Boycott Beth.net

[smooster]

Not everyone sees betheseda through the rose coloured glasses that you do lelcat

[chucksteel]

Not everyone sees betheseda through the rose coloured glasses that you do lelcat

Are you sure it's not Beer Goggles? :rolleyes:

[TimeLadyKatie]

 

 

And here's the kicker - I understand the theory of free markets a hell of a lot better than you do. My undergrad is in political theory. The ideas you've expressed show a very basic and sanitized understanding of market behavior that is absolutely unrealistic when human decision making is factored in. People do not always buy the objectively best product per the price, sometimes people buy absolute garbage for any number of reasons. Pretty packaging, distrust of reviewers, whimsy, misunderstanding... and that's not even factoring in the differences in tastes. Pepsi and Coke don't have to compete on price or quality because they appeal to different tastes (be they actual or cultural), and in modding the subjectivity of what is or isn't good is about a million times more complicated than that.

 

And sometimes, people will buy and support based on the sheer antithesis of reason. I used the "one extra apple" mod for Skyrim as an example before. That attracted so many purchasers because of it exemplifying the exact opposite of what the market dictates behavior ought to be. It was a choice grounded in whimsy and rebellion against rational self-interest. The Internet nurtures this sort of action by its nature. Because of that, even if all other things were equal, you still could not use market dynamics to predict an increase in mod quality. Because sometimes the worst of mods will be the highest of interest.

I counter you with everyone being responsible for their own money. If someone bought an apple in Skyrim because he wanted to make a statement, well then he got his moneys worth. As a consumer you can decide what mods you want to buy. And customer reviews do work in the real world. When buying computer hardware, consulting amazon reviews or dedicated hardware review sites one can make an informed decision on what to buy. And if a Hard drive has pretty packaging, but fails to deliver on performance, then it will be reflected in ratings.

 

Another analogy why the market works is the game market itself. Sure there are many quick cash-in mobile games that could be equalized to boob mods or apple mods. But why is it then that there is a vast and diverse amount of products despite that? Fallout4, COD, BF, Far Cry are all high profile franchises that take years to make. Why do these exist, when by your prediction, everyone would only bang out angry bird clones on mobile platforms?

 

 

Because there is a segment of the market that wants something else than apples and boob mods.

 

 

 

If you have the view that mods add so little of value, why are you here?

 

There are some things I'll agree on - that the base games are viable and playable without modding and that they are, essentially though not unequivocally, good games. But people love to play the games sometimes well over a decade later. That replayability does not come from the unedited game. That comes from mods. Mods take a limited experience, which all games are, and unlimit it. Suddenly, by adding mods to a game, each playthrough of Skyrim is meaningfully different, with elements I've never before encountered and new challenges to face. That can't be said without mods. Fallout's modding community has traditionally been a little less energized, but still the games benefit greatly on replayability from the effort of modders.

 

Without modding, Bethesda would still be a AAA developer releasing tentpole titles every few years, but as we see with other RPG developers, the natural life-cycle of a game usually runs its course by the time the next major installment in the franchise is released, if not sooner. I would argue that for all but die-hard fans, Dragon Age Inquisition has run it's course. By opening arms to modding, though, Bethesda's games are largely immune to this normal life-cycle, as they are constantly being infused with new content. New stories. New characters. New life.

 

You massively undervalue modding if you don't see how embracing it has made Bethesda a wholly unique and very influential company in the industry.

I spent stupid amounts of time working with the Creation Kit and I like doing it even with the promise of paid mods being a vague one. But the way mods are presented in modding communities combined with the hating on Bethesda adds very little value to the actual game developers who worked for years to create the game. Want to empirically test what I am saying? Download the Unreal Engine development kit, then start making a game. Then you will experience how much hard work Bethesda invested into the base game and how great it is that they share their tools with us. This game is years worth of development time, and we get access to play it and mod it for 60$.

And I think that gets forgotten too often among the bethesda haters.

 

 

The comparison of the mod market to graphic cards is faulty no matter how many times you make it. Graphics cards are measured on objective criteria, mods on subjective criteria. And if everyone has their own reasons for supporting a mod, as you call it 'making a statement' (I personally think it's the human love of chaos), then there is absolutely no reason for quality mods to be the necessary outcome of market behavior.

 

You still seem to not really grasp more than the 'in a frictionless vacuum' version of how markets behave.

 

See, here's the thing, some of those AAA franchises can repachage the same thing and re-release it with little concern for how it will affect their profits. I love the Pokemon games, but their business model is 'repaint the game every two years and sell it again'. They have been a powerhouse franchise for twenty years. Some will argue that Battlefield, COD and Halo are prime examples of this as well (though I give props to Battlefield 1 for making a pretty bold step narratively, I also know that most Battlefield players aren't there for the narrative).

 

And some games that are actually remarkable thoughtful and good are never going to be noticed because the whims of the public will never fall their way. Endless Space is an amazing space-based strategy game but will never be a popular title in the strategy genre.

 

Quality per price is not the driving force of actual, real-world markets. It's the driving force of theoretical markets only.

 

And I'm not one to presume Bethesda is inept or evil or anything, but nor am I one to diminish the role modders play in keeping their games alive well beyond the natural life-cycle of a game. I've done my fair share of RPG Maker games when learning game-creation interfaces and Ruby, it's easy for projects even using a single-developer friendly interface to take forever and die before completion. The work a developer does is remarkable. But by the same token, saying modders are placing paper hats on Michelangelo's David is both giving Bethesda too much credit and modders too little.

 

Really, a Bethesda game is more like a really nice statue in a local park. It's not something that'll be a mark of human progress in the arts, but it is really nice and something to be proud of. And you make mods sound more like vandalism than derivative works.

 

As for the sexism, how about if I don't presume that your reproductive organs dictate you love football you stop presuming mine dictate I love shoes? Deal?

Edited July 19, 2016 by TimeLadyKatie

[lelcat]

 

See, here's the thing, some of those AAA franchises can repachage the same thing and re-release it with little concern for how it will affect their profits. I love the Pokemon games, but their business model is 'repaint the game every two years and sell it again'. They have been a powerhouse franchise for twenty years. Some will argue that Battlefield, COD and Halo are prime examples of this as well (though I give props to Battlefield 1 for making a pretty bold step narratively, I also know that most Battlefield players aren't there for the narrative).

That is wrong. Metric data exists to prove that. Every successive COD game has new content. Walk around the game, take screenshots. Then count the new textures, models, animations. A titanic effort every new release. These indie games provide far less new content for similarly priced products. So indie games are far bigger cash grabs than the hated big games.

 

See, now you are downplaying the titanic effort poured into high-profile games. And just because the game has a big company behind it, does not mean the story has to suck. And the average COD single player campaign has supreme storytelling (and set design, cinematography, writing and so forth)

[Arthmoor]

Just a shame theres no such thing as a paid Betheseda mod at the minute so your free market and its laws dont really apply to it

They're called DLCs. Vote with your wallet and the free market will work just fine.

[TimeLadyKatie]

 

 

See, here's the thing, some of those AAA franchises can repachage the same thing and re-release it with little concern for how it will affect their profits. I love the Pokemon games, but their business model is 'repaint the game every two years and sell it again'. They have been a powerhouse franchise for twenty years. Some will argue that Battlefield, COD and Halo are prime examples of this as well (though I give props to Battlefield 1 for making a pretty bold step narratively, I also know that most Battlefield players aren't there for the narrative).

That is wrong. Metric data exists to prove that. Every successive COD game has new content. Walk around the game, take screenshots. Then count the new textures, models, animations. A titanic effort every new release. These indie games provide far less new content for similarly priced products. So indie games are far bigger cash grabs than the hated big games.

 

See, now you are downplaying the titanic effort poured into high-profile games. And just because the game has a big company behind it, does not mean the story has to suck. And the average COD single player campaign has supreme storytelling (and set design, cinematography, writing and so forth)

 

 

I'm honestly starting to wonder if you think the fewer people are involved in a project the more 'impure' a project somehow is, or the worse it must be? That would explain your hostility toward mods and indie developers.

 

The difference between us is I'm not saying AAA titles must, as a rule, suck. Or that they're shameful cash-grabs. Or anything like that. What I'm saying is their status as AAA titles is not directly a result of their quality. If you need to prove that, look at preorders! People who put forward money for a title utterly ignorant of that title's quality.

 

The only widely-applied statement I'm making is that humans do not behave in rational ways and thusly markets do not behave 'as they should', especially as the criteria of 'quality product' becomes more and more subjective. You can't draw the kind of assumptions you're drawing.

 

And I've also not stated opposition to paid modding, for the record. I've in fact said I'm not entirely sure why a modder who has something free right now needs to somehow change their product to justify charging money for it later. Literally the only argument I'm making here is that market theory is not sufficient to predict the outcome of these events.

[Alexotero1219]

 

 

 

And here's the kicker - I understand the theory of free markets a hell of a lot better than you do. My undergrad is in political theory. The ideas you've expressed show a very basic and sanitized understanding of market behavior that is absolutely unrealistic when human decision making is factored in. People do not always buy the objectively best product per the price, sometimes people buy absolute garbage for any number of reasons. Pretty packaging, distrust of reviewers, whimsy, misunderstanding... and that's not even factoring in the differences in tastes. Pepsi and Coke don't have to compete on price or quality because they appeal to different tastes (be they actual or cultural), and in modding the subjectivity of what is or isn't good is about a million times more complicated than that.

 

And sometimes, people will buy and support based on the sheer antithesis of reason. I used the "one extra apple" mod for Skyrim as an example before. That attracted so many purchasers because of it exemplifying the exact opposite of what the market dictates behavior ought to be. It was a choice grounded in whimsy and rebellion against rational self-interest. The Internet nurtures this sort of action by its nature. Because of that, even if all other things were equal, you still could not use market dynamics to predict an increase in mod quality. Because sometimes the worst of mods will be the highest of interest.

I counter you with everyone being responsible for their own money. If someone bought an apple in Skyrim because he wanted to make a statement, well then he got his moneys worth. As a consumer you can decide what mods you want to buy. And customer reviews do work in the real world. When buying computer hardware, consulting amazon reviews or dedicated hardware review sites one can make an informed decision on what to buy. And if a Hard drive has pretty packaging, but fails to deliver on performance, then it will be reflected in ratings.

 

Another analogy why the market works is the game market itself. Sure there are many quick cash-in mobile games that could be equalized to boob mods or apple mods. But why is it then that there is a vast and diverse amount of products despite that? Fallout4, COD, BF, Far Cry are all high profile franchises that take years to make. Why do these exist, when by your prediction, everyone would only bang out angry bird clones on mobile platforms?

 

 

Because there is a segment of the market that wants something else than apples and boob mods.

 

 

 

If you have the view that mods add so little of value, why are you here?

 

There are some things I'll agree on - that the base games are viable and playable without modding and that they are, essentially though not unequivocally, good games. But people love to play the games sometimes well over a decade later. That replayability does not come from the unedited game. That comes from mods. Mods take a limited experience, which all games are, and unlimit it. Suddenly, by adding mods to a game, each playthrough of Skyrim is meaningfully different, with elements I've never before encountered and new challenges to face. That can't be said without mods. Fallout's modding community has traditionally been a little less energized, but still the games benefit greatly on replayability from the effort of modders.

 

Without modding, Bethesda would still be a AAA developer releasing tentpole titles every few years, but as we see with other RPG developers, the natural life-cycle of a game usually runs its course by the time the next major installment in the franchise is released, if not sooner. I would argue that for all but die-hard fans, Dragon Age Inquisition has run it's course. By opening arms to modding, though, Bethesda's games are largely immune to this normal life-cycle, as they are constantly being infused with new content. New stories. New characters. New life.

 

You massively undervalue modding if you don't see how embracing it has made Bethesda a wholly unique and very influential company in the industry.

I spent stupid amounts of time working with the Creation Kit and I like doing it even with the promise of paid mods being a vague one. But the way mods are presented in modding communities combined with the hating on Bethesda adds very little value to the actual game developers who worked for years to create the game. Want to empirically test what I am saying? Download the Unreal Engine development kit, then start making a game. Then you will experience how much hard work Bethesda invested into the base game and how great it is that they share their tools with us. This game is years worth of development time, and we get access to play it and mod it for 60$.

And I think that gets forgotten too often among the bethesda haters.

 

 

The comparison of the mod market to graphic cards is faulty no matter how many times you make it. Graphics cards are measured on objective criteria, mods on subjective criteria. And if everyone has their own reasons for supporting a mod, as you call it 'making a statement' (I personally think it's the human love of chaos), then there is absolutely no reason for quality mods to be the necessary outcome of market behavior.

 

You still seem to not really grasp more than the 'in a frictionless vacuum' version of how markets behave.

 

See, here's the thing, some of those AAA franchises can repachage the same thing and re-release it with little concern for how it will affect their profits. I love the Pokemon games, but their business model is 'repaint the game every two years and sell it again'. They have been a powerhouse franchise for twenty years. Some will argue that Battlefield, COD and Halo are prime examples of this as well (though I give props to Battlefield 1 for making a pretty bold step narratively, I also know that most Battlefield players aren't there for the narrative).

 

And some games that are actually remarkable thoughtful and good are never going to be noticed because the whims of the public will never fall their way. Endless Space is an amazing space-based strategy game but will never be a popular title in the strategy genre.

 

Quality per price is not the driving force of actual, real-world markets. It's the driving force of theoretical markets only.

 

And I'm not one to presume Bethesda is inept or evil or anything, but nor am I one to diminish the role modders play in keeping their games alive well beyond the natural life-cycle of a game. I've done my fair share of RPG Maker games when learning game-creation interfaces and Ruby, it's easy for projects even using a single-developer friendly interface to take forever and die before completion. The work a developer does is remarkable. But by the same token, saying modders are placing paper hats on Michelangelo's David is both giving Bethesda too much credit and modders too little.

 

Really, a Bethesda game is more like a really nice statue in a local park. It's not something that'll be a mark of human progress in the arts, but it is really nice and something to be proud of. And you make mods sound more like vandalism than derivative works.

 

As for the sexism, how about if I don't presume that your reproductive organs dictate you love football you stop presuming mine dictate I love shoes? Deal?

 

Honestly just ignore him.

 

You are literally trying to argue with the guy that tried to compare a paid modding market to an automobile market lol.

 

He clearly doesn't actually know what hes talking about and will refuse to listen to anyone that does. He has just used the types of rational that every layman, for lack of a better word, understands about markets and tries to brute force apply to individual and unique markets. He also never even attempted to answer the slightly more complex questions I have posed to him.

 

Don't waste your time like I did lol.

[gunslinger6792]

Ummm I would just like to point out that using COD as one of the pillars of your argument probably isn't a great idea. COD resuses alot of the animations, game engines, and other assets in each game that's why (in part) they're able to pump them out in rapid succession.

[Alexotero1219]

 

Are you talking about someone using open source software in their creation of a unique product then selling the product or are you referring to something else?

I'm referring to OSS in the sense that OSS combines both a group of people providing free products / services as well as a way for people to take "previously free" products and commercialize them.

 

correct me if im wrong but isn't open source often times something that was previously monetized and then given away for free? Also dont most people use open source software to create something unique and sell? I dont think they sell open source software "out of the box" when it can be obtained for free elsewhere but I could be wrong.

 

Either way if I were to except oss as an example I would still find this sort of behavior rather rare in the grand scheme of things.

[TeamBacon]

Fallout 4 = Best Fallout Game.