Wiktor
Member
Eventually that would turn Steam into place that sells solely indie games.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
This "Bethesda.net" thing feels bad
- Thread starter Salsa
- Start date
Eventually that would turn Steam into place that sells solely indie games.
Wiktor
Member
I doubt most people would care all that much. The whole F2P market operates this way after all and it goes on just fine.
This is actually true... If this were a client, Fallout 4 would be announced to be the first game to use it since it is their next big game, and while the paid mods thing didn't go as planned, Bethesda was perfectly happy working with Valve since they needed Valve's approval to do it. The issues with Skyrim having paid mods would've existed no matter what because it was issues that Bethesda's community cared about.
veloxStrix
Banned
Eh. I hope that it's a regulated mod nexus that allows for paid mods. That is all.
BreezyLimbo
Banned
Didn't stop bethesda from making a subscription MMO(Which failed).
And now a card game.
And now a platform.
I mean.......they think they can be Blizzard. The only thing they have in common are the letter 'B'.
I guess I looked past it. Not sure how I feel after reading this thread :/
I can understand it having extra features. But if I don't want those things, I would rather avoid this. I don't need more clients. There are too many, it's a clutter, not to mention intrusive and annoying.
I'll wait and see though.
I can understand it having extra features. But if I don't want those things, I would rather avoid this. I don't need more clients. There are too many, it's a clutter, not to mention intrusive and annoying.
I'll wait and see though.
It also helps that all of Blizzards game are inherently multiplayer focused.
BreezyLimbo
Banned
Yeah, and the IP is good enough to pull it off. Like, Hearthstone? Jesus christ that's a wonderful game. It probably hooked alot of people who DON'T like WoW(I know my friend who hates WoW loves playing it), it's presentation is slick and fun...Heroes of the Storm ups that ante, Overwatch is quirky enough and at the right time for a team based shooter(TF2 came out what...7-8 years ago?), Diablo SC and WoW are still solid for what they are.
Bethesda...I mean the franchises are iconic. Fallout, Elder Scrolls, Doom, Wolfenstein....Dishonored is shaping up to look nice, Battlecry or whatever....looks horrible(seriously the worst of the line up.)
Can they pull it off? I mean.....it'd be riding on the backs of Fallout and Elder scrolls. They want to create value and attachment to this platform. Maybe even have a mod store where they can benefit creators.
It's early to tell, but I get the basics of why they're doing it. Whether it'll succeed or not...that's the question. They have a strong base however to launch with a bang.
If it's an optional mod manager client or something, sure go ahead. But don't you dare making this UPlay 2.0. Nobody needs nor wants this shit, I buy the few Ubi games I want on steam anyway so they still have to give a cut to valve, there's no need to force this piece of second layer DRM crap on me. Same for RSC.
flaxknuckles
Member
Why do these publishers hate Steam Big Picture Mode so much? They wanna kill my living room couch PC gaming gloriousness right when it's getting good with their shitty clients.
Aquavelvaman
Banned
Battle.net is the only one of these that I can stomach. Screw R* Social Club, screw Uplay, screw Bethesda.net.
Xion_Stellar
People should stop referencing data that makes me feel uncomfortable because games get ported to platforms I don't like
During the whole paid mod nonsense that was going on I mentioned if they really wanted to go through with it they should cut the middleman (Steam) and split mod revenue 50% and 50% between Bethesda and the mod developer.
So they should simply set up their own infrastructure for this whole deal instead of giving money to Steam for hosting files that are 1/5 of a Gig or less (something that youtube themselves don't charge for while hosting videos) and would you look at that if this thing is what I think it is you're looking at the next service that will be hosting Paid Mods for Bethesda Games.
So they should simply set up their own infrastructure for this whole deal instead of giving money to Steam for hosting files that are 1/5 of a Gig or less (something that youtube themselves don't charge for while hosting videos) and would you look at that if this thing is what I think it is you're looking at the next service that will be hosting Paid Mods for Bethesda Games.
alexandros
Banned
I don't think it will be a client, more like some sort of portal for Bethesda games. Valve and Bethesda seem to be having a pretty good working relationship and it is more than likely that Fallout 4 will be the launch platform for paid mods, so I don't see why Bethesda would do something like that now. I could be wrong of course but right now it seems rather unlikely.
And that failed mmo has it's own authentication and key activation mechanisms. It would be extremely simple to create a general DRM platform off the back of that and it would be similar in scope to battle.net.
I am going to wager that is exactly what will happen and it is extremely unfortunate.
Uplay is like an extra hurdle every time I think about playing something on my backlog from Ubisoft. I just dont wanna deal with it.
Wiktor
Member
They might want to at least move the mods out of Steamworks? Because their intent is to do them multiplat, so likely they will need their own system for that on consoles and in this case splitting the modbase could hurt the console prospects in this area.
But at least you have the option to still buy ubisoft games elsewhere if you want to. Bethesda has a big enough PC following that it could just do an Origin and claim 100% exclusivity. It would be terrible if that happened though.
The PC-landscape is getting fragmented, which sucks, but is understandable. Why would they want to give Valve money when they could get avoid it? All the thirdpartys have an interest in getting the players to buy the games on their own services. The ideal solution would be an open plattform built as part of a cooperation between all of them, were nobody got any royalties, but Valve is probably earning to much to ever agree to something like that.
This doesn't make a lot of sense really. It's not like being in the Steam Workshop would somehow affect how mods work on consoles. It isn't like there's really any Steam only mods out there, in fact most of the modding community already advises you to avoid relying on the Steam Workshop.
Though I'd say attempting to court modding consoles will split the modbase more than anything given they'd likely need to really simplify mods in the first place (like how Doom is doing it).
It's obvious that valve have been profiting massively from other people's work for the last few years and that's why they haven't needed to make any games of their own. I don't count that free to play esports shit in that because I'm not even sure those things count as games if I'm perfectly honest.
The further fragmentation of the platform and expressions of greed by the large publishers doesn't seem like the answer to me though. Those moves just seem to be anti-consumerist. Yes, the console manufacturers charge licence fees and impose ridiculous restrictions but that doesn't mean that the PC user should be punished and used as a mechanism for cost renumeration
I dont understand what you are referring to.
They arent competitors. They are just gates to play only that company's games. I hardly call that competing as a storefront.
CecilRousso
Member
Because of everything they get out from selling their games there? EA are losing money by not being on Steam, and Ubisoft has to sell their games also.
Not sure what I have gotten out from these years of EA and Ubisoft competing with their own platforms/storefronts. Except being annoyed at the games I have to play through their clients.
Is this supposed to be a bad thing? That's how a store works, they promote and sell other peoples goods like Amazon and WallMart.
And what would you classify DOTA as? A piece of furniture?
Well, it's a piece of something alright.
Yeah, that's what we need, no PC store competition or choice
I'm gonna assume you mean DOTA2. That thing is more game than 90% of stuff out there put together. I have no idea why you would even think about not qualifying it as a game.
Yeah, I don't know why publishers don't cave and make their own launcher solely for their own games. Fuck valve and their 30%. Fuck the millions of users it has. Fuck the amount of exposure the games get by being on Steam. Fuck the bandwidth it uses - that shits all free anyway.
Turin Turambar
Member
Heh. Way back when Steam was released, one of the arguments of why people disliked was that. They said "what, I need to install this Steam thing to play Valve games? That's bad. If this is considered acceptable every company will do it. Next thing it will be a EA program for EA games, an Activision program for Activision games, etc".
Which is exactly what's happening now.
A touch angsty perhaps. I'm not even sure what your point is.
Yeah Steam is a good service. So? Publishers are entitled to sell their content through other distribution channels without being shouted down by childish fanboys.
Maintenance
Member
I wonder about offline play.
BolognaOni
Member
Well, on the plus side, if it is bad, that's more time to work on games from other companies, or maybe the giant backlog of stuff I already have on steam.
Still haven't installed Origin, and I have quit buying ubi stuff.
I really have no tolerance for anything anti-consumer at this point. My gaming time can easily filled up by great games on Steam or gog, so I'll need a VERY good reason to put up with anything else.
Still haven't installed Origin, and I have quit buying ubi stuff.
I really have no tolerance for anything anti-consumer at this point. My gaming time can easily filled up by great games on Steam or gog, so I'll need a VERY good reason to put up with anything else.
While not a childish fanboy, I did reply in a fashion as I did to a childish post based on an entirely one sided and ignorant position that discounted the benefits of Steam.
I actually did nothing to make you say I was a fanboy and perhaps you should allow people to respond with their viewpoint without resorting to instant name calling. It does nothing to further your own points and only makes you out to be overly sensitive.
AcceptableGhost
Member
what about steam big picture?
A significant number of posts in this thread are some variant of:
"I don't even know what Bethesda.net is yet but fuck it because it might not be steam"
What would you call that?
CecilRousso
Member
Nice way of ignoring the potential issues.
Not all mods would work as they push the hardware more, but content mods might work. Imagine if mods were payed for and imagine gaining access to the huge console market.
Auto-Reply
Member
I'm the exact opposite of that, I started actively avoiding stuff that needs a new account, sometimes even when I want the contend and it would be free just by signing up.
Gambit 1138
Banned
As long as Bethesda continues releasing extremely high quality AAA games like they just demonstrated tonight I say let them try out whatever experiments on the side that they wish.
CecilRousso
Member
I wouldn't underestimate the cost to build a similiar system. Steam is offering quite a lot for those 30%. And insnt those 30 % only for the games sold directly through the storefront?