Yippeeeeeeeee

[togi]

Bulge is going to be a Completely Seperate Base Game

with its own set of Modules

It has Nothing to do with CMBN and its Modules

Will BFC not publish any other module for normandy?

If so , CMBN+CW owners seperately purchased may have rights to get a discount because we have no chance to combine any other module :-)

regards

[waclaw]

And yet you continue to post instead of waiting?

Correct. And because there is $35 worth of content you should NOT expect to pay $10-$15. If you do not think it is worth $35... fine... don't buy it.

If the Module were for sale today you would be correct. But we haven't even announced a shipping date, so why is it *SO VERY IMPORTANT* to know what is in it *RIGHT NOW*? How about you let us confirm what is in the Module when we are ready?

I think we understood that a long time ago.

A hint. If you do not want to criticize something that does not yet exist, maybe you shouldn't criticize something that does not yet exist?

You do see the problem with being so vocally negative/pessimistic and then at the same time say that you don't have enough information to make a judgement? I sure do

Steve

but I can now write about their hopes and fears about the product, on the basis of fragmentary information that you give us? I think it quite natural? I of course I could be wrong (I hope) because I'm curious of your opinion.

[Mord]

will BFC publish any other module for normandy?

They are supposed to do an Odds & Ends Module with rare vehicles and stuff that didn't make in the first three releases. It may end up being a pack, though.

Mord.

[nachinus]

Lastly, some people (many, in fact) like buying something that tells the story of a particular battle/campaign. They want to play historical battles that look and feel the part. Terrain, formations, and equipment... all wrapped up in one package.

I would be in this group. I really value the quality and quantity of campaigns over anything else. And since I find Market Garden the most fascinating operation in WW2, I'm really looking forward to this module.

... this doesn't mean that I don't think that fire should be present to properly depict the urban fights in Arnhem.

[Battlefront.com]

but I can now write about their hopes and fears about the product, on the basis of fragmentary information that you give us? I think it quite natural? I of course I could be wrong (I hope) because I'm curious of your opinion.

I think it is "quite natural" to give someone with a 15 year positive track record a little credit. Then judge things based on what is actually delivered instead of what's been mentioned in marketing materials, complete or incomplete.

But I guess ignoring past history, focusing on only what information you have this week, and doing battle with people telling you that you're impatient is also "natural" for some.

They are supposed to do an Odds & Ends Module with rare vehicles and stuff that didn't make in the first three releases. It may end up being a pack, though.

Correct. There will be more content for Normandy, but no more Modules. Packs have much less in them and are also priced a lot lower.

I think Steve will understand

please read my past message before, I mean that BFC has seen that they are selling more games or modules at first launch, so they don't need to lower price for the favor of ex-buyers (CMBN + CW owners) or they know that their ex-buyers would buy this game at first launch as majority. So they don't need any marketing strategy for ex-owner. Directly sell to milk the cows :-)

I do understand what you are saying and you are correct to a certain degree. But it is a little more basic than that.

It is game industry standard to offer discounts after products get older. It's been that way for at least 20 years. We do not do this as much as other games because the horrible retail model does not apply to us.

The other part is the "bulk purchase" stales standard. No matter what the product or industry is, customers expect to get discounts for buying more things at one time. So when someone wants to purchase a Base Game + Module at the same time, he expects to not pay the same as Base Game and Module separately.

Customers who do not wish to wait, and purchase each game as they are released, do pay more over time. It is their choice. They also have more time to enjoy the games than someone waiting, so that must be remembered.

Our costs are still our costs. We must cover our costs with the money you guys give us. We see this model working out well for both us and our customers so we intend to keep going with it.

Steve

[Oddball_E8]

This is what BMW revealed about their new M3 line in 2011:

I wonder if Waclaw and Togi saw that and thought "What a ripoff! There arent even any wheels on that thing! And where is the engine??? Nobody is going to buy that, it doesnt even look like a real car, its just three lines!"

[togi]

This is what BMW revealed about their new M3 line in 2011:

I wonder if Waclaw and Togi saw that and thought "What a ripoff! There arent even any wheels on that thing! And where is the engine??? Nobody is going to buy that, it doesnt even look like a real car, its just three lines!"

Hey Odd_ball,

It is very Odd that you try to pull me in this disscussion again. I don't mean they are selling the product that is uncompleted as at your photo attached. At past, I had problem of path drawing on the bridges now solved and I cited that the module intent is not worth 35 usd with regards to Steve list. Now I have disscussed about their policy and I understand that they haven't any favorable approach to old customers. It seems all same the new ones and old ones according to the BFC. Even the new ones seem lucky they are grabbing their bundles with lower price according to olderones.

Regards.

[Rocky Balboa]

Just as you might not care about some of the more obscure Airborne forces (British and American) that took part in these battles.

Steve

What no Poles??? or maybe your being deliberately obtuse

[warrenpeace]

Steve:

I'm a bit surprised you did not answer my ratio question. Since the base game is required to play the module, the key statistic is what percentage of the buying universe (i.e. base game owners) by the module. If this percentage is low, it suggests that lowering the cost of the module may increase total revenue. If the percentage is relatively high, then this would not be a good idea. You have this information for all three shock force modules as well as CW mod. (Gustov line might be too new, I don't know how your sales decline over time, although that also would be an interesting question).

With regards to MG, I will take a wait and see approach.

[Ron]

Wow what an interesting thread. As an outsider looking in I'm reminded of the circular arguments from my children; no apologies to those who are clamoring for 'cheaper prices, more content or whatever discount you feel entitled to', bottom line that's exactly what you want and face it you are only speaking for yourself. This old customer is happy with BFC's direction, happy with the content in modules whether new terrain, TOE or scenarios/campaigns and have never blinked at the price they are selling at. For me, these games and modules represent incredible value in gaming time.

It bears repeating again, as a customer I am not obligated to purchase anything from BFC, and if I am interested in a game or module then I will do my research before buying. If not for me, then I won't and move on. If I care enough I may voice an opinion as to why. A simple fact I think. The other things going on here - the sense of some knowing what's best for the majority or BFC, the sense of entitlement or the supposed right to demand, the attempt to pressure or convince BFC/customers they are 'right' is in error. In the end, you can only present the facts then trust that your children will figure it out along the way. Most do.

[Seedorf81]

Ron's statement about this thread starting to look like a children's squabble is in my view not too far from the truth. Maybe it's about time to close this thread?

[waclaw]

I think it is "quite natural" to give someone with a 15 year positive track record a little credit. Then judge things based on what is actually delivered instead of what's been mentioned in marketing materials, complete or incomplete.

But I guess ignoring past history, focusing on only what information you have this week, and doing battle with people telling you that you're impatient is also "natural" for some.

Steve

This convinced me.

I just have a request, give more than the usual movies, photos from the module, I like to watch (like most of us) the progress of your work - and the more you release information / videos / photos is easier to convince us to spend money;)

[sfhand]

Just off the top of my head (don't worry, it didn't take any of my already scarce hair with it), it occurs to me that a lot of the work that went into MG won't be appreciated by some, e.g., terrain, bridges, etc. But, these people who are complaining (my assumption is they are complaining because they value getting new units over all else) will benefit in later titles (if they buy them) due to features added (I know it is a module, but the ditch thingy is a new feature) moving the feature set of CMx2 forward. So, even if they don't plan on buying MG I am hoping they will at least be happy about the state of the game engine improving, but that would mean being able to defer immediate gratification in the quest of a greater reward...

[Waffen_PL]

I just have a request, give more than the usual movies, photos from the module, I like to watch (like most of us) the progress of your work - and the more you release information / videos / photos is easier to convince us to spend money;)

Yeah, there wouldn't be all of this mess if there were some sort of dev diaries or new informations from time to time. Right now there was one list of things that will be in MG and whole big thread about things that would not be included so we were getting worried

[A Canadian Cat]

This is what BMW revealed about their new M3 line in 2011:<snip>

LOL that was a whole lot more entertaining than trying to set these guys straight. Thanks for that.

[A Canadian Cat]

Yeah, there wouldn't be all of this mess if there were some sort of dev diaries or new informations from time to time.

Either that or there would be such a blow up *every time* they posted information to the dev blog.

I wonder which it would be

[Rocky Balboa]

Yeah, there wouldn't be all of this mess if there were some sort of dev diaries or new informations from time to time. Right now there was one list of things that will be in MG and whole big thread about things that would not be included so we were getting worried Yeah, there wouldn't be all of this mess if there were some sort of dev diaries or new informations from time to time. Right now there was one list of things that will be in MG and whole big thread about things that would not be included so we were getting worried

Guys you need to keep in mind that Bf is not a large company with 50 to 100 developers working on these projects. They have very few full time employees and the rest are contract or volunteers. Any time spent doing marketing materials means less time spent working on the game and game content. If they spend time doing videos and dev diaries then the game is delayed even more. If they hire somone to put together more of this stuff then guess what? The price we pay goes up accordingly ... everything costs ....

If you want a dev diary, Jons has done an excellent dev diary on scenario design which is stickied to this forum. Also try to be more appreciative of what efforts they do make to keep us informed. Your criticism of the video that was posted will only serve to make them not want to release information in the future.

[George MC]

Wow what an interesting thread. As an outsider looking in I'm reminded of the circular arguments from my children; no apologies to those who are clamoring for 'cheaper prices, more content or whatever discount you feel entitled to', bottom line that's exactly what you want and face it you are only speaking for yourself. This old customer is happy with BFC's direction, happy with the content in modules whether new terrain, TOE or scenarios/campaigns and have never blinked at the price they are selling at. For me, these games and modules represent incredible value in gaming time.

It bears repeating again, as a customer I am not obligated to purchase anything from BFC, and if I am interested in a game or module then I will do my research before buying. If not for me, then I won't and move on. If I care enough I may voice an opinion as to why. A simple fact I think. The other things going on here - the sense of some knowing what's best for the majority or BFC, the sense of entitlement or the supposed right to demand, the attempt to pressure or convince BFC/customers they are 'right' is in error. In the end, you can only present the facts then trust that your children will figure it out along the way. Most do.

Hear! hear! Well said Ron.

[The Steppenwulf]

This convinced me.

There's the nub of the issue right there - it's called trust and this entire debate centres around trust. I think I referred to this in one of my first ever posts on these forums. I can understand why many gamers - particularly younger ones - are so sceptical about game software and their developers, specifically regarding game content/pricing and value. The reason for that is because so many game companies out there fail consistently to produce a product that IS value for money. Worse than that, they often leave bugs and unfinished content in the game unattended to. Even worse than that, when the customer tries to get some answers on these matters the companies show no responsibility to address the games issues or continue to support the product beyond a six month post-release period. There's little wonder the products wind up unplayed a mere few months post purchase.

I know this experience all too well, I used to spend hours on Ubisoft's forums trying to get answers (Ubisoft were reasonably good back in the day). Try Creative Assembly, or Codemasters - noone can equal their ineptitude. The bottom line is that for most companies (with hardly any exceptions), once they've taken your money - normally in the premium price bracket - their dev team have already moved onto the next project. And, guess what, they don't care.

When I discovered Combat Mission and BF I realised that here was a company and a product that is fundamentally different.

a) The product is unsurpassed in what it is trying to do. You want a 3d ww2 tactical battle sim - this is top of the class.

You want maximum features and options to provide flexibility for your games/scenarios - this is probably top of the class.

c) You want an established community and all the support and contributions with community added content - almost top of the class.

d) You want long term support for the game and see it evolve and improve over time - this is undoubtedly top of the class.

e) You want a dev team that listen to their customers and have a continuous dialogue with their fans - this is undoubtedly top of the class.

For me, the way this company operates goes way beyond the mere product, it's the philosophy. For that alone, they deserve double what they charge for their products. Mind you, it's a good job they don't because I would be priced out of the games altogether on my current budget. But the point is that BF are unlike any other games company and I am not going to judge them with the same yardstick. That's where the trust/belief comes in.

Now, can we let the staff get back to work please

[Oddball_E8]

I know this experience all too well, I used to spend hours on ubisoft's forums trying to get answers (ubisoft were reasonably good back in the day). Try Creative Assembly, or Codemasters - noone can equal their ineptitude.

HAH! I remember back when I still played alot of Rome: Total War, there was a problem that occurred with secondary weapons and their damage.

Modders realized that there was a bug and tried to inform Creative Assembly about it, but CA just started by first ignoring the posts saying that there was no bug. Then they said it was the modders that were causing the bug by incorrectly changing some values in the game.

Finally, after about a year of this kind of "discussion" between CA and the modders, there was a patch... and lo and behold, the bug was fixed by CA

Not once did they aknowledge that they had been wrong in first saying there was no bug and then blaming it on the modders.

Heck they didnt even say "its fixed now", they just deleted all the threads dealing with that subject once the patch was out so that nobody could see that there had even been a discussion...

[The Steppenwulf]

HAH! I remember back when I still played alot of Rome: Total War, there was a problem that occurred with secondary weapons and their damage.

Modders realized that there was a bug and tried to inform Creative Assembly about it, but CA just started by first ignoring the posts saying that there was no bug. Then they said it was the modders that were causing the bug by incorrectly changing some values in the game.

Finally, after about a year of this kind of "discussion" between CA and the modders, there was a patch... and lo and behold, the bug was fixed by CA

Not once did they aknowledge that they had been wrong in first saying there was no bug and then blaming it on the modders.

Heck they didnt even say "its fixed now", they just deleted all the threads dealing with that subject once the patch was out so that nobody could see that there had even been a discussion...

Yes, I was there, one of many, many issues with arguably the most supported product of the franchise - with ETW it was much, much worse than that. But you know all too well what I'm talking about.

[Oddball_E8]

Yeah i gave up on CA after that incident...

Didnt even play ETW.

Gave them a second chance with S:TW2 (sorry, TW:S2) but we all know how that went...

Every time some friend of mine shows me videos or screens of the new rome total war, I just say "yeah, thats pretty" and turn away...

[warrenpeace]

Look at how much money US pharmaceutical companies spend on advertising, bonuses, and lobbying and you'll understand why drug costs are so astronomically high in the US.

BTW this statement is entirely false. As someone who does Biomedical research for a living at a top cancer center, I can assure you that "advertising, bonuses and lobbying" are a very small part of the expense of bringing a drug to market. Most of the expense comes from the research and especially the clinical trials component necessary to get FDA approval. Advertising actually returns huge profits for the companies, by getting people to ask for drugs they don't really need (Think Viagra). Also, the pharmaceutical industry in the USA has traditionally had the greatest profit margin of any business.

Drug costs in the USA are higher than the rest of the Western World because we lack a single payer system. With a single payer all of the negotiating power is with the buyer, not the seller.

[Canada Guy]

I hope something comes out soon. Just reading these forums for some tidbits of info is tiring me out (and me a spritely 45).

Can't we all just get along? We all want the same thing. More content.

Stop playing other peoples games (like some people want when you reply to pointless posts) and start playing CM

[BLSTK]

...I can only imagine what these guys are like in a restaurant.

My guess is they're like trolls at an all-you-can-eat buffet.