razorfish Posted February 2, 2000 Share Posted February 2, 2000 I have a question which I don't want to be taken by anyone here as disrespectful: Namely, why has this game been re-released twice without significant changes? The scenarios, AI, interface, and units are effectively the same as the original version released in the early 90's by Arsenal Publishing, and to my mind these new versions are not different enough to warrant the shelling out of $20 every time TacOps is picked up by a different publisher-I have already invested $60 into TacOps since its initial release, and don't know why I'm being asked to spend more. I know that some changes have been made, but mostly it seems that TacOps Classic and v3.0 are simply milking this particular cash cow for every drop she's worth. Major, is there a significantly new product on the horizon? What about the much anticipated TacOps 98? Again, I really don't want to give the wrong impression on what I'm asking. I know that this is a niche market and that any financial backing is welcome when it appears. I have spent many enjoyable years playing TacOps and haven't come anywhere close to getting bored with the game (even using the original AI scenarios). I'm just disappointed that this new version doesn't offer much over my Classic edition, but that I'm still being asked to pay full-price for it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCullough Posted February 2, 2000 Share Posted February 2, 2000 With the same caveats as Razorfish states concerning how much I've enjoyed TacOps and meaning no disrespect, I have been asking myself the same question over the past few weeks since receiving 3.0, and with the resounding clank of a John Cage fantasy interrupted, finding that there was nothing new for me. I see improvements in the non-solitaire capabilities - and that's great for those with the time to devote to CPX/MBX/PBM games. However for those of us in the Solitaire mode, the "New and Improved" part of the game just isn't there. (Since I was upgrading from 0.1.5 I was expecting a few more changes than Razorfish may have been...) Don't get me wrong - TacOps is my favorite game. Hands down. I believe it is the best game available. Period. I look forward to years and years of blowing up those little red icons! However, being the best isn't always enough. Just ask Apple's Mac team or Sony's Betamax team about the dangers of relying on current superiority... If buying full price "new" versions now helps bring improvements and additional scenarios down the road, well that's the price of good gaming. If not, then there really is little reason for us to buy the latest and greatest versions. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MajorH Posted February 2, 2000 Share Posted February 2, 2000 > I wish v3.0 were free... Money earned and spent last year does not pay bills this year . > why has this game been re-released twice That was the path that fortune and misfortune laid out. A lot of time was burned up working on the unfinished Panzers East and unfinished TacOps98 game engines. A lot of time was expended on recasting the old game engine for a series of military contracts - change and risk were specifically not desired in that contract work. After Avalon Hill died I had to expend five months working on the Military Reference Library CD in order to raise the capital to keep TacOps going. The main reasons for releasing the 3.0 revision in January instead of waiting another six months to add more stuff were (a) to fill a pot full of requests for it from first time buyers that had accumulated since the Avalon Hill version dropped off the market, ( to placate a very vocal niche of active TacOps players who wanted the changes 'now' that were made for the Canadian Army, and © to maintain my trademark claim on the game title 'TacOps'. > without significant changes? Some folks feel that significant changes have been made. The new extra maps and the 20 U.S. Army manuals add more to the package. The French interface is of interest to some as are the additonal Canadian units and the Canadian versions of the scenarios. Others are comfortable with conceptually paying periodically for the game to simply be maintained and supported for six years. At the very least the program has been maintained so that it continues to work as the Mac and Windows operating systems have evolved. > to my mind these new versions are not different enough to > warrant the shelling out of $20 every time TacOps is picked > up by a different publisher Others feel differently plus there are a good number of folks who have yet to purchase TacOps. Between the time that Avalon Hill died and TacOps moved over to Battlefront I received over 500 email requests for TacOps from people who had not purchased it before. Just satisfying the new customers was more than enough to justify the time investment needed to tweak the engine into v3.0. > I have already invested $60 into TacOps since its initial > release, and don't know why I'm being asked to spend more. If the changes, maintenance, and support don't justify another purchase for you then don't buy it . I mean its not like I am trying to force you to do something . > Major, is there a significantly new product on the horizon? No. I plan to continue tweaking the TacOps engine for the rest of this year. I expect to add a real Internet play mode, start moving some new features from the Panzers East/TacOps98 code over to TacOps, and start working on other details that have been pending on the wish list for way too long. I may also put out a military history collection on CD sometime this year. > What about the much anticipated TacOps 98? The TacOps98/Panzers East game engine is on indefinite (perhaps permanent) hold. Some parts of it, such as the map engine with unlimited elevations, proved to be too ambitious for a one man operation. What is most likely to happen is that its new features will be gradually blended into later versions of TacOps. The show stopper in the T98/PzE engine was its use of maps with unlimited elevations. Building maps with unlimited elevations turned into a huge problem at the fidelity level that I was shooting for. It simply took too long for me to create a map manually (several months for an area the size of NTC Ft. Irwin). I figured I could not get away with releasing a game with only one or two battle maps, and I saw no way of solving the problem until the U.S. Government removes its current restrictions on the dissemination of the kind of digital map data that I need to build the maps with computer assistance (i.e. high fidelity, small scale, with vegetation and cultural features as well as elevation). > I'm just disappointed that this new version doesn't offer > much over my Classic edition, That makes two of us . > but that I'm still being asked to pay full-price for it. Full price ? $20 plus $8 S&H is a pretty trivial amount of money these days. About the same as getting two people into a movie with popcorn and drinks and that recreational experience only lasts a couple of hours. > I really don't want to give the wrong impression on what I'm asking. No offense taken. ------------------ Best regards, Major H majorh@mac.com [This message has been edited by MajorH (edited 02-02-2000).] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darroch Posted February 3, 2000 Share Posted February 3, 2000 Originally posted by razorfish: I have a question which I don't want to be taken by anyone here as disrespectful: Namely, why has this game been re-released twice without significant changes [snip] Well, for me, the mere addition of the Canadian units plus all the additional scenarios that were added following release 0.0.0 for the Mac (the last version I bought) are well worth the mere $20.00... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDog Posted February 3, 2000 Share Posted February 3, 2000 I for one am darn glad that you re-released the game. I never noticed it the first time! I do wear glasses, maybe I need a new pair ? In todays market where you have to put down anywhere from $35 to $50 for a game, I don't mind paying $20 for a good modern tactical game. Heck, I wouldn't even mind paying another $20 down the road for some more scenarios. I don't mind the graphics or the limited elevation in this game. I've payed big bucks for games that had eye candy out the wazoo with a brain dead AI and wished I hadn't kept them past the 7 day waiting period (anybody want some coasters?). There, I've said my piece. Keep up the good work Major, and keep improving TACOPS, it's a heck of a game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorfish Posted February 3, 2000 Author Share Posted February 3, 2000 I wrote: but that I'm still being asked to pay full-price for it. And the Major responded: Full price ? $20 plus $8 S&H is a pretty trivial amount of money these days. About the same as getting two people into a movie with popcorn and drinks and that recreational experience only lasts a couple of hours. Trivial?-I guess so, but I'd also be hard pressed to find anyone who'd just give me $20 cuz I had a pretty face Anyway, it is more the principle of the thing... My point is that I already feel that I own the right to use 95+% of the code that's in TacOps v3.0 by virtue of my having purchased the previous two releases-I mean the game just hasn't changed that much. To make things worse for me, I remember the days when Arsenal would release substantial updates with new units, patches and (most importantly)scenarios, and would then make such updates available to licensed users for a nominal cost. Oh well, I'll be quiet now lest anyone think me a stingy a** who can contribute absolutely nothing positive to this forum. However, let me shift gears here and say that I have NOT, NOT ANYWHERE found a more dedicated and supportive game designer than MajorH (perhaps crazy too since it IS a niche market ). I do not for one second feel that I am being gouged by him-if anyone's doing the gouging, it's Fortune herself. So, if you haven't experienced the addiction that is TacOps, by all means get v3.0 cuz for $20, it truly is a deal. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MajorH Posted February 3, 2000 Share Posted February 3, 2000 > I already feel that I own the right to use 95+% of the code > that's in TacOps v3.0 by virtue of my having purchased the > previous two releases. I completely understand and respect your viewpoint. Unfortunately I can not afford to base my current and near future business formula on satisfying that viewpoint. > I remember the days when Arsenal > would release substantial > updates with new units, patches and (most importantly) > scenarios, and would then make such updates available to > licensed users for a nominal cost. There was a time during the Arsenal period when a set of additonal scenarios was sold separately. Those scenarios were later blended into the basic package. All other updates and patches during the Arsenal days were posted to various archives for free downloading. Arsenal had some great policies - Arsenal also went out of business deeply in debt. During and after the Arsenal period, I accumulated $xx,000 in personal debt that is directly attributable to continuing to work on TacOps and TacOps related projects for several years when income from the game did not cover what was being spent on it in time, software, and equipment. The major contributors to the latter situation were that I spent way too much time 'off the books' doing free updates and patches for Arsenal and I engaged in too many speculative coding adventures. I want to continue TacOps indefinitely but it has to be done on a pay-as-you-go basis. The approach that I am looking at now is (1) to serve a niche of TacOps users who are willing to periodically pay around $20 for modest improvements plus compatibility with new operating systems/new computing capabiliites, (2) to pursue a niche of users who have not yet purchased TacOps, (3) to subsidize the niche users' contributions with occasional military contract work, and (4) to occasionally release a new CD based collection of military related textual material. By the way, my best and least risky business model would be to switch to doing only military contract work. I would definitely make more money with less stress but I would likely be unable to then produce any hobby/recreational product. Hopefully I will not have to go down that path. > I'll be quiet now lest anyone think me a stingy a** who can > contribute absolutely nothing positive to this forum. Don't worry about that. I don't take this stuff personally. You bought a ticket to the show so you definitely rate being heard. Besides, I fully expect to succeed in getting my hand into your pocket again at some future date . ------------------ Best regards, Major H majorh@mac.com [This message has been edited by MajorH (edited 02-03-2000).] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monticello Posted February 4, 2000 Share Posted February 4, 2000 Well folks, I just spent US$12 listening to a Marine Historian and General Gordon Gayle talk about the three Pacific campaigns that General Gayle participated in. Add dinner and a metro fare, I paid US$34 for a night of grognard entertainment... so $28 once a year for even one evening's worth of entertainment a month is not bad. For the record... General Gayle was the battalion CO of the 5th Marines, 1st Marine Division during the Peleliu campaign. His battalion captured the airfield and advanced ahead of the 1st Marines, which was on his left flank. From the Marine Corps History page... "Colonel Nakagawa launched his first major counterattack on the afternoon of D-Day. This was a well planned and executed tank/infantry thrust across the airfield at the boundary between the 1st and 5th Marines. Almost as suddenly as it began the Japanese thrust ended, leaving all but two of the supporting tanks as crumpled tin cans behind the leatherneck lines." Now... the story is that Gayle saw the attack and sent his tanks to flank the Japanese tanks. 15 were brewed, although the summed battle reports indicated that 103 tanks were destroyed. He pressed the attack and received a Navy Cross. Of course, if I was one of his grandchildren, I could have heard the stories free Gary Heverly [This message has been edited by Monticello (edited 02-04-2000).] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.