The start of actual news

[Holman]

You are free to provide better data.

Maybe a book count on Amazon, including sales rank?

You'd have to make sure you're comparing apples to apples, which is harder than it looks.

As far as gaming interest goes, I would assume that Europe is more popular than the Med and that the M-G campaign is more popular than the drive to Rome. If BTS decided that GL was worth making, it seems very likely that OMG is more so.

[Vanir Ausf B]

EF is by far, hands down, the favored environment for hardcore wargamers. So if you are one, chances are you are an Eastern Front fan. But if you include casual wargamers and strategy/tactical gamers... Eastern Front drops off in interest. There are tons of reasons for that, the biggest one being that the largest audience of gaming customers have an affinity for Allied forces.

CMBB sold 50% as much as CMBO, yet it was a bigger and (technically) better game. There's tons of discussions about this phenomena over the last 10 years, but it always comes back to what I just said above. Eastern Front appeals most strongly to hardcore wargamers and hardcore wargamers are a minority of our customer base.

......................

[Redwolf]

I'm not comfortable blaming CMBB 1/2 sales compared to CMBO on casual gamers and their US/Brits centric world view - which I don't doubt is real, don't get me wrong.

While CMBB is technically better and bigger CMBO was a) first, and in a different competitive environment and CMBB slowed down gameplay a lot, and with some questionable game mechanic decisions causing that. In addition c) the CMBB demo was a disaster with c1) the scenario choice being a grab into the toilet and c2) putting a looking glass at some underengineered new features and c3) PEOPLE WANT TANK TO TANK, especially the casual ones. Suicide by demo I'd say.

[vincere]

.................

Originally Posted by Battlefront.com View Post

EF is by far, hands down, the favored environment for hardcore wargamers. So if you are one, chances are you are an Eastern Front fan. But if you include casual wargamers and strategy/tactical gamers... Eastern Front drops off in interest. There are tons of reasons for that, the biggest one being that the largest audience of gaming customers have an affinity for Allied forces.

CMBB sold 50% as much as CMBO, yet it was a bigger and (technically) better game. There's tons of discussions about this phenomena over the last 10 years, but it always comes back to what I just said above. Eastern Front appeals most strongly to hardcore wargamers and hardcore wargamers are a minority of our customer base.

.....

EF has a lot of appeal.

CMBB was released in 2002? There are a lot more Russians on line playing wargames now. Would be interesting to see how the new game sales compare to Normandy.

[sburke]

I'm not comfortable blaming CMBB 1/2 sales compared to CMBO on casual gamers and their US/Brits centric world view - which I don't doubt is real, don't get me wrong.

While CMBB is technically better and bigger CMBO was a) first, and in a different competitive environment and CMBB slowed down gameplay a lot, and with some questionable game mechanic decisions causing that. In addition c) the CMBB demo was a disaster with c1) the scenario choice being a grab into the toilet and c2) putting a looking glass at some underengineered new features and c3) PEOPLE WANT TANK TO TANK, especially the casual ones. Suicide by demo I'd say.

The problem with deciding on a position before you have the facts and then being completely unable to adjust your opinion when presented with facts is you continue to try and find "data" (in your case unsubstantiated opinion masquerading as data) that you think somehow supports your position even when said data is contradictory with what you have stated previously.

It the end it just comes across as someone having an axe to grind and not really caring what is true or not.

Really? The demo caused half as many people to buy CMBB over CMBO? That is your position? And that is based on what data that says how many people downloaded the demos of CMBO vs CMBB and how many proportionally chose to buy? Oh right, you don't actually have that data.

[Baneman]

I can't accept that "demo argument" - after all, demo's typically help people to decide whether or not to buy if they know nothing about the game.

Whereas I'd imagine that if you already owned CMBO and liked it, you bought CMBB and then CMAK.

[Lt Belenko]

I can't accept that "demo argument" - after all, demo's typically help people to decide whether or not to buy if they know nothing about the game.

Whereas I'd imagine that if you already owned CMBO and liked it, you bought CMBB and then CMAK.

Concur. The ONLY demo I downloaded was CMBB, that was about 6 months after game release. I bought BB and BO within a few hours.

I've bought pretty much everything else on pre-orders.

Demos are for folks who don't know about the games/gaming system of CM. The early issues of SF taught me of the integrity and support of the BFC folks - Thank You BFC.

[Canada Guy]

There was an article that I read online showing that releasing a demo of a game (though they were referring to console games) halved projected sales from around 530k units to around 250k units after 6 months. Not that I am saying that applies in all cases but it may be valuable to see if it applies in this case.

Re:steam - did I not see CMBO on steam the other day? Perhaps if BF wanted to generate additional income, they may consider releasing CMBB, CMAK, CMSF and CMA on Steam if there sales are not high enough through traditional methods. Anything to generate additional income.

[ForwardObserver]

There was an article that I read online showing that releasing a demo of a game (though they were referring to console games) halved projected sales from around 530k units to around 250k units after 6 months. Not that I am saying that applies in all cases but it may be valuable to see if it applies in this case.

That's a very "interesting" way to see the impact of demos on sales. It will obviously have a detrimental effect on sales: try before you buy allows people to make up their minds before spending money. And chances are that the average person, given adequate information, will assess that game X 'isn't my kind of thing'.

Compare CM forums with forums of games sold without a demo. Count the number of threads where the topic is a variation on the theme 'Game Broken, Want Money Back'. There are indeed the odd spotting here and there of such threads, but given the existence of demos for all BFC products (on non-mobile platforms), those threads strike me to be mostly trolling.

A case in point for that is XCOM: Enemy Unknown. They had a demo - which I tried (and many others). So many of the complaints regarding TU's and inventory streamlining struck me mostly as "this isn't the game I wanted", which is a bit different from "this isn't the game I thought I was buying". Kudos to Firaxis, to have the balls to show their cards and state quite clearly what they had done to the franchise. Even if that meant selling less copies of their game.

Obviously, it all boils down to the business model of the publisher. If the publisher model is based on dumping on the market a high volume of products, with extremely short shelve life, then it's not sound to make demos, because of the overheads in development and the (short term) effect on sales.

Re:steam - did I not see CMBO on steam the other day? Perhaps if BF wanted to generate additional income, they may consider releasing CMBB, CMAK, CMSF and CMA on Steam if there sales are not high enough through traditional methods. Anything to generate additional income.

I think you were confusing Steam with GOG:

http://www.gog.com/gamecard/combat_mission_beyond_overlord

I think the above isn't something BFC appreciates: it looks to me to be something done by Strategy First, a former serious publishing firm, which now survives scavenging the rights from games they used to distribute physically back in the day.

It's funny that they now endorse GOG DRM-free distribution, when they were distributing their games on-line with the most broken, retarded, hardware fingerprinting DRM scheme ever. And that's quite an achievement.

But indeed, the Steam model of unpredictable price reductions on products might work very well for BFC to capitalize their back catalog.

[ForwardObserver]

Really? The demo caused half as many people to buy CMBB over CMBO? That is your position? And that is based on what data that says how many people downloaded the demos of CMBO vs CMBB and how many proportionally chose to buy? Oh right, you don't actually have that data.

Well, in all fairness, Redwolf mentioned three different reasons. I also appreciate that he's been elaborating more about the third reason, than the other two. That might be because he did really hate the scenarios in the demo - which is his subjective appraisal (which I do share to a certain extent) - or because he has a better formed opinion on that topic.

But he has a point indeed. Peeps just love tanks. Just check on these forums how many topics are about infantry tactics or weapons (with the notable exception of machine guns, of course ) compared to the number of discussions regarding tank armour, guns, etc.

Both CMSF2 and Bagration are going to be the wet dream of heavy metal lovers, sburke. I can't wait to see those ISU-152s myself

[Vanir Ausf B]

The whole idea of cancelling MG is nuts. Market Garden is not a stand-alone product. It is an expansion for the Normandy game, so there is a huge existing installed base that MG will appeal to beyond those who are only narrowly interested in Operation Market-Garden itself.

[sburke]

@Forward Observer,

Yeah I understand that. Some Peeps love tanks, some just love the Eastern front (I can't wait to try a shot at Stalingrad myself having just finished STALINGRAD: How the Red Army Triumphed.)

However it gets old hearing every decision BF ever makes critiqued from the cheap seats with a lot of high sounding unsubstantiated opinion.

My two cents - I'd rather BF take their time. When they get to the Eastern front I think we all want urban combat to be a bit tougher and a lot more options for rubbled and fortified buildings, not to mention fire.

[Paper Tiger]

But he has a point indeed. Peeps just love tanks. Just check on these forums how many topics are about infantry tactics or weapons (with the notable exception of machine guns, of course ) compared to the number of discussions regarding tank armour, guns, etc.

Ain't that the truth. The number of times Ive been told that the player's infantry got hammered but at least they didn't lose any tanks.

[Erwin]

What concerns me about the CM2 technology (which emphasizes small unit/infantry actions) re the East Front is that it is the large scale combined arms/armor maneuver battles that made CMBB so much fun. Will that be as much fun if CM2 continues to have small-ish maps that tend to result in repetitive head-on assault scenarios - but just with new terrain features and graphics?

[ForwardObserver]

@Forward Observer,

Yeah I understand that. Some Peeps love tanks, some just love the Eastern front (I can't wait to try a shot at Stalingrad myself having just finished STALINGRAD: How the Red Army Triumphed.)

That's the Pen & Sword book by Michael K. Jones, right?

Very good read, indeed. It does indeed give an insight into that struggle. I appreciated very much the account of the 33rd Guards Division defence of the Tractor Factory: hair raising stuff.

However it gets old hearing every decision BF ever makes critiqued from the cheap seats with a lot of high sounding unsubstantiated opinion.

Yeah, if one wants to present a "contrarian position", since to be honest, I never went back to CMBO when we got the ETO mod for CMAK and I doubt I was in the minority, it is usually needed to illustrate things in a more convincing way.

[Ithikial_AU]

Great, now we're at business arguments back and forth.

Battlefront is a privately held company and I'm assuming they know historically which of their products sells and what doesn't. Let them decide what to release and then do your bit and vote with your wallet. In the meantime lets all keep playing the games, making maps, mods and pestering them for bones to be thrown about upcoming releases.

[Canada Guy]

FO,

I stand corrected. Yes, it was GOG but it did surprise me to see CMBO listed. I had thought that it was BFs decision to release it on that site. I assumed they were testing the business model for release of their old catalogue of games.

I still think it is a good idea, especially for really old titles like CMBB or CMAK but BF knows the numbers as I never will so this is just a knee jerk reaction on my part. They may still be earning decent money from those two games for all I know.

As for demos, I appreciate their ideas about demos and can understand that BF tries to release quality products and wish to have their regulars keep coming back. I sometimes wonder though if we perhaps scare people off due to the relative complexity and if they had just bought it, they may be willing to give it a more thorough try.

[ASL Veteran]

The funny thing about Redwolf's demo argument is that he himself probably invalidates it. I don't know for certain of course, but I'm going to take a guess and say that Redwolf probably bought and played CMBB. He may still play it. Yet, he disliked the demo so much that he compares the demo for CMBB with a toilet. If his demo theory held true, then one would presume that with a demo so bad that it's toilet worthy he wouldn't have bought CMBB. Yet there he is, probably happily playing CMBB for twelve years in spite of the bad demo.

[Redwolf]

The funny thing about Redwolf's demo argument is that he himself probably invalidates it. I don't know for certain of course, but I'm going to take a guess and say that Redwolf probably bought and played CMBB. He may still play it. Yet, he disliked the demo so much that he compares the demo for CMBB with a toilet. If his demo theory held true, then one would presume that with a demo so bad that it's toilet worthy he wouldn't have bought CMBB. Yet there he is, probably happily playing CMBB for twelve years in spite of the bad demo.

Well isn't that pretty. Apart from sburke being completely unable to read a post (if mine) listing 3 things and seeing only one, there's more nonsense here.

See, the thing that you guys just don't get is that I don't take my own behavior and preferences as a perfect study (with a sample size of 1) and then figure that is what the world looks like.

So yes I played the CMBB demo and still bought CMBB. That means what? That I am somehow as blind to the damage that the demo did to sales as you people are?

[Redwolf]

In any case, before the confused people twisted and pulled my post I am saying one thing: 1/2 sale of CMBB compared to CMBO doesn't mean that Eastern Front is half sales of ETO.

[JonS]

It must be so tough being you, Red, being the only person with The True Insight, and yet No One Understands You. Such a burden, such a cross to bear. Luckily you have the stamina to keep repeating your mantra as often as it takes. Truly; religious zealots could learn a thing or two from you

[ForwardObserver]

In any case, before the confused people twisted and pulled my post I am saying one thing: 1/2 sale of CMBB compared to CMBO doesn't mean that Eastern Front is half sales of ETO.

I, for one, understand what you mean. Steve appraisal of the eastern front is based in a sample size of 1: CMBO sales compared to CMBB. Let's dig the Internets for some data

Both CMBO and CMBB are available on Amazon, thanks to those dodgy Canucks in Strategy First:

Combat Mission: Beyond Overlord

Sales Rank: #34,959 in Video Games

Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

Sales Rank: #14,475 in Video Games

and for completeness:

Combat Mission: Shock Force

Sales Rank: #24,678 in Video Games

All of them are boxed versions.

They're different games, but we can also compare with two other (war)games.

One is Gary Grigsby's War In The East. If Steve rule of thumb "Eastern Front mostly appeals to hardcore wargamers, and little to the general public" then 2by3 did a fatal mistake by starting their series of operational games on the Eastern front. On the other hand, 2by3 was maybe able to capitalize the hallowed (wargaming) grounds of ye olde Grigsby's War In Russia. In any case, WitE is far from having bombed: for Matrix games standards it's been a best seller.

The funny thing is that 2by3 is now trying to push forward WitW - the same engine, with substantial upgrades - but covering the 1943-45 struggle in Western Europe. Will it sell so well as WitE? I'm not sure, really.

Another title which gives more direct leverage is the Close Combat original series (the Normandy game, the Market Garden game and the Eastern Front game). In terms of value for money, the third game in the series was a friggin' bargain compared to the other two. These titles are still listed on amazon.com, so we can take a look:

Close Combat

Sales Rank: #36,577 in Video Games

Close Combat 2.0: A Bridge Too Far

Sales Rank: #28,558 in Video Games

(the jewel case version ranks is about 30,000).

Close Combat III: The Russian Front

Sales Rank: #30,898 in Video Games

So what I get from the actual data (and my subjective impressions on WitE) don't really support what Steve said about the Eastern Front (or Modern).

Of course, those are sales numbers. About actual revenue... well, it could well be the case that CMBB publishers just ripped off Steve & Charles. But that has hardly anything to do with the interest (or lack of such) in the subject matter, I think.

[Holman]

Because most gamers love the Western Front, go there first. Once they accept your game engine, take it to the Eastern Front.

[ForwardObserver]

Because most gamers love the Western Front, go there first. Once they accept your game engine, take it to the Eastern Front.

Interestingly, there's an example of a series which didn't do that, the John Tiller's Campaign series made for Talonsoft (which were released in this order, East Front, West Front, East Front II and Rising Sun). Let's turn back to Amazon

East Front

Sales Rank: #38,180

West Front

Sales Rank: #33,519 in Videogames, #43,419 in Videogames for the Elite Edition, #17,211 in Software for the "Gold Edition"

East Front II

Sales Rank: #46,458 in Video Games, #18,289 in Software for the "Gold Edition"

Rising Sun

Sales Rank: #38,344 in Video Games, #25,514 for the Gold version in Video Games

These are even older titles, and TalonSoft erratic marketing strategy at the time, i.e. re-packaging stuff time and again, doesn't help making sense out of the data. I never got Eastern Front (at the time I was a Steel Panthers awed teen), but my impression is that it didn't bombed (it's more or less in the same league as CMBO or Close Combat I).

West Front and Eastern Front II were two big hits, so I'd say that you get a bit of a cold start when you get a new engine out of the door, regardless of whether you go West or East.

PS: Adding Steel Panthers to the comparison doesn't make sense to me, as Steel Panthers I included the whole she-bang, Steel Panthers II covered post-WW2 and Steel Panthers III basically wrapped up together Steel Panthers I & II.

PS2: Last, the Amazon Sales Rank is not only a qualitative measure of the popularity of a product, or in straight speech, sales are just part of the algorithm that determines the sales rank (hypothesis on its actual components are quite varied, but it makes sense it also takes into account what people put in their wishlists, how many reviews, how many people scored existing reviews and probably some measure of the 'Internet footprint' of the product as in number of pageviews or in terms of the output of search engines). But one can say it's a good indicator of how well a particular product sells or has the potential to sell.

[sburke]

Well isn't that pretty. Apart from sburke being completely unable to read a post (if mine) listing 3 things and seeing only one, there's more nonsense here.

Actually I can read a post (your's included) and yes there is more nonsense there. I chose not to comment on your points A and B as there frankly wasn't anything to respond to. First you make a vague assertion followed by a simple opinion statement "CMBO was a) first, and in a different competitive environment and CMBB slowed down gameplay a lot, and with some questionable game mechanic decisions causing that."

To which I answered with "unsubstantiated opinion masquerading as data". I think that pretty much covered it.

Which left you only the friggin demo.

Is there a larger Eastern Front than Western Front audience - hell if I know. I suspect Steve's opinion is based on more than just CMBO vs CMBB sales (though that is certainly some good hard data at least for a game at the tactical scale). I do know that Steve etal have far more experience in this regard and actual data to work from than I and I am sure quite a few friends in the industry. For me to consider second guessing them seems silly. Unless I have actual information to work from what's the point? I'd only end up making comments like, well like you.

BF has survived in a tough market for what? 14 years now? In that time they made a huge risky strategic decision to go with a new engine in a modern context and more recently a new business model to insure that the money we all invest in their games has a continuing life span. I'd say they apparently know their base really well and their business success shows it. Can we stop second guessing them and just enjoy the fact that they are succeeding and they will eventually get to the Eastern Front (which I think I heard Steve say was his prefered theatre)? What's more when they get there the engine will be that much more stable and feature rich. I for one hope Steve is wrong and when they hit the Eastern front their sales turn out to far exceed their best expectations. Redwolf can pat himself on the back, Steve and Charles can chuckle al the way to the bank..and a good time will be had by all.