BUYER BEWARE...you may have overpaid!

[Abbott]

GI Combat also hit the bargain bin in a hurry. I always figured it was because of the poor AI, bad pathfinding and my personal gripe, poor infantry modeling. I always felt that it was marketed as a rip-off because of its obvious game breaking flaws. Now I guess, that is just as good as games with 1-1 can be programmed at the present time.

I do expect things to smooth out by the WWII release.

[dpabrams]

This has to be reconciled. I am happy to support BFC, I do enjoy CM:SF, it is a good game.....BUT

This is crap! An additional PR nightmare for BFC who has already taken a beating for hosting the largest "public" beta test in history.

BFC should offer not only a 1.04 patch but an UPGRADE to those of us who paid big bucks for pre release beta testing privileges, a mouse pad and map. By that I mean additional equipment and features not included with the bargain basement Paradox versions. For starters artillery delivered smoke and M113’s for a start.

[fuss111]

I paid $50 for it, got one big bugfest.. Walmart or not battlefront.com wont see my dollar again.

[Omenowl]

Walmart and several other stores do not buy the game. Distributors rent the shelfspace. If the product does not move then it gets put into a bargain bin to move the product.

As for being beta testers. I think unless BFC stops producing patches we will always be beta testers. The game was released a bit too early, but in no way does that diminish the fact they still support the community and are trying to expand the game more than simply fixing bugs.

Dawn of War despite being out 2+ years still has simple pathing bugs and the AI is pretty stupid. Of the two games I bought CMSF is definitely the better of the two.

[Cpl Steiner]

Just checked and yes I can get the game now for £4.99 from Play.com (83% off). I guess they have a lot of unsold copies - which considering the state of the game when released is hardly surprising.

[John Catsack]

Originally posted by Omenowl:

Dawn of War despite being out 2+ years still has simple pathing bugs and the AI is pretty stupid. Of the two games I bought CMSF is definitely the better of the two.

That may be true, but you don't need good pathing to play a game of DoW, while you do need it to play a satisfying realistic wargame.

[Hertston]

Originally posted by dpabrams:

An additional PR nightmare for BFC who has already taken a beating for hosting the largest "public" beta test in history.

If you think SF is the largest, or indeed worse, you can't have bought many games recently!

However, perhaps BF might consider moving to the model Stardock are using for 'Sins of a Solar Empire' for the WW2 game? Pre-ordering gets you access to the beta - so that's 'paying beta tester' if you like, but they are totally up-front about it. The boards are open to anybody, without the NDA crap - which suggests a certain confidence in the product - so any potential pre-order or release customer can assess exactly what the state of the game is and make a totally informed decision whether to buy it or not. A great way for getting customers on-board with the project rather than antagonizing them. Not to mention keeping the cash-flow rolling.

[kipanderson]

Hi,

I think it has always been the case… since BFC first started to allow CM to be sold other than by themselves…. that CM could be found for less than the BFC price.

This is also true of many other games sold by developers on their own sites and in shops.

All the best,

Kip.

[stikkypixie]

I can buy CMBB for 2 EUR, and that's a whole lot cheaper than what BFC is selling, so I don't really see what all the fuss is about.

[Sirocco]

This isn't about buying it more cheaply, this is about CMSF being in the bargain bin a mere few weeks after release. No one expected it to be full price forever.

[M1A1TC]

The question really is: How much is CMSF worth to you? If you are a cheapskate, you could download a free torrent of it, or pay 2 Euro. On the other hand, if you are a BFC fan-boy/girl, you can pay 70$ and support them. Decision is up to you.

Is an incomplete/beta version worth full price? I dont think so

[stikkypixie]

I was lucky even to find CMBB in stores. It wasn't exactly widely available. I don't regret paying $40 for CMSF. It has flaws, but I have wasted more money on worse things, besides I quite enjoy it. Once/if the TacAi gets better, I don't even see myself playing CMx1 any more.

Anyway I tried the demo first so I knew what I was getting in to. Some people make it sound as if they had to go to great financial length to buy CMSF. If that were true then they shouldn't be buying games in the first place. I understand if you feel cheated out, but what's done is done.

Hell if you don't like it you can always send me the CD, because I only bought the downloadable version

[kevinkins]

Let's talk less about the business aspects of software and more about THE software. No one knows anything about the BFC business plan. Everyone is running around looking in dark closets for a ghost. How many of you would have paid 50 bucks just to be ON the beta team 12 months ago? I would have.

[Guest]

I would have. Unfortunately, I paid $70 two months ago, and I don't get the level of input that a beta tester does.

[average]

Yeah, you are all right, Battlefront should engage in illegal and restrictive trade practices like price fixing (maybe with or without paradox) so you guys don't feel ripped off over what is a truly piss ant amount of money.

It is like their is a free market or something operating to control prices. As it stands, those of us who pre-ordered decided we liked the idea of the game more than out $70 USD. We made a rational decision, although our information wasn't perfect. The essence of any transaction on the market.

So we should be happy that the free market works and rejoice in our economic empowerment.

Maybe that or you guys should spend less time checking the best price, more time figuring out how to get to grad school to get paid in proper money.

If the moaners really are skint, you should spend less time talking up how unplayable it is. That way your copy would retain value.

That said, maybe you guys don't think like that so that's why you are skint to start with.

Oh noes - Catch 22.

[ September 25, 2007, 04:57 PM: Message edited by: average ]

[Guest]

I didn't mind having spent the $70 because I wanted to support BFC. It's only more recently that I've regretted the decision as I've realized that the game I bought will likely never -- due to a deliberate decision by BFC -- be complete.

As for your spurious arguments regarding the "skint" nature of the people here, I don't know what planet you live on, but $70 is a fair chunk of cash if you have things more important than beer to spend your money on.

I do get paid "in proper money". I also, however, have a wife and kids and bills to pay, so even "a truly piss ant [sic] amount of money" is a lot to spend without any real payoff.

[heckler_rider]

What it comes down to for me is this:

Everyone is entitled to make a profit, so I dont mind paying BFC full price. By doing so I am supporting a small business that puts out a specialized product (real wargame) that not many other companies produce. By searching for the cheapest vendor you are taking $$$ out of BFC's pocket versus buying directly from them (all $$$ goes directly to them).

That said, I do feel cheated/taken advantage of that I paid such a high price for an incomeplete product. I have bought ALL of the CM releases directly from BFC at full price. Up until now I did not mind paying the full price, but now I feel my loyalty has been taken advantage of.

I do have hope that future patches will make the game playable. I wont play it in current state- bad pathfinding still and even worse AI drives me nuts, although it does run great on my system.

In closing I hope that in the future BFC takes it's loyal "core customers" into consideration and considers the effect it's actions (even when leveraged) will have upon their core customer base.

[Redwolf]

I was the first out of the trenches to pre-order CM:SF, at full price for the full package, although I did expect something like this to happen (documented in my posts at acg).

Why?

It's a downpayment for later games. Even if I don't play any of the three games in between and hence effectively pay $280 for the fourth game which is the first I like - fine with me. Good software is expensive.

I do, however, reserve the right to have an eye on the progress and voice my opinion when I think a move goes straight into nowhere.

[Sixxkiller]

Phillip,

You keep harping on BFC, so what games have you recently been the programmer on? You act as though you can do better, so lets see it. Your 4 years starts today.......

Originally posted by Phillip Culliton:

I didn't mind having spent the $70 because I wanted to support BFC. It's only more recently that I've regretted the decision as I've realized that the game I bought will likely never -- due to a deliberate decision by BFC -- be complete.

As for your spurious arguments regarding the "skint" nature of the people here, I don't know what planet you live on, but $70 is a fair chunk of cash if you have things more important than beer to spend your money on.

I do get paid "in proper money". I also, however, have a wife and kids and bills to pay, so even "a truly piss ant [sic] amount of money" is a lot to spend without any real payoff.

[MiB]

Its a common (and retarded) business practice when lots of retail distributors get an item.

Retail outlet A posts game for advised price of $60, retail outlet B cut to $50 to compete with A, who cuts to $40, etc., until nobody is making any money off of the item and nobody wants to reorder because "its a bad seller."

Thats how I learned it, anyway, and I was always told to limit to 1 or at most 2 retail distributors for that reason.

YMMV, my advice is worth what you paid for it.

[Omenowl]

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Omenowl:

Dawn of War despite being out 2+ years still has simple pathing bugs and the AI is pretty stupid. Of the two games I bought CMSF is definitely the better of the two.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That may be true, but you don't need good pathing to play a game of DoW, while you do need it to play a satisfying realistic wargame.

Actually, I meant overall the game is better. I also have MTW2 and enjoyed that as well. Still it had a lot of problems with pathing and had less flexibility for the editor.

The game works well for many conditions especially out in the open. I have to admire a game where losing every soldier and wanting to make sure they get medical attention is more than a number. CMx1 I didnt mind as long as I didn't see a body (I could lose 9 guys and that was ok), but in CMx2 if I see a red casualty my gut instinct is get him help.

Maybe it is not quite what I expected, but it is still the best realistic modern sim I have seen at a Platoon or company level.

[Guest]

Originally posted by Sixxkiller:

Phillip,

You keep harping on BFC, so what games have you recently been the programmer on? You act as though you can do better, so lets see it. Your 4 years starts today.......

My major work for the last few years has been the heading the research and development of a massive AI in an industry which I'll keep to myself.

I've worked on a few games, usually as an AI dev or consultant, but I don't see what bearing that has on my criticisms of BFC's development policies. Not once have I said I could "do better". I've offered to help, but that's not saying I can do better -- that's offering to help.

In addition, if you actually read my posts you'll find that I'm pretty fair and balanced when it comes to BFC. I understand the difficulties they're working under in some part.

As for having four years to work on a game... what's my budget?

[Sixxkiller]

Why keep it a secret? You say that you know how the business is. Have you ever worked for a games developer? And who says you CAN help? If you could do the stuff Charles does, lets see it.

As far as your budget, I dont know BFC's budget but why dont we just say your bank account as a starter.

Still 4 years..... tick tock tick tock

Originally posted by Phillip Culliton:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Sixxkiller:

Phillip,

You keep harping on BFC, so what games have you recently been the programmer on? You act as though you can do better, so lets see it. Your 4 years starts today.......

My major work for the last few years has been the heading the research and development of a massive AI in an industry which I'll keep to myself.

I've worked on a few games, usually as an AI dev or consultant, but I don't see what bearing that has on my criticisms of BFC's development policies. Not once have I said I could "do better". I've offered to help, but that's not saying I can do better -- that's offering to help.

In addition, if you actually read my posts you'll find that I'm pretty fair and balanced when it comes to BFC. I understand the difficulties they're working under in some part.

As for having four years to work on a game... what's my budget? </font>

[Guest]

Uhh... because I can? It's certainly not a secret per se. I just don't feel, again, that it has any bearing on this.

Yes, I have worked for game development companies.

As mentioned... I've offered to help. I'm smart enough to *not* want Charles' job (I think BFC and Charles know what I mean by that), but I obviously thought I could help.

Huh. This is getting weird. Are you just naturally this hostile? I've been very reasonable with you, in addition to being very reasonable on these forums in general. Actually read my posts, maybe?

[dalem]

Originally posted by Sixxkiller:

Why keep it a secret? You say that you know how the business is. Have you ever worked for a games developer? And who says you CAN help? If you could do the stuff Charles does, lets see it.

As far as your budget, I dont know BFC's budget but why dont we just say your bank account as a starter.

Still 4 years..... tick tock tick tock

So only software developers are qualified to judge whether a game works well or not?

-dale