RE: Pricing Suggestion

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Pricing Suggestion

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> RE: Pricing Suggestion

Page: << < prev 9 10 [11] 12 13 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 9:57:34 PM

Nemo84

Posts: 115
Joined: 3/29/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

We don't have anything to add to the price discussion. We disagree with the opinions. Give me an example of a game of the complexity level of Command with the utilitarian look and feel of Command that sells to the mass market and then you have something new to discuss. Other examples are unfortunately irrelevant.

Hardcore flight sims such as the DCS series have similar levels of complexity, far higher production values, require an additional investment of several hundred dollars in peripheral hardware and yet somehow currently sell extremely well on Steam thanks to the massive exposure, extensive demo and $30/$16 regular/sale price. But I expect this example to be either dismissed out of hand or simply ignored, just like all the other times it has been brought up so far.

You may not have anything new to add to this debate, but many of your customers quite clearly do.

< Message edited by Nemo84 -- 9/25/2013 10:01:54 PM >

(in reply to IainMcNeil)

Post #: 301

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 10:00:21 PM

JOhnnyr

Posts: 136
Joined: 4/14/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jmscho

If someone is tallying opinion, please add one to the satisfied section for me.

Thanks Warfare Sims and Matrix Games.

Let me add an opposite opinion. Right now I don't feel satisfied at all. I was one of the people who felt the price was too high. Against my better judgment I decided to try it.

Well, the game seems like it could be interesting, but right now I'm not having any fun due to the extremely poor performance. The UI is sluggish and often takes multiple clicks to register anything, Zooming takes seconds and is delayed, And the units on screen don't move smoothly or consistently.

This is all on a high end machine (i7 4770k, GTX660 Ti, 8GB ram, SSD, win8 64-bit).

I'm not the only one with these issues, it does the same thing on my laptop, as well as several others in the "Performance" thread. For $80 I expected the game to at least be playable. At this point it's basically a slideshow.

< Message edited by JOhnnyr -- 9/25/2013 10:04:17 PM >

(in reply to jmscho)

Post #: 302

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 10:04:03 PM

kaburke61

Posts: 225
Joined: 9/25/2013
Status: offline

Add myself to the "completely satisfied" list...

To compare this to a $59 game (like GTA V, which btw I LOVE) is just silly. The depth/scope is amazing.

(in reply to jmscho)

Post #: 303

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 10:07:23 PM

JiminyJickers

Posts: 290
Joined: 10/4/2011
From: New Zealand
Status: offline

I have now bought it and have played around a little bit. For the amount of gameplay and possibility this title offers, I think the price is fair.

Just looking at the database of units show how incredible detail has been put into this game. For example, I visited the New Zealand Army when younger and they showed us these missile launchers they had. I thought it couldn't possibly be in the game, but there they are. I am so going to be creating some scenarios based around my country.

The price is the same as an top shelf AAA title in New Zealand, but I think I will be getting much more out of this and for years to come, which can't be said for most of the AAA titles.

.

< Message edited by JiminyJickers -- 9/25/2013 10:09:57 PM >

(in reply to jmscho)

Post #: 304

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 10:12:45 PM

wombat778

Posts: 25
Joined: 9/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo84
Hardcore flight sims such as the DCS series have similar levels of complexity, far higher production values, require an additional investment of several hundred dollars in peripheral hardware and yet somehow currently sell extremely well on Steam thanks to the massive exposure, extensive demo and $30/$16 regular/sale price. But I expect this example to be either dismissed out of hand or simply ignored, just like all the other times it has been brought up so far.

In fairness, Iain asked for examples "with the utilitarian look and feel of Command." While DCS may not have the most cutting edge graphics in the world, it is orders of magnitude prettier than Command. On top of that, (i) DCS can be configured as essentially an arcade game if you choose, (ii) DCS A-10C on release was $60 and that was several years ago, (iii) adding up all the DCS modules when new comes to several hundred dollars, including fairly hefty prices for relatively small updates (e.g. Black Shark -> Black Shark 2).

(in reply to Nemo84)

Post #: 305

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 10:20:01 PM

Dimitris

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JOhnnyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: jmscho

If someone is tallying opinion, please add one to the satisfied section for me.

Thanks Warfare Sims and Matrix Games.

Let me add an opposite opinion. Right now I don't feel satisfied at all. I was one of the people who felt the price was too high. Against my better judgment I decided to try it.

Well, the game seems like it could be interesting, but right now I'm not having any fun due to the extremely poor performance. The UI is sluggish and often takes multiple clicks to register anything, Zooming takes seconds and is delayed, And the units on screen don't move smoothly or consistently.

This is all on a high end machine (i7 4770k, GTX660 Ti, 8GB ram, SSD, win8 64-bit).

I'm not the only one with these issues, it does the same thing on my laptop, as well as several others in the "Performance" thread. For $80 I expected the game to at least be playable. At this point it's basically a slideshow.

Hi there,

I know this is not much of a consolation, but we've had the same report from some other folks; thankfully not many, but enough that it's a serious issue. Curiously the UI-performance problem (more exactly, map zoom/pan lag problem) seems to be independent of hardware specs; as in your case, most of the people had the problem appear in high-end rigs. I can assure you we are looking into this very carefully. Please allow us some time to find a solution.

Thanks!

< Message edited by Sunburn -- 9/25/2013 10:21:29 PM >

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to JOhnnyr)

Post #: 306

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 10:20:11 PM

wombat778

Posts: 25
Joined: 9/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JOhnnyr

Well, the game seems like it could be interesting, but right now I'm not having any fun due to the extremely poor performance. The UI is sluggish and often takes multiple clicks to register anything, Zooming takes seconds and is delayed, And the units on screen don't move smoothly or consistently.

This is all on a high end machine (i7 4770k, GTX660 Ti, 8GB ram, SSD, win8 64-bit).

I'm not the only one with these issues, it does the same thing on my laptop, as well as several others in the "Performance" thread. For $80 I expected the game to at least be playable. At this point it's basically a slideshow.

Odd. I am experiencing perfectly fine performance on a much more modest machine than yours, and it even is running no problem on my old mac laptop through VMware.

(in reply to JOhnnyr)

Post #: 307

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 10:22:25 PM

Tomn

Posts: 148
Joined: 4/22/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

We don't have anything to add to the price discussion. We disagree with the opinions. Give me an example of a game of the complexity level of Command with the utilitarian look and feel of Command that sells to the mass market and then you have something new to discuss. Other examples are unfortunately irrelevant.

I feel like this is a constant sticking point. There is, in fact, a middle ground between "Call of Warcraft Battlefield 64" and "Super Quartermaster Simulator 2022." The point isn't "Oh, this game won't appeal to Xbox kiddies, therefore we should cater to nothing but the hardest core of hardcore grognards." The point is "There is in fact a very large group of non-hardcore potential grognards who, while not as numerous as the Xbox kiddies, is still so numerous as to justify lowering prices and easing accessibility." The argument is not that Matrix should use mass market strategies, but rather that the overall market has recently become so vast that even a small niche has enough potential customers in absolute terms to justify lowered prices - in effect, that the market has changed, and changed very significantly, since the days when pricing high was the only way a small, niche publisher could stay afloat.

As proof, I point to the fact that the niche of freaking truck driving is large enough to warrant putting up on Steam at an affordable price - and has, in fact, become a top seller. If you don't think a truck driving sim is sufficiently complex to compare with wargames, I point to Kerbal Space Program, a game that is literally about rocket science. Are you really claiming that the niche for wargames is really so much smaller and less profitable than the truck driving niche and the space program niche that it cannot possibly make more money using the same strategies they do? No, not everybody will like Command - but the same applies to Euro Truck Truck Simulator 2 and Kerbal Space Program, and yet they manage quite standout successes.

I repeat: The point is NOT that everyone will like Command. The point is NOT that it will become an instant runaway success that awes the world if the price was lowered. The point is NOT that people are any more accepting of wargames now than they were twenty years ago, or that there are more of those people around. The point is rather that it is now much, much easier to reach out to hidden grognards who never realized that wargames were their niche than it was twenty years ago, so long as the price is right and good distribution channels are used. To use an analogy, it's the difference between advertising by putting up posters outside the store and taking out a national TV broadcast ad - the potential market is and always has been very large, but hard to reach. If you believe that this is entirely untrue, how do you explain the success stories behind a thousand and one tiny, ridiculous niches that would never have turned a profit or appeared on the shelves in the past sprouting up all over the place now?

(in reply to IainMcNeil)

Post #: 308

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 10:23:44 PM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

Someone mention earlier how dead it was in this forum...there are over two pages of threads with posts from today. This might be the most active forum at Matrix now. Plus activity at a couple other sights as well.

(in reply to Tomn)

Post #: 309

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 10:30:07 PM

Nemo84

Posts: 115
Joined: 3/29/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wombat778

In fairness, Iain asked for examples "with the utilitarian look and feel of Command." While DCS may not have the most cutting edge graphics in the world, it is orders of magnitude prettier than Command. On top of that, (i) DCS can be configured as essentially an arcade game if you choose, (ii) DCS A-10C on release was $60 and that was several years ago, (iii) adding up all the DCS modules when new comes to several hundred dollars, including fairly hefty prices for relatively small updates (e.g. Black Shark -> Black Shark 2).

Put the criteria tight enough and it's easy to dismiss just about any example. I would also say that features such as pretty graphics and an additional optional arcade mode require significant development resource and would thus warrant an ever higher retail price. However these features aid in attracting new customers and thus easily repay themselves. Again, a smart business move.

As for (ii), DCS was indeed $60 on release several years ago. My counterarguments are threefold. Firstly, the DCS developers have realized that lower prices means more profits, and adjusted accordingly. New releases now cost $40, VAT included. Secondly, prices are also being dropped when products age, a practice Matrix is also extremely opposed to despite it being a frequent customer complaint. And thirdly, even the original $60 (VAT included) price is still a massive difference with this game's $105 (VAT included), despite having far superior production values.

And finally (iii), this is a false analogy. Each module is a distinct, independent title with its own distinct complexity and long development process. The entry cost for a new customer can be as low as $15. Apart from the multiplayer compatibility, it's no different from Matrix reusing and modifying the Uncommon Valor engine and framework into War Plan Orange and the two War in the Pacific titles. The Black Shark to Black Shark 2 upgrade was also far from small. Oh, and given the current DCS sale, I can in fact buy all the currently-released DCS content (7 full games) for only $15 more than Command: $120 (VAT included).

< Message edited by Nemo84 -- 9/25/2013 10:45:34 PM >

(in reply to wombat778)

Post #: 310

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 10:31:12 PM

JOhnnyr

Posts: 136
Joined: 4/14/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

quote:

ORIGINAL: JOhnnyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: jmscho

If someone is tallying opinion, please add one to the satisfied section for me.

Thanks Warfare Sims and Matrix Games.

Let me add an opposite opinion. Right now I don't feel satisfied at all. I was one of the people who felt the price was too high. Against my better judgment I decided to try it.

Well, the game seems like it could be interesting, but right now I'm not having any fun due to the extremely poor performance. The UI is sluggish and often takes multiple clicks to register anything, Zooming takes seconds and is delayed, And the units on screen don't move smoothly or consistently.

This is all on a high end machine (i7 4770k, GTX660 Ti, 8GB ram, SSD, win8 64-bit).

I'm not the only one with these issues, it does the same thing on my laptop, as well as several others in the "Performance" thread. For $80 I expected the game to at least be playable. At this point it's basically a slideshow.

Hi there,

I know this is not much of a consolation, but we've had the same report from some other folks; thankfully not many, but enough that it's a serious issue. Curiously the UI-performance problem (more exactly, map zoom/pan lag problem) seems to be independent of hardware specs; as in your case, most of the people had the problem appear in high-end rigs. I can assure you we are looking into this very carefully. Please allow us some time to find a solution.

Thanks!

Thanks for the reply Sunburn. I'm glad you guys are looking into it. Hopefully it's something simple. =)

(in reply to Dimitris)

Post #: 311

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 10:31:48 PM

wombat778

Posts: 25
Joined: 9/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tomn
I point to Kerbal Space Program, a game that is literally about rocket science.

While not addressing the rest of your points, I just want to note that Kerbal Space Program may not be the best example. I am always looking for good simulations so I went to the website for it to check it out. What I find is a game involving cute yellow characters that look more than a little like the minions from Despicable Me. The features listed for the game include "Take your Kerbal crew out of the ship and do Extra Vehicular Activities" and you can download a "Kerbalizer" to "create your own custom Kerbal....Dress it up...Give it hairstyles." Not sure I would really compare this to Command...

(in reply to Tomn)

Post #: 312

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 10:42:24 PM

Xornox

Posts: 39
Joined: 8/9/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wombat778
While not addressing the rest of your points, I just want to note that Kerbal Space Program may not be the best example. I am always looking for good simulations so I went to the website for it to check it out. What I find is a game involving cute yellow characters that look more than a little like the minions from Despicable Me. .....

Not sure I would really compare this to Command...

Actually it is one of the best rocket simulations available currently (at least I do not know better). I learnt basics of orbital flying with it.

Do not let looks to deceive you. The simulation may be excellent although little yellow minions are flying devices. Actually those characters does not do anything in the simulation. They are just living "cargo" for rockets. Kerbal is excellent example how you can combine serious and light content and gain wide audience for the game. Kerbal is played from 10 years old kids to 40-50 years old guys like me.

< Message edited by Xornox -- 9/25/2013 10:46:09 PM >

(in reply to wombat778)

Post #: 313

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 10:42:47 PM

Nemo84

Posts: 115
Joined: 3/29/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wombat778

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tomn
I point to Kerbal Space Program, a game that is literally about rocket science.

While not addressing the rest of your points, I just want to note that Kerbal Space Program may not be the best example. I am always looking for good simulations so I went to the website for it to check it out. What I find is a game involving cute yellow characters that look more than a little like the minions from Despicable Me. The features listed for the game include "Take your Kerbal crew out of the ship and do Extra Vehicular Activities" and you can download a "Kerbalizer" to "create your own custom Kerbal....Dress it up...Give it hairstyles." Not sure I would really compare this to Command...

It's a game that requires the player to perform realistic orbital maneuvers, with all the corresponding calculations and complexity. They merely had the good business sense to dress it up in an attractive package. All that stuff you mention is optional extras, little gimmicks tacked on the actual game to make it more fun. So it's an excellent example of how complex, deep games can easily be turned into massive commercial successes.

At this very second more than 2660 people are playing a deep game asking them to do complex calculations of orbital mechanics using a simplistic utilitarian UI, making it the 39th most played Steam game at this moment. Yet according to Iain, Eric and the others at Matrix the average gamer has zero interests in deep complex games, and such titles could never have mass appeal.

< Message edited by Nemo84 -- 9/25/2013 10:52:07 PM >

(in reply to wombat778)

Post #: 314

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 10:49:33 PM

Mad Russian

Posts: 13256
Joined: 3/16/2008
From: Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JOhnnyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: jmscho

If someone is tallying opinion, please add one to the satisfied section for me.

Thanks Warfare Sims and Matrix Games.

Let me add an opposite opinion. Right now I don't feel satisfied at all. I was one of the people who felt the price was too high. Against my better judgment I decided to try it.

Well, the game seems like it could be interesting, but right now I'm not having any fun due to the extremely poor performance. The UI is sluggish and often takes multiple clicks to register anything, Zooming takes seconds and is delayed, And the units on screen don't move smoothly or consistently.

This is all on a high end machine (i7 4770k, GTX660 Ti, 8GB ram, SSD, win8 64-bit).

I'm not the only one with these issues, it does the same thing on my laptop, as well as several others in the "Performance" thread. For $80 I expected the game to at least be playable. At this point it's basically a slideshow.

I would give them a chance to respond to that issue. That doesn't sound like a game issue and not something that would be long term.

Good Hunting.

MR

_____________________________

The most expensive thing in the world is free time.

Founder of HSG scenario design group for Combat Mission.
Panzer Command Ostfront Development Team.
Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm Development Team.

(in reply to JOhnnyr)

Post #: 315

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 10:52:14 PM

wombat778

Posts: 25
Joined: 9/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo84
It's a game that requires the player to perform realistic orbital maneuvers, with all the corresponding calculations and complexity. They merely had the good business sense to dress it up in an attractive package. All that stuff you mention is optional extras, little gimmicks tacked on the actual game to make it more fun. So it's an excellent example of how complex, deep games can easily be turned into massive commercial successes.

Perhaps its good business sense. However, I can tell you without any hesitation that if Matrix decided to put gimmicks like that into Command, I would not buy it. Hell, I would pay double for a version without that stuff. If appealing to the mass market means doing that, I am very glad Matrix stays away.

(in reply to Nemo84)

Post #: 316

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 10:56:11 PM

wombat778

Posts: 25
Joined: 9/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Xornox
Actually it is one of the best rocket simulations available currently (at least I do not know better). I learnt basics of orbital flying with it.

Do not let looks to deceive you. The simulation may be excellent although little yellow minions are flying devices. Actually those characters does not do anything in the simulation. They are just living "cargo" for rockets. Kerbal is excellent example how you can combine serious and light content and gain wide audience for the game. Kerbal is played from 10 years old kids to 40-50 years old guys like me.

Good to know, thanks. Still, I think the chances of me buying it went to basically zero when I saw those characters. In contrast, the marketing for Command appealed to me immediately. Just goes to show that different marketing strategies work for different kinds of people...

(in reply to Xornox)

Post #: 317

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 10:56:27 PM

PipFromSlitherine

Posts: 1446
Joined: 6/23/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo84

quote:

ORIGINAL: wombat778

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tomn
I point to Kerbal Space Program, a game that is literally about rocket science.

While not addressing the rest of your points, I just want to note that Kerbal Space Program may not be the best example. I am always looking for good simulations so I went to the website for it to check it out. What I find is a game involving cute yellow characters that look more than a little like the minions from Despicable Me. The features listed for the game include "Take your Kerbal crew out of the ship and do Extra Vehicular Activities" and you can download a "Kerbalizer" to "create your own custom Kerbal....Dress it up...Give it hairstyles." Not sure I would really compare this to Command...

It's a game that requires the player to perform realistic orbital maneuvers, with all the corresponding calculations and complexity. They merely had the good business sense to dress it up in an attractive package. All that stuff you mention is optional extras, little gimmicks tacked on the actual game to make it more fun. So it's an excellent example of how complex, deep games can easily be turned into massive commercial successes.

I'm not sure I agree. The underlying complexity is high, yes - but then so is the driving model in Gran Tourismo. Indeed, Dirt probably has a highly accurate physics and automotive model, but the game itself is very far from being aimed at a niche market.

I guess one could take Command and put a Battle Stations: Midway or Pacific Fleet game around the superlative simulation, but then it would be a very different game.

Cheers

Pip

_____________________________

follow me on Twitter here

(in reply to Nemo84)

Post #: 318

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 11:04:47 PM

Nemo84

Posts: 115
Joined: 3/29/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PipFromSlitherine

I'm not sure I agree. The underlying complexity is high, yes - but then so is the driving model in Gran Tourismo. Indeed, Dirt probably has a highly accurate physics and automotive model, but the game itself is very far from being aimed at a niche market.

I guess one could take Command and put a Battle Stations: Midway or Pacific Fleet game around the superlative simulation, but then it would be a very different game.

Cheers

Pip

But Kerbal Space Program actually makes the player interact with this underlying complexity in a way that first requires him to understand the mechanics of that complexity. The same can not be said for Gran Tourismo. And while Kerbal might indeed not be as complex as Command or DCS, it is of the same or higher complexity than the majority of the titles sold by Matrix. Yet Matrix claims pretty much all of its games are too complex and deep for the average gamer, a claim which is thus once again dispelled by actual commercial successes from other publishers and developers. Hence why it's a great example.

By the way, I do strongly suggest you guys look into developing lower-complexity games around the engines and datasets from your high-complexity titles. It need not be as arcade as the Battle Stations: Midway example you give, but it would be an excellent way to get more mileage out of already developed assets.

< Message edited by Nemo84 -- 9/25/2013 11:08:22 PM >

(in reply to PipFromSlitherine)

Post #: 319

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 11:06:46 PM

wombat778

Posts: 25
Joined: 9/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo84
Put the criteria tight enough and it's easy to dismiss just about any example. I would also say that features such as pretty graphics and an additional optional arcade mode require significant development resource and would thus warrant an ever higher retail price. However these features aid in attracting new customers and thus easily repay themselves. Again, a smart business move.
...

Gah! I had a long and detailed point by point response typed up, all of which disappeared when my browser died. Since I can't bear to type it all out again, I'll just say I disagree on a bunch of your DCS points. In the end though, none of it probably matters. Matrix has a business model and they seem to be sticking to it. As customers, its our job to decide whether we want to pay to play. Me, I'm off to go play Command some more...

(in reply to Nemo84)

Post #: 320

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 11:10:53 PM

Xornox

Posts: 39
Joined: 8/9/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PipFromSlitherine

I'm not sure I agree. The underlying complexity is high, yes - but then so is the driving model in Gran Tourismo. Indeed, Dirt probably has a highly accurate physics and automotive model, but the game itself is very far from being aimed at a niche market.

In racing games you just take the wheel and drive. In Kerbal you have to understand orbital mechanics, how to ascend to the orbit, how to accelerate the rocket to change the orbit, how to get inside gravity well of the another planet, how to decelerate to the orbit, how to descend to the planet. And you should be able to return to the original planet as well...

And all that must be done by using the rocket which you have designed.

I can tell you that it is not comparable to driving games. It is not easy at the beginning even if you know basics of physics. Actually I have not been able to descend to another planet because it is quite difficult...

< Message edited by Xornox -- 9/25/2013 11:12:35 PM >

(in reply to PipFromSlitherine)

Post #: 321

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 11:13:49 PM

Nemo84

Posts: 115
Joined: 3/29/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wombat778

Gah! I had a long and detailed point by point response typed up, all of which disappeared when my browser died. Since I can't bear to type it all out again, I'll just say I disagree on a bunch of your DCS points. In the end though, none of it probably matters. Matrix has a business model and they seem to be sticking to it. As customers, its our job to decide whether we want to pay to play. Me, I'm off to go play Command some more...

Yeah, the forums are really acting up tonight. Shame, I enjoy a good debate and would have loved countering every point in that reply

You go off to enjoy Command and I'll go off on my no doubt doomed crusade to try and make Command accessible to more people.

(in reply to wombat778)

Post #: 322

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 11:20:28 PM

dutchman55555

Posts: 139
Joined: 4/21/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thewood1

Maybe in a month you'll see some heavy discounting if less than 100 people buy.

I don't think you'll see anything influence the current leadership from their path. Having the philosophy "We won't reduce the prices on our games because then our customers wouldn't value our products" pretty much determines that.

That doesn't mean that this must only be a venue for powerless complaint. It just means that if you're not going to buy a game because it's �65/$90 CAD/$80 USD you can (and should) make that statement here, and discuss why. Discussing the possibility of a sale/discount is wasted effort....there won't be one.

And I do find it interesting that Iain's (tongue in cheek) response is that no one who bought the game is here complaining about the price. Ironically I've seen at least three purchasers here doing exactly that.

(in reply to thewood1)

Post #: 323

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 11:28:01 PM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

But maybe not more than once, hmmm?

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to dutchman55555)

Post #: 324

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 11:33:37 PM

NefariousKoel

Posts: 2930
Joined: 7/23/2002
From: Murderous Missouri Scum
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wombat778

quote:

ORIGINAL: Xornox
Actually it is one of the best rocket simulations available currently (at least I do not know better). I learnt basics of orbital flying with it.

Do not let looks to deceive you. The simulation may be excellent although little yellow minions are flying devices. Actually those characters does not do anything in the simulation. They are just living "cargo" for rockets. Kerbal is excellent example how you can combine serious and light content and gain wide audience for the game. Kerbal is played from 10 years old kids to 40-50 years old guys like me.

Good to know, thanks. Still, I think the chances of me buying it went to basically zero when I saw those characters. In contrast, the marketing for Command appealed to me immediately. Just goes to show that different marketing strategies work for different kinds of people...

KSP is an excellent sim. While they gave it a flippant set of Kermit-like aliens to burn up on the launch pad or re-entry, it also makes it less sad when you do so.

Don't be fooled by the little green aliens, it's an impressive sim that has a surprisingly large and dedicated fanbase for the complexity.

_____________________________

(in reply to wombat778)

Post #: 325

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 11:37:48 PM

JDM

Posts: 76
Joined: 12/8/2004
Status: offline

I have to Comment on Jim Burns posting, he is about as near the mark as any I have read on this thread. So expanding on this, here are some thoughts you may find interesting, or possibly not :-) Firstly we try and read as many of the postings as we can. We absolutely listen to these and are influenced by some, but we then must balance this with our past experience and take careful account of our statistical data which as you may guess is comprehensive. We then consult and advise our developer partner in respect of the potential of his game, also taking into account the time taken to bring the game to market and his expected return to arrive at the best price for his game. This will factor how long the game has to feed him till his next release and then together we set a price. It has to be right or the developer will not be encouraged to do it again, or won't be able to afford too.

In this particular case it has taken many years to bring this highly sophisticated and very special game to the market, but it is not a mass market product and comparing it to games like GTA is not something we think wise, or remotely relevant to the price, or this business.

After all this we take an informed decision on pricing. It's not easy and we often debate this at length before we finally decide. The biggest problem is you will never know for certain if you have gotten it right or wrong, but its a decision we have to take without the benefit of all your advice and rest assured we do take it very seriously.

Another factor you may think relevant: No one on this planet has more experience or knowledge of market size, sales data, purchasing habits, demographics, tastes and budgets in this very special and unique sector of the games industry than we do and the truth is we get this decision right far more than we get it wrong. The proof of the pudding is in the eating and you may think that the fact that we have tripled our number of employees over the past 3 years and our turnover has grown exponentially over the same period and will again this year, is a significant indicator that we do know what we are doing.

Why is this important to you? Many of whom are our very loyal audience and arguably the most important asset this business has. We listen to your feed back and as a result we are making significant changes particularly to the UI in our games and making more and better games in this genre than ever before. We are providing a far higher level of support to our developers, often financial and we are taking these games across multiple platforms, growing our audience base at a faster rate than at any time in our history. Just as well many of you tell us, as few others are investing in this niche sector.

So the point of my thread is to confirm that we do listen and we do give very careful consideration to pricing and the many other factors I have mentioned. Its a very complex mix of hard data and ultimately intuition which we simply cannot afford to get wrong, because if we do this unique sector of the strategy games market, that we all love so dearly may well be the loser.

(in reply to Jim D Burns)

Post #: 326

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/25/2013 11:47:13 PM

dutchman55555

Posts: 139
Joined: 4/21/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tomn

Are we supposed to imagine, then, that games depicting war (one of the single most popular subjects in the world for all of humanity, let alone gamers!) in a realistic fashion are a SMALLER niche than realistic games about the space program or truck driving?

This gets at the meat of things. I love ETS2 (Euro Truck Simulator 2 for the uninitiated), by now it has sold hundreds of thousands of copies. It's a hardcore simulation, as are its even more successful cousins the Rail Sims, and the orphaned step-children Agricultural Simulators.

These are not GTA clones. There are no Marios, or Zeldas (Links, I know, I know). They faced the same challenged PC wargaming had/has, and have been financial blockbusters in the industry compared to PC wargaming.

Do we really feel confident in the direction that Matrix/Slitherine is steering the hobby? Do we see it growing, do we see more and more joining? No, we see the argument that we need to value their products, spo that's why the price is high. We see the argument that we're niche, and niche can't do well in a broad market with all those annoying discounts and sales all the time.

If this was just the future of Matrix/Slitherine I think they'd be justified in everything they've done. I can't say I'm so generous when you factor in the future of the hobby we love.

And since I've seen Iain mention twice about locking the thread, best get your feelings out soon...

(in reply to Tomn)

Post #: 327

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 12:24:05 AM

dutchman55555

Posts: 139
Joined: 4/21/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wombat778

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tomn
I point to Kerbal Space Program, a game that is literally about rocket science.

While not addressing the rest of your points, I just want to note that Kerbal Space Program may not be the best example. I am always looking for good simulations so I went to the website for it to check it out. What I find is a game involving cute yellow characters that look more than a little like the minions from Despicable Me. The features listed for the game include "Take your Kerbal crew out of the ship and do Extra Vehicular Activities" and you can download a "Kerbalizer" to "create your own custom Kerbal....Dress it up...Give it hairstyles." Not sure I would really compare this to Command...

Get your Kerbals to the Mun and back...if you still declare it to not be an in-depth simulation (you literally have to understand college-level Physics to succeed) then I'll accept that. I'll think you're crazy, but I'll accept it.

(in reply to wombat778)

Post #: 328

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 12:26:34 AM

JDM

Posts: 76
Joined: 12/8/2004
Status: offline

I think there is some misunderstanding in the meaning of Niche, so just to clear up this point, when we say niche we mean an interest group which is a subset of the overall video games market that a specific product is focused on, often aimed at satisfying a specific audience. Generally our games attract many different such sub sets. Some perceptions in this thread seem to be that that in fact niche means small, it does not, at least in our experience.

(in reply to dutchman55555)

Post #: 329

RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 12:28:41 AM

dutchman55555

Posts: 139
Joined: 4/21/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PipFromSlitherine

I'm not sure I agree. The underlying complexity is high, yes - but then so is the driving model in Gran Tourismo. Indeed, Dirt probably has a highly accurate physics and automotive model, but the game itself is very far from being aimed at a niche market.

Thank you. Thank you.

The admission that PC wargaming need not necessarily be a niche market, but that Matrix/Slitherine's model makes it one...complete agreement. Very revealing.

(in reply to PipFromSlitherine)

Post #: 330