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  12 13 [14] 15 16   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 9:31:58 AM   
Kipper


Posts: 272
Joined: 3/5/2005
Status: offline 		This thing is under priced. This isn't a game it's a hobby.

(in reply to IainMcNeil)
Post #: 391
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 9:38:47 AM   
delenda

 

Posts: 29
Joined: 9/25/2013
Status: offline 		I agree with your point about ETS2 - the mechanics are simple. I assume that the OP was talking about how much of a niche market driving a truck around Europe is.

As for flight sims, if you think that's true, I challenge you to get inside a cold A-10 on the ramp, get it started and then take it for a spin.

With Command, you can fire it up and launch units within 5 minutes. I'm not saying it's not an in-depth game because it clearly is but the assertions that a) it takes hardcore knowledge to get something going and b) the interface is approachable are wrong.

< Message edited by delenda -- 9/26/2013 9:57:21 AM >

(in reply to IainMcNeil)
Post #: 392
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 9:45:43 AM   
IainMcNeil


Posts: 2804
Joined: 10/26/2004
From: London
Status: offline 		You may be able to launch missiles in 5 mins but I doubt most people would :)

_____________________________

Iain McNeil
Director
Matrix Games

(in reply to delenda)
Post #: 393
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 9:50:00 AM   
histgamer

 

Posts: 1455
Joined: 11/30/2006
Status: offline 		Comon Iain, I agree with a lot of what you've said but even inside flight sims there are varying degrees of "hardcore". There's the 99% and then there are games like Falcon 4.0, and Battle of Britain 2 which if the settings kiddie gloves are turned off are every bit as "hardcore" as any Matrix games... well heh... Battle of Britain 2 is a matrix game but oh well.

(in reply to IainMcNeil)
Post #: 394
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 9:58:07 AM   
delenda

 

Posts: 29
Joined: 9/25/2013
Status: offline 		Flattery will get you everywhere

(in reply to IainMcNeil)
Post #: 395
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 10:00:37 AM   
Nemo84

 

Posts: 115
Joined: 3/29/2010
Status: offline 		As I predicted. Every example people give just gets dismissed out of hand because they are not nearly identical to this special unique little snowflake.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

Lets look at a Truck Simulation. I don't care how dull it might sound and how niche you personally think it is lets think about how you play and control it. There is accelerate, brake, change gear and steer. Ok you may have a few more advanced options but to be honest all you need to do to at least get a basic level of entertainment out of it is hit accelerate while steering. My 2 year old girl can do that. I'm not saying she would be good but she can make something happen and see it crash which my 5 year old boy would love.



It also includes scheduling rest periods, navigation, business management decisions, .... It may not be as complex as Command, but its complexity matches or exceeds the vast majority of titles Matrix offers. Yet according to you every single one of your titles is somehow different. Your 2 year old girl could also move a bunch of counters around in WitE. She'll not be actually playing the game, but apparently according to you just being able to interact with it at that age dismisses it as anything deep or complex.



quote:

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

Lets look at Kerbal. The game basically has you bolt together some components. You don't need to know what you are doing. You can just load it up, click a few buttons and launch in to space. Anyone can do it. You might fail but you get to build a rocket and launch it and see all that visually.


So basically making games accessible to newcomers is now considered something bad? That's just one more way of artificially making a genre "niche" and unpopular.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

On a flight simulator, ok its more complex. But the fundamental thing is you only have a very limited number of ways to interact with it. Or at least for the basic function like take off and steering. You adjust the thrust, flaps etc and you can take off and steer with a joystick. You might crash but you get something to happen. You try again and get a bit better.



Again, accessibility. I'll also point out that the start-up procedure for DCS A-10 requires 20 min of flipping switches and requires a large checklist, but apparently that's not deep or complex enough.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

Lets look at Command... are you seriously suggesting that you could put anyone in front of Command and have them be able to get something to happen without a significant amount of thought and effort on their part. I don't mean win a game. I mean actually make something happen like launch some aircraft and have them fire missiles at the enemy. Most people would sit and stare at the screen without the slightest idea how to get anything at all to happen and if it did they'b be unlikely to understand what had happened. That's because it is a wargame. You have to accept we are in a niche the vast majority of people do not understand at all. Even wargames as simple as Panzer Corps are looked at with confusion by the wider market.



Achieving something like a shot down plane in Command takes no more planning or thought than achieving something in DCS, Truck Simulator or Kerbal Space Program. Wargames are not this special unique genre that's the only one where people actually have to think. Half the complexity in Matrix titles isn't even the gameplay but instead it's figuring out the often arcane obtrusive UI.

The amount of doublethink going on in the company is impressive, though. "The wargaming industry is doing well and we are expanding steadily and increasing sales constantly. There are not enough untapped gamers to justify lowering the price" is your best one.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

If someone actually comes up with relevant real data that proves us wrong we'll be happy to listen. If there is a way to make more money for the devs of course we would do it. Sales number and prices on these games are unrelated to Command.




People have been given relevant real data throughout this thread. As your post evidences, everything that doesn't agree with your preconceived theory just gets dismissed or ignored. One could also argue that Matrix has a very vested commercial interest in keeping wargames a tiny but expensive niche, as that makes you the only publisher for every new title. Should the wargaming genre suddenly pick up, new publishers would rise, self-publishing would rise and you guys would lose your near-monopoly. Similar to what was said about Steam earlier: what is good for the wargaming genre might not necessarily be good for Matrix Games.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

PS Sales are great so far. It seems the vast vast majority of people are buying and playing rather than commenting.



Until you can put actual numbers on this, so it can be compared to the sales of similar-complexity games like DCS, it's a useless argument.


< Message edited by Nemo84 -- 9/26/2013 10:02:59 AM >

(in reply to IainMcNeil)
Post #: 396
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 10:04:18 AM   
ComDev

 

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: delenda

With Command, you can fire it up and launch units within 5 minutes. I'm not saying it's not an in-depth game because it clearly is but the assertions that a) it takes hardcore knowledge to get something going and b) the interface is approachable are wrong.


Hey-heeeey I think you will absolutely LOVE Command as it has painfully long (read: realistic) turn around times, which results in realistic aircraft availability and sortie rates. Further refinements to the current model are planned. If you have any comments/suggestions/ideas please post up, we add all good feedback to our 'design comments'!

Aircraft that are ready at game start in Command have already been warmed up and prepped with stores. When they return from the first mission it will (naturally) take some hours before they fly again. The actual time depends on aircraft type, loadout type, country of origin, etc.

So please give the sim a spin.

Not sure I quite got b), though.

< Message edited by emsoy -- 9/26/2013 10:08:01 AM >

_____________________________



Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to delenda)
Post #: 397
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 10:07:06 AM   
hondo1375


Posts: 157
Joined: 3/12/2005
From: London, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

As approachable as the Command UI is, it is in a completely different ball park to these more casual games that anyone can pick up and play. If you can't see the difference that's fine but we do. We understand the business more than anyone in the world. If someone actually comes up with relevant real data that proves us wrong we'll be happy to listen. If there is a way to make more money for the devs of course we would do it. Sales number and prices on these games are unrelated to Command.



I'm no Matrix shill, but Iain is making a good point here. I think we can all agree that Matrix is trying to make as much money as possible "for the devs" over the lifetime of this game. If they believed they could make more by selling it for $40 at release, why wouldn't they? What's stopping them? Nothing except the fact that they don't believe they can. Based on tons of data built up over 14 or so years that let's them understand the different market segments for wargames, the demand, the price elasticity and so forth.

Also, their day job, for 14 years, as distributors, is to understand just these kinds of things. Who that has posted here can claim to know the business better? You've got to imagine walking into a business board meeting presenting to a CEO - you need lots of data to support a contention, not a couple of anecdotes, some (possibly dis)analogies, and a few numbers published by Steam.

In the end you have to believe either Matrix doesn't know their job or are greedy. They certainly may be mistaken about how they have assessed the market for this game, but Iain has even accepted that, and is willing to listen to any "real" data to the contrary. (The other argument, that is not being made here, is that Matrix and the devs should make less profit from this game by offering it at a lower price so the people that find it too expense can afford to buy it. Since no one is making that argument, I won't pursue it here, although I expect there aren't too many hardcore wargaming millionaires around.)

Don't get me wrong, I certainly have sympathy with the posters here that are priced out of this game, and I myself am waiting a couple of weeks to see how the game is before laying down that much cash, I just think the arguments that claim to know Matrix's business better than Matrix need a lot more data to be convincing that is being offered here.

(in reply to IainMcNeil)
Post #: 398
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 10:09:00 AM   
ComDev

 

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline 		Oh and while we're discussing aircraft sortie rates, check this one out:

http://harpoonhq.com/waypoint/waypoint_2003_03.zip

_____________________________



Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to hondo1375)
Post #: 399
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 10:20:41 AM   
delenda

 

Posts: 29
Joined: 9/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: emsoy

quote:

ORIGINAL: delenda

With Command, you can fire it up and launch units within 5 minutes. I'm not saying it's not an in-depth game because it clearly is but the assertions that a) it takes hardcore knowledge to get something going and b) the interface is approachable are wrong.


Hey-heeeey I think you will absolutely LOVE Command as it has painfully long (read: realistic) turn around times, which results in realistic aircraft availability and sortie rates. Further refinements to the current model are planned. If you have any comments/suggestions/ideas please post up, we add all good feedback to our 'design comments'!

Aircraft that are ready at game start in Command have already been warmed up and prepped with stores. When they return from the first mission it will (naturally) take some hours before they fly again. The actual time depends on aircraft type, loadout type, country of origin, etc.

So please give the sim a spin.

Not sure I quite got b), though.


Sorry, I meant no disrespect! I have bought and am playing Command! I spent all of my evening last night trying to get it working with Wine on OSX/Linux too (which, from what people have said, would result in more sales for you guys!).

I've yet to make a fully informed decision on the UI, more hours of Command should get me there but I'm not yet sure as to why people are saying the UI is approachable. Items are often in obscure places, (IMHO) it doesn't look that great and basic windows form elements do not necessarily mean approachable. Has the MS UX Guide been consulted/used? People that I've shown youtube vids/screenies too haven't been impressed with the UI and one of the main vocalists is a professional UX guy.

I feel like I'm being too negative - it's really not my intention and I really do want CMANO to succeed!

Also, I had to jump in to point out that dismissing flight sims as "get in and push joystick" is disingenuous.

(in reply to ComDev)
Post #: 400
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 10:21:37 AM   
Nemo84

 

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

ORIGINAL: hondo1375

I'm no Matrix shill, but Iain is making a good point here. I think we can all agree that Matrix is trying to make as much money as possible "for the devs" over the lifetime of this game. If they believed they could make more by selling it for $40 at release, why wouldn't they? What's stopping them?


Matrix is a business, not a charity. Their primary goal is making enough money for themselves. Making enough money for the devs is a secondary concern, as is evidenced in the few games where Matrix does not have unique distribution rights. Matrix primary goal therefore is most likely to keep their near-monopoly on the genre intact as long as possible. A genre that suddenly starts growing faster than they can keep up might actually not be in their benefit.


quote:

ORIGINAL: hondo1375

Nothing except the fact that they don't believe they can. Based on tons of data built up over 14 or so years that let's them understand the different market segments for wargames, the demand, the price elasticity and so forth.


I know from years of professional experience that data can easily, either deliberately or accidentally, be completely misinterpreted, especially is said misinterpretation seems to prove a pet theory.

quote:

ORIGINAL: hondo1375
Also, their day job, for 14 years, as distributors, is to understand just these kinds of things. Who that has posted here can claim to know the business better? You've got to imagine walking into a business board meeting presenting to a CEO - you need lots of data to support a contention, not a couple of anecdotes, some (possibly dis)analogies, and a few numbers published by Steam.



When people can see every other distributor in the entire industry is doing the exact opposite and obviously benefiting from it, it doesn't take being a distributor yourself to see which way the wind is blowing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: hondo1375

In the end you have to believe either Matrix doesn't know their job or are greedy. They certainly may be mistaken about how they have assessed the market for this game, but Iain has even accepted that, and is willing to listen to any "real" data to the contrary. (The other argument, that is not being made here, is that Matrix and the devs should make less profit from this game by offering it at a lower price so the people that find it too expense can afford to buy it. Since no one is making that argument, I won't pursue it here, although I expect there aren't too many hardcore wargaming millionaires around.)



Iain just dismisses every single piece of data that does not prove his preconceptions. That's not "being willing to listen", that's just trying to smother the discussion.

Nobody wants less profits for everyone just to save themselves $30. People are arguing here in favor of a business strategy that would massively increase profits for the developers and see the wargaming genre actually flourish again.



quote:

ORIGINAL: hondo1375
Don't get me wrong, I certainly have sympathy with the posters here that are priced out of this game, and I myself am waiting a couple of weeks to see how the game is before laying down that much cash, I just think the arguments that claim to know Matrix's business better than Matrix need a lot more data to be convincing that is being offered here.


Matrix doesn't present any actual data to support their point of view either, and yet somehow you consider them convincing.

(in reply to hondo1375)
Post #: 401
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 10:35:25 AM   
Xornox

 

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

ORIGINAL: hondo1375
Also, their day job, for 14 years, as distributors, is to understand just these kinds of things. Who that has posted here can claim to know the business better? You've got to imagine walking into a business board meeting presenting to a CEO - you need lots of data to support a contention, not a couple of anecdotes, some (possibly dis)analogies, and a few numbers published by Steam.


How they could have data if they have not tried all possible strategies? Have they tried to create easily approachable cheap war games (for example, Panzer Corps could be such) and then middle price more complex games? Have they seen how this approach would work in the long term when cheap, easy games would pull more customers here and they would then to start buy their more expensive products? Only tested strategies they have are high or very high price approaches.

Panzer Corps could have been selling huge amounts in Steam if it would have been marketed as a new version of Panzer General. How many new customers they would have here then? Another huge selling candidate is Distant Worlds... Steam has several quite well selling space strategy games but they all are worse than Distant Worlds.

Of course, Steam is competitor of Matrix games... They are trying to hide war games to their own world and sell them with high price - same time the world changes around them and eventually only few people will pay 100$ per game when Steam sells same or higher quality for even 5-10 dollars.


< Message edited by Xornox -- 9/26/2013 10:45:12 AM >

(in reply to hondo1375)
Post #: 402
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 10:38:24 AM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 3916
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline 		Not only do they not have to provide you with data that you'll accept, but you are not entitled to it.

No one here is entitled to it.

And does anyone have any hard proof that says Panzer Corps could be selling huge amounts on Steam?

Or that they have not already looked at that?




< Message edited by Aurelian -- 9/26/2013 10:42:32 AM >

_____________________________

If the Earth was flat, cats would of knocked everything off of it long ago.

(in reply to Nemo84)
Post #: 403
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 10:42:03 AM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		+10000!

The Slitherine Group is a COMPANY! You're a consumer. You don't get to demand anything from them, and they don't get to demand your money. That's how our beloved capitalist system works.

Stop being so stupidly passive aggressive.

< Message edited by Terminus -- 9/26/2013 10:44:35 AM >

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Aurelian)
Post #: 404
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 10:43:58 AM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 3916
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

+10000!

The Slitherine Group is a COMPANY! You're a consumer. You don't get to demand anything from them, and they don't get to demand your money.


Don't ya love how people think they know better than a company that has been in business for years? And has expanded?

Let's simplify. "I want your product, but I don't want to pay what you ask. So your business model is a failure."

< Message edited by Aurelian -- 9/26/2013 10:45:44 AM >

_____________________________

If the Earth was flat, cats would of knocked everything off of it long ago.

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 405
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 10:49:43 AM   
Nemo84

 

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

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

+10000!

The Slitherine Group is a COMPANY! You're a consumer. You don't get to demand anything from them, and they don't get to demand your money.


Don't ya love how people think they know better than a company that has been in business for years? And has expanded?

Let's simplify. "I want your product, but I don't want to pay what you ask. So your business model is a failure."


Quite frankly, your attitude is downright short-sighted and insulting. If you don't have anything useful to add to the discussion, outside of ad-hominems, the wise thing to do would be to stay out of it.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

Not only do they not have to provide you with data that you'll accept, but you are not entitled to it.

No one here is entitled to it.

And does anyone have any hard proof that says Panzer Corps could be selling huge amounts on Steam?

Or that they have not already looked at that?



Then they aren't entitled to dismissing pricing discussions based on their fancy data. Besides, where is your hard proof that Panzer Corps will be unable to sell huge amounts on Steam?

< Message edited by Nemo84 -- 9/26/2013 10:52:22 AM >

(in reply to Aurelian)
Post #: 406
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 10:53:48 AM   
ComDev

 

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: delenda

I've yet to make a fully informed decision on the UI, more hours of Command should get me there but I'm not yet sure as to why people are saying the UI is approachable. Items are often in obscure places, (IMHO) it doesn't look that great and basic windows form elements do not necessarily mean approachable. Has the MS UX Guide been consulted/used? People that I've shown youtube vids/screenies too haven't been impressed with the UI and one of the main vocalists is a professional UX guy.



Thanks for your feedback Delenda, I've added a new 'feature request' in our database and copy-pasted your comments

If you have more comments/suggestions, even screenshots etc showing how things could be improved, then please post up!

_____________________________



Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to delenda)
Post #: 407
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 10:55:10 AM   
smudge56

 

Posts: 667
Joined: 1/17/2009
From: UK
Status: offline 		I love the games its just a shame that in this global financial crisis, where people are trying to save money where they can. its priced this high.

< Message edited by Blighty56 -- 9/26/2013 12:27:36 PM >

(in reply to Nemo84)
Post #: 408
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 11:14:06 AM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 3916
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo84

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

+10000!

The Slitherine Group is a COMPANY! You're a consumer. You don't get to demand anything from them, and they don't get to demand your money.


Don't ya love how people think they know better than a company that has been in business for years? And has expanded?

Let's simplify. "I want your product, but I don't want to pay what you ask. So your business model is a failure."


Quite frankly, your attitude is downright short-sighted and insulting. If you don't have anything useful to add to the discussion, outside of ad-hominems, the wise thing to do would be to stay out of it.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

Not only do they not have to provide you with data that you'll accept, but you are not entitled to it.

No one here is entitled to it.

And does anyone have any hard proof that says Panzer Corps could be selling huge amounts on Steam?

Or that they have not already looked at that?



Then they aren't entitled to dismissing pricing discussions based on their fancy data. Besides, where is your hard proof that Panzer Corps will be unable to sell huge amounts on Steam?


Don't really care if you find my attitude insulting. You have no right to the information. And I don't have to prove anything. Your claim, your's to prove.

Now, what *is* insulting is what you think a private entity is or is not entitled to. So long as you continue to think you are, it is *you* who has nothing to add. Especially as you bring nothing new.

_____________________________

If the Earth was flat, cats would of knocked everything off of it long ago.

(in reply to Nemo84)
Post #: 409
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 11:35:15 AM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		And the Slitherine Group has nothing to prove to you. They don't have to present any sort of data to you. You don't like it, take your ball and go home.

< Message edited by Terminus -- 9/26/2013 11:38:23 AM >

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Aurelian)
Post #: 410
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 11:36:20 AM   
hondo1375


Posts: 157
Joined: 3/12/2005
From: London, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo84
Matrix is a business, not a charity. Their primary goal is making enough money for themselves. Making enough money for the devs is a secondary concern


Agreed, I was just being polite and quoting Iain, although all supplier-distributor relationships are not adversarial or zero-sum games. I'm sure Matrix wants the good devs to survive and even thrive because it will be more revenue for them over the long term.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo84
I know from years of professional experience that data can easily, either deliberately or accidentally, be completely misinterpreted, especially is said misinterpretation seems to prove a pet theory.


That is of course always a possibility, but it applies to the data provided by both sides of this argument.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo84When people can see every other distributor in the entire industry is doing the exact opposite and obviously benefiting from it


I think if you could somehow prove that every other distributor was doing that and benefiting, that no other distributor was following Martix's model, and that these other distributors were addressing the same market segments as Matrix, then I would be disappointed if Matrix didn't take that on board.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo84
Iain just dismisses every single piece of data that does not prove his preconceptions. That's not "being willing to listen", that's just trying to smother the discussion.


I think it depends on what you count as data and proof. I'm expecting they have tons of data, and a few data point presented here that may or may not be relevant to their market isn't going to sway them, or anybody in their position I expect.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo84
Nobody wants less profits for everyone just to save themselves $30.


Actually, I do. Matrix are free to set their price as they see fit, and I'm free to purchase at whatever price I see fit. We don't owe each other anything or have any obligation for each other's well-being. That's market capitalism. If Matrix want to forgo $30 from their bottom line so I can keep $30 more in my pocket, then I whole-heartedly encourage them to do so. Of course, I wouldn't want them to go out of business, because nobody is bringing games like this to the market, but I'm sure they are looking out for their own interests (have we come full circle yet?).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo84
Matrix doesn't present any actual data to support their point of view either, and yet somehow you consider them convincing.


I'm convinced that they are a professional wargaming distribution outfit who have survived three major economic downturns and who are capable of looking out for their own economic interests.


(in reply to Nemo84)
Post #: 411
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 11:47:03 AM   
Tomn

 

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

ORIGINAL: Aurelian
And does anyone have any hard proof that says Panzer Corps could be selling huge amounts on Steam?

Or that they have not already looked at that?


It's not exactly hard proof, but there IS the fact that Panzer General, the game Panzer Corps is based on, WAS a mainstream success back in its day. It hardly seems far-fetched to suggest that, properly marketed and sold on a major platform at a decent price now, it could be again. And as for claims that they have already looked at this, well, the trouble is they haven't REALLY tested such theories out, other than occasional half-hearted stabs - and as demonstrated in this thread, certain folks in Matrix Games seem a little quicker than one would think quite right in dismissing any arguments in favor of doing things differently.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil
On the comparisons with other games I'm surprised by the choice of games as they are not indicative of Command at all.


With all due respect, I believe you're missing the point. Complexity doesn't in and of itself make a genre completely and uniquely different - what it does is make it NICHE. A sufficiently complex game means that there are only a few people out of a much larger total who would be interested in such a game, which from a functional perspective makes it little different from a game about truck driving (which might not be as complex, but whose subject matter is hardly mainstream) or a game about going into space (which IS complex enough that it isn't everyone's cup of tea).

This is key. What we are discussing is not the very specific differences between games, but rather the fact that all of them can only sell to a small percentage of the total marketplace. Only a small percentage are willing to play a game about driving trucks. Only a small percentage are willing to muck around with rocket science for entertainment. Only a small percentage are willing to struggle with the difficulties of modern naval warfare. In this, there is little difference between Command, Euro Truck Simulator, and Kerbal Space Program. Yet ETS and KSP have become major successes. Why? Because by using a reasonable pricing point and major distribution channels, they have been able to get in touch with and appeal to their small percentages much more efficiently than was ever possible in the past. Is it so strange then to imagine that Command would do so much less well?

(in reply to Aurelian)
Post #: 412
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 11:54:19 AM   
hondo1375


Posts: 157
Joined: 3/12/2005
From: London, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo84
One could also argue that Matrix has a very vested commercial interest in keeping wargames a tiny but expensive niche, as that makes you the only publisher for every new title. Should the wargaming genre suddenly pick up, new publishers would rise, self-publishing would rise and you guys would lose your near-monopoly.


I respect your passion Nemo84, and your concern for the hobby, but I'm not sure I follow your argument here. So long as there are no significant barriers to entering the market, keeping prices high is about the worst way of maintaining a monopoly position. It makes the market attractive for others to enter, and provides a price umbrella for them. Especially, if as you say, there is a big untapped wargaming market to be addressed at lower price points. Someone could just come in and set up shop, undercut Matrix by 30%, get lots of new customers, and still bring in lots of revenue. The best way for Matrix to keep out competition would in fact be to discount, as that means it would be hard for someone inexperienced in the business, without a reputation with developers, to set a price point in the market that could make everyone some money.

< Message edited by hondo1375 -- 9/26/2013 11:56:54 AM >

(in reply to Nemo84)
Post #: 413
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 12:01:44 PM   
IainMcNeil


Posts: 2804
Joined: 10/26/2004
From: London
Status: offline 		The data that guides us is confidential and extremely valuable and we can't share it which brings us to a wall. It happens every time there is a big release and if it didn't work we wouldn't still be here ;) It is not even related to the price - Panzer Corps was $40 and the price received the same kind of reaction. Battle Academy iOS released for $20 and received the same kind of reaction. Legion iOS was $10 and received the same reaction. Whatever price we release at there will be people who think its too expensive. Those people assume if they wont pay the price the vast majority of other people are like them. This is clearly not true or the business would not be growing so fast.

We'll have to agree to disagree. I don't accept the points but don't want to spend any more time discussing it so I'll have to withdraw from this thread. 1 release a week doesn't happen by itself!

_____________________________

Iain McNeil
Director
Matrix Games

(in reply to Tomn)
Post #: 414
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 12:09:21 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		So one might say,

They See Slitherine Rollin'...
They Hatin'...



_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to IainMcNeil)
Post #: 415
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 12:10:02 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline 		How street of you...

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 416
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 12:13:16 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Slitherine doesn't even share its sales numbers with its development teams. When we made WitP: AE, all we got was the money agreed upon. Fine by me.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 417
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 12:13:41 PM   
Tomn

 

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


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo84When people can see every other distributor in the entire industry is doing the exact opposite and obviously benefiting from it


I think if you could somehow prove that every other distributor was doing that and benefiting, that no other distributor was following Martix's model, and that these other distributors were addressing the same market segments as Matrix, then I would be disappointed if Matrix didn't take that on board.


It seems a bit of a tall order to say "If you can find our identical clone who is doing the exact opposite of what we are doing, THEN we'll consider changing," don't you think? Part of the problem here is that Matrix has a near-monopoly on wargames at present, and that the only data specifically about wargames has to do with what Matrix has done, not what it hasn't tried. It would be a little like Standard Oil saying "Well, if you can find another oil company that sells oil at a lower price than we can, we will consider lowering our prices. Until then, we shall continue doing what we have always done and has always worked for us."

Yet it doesn't seem necessary to find an exact, identical clone. There are, as I have pointed out earlier, a great number of similar markets and genres in terms of their nicheness and how they appeal only to a small minority. Though there are certainly some unique challenges involved with wargames, the essence of the thing remains the same - games which appeal to a small percentage of people can do much better than they could in the past by reducing their prices and hitting major distributors.

quote:


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo84
Iain just dismisses every single piece of data that does not prove his preconceptions. That's not "being willing to listen", that's just trying to smother the discussion.


I think it depends on what you count as data and proof. I'm expecting they have tons of data, and a few data point presented here that may or may not be relevant to their market isn't going to sway them, or anybody in their position I expect.


As mentioned just above, the problem here is that "tons of data" applies only to what they actually have done. You'll note earlier that JDM very politely asked for data on ARMA, DCS, ETS, KSP, rail sims. etc. because they lacked that data and would liked to have done an analysis. Yet all of the mentioned games are very much niche markets, just as wargaming is a niche. We can see then that they haven't really looked too far outside of their own niche - perhaps because they believe that wargaming is completely and perfectly unique to the point that they don't follow any of the rules any other game must follow, which seems a bit of a stretch. To use an analogy, then, this would be like a racer saying "I am walking very fast! I am going much faster than I did when I was crawling! I can't think of any way I can go faster!" while around him everyone is sprinting, who he ignores because they're not running down exactly the same lane he is and therefore he considers them irrelevant. Does it seem surprising, then, that others who have been looking at what others are doing should constantly bring up their data points, if it seems that Matrix really hasn't considered them?

quote:


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo84
Matrix doesn't present any actual data to support their point of view either, and yet somehow you consider them convincing.


I'm convinced that they are a professional wargaming distribution outfit who have survived three major economic downturns and who are capable of looking out for their own economic interests.


Certainly - I don't believe anyone is saying that they will absolutely go out of business any time soon, or that their business model cannot possibly function. What they are suggesting, rather, is that their business model is highly inefficient and stagnant. To use another analogy, we are suggesting that they are a medievally-managed agricultural estate during the peak of the Industrial Revolution. Yes, they could keep going on as ever they did if they really wanted, but they're missing out on quite a lot. They may grow, and this growth may astonish them, but it seems that such a growth would have less to do with their policies and more to do with the explosive growth of the market around them, of which they allow a small trickle to bleed into their wallets, which trickle still being incredibly good compared to how they did in the past. We suggest, then, that they open the spigot and see how it flows.

(in reply to hondo1375)
Post #: 418
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 12:27:17 PM   
Tomn

 

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

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

The data that guides us is confidential and extremely valuable and we can't share it which brings us to a wall. It happens every time there is a big release and if it didn't work we wouldn't still be here ;) It is not even related to the price - Panzer Corps was $40 and the price received the same kind of reaction. Battle Academy iOS released for $20 and received the same kind of reaction. Legion iOS was $10 and received the same reaction. Whatever price we release at there will be people who think its too expensive. Those people assume if they wont pay the price the vast majority of other people are like them. This is clearly not true or the business would not be growing so fast.

We'll have to agree to disagree. I don't accept the points but don't want to spend any more time discussing it so I'll have to withdraw from this thread. 1 release a week doesn't happen by itself!


I'm sorry, but this seems inconsistent. You yourself claim that each game is different and is priced accordingly, and that your stable of games runs the gamut from incredibly complex and pricey to accessible for newcomers and relatively cheap. In short, you already admit that you place a differing value on each of your games. It hardly seems inconsistent, then, that people will consider a game cheaper than your most expensive game to be overpriced if it is priced higher than they believe the worth of the game to be. One does not sell Pac-Man for eighty dollars on release, and one does not sell Call of Duty for five dollars on release. To claim then that complaints about price will always exist when the argument is that there is a clear pattern of overpricing in all sectors seems disingenuous.

I say again, might I add, that there is no contradiction between the statements "Matrix Games is currently growing fast" and "Matrix Games could grow far faster if they priced lower." Please do not dismiss an argument proposing improvements, then, simply because you have yet to go bankrupt.

Hondo: As it happens, I certainly do think that a good bit of healthy competition is just the kick in the pants Matrix needs to come awake to the realities of the modern marketplace. As it stands, without competition, they are free to do almost whatever they want and still call it successful. Having a direct competitor would certainly help shake up some preconceptions. I for one am very much in favor.

(in reply to IainMcNeil)
Post #: 419
RE: Pricing Suggestion - 9/26/2013 12:28:37 PM   
Maesphil74

 

Posts: 93
Joined: 4/10/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Slitherine doesn't even share its sales numbers with its development teams. When we made WitP: AE, all we got was the money agreed upon. Fine by me.

quote:

Slitherine doesn't even share its sales numbers with its development teams. When we made WitP: AE, all we got was the money agreed upon. Fine by me.


Serious?
So you're saying you were paid a fixed amount that had no relation to sales figures?

So basically if Matrix sold 1 copy or 1.000.000 copies, you would have been paid the same amount?
That can't be right.

And also very strange as Matrix is telling us in this thread that they have to keep prices high, so they can make sure the devs get a fair renumeration for their work.
While according to your statement, the income Matrix generated, has no relation to the payment you receive.
Can somebody clarify this?

I was not planning to get involved in this discussion, but this is very strange (and unfair to the devs; Imagine they score a huge hit with a game and got paid a fixed amount based on a wrong market-forecast)
.
Baseline: of this discussion.
They set the price like they want
We buy if the price is ok with us.

Personnaly: 90 euro for a game (which seems to have performance issues) without a demo and no (independant) reviews?
No way.

All the best to the devs btw



(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 420
Page:   <<   < prev  12 13 [14] 15 16   next >   >>
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> RE: Pricing Suggestion Page: <<   < prev  12 13 [14] 15 16   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.143