Armed Assault - Self Publish?

[SodaBob 0]

First off, I am in no way affiliated with cafepress.com, but I do have several stores using their service.

At any rate, they allow anyone to create an online store with items like custom t-shirts, hats, etc. But they also give the store owner the ability to upload and publish their own data CD's.

Perhaps you folks at Bohemia could "cut out the middle man" and simply publish your own game via cafepress.com?

[Killbert 0]

That sounds more like a last resort. BIS can reach a much bigger audience with a real publisher. And I do believe they will get it too.

[meyamoti 0]

As long as its not EA,then we'll have some third in team fighting and they'll make 20 shots or more to kill a person and vehicles get damaged simply a bump,imagine trying to weave through a forest in one of those (I think their willis jeeps...) and you tap a tree,either 2/3 of that vehicles armor is gone or BOOM your dead,weee.

I just hope its not EA.

[Uziyahu--IDF 0]

That sounds more like a last resort. BIS can reach a much bigger audience with a real publisher. And I do believe they will get it too.

Can't anybody order from CafePress?  (I also had this idea.)  And the CafePress business model means that only copies being sold would need to be made.  Much less WASTE.

Has America's Army had problems with distributing its MONSTER download to gamers who wanted it? Yet you're telling me that B.I. needs to go with a publisher so that they can kill trees cranking out manuals and boxes?

[jotte 0]

AA have a publisher.. US DoD With that behind you and the funds they got for it its like compering apples and oranges.

[stakex 0]

Thats not publishing your own game really... and Im sure they would do it all in house before they do something like this. Dont mena to shoot down your idea, but its not a logical one. Big companies dont use things like this to publish a serious game... they either go to an established publisher like Take Two, EA, or Codemasters, or they just do it in house.

[Raptor 10]

lol cafepress.... yes.

bad idea...

[schmerzbringer 0]

1.) lol @ cafepress

2.) It is End of September now.

Most parts are fixed, also the publisher, except ArmA ´ll not hit stores this year.

So it is already to late, although we didn´t see the flash.

So let´s wait for our unicorn.

[meyamoti 0]

Thats not publishing your own game really... and Im sure they would do it all in house before they do something like this. Dont mena to shoot down your idea, but its not a logical one. Big companies dont use things like this to publish a serious game... they either go to an established publisher like Take Two, EA, or Codemasters, or they just do it in house.

Codemasters over ea...pplleeease dun let it be ea.....

[Uziyahu--IDF 0]

AA have a publisher.. US DoD    With that behind you and the funds they got for it its like compering apples and oranges.

But until recently they distributed America's Army through downloads and probably game magazine discs.  So all their "publisher" did was provide the original server for download.  Once the first few copies are downloaded they can be mirrored on other hosts. (Or you just burn several discs, which anybody can do, then send it to those who will be mirroring it.)

Yeah, you guys laugh, but that's all that you do. Laugh. Let's hear some reasons why CafePress (or any similar service, if there are others) is such a bad idea.

America's Army has 3.4 Million players who completed Basic Training.

It would seem that putting a box, a manual and a disc on a shelf is not necessary.

Can you hear the voice whispering in the field?

"If it is good, they will download it."

[jotte 0]

"If it is good, they will download it."

I wouldn't mind at all if BIS selfpublished ArmA since that would mean no publisher meddling with the game to fit their view of "what the market wants". Since I'm blessed with a fast internet access a digital download style publishing is something that is very convinient to me, I've got several games from Matrix Games that way.

But compering ArmA to AA in this regard is not a good idea since the later one is a free of charge game. It's such a hit since it is FREE, this all become a diffrent story when you have to pay for it. It's like I said befor, apples and oranges.

[SpecOp9 0]

Cafe Press is made for people like us - not major companies

[marcusjm 0]

Seriously. What's wrong with EA? They can ensure that BIS gets maximum shelf coverage, marketing resources etc. Only reason people bash EA is because they are big and succesful, there's no other good explanation. It's like the unwarranted hate towards Microsoft (which for some reason seems to have lessened by each year).

More sold copies = more resources for BIS.

Activision would be nice too, they can handle big releases.

And why not Microsoft?

The Cafepress idea sounds bad to me too. BIS would probably get a bigger distribution if they used hot dog stands .

marcus

[kevb0 0]

I couldn't agree more, Marcusjm.

They will put it on the shelves, and they will get alot of people to buy it. It's too late to make gameplay altering decesions for the game, since the release date is still for Q4 2005.

If you think about it, Most of the releases from EA are the top of the line. Even if you may not like the game, CoD, Battlefield 2 Sims, MoH, Most of the sports games, And many many other games are top of the line best selling games.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Armed Assault have Codemasters? I thought it was OFP2 that wasn't going to be produced.

[Madus_Maximus 0]

CoD was Activision by the way.

Most people don't want EA to get involved as they always end up dictating what happens. Even if they don't get their way with the initial release, it's EA, who's to say they won't make an addon that's already being produced before the original game hits the shelf (coughBF2, The Sims 2)?

If EA get something successful, they move in and tell the devs what THEY want and they have to do it, or they're out of a job, simple as. It's not like EA need them is it? They're not losing anything that'll brankrupt them for doing so. They'll just take the rights and get another team to do it the way they want it doing.

EA screw over the end user too. Sure they get massive coverage in advertising and so on, but they ALWAYS seem to remove a LOT of content from the games before release, then put them in an addon pack later on and charge us for something we should have had from the get go.

Plus if EA publish Armed Assault and/or Game 2 I'll most likely not buy them. I really hate the EA "ethitcs". "Why compete when you can buy them out?". It's morally wrong, and illegal, as it's called a monopoly. Look at ESPN, EA got the rights to make ESPN games for 15 years, JUST them! They have NO competition in those games now, same with Lord of the Rings. They recently got the full rights to all of Tolkiens work.

EA just get licences then sell crap inferior products based on their success (not the games success but the name on the box... eg Lord of the Rings and loads of other movie licences).

If any of you lot have seen the progress of the new "Special Forces" addon for Battlefield 2 you'll see what I mean about spouting out any crap they know people will buy because of the name (in this case the Battlefield name). I've seen better quality addons in OFP, and it's a 4 year old engine for god sake! I've seen much more impressive and well researched mods for BF2 than that pile o' shite addon.

Meh rant over. I just hope they DO NOT go with EA. They may sell more, but they'll lose their developers freedom for any future titles and the name will become a joke with the masses of addons and sequels they'll undoubtably make.

To a lesser extent I hope they don't go with Ubi either, they seem to screw over PC gamers all the time, especially with after game support like patching (which they seem to adament to make themselves... then fuck up the game). Remember Raven Shield guys? Oh the memories!

P.S. EA seem to spend more money hyping and advertising the games than actually making them good. It's all shiny presentation, and sadly there's morons out there who buy things just because they look nice and for no other reason.

[chipper 0]

true dat

[Uziyahu--IDF 0]

"If it is good, they will download it."

But compering ArmA to AA in this regard is not a good idea since the later one is a free of charge game.  It's such a hit since it is FREE, this all become a diffrent story when you have to pay for it. It's like I said befor, apples and oranges.

Publishing is where a great deal of the overhead comes from!

You're telling me 2 million wouldn't pay $20 to order the game from CafePress or some similar service or download it from the 'net?

And whether it was 500,000 or 4,000,000, the result is the same. Little publishing overhead and much less waste.

[Uziyahu--IDF 0]

Cafe Press is made for people like us - not major companies

You're telling me that if CafePress makes $1 profit for every data disk burned for individuals that they wouldn't be willing to make $1 x 1,000,000 for burning THE SAME disk 1,000,000 times instead of having to deal with the administration of so many different burning requests?

I think you're wrong.

[marcusjm 0]

Not that we have any say in the matter anyway .

But.

The talk about overhead. If BIS were to self-publish they would end up having the overhead in their own laps anyway. They would have to hire marketing personnel, deal with printing issues etc etc (and so forth). Having done publishing on a smaller scale I know it's no small thing to publish a product.

Would you rather have BIS spend money/resources on that crap instead of development?

Ok so EA might not be the best but what about Microsoft? They have invested in serious simulations before. FS2004 is a good example that MS have long term investments.

marcus

[EiZei 0]

Anybody who wants EA should do some research and see what happened to ultimas after EA acquired origin.

What we would end up with would be a 2010 edition of call of duty or something similar.

Last but definetly not least EA is extremely hostile to user made mods.

Quote[/b] ]

Ok so EA might not be the best but what about Microsoft? They have invested in serious simulations before. FS2004 is a good example that MS have long term investments.

I dont think they are doing anything but age of empires and FS series on PC nowadays.

[DBR_ONIX 0]

P.S. EA seem to spend more money hyping and advertising the games than actually making them good. It's all shiny presentation, and sadly there's morons out there who buy things just because they look nice and for no other reason.

Erm, if EA published it, they are very good at hyping/advertising the game. They can't make a bad games, as they are not developing it

"sadly there's morons out there who buy things just because they look nice and for no other reason" - Erm, maybe certain people play games for different reasons? And acctualy enjoy games you don't?

I'm really not bothered about what publishers they use. Cafepress is not a good idea at all, as it's mainly (or totaly? Not sure) online based.. No ArmA in the shops = very very very bad idea..

(Don't mention AA: Online isn't it in shops, I've seen it in shops in a box with a manual, and it will come free, oddly enough, with magazine cover discs..)

Hmm, EA publishing it would be.. funny.. All the people who hate OFP would be semi-forced to buy a game published by them.. Would be interesting to see the reaction

Again, I'm not bothered about what publisher is used, aslong as 1, they advertise the game well enough, 2, put the games in as many major game shops as possible, 3, put it round several countys, 4, they make it avalible online for people who don't live in the countrys where it's put in shops

3 kind of limits it to large publishers, altough I suppose a determined small-published could get the game spread around more than a huge publisher that just sends a few hundered boxes to a set bunch of stores...

Meh, we'll see

- Ben

[redface 1]

in one way or another, the Prague-based publisher CENEGA will be involved, since BIS participates in that company, and this is probably why it takes so long to broker the deal with a company that is willing to supply ArmA outside Europe only.

so the panic is a bit premature

[imported_bör 0]

As long as EA wouldn't influence future BIS productions, I'd be content with EA as publisher for ArmA. But I seriously doubt that, we're speaking of EA.

[Uziyahu--IDF 0]

I don't see how not having a box in the shop is a bad idea if it is a good game. Both online stores and full version downloads have been proven workable by other companies.

Anyway, I'm through arguing it.

People that fail to see that the internet was made for mass distribution of any kind of data really bug me. The internet had the aim of a paperless society, yet we keep cutting down the trees. We're such stupid monkeys.

I haven't had a printer on my computer for YEARS. You would be surprised how little you need to use paper.

[VerySolidSnake 0]

I agree the internet is made for mass distrubution. I agree we should turn into a paperless society (which it's basically becoming).

But that's where our similarities end. So lets say BI puts ArmA on cafepress, without a publisher. What do they do after that? Throw some banners on ebaums world? They will have to do everything themselves, which is so damn frustrating. You'll have to make hundreds of new contacts that publishers already have, you'll have to cut advertising deals with so many different people that publishers already have the templates to do so.

I could go on and on, but even if they did something as to distrubuting everything online, they still need a publisher, making cafepress a bad idea.