Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Is $69.99(US) too much for a game??

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Is $69.99(US) too much for a game?? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Is $69.99(US) too much for a game?? - 10/17/2003 2:55:24 AM   
Penguin

 

Posts: 8
Joined: 10/1/2003
Status: offline 		According to Amazon.com, the release price for War in the Pacific will be 69.99. Does anyone feel any price resistance at that level?? Or will it be worth it for the intended scope of the game? Is that going to be the new price level for games overall?? I am cringing at the thought of $100 for games down the line... Very hard to hide in the grocery budget...lol

I hardly ever buy a "version I" game; the "version II or III" generally have the bugs worked out and show that the early versions were competently executed and well-received in the marketplace. Usually I wait to buy till the $49 game goes down to $29. By then the major patches are out, and the initial hype has died down and people are more realistic about it. I broke that pattern with Master of Orion 3, because of all the hype and paid 49.99, plus 19.99 for the strat guide. Now it is 19.99 and 9.99, respectively, a mere 6 months later. I coulda bought a whole 'nother game to play, if I had waited six months. :( And many reviewers decided that Galactic Civs was probably the better game anyway. Making your customers feel stupid is not a healthy long term outlook for any industry...
Post #: 1
- 10/17/2003 3:00:57 AM   
madflava13


Posts: 1530
Joined: 2/7/2001
From: Alexandria, VA
Status: offline 		I don't think it's too much... A couple of reasons why:
1. As you mentioned, the massive scope of this game, plus the inclusion of several UV sized games as well (as scenarios) makes the price worth it.
2. Matrix/2by3 aren't expecting to sell 7 million copies, so where the Sims can be priced more cheaply, WiTP cannot.
3. The size of the companies involved means that a higher price needs to be set. Where EA games can take a risk of a loss because of the diversity of their products, Matrix/2by3 cannot.
4. I've been waiting for PacWar's successor for years now, so basically any price is worth it for me.

Just my two cents...

_____________________________

"The Paraguayan Air Force's request for spraying subsidies was not as Paraguayan as it were..."

(in reply to Penguin)
Post #: 2
- 10/17/2003 7:44:35 AM   
2ndACR


Posts: 5665
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline 		For WITP heck yes. For any other game no. Matrix/ 2by3 have proven that they do try to get it right and fully support their games. Unlike some other companies out their.

Sorry I meant to say that I will pay whatever they charge for WITP. But not any other game.

(in reply to Penguin)
Post #: 3
- 10/17/2003 7:50:37 PM   
Sonny

 

Posts: 2008
Joined: 4/3/2002
Status: offline 		$69.99?? A bargain. I thought it was going to sell for $79.99.

They could charge $100 and I would buy it (hope they don't read this and jack up the price). On a $/hr basis UV has given me more for my money than almost any other game. I suspect WitP will return a similar value (even if I only play one campaign game!).

If you want a Med. game then they need the $upport.

They support their games so -

Gotta support the guys who produce the games you love.

_____________________________

Quote from Snigbert -

"If you mess with the historical accuracy, you're going to have ahistorical outcomes."

"I'll say it again for Sonny's sake: If you mess with historical accuracy, you're going to have
ahistorical outcomes. "

(in reply to Penguin)
Post #: 4
- 10/21/2003 3:55:01 PM   
Reg


Posts: 2787
Joined: 5/26/2000
From: NSW, Australia
Status: offline 		[QUOTE=Penguin]I hardly ever buy a "version I" game; the "version II or III" generally have the bugs worked out and show that the early versions were competently executed and well-received in the marketplace. Usually I wait to buy till the $49 game goes down to $29. By then the major patches are out, and the initial hype has died down and people are more realistic about it. [/QUOTE]Just a question. Where are all these patches going to come from if no one buys the first edition??? I will pay the money for what promises to be a good product in as I feel it will encourage more development in an area of my interest. What I do object to is paying exorbitant sums to the currency exchange bankers!! (insert less than complentary description here). Why??? Because I end up paying $$$$ and none of the extra goes to the guys who actually do the work in producing the product!!!!

_____________________________

Cheers,
Reg.

(One day I will learn to spell - or check before posting....)
Uh oh, Firefox has a spell checker!! What excuse can I use now!!!

(in reply to Penguin)
Post #: 5
- 10/22/2003 8:05:34 AM   
Zakhal


Posts: 2494
Joined: 1/4/2001
From: Jyväskylä, Finland
Status: offline 		Well it was just few months after i had got my first pc, a brand new 486 when i saw this two page full review of the game in our local magazine. After reading it as a 14 year old i was totally sold. I had studied ww2 (europe) before but only read one book about pacific war. All i can say i saved my money and bought the game. After six years nothing compared. There was *no* *any* *other* *game* with the same scale. And i was still playing.

Now its bin TEN YEARS and you ask whether i "might" pay $70 for the ONLY true "sequel" of this game? WELL YES I MIGHT ;)

(i have played boardgames too)

_____________________________

"99.9% of all internet arguments are due to people not understanding someone else's point. The other 0.1% is arguing over made up statistics."- unknown poster
"Those who dont read history are destined to repeat it."– Edmund Burke

(in reply to Penguin)
Post #: 6
- 11/4/2003 9:56:37 PM   
Hornblower


Posts: 1361
Joined: 9/10/2003
From: New York'er relocated to Chicago
Status: offline 		I don't think $69.99 is too much to ask, given the massive scale that WiTP looks to be, based on the comments of the testers. I spent $49.99 on UV, and for the last 18 months its been the only computer game I've played. Personally I think it was $49.99 very well spent. More so when I think of the amount of game time I get out of it. If it wasn't for UV I would have had to watch all those reality shows with the wife- ICk...... :(

(in reply to Penguin)
Post #: 7
RIO - 11/12/2003 12:53:34 AM   
siRkid


Posts: 6650
Joined: 1/29/2002
From: Orland FL
Status: offline 		Return on Investment is what we use to determine if a training simulator for the navy is worth the price to build, install, run, and maintain. To figure out the ROI of WitP take the price of the game and divide it by the number of hours you think you will be playing to see what you will pay per hour of entertainment. Then compare this to the price you pay for other forms of entertainment.

I think when you do the math you will see that it is a bargin. :D

_____________________________

Former War in the Pacific Test Team Manager and Beta Tester for War in the East.


(in reply to Penguin)
Post #: 8
- 11/16/2003 2:26:48 AM   
emorbius44

 

Posts: 97
Joined: 5/15/2002
Status: offline 		[QUOTE=Penguin]According to Amazon.com, the release price for War in the Pacific will be 69.99. Does anyone feel any price resistance at that level?? Or will it be worth it for the intended scope of the game? Is that going to be the new price level for games overall?? I am cringing at the thought of $100 for games down the line... Very hard to hide in the grocery budget...lol >>>>


$69.99 is not too high at all. Consider the following:

1. I started computer games with Carrier Force back in 1983. That was an SSI game and listed for $60. Consider 20 years of inflation and what $60 would be in 2003 dollars.
2. Back in those days games were much simpler and usually designed by one or two people (Grigsby, Keating, Landrey and Krogel, etc) and they could grind out three or four games a year. Now it takes several people to do one game and usually a couple of years or more to do that.
3. The wargame market really hasn't expanded that much over the last 20 years and alot of games that used to be available in a malls or retail stores are no longer available. i.e. unit sales are not really compensating for declining revenue per game and increased development cost per game.

Games can't be made if it's not economically feasable to do it. These guys have to make a living and frankly for $70 you're going to get months if not years of game play out of it. They earn and deserve every penny they get.

Bob

(in reply to Penguin)
Post #: 9
RE: - 2/6/2004 4:47:47 AM   
Rocco

 

Posts: 282
Joined: 10/20/2002
From: IL, USA
Status: offline 		After enjoying UV as much as I have and still am, I don't fear paying 70 bucks. I will gladly lay it down.

Rocco

(in reply to emorbius44)
Post #: 10
RE: RE: - 2/6/2004 5:09:14 AM   
pasternakski


Posts: 6565
Joined: 6/29/2002
Status: offline 		Seventy bucks is okay with me.

Actually, I'm just posting to find out what my posts look like now.

_____________________________

Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.

(in reply to Rocco)
Post #: 11
RE: RE: - 2/6/2004 5:29:11 AM   
Nomad


Posts: 5905
Joined: 9/5/2001
From: West Yellowstone, Montana
Status: offline 		Ditto Pasternakski.

(in reply to pasternakski)
Post #: 12
RE: RE: - 2/6/2004 8:15:08 AM   
stubby331


Posts: 268
Joined: 10/24/2001
From: Perth, Western Australia
Status: offline 		Hi guys,
Are we missing about a month of posts or am I going nuts?

(these new smilkeys are great!)

(in reply to Nomad)
Post #: 13
RE: RE: - 2/6/2004 3:07:33 PM   
mbatch729


Posts: 537
Joined: 5/23/2001
From: North Carolina
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: stubby331

Hi guys,
Are we missing about a month of posts or am I going nuts?


While not qualified to comment on your sanity, or lack there of, it does seem a good chunk of the forum history was lost due to a hacker attack on the Matrix boards. Remove the b*astard's b*lls, I say!

< Message edited by mbatch729 -- 2/6/2004 8:10:33 AM >

_____________________________

Later,
FC3(SW) Batch
USS Iowa

(in reply to stubby331)
Post #: 14
RE: RE: - 2/6/2004 5:51:46 PM   
Burkowski


Posts: 56
Joined: 9/9/2001
From: West Virginia SRA
Status: offline 		I just finally got back to reading recent posts after the hacker episode... and I have been thinking about Penguin's initial comment/question about price sensitivity and responses to that... got me to thinking about trying to nail down in my own mind about exactly why I do not feel any qualms about forking over the seventy bucks eventually for WITP...

Part of it is, as Kid said, a decent feeling about "return on investment," but there's more to it than that.... made me think about the old term "replayability" left over from the days of board wargaming... but it's even more than that, too... over the years, since Tactics II and Gettysburg and on into the SPI era, I have always gravitated toward the larger, even monster-sized games. I suspect there are lots of other folks like that, too... seems to me that the reason for that is that we share, at some gut level, a desire and an appreciation for complexity, almost for its own sake... the warfare simulation is the vehicle that delivers it for us, and that appeal is large, of course, but the intellectual challenge of managing (sometimes successfully) a large, strategic-scale enterprise is really the thing, isn't it?

Through all my years of wargaming, whenever I had the chance to give a preference (remember those "What would you like to see in future games?" cards in the wargame box?) I always said I wanted a strategic-scale Pacific war game with all of the possible moving parts to manage... it's the intellectual, almost academic nature of the big, demanding beast that appeals to me... which is why Pacific War was and still is so appealing and why UV has been consuming... UV was a great teaser, but in my rich fantasy world while "in the game" I can't help but wonder what's going on west of Port Moresby and north of Truk...

So, that's why the $ 70.00 is just fine... it's not just a game, not even just a simulation we aspire to... it's the challenge of long-term competence in warfare management and it doesn't happen or not happen overnight.... it takes months and maybe much more... bring it on!

Burkowski

(in reply to stubby331)
Post #: 15
RE: RE: - 2/6/2004 9:56:36 PM   
Sonny

 

Posts: 2008
Joined: 4/3/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Burkowski

.......................

but it's even more than that, too... over the years, since Tactics II and Gettysburg and on into the SPI era, I have always gravitated toward the larger, even monster-sized games. I suspect there are lots of other folks like that, too................

Burkowski


You can certainly count me in that group. We used to make tons of cardboard counters for the Gettysburg game trying to get the feeling of a huge game with control of the smallest units. Unfortunately we used the same board and all we got was a slugfest with counters stacked everywhere.

_____________________________

Quote from Snigbert -

"If you mess with the historical accuracy, you're going to have ahistorical outcomes."

"I'll say it again for Sonny's sake: If you mess with historical accuracy, you're going to have
ahistorical outcomes. "

(in reply to Burkowski)
Post #: 16
RE: RE: - 2/6/2004 10:03:54 PM   
MikeH1952

 

Posts: 92
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: Salisbury England
Status: offline 		$70 is OK by me, especially with the £ at £1,80 plus
I cant wait to get the game, hope its out this summer
These new smileys are a lot of fun. It's a shame that all my posts seem to have disappeared!

(in reply to Sonny)
Post #: 17
RE: Is $69.99(US) too much for a game?? - 2/7/2004 2:42:11 PM   
whiteoak

 

Posts: 3
Joined: 8/20/2002
Status: offline 		I ran across my receipt for Gary Grigsby's 'Pacific War' (one of my all-time favorite games...which I still play occassionally) which I bought at Babbage's on December 25, 1992...for $64.99. So I don't think $70 is too much in 2004 considering how much more you get for your money in today's games.

(in reply to Penguin)
Post #: 18
RE: Is $69.99(US) too much for a game?? - 2/7/2004 3:45:03 PM   
stevel40831


Posts: 83
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		I can spend that much at the local bar in one night and have nothing to show for it but a hangover and a fake phone number! This would be money well spent.

Steve

(in reply to whiteoak)
Post #: 19
RE: Is $69.99(US) too much for a game?? - 2/8/2004 12:08:43 AM   
Cmdrcain


Posts: 1161
Joined: 8/21/2000
From: Rebuilding FLA, Busy Repairing!
Status: offline 		$70 makes me cring, basically because those on linited budgets have only so much spare cash.

However its not unsimiliar to other nich games like a baseball one I play which new buyers pay a similar amount, through for updated versions pay a lower upgrade price.

$70 through might mean going a bit hungry unless budget and save the cost over a few months , its easy to plunk down $70 if have a well paying job, but for those on pensions, retiremebt incomes and limited income it hits hard.

I too wait around for many games to drop to the $20-$10 level, where they come out in just a jewel case..

If it goes out at $70 I'll have to consider other needs first.. rent, Food, other costs of living.

Might also at that price wait to see how it is with others who buy and try it..

My Top limit usually for a game is $40, over that mark it impacts other needs.

Companys need make a profit but I do question if the prices especially for mass marketed games are realistic, too high a price and a good game can flop if its priced too high that buyers resist buying..


(in reply to stevel40831)
Post #: 20
RE: Is $69.99(US) too much for a game?? - 2/8/2004 12:21:24 AM   
Cmdrcain


Posts: 1161
Joined: 8/21/2000
From: Rebuilding FLA, Busy Repairing!
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: whiteoak

I ran across my receipt for Gary Grigsby's 'Pacific War' (one of my all-time favorite games...which I still play occassionally) which I bought at Babbage's on December 25, 1992...for $64.99. So I don't think $70 is too much in 2004 considering how much more you get for your money in today's games.



I got Pac war for around $40-50 back then, via I believe mailordered discounted seller, Babbages? Would be like a Dept store? So Paid full retail

Also don't forget back then computers STILL were relatevely new and the BASE of computer users was still small, now the Base of users is HUGE and so the customer market is much larger then back then, its not as simple as pulling out an old receipt and comparing prices.. also Money was worth more so Pac war actually was high priced for those times if paid full retail.

For me $70 will be pushing it if a game comes out at $80-100 forget it.

(in reply to whiteoak)
Post #: 21
RE: Is $69.99(US) too much for a game?? - 2/9/2004 10:39:44 PM   
Damien Thorn

 

Posts: 1107
Joined: 7/24/2003
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: whiteoak

I ran across my receipt for Gary Grigsby's 'Pacific War' (one of my all-time favorite games...which I still play occassionally) which I bought at Babbage's on December 25, 1992...for $64.99. So I don't think $70 is too much in 2004 considering how much more you get for your money in today's games.


Babbage's is open on Christmas Day?

(in reply to whiteoak)
Post #: 22
RE: Is $69.99(US) too much for a game?? - 2/9/2004 11:20:19 PM   
foliveti


Posts: 371
Joined: 9/12/2002
From: Buffalo, NY
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Damien Thorn

quote:

ORIGINAL: whiteoak

I ran across my receipt for Gary Grigsby's 'Pacific War' (one of my all-time favorite games...which I still play occassionally) which I bought at Babbage's on December 25, 1992...for $64.99. So I don't think $70 is too much in 2004 considering how much more you get for your money in today's games.


Babbage's is open on Christmas Day?

That must be why he paid $25 more than I did for the special Christmas service.

_____________________________

Frank

(in reply to Damien Thorn)
Post #: 23
RE: Is $69.99(US) too much for a game?? - 2/9/2004 11:44:29 PM   
Sonny

 

Posts: 2008
Joined: 4/3/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Cmdrcain

$70 makes me cring, basically because those on linited budgets have only so much spare cash.

However its not unsimiliar to other nich games like a baseball one I play which new buyers pay a similar amount, through for updated versions pay a lower upgrade price.

$70 through might mean going a bit hungry unless budget and save the cost over a few months , its easy to plunk down $70 if have a well paying job, but for those on pensions, retiremebt incomes and limited income it hits hard.

I too wait around for many games to drop to the $20-$10 level, where they come out in just a jewel case..

If it goes out at $70 I'll have to consider other needs first.. rent, Food, other costs of living.

Might also at that price wait to see how it is with others who buy and try it..

My Top limit usually for a game is $40, over that mark it impacts other needs.

Companys need make a profit but I do question if the prices especially for mass marketed games are realistic, too high a price and a good game can flop if its priced too high that buyers resist buying..




What baseball game is it you play?

_____________________________

Quote from Snigbert -

"If you mess with the historical accuracy, you're going to have ahistorical outcomes."

"I'll say it again for Sonny's sake: If you mess with historical accuracy, you're going to have
ahistorical outcomes. "

(in reply to Cmdrcain)
Post #: 24
RE: Is $69.99(US) too much for a game?? - 2/10/2004 12:24:22 AM   
denisonh


Posts: 2194
Joined: 12/21/2001
From: Upstate SC
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Cmdrcain

[snip]

Companys need make a profit but I do question if the prices especially for mass marketed games are realistic, too high a price and a good game can flop if its priced too high that buyers resist buying..


[snip]


I would not neccessarily call War in the Pacific "mass marketed".

And average that out over the lifetime of the software. I have paid $40 for software that spent less than a month on the harddrive.

Uncommon Valor was purchased over 18 months ago, and I have 4 PBEMs games on going, and it averages out to a bargain for time played versus money spent. That is commonly referred to as value.

If anything at all like UV, WitP has tremendous potential to be a good "value" even at $70.

_____________________________


"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid" -SGT John M. Stryker, USMC

(in reply to Cmdrcain)
Post #: 25
RE: Is $69.99(US) too much for a game?? - 2/10/2004 1:58:07 AM   
Zeta16


Posts: 1199
Joined: 11/20/2002
From: Columbus. Ohio
Status: offline 		Just think of this everyone complains about gas price going up 10 cents, which for each fill up is some were between 1 and 2 dollars more. But then people will go out and buy name brands at stores while the generic food is just as good. People this is not a high amount for a game. People will pay 30 dollars to get their haircut, while you can get it done for 10 dollars just as good. The games that cost 40 dollars are not like this game. Yes most computer games do not cost very much, but most of these games are mass produced. WiTP is not for the mainstream market, thus the cost to break even. Also I will go on record that they do not break even on the game.

_____________________________

"Ours was the first revolution in the history of mankind that truly reversed the course of government, and with three little words: 'We the people.' 'We the people' tell the government what to do, it doesn't tell us." -Ronald Reagan

(in reply to denisonh)
Post #: 26
RE: Is $69.99(US) too much for a game?? - 2/11/2004 9:50:31 AM   
soeren

 

Posts: 69
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Bayern/Germany
Status: offline 		Just following this forum for the last year was worth that much money. It's entertaining, interesting and you learn something new every day, may it be about history, game design or software developement. A daily newspaper for a year costs more and ( with todays newspapers ) is much less interesting.

Soeren

(in reply to Penguin)
Post #: 27
RE: Is $69.99(US) too much for a game?? - 2/11/2004 6:00:05 PM   
Harald1050


Posts: 81
Joined: 9/30/2003
From: Wien
Status: offline 		Servus!

Completely agree with Soeren.
I also agree with the others that you have to pay 45 to 50 Euros for almost every game that is currently released. 70 USD are some 55 Euros recently. I don't know what the prize in Euros will be then, but the game is a very ambitious project, and you have to pay the one that work on that game and much more.
If you don't like these kind of games you won't even spend 30 Euros to buy, i guess. I also would not pay 30 Euros or even less for an 3D-RPG, cause i am not interested in playing such games.
We, who like playing UV, Korsun Pocket, etc., know the good work of the Matrix-people and therefore - if you liked e.g. UV - you will like WITP and pay that prize.

Gruß
Harald

(in reply to soeren)
Post #: 28
RE: Is $69.99(US) too much for a game?? - 2/11/2004 10:06:07 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline 		Last weekend I lost $260 bucks on a pair of kings. Spent $100 bucks on a bag of groceries and paid $30 to fill up my gas tank! If I get as much entertainment out of WITP as I did from UV, $69 seems like a pretty good deal.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Harald1050)
Post #: 29
RE: Is $69.99(US) too much for a game?? - 2/13/2004 6:27:10 AM   
Crowsfan

 

Posts: 9
Joined: 10/30/2003
From: Pennsylvania
Status: offline 		agree with all... the $50 I spent on UV was well worth the enjoyment and entertainment I received. So another $20 for the whole Pacific? No Brainer!

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Is $69.99(US) too much for a game?? Page: [1] 2   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

2.953