Could BFC be going bankcrupt.....

[Peter Cairns]

Given the lack of feedback from BFC recently it occured to me that they might be in financial melt down.

Two things could have brought this about.

Firstly as a small company who hadden't brought out a hugely selling game in a few years they might have borrowed substantially or sunk there own money in to developing CM:SF.

The collatoral for this could have been the pitch to the banks/investors that like CMBO it would be a huge success and make money.

However it's fair to say it hasn't been recieved like that and that means the bank won't be happy.

The second option is that there was a part 2 to the Paradox deal that went beyond a release date.

If it covered an advance based on game sale, something like we give you X dollars which you don't have to pay back if it sells Y in the first Z, then we give you A per game sold.

What if CMSF hasn't done the Y and Z and Paradox has said hand back the X.

I remember Steve once posting about how games like movies sell the bulk on the first weekend and that games shops often have a sale or return deal if things don't sell.

He also said that's why they avoided that kind of thing and sold direct, but then they did the realease date deal?

If in sales terms after two plus years development CM:SF has gone straight to the bargin bucket then things could go pear shaped pretty quick.

All this over and above the financial straight could put enormous pressure and a small group of people, especially if there is an autopsy (wake) over who made what fundamental game design decisions, be it "8m grid", "Real time" or " Lets do modern Syria".

It can't be much fun if people are in a corner with their homes on the line ( particularly if they are worth less than the mortgage) and blaming each other for messing it up.

Relationships could get very strained and some might want to jump ship while there was money left, or try to cut a deal with someone bigger to buy them out/take them over.

Right now there time might be divided between trying to turn around a game that even if they can fix has a tarnished image that they can never repair, apportioning blame to friends for what went wrong, trying to fight off the bank and punting their Cv's around the industry.

So what do people think of this as a theory.

Peter.

[Cpl Steiner]

Peter,

I'm afraid I don't buy into this theory. BFC have just gone quiet for a while. It is entirely possible that they have just decided to take a few weeks off to recuperate. Alternatively, they just want to keep focused on the next patch, module, and eventually the WWII version of CM:SF, and they believe the forum is detrimental to this.

Let's not get totally pessimistic just yet!

[Thomm]

Originally posted by Peter Cairns:

So what do people think of this as a theory.

I think you should avoid action points occupied by Madmatt!

Best regards,

Thomm

[Peter Cairns]

It's probably being a politicain that does it.

Politics hates a vacuum so when nothings happening I immediately think somethings happening we just don't know what it is yet.

I am a big Apple fan, and use a Mac all the time. Right now they are up their with the top rated companies in the world.

But less than a decade ago they got the market wrong and ended up with warehouses full of computers no one wanted just after Christmas. That one mistake (well it was actually two or three mistakes that came together) nearly bankrupted them.

In short it's not an attack on BFC, it can happen to the best teams of people. Great inventors and designors can make poor marketing and business decisions.

In little more than 10 years the Northern Rock in the UK grew from a small provincial mutual lender to be in the Top five UK mortgage companies and a darling of the stock market.

it's startegy of borrowing short and lending long enabled it to build up a £100bn mortgage portfolio undercutting it's bigger rivals.

But then came the credit crunch due to US sub prime and Northern Rock has the first run on a UK bank in 200 years ( or as someone wrote in the papers, "The last time we saw this was in Mary Poppins").

A model that had worked well for a good team came unstuck because the market changed. it happens.

Peter.

[stikkypixie]

Check out skunkworks, it is not because there not talking here, that nothing is happening.

[Cpl Steiner]

From past experience, BFC usually go very quiet just before a big announcement. My guess is that the v1.05 patch is nearing completion and that it will be a massive improvement over v1.04, which was already a massive improvement over v1.03. Either that or the CM:SF USMC module is taking shape and they are about to release some screenshots of Amtracs disgorging grunts on a Syrian beachhead.

[Panzer76]

Bankcrupt? Nah. Whatever my feelings for CM SF, it has (or so said Steve) outsold CMx1 the first few weeks after it was released. Now, BTS certainly did not have the profit marign pr copy they had before (selling directly), nor do I think they will have a strong after market, but still. Bankcrupt? Nah.

[thewood]

I don't think they will go out of business over CMSF alone, but if its follow on modules don't catch on, it could be likely.

As far as CMSF outselling CMBO, I think Steve was saying that in the same time span CMSF outsold CMBO, that is, in the first few weeks of release. I would be surprised if CMSF outsold CMBO overall in just a few weeks.

I feel like the reporters who used to parse every word Greenspan uttered.

[Nidan1]

Originally posted by Peter Cairns:

It's probably being a politicain that does it.

Politics hates a vacuum so when nothings happening I immediately think somethings happening we just don't know what it is yet.

I am a big Apple fan, and use a Mac all the time. Right now they are up their with the top rated companies in the world.

But less than a decade ago they got the market wrong and ended up with warehouses full of computers no one wanted just after Christmas. That one mistake (well it was actually two or three mistakes that came together) nearly bankrupted them.

In short it's not an attack on BFC, it can happen to the best teams of people. Great inventors and designors can make poor marketing and business decisions.

In little more than 10 years the Northern Rock in the UK grew from a small provincial mutual lender to be in the Top five UK mortgage companies and a darling of the stock market.

it's startegy of borrowing short and lending long enabled it to build up a £100bn mortgage portfolio undercutting it's bigger rivals.

But then came the credit crunch due to US sub prime and Northern Rock has the first run on a UK bank in 200 years ( or as someone wrote in the papers, "The last time we saw this was in Mary Poppins").

A model that had worked well for a good team came unstuck because the market changed. it happens.

Peter.

Politics....hmmmmmm maybe...what you describe is more like paranoia.

[Other Means]

I think the major saving feature for BFC is that it really is a very small team. If they were Valve or EA (God forbid)or similar then they would need to sell bucket loads to cover just their salaries.

As it is, it's 6 (7?) guys salaries for 3(?) years which really, in business, isn't that much. Now I know they've all got biggin grillz and solid gold baths and silk toilet roll but really, they can't be in that bad a way.

And yes, Skunkworks is buzzing so it's not like they're AWOL, just quiet.

[istari]

I'd be surprised if they were bankrupt, but looking ahead I think Peter may be onto something.

Steve has emphatically stated they couldn't afford to repeat the overall sales #s of the CMX1 series. That if they just cranked out an updated version of CMX1, they'd go out of business. That the turn-based WEGO market is simply too small to support a modern developer.

This was a major rationale for the move to Real-Time in CMSF - a deliberate effort to broaden their market base. Those market lessons from CMX1 also drove the move to a master engine + many small modules to ensure a steady stream of revenue over time.

It sounds like BFC really needed to improve their sales #s over CMX1 in order to stay in business. Given the mediocre reviews and the stagnancy of the forums compared to the vibrant discussions after CMBO was released, I'm pretty sure sales are far short of the CMX1 series. Yes, they may have outsold CMBO in the first few weeks, but CMBO was a sleeper hit that took the market by storm AFTER it was out and word of mouth spread, so that's not necessarily an indication of CMSF's sales being healthy.

One last piece of data. Steve has also repeatedly stated that follow-on games never sell as well as the first. That the sales were CMBO > CMBB > CMAK and it was a steep dropoff along that curve.

My bet is that they're solvent today, but looking ahead and seeing that the financial projections 8-12 months out are ruinous. That the current sales of CMSF are anemic, and they can't expect a Marine module or a Brit module to outsell the original CMSF, so that the total revenue projecting out 1 year is looking very grim.

I wouldn't be surprised if there are serious discussions going on in BFC right now about skipping any further modules in the modern era, and making a race against time for the WWII version in the hopes it will rejuvenate sales and keep them solvent in 2008-2009.

This is all total speculation, but I run a small startup company in medical software, and while we're fortunate enough to have a successful product, I can easily see how a failed follow-on product would lead to these kinds of calculations for my business.

Chris

[Dirtweasle]

We are being punished for not fully appreciating the new baby. Also, some must continue to point out it has eleven toes, a bad case of cradle cap, and reeks of spolied milk and worse.

[Abbott]

Originally posted by Dirtweasle:

We are being punished for not fully appreciating the new baby.

Exactly.

[Cpl Steiner]

Sometimes disappointment gets in the way of an accurate appraisal of the situation. Yes, there are many things wrong with CM:SF but there are also many things right with it. Graphically for instance, who can deny that it is streets ahead of CMx1? I was actually quite surprised at how well modeled and animated the CM:SF soldiers are for such a small company as BFC. The soldiers look almost motion-captured, even though I know they are not.

I hope for all our sakes that BFC is not in financial meltdown and that they remain firmly committed to the CMx2 engine. A year from now, CM:SF may still become the "sleeper" hit that CMBO once was.

[Panzer76]

Originally posted by Cpl Steiner:

Graphically for instance, who can deny that it is streets ahead of CMx1?

At what time was that a big deal for *this* crowd?

[Cpl Steiner]

Originally posted by Panzer76:

At what time was that a big deal for *this* crowd?

It was never a big deal for the dyed-in-the-wool wargaming community. However, you should also bear in mind that this community is very small compared to the gaming public in general, so it is hard to make any money by catering solely to this community. BFC have beefed up the graphics in an attempt to widen their audience. From a business point of view, who can fault their logic?

[Sixxkiller]

I saw a "for sale" sign on the BFC compound yesterday when I was driving by. Had a rusted Weasel and what looked like military uniforms strewn out in the front yard. Wonder what that meant?

[Cid250]

Originally posted by Cpl Steiner:

Yes, there are many things wrong with CM:SF but there are also many things right with it. Graphically for instance, who can deny that it is streets ahead of CMx1? I was actually quite surprised at how well modeled and animated the CM:SF soldiers are for such a small company as BFC. The soldiers look almost motion-captured, even though I know they are not.

Graphics is the last thing for a game like this... So, to have good graphics it's like having nothing at all.

For me and for many others, CMx1 engine is far better than CMx2 actually is from the pure gameplay point of view. I doubt that any new WWII game development over the CMx2 engine, brings anything interesting to pay for it. Battles will be smaller, plenty of LOS bugs, and the high detail needed for the models, will make the weapon diversity very narrow (due to the increased cost and time to add new weapon's models to the game)... so CMBB and CMAK will ever be better games than anything built over the CMx2 engine. Few weapons diversity in the huge background of WWII, and buggy battles, are a much worse option than the bad graphics of CMx1.

I have no worry at all. Because the WWII games based on CMx1 was the most complete and satisfactory ever built. The features of the CMx2 engine will not add anything of interest, since I'm not interested in a narrower version of WWII weaponset, smaller size engagements, less tactical consistency, etc.

Good graphics is not a good trade for all the core features of a good wargame.

[bitchen frizzy]

OK, so one kind of gamer demands good graphics, another kind of gamer (the hardcore wargamer)demands playability and realism, and then of course there's those who demand both.

If Battlefront's aim was to broaden its demographic (and not, as I suspect, to land a DOD contract (why else do modern ME setting) but that's a different thread) then to succeed CM2 must be good at pleasing everybody.

Is it? That's the question. Myself, I don't know the answer to that.

The road to failure is to please nobody by trying to please everybody.

[thewood]

I think BFC was in close to a no win situation. Building a kick ass wargame would not have expanded their customer base much at all. Pushing the game more towards a real-time crowd alienated, for whatever reasons, their existing wargamer base, but it is still a wargame. I have a hard time believing that CMSF will appeal to a lot of mainstream gamers. It is just too difficult to comprehend and master.

To me, if they were going to take a risk, go all the way one way or the other. Instead CMSF is kind of stuck between to genres and only appeals to that narrow space where they overlap. Few truly new BFC customers plus a somewhat alienated traditional base sure seems like a recipe for an extremely "niche" game.

I think CMSF has a enomous amount of potential. But, it needs to decide what it wants to be. Right now it masters very little. Still somewhat buggy, hard to understand mechanics, very narrow scenario opportunites, limited random battles, an environment that is somewhat being overtaken by events, etc. If they can knock a couple of these things off my list, my final verdict will be its a winner. If CMSF can decide whether it wants to be WEGO or RT, it might alienate some, but would probably draw in others who still look at it as a turn-based game. Jettisoning any pretense of WEGO may allow more resources to applied to RT issues. Vica versa also applies to RT and WEGO.

Also, I look at CMSF the same way I look at comparing X-Plane and MS Flight Simulator. X-Plane is a very detailed and realistic simulation of how a specific plane flies(CMSF). MSFS is a rich representation of flight with a huge community for support (CM1). I fly X-Plane when I want to know the specifics of how one plane flies in a specific set of parameters. I fly MSFS to get a much complete experience of flying from planning to coming into a gate.

[Panzer76]

I agree that CM SF as it stands now falls between the markets. It does not appeal to the RTS crowd, the game is not polished enough, the UI is akward and the gameplay too complicated. It does not appeal to the CMx1 crowd as much because its too limited in scope, has very little flexibility and WEGO is a after thought. It does not appeal to hardcore wargamers as the bugs are too apparent.

I think it appeals to those who are very interested in modern warfare, in Iraq, Syria USA conflict because of the relevance it has today and since there are no other game out like it.

Now, just because there are no other games out there like it does not automatically mean its a great game, as I feel CM SF has shown.

[Panzer76]

RE graphics:

When I first loaded up SF and saw a big IED go off, I was like "Oh man, that was cool!"

1 week later, I hardly touched the game.

When I first played CMBO I thought the gfx was rather clunky.

5 years later I still played CMx1.

[Pvt. Ryan]

I still see CMSF as a testbed for CMx2, which is why BFC didn't want to use WWII, their moneymaker, for experimental purposes.

[M1A1TC]

I am not playing CMSF as much as I hoped I would,but I am still optimistic.

I really like it since I am a US Army soldier myself, so I LOVE playing with modern tanks

I think if the patches fix LOS/LOF issues, pathfinding, and Tac AI, then this game has hope

[Cpl Steiner]

We have to separate out a lot of the criticism to get the full picture.

A lot of people would not play CM:SF even if it was the most perfect and bug-free simulation of modern warfare ever made. That's because they only like WWII and are frankly put off by a modern Middle-East setting. For them, CM:SF will never be any good compared to CMx1.

Another group like the idea of a modern Middle-East setting but think the game is too limited in scope, too buggy, and does not accurately reflect modern tactics due to the limitations of the game engine. To these I would say, don't give up on CM:SF just yet. Scope will increase with each new module; bugs can and will be fixed; and more realistic tactics may become possible with refinements to the game code.

Personally, the day I order a British Infantry squad to the side of a building and witness them stack up behind the lead man whilst he takes aim around the corner, I will be a happy camper.