How often do sales come up on the BF website?

[Bagpipe]

As per title, and if anybody could speculate when the next may be based on previous years?

I am new to the series with CMCW but fancy maybe one of the WW2 and a toss up between SF and BS.

It's not that I am miserly with my money but I am fairly miserly with my money

[A Canadian Cat]

Before things were released on Steam there never were any sales. None. So, I don't think we have enough data to speculate on a pattern.

[landser]

2 hours ago, Bagpipe said:

As per title, and if anybody could speculate when the next may be based on previous years?

If I take the years 2001 through 2021 in to account, and average all the sales data over that period, including but not limited to flash sales, community events, door prizes, bundles and giveaways, the best prediction based on the data is the next sale will be in never.

[Monty's Mighty Moustache]

They discounted CMBS and CMSF2 when they were on sale on Steam so I would expect the WW2 ones will be on sale when they are on sale on Steam (once they have been added). So it could be a while. 

[Vacillator]

As above, but I would add that if you buy one of the bundles you can 'save' on the full price of all components.  For example CMBN big bundle parts would seperately cost $160 but the bundle is keenly priced at $110.  Assuming you want all the parts, but who wouldn't .

[Lucky_Strike]

5 hours ago, Vacilllator said:

As above, but I would add that if you buy one of the bundles you can 'save' on the full price of all components.  For example CMBN big bundle parts would seperately cost $160 but the bundle is keenly priced at $110.  Assuming you want all the parts, but who wouldn't .

Yes, just buy everything and you'll effectively get at least one game for free compared to full retail price ...

[MikeyD]

BFC had been dead-set against 'sales' on principle. Then they got tied up with Steam, which was so lucrative for them that they decided, heck, might as well let Steam have their way on this. I don't know what's happening on BFC's own sales site because I have no reason to visit it. Do they try to match Steam's sales when they happen? I consider 'sales' to be a different beast from bundled discounts.

[Bagpipe]

Without wanting to rattle the hornet's nest, I guess I am just struggling to justify the full price of another module when i already have CMCW. 

Like, If you have invested in the game engine (i.e. bought one game already), it would make sense to offer a fixed discount off of future game/module (or in my perspective DLC) purchases. 

Don't get me wrong, every module has a ton of work invested in the units, maps, database etc. but it just doesn't add up that pay for example £60 for the entry fee and then a further £60 for every ride in the park.

I know this is probably said ALL THE TIME by noobs to the series but I mean... I played the original when it came out wayyy back so yer not fooling me with your fancy new tech

TL;DR I would happily pay £35-£40 for additional modules/titles once I have shelled out for a "base" game but that's just my opinion

[dbsapp]

53 minutes ago, Bagpipe said:

Without wanting to rattle the hornet's nest, I guess I am just struggling to justify the full price of another module when i already have CMCW. 

Like, If you have invested in the game engine (i.e. bought one game already), it would make sense to offer a fixed discount off of future game/module (or in my perspective DLC) purchases. 

Don't get me wrong, every module has a ton of work invested in the units, maps, database etc. but it just doesn't add up that pay for example £60 for the entry fee and then a further £60 for every ride in the park.

I know this is probably said ALL THE TIME by noobs to the series but I mean... I played the original when it came out wayyy back so yer not fooling me with your fancy new tech

TL;DR I would happily pay £35-£40 for additional modules/titles once I have shelled out for a "base" game but that's just my opinion

As with every other product in market economy, the price of Combat Mission games is determined in very simple way: it costs whatever people are ready to pay for it. 

If the majority of players are ready to pay $40, why take less? 

[slysniper]

well, hope that steam somehow starts producing many more players buying the game and then maybe BF will be a little more willing to cut the price and put the game on sale as they start to age.

I really think part of the reason was they were not doing the volume to do much less than to price the game as is and to leave it there. With the niche market, they could do it.

If they can get to a different volume as to sales numbers, maybe the willingness to reduce pricing will be more willing.

 

I cannot really say, but from what I have seen, it does not appear that the steam number of users is really big. but maybe someone can give some good guesses as to the number of sales they are getting there.

[MikeyD]

If we're talking modules, CMRT Fire and Rubble module is a behemoth, it expands the scope of the already-impressive basegame exponentially.  If you have no particular interest in the British army there's no need to buy the CMFI, CMSF2 or CMBN British modules. If you're fascinated by modern NATO the CMSF2 NATO module is a must-have.

As for price. If the prices don't change that mean inflation naturally eats away at the dollar cost. in 2008 a cut of steak in the supermarket would have perhaps cost to $2.50. Now its $14. The CM Marine module's price didn't inflate over that time.

Edited August 1, 2021 by MikeyD

[IMHO]

9 hours ago, Bagpipe said:

I guess I am just struggling to justify the full price of another module when i already have CMCW. 

Like, If you have invested in the game engine (i.e. bought one game already)...

They are not modules - they are different games. Gameplay is totally different. What you can get away in CMSF2 you cannot with CMCW and what is okay for CMCW is not for CMBS. And WWII titles are another beast unto itself. So they are not DLCs to a common base game. As per real modules in "CM speak" look into the TO&E. Like I bought CMSF/CMSF2 Marines to get 13 strong rifle squads, high capacity AAVs and Milkor MGL. Infantry combat feels sufficiently different with them when compared to US Army rifle squad with no CDTE.

Edited August 2, 2021 by IMHO

[Monty's Mighty Moustache]

13 hours ago, Bagpipe said:

Like, If you have invested in the game engine (i.e. bought one game already), it would make sense to offer a fixed discount off of future game/module (or in my perspective DLC) purchases. 

How does that work with say, Unreal engine? Why don’t companies offer discounts on every game built using that engine since the first one? Because it’s an engine, not a game. The engine powers the physics, ballistics etc but each game, not module, has a ton of custom code to model the differerent weapons, TO&E, vehicles, terrain, weather and such as other have said.

It’s not the first time I’ve seen someone say this and it seems to stem from the gameplay feeling similar but each game is very much its own thing. 

I also thought that way way back when but I soon was sucked in and now don’t think twice about the price. As for sales as I mentioned earlier Steam had a sale recently and BF did indeed price match and they have stated the intent to do so going forward. But obviously that only applies to the titles that are available on Steam. 

MMM

Edited August 2, 2021 by Monty's Mighty Moustache

[Monty's Mighty Moustache]

Also if it were as simple as it being the same game with a few tweaks then we’d have early Ostfront and Africa by now

[Pelican Pal]

On 7/31/2021 at 7:11 PM, MikeyD said:

Do they try to match Steam's sales when they happen? I consider 'sales' to be a different beast from bundled discounts.

They seem to match the Steam sale but tend to be 1-7 days late on actually matching it and sometimes leave the sale up past the Steam sale. I suspect it has to be manually entered on the site and no one is in a hurry to do it.

So far only games that are on Steam have a sale here.

[Bagpipe]

Yeah I understand your points, I also appreciate your understanding of my reasoning and not just biting my head off lol You gotta tread careful on the internet these days everybody can get trigger happy!!

I know the die hards and long term supporters will have been over it and I guess over the years shelling out for a new game is more affordable, as I have done with other series and flight sims for example, than just piling into them all in one go.

So clear this up for me too please, if they upgrade the engine you have to pay for the upgrade on every game you own if you want to run that upgraded engine on your game yeah?

So, would it not make more sense if you are gonna charge so much for each game that when the engine upgrades come along you only charge one fee per account for upgrading? Or is this another can of worms? Are we paying for the engine or the game? I guess to strangers the pricing structure is just a little excessive in appearance. I suppose the confusion probably stems from other developers not ever upgrading the engine of one game in particular so the situation never really arises in the general gaming industry.

Don't get me wrong I am not belittling BF's efforts or quality in saying this I am just trying to understand the why of it all. I suppose in a way I kind of do understand anyways and at this point I am now in full blown ramble mode but yeah...money's tight I guess and BF has so many games!

[landser]

20 hours ago, MikeyD said:

  If you have no particular interest in the British army there's no need to buy the CMFI, CMSF2 or CMBN British modules.

That sounds fine in theory. But in practical terms I have to disagree. And the reason is that scenario and campaign designers tend to use parts of any and all modules. For example they may use just a few pieces of one. And then in order to play that scenario or campaign you must have the module. Even if it's not designed around British army forces, it may still use units, or map elements or anything really. And with how precious campaigns are in the Combat Mission world, not having these modules restricts our choices more than they already are. Just imagine a CMBN player who opted not to get the vehicle pack

So while technically your point is true, I think for most players that not having the whole works is too limiting when searching for new content to play.

And I concur with the point above about a base game with plug-in modules. I hope this is Combat Mission's future, a point I've made here myself before too.

 

[IMHO]

1 hour ago, Bagpipe said:

So clear this up for me too please, if they upgrade the engine you have to pay for the upgrade on every game you own if you want to run that upgraded engine on your game yeah?

1. If my memory does not fail me we've had just two major engine upgrades for the past 21 years of CM series existence  And the first engine upgrade was released via new games rather than altering existing games so you didn't really need to invest more into the games you already own - old games stayed on the old engine and you got a new engine simply by buying a new game. Second engine upgrade was released step by step for the newest games in the portfolio (newest back then ). But you had to buy this upgrade just once and it upgraded all the games that you own that were meant to be upgraded. If I remember correctly it was 10 bucks whereas new games costed 40 bucks back then. Again 10 bucks in past 21 years and you got it all in one  And those were TOTALLY different and MUCH improved games after the engine release. Minor upgrades come in patches and they are free.
2. May be there were paid upgrades for WWII titles - I don't know. After CMBS I stopped playing WWII titles though I own two full sets of them as well. I didn't know I can reuse Win keys for Mac platform so bought a second full set by accident
3. There are modules that add to your unit roster - they cost money but you really need to buy them only if you're either into "authentic looks" or you want some specific set of equipment or units that significantly alters the gameplay. I'm not a big fan of the former so I own only Marines for CMSF1/2. Three full strength fire teams, AAVs and Milkor do change how you play the game IMO.

So basically the CM business model is (or was - let's see what Slitherine will do to the game ) different from big Triple-A titles. Yes, you pay more upfront but basically that's it. You don't need to burn monies every year or half a year to stay in the game.

1 hour ago, Bagpipe said:

I guess to strangers the pricing structure is just a little excessive in appearance. I suppose the confusion probably stems from other developers not ever upgrading the engine of one game in particular so the situation never really arises in the general gaming industry.

The question is will there be more revenue if BTS changes the business model. Will more gamers flock to the titles should BTS lowers the bar? I really doubt. CM is a VERY special game made for VERY special audience. If you like it - you'll buy anyway and if you don't - you won't bring your monies irrespective of the price. E.g. up-to-date GAME MECHANICS in EU4 will set you for $200-$300, up-to-date HOI4 - $150-$200. And when I say GAME MECHANICS I mean it. Without major DLCs you're playing TOTALLY DIFFERENT game from the rest of "the bunch". You have nothing to speak about with other players, guides and tutorials are useless etc. Good strategy/tactical game is expensive to develop so if the costs are allocated to a smaller audience you have no choice but to charge more for individual title. I'd say in terms of bang for a buck BTS is super-efficient.

Edited August 2, 2021 by IMHO

[Artkin]

Yeahh call me American but $60 really ain't a lot of money. I can buy a weeks worth of pot or I could buy a years worth of entertainment value for the same price. 

[IMHO]

19 minutes ago, landser said:

And with how precious campaigns are in the Combat Mission world, not having these modules restricts our choices more than they already are.

I'd disagree. CM is different from other games since it offers every gamer an ability to make  his/her very own game in no time. Aside from CMxx I play ARMA3 and HOI4. You cannot make your own games in HOI whatsoever and any descent scenario for ARMA3 requires scripting and good command of the engine so next to impossible for an "average" unless you can invest hundreds of hours into learning the object model and methods.

Edited August 2, 2021 by IMHO

[landser]

Playing battles I designed, knowing everything about it, is a nonstarter. Sure the ability is there, but I have no real desire to play scenarios I designed myself. I won't even pick the enemy forces in a QB.

[IMHO]

29 minutes ago, landser said:

Playing battles I designed, knowing everything about it, is a nonstarter. Sure the ability is there, but I have no real desire to play scenarios I designed myself. I won't even pick the enemy forces in a QB.

1. I'd agree with you to a certain degree. CM is different because community developed UGC is part of the equation. So if a certain title does not find much of a following then the title is in a kind of trouble. But for CMSF1/2 and WWII games there's a ton of content out there. For me CMBS was a bit of disappointment but reading CMCW forum it seems just not so many people like very challenging lethal battle space where a tiny mistake ruins the whole day
2. After all games are just a form of entertainment - one kinda pays per-hour rate for "wasting one's time"  So would you honestly say that even CMBS that is not so rich in UGC is more expensive per-hour than buying films of paying for Netflix?  Save CMSF1/2 or WWII titles with very vibrant scenario community.

Edited August 2, 2021 by IMHO

[Bagpipe]

8 hours ago, IMHO said:

I'd disagree. CM is different from other games since it offers every gamer an ability to make  his/her very own game in no time. Aside from CMxx I play ARMA3 and HOI4. You cannot make your own games in HOI whatsoever and any descent scenario for ARMA3 requires scripting and good command of the engine so next to impossible for an "average" unless you can invest hundreds of hours into learning the object model and methods.

I got ARMA 3 a few years back having not bothered with ARMA 2. I was pleasantly surprised to find that much of the unit behavior script lines etc were still identical to the original flashpoint game I had played some years before as a kid. Though iirc they now have an even easier system for that stuff where you just click a button. Back in the day you had to script EVERY waypoint, EVERY action, EVERYTHING lol. Today's ARMA crowd don't know the half of it lol

I don't play Arma anymore though just due to hard drive limitations, I am a big DCS World fan so that takes up nearly 250GB iirc 

[Bagpipe]

7 hours ago, IMHO said:

1. After all games are just a form of entertainment - one kinda pays per-hour rate for "wasting one's time"  So would you honestly say that even CMBS that is not so rich in UGC is more expensive per-hour than buying films of paying for Netflix?  Save CMSF1/2 or WWII titles with very vibrant scenario community.

Try telling that one to my wife! I'll get the spades