Jump to content

Yippeeeeeeeee


Recommended Posts

Also, I've been a BF customer for a good many years. In fact, it's a bit scary to think I've grown so goddamn old (36!) and still keep their games on my hard drive. They have provided me with years of entertainment and I've lapped up all CM-releases bar Fortress Italy since I'm not really interested in the Italian campaign. What I've learnt during these years is that BF is really passionate about what they do, and I support their efforts. I trust them to come up with a solution that suits the way they want to work (and that they feel will benefit the community). If they swing and miss for some reason, I know they will fix or do somfink about it. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 359
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

after all, I think we should put pressure on the battlefront, in the end, we stand on the other side of barricade, we as consumers want to get the best product at the lowest price, and the battlefront to sell the game at a profit with the least effort(edit.the least financial cost), and possibly (I'm pretty sure) as best quality.

I understand the problems related to the cost, lack of time, a small team, but just understand not justify the quality of the product

little pressure shall not hurt them, and they can stimulate a better job with the benefit of us all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't seriously expect Battlefront to squeeze four years of Eastern Front war (A multitude of battlegrounds with near endless differences in size, landscape, weapons and uniforms, weather and what not) in one single game, can you?

Actually yes I can. As some post above. One core game with modules. As this is much longer time period then CMBN or FI so more modules is justify. Its imo far better and fair then making four separate but identical games for each year of the war that would differ from each other mostly with units. Any one who would have such core game will have choice to extend this game of period or part of the front he is most interested by buying module not whole new(but in sense of engine and mechanics old) game.

I remember the last tactical level wargame that covered the entire Eastern Front": Close Combat III.

Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin? But I'm not expecting to see one product that content everything. I've said what is imo best solution.

I'm not sure which Matrix Games you're talking about. The one that has grown in size every year and keeps adding many high quality games (and customers) every time I go to their site?

Yes, this Matrix that is keeping prohibiting prices for their games counting only for biggest "funboys"(i'm not using it in much pejorative way, so don't kill me). I've seen on web many persons very interested for example in War in the East, Command Ops or Carriers at War(like me) but they give up them or use pirated versions. Compare this to AGEOD games. Is quality of those games worse? No it is not. Paradox games? Yes they are selling modules too, but in much more accessible way, and their modules change a lot in game itself. Graviteam? Their games are changing from patch to patch Are they low quality? No they are not.

And do you really think that eliminating the moduled approach is going to suddenly make them aware of games like CMBN?

No, this is not what i've said. I accept modules. I didn't criticize Commonwealth module. It is good one. I don't have problem with Fortress Italy as a separate game. Gustav line looks good two. I talking about making too many of them without good idea. Like idea of making four games on eastern front. Like Market Garden that right now looks like they are doing it ad hoc without any good idea. The project which was even consider to be canceled Maybe they are making some secret surprise but really, why they should do that if there is no pressure from community?If you don't expect them to do something more. If you are happy of this quality and will buy it regardless of it's content? Why should they make more? I was waiting for this module. I would like to play in CM Market Garden operation but seriously 35$ for a few AA vehicles, bridges and the mill? And by the way, there were many urban combats during MG operation. With current optimization level what computer do I need to play dense urban combat scenarios?

Same with upgrades. Once i criticize "payable patch" and people here almost killed me, and it wasn't me to start flaming I was just responding :) It's always about misunderstandings. In fact I like the idea of upgrades. I wasn't negating them but I was questioning their quality. My suggest was to make more ideas for new improvements before making such upgrade. Yes, changes that were included in 2.0 were important(I even bought it) but many companies include such content in their patches. That's why there were many people that were angry about this step. They saw not upgrade but $$ patch. That's what was I suggesting

I have the luxury of looking at sales numbers, which mean more than looking at this Forum

I'm sure of that. Otherwise you would be bankrupt :) My point was that customers that you have lost because of your policy are far more than those few people who complain here from time to time.

1. We can lower the prices by reducing the content and quality of what is in each game. You pay less, but you get less.

Yes, but i also mention few companies that are running within same difficult market and are using much different and more customer-friendly policy. Is their games quality lower? I don't think so

And btw what is so expensive for you in making MG module? Most things is already done.

While I don't call people "Socialists" for having no understanding of how game development works, I do think that people who don't understand the fundamentals of economics shouldn't be trying to tell us how to run our business.

No one is trying. These are only suggestions and opinions.

I know that you have enough faithful fans that have beloved this game so much that they will buy it whatever you will do. And you know that too :) I think that you could even raise your prices because of global financial crisis or something and they will buy it anyway ;) But i still think that some small, not even big changes could attract more players and I mention few examples of companies that are going different way. But this changes are impossible without pressure from the community itself

Link to comment
Share on other sites

after all, I think we should put pressure on the battlefront, in the end, we stand on the other side of barricade, we as consumers want to get the best product at the lowest price, and the battlefront to sell the game at a profit with the least effort, and possibly (I'm pretty sure) as best quality.

I understand the problems related to the cost, lack of time, a small team, but just understand

little pressure shall not hurt them, and they can stimulate a better job with the benefit of us all.

Trust me, Battlefront is NOT trying to sell us a game at profit with "the least effort" in the way you seem to think.

Of course they will try to streamline their production, but as they do they always put more into the games.

I have never felt cheated by Battlefront in any way, and thats saying alot since almost every game out there have left me feeling cheated in one way or another.

You seem to view Battlefront like you would any larger company (like EA games or Activision) but this is not some large corporation trying to make a profit from selling games at a huge margin.

This is a small, dedicated team of people designing and selling games to a small dedicated group of gamers. The fact that they can make a living out of it at all is pretty amazing, and is no doubt connected to the higher than average prices on the products.

If they tried to compete with larger corporations by lowering their prices, they would all have to get second jobs to get by.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You seem to view Battlefront like you would any larger company (like EA games or Activision) but this is not some large corporation trying to make a profit from selling games at a huge margin.

This is a small, dedicated team of people designing and selling games to a small dedicated group of gamers. The fact that they can make a living out of it at all is pretty amazing, and is no doubt connected to the higher than average prices on the products.

If they tried to compete with larger corporations by lowering their prices, they would all have to get second jobs to get by.

I have shown few examples of competitor companies that share same situation as BF but are using different development and prices policy. You demand less you will get less

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks and I largely agree, with one exception. Remember that our audience is world wide. Yes, the vast majority live and work in countries that have fairly good standards of living. But even within those there's a large amount of unemployment that lasts for years. Then there are all the other countries that have lower standards of living and that means their money doesn't go very far for our products.

With that in mind I do understand people wanting our products to cost less because because they don't have a lot of money to spend. This is very understandable. The problem with this is it has nothing to do with our costs or our pricing. Which means we will lose some customers because they can not afford our products. I'm sorry to know this happens, but it is outside of our control.

Steve

Not to sound like a drooling fanboi, but I have long admired BF because they unabashedly make games they want to play, which for me translates into having a passion for their craft. I have also admired the glimpses of social/political views I've seen you (Steve) reveal from time to time. But this post here is easily my favorite glimpse into your worldview and I thank you for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trust me, Battlefront is NOT trying to sell us a game at profit with "the least effort" in the way you seem to think.

Of course they will try to streamline their production, but as they do they always put more into the games.

I have never felt cheated by Battlefront in any way, and thats saying alot since almost every game out there have left me feeling cheated in one way or another.

I used the wrong word, it should be "the least financial cost" and also like you never felt cheated by BF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But making 4 identical sliced Eastern Front Games...

Maybe it's the language barrier at work again, but I don't get why you think the four games set on the Eastern Front are going to be identical. The four years of war in the East saw really drastic evolution of weaponry, tactics, organizations, and strategy. Given how hard BFC strives to replicate the realities of combat, I am confident that those changes will be represented in the games.

I really think you are indulging in a straw man argument here. There are things that BFC can be reasonably criticized for (mostly small things), but this isn't one of them.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe it's the language barrier at work again, but I don't get why you think the four games set on the Eastern Front are going to be identical. The four years of war in the East saw really drastic evolution of weaponry, tactics, organizations, and strategy. Given how hard BFC strives to replicate the realities of combat, I am confident that those changes will be represented in the games.

I really think you are indulging in a straw man argument here. There are things that BFC can be reasonably criticized for (mostly small things), but this isn't one of them.

Michael

Frankly it is no different than there being 3 different families for the Western Front: CMBN, CMFI and the eventual bulge game. If you get away from the old EF vs WF mentality you could look at is as 7 families to reproduce the European war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had many friends and people that were playing CMx1. Most of them give up CMx2....From my experience Combat Mission has lost significant amount of players...

I don't doubt that this is so. The experience of playing CMx2 is significantly different from playing CMx1. I don't know who would dispute that. That being the case, there are going to be people who loved x1 but don't find x2 to be their cup of tea. I seriously doubt that lowering the price of the game would bring many of them back into the fold. For some, you couldn't pay them to play the game.

So they are gone and may not ever come back. The question then is, are they being replaced by new players who are quite happy with x2? I don't know, but Steve has recorded in these pages that they are quite happy with the volume of sales. You can draw whatever conclusions you like from that.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With that in mind I do understand people wanting our products to cost less because because they don't have a lot of money to spend. This is very understandable. The problem with this is it has nothing to do with our costs or our pricing. Which means we will lose some customers because they can not afford our products. I'm sorry to know this happens, but it is outside of our control.

I have a solution. Some big ticket international organization, like the IMF, should contract you to produce say a million copies of your line of games for the usual price per game minus a small discount for buying volume. Then they in turn would sell them in countries with lower standards of living at a nominal cost. Everybody happy!

:D

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? I can see how Italy would be a hard sell, but the Eastern front? Is this an US thing as in no US troops on the Eastern front, hence lower interest in that theater? Just look at all the possible scenarios and campaigns available for that part of the war and I would imagine there would be sufficient interest from a very large group of people. Live and learn I guess. :)

I've made a number of detailed posts about this topic over the years, going way back to CMx1 days. Eastern Front is not a wargamer's first choice for a wargamer. It is, however, the first choice for a grognard's first choice. Wargamers are a larger audience, grognards a smaller subset. And yes, it has a lot to do with the game not having US or British forces. It's a complex topic, that is for sure.

As I've said to people for a long time... CMBB sold significantly fewer copies than CMBO, despite being a higher quality game and much larger in scale and scope. This is not limited to CM either. Other game companies have said the same thing.

I am an Eastern Front grog and I don't really understand this either, but it is what it is.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

little pressure shall not hurt them, and they can stimulate a better job with the benefit of us all.

Putting pressure on us just makes us not want to produce games any more. You have no idea how risky, life sucking, and un-rewarding it is to make wargames. If anybody wonders why we have no competition, it's because nobody is dumb enough to try.

Actually yes I can. As some post above. One core game with modules. As this is much longer time period then CMBN or FI so more modules is justify. Its imo far better and fair then making four separate but identical games for each year of the war that would differ from each other mostly with units.

There will be nothing identical between the games. Or do you think Shock Force, Afghanistan, Normandy, and Fortress Italy are all "identical" with just some minor differences in units?

Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin?

And nobody is stupid enough to try that again. Not even the ones stupid enough to have done it in the first place :D

Yes, this Matrix that is keeping prohibiting prices for their games counting only for biggest "funboys"(i'm not using it in much pejorative way, so don't kill me). I've seen on web many persons very interested for example in War in the East, Command Ops or Carriers at War(like me) but they give up them or use pirated versions. Compare this to AGEOD games. Is quality of those games worse? No it is not. Paradox games? Yes they are selling modules too, but in much more accessible way, and their modules change a lot in game itself. Graviteam? Their games are changing from patch to patch Are they low quality? No they are not.

Each game company has their own models which fit their own games and their own company structure. We have ours and it has kept us alive longer than most other game companies that came before us (note that Matrix was bought out). We aren't getting rich so either we're under charging or we're over delivering. If you want to pay less you'll get less. Or we could go out of business and you get nothing. Fortunately we're not interested in going out of business :D

No, this is not what i've said. I accept modules. I didn't criticize Commonwealth module. It is good one. I don't have problem with Fortress Italy as a separate game. Gustav line looks good two. I talking about making too many of them without good idea. Like idea of making four games on eastern front. Like Market Garden that right now looks like they are doing it ad hoc without any good idea.

Argh. Based on what information? We haven't even put up a website yet and you seem to know everything about this.

The project which was even consider to be canceled

You apparently didn't really read what I wrote. I said we considered canceling it because we weren't sure we could make something that would justify the price to the customer. So if we faced a decision and chose to make it, might it be more logical to assume that we figured out what would make it worth $35?

Maybe they are making some secret surprise but really, why they should do that if there is no pressure from community?If you don't expect them to do something more. If you are happy of this quality and will buy it regardless of it's content?

If we thought our customers were like that you'd have seen a drop off in quality long, long, long ago. We understand that we are in competition with anything that costs money and/or time. It's why games companies usually last no more than a single game or maybe two. We're well aware that to survive we must constantly impress.

I was waiting for this module. I would like to play in CM Market Garden operation but seriously 35$ for a few AA vehicles, bridges and the mill? And by the way, there were many urban combats during MG operation. With current optimization level what computer do I need to play dense urban combat scenarios?

When it comes out you can make your own judgement. Doing so now, when you have very little information, doesn't seem to be very smart, does it?

Yes, changes that were included in 2.0 were important(I even bought it) but many companies include such content in their patches.

And they don't include lots of other things that CM already had in it. This is the argument that always gets forgotten by the "I always want more than what I've paid for" customer type. Never any credit for what's been done, always criticism for what hasn't been. Fortunately they usually purchase anyway because, deep down, they do see the value even though they complain they see none.

That's why there were many people that were angry about this step. They saw not upgrade but $$ patch. That's what was I suggesting

And we don't care. The upgrade cost us a lot of money to make. If the people using it don't pay for it, who will? Nobody. And what happens if nobody pays for our costs? We go out of business. Better then to charge for our costs and see if we stay in business than give things away for free and definitely, without a doubt, go out of business.

I'm sure of that. Otherwise you would be bankrupt :) My point was that customers that you have lost because of your policy are far more than those few people who complain here from time to time.

This is the same bad logic as you said about the Upgrades. Sure, we have lost a LOT of CMx1 players. We have also gained a lot of new customers who never bought CMx1. On top of that, we've retained the bulk of our CMx1 customers who would probably have left us if we did not make significant changes as we did.

As the old saying goes, you can not make an omelet without breaking some eggs. I know some CMx1 players are very bitter for being left behind by us. But progress never takes everybody along for the ride. That is just the way it works.

Yes, but i also mention few companies that are running within same difficult market and are using much different and more customer-friendly policy. Is their games quality lower? I don't think so

It all depends on definitions of "quality" and "customer friendly". From our perspective there is no game out there that is even close to CM's quality at any price. And we offer customers plenty of options to choose from when making their purchasing decisions. All we ask is that we get paid for our work.

And btw what is so expensive for you in making MG module? Most things is already done.

Again, you presume to know far more than you do. If you a) knew what was in the Module and B) knew what it costs to make those things maybe you would not be so bold with your assumptions.

No one is trying. These are only suggestions and opinions.

You are suggesting that we should lower our prices without regard to our costs because it is your opinion that we are charging too much. This is not a suggestion or opinion we find useful.

I know that you have enough faithful fans that have beloved this game so much that they will buy it whatever you will do. And you know that too :)

Sure, but there are too few of these to keep us in business. So if we catered only to those players we would be out of business.

But i still think that some small, not even big changes could attract more players and I mention few examples of companies that are going different way.

And next year they might have GONE away. We've been in business for 15 years. Longer than any of our competition and longer than most game companies in general. If you think we have done this through dumb luck and taking advantage of customers, you've just made your opinions worth even less.

The keys to our success are not being stupid or naive. That means not chasing after customers that don't exist or charging less than it costs to make our games. It does mean making something that doesn't exist elsewhere and constantly improve it. Those improvements come from customer suggestions, not out of thin air.

But this changes are impossible without pressure from the community itself

Sometimes what people want are just impossible. Wanting something for nothing is one of those things that just can't happen. Pressure us all you want, the outcome is either we ignore it or we go out of business.

What I think you fail to understand is that we make these games voluntarily. It wouldn't take much "pressure" to get us to reevaluate our future. There are other things we can be doing with our time instead of making wargames. It is something that you should consider before you criticize us again. As the old saying goes, "be careful for what you wish for because you might not like what you get".

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, you guys don't need to worry about us making rash (or ANY) decisions based on the attitudes of just a few customers. We've never, ever been swayed by the minority customer unless they had a valid point of view. Asking us to make more for less is not a valid point of view :D

We've listened to reasonable requests and unreasonable demands for more than a dozen years. We've always been able to sort through them and move forward with better games and better support. While nothing lasts forever, we have no plans to pack it in any time soon. In fact, we feel like after 15 years we're finally hitting our stride :D

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as the game brings people together, it has the potential to drive them apart.

The beauty of this forum is the freedom it allows each of us to speak his/her mind...and it is free.

Let us not take that for granted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't doubt that this is so. The experience of playing CMx2 is significantly different from playing CMx1. I don't know who would dispute that. That being the case, there are going to be people who loved x1 but don't find x2 to be their cup of tea. I seriously doubt that lowering the price of the game would bring many of them back into the fold. For some, you couldn't pay them to play the game.

So they are gone and may not ever come back. The question then is, are they being replaced by new players who are quite happy with x2? I don't know, but Steve has recorded in these pages that they are quite happy with the volume of sales. You can draw whatever conclusions you like from that.

Michael

Not only that, but some are sure to be like my friend who played CMSF and never returned to battlefront until yesterday when i convinced him to play H2H against me in CMBN-CW...

He had such a poor experienc in CMSF that he gave up on the CMx2 engine completely and moved on to other games, never looking back.

The problem is that CMSF suffered from the teething problems of the CMx2 engine at the start.

That, combined with the "shock" of getting used to a new engine, meant that he just didn't like the game.

I was the same, but i returned to try out cmbn when it came out and noticed the progress.

I'm sure quite alot of the old CMx1 players that gave up on CMx2 had a similar experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've made a number of detailed posts about this topic over the years, going way back to CMx1 days. Eastern Front is not a wargamer's first choice for a wargamer. It is, however, the first choice for a grognard's first choice. Wargamers are a larger audience, grognards a smaller subset. And yes, it has a lot to do with the game not having US or British forces. It's a complex topic, that is for sure.

As I've said to people for a long time... CMBB sold significantly fewer copies than CMBO, despite being a higher quality game and much larger in scale and scope. This is not limited to CM either. Other game companies have said the same thing.

I am an Eastern Front grog and I don't really understand this either, but it is what it is.

Steve

Yeah, I'm an east front grog myself and I just dont get the uninterest from others. It's definately one of the most interesting fronts to play on.

Not to mention that the russians have the coolest toys! (ie. tanks)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the really cool thing is once we have them in bulge or EF we will also get them in MG as CMBN will be upgraded to CM 3.0. The key to all this is patience. And before all you youngsters start going off on how long you waited, us geezers have a deadline, literally. We want to see it before we are dead. However you do have to understand including fire isn't about just having fire. It means having the fire interact with material in buildings and terrain, environmental conditions, having the TAC AI know how to respond, knowing that gamey players will deliberately drive jeeps into fields to be shot up, catch fire and then cause the field they are in to go up in flames. Yeah you know you'll do it.

BF is well aware they need to introduce fire and they will WHEN it is ready. In the meantime, keep your pants on.

What I'm trying to get my head around is whether the assumed future fire patch to CMBN & CMFI will also include all the extra units that can actually create fire by themselves. In this case I'm referring to flamethrower teams for all nations, German flamethrower halftracks, Wasps, Crocodiles etc, etc. Does that seem likely?

Regards

KR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

will also include all the extra units that can actually create fire by themselves. In this case I'm referring to flamethrower teams for all nations, German flamethrower halftracks, Wasps, Crocodiles etc, etc. Does that seem likely?

Regards

KR

Hell yes! Right after Steve cons Brain Jar Man into coding me up a PSW 234/3.

Mord.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Putting pressure on us just makes us not want to produce games any more. You have no idea how risky, life sucking, and un-rewarding it is to make wargames. If anybody wonders why we have no competition, it's because nobody is dumb enough to try.

well, I hope that I am wrong, and the series is going in the right direction, although I do not agree that it was just a few malcontents, because we all want the same thing, except that we are more impatient and less forgiving;)

ps. I hope though that you are doing the best game in the segment gives you a little joy;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...