Post by Bolkonsky on Oct 13, 2012 21:33:38 GMT -6
What do I mean by Open vs Closed Development?
Basically there are two general PC development models, and I'm curious to hear how people think they affect marketing. On one side of the market we're seeing extreme closed development. Take for instance, Battlefield 3. After Battlefield 2 being one of the most modded games in PC gaming history, especially in terms of complete overhauls and conversions, DICE decided to keep the game closed and not allow modding. They even threatened to permanently ban users for a simple color mod that most mid-tier monitors can do without any software. (To put things into perspective, if you get caught cheating you only get a stat wipe.) A lot of times when programmers take active steps to stop mods, they blame security reasons. Personally, I think they may just be trying to sell DLC that could otherwise be modded in.
Now on the other side of development, we're seeing some games open up completely to modding, take for instance Minecraft which is almost limitless, or the Mount&Blade series, or The Elder Scrolls, and now even games like Shogun 2, and most Tripwire games. What I've noticed though, is that a lot less blockbuster games are supporting modding than are. That's because they know that getting a larger fanbase means having a more active community, and the best way to get an active community (especially one that stays active) is to allow modding.
So does modding detract from sales? Does it detract from the fan-base? Fan input and giving fans what they want can be seen as a great way to expand your fan-base, but with say the Minecraft model, do you end up making a game that you never wanted to make in the first place, just because the fans want it?
Personally I'm of the mind that good modding support and a clear path of development while still taking some input is the best way to go, but then you do run the risk of disgruntled fans who wanted something a certain way but you refused because of your vision for the game.
Basically there are two general PC development models, and I'm curious to hear how people think they affect marketing. On one side of the market we're seeing extreme closed development. Take for instance, Battlefield 3. After Battlefield 2 being one of the most modded games in PC gaming history, especially in terms of complete overhauls and conversions, DICE decided to keep the game closed and not allow modding. They even threatened to permanently ban users for a simple color mod that most mid-tier monitors can do without any software. (To put things into perspective, if you get caught cheating you only get a stat wipe.) A lot of times when programmers take active steps to stop mods, they blame security reasons. Personally, I think they may just be trying to sell DLC that could otherwise be modded in.
Now on the other side of development, we're seeing some games open up completely to modding, take for instance Minecraft which is almost limitless, or the Mount&Blade series, or The Elder Scrolls, and now even games like Shogun 2, and most Tripwire games. What I've noticed though, is that a lot less blockbuster games are supporting modding than are. That's because they know that getting a larger fanbase means having a more active community, and the best way to get an active community (especially one that stays active) is to allow modding.
So does modding detract from sales? Does it detract from the fan-base? Fan input and giving fans what they want can be seen as a great way to expand your fan-base, but with say the Minecraft model, do you end up making a game that you never wanted to make in the first place, just because the fans want it?
Personally I'm of the mind that good modding support and a clear path of development while still taking some input is the best way to go, but then you do run the risk of disgruntled fans who wanted something a certain way but you refused because of your vision for the game.
