Let's expound on that last bit.

Voting with my wallet is problematic.

And I don't just mean in the sense that it involves restraint and management of money. I mean in the sense that it doesn't tell the other side much. It's the most powerful communication channel we have with the developers and publishers, but it can only carry one bit of information. Yes/no, like/dislike.

Gamers that grumble on forums about this or that loved or hated (mostly hated) game and its qualities (or lack thereof) are often told to just vote with their wallet. But what will my vote mean to the people in charge? It won't tell them anything about why I did or didn't buy the game. Modern Warfare 2 is an excellent example: how do I convey to Activision that I love their embracement of Steamworks without implicitly supporting their... slightly controversial stance on PC multiplayer?

Shouldn't we be past this? Isn't it time for publishers to take a slightly more proactive stance with their audiences? I don't mean the forums; they're half-useless as a communication or survey tool, what with the amount of demographic self-selection that applies to every poster. No, we need something with more weight. And I believe that a good approach might be designed around stealing from Brad Wardell.

Specifically, we should start with his popular and controversial post on piracy, where he essentially posited that "Piracy doesn't matter, only sales matter." Let's paraphrase that bit into "Opinions don't matter, only sales matter."

Let's be realistic here: a lot of people that complain about Modern Warfare 2 are going to buy it. I will too, in a few years. That means we'll give money to Activision. And even if they ignore the vocal minority on the forums (though I'm sure they do care at least a little bit), they should be listening to their customers. It's impossible to know who might have bought your game but didn't and why, but it's comparatively trivial to ask the people who did why they did. Big publishers already do this to some degree, but it should be done far more comprehensively. Exit polls, maybe? Cooperate with game stores to ask customers why they've bought what they did? No, that's simplistic. So why don't we use our Gore-given Internet to do it?

It's easy. Most of these games are already integrated into one online service or another, most of them with social networking aspects and cute stuff like achievements. So let's expand on that. Every purchase comes with one online account. Let us give each account two vote credits. At any time from the moment of purchase any customer may use the game interface to cast a positive or negative vote on an aspect of the game. But the votes aren't fluff like achievements. You only ever get two for any game, and once you spend them you can never vote on that game again. There are no rewards for using them - in fact, casting a vote might carry a slight in-game penalty (to discourage frivolous voting). They should be used by customers who really want to tell you something, so much so they are willing to inconvenience themselves to do it.

You do this, and you are no longer listening to strangers on the Internet. You are listening to your faithful customers, who care about your game (meaning of course they might buy the next one) and have something important to say. The trick of course is to integrate these votes wholly and elegantly into the game. This isn't tech support. You don't want to hear just from people who know how to use the console commands in your FPS; in fact you don't want to hear just from people who play multiplayer (still a minority, despite what most pundits think; not everyone is a social animal and games have diverse patterns of use). Casting a vote should be as simple as saving a game. Everyone should be able to do it, quickly and easily. And if you promote these vote credits as much as achievements are touted (so that everyone knows about them), you can start estimating with some degree of reliability what percentage of your customer base really cares about this or that design choice. Not to mention the knock-on effect of customers feeling like they matter and their voices are heard, which is how fanbases are born.

You do want to know more about your customer base, don't you? We already have these wonderful communication and data processing machines on our desks - so let's use them more.

Why the Modern Warfare 2 uproar is dumb, but not for the reasons you think

Also why voting with one's wallet presents quantization issues 

Here's a letter I sent to Tycho of Penny Arcade after reading his comment on the whole MW2 mess. I didn't much care one way or the other before, but his attitude - specifically with him being an avowed PC enthusiast - caused me to form a concrete opinion. (I later realized the prose is a bit ornate, but since it's Tycho I find it completely appropriate.)

Still a big fan of this teaser. Infinity Ward are artists and artisans. 

Here's the thing: a lot of really big game makers create PC games with server browsers and dedicated servers and all that. It's not unreasonable to expect Infinity Ward to follow suit - what is unreasonable is the degree of fanaticism, malice and paranoia present in the uproar. This is wrong not in relation to the game, but as a signifier of the introversion of the PC gaming community. One game is irrelevant, but this type of nonconstructive response might lead to a future PC platform inundated with console-like games, as the developers abandon the community entirely.

I like my PC games. I like mods and user-created content and server browsers. It may be whiny to complain when we're disallowed them, but it would be disingenuous to pretend I don't care. I don't spew hate on gaming forums though, because it won't change much. I will vote with my wallet however, but it saddens me to be forced to do so, because it robs me of an opportunity to wholeheartedly support the inclusion of Steamworks in the game, hopefully a sign of a coming trend*. How can I condemn one and praise the other? There's but a single box and single price. How could the developers ever know what my reasons were, whatever the decision?

One last bit: You imply that PC gamers are lashing out because they feel betrayed, their platform of choice abandoned. You have no sympathy for such an emotional response to a foregone conclusion, but I do. It always hurts when someone you love (however superficially and transitively) tells you they don't much care about you, and in fact would much rather court that cute young demographic from down the hall. It doesn't hurt less just because many others before them said the same thing. Perhaps I'm being naïve though. I do condemn the methods, but I can't not sympathize with the emotions behind them.

* I'm aware of the hypocrisy of lauding one type of consolization of the PC platform while decrying another, but I firmly believe that Steam represents most of the best bits of the console experience, while avoiding most of the worst. I can't honestly say the same about some parts of Modern Warfare 2.

Spirit and Steam

Some time ago, an interested customer on The Spirit Engine 2 forums asked if the game will be available on Steam, citing the likely popularity and income boost. The developer, Mark Pay, said no, citing the game's lack of popularity and production values/his reluctance to get into the marketing&sales game. I've been interested in TSE2 on Steam myself, and was flabbergasted by this response. So I set out to give him a piece of my mind. This is relevant because my post also encapsulates my general opinion on Steam and indie games (in short: they mix well). Here are my arguments as to why:

I've registered specifically and only to tell you guys this: You really really should put this game on Steam.

Here's why:
1) A placement on Steam guarantees a sales boost. Considering how big and mainstream Steam is, from their perspective you basically don't exist - which is good, because it means you can expect buyer behavior similar to your initial release (only bigger). Steam pretty much made Darwinia, and by extension Introversion. It's been a while, but things haven't changed much.

2) You're in a position to do exactly what the guys at Zombie Cow Studios did just recently. They just released Time Gentlemen Please, a very lovely (and very very low-profile) adventure game, and sequel to the freeware (and not so good, but still fun) Ben There Dan That. The indie press adored it. People bought it. Then Zombie Cow pestered the guys at Steam to publish them, and did it as a package: you buy our new game, you get the original for free. The original already was free, but it didn't matter, because that's not how buyers think. Steam customers see "Double Pack", and they buy. It's psychological. You guys have an older, OK game, and a great new sequel, and we can have both for $15! Yay! (Granted their price point is lower, but I think it translates.)
Though I have no firm numbers either way, I'm led to believe they haven't regretted their partnership with Steam.

3) Low-hassle, customer-friendly anti-piracy system included free of charge.

4) Valve are fussy about games they allow onto Steam, but TSE2 absolutely has more than good enough production values (compared to some of the other stuff on Steam) - in fact, it's downright odd how much you fit with the Steam Indie aesthetic, if there is such a thing. There are guys on the Steam staff that love indie games, and you absolutely have a chance with them. And they don't require popularity (though it helps) - they can make you popular. This is actually a symptom of a larger issue, which leads me to my next point:

5) I don't intend to be mean, so please take this as a friendly critique: from where I'm standing, you haven't done as good a job promoting the game as you could have. As I understand it you've sent the release to a few indie-oriented sites, and relied on word-of-mouth to carry you - which it surprisingly has for a bit. But you've underestimated yourself. You've been aiming at GameTunnel, while you should have aimed at 1UP and Eurogamer. Because you're good enough for mainstream, and you need to be aware of it and take advantage of it. Kieron Gillen wrote a glowing article about TSE2 on Rock Paper Shotgun, after hearing about it accidentally and doing some digging. You should have been all over Rock Paper Shotgun from the first announcement you made. OK, so you don't consider yourself a good salesman. You didn't publicize the release all that much. Forget about it, because now you have a chance to fix it, and to make things even easier, this time there's only a few people you need to convince, and they all work at the same place. (Yes, Valve's Steam department is surprisingly small. Don't get intimidated.)

6) Therefore, I know Steam is not very "fun", and is about as mainstream as you can get in this line of work, but please don't let that dissuade you from trying. And trying. You will have a hard time convincing Valve to pay attention, but treat them just as you would a game journalist. Be polite and insistent, and show them why Steam absolutely needs to have your game, because it's just that good. (And it is more than good enough.) Show them how and why you're special and different from the rabble trying to get in. You might want to emphasize your streamlined, but not simplified innovative combat system, your strange and new gameworld, your wonderful graphics, and of course all those glowing reviews and awards.

7) It might be possible to integrate Steam Achievements into the game, you know better than I whether it can be done. But if you can do it, your game will sell more. In fact, I encourage you to integrate as much of Steam functionality as you reasonably can (not just Achievements but general gameplay stats, a la Team Fortress 2 - you can imagine how much more some numbers in an RPG mean if the whole world can click on the player's Steam webpage and see them), because these things do matter to us customers. They're kind of stupid, but they help sales. Think of them as a metagame - one of the advantages of a huge, unified online game platform. The guys at XBox Live can tell you it does make a difference.

8) I'll be very honest now: I haven't bought TSE2. Oh, I've played the demo, and liked it a lot, but as a matter of habit I just don't buy games online. Except on Steam, where I buy quite a fair amount. The reasons are partly rational (the advantages of Steam as a platform, cuts down on my spending if I have a mental line I won't cross) and partly irrational (I like to keep all my games in one place). So understand I'm not just doing this for your benefit - I want you to put the game on Steam, so I can convince myself to buy it. I guarantee there are others like me, because Steam is just such a mindshare leader.

*) Oh, finally, when you get Steam to publish you, do all of us European gamers a favor and don't let the bastards equalize the prices. Currently the default European price for a $15 game is 15€, a ridiculous 40% increase. Same goes for pounds. Apparently all it takes for Valve to fix this is that you firmly insist on it, and tell them what prices you prefer for each market (US/UK/EU). You wouldn't believe how much it pisses us off when we see a game that hasn't had this done.

OK, I understand. You hate sales, marketing and business. That's perfectly normal :-)

But don't think of it that way. Think of it from my perspective: there's this awesome game, see, but so few people know about it. I want it on Steam, not so you can reach my market segment to monetize your brand leverage (or whatever bullshit), but to give myself and all the people like me the opportunity to play it. Or, to really lean hard on the guilt-trip, you're not denying yourself our money - you're denying us your game.

Well, not me specifically, but all those gamers who don't know about you. You know what I mean.

So there. Thank you for your time, and I hope you will consider my proposal. Best of luck, lots of sales.

An interesting phenomenon

Did you guys notice? Steam game prices seem to be diversifying.

Not so long ago, there was mostly just a few price classes, and all the games fit them, but lately (at least on the cheap end of the spectrum, which is the part that interests me most) new articles are sliding in between. This is especially true for indie games, which of course are free to set their price point as they please.

I like it - diversity is good.