Market failure and games.

[Schrodi]

OK, despite some tweaking that apparently will take place in the final addition of the commercial product(before release - imagine that). BTS has come up with a really great game. I think most people who are even marginally interesting in playing them, and right up to those of you who obviously have no life outside of war games, think this is one fantastic effort from BTS. So the question I think, as an important and perhaps worrisome aside to the specifics of the game, is: why have market forces been such a dismal failure in producing good war games( and games in general) and good companies that we don’t all end up hating? Is it because corporations like Microsoft are involved and the vary nature of monopolies (and corporations in general) is market interference? Does big adverting campaigns(corporate propaganda) lead to inferior products? It seems to me that there will be a powerful grass-roots word of mouth campaign for CM because of the high quality of the product. Do others suffer from a lack of spontaneous applause without having advertising dollars?

So...don’t we all know great gamers and programmers out there that can’t get on a good team or get involved with a company that even cares about it’s product? One of the best artists/graphic designers I know-tons of talent-worked for two years making great stuff for, in the end, the worst games. At the time I didn’t believe him when he told me stories of how his company operated. Only later did a learn that this is the rule, not the exception. If, as it seems to me, that there are other talented people out there than just those who work for Big Time (and they seem very talented) then it must be in our market structure at the present that is causing all this crap. I mean really, isn’t there only really about 3 or 4 fantastic games out there?

What do you guys think?

[maxm2]

In every business I know anything about, and also in terms of government agencies and other bureaucracies, the majority of efforts and products are mediocre to just okay, and far too many for comfort are not very good to real bad. My own take as a psychologist is that it has nothing to do with how the business or agency is structured, it has to do with the quality of leadership and whether there are institutional restrictions on how much freedom the leadership has.

So even if you have a wonderful system in place with great rules, if you have supervisors/bosses who don't care about the rules and are petty tyranical manics, the rules don't matter. Or, you can have wonderful managers/supervisors, but the agency, business, or institution doesn't reward or encourage innovation, or humane treatment of workers, or responsiveness to customers/consumers, so it's still a crummy outfit and the good people leave.

I think BTS is putting out a superior product and (more importantly) treating consumers decently because there was a lucky gathering of good people in the company. I've seen it over and over again my 35 years of working in various places. And it seems that there are very few places where you can make major changes if things arene't good, because part of the reason they aren't good is that key people aren't open to change and don't encourage or reward it.

Bottom line: thank heavens for the lucky stars that bring everything together just right to make a BTS and a CM. And if you're working in a crummy place, don't bemoan, don't wreck yourself trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear--move on!

------------------

Max Molinaro

[Jarmo]

Yeah, this is an unique piece of work all right! It's really good to see a great new game not requiring 500+ Mhz machine with 32 MB video card, especially as I don't have one.

I bet this'll sell at least A HUNDRED copies!

[Dar]

You have to remember that with a lot of software companies, making money is the bottom line. Historical accuracy and realism are obviously not primary concerns for Atomic beyond CC2, but flashy graphics and killer rocket-firing tanks are--and in this day and age that's what appeals to a lot of people.

It sounds like Combat Mission is a labor of love for Charles and Steve. Yes, they definitely want to make some money (Side note to Pirate scum: and they'd better get their money to reward them for these years of hard work and so we can see CMII, CMIII, etc., so buy your damn copy!), but they are focused on delivering a quality product.

I also believe that the axiom, "Too many cooks spoil the soup" applies to software development only too well! While a project as large in scope as CM has got to be a daunting prospect for only two people, it also streamlines the specification and design aspects. They knew what they wanted; they could quickly reach consensus on what goes in and what doesn't; they didn't have to compromise their design decisions to appease a bunch of ignorant middle managers. You've seen how many "suggestions" and "improvements" people post here (from myself included)--fortunately, though, none of us have the authority to insist something goes in that might compromise the accuracy or integrity of the product. Too often in software development you have to compromise in this way and a potentially great product becomes mediocre.

Dar

[This message has been edited by Dar (edited 11-24-99).]

[Darstand]

The creation of computer games are an Art not a science. There are so many variable for game creation. The sound and graphics is the easy part. Figuring out WHAT to make is the hard part; there is a wide rage of interests to appeal to. Many of us here don't like Quake. But, does that mean it isn't a good game? I never liked Total Annihilation but apparently over a million other people did. So once again we are dealing with opinions and personal preferences. CM is the FIRST war game I have ever liked. Before CM I was a big fan of Starcraft, I have literally played over a 1,000 hours of it before putting it away. How many on this board can't stand the game or have never played it, but it is on my list of all time favorite games. Also on this list is Master of Orion, Civilization II, Master of Orion II. So when you speak of a lack of quality games, maybe you just need to expand your horizons just a little bit.

Dar

I agree with you 100%.

------------------

"Armchair Generals never lose any men"-Darstand

[Guest Big Time Software]

Having worked for a big games publisher (the BIGGEST, Sierra OnLine) I can safely say you are all correct. The ratio of good games to crap is horribly in favor of crap. Mostly because everybody wants to make money off of someone else's "invention". Two years ago it was RtS. There were 47!! RtS games put out before x-mas! How many of them can be named now? I can think of about 3 Why have I forgotten about the other 44? Because they weren't worth the plastic they were burned into.

The games industry works like the movie industry. They make x number of games per year, but only expect one or two of them to really take off. The others are there for safety and/or padding. However, the market is changing and now titles are being shaved of (Sierra just killed a boatload!) so that they can put more of their eggs in one basket. This will work for some companies, like Sierra, but won't for others (GT Interactive) are having problems adjusting to fewer is better.

As for wargames. They are of limited appeal. They are also MUCH harder to make than any other game. Why? Because the crowd is so very unforgiving, and in general VERY demanding. It is an audience that makes corporate game makers run away from faster than you guys can imagine. They loath wargamer type crowds because "nothing is ever good enough for them" and "how can we make money off such a small number of gamers, especially becaues they WON'T buy our game if it is only marginal?". In other words, it is too tough to make a good wargame for us.

There are other reasons too. "Too many cooks" is one of the big ones. It also has to do with the development cycle. These companies want 1.5 years MAX for development. Combat Mission has taken nearly 2.5 years. And time is money to these guys, so 2.5 years means the game had better sell a crudload (like Starcraft). But no wargame has ever sold enough to pay back such a development overhead. Microsoft managed to sell lots of Close Combat games. But why is that? Because they own retail...

And there is the last piece of the puzzle. Retail only wants games that sell, and sell quickly. Wargames sell modest at best, and always slowly. Wrong answer For more details on this all important killer of things niche like... check out:

www.battlefront.com/about

Steve

[Dar]

I only hope that CM becomes the equivalent of Panzer General when it is released. That is meant in the sense that it will appeal to a broader base of gamers and introduce people to wargaming like PG did. CM has the visual and aural appeal and wonderfully simple interface that PG has, and that will get people hooked long before they realize just how complex the game is. Only after they've oohed and aahed over the ability to replay a turn repeatedly from any angle and level until the initial novelty wears off will they realize that this is not the "beer and pretzels" game that PG is, but by then they'll be addicted and will want to learn more about the strengths and weaknesses of different weapons, AFVs, and tactics.

Aside from the pure satisfaction of playing CM, I am looking forward to seeing a surge in wargaming popularity and historical interest. I'm also excited about the standard CM will set in the industry. We wargamers can only benefit across the board from this.

Dar

[Iguana]

While we are on the subject of small, dedicated, developers making good wargames, I urge everyone to check out Edensoft. They are almost ready to release an operational level east front game called Red Thunder. It looks like it may be a winner.

http://www.eden-soft.com/index.htm

Let's all support these small developers who are making the games we love. If anyone knows any others, please share the information.

-Doug

[Schrodi]

Well Maxm2,

You say that in your view it has “nothing to do with how the business or agency is structured, it has to do with the quality of leadership and weather there are institutional restrictions on how much freedom the leadership has.”

Well, you sort of contradict yourself in the first place since the institutional restrictions, if any, ARE how the business is structured. Also, I totally disagree in you assessment. In the first place there are many people of talent out there and very few superlative products, as you yourself mention. This has to do more with institutional structures than leadership. There are plenty of good and potentially good leaders out there. You views on leadership and it’s restrictions being the cause would have gone down well with certain circles being depicted in this game though. Further, if you have great rules in place you CAN’T have bosses who are “tyrannical maniacs” This applies much more broadly too. BTS may, in fact, be a “lucky” mixing of talents. But that lack of other such companies I think has less to do with *bad* luck and more to do with our surrounding institutional structures.

---

[Schrodi]

Hi Dar,

Well, I think I agree with you for the most part. Especially about most software companies having money as the bottom line. But, to be fair I think that they way the market is structured that *has* to be the way the function. I think that it just may be the case that CM *is* a labour of love, BUT, part of the problem is, I think, that their a few opportunities for people with talent to exercise their labours of love in the gaming world. And what are the financial prospects for CM? Is the fact that they strive for excellence and will serve no code before it’s time a detriment to their profitability given the market? Even though this seem refreshingly novel and welcomed approach is great-loved by all, could it be economically punished? I agree with the middle management problem you point out, but is middle management the price of success in this business, thus starting the whole mess again in yet another company? It also seems that catering to the grognars(?) does have an negative effect on the bottom line. Despite the superiorly of this game I doubt it will out sell the well advertised, corporate supported crap games that have been discussed here.

[Schrodi]

Darstand,

I think the games you mention are the few exceptions in the sea of crap in the twitch game category as well. Also, in the high end line the development costs are such that it might be more of just not having a choice. i.e. Ma Bell a few years back you could say “hey x million customers can’t be wrong”

[howardb]

Dar I'm afraid CM wil NEVER be a big hit, not because it's not good enough but because it won't be found in shops everywhere. Just the fact that you have to order it and that there's no commercials for it will prevent it from being a hit. It will however be a hit among wargamers, a game which wargamers and wargamers alone will judge other games. The gfx is also a something that's being judged by the non wargaming crowd and while CM's gfx is ok it's not like Wargasm or anything like that. Gfx usually doesn't mean diddly (is that a word?) to wargamers (although we all want it) but it does to the man on the street.

Anyway the average gamer doesn't want 100% realism because it's intimidating and boring. Intimidating that it shows him that he doesnt rule the game like he does Quake and boring that the guys doesn't fall like flies when he's opening fire. The action isn't fast paced enough simply because it's realistic. Wargames doesn't give you a quick fix either.. some games takes hours to finish and even days to learn (especially if you're not a wargamer in the first place).

No to be frank I gotto admit if this was just a mediocre looking project I wouldn't gone through the work to buy it and get it sent oversea my self. I have currently not sent in my order tho because I'm waiting for some smart ideas on how we are going to save us that customs fee's, Steve ?

PS. What do we actually get in the full version.. any manuals, cd's etc ? If we won't receive anything special why can't we europeans just download it from your site ? How many MB roughly will the finished product be ?

[Dar]

Well, let me clarify:

I want CM to be a financial success, because I want to see CMII, CMIII, etc., and I want to see the standard for wargames in general rise. I do not want CM to be the most popular game of all time because then Steve and Charles will have enough money to buy Tahiti or Aruba, and we'll never see them again!

Seriously, though, I still maintain that this will be a popular game. It does have the eye candy and sound to catch the eye of any gamer; it has the easy interface so you can get started playing right away; and they have the demo to let those people who want to try before they buy do so, even if they can't get it in stores.

Dar

Dar

[Greg Deych]

I know Steve and Charles are not going to let us examine their checkbooks *grin*, but let's throw some numbers around. With the market being what it is, they could be pulling in anywhere from $60K-100K+ by working for somebody else. They've been working on this for 2 years, which comes off to around $300K in lost wages. For CM to compensate them for it, they would need to sell anywhere from 6000-10000 copies, depending on what their exact costs for manufacturing, advertising and other associated overhead are. Is it doable? I'd like to think so. Like they said, by controlling all stages of the distribution process they can potentially survive off a much smaller volume then other games, which would need to sell many tens of thousands of copies to be sucessfull.

[howardb]

Dar I think we all want CM to be a success but if we're to embrace reality I don't think that will happen (artistic success yes but in record numbers being sold no, my bet is that Starcraft has sold more copies than CM will). The thing is that regular numbers doesn't apply here because BTS are running a strict budget it seems and they're the one saying how many copies are a success and not.

One of the reasons I want this game to be a success is mainly because they could hire some mercenaries so we don't have to wait for another 2,5 years for the next heheh (well most of the basics are already done now so it wouldn't take that long anyway).