Londoner Posted May 31, 2000 Share Posted May 31, 2000 Ted m8, i see where your comin from but u've gotta realise that other people take different variables into account when buyin a game. I for 1 do. I'm all for BTS makin a nice profit from this, after all it's a fukin sorted game, job well done. But, and it is a big but, there are many other groundbreakin militarily orentiated games that have been released over the last couple of years. Half-Life, Hidden&Dangerous, the Close Combat series? and maybe Shogan Totar War (hehe not a hex fan). All these games were/are competitively priced. OK Battlefront is a small company with a limited comsumer base but surely CM didn't cost more than say Hidden&Dangerous (which was developed by a small Chech' company wasn't it?) Battlefront r making plenty by shipping direct n cuting out untold middlemen so why should they charge us $100 or 65 quid 2 me! If i pay $45-50 4 top quality games from other companies, why should i pay more from another? Simple fundementals of our luvly(not) capitialist system. If u buy a ****e game 4 the same price, more fool u for not researching it, in this day n age there's no excuse . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark IV Posted May 31, 2000 Share Posted May 31, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Seanachai: Excuse me? Where in my post did I advocate ripping off corporations? Or imply that I thought that behaviour was alright?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Where did I say you did? I rejected the use of "shareware" to describe CM, partly because shareware is so widely cracked on the internet. Many netizens think this is OK because the shell is "out there" in the first place. I never said you advocated piracy. I still oppose the use of the term because, among other reasons, it makes piracy seem "softer". And why would you think that something being 'shareware' makes it permissible to pirate it? Obviously, I don't. And I've bought plenty of 'shelf' software that wasn't worth the price of setting a match to it, with no response from the retailer or the manufacturer beyond a shrug and a $mile. I've found a lot of shareware that was superior to commercialware I believe I said that ("Agreed") in my follow-up 2 posts down. See it up there? Response to G4A? Your entire post seems intent on misrepresenting what I'd said originally, and taking exception with it for no particular reason. Reason #1: CM simply isn't shareware (you do not get a fully-functional game for free, for any period of time). Reason #2: some reviewers use "shareware" (as in "OK for shareware") to slam the product, the implication being that it is not suitable for outright sale as a finished game. One has already done so, with regard to CM, in exactly those words, with exactly that intent. Reason #3: "Shareware" is especially prone to piracy since it is so easy to crack. As a good sycophant I would prefer to see BTS get paid for all release copies of CM. Therefore, I try to avoid the impression that it is anything less a full game for sale, which also happens to have a free demo. It's too bad if you took this personally, since I was responding to "In my opinion, Combat Mission qualifies as shareware..." which I believe is incorrect. You justified your belief with "...because it's a product created by people, as opposed to a corporation, not merely responsive to its customers, but personally responsive, with a version available for evaluation, without millions being spent on advertising, marketing, and strong-arm distribution tactics". "People as opposed to a corporation"? Millions spent on "strong-arm distribution tactics"? This sounds a little... misrepresentative. I think you owe me an apology, buddy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted May 31, 2000 Share Posted May 31, 2000 Well, just to put in some opinions... The price of CM is in line with other "AAA Titles" out there, even though we feel that most are utter crap (i.e. unoriginal, unimaginative, and sometimes even unplayable). So in theory if utter crap goes for $50 CM should be priced higher. But of course that isn't the way capitalism works (unfortunately quality and price do not have any absoulte relationship) so we aren't pricing CM based on quality. However, any price lower than about $45 would be doing ourselves a great injustice for all the work we put into the game. Also keep in mind that our market segment is *tiny* compared to what the average $45 game on the shelf is aiming for. Without any doubt Combat Mission is not shareware. As Mark IV stated above, CM does not fit the definition one bit. I also agree with him that "shareware" is a term used to insult software all too often. People are going to have to get used to the idea that the Internet is just another means of selling product, and therefore is no different than retail or mail order. As the costs of the latter two outlets gets even higher and harder to buy into, you will see more and more software being sold over the Internet only. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V B Posted May 31, 2000 Author Share Posted May 31, 2000 Dubious companies out there (Ion Storm) Who profit from namesake really do tend to hurt the game market reguardless of quality of product. And believe me, I am not saying that CM is NOT worth the money being dished out but the amount of software that is approaching games makes a unique little cold war in the games industry. I personally cannot afford to spend 45$ for many games. CM is one of the few. But truth be told, if I had to chose between a game such as CM 2/3/4 and one such as WW2Online. I would shift my earnings from purchasing something that I play quite often (CM) to something new and original that is really making an amazing attempt for a small company (WWIIOnline). I would have to purchase WW2Online. This is just an example of my way of thinking about how to wisely purchase my next few weeks of computer entertainment. I really do hope Big Time gets well established after CM does get released (Tac Ops did it for me guys, loved it and still do, even though Op. Art of War is taking up the same diskspace). Fortunately CM will be a game like Steel Panthers, never forgotten with an eternal place on my harddrive (Thank you Matrix). But I cannot see paying 45+ dollars for 4 games in a series. Much like Talonsoft, I will buy one Op. Art Game and they will release a new and improved Elite edition(This totally pushes my buttons) of the same basic engine with improvements. Now being a consumer, my suggestion to Big Time would be to offer a rebate to previous buyers of CM for CM 2 (20$?) and so on. Just a suggestion. But I really do base my purchases, like many others out there, on priority and originality. That is why I eagerly purchased Combat Mission without even considering what else is out there to buy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flix Posted May 31, 2000 Share Posted May 31, 2000 What position will BTS be in within the next couple of years? I believe that it will be determined by the sales produced by CM. Folks, CM is a one of a kind! It truly is a revolutionary design in the genre of wargaming. Whether CM2 is $75, $45, or $20, it will be mine! I will skip buying lunch and pack a sandwich for a couple of weeks to get it. Judging from the initial product the game can only get better with age. More development, faster machines, new innovations, etc. Start saving your money now!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperTed Posted May 31, 2000 Share Posted May 31, 2000 Hey all, I feel obligated to apologize to everybody who has responded to my obviously ineffective attempts to explain my thoughts on this issue. I appreciate all the feedback you have provided. I assure you this will be my last attempt to make my point. Okay, here goes! I do not advocate BTS selling CM for $100. However, I am very happy that it only costs about $50. Based on what I know about the game, if it was priced higher and I had the money, I would probably buy it at the higher price. End. Thanks. Ted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorak Posted May 31, 2000 Share Posted May 31, 2000 Hell SuperTed, I feel like I should have paid $50 for the beta Demo as much as I played it. Lorak ------------------ http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/combatmissionclub Lorak's FTX for CM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark IV Posted May 31, 2000 Share Posted May 31, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lorak: Hell SuperTed, I feel like I should have paid $50 for the beta Demo as much as I played it. Lorak <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Ditto. Already allocated to CM2 instead (now that we're promised a release date, only 4 years hence, for CM5: The PTO). just kidding, already!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Posted May 31, 2000 Share Posted May 31, 2000 amorbuff: I stand by what I said. I said CM is the most realistic wargame covering this topic and scale. This is not an opinion, it's a fact. Name one other wargame covering the same subject matter and scale that more accurately models combat. There are none. CM stands alone. And I wasn't comparing apples and oranges at all. I specified that CM is the most realistic wargame covering this particular subject (western front tactical combat) at this particular scale (squad/team based). Never once did I try to compare it to anything else but another wargame covering the same exact thing. PE isn't even a wargame, it's a sim, so obviously is not even up for consideration. And I never said anything was wrong with SP having a boardgame feel. But it is clearly inferior to CM in how accurately it models WWII tactical combat. That doesn't mean it's not a fun game, but it certainly can't compete head-to-head with CM in the realism department and hope to win, or even tie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts