Did piracy kill the commercial viability of CMx1?

[Sirocco]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

I wonder what the sales figures would have been had it been marketed from a Western Europe/Africa angle rather than just "Afrika Korps"

I think that's a critical point.

[bitchen frizzy]

A CMAK Expansion Pack, adding on the items you've described, would probably have sold well enough to be worthwhile. I'd have payed $10 bucks for it, maybe more. It would have extended the shelf life and market of the base CMAK game (I think).

The backlash could be managed by describing the expansion on this website as an acknowledgement of the hard work and vision of those who worked on the conversion.

[Battlefront.com]

I don't have time to read/respond this thread, but I can tell you piracy had nothing to do with it. This comment sums it up very well:

Anyone who pirated CM.x would most likely have absolutely no intention to ever buy it, and probably didn't even play it. Small file size means nothing. Lack of documentation is the #1 killer for people pirating the game and limited ability to get patches.

The two primary reasons for declining sales were:

1. Only the hardcore customer sees subtle differences between games as being significant, and the hardcore is always a minority (though a larger minority for us than other games)

2. Time always kills off interest in a game engine

As far as I know there is no game series in history that was able to buck the trend of reduced sales with each successive release. I'm not talking about basically ground up redos or major revisions, such as the difference between Warcraft I, II, and III or Quake I, II, III, etc. Those games were quite different, even if most of the difference was visual. Instead compare CMx1 to games like Panzer General or V for Victory, or Close Combat. Each successive game in those series sold less than the one prior.

Rule of thumb is 50% loss each release. We did much better than that, but we also started the pricing of CMAK lower than the previous two, so from a revenue standpoint it dropped probably about the same.

Contrary to what many of you think, this was not the main problem with CMBB:

CMBB was a great improvement over CMBO. I think it suffered from a poor choice of demo scenarios,

Nope, CMBB suffered because there were no Americans in it and many people hated the thought of playing as the Soviets. That and the game engine, although significantly improved from a true wargamer standpoint, was just about the same as CMBO in the eyes of the majority of people.

CMAK suffered because people had already played Shermans vs. Tigers and few have any interest in tactical desert warfare. So again, the core wargamers bought it, but as this comment shows even a lot of them shied away from it:

I bought the game because I loved CMBO and totally loved CMBB. Had I lost interest with the franchise after either of those purchases, I would not have payed for CMAK - at full-game not upgrade prices - until I saw it in the bargain bin.

Bottom line here is that some of you guys are looking at this from the perspective of our core customer, not from the perspective of our customer base. There is a HUGE difference. CMx1 was doomed to decline in sales from before it launched, no matter what. It's just the natural law of game releases. We did far better than others, but we can not buck the trend. It doesn't matter whether you guys know this, understand this, accept this, etc. It is the way it is and that's all there is too it. It is part of the reason why we decided to make CMAK the last CMx1 game 1/2 through making CMBB. In fact, we ALMOST didn't make CMAK at all because we weren't sure it would be worth the effort. True fact guys.

Steve

[bitchen frizzy]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />I bought the game because I loved CMBO and totally loved CMBB. Had I lost interest with the franchise after either of those purchases, I would not have payed for CMAK - at full-game not upgrade prices - until I saw it in the bargain bin.

Bottom line here is that you guys are looking at this from the perspective of our core customer, not from the perspective of our customer base. There is a HUGE difference. CMx1 was doomed to decline in sales from before it launched, no matter what. It's just the natural law of game releases. </font>

[MikeyD]

That's a concept - they could've rejiggered CMAK to be a replay of CMBO, say up front that they were doing just that, and even as a 'redo' may have still potentially outsold CMAK smply because the game stayed in ever-popular NW Europe. I can't argue with your logic. But that says less about BFC's business acumen and more about the frightening lack of imagination of much of their customer base!

:eek:

[bitchen frizzy]

Originally posted by MikeyD:

That's a concept - they could've rejiggered CMAK to be a replay of CMBO, say up front that they were doing just that, and even as a 'redo' may have still potentially outsold CMAK smply because the game stayed in ever-popular NW Europe. I can't argue with your logic. But that says less about BFC's business acumen and more about the frightening lack of imagination of much of their customer base!

:eek:

In response and to qualify what I said earlier about an expansion pack and/or a marketing of CMAK as including NW Europe, it might have added some dollars and life to CMAK's sales, but as Steve says, it would not have revived the franchise to the sales levels of CMBO.

[Sirocco]

Well, I recall the discussion over the CMBB demo, so I know your position on that, but I respectfully disagree.

And I still think you missed a trick on how you presented both BB and AK. Perhaps not huge differences in sales terms, but I believe there was scope there for an increase.

[thewood]

Speak for yourself...ah, what were we talking about?

[metalbrew]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Bottom line here is that some of you guys are looking at this from the perspective of our core customer, not from the perspective of our customer base.

Ah ha! So you admit we're the core customers? I'll have to tuck this token away for a Bren tripod debate.

[drtechno]

Well I for one, although I consider myself a core customer and diehard wargamer, followed the laws of gaming.

I played CMBO a LOT. I played CMBB a moderate amount as some of the battles were hugh and tedious with WEGO (I also couldn't decide who I hated more, the russians or the germans), and I bought CMAK. I state bought CMAK because I hardly played it.. It just turned out that I didn't care too much about desert warfare and cared even less about italy.

I personally liked CMBB the most as it spanned the longest time period, contained many pieces of interesting equipment and had matched (=/-) airforce and artillery.

So some core customers like myself had our interest drop off.

And let me just say, I REALLY prefer RT because I can pause whenever I want, issue orders, and continue. I ALWAYS pause when issuing orders, so it becomes essentially like WEGO minus the replays. So I really dont understand people's complaints (minus the ability to watch replays).

[Canada Guy]

I probably make up for all the guys that downloaded the CMx1 games off of bittorrent. I have bought 1xBO, 3xBB and 5xAK. and given my extra copies away to my friends. This resulted in me now having 3 PBEM buddies that I would not have had otherwise (and worth every penny)

I am surprised at the negative comments that seem to be coming out of people. CMx1 (and now CMx2) is what it is. I do not play BO as I am not interested in the subject matter (who wants to play as Americans when you can play as the Finnish!!) but I do not rail against BF because of it. I am sure that I will buy CMSF (as I have already put down money at my local EB Games store) and when it goes down in price, I will buy a few more copies. The best thing to do for any of us (call it enlightened self interest) is to try to get more people to play (and thus buy) the game.

Yes, I know I am the core customer and that to be a commercial success they have to forgo some of our wants to be more accessible to the general gaming public. I would rather lose a little of what I want than lose everything because BF cannot make a commercial go of it. I also think that we did get some bang for our buck. When was the last time you guys played Close Combat, Panzer General or even Starcraft? I will still play CMBB/CMAK for years to come.

I love the idea of CMx1 becoming open source. When BF thinks that the amount of sales does not justify the support, they should look into this. It could also spur on sales for CMSF et al. because of the unique concept.

[jep]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

CMAK suffered because people had already played Shermans vs. Tigers and few have any interest in tactical desert warfare.

Steve

And now you released yet another desert game! I would like to know what the market share between US and the rest of the world. It is hard to believe that non-us customers would be interested about CMSF setting. I need forests, please. I have to say thought that I like CMSF because modern warfare. Unfortunately CMX2 gives nothing compared to Close Combat. Tactical battles in CMX2 are some what better (3D should be better utilized), but CC2 gives me superior usability and the multiplayer experience. Would it be possible to include CC2 style campaign? As a realtime game CMX2 with decent campaign would be be a real killer. Unfortunately, it seem that for Battlefront a decent campaign is fabulously difcult to do (CM: Campaigns -> No release, CM:SF -> Nothing but Series of Scenarios. No troop puchase etc. ). The obvious worst case scenario is that both CMx2:WW2 and the moderniced Close Combat: A Bridge too far would be released about same time.

[Battlefront.com]

Sirocco,

And I still think you missed a trick on how you presented both BB and AK. Perhaps not huge differences in sales terms, but I believe there was scope there for an increase.

No, it wouldn't have made a difference IMHO. The guys that complained the loudest about the demo did what? Bought the full game The row over the demo was you couldn't play it for 8 months. So if anything, the way we did it INCREASED our sales because people couldn't use the demo as if it were a full product. Though personally I think it was a neutral.

Jep,

And now you released yet another desert game!

My statement was in the context of WWII, not current time. I would wager that the interest in modern desert warfare is higher, at the moment, than WWII of any flavor. It is in the news every day and (as others have pointed out) WWII has been overused by game companies the last few years.

I would like to know what the market share between US and the rest of the world. It is hard to believe that non-us customers would be interested about CMSF setting.

Roughly speaking, about 80% of our direct sales are North America (US + Canada). Retail is quite different.

I need forests, please. I have to say thought that I like CMSF because modern warfare. Unfortunately CMX2 gives nothing compared to Close Combat. Tactical battles in CMX2 are some what better (3D should be better utilized), but CC2 gives me superior usability and the multiplayer experience. Would it be possible to include CC2 style campaign? As a realtime game CMX2 with decent campaign would be be a real killer. Unfortunately, it seem that for Battlefront a decent campaign is fabulously difcult to do (CM: Campaigns -> No release, CM:SF -> Nothing but Series of Scenarios. No troop puchase etc. ). The obvious worst case scenario is that both CMx2:WW2 and the moderniced Close Combat: A Bridge too far would be released about same time.

I found the CC2 style campaign boring, repetitive, and downright aggravating. Just a reminder that opinions can differ

Steve

[Hawkmek]

I guess I fit in with market predictions.

Bought CMBO: loved it, played it death

Bought CMBB: liked CMBO so much, I had to get the new one. Even though the setting was less desirable, I did appreciate the new features. Played it a bit.

CMAK: Played the demo and got kind of burned out. The desert just didn't do it for me. Never bought CMAK.

I did buy CM:SF and am learning to love it.

Not too thrilled with desert setting again, but I am getting used to it.

I will buy the WWII release when it comes out.

I saw the Combo deal at Fry's for all three games for $19.99. Thought about getting it, but how would I spend my time?

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

I found the CC2 style campaign boring, repetitive, and downright aggravating. Just a reminder that opinions can differ

Steve

Agree totally. Not enough story to it, and very idiotic to have to fight on the same handful of maps over and over. The CM:SF campaign has a lot of advantages over the CC model in that regard.

[Battlefront.com]

Hawkmek and others who have posted about what they bought and why...

THANKS!

I think it benefits the group of us here to see that not everybody was tripping over themselves to get each new CMx1 game. I know that some people did, but we know it wasn't everybody. As I said, this is a natural thing and we completely expected it.

Posts that show a customer's perspective of why something was/wasn't bought is valuable for all of us to see, especially those who are surprised by what they read. It would seem that some people don't believe us when say it But it is no surprise to uss and it is why that in 2001, just 1 year after the release of CMBO, that we started planning on CMx2 being very different than CMx1.

CMx1 was a huge succes for us and for wargaming. People have received more value from these games than stacks of other games combined. We know this becuse you guys tell us that all the time. We are humbled by it, still. The problem is we can't live off of past glories, we have to keep moving forward. If we don't, we go out of business. It's a tough industry, but a fair one in many ways.

Steve

[ August 16, 2007, 12:05 PM: Message edited by: Battlefront.com ]

[Molinator]

I think that the main reason of the decreasing sales of CMx1 is the nations involved and the theatre of operations.

This game, sold about a 80% in north america, where Normandy are the most famous theatre of WW2 (at least in Europe war). And, the same in western Europe.

The eastern theatre, in Europe has good fame, but no in america, probably because the war was between Germany and USSR, and maybe because here we does not hate the communism as much as there.

Finally, the desert war and Italy, not has the same flavour than the oters anywhere (well, maybe in Italy ).

However, also it is certain that CMSF does not interest much in Europe. This remember much Irak, and here most people hate this war. I know which did not play CMSF because this reason....

And, of course, the lack of graphics improvement in Cmx1 series affect too much to their sales. Other games conserves the same concept, the same playability, but best graphics, and their sales are very good.

[thewood]

I'll say one thing, BFC's concept of marketing is unique...denigrate your own product to the point people will only buy the new one.

[SKELLEN]

Originally posted by Lt Bull:

I was reading the interesting "The Wrong Left Turn and the Uncanny Valley" thread by MD and was facinated when the discussion started to veer on pages 6-8 towards potentially "saving" the CMx1 concept by making it open source etc and the viability of it all and BFC views on it etc.

It got me thinking, "what went wrong" especially when I took a closer look and considered the implications of this statment made by BFC:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

...As I've said many times over, CMBO sold the most, CMBB sold significantly less, CMAK sold even less than CMBB. You guys can have rose colored glasses about how great our past games are, but we can not. ...

Steve

If you go by what BTS is trying to tell us, the CMx1 game concept HAD to be abandodned, reinvented and made RT if there was ever a successor to the CMx1 series. The evidence from "ecomonic realities" of the CMx1 series seems to support and vindicate their case for doing so.

POSSIBLE EXPLANATIONS:

1) Market was saturated and satisfied with the intital CMx1 release of CMBO. Subsequent releases of CMBB and CMAK did not justify to either prospective new customers or owners of previous titles that they were worth buying or of any better value than CMBO.

2) BTS/BFC strayed from a winning formula. With each successive CMx1 release, BTS/BFC made changes to the game which made the product of less value and worth to their existing customers/prospective customers. They in effect killed their market by reducing the quality of the game with each succesive release of CMx1 making it less attractive for customers to buy than each preceeding release.

NOTE: Unlike the Total War Series or even the Madden football series, BTS/BFC do not know how to repackage the basic same game concept and make it more commerically succesful or at least commercially sustainable than previous releases. I guess they are not good at knowing what their market really want or knowing what a good thing is.

The thing I believe that might be the most important issue being overlooked here and resulting in a convincing case against CMx1 being "commercially viable" is ....software piracy!

The latest CMx1 was certainly a game to check out!! But it was a double edged sword.

But probably most importaat of all. IT WAS A FREAKN AWESOME GAME TO PLAY!!!!!!

So what I am suggesting is that perhaps BTS/BFC almost have themselves to blame for not "protecting their investment" and allowing CMx1 to become "just another game to pirate" whose market value subsequently saw it relegated to "baragain bin" status.

The tragedy is this: How could they (BFC) have let this happen? </font>

[Thomm]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

The CM:SF campaign has a lot of advantages over the CC model in that regard.

Nevertheless, persistent map damage should be implemented as soon as possible in CM:SF!

Best regards,

Thomm

[Battlefront.com]

Molinator

I think that the main reason of the decreasing sales of CMx1 is the nations involved and the theatre of operations.

That was part of the reason, but as I said there is a natural law. First one sells a lot because it is new, everything after is not so there are lots of sales lost for that reason alone.

However, also it is certain that CMSF does not interest much in Europe. This remember much Irak, and here most people hate this war. I know which did not play CMSF because this reason....

How do you know this? I ask because I just checked and sales to Europe so far have been proportionally double that of any CMx1 game ever sold. So it would seem that the actual sales numbers contradict your position

thewood,

I'll say one thing, BFC's concept of marketing is unique...denigrate your own product to the point people will only buy the new one.

We're forced into it by people that have the mistaken presumption that there was nothing to improve upon and that our sales would have been fantastic if all we did was make CMx1 a bit prettier and left everything the same.

Steve

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

How do you know this? I ask because I just checked and sales to Europe so far have been proportionally double that of any CMx1 game ever sold. So it would seem that the actual sales numbers contradict your position

Steve

You haven't provided any "actual sales numbers."

And you sold internet only for CM:BO, so one would naturally expect retail sales via Paradox to be substantially higher, wouldn't one?

I have to agree with the comments about the marketing of CM:AK - the box art really gave no clue you could even play in Italy (NW Europe) which may have had a part to play in its perceived unpopularity - but of course, we don't know what the actual level of unpopularity is, since BF.C doesn't release sales figures.

I'm not sure anyone has suggested that CMX1 be prettied up and left the same, either, so that seems like a wee bit of a strawman. I think there are legitimate questions about the level of 1:1 portrayal in the new engine, some of which you've been kind enough to address, but new ones seem to keep cropping up. See the 8m grid thread currently running.

[Sergei]

The divine truth is that CMBB sold poorly because it had some Italians in it, and CMAK sold even worse because it even had Italy in it. This is why you don't see them in CMSF upcoming modules list.

[Sergei]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

the box art really gave no clue you could even play in Italy (NW Europe)

Actually, Michael, Italy is not in NW Europe.

And I absolutely refuse to recognise what you really meant

[Dennis50]

Ouch!

Regards,

Gunz