| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (15)

Posted: Apr 17th 2007 3:32PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
What publishers and developers should be afraid of is a kid making nudie skins for their game and Jack blaming them for allowing it.
Reply

Posted: Apr 17th 2007 3:38PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I love the Great Auk, we were talking about it in biology and I was just thinking how awesome the bird was when my teacher mention it was extinct. I still havn't gotten over the pain.
Reply

Posted: Apr 17th 2007 3:38PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Afraid of it? Not really. User generated content is rarely anywhere near the quality of publish works. I think in general it adds value to your product rather than the other way around.
Reply

Posted: Apr 17th 2007 3:40PM Antibot said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I hope the post was meant to be cynically sarcastic, not naively optimistic. If it's the latter, then you should continue reading the article:

"Sixty-two percent said their companies would make money advertising and sponsoring social media.

Other areas of revenue mentioned were subscriptions (21 percent), and pay-per-play offerings (18 percent)."

Bad publishers are fearing this. Smart publishers are finding ways to make money.
Reply

Posted: Apr 17th 2007 3:47PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This is especially ironic if you look at the previous post - I suppose TV show producers will soon join game publishers "62% of crap TV program makers feel threatened by user-generated content"
Reply

Posted: Apr 17th 2007 4:10PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think it depends on the level of user-generated content...

User-generated avatars (i.e. in Sony's "Home") is advantageous to publishers, because they can sell you clothes and make you pay to unlock options. The publishers still have real control.

User-generated levels and missions (i.e. any number of PC FPSs) is in the middle ground. It is advantageous to publishers because it adds value to the game and therefore encourages sales of the core game, but makes it more difficult for publishers to nickle and dime players through level and mission packs.

User-generated games (i.e. created in Adobe Flash or Microsoft XNA) is advantageous to the publishers of the tools, but not game publishers. Any time consumers are playing amateur games is time they are not playing commercial games.

However, all are advantageous to consumers!
Reply

Posted: Apr 17th 2007 4:24PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
User generated content is a powerful idea.

However...

It takes more than one kid in his basement re-texturing skins for Oblivion to make Publishers fear an overturn.

User generated content will be seen as something that enhances a product already on the market - not as a competitor.

You need a team of people to create and compete - like the Counterstrike or the Team Fortress guys.

The caveat of course is that I am happy to be proven wrong.
Reply

Posted: Apr 17th 2007 5:01PM In A World said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
For my part I've been trying to make a map for Counter Strike: Source that looks like the "Gridlock" map in Gears of War. Right now it looks like absolute crap. user-generated content FTW!
Reply

Posted: Apr 17th 2007 5:39PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
They threaten us with crappy content, and then push us over the edge by charging us extra for even more crappy content, this is more than fair.

Grind these fossilized publishers into dust, let someone with a brain like Will Wright take over EA.
Reply

Posted: Apr 17th 2007 5:49PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
They better fear not having user created content! I find games are more fun when they let me be creative and let me add on things that I like--and more and more those are the types of games that I buy, especially when I'm choosing release day games.
Reply

Posted: Apr 17th 2007 7:25PM hotpuck6 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Fear?
seriously?
Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo, they are the gate keepers, they dictate who gets in and who doesn't.
So far, only Microsoft has made any used created content (XNA) available. Also, them and sony have been friendly to indie devs, with their arcade services, but thats hardly competition to a full publisher.
With the exception of the PC, user generated content will only become as prevelant as the big three want, not a second sooner (unless you consider PSP hacking the future of gaming)
Reply

Posted: Apr 17th 2007 8:50PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Corporations love the free market so long as they hold a monopoly on it.
Reply

Posted: Apr 18th 2007 6:38AM BurntMeatloaf said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Aren't game designers supposed to be professionals? If you can be outdone by someone just doing stuff on free time, how good are you?

The real threats are relying too much on user-generated content and hype. IE, market saturation.
Reply

Posted: Apr 18th 2007 9:47AM joevill said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Wow! That's crazy! I never thought of it like that!
Reply

Posted: Apr 18th 2007 12:09PM jdsony said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Game Designers are professionals but they are stuck following a plan which is dictated to him by the company. The bigger companies have more bureaucracy and more specific demands for games that follow the a strict guidelines of mediocrity. It's not always the fault of the game designers.

The great thing about user crated content is that they don't have to follow any rules. They can create content without fear of reprucutions. A 16 year old kid living in the suburbs is unlikely to be sued for copyright infringment with his free game. At most he will be threatened to stop making it. User created content also doesn't have to follow gaming fads. A free game can be risky and build new genres because it doesn't have to worry about meeting sales targets.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW