RE: Business Model

RE: Business Model (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion

Message

diablo1 -> RE: Business Model (1/9/2011 9:31:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: V22 Osprey I found matrix through SPWAW. For a few years I was broke so I went looking for good freeware games. I came across SPWAW, though at first I thought it was a real-time top-down view war game like Close Combat because of the screenshots. Took a hours to finally download and I loaded it up. Boy was I surprised to discover it was a hex-based, turn based wargame. However I had spent hours downloading the game and didn't want it to all go to waste so I gave it a try anyway. I was hooked.[:)] Found my way to Matrix site and then found out about other games. Yeah that's it...I was trying to figure out how I found Matrixgames as well. It was good old SPWAW.

junk2drive -> RE: Business Model (1/9/2011 9:36:51 PM)
2001 PCGamer magazine had an article about SPWAW.

Arctic Blast -> RE: Business Model (1/9/2011 10:29:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Perturabo A lot of wargamers that I know are wargamers only because of a demo on cover CD or some game that they saw in a magazine or in store. That whole ghettoisation of Wargames thing is a very bad idea. There need to be new gamers to keep the show going. I'm pretty sure that a modern Close Combat successor could steal tons of players from a lot of more mainstream as it offers much more brutal action than abominations like RTT games. If they priced that new Close Combat at rates you are suggesting, the odds of actually getting new customers to come in would be zero. If you want them to try to enter the larger marketplace, that also means entering a more competitive marketplace. And throwing a game in to that market with your suggested $130 price point would result in crickets and laughter.

RangerX3X -> RE: Business Model (1/10/2011 1:01:58 AM)
This article tells you all you need to know. quote: GO: Are you concerned the higher pricing may put off both your loyal fans as well as potential newcomers to the series? ER: We're certainly aware of that possibility and we're watching the feedback and the sales closely. This is clearly not an introductory price, it's aimed at fairly hard core wargamers who are already familiar with the series. While I am glad that Matrix dropped the price from the initial offering, I am still somewhat distressed by a high asking price (even though I got it) and their obvious desire to sell to no one other than the "hard core wargamers". What company intentionally alienates potential customers? What are you people, a cult?

bairdlander2 -> RE: Business Model (1/10/2011 1:57:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Perturabo Modern wargames are severely underpriced taking in account how small and elite (let's not cheat ourselves, it's not like just anyone can play wargames. Such an intellectual entertainment naturally belongs to people who are able to earn reasonably high amounts of money) the market is. Realley?I only completed high school along with many others on this forum.I also made over 100k last year,so I guess I qualify to play your "intellectual entertainment".I guess someone unemployed or with a low income doesnt belong,"naturally".Glad to be part of your "elite" group.[:@]

Hertston -> RE: Business Model (1/10/2011 2:17:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RangerX3X What company intentionally alienates potential customers? The Ferrari analogy in that piece is a good one. In the context of sports cars the answer to that question is obvious; any customer is welcome who has the money the pay the price that in the manufacturer's opinion will cover costs and maximise profits. I can't afford a Ferrari and probably never will be able to even if I wanted one, but I don't consider that the company is 'intentionally alienating' me!

RangerX3X -> RE: Business Model (1/10/2011 3:20:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hertston quote: ORIGINAL: RangerX3X What company intentionally alienates potential customers? The Ferrari analogy in that piece is a good one. In the context of sports cars the answer to that question is obvious; any customer is welcome who has the money the pay the price that in the manufacturer's opinion will cover costs and maximise profits. I can't afford a Ferrari and probably never will be able to even if I wanted one, but I don't consider that the company is 'intentionally alienating' me! The Ferrari argument does not hold water on two specific fronts: 1) Price & 2) Quality. 1) Price - If we assume the average price of a Ferrari is around $200,000 and the average price of a new Honda is $25,000, then by comparison BftB should be priced around $400 compared to a $50 "average" retail game. While that price may sit well with the elitest arogant snob Perturabo, it is beyond unrealistic. 2) Quality - There are many that would argue - and do so on these very forums - that BftB has its issues, and to sum up several posts, is an overpriced mission pack at the most. No matter how you cut it, there is no way that any game that Matrix is part of is that much better than an "average" retail game to justify a Ferrari analogy.

Perturabo -> RE: Business Model (1/10/2011 2:11:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arctic Blast quote: ORIGINAL: Perturabo A lot of wargamers that I know are wargamers only because of a demo on cover CD or some game that they saw in a magazine or in store. That whole ghettoisation of Wargames thing is a very bad idea. There need to be new gamers to keep the show going. I'm pretty sure that a modern Close Combat successor could steal tons of players from a lot of more mainstream as it offers much more brutal action than abominations like RTT games. If they priced that new Close Combat at rates you are suggesting, the odds of actually getting new customers to come in would be zero. If you want them to try to enter the larger marketplace, that also means entering a more competitive marketplace. And throwing a game in to that market with your suggested $130 price point would result in crickets and laughter. Close Combat successor could either be a mainstream AAA game with some cinematic qualities sold to mass market or a game aimed mostly at CC grogs. quote: ORIGINAL: bairdlander quote: ORIGINAL: Perturabo Modern wargames are severely underpriced taking in account how small and elite (let's not cheat ourselves, it's not like just anyone can play wargames. Such an intellectual entertainment naturally belongs to people who are able to earn reasonably high amounts of money) the market is. Realley?I only completed high school along with many others on this forum.I also made over 100k last year,so I guess I qualify to play your "intellectual entertainment".I guess someone unemployed or with a low income doesnt belong,"naturally".Glad to be part of your "elite" group.[:@] So, games should available to everyone regardless of their incomes?

NefariousKoel -> RE: Business Model (1/10/2011 5:13:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sarge quote: ORIGINAL: Perturabo I think that you, guys should raise prices of games to about 130$ -150$. It's a perfect price for hardcore games - with monster games like BftB and WitE costing 165$. quote: ORIGINAL: Terminus What, you actually LIKE hearing the endless whining about $80 games? No thanks. Good Lord ..........[8\|] Matrix would last all of a week with you 'n Termite in charge. Yeah. It never fails, you can always find some terrible ideas on the web. [:D]

bairdlander2 -> RE: Business Model (1/10/2011 6:22:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Perturabo quote: ORIGINAL: Arctic Blast quote: ORIGINAL: Perturabo A lot of wargamers that I know are wargamers only because of a demo on cover CD or some game that they saw in a magazine or in store. That whole ghettoisation of Wargames thing is a very bad idea. There need to be new gamers to keep the show going. I'm pretty sure that a modern Close Combat successor could steal tons of players from a lot of more mainstream as it offers much more brutal action than abominations like RTT games. If they priced that new Close Combat at rates you are suggesting, the odds of actually getting new customers to come in would be zero. If you want them to try to enter the larger marketplace, that also means entering a more competitive marketplace. And throwing a game in to that market with your suggested $130 price point would result in crickets and laughter. Close Combat successor could either be a mainstream AAA game with some cinematic qualities sold to mass market or a game aimed mostly at CC grogs. quote: ORIGINAL: bairdlander quote: ORIGINAL: Perturabo Modern wargames are severely underpriced taking in account how small and elite (let's not cheat ourselves, it's not like just anyone can play wargames. Such an intellectual entertainment naturally belongs to people who are able to earn reasonably high amounts of money) the market is. Realley?I only completed high school along with many others on this forum.I also made over 100k last year,so I guess I qualify to play your "intellectual entertainment".I guess someone unemployed or with a low income doesnt belong,"naturally".Glad to be part of your "elite" group.[:@] So, games should available to everyone regardless of their incomes? They shouldnt cost upwards of $160 as you are suggesting.PC strategy/wargames are not "elite" or "belong" to people based on "natural intellect",high income or socio-economic status.Your arrogant statements imply this.[:-]BTW,can you pass me the grey puopon?[:D]

PJJ -> RE: Business Model (1/10/2011 6:55:33 PM)
I rarely take part in these discussions here, but now I feel the need to do so. I mean, somebody is seriously suggesting that games should be restricted to a certain 'elite' group of people only? Wow! And here I thought we were living in the 21st century, not the 18th... Perhaps we should have our IQ tested and give proof of our income level before being allowed to purchase games? Could something like that be added to the Plimus payment system? [:'(]

Hertston -> RE: Business Model (1/10/2011 7:19:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RangerX3X The Ferrari argument does not hold water on two specific fronts: 1) Price & 2) Quality. 1) OK, pick the car of your choice costing $40-50k rather than $25,000. Problem solved. 2} As above, although I suspect that when it comes to avoiding 'issues' that actually stop you driving from A to B, the Honda is a better choice! quote: No matter how you cut it, there is no way that any game that Matrix is part of is that much better than an "average" retail game to justify a Ferrari analogy. If the garage had run out of Ferraris, I could always buy a Lamborghini or an Aston Martin without compromising. What games do you suggest I replace BtfB, WitE or WitP with so I could say the same? Exactly the same goes for Steel Beasts Pro (at $125). There is no alternative. One further point. Consider games that have more than one 'edition', offering reduced features for a reduced price; MS Flight Simulator and Storm Eagle's Jutland spring to mind. How many genre fans (not obsessives, just fans) didn't buy the 'Professional' version? Only difference with the Matrix premium titles is that they didn't bother with the cheap versions - as they knew perfectly well nobody would buy them if they did.

Perturabo -> RE: Business Model (1/10/2011 7:37:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bairdlander quote: ORIGINAL: Perturabo quote: ORIGINAL: Arctic Blast quote: ORIGINAL: Perturabo A lot of wargamers that I know are wargamers only because of a demo on cover CD or some game that they saw in a magazine or in store. That whole ghettoisation of Wargames thing is a very bad idea. There need to be new gamers to keep the show going. I'm pretty sure that a modern Close Combat successor could steal tons of players from a lot of more mainstream as it offers much more brutal action than abominations like RTT games. If they priced that new Close Combat at rates you are suggesting, the odds of actually getting new customers to come in would be zero. If you want them to try to enter the larger marketplace, that also means entering a more competitive marketplace. And throwing a game in to that market with your suggested $130 price point would result in crickets and laughter. Close Combat successor could either be a mainstream AAA game with some cinematic qualities sold to mass market or a game aimed mostly at CC grogs. quote: ORIGINAL: bairdlander quote: ORIGINAL: Perturabo Modern wargames are severely underpriced taking in account how small and elite (let's not cheat ourselves, it's not like just anyone can play wargames. Such an intellectual entertainment naturally belongs to people who are able to earn reasonably high amounts of money) the market is. Realley?I only completed high school along with many others on this forum.I also made over 100k last year,so I guess I qualify to play your "intellectual entertainment".I guess someone unemployed or with a low income doesnt belong,"naturally".Glad to be part of your "elite" group.[:@] So, games should available to everyone regardless of their incomes? They shouldnt cost upwards of $160 as you are suggesting.PC strategy/wargames are not "elite" or "belong" to people based on "natural intellect",high income or socio-economic status.Your arrogant statements imply this. I assume that anyone who can play a hardcore wargame has enough patience to save up 18 minimal hourly wages buy it. It's not an unreasonable assumption since it works with gaming market here and still gives 10+ x more hours of entertainment. Or are you suggesting that every human being has some kind of a right to be able to easily buy a wargame and that maximum amount of work for it should be 7 hours?

bairdlander2 -> RE: Business Model (1/10/2011 8:01:16 PM)
I never said anything remotely like that.But you did state that " wargames are severely underpriced taking in account how small and elite (let's not cheat ourselves, it's not like just anyone can play wargames. Such an intellectual entertainment naturally belongs to people who are able to earn reasonably high amounts of money)."Which implys that this form of entertainment is for "elite" and "belongs" to only certain members of society.Statements such as these are very arrogant and untrue.Why dont you develop and sell your own pc wargames,charge a high price for your "elite" customers with "natural intellect" and report back to us.

Anthropoid -> RE: Business Model (1/10/2011 8:16:36 PM)
I don't understand why people are so entranced by low priced games. I generally find that, I get what I pay for, with some exceptions at both ends of the continuum. Unless you are basically seeking to buy _too many_ games, I don't see how a difference of 50% or so in price really makes a difference to your consumer satisfaction? I can barely get full use out of the ten-or-so games I've bought in the last year-or-so, let alone if I had "been able" to buy an additioanl 5 or 6 because they were so cheap. In fact, I could probably buy as many games as I want (well, almost, the wife makes good money after all [;)]), but so what? There are plenty of games on my machine that I bought for $15 or $20 that I have yet to "finish!" If prices were truly outlandish (like $130 or $150 [:D] ) then putting pressure on distributors to lower prices might be worthwhile, but as it is, I'd like to see them RAISE prices across the board. Charge us a little more money, and put more effort into development, that is what I'd like to see happen = better games overall. There are just too damn many mediocre games. This is not so much true of Matrix, but it seems true of gaming in general.

wworld7 -> RE: Business Model (1/10/2011 9:25:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PJJ I rarely take part in these discussions here, but now I feel the need to do so. I mean, somebody is seriously suggesting that games should be restricted to a certain 'elite' group of people only? Wow! And here I thought we were living in the 21st century, not the 18th... Perhaps we should have our IQ tested and give proof of our income level before being allowed to purchase games? Could something like that be added to the Plimus payment system? [:'(] No need for 21st century technology. Use a simple 17th century one instead. Hold any non-Irish prospective buyer under water for 30 minutes and/if he or she survives the purchase is approved. Note: For all Irish prospective buyers substitute BEER for water and proceed as above.[:D][:D][:D]

warspite1 -> RE: Business Model (1/10/2011 9:59:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Perturabo .......let's not cheat ourselves, it's not like just anyone can play wargames. Such an intellectual entertainment naturally belongs to people who are able to earn reasonably high amounts of money..... Warspite1 Ahh..now I know why I'm so rubbish at these wargames [:D]

ilovestrategy -> RE: Business Model (1/10/2011 11:47:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Perturabo Modern wargames are severely underpriced taking in account how small and elite (let's not cheat ourselves, it's not like just anyone can play wargames. I thought about this while playing Storm over the Pacific last night. Exactly which wargame is it that not anyone can play? WitP? Anyone can learn to play that. All you have to do is go through trial and error to learn the game mechanics. There's no special intelligence involved. Maybe you mean boardgames? I played Starfleet Battles for over 10 years. The rules alone are three books and that's the core game. And I'm no rocket scientist. I'm just an average Joe. Learning how to play a wargame, computer or board, doesn't require some special IQ. Just a desire to learn. My wife speaks three languages fluently and runs a catering service as a side job. But I cannot get her near a wargame at gunpoint. She has no desire for it. Anyone can play a wargame. I'll end this post with a totally OFF TOPIC remark. It's 1943 in Storm of the Pacific and my carriers that I ordered are finally coming into play. Tojo and Yamamato are gonna pay for chasing me all over the Pacific for over a year. [sm=00000023.gif][sm=00000055.gif][sm=00000106.gif][sm=Evil-210.gif][sm=sterb020.gif][sm=sterb032.gif][sm=Tank-fahr09.gif][sm=sterb003.gif]

Arctic Blast -> RE: Business Model (1/10/2011 11:52:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Perturabo Close Combat successor could either be a mainstream AAA game with some cinematic qualities sold to mass market or a game aimed mostly at CC grogs. And again, at a $150 price tag it wouldn't be a mainstream AAA title because people would laugh at a game priced at triple what other mainstream titles are. It would flop.

V22 Osprey -> RE: Business Model (1/11/2011 12:03:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arctic Blast quote: ORIGINAL: Perturabo Close Combat successor could either be a mainstream AAA game with some cinematic qualities sold to mass market or a game aimed mostly at CC grogs. And again, at a $150 price tag it wouldn't be a mainstream AAA title because people would laugh at a game priced at triple what other mainstream titles are. It would flop. Not if it comes with a remote control car:[8\|] [image]local://upfiles/28875/C7B489C014CA414787DE9465E568174D.jpg[/image]

ilovestrategy -> RE: Business Model (1/11/2011 12:26:20 AM)
$150. Point of principal alone would keep me from paying $150 for a computer game.

bairdlander2 -> RE: Business Model (1/11/2011 12:38:38 AM)
The idea that pc wargames should cost more because wargamers are "elite" and require higher intellect to play is absurd.Equating higher intellect (I also think this implies higher education) with income earning potential is also absurd.I know of many university degree holders that are unemployed as well as many people who didnt get a higher education that make 150k a year.

Yogi the Great -> RE: Business Model (1/11/2011 12:42:02 AM)
You have to be brilliant, handsome, athletic, affluent, entertaining, desirable, stylish, honest, fair, knowledgeable, relevant, rich, and an all around top notch good guy in order to play computer wargames. Thats my story and I'm sticking to it! [:'(]

ilovestrategy -> RE: Business Model (1/11/2011 3:00:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yogi the Great You have to be brilliant, handsome, athletic, affluent, entertaining, desirable, stylish, honest, fair, knowledgeable, relevant, rich, and an all around top notch good guy in order to play computer wargames. Thats my story and I'm sticking to it! [:'(] I bow to your wisdom! [&o][:D]

jomni -> RE: Business Model (1/11/2011 4:37:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: diablo1 Yeah that's it...I was trying to figure out how I found Matrixgames as well. It was good old SPWAW. Me too.

mjk428 -> RE: Business Model (1/11/2011 5:48:20 AM)
Matrix Games put themselves on the map by reworking a couple of great Grigsby games and giving them away. Now we've got people here advocating that Matrix make themselves exclusive to the rich & uber-smart. "Dance with who brung ya".

Prince of Eckm�hl -> RE: Business Model (1/11/2011 6:01:08 AM)
I don't particularly care how much a game costs, so long as the quality is there. By quality, I mean a well-coded game that's passed a reasonable QA regime. Those comments made, the last game that I purchased from Matrix was BftB. As of yet, in its wake, there are no Matrix boats on the horizon.[:(]

bairdlander2 -> RE: Business Model (1/11/2011 6:16:28 AM)
I bought BftB as well.Put in about 10 hours then quit.WitE I've put in about 50+ hours.WitP maybe 20,before I got tired of running logistics BORING.HOI2 maybe 200+.CEaW about 30 minutes total waste of money there.All the Close Combat series I did all scenarios both sides so got my money's worth there.But Im sticking with WitE,probably my favourite out of all of them.So overall the biggest wastes of money for me were WitP and possibly BftB,but not realley cuz I will most likely pick it up again.As I've said in all these price complaint threads,do some reasearch,read some reviews,read what the consensus is here on forums,try a demo if one is available and be wise with your decisions.Think of the purchases as books since Matrix is a publisher.I doubt there are forums for Random House with people saying the prices are too high.Its like that,certain developers,like certain authors have made a name for themselves because of quality releases and they have the right to charge more for their product,just as well known authors usually charge more for their books.

GaryChildress -> RE: Business Model (1/11/2011 9:09:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Perturabo Such an intellectual entertainment naturally belongs to people who are able to earn reasonably high amounts of money) the market is. Wargamers make lots of money? I thought many of us were just pimple faced "geeks" who stay up all night playing computer games and then go into work late the next day. Little did I know we are part of the movers and shakers in society! [X(]

diablo1 -> RE: Business Model (1/11/2011 12:05:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Gary Childress quote: ORIGINAL: Perturabo Such an intellectual entertainment naturally belongs to people who are able to earn reasonably high amounts of money) the market is. Wargamers make lots of money? I thought many of us were just pimple faced "geeks" who stay up all night playing computer games and then go into work late the next day. Little did I know we are part of the movers and shakers in society! [X(] Learn something new everyday don't we Gary? So, how's that job at Burger King treatin yah?[:)]

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.859375