J Davis Posted May 24, 1999 Share Posted May 24, 1999 Question for BTS: I'm curious as to why you decided upon the direct-sale-only approach (this is not a criticism, BTW). Certainly, with a title such as CM, I'm sure you could've swing an attractive deal with such pubs as SSI or Talonsoft or whoever. I suppose what I'm wondering is the volume of sales that you would need to break even respective to each of the two approaches to sales. And as a follow-up, what your realistic expectation of sales would be, again with each of the two approaches. I'm not sure if you're willing to divulge what your break-even point would be, as many companies prefer to keep their financials under wraps. If so, then would you give a simile with reasonably accurate amounts? A third question: When I was still playing computer boardgames, the bulk of the titles I bought were in small hobby/book stores. The only wargaming title I ever recalled seeing in a "big" game store (Toys 'R Us) was Squad Leader, and it was only in there for a short time before the place realized they made a mistake. What has happened to these traditional outlets for wargaming? Or have they been swallowed up by the larger chains? Thanks in advance for any answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Beman Posted May 24, 1999 Share Posted May 24, 1999 Direct sale means BTS can develop this game how they see fit--by grogs for grogs (shall not perish from this earth) Distributing through a "majorlabel," even one as dedicated to wargames as SSI/SSG, would take creative control away from BTS. Plus the fact that, in many cases, games are released unfinished because the publisher (pub) is demanding that the devs meet some arbitrary release date for whatever reasons. Also, not to slight BTS, convincing pubs to support and release a game is HARD--they get many many devs with "the next big game" and they have to pick one or two per year to throw their weight behind. As for money, an indie developer gets to keep much of what the game brings in. When released through a second party, the devs have to settle with a (usually low) percentage. It's "many sales at low profit/sale" vs "fewer sales at higher profit/sale." Actually, somewhere on this site is a whole topic devoted to this concern. I don't remember where it is, but I'll bet that BTS will alert you. BTS says going the pure indie route is better for the game, and I believe them. It's all about the game, right? DjB ------------------ A lot of my schoolmates called me "warmonger." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted May 24, 1999 Share Posted May 24, 1999 The "Manifesto" - the why and how Battlefront.com is going to work - can be found here. Should answer most of your questions: http://www.battlefront.com/about/about_festo.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted May 24, 1999 Share Posted May 24, 1999 J, As a matter of policy we don't discuss internal business matters publicly here on the site. But I can tell you this much. First, going "indie" does indeed give us a lot more control over what goes into CM and when. Also, we will receive no pressure to release the game prematurely. But honestly (and you should read the Manifesto Moon linked to) the major impetus was this: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Certainly, with a title such as CM, I'm sure you could've swing an attractive deal with such pubs as SSI or Talonsoft or whoever.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You'd be surprised. We received a lot of interest and several offers. However, I would not describe any of them as "attractive." A seeming contradiction, I know, but that's the software publishing industry for you. Charles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted May 24, 1999 Share Posted May 24, 1999 Doug and Moon are correct. The truth is that both publishers you mentioned did try and get Combat Mission, along with others. But read the Manifesto and the other info in the section: www.battlefront.com/about Read this stuff and you will see why we turned them down. They simply can't offer us the security that we require, not to mention the payback. A good example is that one of the companies that tried to get Combat Mission has, since then, basically became defunct (or nearly so by any standard). We *could* have signed with them, but where would Combat Mission be now? I shudder to think! So the Big Boys aren't all they are cracked up to be. We will sell less through Battlefront.com, but we will wind up in a much better position when all is said and done. This is best for us and for you. Steve [This message has been edited by Big Time Software (edited 05-24-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Davis Posted May 25, 1999 Author Share Posted May 25, 1999 Thanks to Steve and Charles and others for their replies. Since I am out of the board wargaming for some time, I have some other questions: 1) Is the board wargaming industry now truly dead with the passing of AH? Or are there still publishers who are putting out new board wargames (I'm thinking mainly of the US market)? 2) The hobby/book stores were a major outlet for board wargames when I was playing them. From my take of reading the manifesto & other info of the Battlefront site, these outlets aren't feasible for computer wargames. Why can't they function as an adjunct to the direct-sales model? 3) What exactly is the target market of Battlefront, BTW? Is it only to hardcore wargamers? What does it offer to the indie developer other than just a web site? Say, if I were a developer and I have under development a game like Panzer General (i.e. more of a beer-n-pretzel wargame), would I fit under the Battlefront banner, and what help could I expect from them? The Battlefront manifesto, unfortunately, is long on rhetoric and short on specifics (no offense intended). 4) Do BTS plan on any marketing campaign other than word-of-mouth? I can't imagine the traditional marketing vehicles (mainstream gaming mags) to be effective in reaching wargamers. Or would this be a Battlefront function? Anyway, Combat Mission looks very appealing, even to casual wargamers (which is what I categorize myself as nowaday). I am hoping that it, and BTS, will meet with lots of success, if only for the selfish reason that it will mean more titles for the CM family. I think the web-only sales approach would happen eventually, and it's nice to see someone taking up the banner. However, I've yet to see any evidence (or intention) for anything other than by word-of-mouth advertising, and I have my doubts as to Battlefront's function. In any case, good luck. I'm looking forward to trying the demo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest John Maragoudakis Posted May 25, 1999 Share Posted May 25, 1999 Selling only through the web had to happen sometime. Why not now. A calculated risk, maybe, but where there is risk, there is the chance of success. With a good game it might just work. If it does work, ask yourself what will happen to the gaming industry, it could spark changes that we have yet to imagine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Davie Posted May 25, 1999 Share Posted May 25, 1999 John; I'm cynical enough to believe that if Web Front marketing takes off, then the 'big companies' will buy into it, or use it for low volume products Which, come to think of it wouldn't be all that bad. Turn a couple of programers lose on a project, don't risk all that much and then see if it takes off. And, if I was feeling slightly more paranoid, I'd think that Battlefront was a sub arm of some big company. But heck, if it gets me the games that I want, I'll go for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted May 25, 1999 Share Posted May 25, 1999 Hi J, Board wargaming has been languishing and decreasing in popularity every year for some time now. AH's absorbtion into the mass market machine is the single biggest blow to boardwargaming. But board wargaming is not dead. For proof of this check out comsimworld.com to see that there are still boardgames being developed. Why, I don't know. I grew tired of stacks, math, very limited range of possibilities, cat attacks <g>, needing another player, etc a long time ago. As flawed as a game like Steel Panthers was, it was infinitely more detailed, playable, and enjoyable than any board wargame I had ever played. AH's Civ was the last boardgame I played, and that was many years ago. Trying to get 4-5 people to sit around for 12hrs straight is simply impossible now that we (my gaming buddies) are all adults with high perssure jobs, wives, and in some cases kids. The problem with "Mom & Pop" shops is that the effort to return ratio is very poor. We don't have time to chase after what will amount to about few hundred sales a year. When you figure in discounts, payment problems, the inevitable returns, etc. the monetary return just isn't worth it. There are better things to do with our limited time. So no retail at all, no matter what its form. Battlefront.com is all about publishing games that cater to wargamers. Hardcore and casual wargamers are both a part of our audience, though we lean more towards the hardcore. Combat Mission is a perfect example. It is hardercore than probably any wargame out there, yet it is also the most easy to use, flexible, and cool to look at wargame as well. Therefore we have something that has broad appeal without compromising the simulation aspect. If something like Panzer General came our way we might want it to be a part of Battlefront.com, as we would other simplified war/strategy games like Empire derivatives. However, the more "fluff" and/or the simpler the game system, the more we will be critical of its ability to deliver significant tactical/stragetic challenge. If something fails the balance test (which is heavily weighed towards the simulation aspect), it will be passed over. Battlefront.com does all marketing and traditional features of a Publisher, with the exception of tech support. Big Time Software is simply a developer who can concentrate on making great games because it is freed up from the worries of getting their games sold. But since Battlefront.com is a grass roots organization, it is starting off without a huge ammount of capital. What it does have is invested in its products and the core business elements. This is the way things should be -> investment in the games first, marketing second. As time goes on the word of mouth will be expanded into web advertising, but not just yet. The future of Combat Mission, Big Time Software, and the other developers here is tied to that of Battlefront.com. The good news is that Battlefront.com knows what it is and where it is going. The most important part is that it already knows what it isn't and where it shouldn't go. Retail and/or Publishers killed off many of us before, and they shall not get a second chance at it. We joke that their worst mistake was leaving us alive Thomas, eventually others will get into the Web as well. But the bigger the company the harder it is to do this. Unfortunately, Retail and Web sales channels are mutually exclusive for games (if not all software). It is hard to explain this in under 10000 words, but there is sound economic reasons for this. More companies are likely to go under before even one major company makes the switch 100%. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest John Maragoudakis Posted May 25, 1999 Share Posted May 25, 1999 The mailman is crossing the street. Je repete, the mailman is crossing the street. Lock your doors tonight. Well my post was in response to Thomas but Big Time's post came in between like lightning in a storm. LOL on being left alive. [This message has been edited by John Maragoudakis (edited 05-24-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest John Maragoudakis Posted May 25, 1999 Share Posted May 25, 1999 The way the two messages came in at the same time parallels the nature of the simultaneous turn system of Combat Mission itself. the nature of uncertainty was something that the ugo igo games never intuatively developed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MajorH Posted May 25, 1999 Share Posted May 25, 1999 <<I'm curious as to why you decided upon the direct-sale-only approach>> Speaking just for myself ... I tried everything else and nothing worked <g>. Everybody involved with my stuff made more money than I did and I was the last to get paid - when I got paid. ------------------ Best regards, Major H majorh1@aol.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Oberly Posted May 25, 1999 Share Posted May 25, 1999 Steve wrote: Read this stuff and you will see why we turned them down. They simply can't offer us the security that we require, not to mention the payback. A good example is that one of the companies that tried to get Combat Mission has, since then, basically became defunct (or nearly so by any standard). We *could* have signed with them, but where would Combat Mission be now? I shudder to think! ____________________________ Let me guess-that company was ...iMagic? Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted May 25, 1999 Share Posted May 25, 1999 Mike, We can neither confirm nor deny the allegation! Charles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts