PC- DLC maps vs SDK


(MonoXideAtWork) #1

After reading the plans that the DLC will feature more maps, I have a few thoughts and questions, and wish to encourage an open dialogue on this subject.

  1. Historical Precedent
    When looking at games that have provided revenue streams for upwards of 10 years, via repeated retail sales only, a trend begins to become evident: Games which support community mappers/modders with an SDK release last on average, 5 times longer than games that do not.

Examples:

Half-life 1998-present
Gave rise to Team Fortress Classic, Counter-Strike, and Day of Defeat, all available from valve at a later time for an additional retail sale.

Quake 3: 1999-2009
Without the experience mappers gained from this game, even your own RTCW:ET may not have enjoyed the success to allow a large enough player base to be interested in team-based objective FPS gameplay to even allow development of ET:QW or for BRINK to succeed at launch.

Unreal Tournament: 1999-2008
Simultaneously, as counter-strike was introducing players to objective based gameplay, Tactical Ops was introducing more players to the first incarnations of sprint and ironsights seen since COD2 on PC.

Starcraft 1997- 2011
The included scenario editor gave rise to custom games such as cannon defense, which inevitably was continued in further blizzard games with Tower Defense, which is now it’s own game archetype, participating in retail sales.

Warcraft III: 2002-Present
Again, blizzard’s inclusion of a scenario editor gave rise to DOTA, creating a whole new game genre, MOBA, opening up a whole new playerbase, which like all mods, required the purchase of WCIII in order to participate.

Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare
Activision’s release of an SDK allows this game to continue to support an online community, 2 sequels later, mainly due to the sequels shunning the map development community. Consequently, these two sequels, COD: MW2 and COD: Black Ops, carry a reputation for being dominated by “hackers” and other unsavory modders.

Upcoming Professionals:

I think it would be safe to say that the developers of BRINK love gaming, and were amateur modders/mappers themselves before making an entrance into the industry.

Without the tools supplied by the above example games, the experience your team would have had would be limited to professional education from entertainment schools, or by violating TOS agreements and reverse engineering/ini tweaking. Denying your player base, which is an extension of yourselves if you put anything of yourselves into this project, the same opportunities to gain experience doing something they love, would be a slap in the face to the players that play maps and mods by little known developers, which any modder or mapper can tell you, is crucial to improvement.

DLC:

When Modern Warfare II was released, the PC gaming community collectively decried the lack of dedicated servers and SDK. After being told enough times by the console players, which have hardly experienced the joys of playing a map made to look like a wal-mart in counter-strike, or ever having experienced any Rats/turkeyburgers style map, that we should shut up and enjoy what we’ve been given, we caved.

Then Activision releases 2 map packs via DLC, complete with PORTS from the previous game, for a fee. To me, and I assume may others, this reeks of elitism. The idea that the community is incapable of developing their own content, which to further enjoy the game, while having to pay for more levels to play on, including a very rudimentary port of past maps, is mufch like selling a man a hotdog and then charging extra for the bun.

For the TL:DR crowd:

Do not want to pay for more maps from the same developers without having community-created alternatives, although DLC packs with weapon skins or more character customization options would be awesome.

Feel free to flame/comment/whatever.


(0xT1) #2

I fear DLC means no SDK =[ Hopefully this isn’t the case or they release it when its too late


(Mawi) #3

Yea this. Im hopping for SDK release shortly after the first DLC but I doubt.


(Mycologist) #4

I can tell you that there is a huge interest in creating maps. The makers of Coldfront and Swif****er frequent our servers and to deny them the ability to create maps for Brink would be a great shame.


(MonoXideAtWork) #5

Thanks for the feedback!

Keep it coming.


(Waldo) #6

As games get more technically involved, I wonder how that affects the ability for modders to create new maps.

In the case of Brink, we have to consider SMART. I’m not sure if each item has individual properties for handling smart (I recall hearing something about some process that traces the map to make it automatically handle SMART movement?).

Anyways, an SDK down the line would be nice. I don’t have a problem with them releasing paid DLC. However, I like BC2’s approach where maps are free, but there’s cosmetic DLC. If you want to support the devs, you can buy the cosmetic DLC. (KillingFloor also does something similar)


(Codine) #7

Brink might get some custom maps, granted if the SDK isnt super delayed like quake wars.

I have NEVER played a custom map in quake wars. I know they exist, but you can only do bot matches with them for the most part. And SD has been pretty neutral about the whole sdk.

I have a feeling it wont be coming out.


(Twistedpandora) #8

my hope is that the DLC was made not using a developer SDK but using a public SDK that will then be given to us.


(Nail) #9

smart’s ability works “at the moment” to judge what it can and can’t do, iirc


(MonoXideAtWork) #10

That would be great. Like I said, I’ll pay for cosmetics, but not maps unless community created maps are an alternative.


(Heburnll) #11

I would pay for a dlc to give us the sdk - its that important. We need mods for this, every one of their previous games had it. Ill pay for other things. I’ll even pay for maps if you give us the sdk


(panickin) #12

I assume you include Counter Strike in your HL2 percentage, still one of the most popular and still maps released almost every day, I hope SD supports community created content, it will be a huge disappointment if they don’t


(jazevec) #13

While I sympathize with your position and much prefer SDK and user-generated maps and mods over “DLC”, I think your sample is too small. Your choice is questionable, too. Do you know what Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy is ? A marksman shooting the broad side of a barn and then painting bullseyes around holes.

All the games you’ve picked are exceptional and would probably fare quite well (but not as well) if they weren’t moddable. Come on ! Quake3, Half-Life, UT, Starcraft… these are landmark games.

Counterexamples:

Enemy Territory: Quake Wars
Splash Damage hyped their modding tools and competitive play support long before release. In the end, it hasn’t saved the game. You can’t build, or force, a community around an unremarkable game with serious technical issues. Think Brink but with dull graphics and worse sound.

Elemental: War of Magic
The game’s design is all over the place. Despite several kinds of editors the game comes with, it has failed miserably. People aren’t even sure how to mod the game because they can see no pattern in its design. The individual parts don’t add up, it looks like a bunch of game mechanics thrown together.


(r5ada) #14

People underestimate modders. I’m not going to say every modder out there is capable but there are some very talented people modding games and creating custom content. I wouldn’t say something like the SMART system will hold custom content developers any further back than the willingness to create that content in the first place.

This reminds me of an article I read stating that Battlefield 3 will not have an SDK because it will be too difficult for the general public. Modders have NEVER been considered the general public and I take offense to such statements. The Battlefield series would have never been as popular as it was without the mods. Now they spit in our face. I’ve already gave up hope on that game, I hope Splash Damage/ Bethesda decide to release an SDK, I have a few ideas and I really like Brink.


(jazevec) #15

This includes executives of game publishing companies. This is because they don’t play games.


(Deltaz) #16

I am all up for SDK and DLC, they can co-exist :smiley:


(r5ada) #17

Maybe in a way. Publishers probably see it more so that it’s more profitable in the short term to focus your assets on releasing DLC instead of releasing an SDK, which would mean they don’t underestimate modders at all. Also if you’ve got modders making custom content it devalues content made by the game developer. However, I would argue that you could build a strong following by releasing an SDK and supporting your games community. When I think back on Half-life or maybe a better example for myself would be Battlefield 1942. When I think back on that game, half of the reason that game will always have a place in my heart is because A) it was a great game and the other half B) because of modding and the mods I played. Whenever a new Battlefield game is released, my hype skyrockets, but then I realize where this brand has gone and that hype dies out fairly quickly and I move on. Think about all the big names in PC gaming, they all had mods and that is in large part because the developer supported their community. Not releasing tools for modding is probably some way of these publishers thinking that they can turn the PC platform into something like a console platform. They are half way there in all honesty.


(Mycologist) #18

I really hope they open up map making to everyone. TF2 is an excellent example of how talented people can create new and unique things. In fact, the maker of one of the most complex TF2 maps “cp_steel” now works at Splash Damage.

If Splash Damage plans on selling DLC, please do not sell maps. Sell guns, outfits, etc, but never maps. This would only fracture your community.


(Om3ga) #19

[QUOTE=Mycologist;306971].

If Splash Damage plans on selling DLC, please do not sell maps. Sell guns, outfits, etc, but never maps. This would only fracture your community.[/QUOTE]

Yea. I agree!


(Avoc) #20

It all depends on if they wish to compete against a much larger pool of creativity that is available amongst their community than inside their company.

We all know that as proffessionals, they can’t really release any crazy maps or mods to their game that might potentionally be unbalanced. Amateur mappers have this freedom and that is what SD will be competing against.

[QUOTE=Mycologist;306971]
If Splash Damage plans on selling DLC, please do not sell maps. Sell guns, outfits, etc, but never maps. This would only fracture your community.[/QUOTE]

I strongly agree with this. Just look at COD and their map-packs. It splits up the community into smaller groups, making it harder to find matches. Now, COD offsets this by having a ton of players, but I don’t think that Brink can afford this.

If any additional maps are free, then SD will not have to fear competition from their own community, and could instead just get extra revenue from selling extra skins and weapons.