CD Projekt RED - Worry Not

[Mosaic]

They absolutely have the benefit of the doubt from me. Heck, I'll probably pre-order it! I don't think I can say that about any other company right now.

Of course you know reputations. A lifetime to build and minutes to destroy. Who knows what the future holds. I wish them the best of luck.

 

[sibroc]

Excellent point. I would like to stress that, though you do mention it, you underplay the impact of production costs of CDPROJEKTRED. Globalization means that they produce in a country where the cost of living is a great deal lower from where their bulk sales come from. Considering that they also own a major digital distribution channel they have a very clear advantage in profits vs revenue.

(Don’t get me wrong, I am as big a fan of CDPROJEKTRED as anyone, but they are a business and they take advantage of whatever is available to them to thrive).

The price of a AAA game, at least in the console space, has been fixed at $60 since 2006. According to the official inflation numbers that's equivalent to about $73.50 in current dollars, which is to say that in real terms the price of a AAA game has dropped about 22% over the last decade. If you, like me, suspect that the official inflation numbers significantly under-report the actual state of the economy then the equivalent price of a AAA game in 2017 dollars would be even higher. I'm pretty sure that development costs have not remained fixed in the same way. (I'm a software developer, although not in the games industry, and my nominal income certainly hasn't stayed the same since 2006.) If we really want the micro-transaction BS to go away we should be willing to accept an inflation adjustment in the base price of a game. If you cut a company's real revenue per game by 22%, they're going to try to get some of that back in some other way, just like you would if your income got cut by the same amount.

I can't help but wonder to what extent CD Projekt RED's business model works because of the relative cost of living in Poland. It wouldn't surprise me if their cost of development is lower than that of US-based developers. The inflation-based revenue hit probably doesn't hurt them as badly, so they have less need to make up the difference.

 

[NewDArt]

Sometimes I'm amazed how difficult good PR seems to be for certain companies. I mean, EA could literally rule the world if they understood gamer psychology and managed to temper their blatant focus on profit - and instead bothered to nurture a solid long-term relationship with their customer base.

CDPR seems to have that down cold, certainly.

Personally, I never understood why their "free DLC" scheme was supposed to be a good thing. I mean, the vast majority of it was trivial - and should have been part of the base game at release. Delaying the integration for several weeks in order to appear generous did NOT work for me, but it seems to have worked wonders for the majority.

They must be doing something right, that's for sure.

In terms of genuine "good guys", Larian tends to come off as more generous, anyway. That said, I don't really believe in "good guys" at all.

I guess there's something off about guys who constantly proclaim themselves as "fair and straight". I always felt that the people who were the most fair and generous didn't actually talk much about it at all.

 

[ChienAboyeur]

They did not answer the question about online elements presence. They simply deflect by categorizing certain online elements as greedy and not desired.

They speak the language their supporters desire to hear: online elements are not bad to SP experience as long as they are done by their favoured company.

The question is no longer about dropping the commitment to SP, the question is how to drop the commitment to SP in a pleasing way to their supporters.

Wired.

 

[Moriendor]

Personally, I never understood why their "free DLC" scheme was supposed to be a good thing. I mean, the vast majority of it was trivial - and should have been part of the base game at release. Delaying the integration for several weeks in order to appear generous did NOT work for me, but it seems to have worked wonders for the majority.

100% agree with this. My personal core criticism of DLC is not that DLC costs money (that's generally fine if the content is worth it) but that games are getting slashed into pieces for piecemeal deliveries.

TW3's 16 DLCs, even if free, is my personal DLC nightmare. Especially when the DLCs are released as close to release as those DLCs. They certainly could have very easily been included with the main game and were only delivered in this fashion for pure marketing reasons.

This was very high among the reasons why I waited for the GOTY. To me it was their second dumbest PR move (right after that one time when they pretended that GOG needed to close due to bankruptcy which was by far the dumbest PR move in the history of video gaming IMO).

 

[Ripper]

I don't think they're saints, and the wonderful world of commerce doesn't really permit for such creatures. Still, there are companies that are less cynical, and actually operate on the basis that if they produce good work, and treat their customers with respect, they will have a solid business. CDPR have built up a fair bit of credit with me in that regard, not just through their games, but with the DRM-free GOG platform.

I think it's sensible to praise and reward those companies, and point out the contrast to the thoroughly cynical machines that other enterprises have become.

With the DLC thing, it was plainly a marketing gimmick to help keep their game in the headlines for few weeks. It's a bit of a pain in the arse, but it was free, and I understand that they have to play the game to some extent.

 

[NewDArt]

100% agree with this. My personal core criticism of DLC is not that DLC costs money (that's generally fine if the content is worth it) but that games are getting slashed into pieces for piecemeal deliveries.

TW3's 16 DLCs, even if free, is my personal DLC nightmare. Especially when the DLCs are released as close to release as those DLCs. They certainly could have very easily been included with the main game and were only delivered in this fashion for pure marketing reasons.

This was very high among the reasons why I waited for the GOTY. To me it was their second dumbest PR move (right after that one time when they pretended that GOG needed to close due to bankruptcy which was by far the dumbest PR move in the history of video gaming IMO).

Yes, we very much agree on this - but it obviously worked for marketing purposes. They seem to be doing very well in the public eye.

I have absolutely nothing against DLC or "microtransactions" in principle - it's all about the details.

Sadly, the details are generally determined by suits who could just as well be selling matches - so it almost invariably ends up being to the detriment of the consumer or the complete experience, because that's how you maximise profit in the shorter term.

To me, the W3 DLC scheme was downright awful and annoying. I would actually have preferred that it cost money - because then I could feel better about ignoring the mostly trivial additions.

My issue is primarily that I want a game to feel UTTERLY complete and self-containted upon release. Certainly if it's a singleplayer game.

As long as the DLC marketing scheme doesn't interfere with that - I don't really mind.

Obviously, though, it almost always interferes with that - so I never really get that "complete" feeling anymore.

My own fault, because I could just wait a couple of years for each release - but then again, isn't that pre-requisite pretty sad?

 

[ChienAboyeur]

Still, there are companies that are less cynical, and actually operate on the basis that if they produce good work, and treat their customers with respect, they will have a solid business. CDPR have built up a fair bit of credit with me in that regard, not just through their games, but with the DRM-free GOG platform.

It shows that SP was given no importance: a company that drops its commitment to SP does not show respect to players who are committed to SP. It ends there.

As to cynism, for whatever it means, this company drops SP on the back of other companies: they do not take their responsibility. All they do is surfing the wave: the way other companies drop SP is the bad way, theirs is the good one.

They find their pretext in others'doings.

 

[Ripper]

It shows that SP was given no importance: a company that drops its commitment to SP does not show respect to players who are committed to SP. It ends there.

As to cynism, for whatever it means, this company drops SP on the back of other companies: they do not take their responsibility. All they do is surfing the wave: the way other companies drop SP is the bad way, theirs is the good one.

They find their pretext in others'doings.

That is a festival of flawed reasoning.

A company that produces games may not create a multiplayer game without "disrespecting" their single-player fans? Come on, man - all you're doing is applying black and white thinking to a situation you've neatly divided into binary conditions to make your flawed conclusions appear inescapable.

 

[ChienAboyeur]

They cant because MU is not compatible with SP.

Like asking a formula one car to be a family car. It is not compatible.

Vid products claiming to conciliate both sides simply favour one other the other. Often, SP customers are asked to fund the MU part.

 

[NewDArt]

They cant because MU is not compatible with SP.

Like asking a formula one car to be a family car. It is not compatible.

Vid products claiming to conciliate both sides simply favour one other the other. Often, SP customers are asked to fund the MU part.

What do you mean it's not compatible? Are you saying when I played Dragon Age Inquisition in singleplayer - I wasn't actually playing it? I was imagining the whole thing?

That seems unlikely.

 

[borovnica]

It shows that SP was given no importance: a company that drops its commitment to SP does not show respect to players who are committed to SP. It ends there.

As to cynism, for whatever it means, this company drops SP on the back of other companies: they do not take their responsibility. All they do is surfing the wave: the way other companies drop SP is the bad way, theirs is the good one.

They find their pretext in others'doings.

What about DOS:2, it's a great SP that can be played in the MP and does not take away anything from it. NWN2 as well, and there are many other good implementation of MP in a game that can be played as SP easily as well.

 

[ChienAboyeur]

No.
It always removes features that are not compatible. By design, SP features that are not compatible with MU are left out. And usually, those are the most priced.

SP is being degraded to accomodate MU. It does not work another way.

What do you mean it's not compatible? Are you saying when I played Dragon Age Inquisition in singleplayer - I wasn't actually playing it? I was imagining the whole thing?

That seems unlikely.

No. Simply playing a product that was meant to be MU.

That is where commitment kicks in.

 

[Ripper]

Well, given that it's evident that games can combine multiplayer with single-player and still be enjoyable to single players, I assume you mean that a persistent online element is unwelcome to single player purists (of which, I'm one). If that's the case, I somewhat agree with you - for example, I was disappointed when Elite Dangerous dropped its purely independent single player commitment, and only provided a single-player experience within the context of its persistent universe.

But, the problem there is that they promised one thing and delivered another. That is quite different to a charge of disrespect by a company that chooses to change its aproach in its latest game, without any failure of promise. To my mind, the idea of accusing a studio of some sort of treachery because they don't deliver what one wants from one game to the next, is a fine example of petulent internet thinking.

 

[NewDArt]

No. Simply playing a product that was meant to be MU.

That is where commitment kicks in.

Please explain how. I enjoyed SP as did a lot of other people.

How is that not being compatible with MP?

 

[NewDArt]

No.
It always removes features that are not compatible. By design, SP features that are not compatible with MU are left out. And usually, those are the most priced.

SP is being degraded to accomodate MU. It does not work another way.

So, whenever they change something in MP because of SP - then MP is not degraded?

If the end result is a great SP experience - how is that not commitment to SP?

It makes no sense at all.

Have you checked the response to D:OS2? Most people seem to think it's one of the best CRPGs in many years. The VAST majority of those people have played it exclusively in SP mode.

 

[Black Rune]

I am pretty much indifferent with all this CDPR drama.
At the same time,nothing would surprise me.

The Witcher trilogy is something very special. Wonderful games. Great job on that CDPR!
Not really waiting anything new from them. Specially not a cyberpunk themed game.
If they really continue on the similar path as before.
There is really nothing to worry about.

 

[JDR13]

100% agree with this. My personal core criticism of DLC is not that DLC costs money (that's generally fine if the content is worth it) but that games are getting slashed into pieces for piecemeal deliveries.

TW3's 16 DLCs, even if free, is my personal DLC nightmare. Especially when the DLCs are released as close to release as those DLCs. They certainly could have very easily been included with the main game and were only delivered in this fashion for pure marketing reasons.

This was very high among the reasons why I waited for the GOTY. To me it was their second dumbest PR move (right after that one time when they pretended that GOG needed to close due to bankruptcy which was by far the dumbest PR move in the history of video gaming IMO).

For me, it depends on what sort of DLC we're talking about. None of the free DLC for TW3 felt like it was integral to the main game whatsoever, so I don't quite get the thing about needing the game to feel "complete". It was complete at release.

Unless you waited because of Hearts of Stone and Blood and Wine. Then yeah, I get that. Those were more like full fledged expansions, but I understand that some people want it all at once.

The free DLC was nothing but fluff though. Pure marketing yes, but at least they didn't nickel & dime us like so many other companies.

 

[screeg]

I agree that CD Projekt RED are great and microtransactions are crap, but let's not forget: this dev is paying wages and rent in złoty and selling their games for dollars and euros.

That might have just a teensy bit to do with their massive financial success.

 

[Arkadia7]

Interesting, didn't know the Polish money was called zloty. I looked up the current exchange rate and 1 zloty is worth .28 cents of a dollar, or to make it more clear, one us dollar is worth 3.6 zloty.

So that makes it easier to understand that the exchange rate helps them quite a bit in Poland.