RE: Pricing Suggestion

RE: Pricing Suggestion (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion

Message

aaatoysandmore -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/30/2013 11:55:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dutchman55555 quote: ORIGINAL: Rtwfreak The minute Matrixgames starts to give deep discounts it when they will start on the spiral out of business because the smart shopper will start to wait on the bargain bin prices on the majority of products. Seems to me there are a number of "smart shoppers" who are giving their games a pass all together, and voicing it here, with the current model Matrix uses. There's no black or white, one model or the other, situation here. Steam has hundreds of games that start off full price ($40-$60), and remain that way for 6, 12, 18 months before there's a significant discount (33% or more). If the only shopper that Steam catered to was the deep discounter, patient waiter type, then these prices would be lower on release, or discounted within weeks. Obviously they're making money on full price sales, but once that "gotta have it" momentum is gone, and you want to sustain sales, discounting is one path to take. I don't think anyone here is demanding Matrix become a clone of Steam. But Steam works, and works well...surely there are lessons to take from Valve. Unless you want to see $90 become considered to be a normal, and later a bargain price here. The current Matrix model shows only the capacity for price rises on recent games. Even the discount codes for semi-recent games that loyal customers used to receive in their monthly newsletters have disappeared. Did you not see the price of Sid Meier's Ace Patrol when released? $9.99 and a $1.00 off to $8.99 almost immediately and then in a day or two it was down to $4.99 on Green Man Gaming. So yes some mainstream games are starting off less than these $40-$60 prices. Let's look at Magic the Gathering 2014 also $9.99 at release (I'm waiting on a bargain price on that one myself lol) The fact of the matter is Steam works the way it does business and apparently Matrix is working the way it does business. I owned a Hardware store in my life and I didn't stay in business giving stuff away. Of course I had some sales but you can bet my power tools remained pretty high. Not everybody is a smart shopper as well. You will just have an influx of them coming here if Matrix lowered their prices like Steam. A smart shopper isn't good for a business on the contrary they want everything 'cheap' and a good business minded person knows this. They also want quality too and the best for cheap. They are basically just cheapskapes (like some of our smart shoppers around here lol) Steam caters to "all" types of shoppers, they are like your big discount stores like Home Depot, Lowes, Walmarts, Targets. You're wanting Matrix to be like them but Matrix is more like your ACE hardware store, Albertsons, and Krogers maybe. They just don't get the traffic of Home Depot, Lowes, Walmarts, Targets, for one they don't have the parking spaces and for another they don't want it. You have to also understand the more consumers you have the more problems you have with them. It takes people to handle that much of a headache once again Matrix doesn't have that kind of employee base as a Walmart or Home Depot, etc. etc. So once again you are basically looking at everything with eyes wide shut. There's a lot more to pricing than meets the consumers eye than just the amount of the product. Everything in the equation costs money. Big businesses can afford it. Little niche stores like Matrix cannot. They need more support from us. So get out your wallet and fork it over. lol

dutchman55555 -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/1/2013 12:46:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: aaatoysandmore Did you not see the price of Sid Meier's Ace Patrol when released? $9.99 and a $1.00 off to $8.99 almost immediately and then in a day or two it was down to $4.99 on Green Man Gaming. So yes some mainstream games are starting off less than these $40-$60 prices. SMAP was first released, and did very well, on the iPad. Anything earned from a PC conversion is icing. Having said that, it doesn't offer anything near the content or complexity your usual $40-$60 game does. quote: ORIGINAL: aaatoysandmore I owned a Hardware store in my life and I didn't stay in business giving stuff away. Of course I had some sales but you can bet my power tools remained pretty high. Not everybody is a smart shopper as well. You will just have an influx of them coming here if Matrix lowered their prices like Steam. A smart shopper isn't good for a business on the contrary they want everything 'cheap' and a good business minded person knows this. They also want quality too and the best for cheap. They are basically just cheapskapes (like some of our smart shoppers around here lol) So (and trust me I'm not being facetious) Matrix caters to, and desires, no one but the stupid as customers? quote: ORIGINAL: aaatoysandmore Steam caters to "all" types of shoppers, they are like your big discount stores like Home Depot, Lowes, Walmarts, Targets. You're wanting Matrix to be like them but Matrix is more like your ACE hardware store, Albertsons, and Krogers maybe. They just don't get the traffic of Home Depot, Lowes, Walmarts, Targets, for one they don't have the parking spaces and for another they don't want it. So (and I'm not being deliberately obtuse) a business that opens itself to "all" shoppers stands to make less profit than a business that caters to 0.001% of them? quote: ORIGINAL: aaatoysandmore You have to also understand the more consumers you have the more problems you have with them. It takes people to handle that much of a headache once again Matrix doesn't have that kind of employee base as a Walmart or Home Depot, etc. etc. So once again you are basically looking at everything with eyes wide shut. There's a lot more to pricing than meets the consumers eye than just the amount of the product. Everything in the equation costs money. Big businesses can afford it. Little niche stores like Matrix cannot. They need more support from us. So get out your wallet and fork it over. lol So (and once again I'm serious here), Matrix could not expand slowly and gradually, gaining a larger customer base (and thus more money for staff, infrastructure and more expansion), and becoming healthier and thus furthering the hobby we all love? It must, absolutely must, follow the path it has chosen, which is regularly increasing the prices of their products, shrinking (certainly not expanding) the number of people in our hobby, which then leads to even higher future prices and a quite possible slip in quality as budgets are snipped? We have people here praising capitalism as Matrix looks at the very foundation of it and says "No, uh uh, we're fine with people walking away from our higher prices". They address discussions like the high price of their games, lack of discounts on very old product, the refusal to issue demo versions, and the release of products often resembling Beta versions with "We know what we are doing, we will not be swayed, you are wasting your breath", and you summarize with they need our support? They sure don't sound like they want it.

RockKahn -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/1/2013 1:42:03 AM)
Why are you so worried about Matrix not making mega profits? I hope they do well, but I'm not going to let their profit margin consume me. I don't think beating Matrix's business plan up on a forum is going to get you anywhere. It would probably be more professional if you'd write them a letter outlining your plan. If they're interested, you'll hear back. If not, it's time to move on. Maybe start your own game publishing company. If your ideas are sound, you'll do well.

dutchman55555 -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/1/2013 3:46:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RockKahn Why are you so worried about Matrix not making mega profits? I hope they do well, but I'm not going to let their profit margin consume me. There's no mega in my worries, sir. I don't expect, or hope, that Matrix will become the EA of the PC wargaming world. My fear, however, is that it will become the THQ of PC wargaming.

aaatoysandmore -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/1/2013 4:07:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dutchman55555 quote: ORIGINAL: RockKahn Why are you so worried about Matrix not making mega profits? I hope they do well, but I'm not going to let their profit margin consume me. There's no mega in my worries, sir. I don't expect, or hope, that Matrix will become the EA of the PC wargaming world. My fear, however, is that it will become the THQ of PC wargaming. The only thing man needs to fear is fear itself. A great man once said that you would do well to listen to it. I'm sure Matrixgames and Slitherine are not listening to you. lol

Aurelian -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/1/2013 4:12:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RockKahn Why are you so worried about Matrix not making mega profits? I hope they do well, but I'm not going to let their profit margin consume me. I don't think beating Matrix's business plan up on a forum is going to get you anywhere. It would probably be more professional if you'd write them a letter outlining your plan. If they're interested, you'll hear back. If not, it's time to move on. Maybe start your own game publishing company. If your ideas are sound, you'll do well. This bears repeating. (Not aimed at you :) ) To quote Ian from another thread: 1) Follow a business plan based on 13 years of running a successful company and over 20 years in the games industry. 2) Follow a business plan based on what a journalist and our fans (none of whom to my knowledge have ever made a game or run computer game publisher) suggest because we don't have the guts to follow our beliefs. *************************** It's real easy to criticize the pros from the safety of the stands or the TV. Put on the pads, get into the mud and muck, and prove you know what you're talking about.

histgamer -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/1/2013 4:39:30 AM)
Can we also dispell the myth that just because steam has 50 million customers every game sold there is way more successful than elsewhere? Steam is great but it's 50 million person customer base is smaller than the install bases on either the PS3 and Xbox360 (combined they have over 140 Million) and yet the console customer base wouldn't be a fit at all for Matrix. Many PC game companies go out of buisness even today in the mega discount high sales world. There are many success' on steam but there are also failures which don't get nearly as much press. Simply proposing lower you're prices and you're golden is a myth. It works for some, it doesn't work for some. The question is would it work for Matrix. The problem here is it's not possible for anyone to prove it will work for matrix. I think it's telling that Ageod tried to get their games on Steam and Steam refused to carry them. Clearly at the time anyway Steam didn't think their 50 million person customer base would want to play those types of games. Steam Declines Ageod If Steam didn't think the games would succeed then why are we so sure they would succeed now? Note: I'm not saying it's impossible I'm just saying people are so convinced racing to the bottom is the only way to survive, and it's not a forgone conclusion that they are right.

Challerain -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/1/2013 5:04:04 AM)
Didn't they also try and get Panzer Corps on Steam Greenlight and it failed?

histgamer -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/1/2013 5:07:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Challerain Didn't they also try and get Panzer Corps on Steam Greenlight and it failed? That's what they said. According to Iain I think something like 50% of the votes for the game were against it being included. Of course the tone of this thread is people wouldn't believe that but it's not like we have anything else to go on.

2ndACR -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/1/2013 6:28:59 AM)
Good grief this thread is still alive? Dang folks get it right, if you don't like the price don't buy it. If you don't like Matrix, well there is the door. Matrix has been around long enough now that they know what they are doing, and it is their business. I see the same threads in every game forum here upon a release. If they price at 19.95 folks ask "why so much". I have not bought a non Matrix game since I joined way back when. I generally bite my tongue on the price issues, but think I am on page 2-3 with a "geez Erik, getting up there" comment. I keep buying Matrix for the simple fact that I have yet to buy a game that was not supported long after release. Way longer than 90% of the other companies out there support their games. I have yet to be burned by Matrix on any game. I got burned horribly by Atari (prob no need to name that horrible release), I am not a CA fan in any way, I will not touch Steam to save my life. So I don't go to those locations and dang sure don't sit on their forum griping about them. Basically, everyone quit wearing out your keyboard over the issue, it is not going to change anything.

Hexagon -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/1/2013 9:30:05 AM)
Yep, Matrix has the "truth" and customers are wrong, and when Matrix do another step on the price and set 63 euros + taxes as the basic price for their games (sorry, i want say the games of others guys that they sell) we can apreciate more their job [:D] Is curious how some customers send their interests through the window to defend pay more for same products... "shut up and take my money" syndrome??? and man dont say is to support devs because i have serious doubts that devs see a single penny from the extra money we pay. And talking about support, i have a lot of games from Matrix and in some of them support is bad, i wait for some patches YEARS and one of them miss a patch in the begining of this year and you know what say matrix??? devs problem them for me is clear that Matrix sells games if games have good support is not thanks to matrix. EDIT: i dont defend see these games on Steam, i defend see a MODERN wayt o sell them, we talk about downloads, no physicall games and i dont see reduction in price for games that dont have production cost, no DVD boxes, printed manuals... for example now i need pay around 40 euros to buy an AGEOD game only download version when some years ago i pay 20 euros and have it in physicall version with printed manual translated to my language... 100% increase in price??? [:-]

Alchenar -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/1/2013 10:12:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 2ndACR Good grief this thread is still alive? Dang folks get it right, if you don't like the price don't buy it. If you don't like Matrix, well there is the door. Ok just on this - back when there were brick and mortar shops I could pick up a game, walk to the counter, say "You want how much?" and then put it back down and walk away. And the shopkeeper can see how many people do this. On the internet that just doesn't happen, so the only way to provide meaningful feedback to Matrix is one of these threads. Why haven't I bought CANO yet? 1) No Demo. 2) No reviews. 3) The price is extortionate. Now they know that for some people at least this is a problem. I don't want to 'walk out the door'. I do actually want Matrix and the developers to get my money. And that's why I think it's important that they're at least aware of why I haven't spent my money yet. Other people seem to think that this is greedy or entitled in some way, so we have these long threads where we try to explain that many of the reasons that Matrix give for their business practices have been proven not to be true by other bodies in the industry. Finally, these threads aren't pointless. The last big thread on prices resulted in the weekly sales, which have been going on long enough to indicate that despite everything Matrix claims about the magical Wargame sales model, actually there is a revenue bump from even the minor discounts they're going for.

aaatoysandmore -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/1/2013 10:21:40 AM)
quote: i defend see a MODERN wayt o sell them, we talk about downloads, no physicall games and i dont see reduction in price for games that dont have production cost, no DVD boxes, printed manuals... for example now i need pay around 40 euros to buy an AGEOD game only download version when some years ago i pay 20 euros and have it in physicall version with printed manual translated to my language... 100% increase in price??? What yer leaving out here is inflation. The prices went up due to production costs not because of reduction of cd's and manuals. If those things were still in games the prices would be much higher due to inflation. You'd be seeing $80-$100 games if they weren't digital. Look at the price for a boxed game and cost of shipping it's nearly $30 more. Same just about anywhere you shop and want a game box, cd, and colorful printed manual or even a black and white one and shipped to your door parcel mail. Go price some games physical at Battlefront. I was going to order Strategic Command II Gold and to have it all shipped to my front door was going to cost me $75 but to digital download it only was about $45 see the savings that digital did. Everything costs money these days. Postage, employees screaming gemme a raise and on and on. Prices aren't going to stay like this forever. In fact we've been getting great deals with these $19.99 games and you want even more discounts? LOL I mean I like to save money too but I'm not unhappy with Matrix/Slitherine price policy. They have their sales now and I no longer have to wait until Christmas to get some games. I will still wait for a discount though, but, I'm not going to look a gift horse in the mouth.

Hexagon -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/1/2013 11:00:29 AM)
Well, i see this from my point of view as buyer and i see a price over console games with no DVD box, no DVD and no printed manual (yes, i know that today manuals are [8\|] but not all games have single page manuals) and of course no marketing campaign (main part of the price in a console game) and my last console was a NES because i buy a PC around middle of 90 and find cheaper games with a more interesting point for me but now i find the games i like with prices over console games and only in download version. Battlefront... where i say i buy Battlefront games??? apart a little high prices for my taste they use a s***t DRM i buy one game from them and first and last i buy and i can add other examples here but i dont remember see people complain for Matrix protection system but do fine in one point doesnt means do fine in all points. If is a question of support why no create 2 versions??? silver and gold version, gold version give you early access to beta and your name appear in the game credits and you receive a certain discount if you buy the physical version ... for example, in my case i buy a game and i think do it is enough but pay a premium price only to have the game... Discounts are a bonus to buy a game (independent of game price) every euro i save is an euro for a future game or other things again, in my case i plan buy 1 game on this 2 crazy months, i add later CMANO and the 2 AGEOD games but now with the prices maybe i can finish with 0 buys and the 150-175 euros i farmed used in other games or books (i have 2 in mind now). You are right and no here "Prices aren't going to stay like this forever" because compared with other games prices are same in the last 10 years and discounts... they dont reduce game prices??? you think that a game with a discount means lose money???. I have my point of view, i mix game quality and price and have the price i want pay its something personal, if you see price ok buy it but if in 3-4 years we see another 20 euros increase in price lets see if you think the same.

Koesj -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/1/2013 5:02:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: flanyboy yet the console customer base wouldn't be a fit at all for Matrix. With more than one console game bought per year I'd say I'm part of that customer base [&:]

histgamer -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/1/2013 6:34:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Koesj quote: ORIGINAL: flanyboy yet the console customer base wouldn't be a fit at all for Matrix. With more than one console game bought per year I'd say I'm part of that customer base [&:] In General. I play consoles too but I don't believe there is a substantial market there for their games. Doesn't mean they wouldn't sell some games. Plus I think most of their games UI's dont' work well without a mouse keyboard and I don't like having to fiddle with one for my PS3.

aaatoysandmore -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/1/2013 7:09:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hexagon Well, i see this from my point of view as buyer and i see a price over console games with no DVD box, no DVD and no printed manual (yes, i know that today manuals are [8\|] but not all games have single page manuals) and of course no marketing campaign (main part of the price in a console game) and my last console was a NES because i buy a PC around middle of 90 and find cheaper games with a more interesting point for me but now i find the games i like with prices over console games and only in download version. Battlefront... where i say i buy Battlefront games??? apart a little high prices for my taste they use a s***t DRM i buy one game from them and first and last i buy and i can add other examples here but i dont remember see people complain for Matrix protection system but do fine in one point doesnt means do fine in all points. If is a question of support why no create 2 versions??? silver and gold version, gold version give you early access to beta and your name appear in the game credits and you receive a certain discount if you buy the physical version ... for example, in my case i buy a game and i think do it is enough but pay a premium price only to have the game... Discounts are a bonus to buy a game (independent of game price) every euro i save is an euro for a future game or other things again, in my case i plan buy 1 game on this 2 crazy months, i add later CMANO and the 2 AGEOD games but now with the prices maybe i can finish with 0 buys and the 150-175 euros i farmed used in other games or books (i have 2 in mind now). You are right and no here "Prices aren't going to stay like this forever" because compared with other games prices are same in the last 10 years and discounts... they dont reduce game prices??? you think that a game with a discount means lose money???. I have my point of view, i mix game quality and price and have the price i want pay its something personal, if you see price ok buy it but if in 3-4 years we see another 20 euros increase in price lets see if you think the same. You need to go back and look at game prices in the 80's. The prices today are very simuliar to them $30-$60 now you know as well as I do that inflation has caused most items and prices to go up. A loaf of bread name brand is about 100% increased in price cost to consumer, a movie another form of entertainment that you get nothing back from except a memory and one night of entertainment if that. And you want gaming prices to remain the same or less than what they were in the 80's? You've gotta be kidding me. If anything a lot of these games should be $80-$150 War in the East should easily be $150 maybe discounted some day to $75 same with War in the Pacific AE. You think these games grow on trees. You think these developers do it for nothing? A $150 to $5 just because you want it that way is rediculous and as a business owner I sure wouldn't cater to your customer kind. I'd have gone out of business long before retirement. Nope everything has to work with checks and balances in its own time not yours or mine or anyone else's. It boils down to once again you pay or you don't pay and you get or you don't get, but it certainly never boils down to you make the rules. lol Now, of course it is ok to ask about the rules and to attempt to change them as a customer but demanding them....lol......that will get you nowhere fast. Most consumers never see the whole picture or take it into account or want to they just want what they want and a lot of them want it for nothing....that is one of the reasons why there is software piracy and music video piracy and media piracy. People who want what they want and don't care about anything else are usually this type of people. But, good luck on your endeavor to change Matrixgames pricing policy. lol I think you will lose. :{P

Alchenar -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/1/2013 7:10:28 PM)
I don't think anyone's making the claim that wargames would work on the console market (although XCOM sold well enough, it's a matter of whether you can structure the UI to make it work). But I don't think you can escape that Eyeballs * Conversion Rate = Sales formula. Steam gets you more eyeballs than anyone else on the internet can. Even if your conversion rate is absolutely pathetic, you have to do very badly not to do well from going on Steam. And I don't think anyone's claiming that every wargame must go on Steam, but the recent run of releases include a high proportion of games that seem like they should be able to get on and do well. You don't really need to see the data to know that when someone doesn't appear to be working to get as many eyeballs as possible onto their product then there's probably something wrong with their strategy.

aaatoysandmore -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/1/2013 7:30:07 PM)
The developers that go on Steam are one of two things either greedy for more money (CA, Paradox) or desperate to just get their game out there( unbridled indies). I overlook games on Steam all the time because it's like the Library of Congress if you spent your entire time looking through it you'd never have time to read/play anything. In this case play anything. With Matrixgames it's like a comic book store or wargame plaza in the mall, it only caters to a few products and I don't have to look or search all over the place to find a copy of Spiderman 100th issue same with their wargames. They don't get lost in the mix. When I come to Matrix I can open up the forum page and go right to the game of my choice. I like being able to just browse the wargame dept. can you do that on Steam? No the games would just get lost in the sea of STRATEGY games section. Even Amazon.com is like that. Wargames in the Strategy Game section not seperate. And they put RTS games in that section and call them wargames gaaah that's even a worse crime. With Steam I have to jump through hoops and ladders to find a game I'm looking for there's so many types of games there. Then too if I'm looking for a particular game on the $5 sale I better had know the name of it and when it's onsale. At Matrixgames you don't have to worry about that because there's very little sales going on. :{P Matrix does the right thing for Matrixgames wargames. If it were mainstream stuff I might agree with you but since it is so niche I like the little store comic book store feel to it. Get in get out no waiting no fuss. Buy when the price IS right and walk away when you don't like them I always do. It's like the Big Bang Theory tv show when the guys all go down to the comic book store it has a nice feel to it. I'm glad it's not some huge shopping mall like Steam. Yeah you can always make exceptions and new rules and if's and but's but if if's and but's were candy and nuts we'd all have a merry Christmas anyway. :{P

histgamer -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/1/2013 10:21:20 PM)
I'm not arguing about the eyeball to conversion rate but I also think you may be overstating it. At least the way you're writing it you make it sound like every single game is a success on steam and that simply isn't the case. Also I wonder if a more valid debate might exist between the differences between wargames and strategy games. Often strategy games cover military topics but they are typically unique from strategy games. Xcomm in my mind, and MOST Parradox games are Strategy games but they are not wargames, even if they have a military topic. I think it might be fair to consider Panzer Corps a strategy game more than a wargame fwiw, so I'm not saying Matrix is ALL wargames either. quote: ORIGINAL: Alchenar I don't think anyone's making the claim that wargames would work on the console market (although XCOM sold well enough, it's a matter of whether you can structure the UI to make it work). But I don't think you can escape that Eyeballs * Conversion Rate = Sales formula. Steam gets you more eyeballs than anyone else on the internet can. Even if your conversion rate is absolutely pathetic, you have to do very badly not to do well from going on Steam. And I don't think anyone's claiming that every wargame must go on Steam, but the recent run of releases include a high proportion of games that seem like they should be able to get on and do well. You don't really need to see the data to know that when someone doesn't appear to be working to get as many eyeballs as possible onto their product then there's probably something wrong with their strategy.

Vyshka -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/1/2013 11:01:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: flanyboy quote: ORIGINAL: Challerain Didn't they also try and get Panzer Corps on Steam Greenlight and it failed? That's what they said. According to Iain I think something like 50% of the votes for the game were against it being included. Of course the tone of this thread is people wouldn't believe that but it's not like we have anything else to go on. Wow, hehe I don't think I've ever heard of someone voting against a game in greenlight. It is still up there for people to vote on it, so it might eventually make it on there especially if Steam continues to relax whatever strange requirements they have on greenlight admission.

Alchenar -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/1/2013 11:59:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: flanyboy I'm not arguing about the eyeball to conversion rate but I also think you may be overstating it. At least the way you're writing it you make it sound like every single game is a success on steam and that simply isn't the case. Also I wonder if a more valid debate might exist between the differences between wargames and strategy games. Often strategy games cover military topics but they are typically unique from strategy games. Xcomm in my mind, and MOST Parradox games are Strategy games but they are not wargames, even if they have a military topic. I think it might be fair to consider Panzer Corps a strategy game more than a wargame fwiw, so I'm not saying Matrix is ALL wargames either. This is a bit of a tangent but's a fun non-partisan argument so I'll take it up: I consider wargames to be in video game terms a subset of the strategy genre (obviously your view will be different if you think of them as an electronic evolution of the historic board wargaming hobby and not really part of the pc games market, as I've seen suggested). It's tempting to say that wargames are more complex - but I think that's actually a bit of a lazy characterisation. Civ and XCOM are both very deep games, they're just easy to play because they're designed well. Sourge of War is a great wargame - but all the player actually needs to do it move his regiments around and they will sort out the fighting bit themselves. I'd call Decisive Campaigns as being somewhere middle-of-the-ground in terms of complexity, but it has a 'movement and fighting are the same resource' system that means once you get over the inital hurdle it's actually very easy to play. X-COM is actually really important because it brought back to mainstream gaming the idea that 'failure is possible and something you have to deal with', which I think is something that's also an essential element of any good wargame. Note that neither of us have really put out a full definition of what makes a 'wargame'. We need to make sure your starting position isn't a hazy 'games that mainstream people don't buy'! Therefore my natural assumption is to look at the really quite good sales for Civilisation and XCOM (AAA games designed and marketed to be as accessible to the mass market as possible) and say 'a decent proportion of these people would potentially be interested in buying more turn-based strategy games - so Panzer Corps and Unity of Command are obvious choices (I wouldn't put Panzer Corps being rejected from Greenlight as being the end of the story - one of the things Valve can be criticised for is that their game acceptance process pre and post greenlight has been a complete mess). Scourge of War is another - I know Take Command 2 was on Steam back when Norb was with Paradox and that apparently didn't work out, but it's already at a price that would probably be okay for Steam and already has a demo, so is probably best placed to take advantage of the aforementioned awesome conversion rate Steam gets you. A thing that we think is another problem with the Matrix strategy and has been brought up before is that there isn't currently a clear entry-path to wargaming from those people who clearly have an interest in something a bit more intellectual. Part of that is eyeballs, part of that is price.

histgamer -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/2/2013 12:22:16 AM)
This is actually a great topic. I've been wanting to make a YouTube video about what makes a Wargame a Wargame and how is it different from a Strategy Game or as you suggested is it a subset. I'll probably get around to it in the next few days. Also was Take Command 2 on steam? I know it was on Gamersgate but I don't remember seeing it on Steam. I could be mistaken here. Scourge of War Gettysburg was also on GG for awhile too. With that said I'll respond to you but I really can't right now as I need to head to my Math class. [:D] After classes perhaps.

TheGrayMouser -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/2/2013 1:25:16 AM)
That a good question... I tend to think its about marketing. Axis and Allies is no doudt marketed as a family friendly Strategy game by Milton Bradley and lumped together with games like Life or Monopoly. My own definition: if the question asked is "does the game incorporate strategic, operational or tactical gameplay elements"? , and the answer is "yes" to at least one, then its a Wargame. If no,then its a strategy game.

aaatoysandmore -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/2/2013 1:36:21 AM)
The thing about wargames and strategy games is they do cross over the lines from time to time and one becomes the other. I always felt a wargame dealt with a war or a battle of a war with lots of details and complexity. Civilization and X-Com though great games are not wargames. Paradox games are one of those that cross over that line though being strategy and a wargamelike endeavor afterall you do fight wars and bsttle and skirmishes in them but they aren't historical ones. They are just generic battles, even HOI you don't fight historical battles but you do fight an historical war. That's why it draws a fine line of a wargame strategy game. But, lots of the Matrixgames line are actual historial battles like Kharkov and because they are turn based and not some rts clikyfest then those to me are wargames. Just because you throw some real time moving units into an historical area doesn't make it a wargame. The TW's are not wargames they are just close cousins, more rts strategy with a lil turn based gameplay along side of it. Now Norbsoft's Civil War series I consider a wargame and a strategy game even though it is real time because everything moves in real time and the OOB is made up of realistic oob's of the time. It's still more strategy than real warfare because there's no supply rules, no reinforcements, just everything thrown out there for you to use if you want to, excluding the independent scenarios (does anyone play those things?) But at any rate the majority of the Matrixgames Library are wargames. I'm not really happy calling rts clik fests wargames and never will really until they start to feel like a wargame and not a TOY. That's what most of them are that move at the speed of light.....TOYS. Wargames require "thought' and "time to think". TOYS are made to play with and makeup stuff. Wargames do not fall into those catagories. Wargames are chesslike once again taking thought and time based on real war battles or real wars periods. RISK though is not a wargame nor is Axis and Allies type games or Battlecry just because they are turn based and you do sit and think. To me Tactics II was not a wargame but a strategy game using warlike units. QQP's Perfect General was not a wargame though it used tanks and infantry, true yes Panzer Corp is not a wargame either, Close Combat draws one of those fine lines because of it's unrealistic nature of things (armor penetration, ai stupidity, microscopic units etc.) On the other hand John Tillers stuff were and are wargames to me. A lot just depends on the nature and way to play the game that makes it a wargame and not a strategy game or strategy wargame. Pittsburg just went up 2-0 on 2 back to back home runs YAY!

histgamer -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/2/2013 1:53:42 AM)
Is it fair to call wargames their own genre then? Or are they merely a sub genre of multiple other genres? Sid Meier's Gettysburg is a wargame imho but probably also a RTS.

aaatoysandmore -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/2/2013 2:01:50 AM)
I'd say they are a sub genre of strategy because they do have strategizing in them if given the time allotted to think. To me that's the key point the thinking time and part. If you don't have time to think about what you are doing then it's not a wargame to me it's a simulation of what it feels like to be in a battle with all the stuff going on that you can't keep up with but without the details of supply, terrain, soaking off's (a real wargames component), reinforcements, zones of control, hidden movement, opportunity fire and above all an actual real battle of the era not some made up something then it's not really a total wargame it's just make believe and watch me go pew pew the bad guys lol. We can get into Whatif's later but that's where wargame/strategy comes into play. But they should be separated from just strategy games and strategy wargames in a wargame section. I don't want to see Battlefield Academy in with Battles from the Bulge or D-Day. It should be like 1st Folder: Strategy 2nd folder: Strategy Wargame 3rd folder: Wargames

TheGrayMouser -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/2/2013 2:06:38 AM)
from Merriam-Webster: strat�e�gy : a careful plan or method for achieving a particular goal usually over a long period of time : the skill of making or carrying out plans to achieve a goal war game noun : a military training activity that is done to prepare for fighting in a war full definition: : a simulated battle or campaign to test military concepts and usually conducted in conferences by officers acting as the opposing staffs : a two-sided umpired training maneuver with actual elements of the armed forces participating So, it likely MOST games we consider wargames really arnt ;) (sadly even TOAW III)

aaatoysandmore -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/2/2013 4:02:06 AM)
look up tabletop wargame or board wargame you are looking at the generic term.

Alchenar -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (10/2/2013 9:58:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: flanyboy This is actually a great topic. I've been wanting to make a YouTube video about what makes a Wargame a Wargame and how is it different from a Strategy Game or as you suggested is it a subset. I'll probably get around to it in the next few days. Also was Take Command 2 on steam? I know it was on Gamersgate but I don't remember seeing it on Steam. I could be mistaken here. Scourge of War Gettysburg was also on GG for awhile too. With that said I'll respond to you but I really can't right now as I need to head to my Math class. [:D] After classes perhaps. See this is an important question because there's the suggestion floating around that Wargames are somehow a unique and special genre with a unique and special customer base and I just don't think that's true. I think that there are specific wargames with very limited appeal, but that's because of questionable design choices rather than anything inherent to the genre. If a wargame is just 'a strategy game that's set in a specific historical war or battle' then there's no reason why they shouldn't be accessible at all.

Page: << < prev 24 25 [26] 27 28 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.845703