Reason behind making User Modifications Sub-Forum Private

[Jolt]

Hello guys. Basically, looking over the Crusader Kings 2, I was wondering why was the decision made to turn the User Modifications sub-section into a private one (And therefore away from the eyes of both prospective clients and pirates) - (Apparently the decision was done since the release of Sengoku, now that I think of it).

The reason why I wonder this is because I always enjoyed seeing what mods were being developed and how they could fundamentally change the game, and it might be a good reason to attract undecided customers into buying the games. Just to give several examples from different games, ranging from Magna Terra (Of EU:Rome, where a map ranging from Europe to Asia would phreaps bring a different experience to the game), MEIOU/Magna Mundi (Improving several aspects and realism to the original game), AGCEEP (In EU 2, for basically the same reasons), WiF (In HoI 2, for bringing a huge challenge to an otherwise "easy" game), VIP (In Victoria 1, which turned Vicky 1 into a fantastic game), PDM (In Vicky 2, which apparently is the successor of VIP), DVIP or Mappa Regnorum (For CK 1) among others.

The only two reasons I can come up with would be to:

1. Make a further effort in combating Piracy and preventing pirates from downloading the mods.
2. Attempt to enforce the registration of the game by those who did buy the game and saw no reason to register it.

Now, as to reason 1, I doubt many of the pirates who pirate Paradox games might pirate it due to the modifications, whereas it could well sway an undecided customer who had tried the demo, and went to see what mods there were that could improve the gameplay of the game. So turning the User Mods sub-forum into private to combat piracy doesn't seem very appropriate to me. If the company loses out on even 5 people not buying the game due to the lack of knowledge about how well the modding community was developed for the game, then it is a pretty large loss, especially in the initial lifecycle of the game (While I'm not quite sure this decision can turn 5 Pirates into 5 paying customers).

Which brings me to reason 2, and indeed, turning the User Mods into a private sub-forum might be a good catalyst for people who have bought the game, and want more out of it to register the game. And that is the only sound reason that I can think for Paradox to turn the sub-forum to private.

Since I like to see what is being done in the User Mods of the games I'm interested in, I was wondering what was the rationale behind the decision.

 

[LodovicoAriosto]

I am pretty sure it will open soon. The game was just released. The subforum has not been adjusted yet, that s all.

IIRC, mod subforums were like this with at least some of the previous releases as well, so nothing abnormal here.

 

[Castellon]

You can only participate and view sub forums if you have the game registered.
Extensive focus groups have told us this is the way to go.

 

[Jolt]

Extensive focus groups have told us this is the way to go.

Yes, I do realize that for a company that prides itself and advertises on having large modability of its games, and considering the small size of the company, a decision to restrict access of a major part of its products would be done by group consensus rather than "executive order".

What I was asking was, what was the consensus of the focus groups that drove to such an idea.

 

[jamhaw]

I would have to disagree with this policy, there is more than one Paradox game that I bought exclusively because I wanted to a play a particular mod. If I cannot peruse the subforum then I have no idea what I am missing and will just assume that there are no mods that are relevant to my interests and shall take my money elsewhere. I thought that the old policy where non-registered viewers could look but not post seemed like an effective compromise, surely some way could be determined to ensure that they could not download also?

 

[jamhaw]

I would have to disagree with this concept. There are many games I have purchased simply in order to play a particular mod and if I cannot peruse the relevant sub-forum then I will just assume that there are no modifications relevant to my interests. I don't see any reason why the old compromise of allowing someone to view but not post in the modifications sub-forum was not good enough, as provisions could be made to ensure that unregistered users could not download (say by ordering all posts containing links to the downloads to be on a hidden sub-forum or some such).

EDIT: Odd how my previous post did not display before, perhaps I have a problem with my web cache?

 

[flame7926]

I dont like this decision either. I bought EU3 and Victoria 2 particularly for the mods, as the general reactions to the game was mixed, something I probably wasnt interested in, but after seeing what mods can do with them, and how much better they were, I purchased both. A big reason I didn't look more into Sengoku was because the base game seemed bland, but mods could spice it up. Unfortunately I couldnt view the mod subforums.

 

[Castellon]

Yes, I do realize that for a company that prides itself and advertises on having large modability of its games, and considering the small size of the company, a decision to restrict access of a major part of its products would be done by group consensus rather than "executive order".

What I was asking was, what was the consensus of the focus groups that drove to such an idea.

I don't thik you understand what a focus group is, it is made up of Consumers not staff.

 

[LodovicoAriosto]

You need to separate forum members and general customers. Most customers don't play mods. They just don't bother with checking the forum every few days to get the latest 2.9376 beta patch and get a DLC instead.

It is similar to the situation when PI decided to offer loads of DLC instead of consolidated expansions. Forum community rejected the idea in the poll but Johan said "people love DLC". I guess he was not making it up so it must have been based on market analysis as well as this decision.

This move from modding support (and closing those subforums for any member is precisely that, I would bet on decline of activity in "private" subforums) to DLC can be observed in more than one PI game lately, especially when the best modders suddenly stop modding and work on DLC or spinoff games.

Focus group samples were probably consisting of different kinds of possible customers not just hardcore fans from the forum which are a minority.

So yes, people here need to get used to the fact that they are not a priority. It's only natural in growing businesses.

If at least one sample was created solely from forum members I doubt they would prefer this setting.

Just my thoughts. I have actually moderated a few focus groups myself BTW.

Personally, I am not buying any PI game unless I see mods first. Since the clausewitz engine introduction I find all PI games rather incomplete or lacking flavour or immersion, just shells which need to be filled. But this is just me and other fools on the forum who are not fanboys who need to buy every title made or published by PI even if it is a total disaster (and lets admit it, there have been some among third party titles lately).

 

[Castellon]

Sorry you feel that way.
Our policy is to reward people that buy our games with additional benefits like access to specialty user mods forum, rather than punishing them by putting invasive DRM into the game.
This is something our fans yes fans on this forum have said over and over again that they prefer.

 

[LodovicoAriosto]

I get your point but you present two things (DRM, limiting forum access) and categorically say one of them needs to be introduced like it's natural law although until recently none of them were present. Why at least one instead of none? Of course there are reasons but you did not provide one although at first sight it may look like you did. Standard became "special benefit", that is all.

Well, most of what I wrote can be dismissed. the main point is that I don't think that modding activity will increase as a result of this change. For me, mods are essential since EU3. That is also the reason why I came to the forum. Simply put, PI IMHO 1. takes the risk of reduction of modding and 2. making advantage of the possible fact that mods became more important for proper and fun gameplay; all for the sake of fighting piracy. Which does seem a bit less fair than it was before to me - reduce an audience for modders while, at the same time, advertising them as "special benefit", that is making them part of the product?

It looks like cutting the branch which you are sitting on. Offering flourishing mods as part of the product while making them less flourishing as a consequence of doing so.

But of course I don't have the insight needed for proper evaluation so I will try to steer clear of digging into this further.

 

[Comrade Chaos]

I'd like to note I buy most games entirely on the mods for them.

 

[unmerged(174159)]

Sorry you feel that way.
Our policy is to reward people that buy our games with additional benefits like access to specialty user mods forum, rather than punishing them by putting invasive DRM into the game.
This is something our fans yes fans on this forum have said over and over again that they prefer.

Would it be a problem to ask for links to Forum threads where people have specifically requested that access to mods forums be restricted?

Personally I dislike DRM, but I have found the games that I have purchased and bothered to register, worth the cash. However like others, I like to look before I leap - I don't feel it's fair personally that you've taken that option away.

 

[flame7926]

Why not conduct a forum poll, so the people that will be affected by it can vote. Pirates arent going to buy a game to access a mod.

 

[Lor Dric]

I don't think they will change this

 

[Brent15]

I prefer forum registration over DRM. The registration doesn't seem to be a problem for most forum users. I do, however, get upset when members quickly dismiss those who haven't registered as pirates. The forums here are generally polite and sophisticated (as far as forums go) but I've noticed a few times when new members were treated poorly because they had questions and hadn't registered.

I'd rather registration weren't a requirement for the sub-forums but it's a good "middle path" IMO.

 

[Jolt]

I don't thik you understand what a focus group is, it is made up of Consumers not staff.

I have confused terms. There's a similar term in Portuguese that stands for group meetings between a company's members to discuss/address certain topics.

Regardless, it is sad that you have quoted my post just to show a simple mistake rather than attempting to clarify my original doubt which began this thread.

 

[Castellon]

I think the rest of the thread has done that.

 

[P-51]

Wow I just noticed this. Since nothing I say would change anything I won't bother going into detail but it seems like a pretty stupid idea and it would be nice if we were given an explanation to why this decision was thought to be the right choice.

 

[Castellon]

I don't really understand the issue since most people posting in this thread like you have full access.