Professional.

[dbsapp]

I understand Battlefront decision, because if they open game engine, each game\add-on could be converted to another, like CMRT to CMBS. That would ruine their business model. Having one game would be tantamount to having them all.

I don't know if it necessary means that changing units qualities (visibility, fire eanges etc.) must be forbidden as well.

 

 

[Battlefront.com]

10 hours ago, holoween said:

Id say thats just a fallacy that has been proven invalid quite often.

You missed a key part of the equation.  Yes, people need to purchase a game to mod it, but they only need to purchase it one time.  Combat Mission currently has the equivalent of 8 games, so that's a potential of a 90% decrease in revenue just for the Base Game sales we currently have.  For Modules and Packs, there's now a potential for a 100% decrease in revenue.

Obviously in reality many people would opt to purchase Battlefront branded content because it's likely to be superior to scattered free stuff.  But how many sales and how much people are willing to pay for sales is a big question.  What isn't a big question is that the amount opting to not buy anything more from us would be extremely large.

The only way to make up for this is to sell "single games" to new customers who otherwise would not have purchased it.  If we presume a 50% overall reduction in sales, that means we have to double the number of individual people we're currently selling to.  We do not believe that is possible to do just because the game is moddable.

What this means is we slaughter the revenue we know we can count on, and which keeps us alive, for something we have zero faith we can achieve based on decades of professional experience.  No sane business would ever go down that path.

10 hours ago, holoween said:

But obviously its not my risk so easy to say you should allow it.

I always like to see someone say this as it's often left out of people's equation.  For you guys, you risk not having any more Combat Mission ever again.  For us, we risk having to flip burgers instead of making Combat Mission.  The two are not equivalent risks

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

I will say there is an alternative system that we, so far, have rejected -> subscription software.  This is the model that almost all professional software has moved to. The customer pays an annual fee based on various factors to "rent" the software for the year.  As soon as payment stops, use of the software stops.

This is similar to how things work with our Professional customers.  It works because that's the norm for that market.  For the gaming market it isn't.  As innovative as we think we are we don't feel like trying it out.

Steve

[chuckdyke]

18 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

As innovative as we think we are we don't feel like trying it out.

It could work out to replace PBEM not to rent but just play the game with a version of the software in the cloud so to speak. We don't need to send huge files by mail. 

[A Canadian Cat]

24 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

system that we, so far, have rejected -> subscription software.

Thank goodness for that. I hate subscription software - except for things that are actually services (like file sharing, web hosting, email stuff that actually has running costs).

I have dumped companies when they moved to subscription only. Having said that there would be no where for me to go if you guys decided to do that but I would *HATE* it if you did. ;D

[holoween]

15 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

You missed a key part of the equation.  Yes, people need to purchase a game to mod it, but they only need to purchase it one time.  Combat Mission currently has the equivalent of 8 games, so that's a potential of a 90% decrease in revenue just for the Base Game sales we currently have.  For Modules and Packs, there's now a potential for a 100% decrease in revenue.

Obviously in reality many people would opt to purchase Battlefront branded content because it's likely to be superior to scattered free stuff.  But how many sales and how much people are willing to pay for sales is a big question.  What isn't a big question is that the amount opting to not buy anything more from us would be extremely large.

The only way to make up for this is to sell "single games" to new customers who otherwise would not have purchased it.  If we presume a 50% overall reduction in sales, that means we have to double the number of individual people we're currently selling to.  We do not believe that is possible to do just because the game is moddable.

What this means is we slaughter the revenue we know we can count on, and which keeps us alive, for something we have zero faith we can achieve based on decades of professional experience.  No sane business would ever go down that path.

I think youre misjudging the risks and chances.

No modder in their right mind is going to redo work you already did. More likely them masing their mods on games with all modules and packs forcing anyone wanting to use them to actually buy all of them.

They are also far more likely to cover timeframes and areas youre simply not going to be able to make games on due to time/cost constrains. So anyone with a special interest in those would buy a CM game without being interested in the game itself.

 

23 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

I will say there is an alternative system that we, so far, have rejected -> subscription software.  This is the model that almost all professional software has moved to. The customer pays an annual fee based on various factors to "rent" the software for the year.  As soon as payment stops, use of the software stops.

This is similar to how things work with our Professional customers.  It works because that's the norm for that market.  For the gaming market it isn't.  As innovative as we think we are we don't feel like trying it out.

Steve

Id personally get it if it just allows any combination of units and maps from any previously purchased game just so i can play SF2 units on good maps. But i might be an exception there.

[Battlefront.com]

15 hours ago, Artkin said:

Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems that 1C Company is still in business, along with Digitalmindsoft who has taken over the series after Best Way (Though I'm not sure who did the development work for the game). Best Way has another "Men of War" title in the works. They seem to be based out of Luhansk so I wonder if the conflict had anything to do with it. Who are you referring to? Best Way? In that case then Digitalmindsoft seems like they know what they're doing kinda sorta.

1C is still in business, though they had some rough times.  They were a very big name at the time and had far greater marketing reach than we ever have.  Regardless, they didn't develop the game, they published it. The financial incentives and rewards are very different for publishers and developers.

Digitalmindsoft, the developer, seems to be out of business.  I checked their website and the last update was 2015 and I can't find any references to releases since then.  Don't even know who Best Way is.

So... you are pointing to a "success" that doesn't help advance your argument

BTW, I refreshed my memory about Arma.  Bohemia almost went out of business after their first release.  The military contracts, not modders, saved them from that fate.  I'm hearing that they are again in financial peril.  In fact, a Chinese tech company just bought a piece of them this year.  Privately held companies tend to sell pieces of themselves because they need cash, so I guess that checks out.

15 hours ago, Artkin said:

Why does the engine need replacing? What makes it any different than CMx2 which is just as old? By that logic I would think CMx2 would be considered an engine that needs replacing as well.

Yes, CM2 does need replacing.  But we've been actively selling products made from it for more than 10 years.  That is possible because the emphasis is on the simulation aspects and not the whiz-bang features.  That is the exact opposite for FPS games.  For that sort of game you need to reinvent the game engine every couple of years to keep up with the competition or you're out of business.  Which is why so many FPS game franchises have either failed to start (i.e. first game flop) or failed after a second release.

15 hours ago, Artkin said:

The strategy wargaming market was just as big back in those days. Company of Heroes... World in Conflict... it died out because the games got old, CoH had a terrible engine to modify (Lots and lots of crashes). Modding is what made the community EXPLODE. None of us ACE boys were happy about it, but the community essentially did a ton of work for the developer (Which in turn sold tons of copies).

RTS type games have always gone in "fad" cycles since the genre was invented.  Those games died out because the financial rewards to keep them going weren't there.  Which once again undermines your theory that modding keeps game companies in business.

15 hours ago, Artkin said:

I'm not asking for an arm or a leg, but an expansion of what we could do in general with CM would be appreciated by the masses. Not sure what you think I'm talking about...

Anything that opens up the data, units, and models to modification.  What are you talking about?

15 hours ago, Artkin said:

Any Combat Mission veteran will tell of how BFC's customer support is the best of the best. But that is because game developers don't really do that kind of thing. Which is great, we all appreciate it. This now diverts resources to support a minuscule minority. I understand the price must be right.

Exactly.  If our sales could go up because of opening the game up, we would be able to afford to support it (theoretically, at least).  But we don't think sales will go up, we think overall they will go down AND we'll have more demands for support.  That is not workable.

15 hours ago, Artkin said:

 can see how allowing new models into the game could hurt sales. Maps too. But we port maps from title to title anyway, because if they didn't the games would get stale (For me!). I probably play more often than most, I have 15 active PBEM in my manager across four different titles right now. So it really helps to have the kind of flexibility I am talking about. If we weren't able to port maps that would be a huge, huge bummer.

Porting maps doesn't give anybody any new functionality because we already provided a fully functional Editor.  Which is, BTW, something that most games don't provide.  For most games a huge part of the modding effort is to recreate the developer's editor, but in Combat Mission that's not the case.  Which means, in a way, Combat Mission is more moddable out of the box than most other games.

15 hours ago, Artkin said:

Nobody is asking for anything for free either. Nor is anybody demanding it.

You have not paid very much attention to the phenomena known as "customer entitlement".  The game industry is notoriously bad in that respect.  We certainly experience it.  Just look at the way this thread started

15 hours ago, Artkin said:

I understand, and I'm not trying to come off arrogantly. Everyone wants to see this series succeed, Battlefront to expand in their staff and capabilities, and get these modules rolling for us already. It's been five years since I bought CMBS, and it has yet to have a module. I'm not dragging you down for that, but it really would have been nice to play with the nato units from SF2 during this time. It would have made the game so much more enjoyable.

And it would have put us out of business, which would not be enjoyable for us and (eventually) would not have made you happy either.

15 hours ago, Artkin said:

I'm not trying to demand things, just be vocal about how I feel about the series. Which should be taken into consideration at the most.

As I said, nothing you've said is different than what I've heard the last time I engaged in this discussion.  Because nothing has changed to make those arguments applicable to Combat Mission, nothing has changed in our position towards opening up the game engine to major modifications.

Steve

[Erwin]

1 minute ago, IanL said:

Thank goodness for that. I hate subscription software

+100

[Battlefront.com]

3 minutes ago, IanL said:

Thank goodness for that. I hate subscription software - except for things that are actually services (like file sharing, web hosting, email stuff that actually has running costs).

Same here, but unfortunately the options for non-subscription software in particular areas is not good.  If you want a professional grade 3D or CAD program, for example, you're either looking at subscription or a massive up-front cost.

But don't worry... we think the gaming market would reject such an approach so we're not going to try it.

3 minutes ago, holoween said:

I think youre misjudging the risks and chances.

No modder in their right mind is going to redo work you already did.

The point is they'd likely do it before we did, so no game developer in their right mind is going to redo work someone else is offering for free.

3 minutes ago, holoween said:

They are also far more likely to cover timeframes and areas youre simply not going to be able to make games on due to time/cost constrains. So anyone with a special interest in those would buy a CM game without being interested in the game itself.

The subject matter that we don't cover, but could work with the game engine, isn't very large.  It's not like someone could do Napoleonics with CM if we opened it up to the fullest extent.  Maybe something like Pacific or Vietnam, but even then I'm not too sure about that.

The chances that someone would purchase Combat Mission to play something we wouldn't make (like Korean War) but NOT purchase it because of something we do make (like Normandy) is very small.  Which means we'd see no extra sales from someone making a Korean War mod.

Again, for the financials to work we'd have to sell to a very large number of people who wouldn't otherwise purchase Combat Mission JUST TO BREAK EVEN.  Breaking even is equivalent to losing the bet.  For a risk of this size we have to be pretty convinced that we're going to make 200%-300% more than we would by not doing it.  I see zero chance of that happening, but I see a very good chance of reducing our sales by 50% or more.

It's really a no-brainer decision for anybody who is sitting in our shoes.

Steve

[landser]

What a thread, not the first time the curtain's been pulled back, and thanks to Steve for engaging.

Not much I've read here surprises me, and Combat Mission is what it is as a result of this mindset. There's good in that and bad in that. Each player/customer can judge what that is on his own criteria. I'll continue to vote with my wallet as all of us can, and should, do.

Ultimately the buck stops with Battlefront, it's their skin in the game, and rightfully they should call the shots as they see it. Any other thing is just noise. I'll be critical of Combat Mission, but not of Battlefront. I could just make my own damn game if I don't like it. Well, no I can't, but you get the point.

[ratdeath]

Personally I am very happy with the products provided and that shows in my order history. Hopefully Battlefront do the right decisions to stay in business. For the engine to continue evolve they need to earn money and it's their right to have CM as closed or opened as they like. Even if the unit data could be open I assume the engine would be closed anyway and if Battlefront is loosing money I guess we will never see a new CM product. I am already looking forward to a Cold War module!

If Battlefront stops to develop CM for whatever reason, it would be great if they would release the code under an open source license for the community to continue development of the engine.

 

[A Canadian Cat]

17 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Same here, but unfortunately the options for non-subscription software in particular areas is not good.  If you want a professional grade 3D or CAD program, for example, you're either looking at subscription or a massive up-front cost.

Oh I hear ya. And frankly for businesses it makes a lot of sense - its more flexible and it funds better support. Or it better ties good support to funding. Usually

17 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

But don't worry... we think the gaming market would reject such an approach so we're not going to try it.

Wheeeew. I'll rest easy. I don't really want to hate anything you guys do

[danfrodo]

so maybe instead of endless discussion of things Steve's made clear are NEVER going to happen, we could return to the fine forum tradition of harrassing BFC about what are next releases and when will we get pre-order.  And after pre-order we can harrass them about delivery for a couple months.  At least we'd be complaining about something that is real instead of all these fantasies.

[ratdeath]

CMCW Scandinavia Module! Yes! When? or maybe that's a fantasy!

 

[danfrodo]

I don't think that's a fantasy.  All we need is NATO & winter stuff, then pretend we're in Norway.  I don't see Steve saying we will NEVER have NATO CMCW.  I hope you're right.  We should start a thread endlessly complaining about lack of Norway module , to which I would happily contribute.

[BornGinger]

21 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

We should start a thread endlessly complaining about lack of Norway module

Would Marve Fleksnes be in it to cause havoc?

Edited October 20, 2021 by BornGinger

[MikeyD]

Back-in-the-day a nerdy college friend told me how he once found himself sitting at a table with the publisher of Consumer Reports Magazine at some event. He proceeded to spend the entire time bending the poor guy's ear telling him EXACTLY what was wrong with the magazine and how EXACTLY to fix it. I'm sure the publisher guy reeeeeally appreciated all that valuable input from a random pimply 17 year old.

[danfrodo]

27 minutes ago, BornGinger said:

Would Marve Fleksnes be in it to cause havoc?

is that the guy that betrayed the commandos who came ashore to attack the heavy water plant?

[kohlenklau]

Is it just a forum urban myth that CMFI only became a reality because some guy ponied up the money to make it happen? But maybe that was long ago when you BFC guys were still eating Ramen noodles for lunch...

Maybe the BFC HQ parking lot is full of Porsches now...

How much money do I need to assemble (gofundme/kickstart/blood plasma/aluminum cans turn-in) to get a CMFI pre-Husky vehicle pack made?

 

Edited October 20, 2021 by kohlenklau

[A Canadian Cat]

1 hour ago, danfrodo said:

need is NATO & winter stuff, then pretend we're in Norway.

That would be awesome. NATO arctic exercises. My dad tells stories about visiting the Norway, Swedish and Finish boarders back in his day.

[BFCElvis]

29 minutes ago, kohlenklau said:

Is it just a forum urban myth that CMFI only became a reality because some guy ponied up the money to make it happen? But maybe that was long ago when you BFC guys were still eating Ramen noodles for lunch...

Maybe the BFC HQ parking lot is full of Porsches now...

How much money do I need to assemble (gofundme/kickstart/blood plasma/aluminum cans turn-in) to get a CMFI pre-Husky vehicle pack made?

 

Nope. It is not a myth. 

[BFCElvis]

20 hours ago, Artkin said:

Any Combat Mission veteran will tell of how BFC's customer support is the best of the best. 

Thank you.

[Artkin]

3 hours ago, MikeyD said:

Back-in-the-day a nerdy college friend told me how he once found himself sitting at a table with the publisher of Consumer Reports Magazine at some event. He proceeded to spend the entire time bending the poor guy's ear telling him EXACTLY what was wrong with the magazine and how EXACTLY to fix it. I'm sure the publisher guy reeeeeally appreciated all that valuable input from a random pimply 17 year old.

Right... 

do you know how much fun that Berlin map is with CMCW?

Edited October 20, 2021 by Artkin

[BornGinger]

11 hours ago, BFCElvis said:

Nope. It is not a myth. 

So which porsche do you have, then? I guess that's what you answered to.

Edited October 21, 2021 by BornGinger

[domfluff]

Elvis uses two of them, like Van Damme in that commercial.