Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greywolf

I think the game could impact the computer wargaming community, some of them not being WiF player. The game wont appeal at all to the vast majority of the other gamers : it is dry 2D graphics (even Paradox had to go 3D with Europa Universalis, to my great dismay by the may and alienating quite some fan base), turn-by-turn, long and need to understand nearly 80 pages of rules, even if the computer manage some of them.

Let it be clear: its rating on many general newsgaming papers and site will be abysmall (splg?) regardless of the game real quality. That is the way all complexe strategical game with no 3D and real time action go. For them Strategy mean RTS, even if a RTS is not really a Strategy game but a Logistic and Tactics game as we all know.

The other trouble is that the previous release of a Matrix game adaptation of a ADG boardgame was very very poorly received, commented and bashed. I know quite a lot of players with burned fingers syndroma about EiA that wont jump on MWiF on fear it suffer from the same bugs and poor AI problems. And no amount of fixing of EiA after release can cure that.

As other comments there is a community of online WiF players using cyberboard, Vassal and Zuntzu, and Wiffedit and other PBEM or NETPLAY game support. Thoses players will be interested with MWiF but wont be motivated to pay a lot for something that just do a bit more than their regular programs do and change quite some things too. Thoses people wont care about the AI as they want to play PBEM or NETPLAY only. They could be turned back by the changes MWiF introduce : new map, infinite division, no POLIF, no house-rules because that is the computer that set the rules so you can just adjust the option set but not the way you usually tweak the options, a graphical choice that is nice but not necessarily better than the original nor better looking than the high quality scan of some cyberbox. Thoses guys want a computer to play regular WiF on or with, not something different, and the closest it feel and look to real WiF the better.

All considered I think a release price in the WiTP range is what to be expected, but it wont sold a lot of units. Cutting the price down to 49$ would sold a bit more but not that much. MWiF is already a niche project. I think they have quite a clear idea of the number they will sold. If it is sold above 60$ I think I will probably pass on and wait for it to hit to sold-out or second hand bin. There is too many thing you can do or buy nowadays and a lot of high quality games for a lot cheaper than that. MWiF will appeal to the hard-core wargamers but it is not the only that will appeal to them and we are in a time of choice.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greywolf

I think the game could impact the computer wargaming community, some of them not being WiF player. The game wont appeal at all to the vast majority of the other gamers : it is dry 2D graphics (even Paradox had to go 3D with Europa Universalis, to my great dismay by the may and alienating quite some fan base), turn-by-turn, long and need to understand nearly 80 pages of rules, even if the computer manage some of them.

As other comments there is a community of online WiF players using cyberboard, Vassal and Zuntzu, and Wiffedit and other PBEM or NETPLAY game support.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansHafen

Even at $200.00 US Dollars, the price per hour of entertainment will be miniscule! 

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

Willy, I'm pretty certain Matrix will come up with a reasonable price structure for MWiF. After all, while both games have substantial development costs, unlike tabletop WiF where printing all the maps, counters, &c is expensive, cutting new disks for MWiF is a trivial expense. There's other games MWiF has to compete with to sell (even other strategic/operational-level WW2 games sold by Matrix!) so it can't be non-competitively priced.

Nevertheless, you may wish to avoid being too harsh on enthusiasts like HansHafen. While $200 is much too high indeed, there will be a necessarily limited print run (how many units can be expected to sell?) and Matrix has to pay Steve somehow (to say nothing of turning a profit). What that will end up costing us? Who knows?

quote:

ORIGINAL: bo
The last game my wife let me buy was MVP 2005 [yes I am a wimp] it cost $30 and she pi--ed and moaned for two months, Willy

quote:

ORIGINAL:

I can see you gentlemen are not married or you would not be talking this gibberish [crap] about pricing. The last game my wife let me buy was MVP 2005 [yes I am a wimp] it cost $30 and she pi--ed and moaned for two months, so please you single moguls with all that money to spend SHUT UP! Please!

Willy

quote:

ORIGINAL: jaimain

Steve in my humble opinion you are going to be a wealthy programmer soon  ( well it depends on your percentage ) Good work

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greywolf

I think the game could impact the computer wargaming community, some of them not being WiF player. The game wont appeal at all to the vast majority of the other gamers : it is dry 2D graphics (even Paradox had to go 3D with Europa Universalis, to my great dismay by the may and alienating quite some fan base), turn-by-turn, long and need to understand nearly 80 pages of rules, even if the computer manage some of them.

quote:

Let it be clear: its rating on many general newsgaming papers and site will be abysmall (splg?) regardless of the game real quality. That is the way all complexe strategical game with no 3D and real time action go. For them Strategy mean RTS, even if a RTS is not really a Strategy game but a Logistic and Tactics game as we all know.

quote:

...

As other comments there is a community of online WiF players using cyberboard, Vassal and Zuntzu, and Wiffedit and other PBEM or NETPLAY game support. Thoses players will be interested with MWiF but wont be motivated to pay a lot for something that just do a bit more than their regular programs do and change quite some things too. Thoses people wont care about the AI as they want to play PBEM or NETPLAY only. They could be turned back by the changes MWiF introduce : new map, infinite division, no POLIF, no house-rules because that is the computer that set the rules so you can just adjust the option set but not the way you usually tweak the options, a graphical choice that is nice but not necessarily better than the original nor better looking than the high quality scan of some cyberbox. Thoses guys want a computer to play regular WiF on or with, not something different, and the closest it feel and look to real WiF the better.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PDiFolco

I'm amazed noone suggested to sell a "basic game" for 30$, then a sh*tload of "expansions" 20$ each... That's what is priced the boardgame, but if you tuck 10 boxes-equivalent into one proggie you can't squeeze as much cash..
I'm playing devil advocate, granted  !

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: PDiFolco

I'm amazed noone suggested to sell a "basic game" for 30$, then a sh*tload of "expansions" 20$ each... That's what is priced the boardgame, but if you tuck 10 boxes-equivalent into one proggie you can't squeeze as much cash..
I'm playing devil advocate, granted  !

quote:


The decision to not do that was made by Matrix Games way back before I joined the project. I had asked them about this then.

That was a great decision. Imagine trying to test the game with 11,783 combinations of options in play. Gak!

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greywolf

I think the game could impact the computer wargaming community, some of them not being WiF player. The game wont appeal at all to the vast majority of the other gamers : it is dry 2D graphics (even Paradox had to go 3D with Europa Universalis, to my great dismay by the may and alienating quite some fan base), turn-by-turn, long and need to understand nearly 80 pages of rules, even if the computer manage some of them.

To be true, Paradox has received a lot of bad critics on this. First because the easy part of creating a game is to include nice graphics but the hard one is to improve AI. Paradox has not solved the problems with the AI and tries to compensate with graphics. This has been received by the Community with divided opinions.

But furthermore, even for the graphics fans, the graphics for EU3 have been so poorly designed that many of the people who supported this evolution have said they prefer good 2D graphics than bad 3D. Not to speak of having to buy a new computer or at least a new graphic card and RAM memory with every new game, just for that.

quote:

Let it be clear: its rating on many general newsgaming papers and site will be abysmall (splg?) regardless of the game real quality. That is the way all complexe strategical game with no 3D and real time action go. For them Strategy mean RTS, even if a RTS is not really a Strategy game but a Logistic and Tactics game as we all know.

Maybe. Anyway, Matrix is behind the project and it means it has a credit originally. Anyway, I believe that, unlike other videogame players, the strategy gamers rely more on opinions of fellow players than in magazines' punctuation. I have seen really mediocre games, that include frequent CTDs, horrible AI, bad graphics, ..., be given a 9 out of 10 points, and so have the rest of players, so everyday more we only believe in reviews, and if possible, of people we know.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Obsolete

Still desperately waiting for this release.  But if purchaser's have to be beta-testers, then I'd rather wait a bit longer.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greywolf

Let it be clear, what I am reporting is not what I feel. I didn't like 3D on real strategy games (especially EU3). But what I said is what I think will be the comments in the majority of gaming magazine and site, not in the wargaming specialised ones (not that they are all the numerous but they are the one that count).

For non-wargamer or casual wargamer to be attracted to a game like MWiF you need a real good buzz that you simply wont get. A lot of the journalist wont try the game at all, a lot of the game reporter just wont understand it because they lack the background to do so. That's the reason why I think the mass wont be appealed to the game at all.

If you say a WWII strategic games they expect a Blitzkrieg, Company of Heroes or Sudden Strike game. Some will buy, get disappointed and bring bad opinion on the game.

The game will sell well to computer wargamer, and will attract some to WiF that were scared at the sheer size of the game. But dont expect it to snowball the community and replace RTS. The only wargames that achieve some great public notoriety are the Panzer General/Operation Panzer and Steel Panthers ones, and they were perceived as having good graphics at this time and not so many opponent.

My guess is that MWiF will sold decently, hopefully as well as WiTP, but dont expect it to become a blockbuster or even be avaliable at every retailer.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansHafen

Don't tell her how much it cost. Just say you forgot or mumble something unintelligible.