Impression

[Monkeys Brain]

And another thing. If anyone is making a niche out of Close Combat that is Matrix in this case.
Close Combat sold 1.2 million together. That is enormous potential.
But certanly you will not attract too much would be customers with a price tag of 40$.[:-]

If I were you I would mass market it at 20 $. There you cannot lose. But your stubborness is amazing and so be it. You are at loss.

[Erik Rutins]

Monkeys Brain,

I was responding honestly. We have tried various price points over the years and know the results. The original CC series sold tremendous amounts, yes - that was with the marketing muscle of Microsoft behind it and in a day when the retail market was vastly different than it is now. Saying the publisher is at no risk also shows very little understanding on your part of what a publisher in this market does.

There are a few comments you made that really bothered me. I'd like to note those specifically:

"we customers must pay slightly more for remakes"

I never said that anyone must pay - but that we set the price at what we felt was the best one to ensure continued development. We then informed our customers of what this updated release would contain. Those who choose to buy it, it's their choice.

"there is 2000 certain fools who will pay 40 $"

Painting people who buy this release as fools is remarkably arrogant on your part. Again, everyone was informed ahead of time of what the price and features were. It's a free market and you can choose to or not to buy. I've seen comments like this before. I realize that not everyone can afford to buy every game at $40. I realize there are some games you may have to pass up as a result of prices not being lower. We did not price this game to minimize profits for future development, we priced it to maximize profits for future development. If you have any interest in the future of CC (for at this point, it rests here and nowhere else) then you should criticize if we priced it lower. Copies of CCIII, which performed imperfectly on XP, were priced over $100 on E-Bay before this release.

Those that want an updated, working CCIII with the new features we've listed at a price well below what the original CCIII was selling for, appreciate what's been done here.

"If I were you I would mass market it at 20 $. There you cannot lose. But your stubborness is amazing and so be it."

I'm at least basing my comments on actual sales figures based on our experience. We've been publishing wargames for six years now. What are your conclusions based on? You indicate above that you are basically infallible ("you cannot lose" - if you follow my advice) and then call me stubborn for saying that our experience indicates your suggested price would not in fact help us at all. On what basis are you so sure of yourself?

Regards,

- Erik

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: Monkeys Brain

No, you opted the other way, there is 2000 certain fools who will pay 40 $ so why don't even enlarge that base. Hat's off.

Was I a fool when I took my wife to a movie on Valentine's Day? I ask because I spent that much on the outing. It always sort of amazes me when folks start complaining about how much this stuff costs, considering how much other entertainment runs these days, music CDs for instance.

And the arguments about what the original cost in comparison to this "super-patch" don't hold water because of the economy of scale involved. While CoI may have lower development costs, NO ONE will make a dime on it until those costs are recovered. And in today's market for this type of product, even that's no certainty.

IMO, this all comes down to how committed that you may be to seeing the CC series of games continue to evolve. If we're willing to live happily-ever-after with the games as is, then so be it. If on the other hand, you want to see the series evolve and get the sort of professional development that it needs, then you're gonna have to pay the proverbial piper.

My two cents,

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[LitFuel]

Hey, I'd rather invest $40 in CC then plop down another $40 on a new game I play all of a few days that has no mods, and a short gaming community life. It's been around 10 years, how many games can say that. It's actually one of the better $40 investments you can make in gaming these days. At least I know what I'm getting here as opposed to the  hundreds of games I've spent a small fortune on and wish I hadn't.

[pahom]

I came into wargaming late and never purchased a copy of CC3 at retail. Later, when I became interested in wargames, CC3 was not available in retail. So when Matrix announced that they were going to update and release the title, I was thrilled. I have purchased Harpoon 3 ANW, TOAW3 and now CC3 and have gotten tremendous value out of each of these older titles that came out before I go into wargaming. I would hate to think where the wargaming community would be without them, no Wargamer.com,  just HPS (I own most of their titles), Paradox (I own a few and play very little) and the latest RTS WW2 title? 
 
I am sitting around playing this game today on my widescreen monitor at 1680X1050 in windows vista and I must say that this title holds up well with the rest of todays games. I understand that those people who purchased the title in the past have a decision to make. But don't assume that you speak for the majority of gamers here (or that I do, for that matter). But if there are more than a few of me out there, maybe Matrix is on to something. [;)]

[Monkeys Brain]

Well, I would spare you and me of rather unproductive blah-blah.

I apologize for calling fools customers of CoI. First that was a bit of artistic liberty in choosing a words, not very wise I admit.
I don't want that this get personal so let's calm this down.

You will obviously see a lot of this threads like this. Did I started this? Even the very most of loyal fans will start to grumble and tell you that they are not pleased with this. You can tell "my way or highway" and I say Paradox and will buy EU 3.
Instead of this game. Simply my choice.

I disagree about pulling of a millenium old so called ebay argument. You can sell old games on ebay and that is not a secret.
That is called collection, people are collectors of old things from the past. Like time travel.

You have your shares of fanboys and worshipers but I am not one of them. Let them applaud every move that you make, I will not I am speaking how I feel not how crowd expect that I feel.

So this not make any sense. Remember - you can paint it yellow you can paint it blue or red but still you will have to respond to your customers who will feel that this ain't right.

From my part I am certanly not caring anymore. Yes, that is your company and do whatever you want. One thing is certain - you will not see a one cent from me.

EOD.

[BigJ62]

I think the alias says it all.

[Monkeys Brain]

ORIGINAL: BigJ62

I think the alias says it all.

Of course it says. Even my monkey brain is smarter than rest of the crowd lol
Now seriously for me discussion is over. Enjoy your game etc...

[Marc von Martial]

Remember - you can paint it yellow you can paint it blue or red but still you will have to respond to your customers who will feel that this ain't right.

So we did not reply to you? Tell me some other publisher that actually get involved in such discussions with forum members.

Or do you mean we must "respond to you" by following your brilliant marketing advise?

One thing is certain, with your logic you could start a marketing career in the game publishing business. It would last exactly for one project.

One thing is certain - you will not see a one cent from me.

Your right as customer.

I really get the feeling you take the price tag personally [8|]

[Monkeys Brain]

So we did not reply to you? Tell me some other publisher that actually get involved in such discussions with forum members.

Or do you mean we must "respond to you" by following your brilliant marketing advise?

One thing is certain, with your logic you could start a marketing career in the game publishing business. It would last exactly for one project.

OK, let's calm down. I didn't come here to start a fight or something. Your right is your right, and my right is my right to not confuse things. You get your feedback and move along. It is not me that will bring you troubles, you can ban me anytime I wouldn't care.
Did I start this thread? No, amigo. I didn't. That's your business and your right to form the price you want. Some of us can disagree, which I said and move along. Yes, I will move along. Nothing personal here.

One thing is certain - you will not see a one cent from me.

Your right as customer.

I really get the feeling you take the price tag personally [8|]


[/quote]

See, I am not part of the problem. With or without Matrix Games I have plenty of entertainment. So, you don't need me, and I don't need you [:D]

So no problem at all. I will relocate me and stirr no trouble no more. I will certanly not build golden statues because I worship Matrix. And I don't. It's kind of funny when Eric say that Close Combat: Cross of Iron should have cost even more. Well, maybe those who bought it can donate 50$ more as a thank you sign. (irony).

And one more thing about the game, market will say last word. And as entertainment is so strong with PS3, PS2 games, Xbox360, Wii, other PC games, this of course will stay on the margine. Yes, even at 20 $ will be on the margine but at least some customers would not feel that they are paying over the top.

What's wrong with Paradox? Now I start to respect those guys. I give them 40$ but I get new game. And that is a difference. And EU 3 is not so big game like those of Activisions, they also have their download hube so comparable to Matrix Games.

[Erik Rutins]

Monkeys Brain,

ORIGINAL: Monkeys Brain
OK, let's calm down. I didn't come here to start a fight or something. Your right is your right, and my right is my right to not confuse things. You get your feedback and move along. It is not me that will bring you troubles, you can ban me anytime I wouldn't care.

You know, I'm fine with having a calm discussion, but it would help if you stopped making assumptions that have no basis. We've banned less than ten people in the six years these forums have been up and NEVER for disagreeing with us.

So no problem at all. I will relocate me and stirr no trouble no more. I will certanly not build golden statues because I worship Matrix. And I don't. It's kind of funny when Eric say that Close Combat: Cross of Iron should have cost even more. Well, maybe those who bought it can donate 50$ more as a thank you sign. (irony).

Here's the thing. You comment, we reply, that's a discussion. It seems like when we disagree with you, you have to cast it in this other light where if one does not disagree with everything we do, the only other choice is to worship a golden statue of us. You do realize that there's room between those extremes, right? Using these kinds of argumentative methods doesn't really help you make your point.

And one more thing about the game, market will say last word. And as entertainment is so strong with PS3, PS2 games, Xbox360, Wii, other PC games, this of course will stay on the margine. Yes, even at 20 $ will be on the margine but at least some customers would not feel that they are paying over the top.

Sure, go ahead and pay more for one of those games, no problem. It is not news to us that the customer has all these options, but the options for real wargaming are far fewer. We decided to go in on a project with CSO, based on community demand, to re-engineer old code to work on modern systems. Also, to add quite a few new features as well as a new campaign. We then presented it as exactly what it was, stated our price and left it at that.

The disagreement comes when people say there's "nothing new" or "it should have been priced at $20". That's certainly every gamer's right to make their own decision, but please don't expect us to agree with it. We know how much work went into this, so we know there is a lot that's new and improved. We know it was marketed as exactly what it was, not as a brand new release, but an improved re-release with new multiplayer campaign support. We also know that it needs to be priced at around $40 for us to be able to justify future development - this is based on past sales experience, not on numbers pulled out of thin air.

What's wrong with Paradox? Now I start to respect those guys. I give them 40$ but I get new game. And that is a difference. And EU 3 is not so big game like those of Activisions, they also have their download hube so comparable to Matrix Games.

Here's another one of these assumptions. We've released several brand new games (i.e. new engines, never before seen, etc.) in the last year and every year. You can find them in our store. This project was specifically take up to re-release an older game due to community demand and see if the community would be willing and able to fund ongoing development and improvement. CC is not the newest game on the market, but its gameplay remains outstanding, in some areas unsurpassed and the engine has not been abandoned by the military as a training tool for that reason. A lot of folks wanted to see this title have another chance at ongoing development and improvement.

I would of course love to sell you a copy, but we've priced it as low as we can and stated clearly what it contains. If that's too high for now, no problem. Hopefully development will continue and in the future the mix of features vs. cost will be more in your ballpark.

Regards,

- Erik

[Motomouse]

Hi,
I have both EU3 and CoI
so far palying time EU3 : CoI = 10% : 90%
And I dont want to start a EU3 CoI Discussion! (I like both games)
I just felt the urge to mention it.
Have fun with your games, and buy the games you want to buy.
Regards

[jmkas]

I have spent 100s of hours playing the CC series, but due to faster machines and new operating systems most of my favorites are unplayable. I have tried and determined that modding my machine or software to play a game is not worth my time. If an updated / new version of one of my favorites comes out that is playable on modern equipment, then I will buy it. The bottom line is what I get out of my entertainment dollar. If I spend $50 for a game and put 100 hours into it then I am paying 50 cents an hour to have fun. That's money well spent in my eyes...and I know I will put more than 100 hours into CC:CoI

Thanks Matrix,
jmkas

[Monkeys Brain]

You know, I'm fine with having a calm discussion, but it would help if you stopped making assumptions that have no basis. We've banned less than ten people in the six years these forums have been up and NEVER for disagreeing with us.

OK, I will apologize - I cannot be nasty when someone is kind to me [:)]

Here's the thing. You comment, we reply, that's a discussion. It seems like when we disagree with you, you have to cast it in this other light where if one does not disagree with everything we do, the only other choice is to worship a golden statue of us. You do realize that there's room between those extremes, right? Using these kinds of argumentative methods doesn't really help you make your point.

I agree here completely. [;)]

Sure, go ahead and pay more for one of those games, no problem. It is not news to us that the customer has all these options, but the options for real wargaming are far fewer. We decided to go in on a project with CSO, based on community demand, to re-engineer old code to work on modern systems. Also, to add quite a few new features as well as a new campaign. We then presented it as exactly what it was, stated our price and left it at that.

The disagreement comes when people say there's "nothing new" or "it should have been priced at $20". That's certainly every gamer's right to make their own decision, but please don't expect us to agree with it. We know how much work went into this, so we know there is a lot that's new and improved. We know it was marketed as exactly what it was, not as a brand new release, but an improved re-release with new multiplayer campaign support. We also know that it needs to be priced at around $40 for us to be able to justify future development - this is based on past sales experience, not on numbers pulled out of thin air.

OK, that is your side of story. First don't think that I don't appreciate that you brought back CC: CoI, that would be not true. I appreciate it. In fact the most desirable thing for me was that multiplayer option. Beside that, I admit, I played only vanilla CC3 without mods so another plus on this release is easy to use mods etc...that is really a plus. I don't expect that you agree with me or vice versa. And there is no free lunch, I have hundreds of games. Maybe in the end I will even buy this game. If I don't resist this temptations ...
Numbers are on your end - so I cannot argue them because you didn't disclose them.
But just as I said Erik, it would be not me that will ask the questions about the price again and again. People don't know what you know and many will act by their instincts or with the fact that they know from their experience. So until you clear that up completely they will know few facts:

1. They don't know your prediction of sales, and mostly they don't care. Many will just jump over this game and say "there is not much for me for 40$ as this or that game offer this or that". Customer menthality plays role here as well. Gamers are spoiled kids. They were spoiled by whole game industry. They were used to bigger, better, new, added, etc...
For most times they don't care if you would sell 5 copies or 5 million.
So this question will hang in the air all the time.

Here's another one of these assumptions. We've released several brand new games (i.e. new engines, never before seen, etc.) in the last year and every year. You can find them in our store. This project was specifically take up to re-release an older game due to community demand and see if the community would be willing and able to fund ongoing development and improvement. CC is not the newest game on the market, but its gameplay remains outstanding, in some areas unsurpassed and the engine has not been abandoned by the military as a training tool for that reason. A lot of folks wanted to see this title have another chance at ongoing development and improvement.

I would of course love to sell you a copy, but we've priced it as low as we can and stated clearly what it contains. If that's too high for now, no problem. Hopefully development will continue and in the future the mix of features vs. cost will be more in your ballpark.

OK, cannot counterargue this. I am just saying that no matter how much your loyal customer trust you some of them will still think that this or that price is much bigger than what they accept to pay. I know also that is not good when some company get a reputation of pricing their products too high. You may be right 100% from your point of view but average Joe Gamer doesn't nececary share that view. They stil think in the terms of new games, new shiny interface and animation, new engines that took 2 years to develop and still expect of developers to reinvent the wheel every time they develop their new game. If you are satisfied with small circle of diehard grognards that will support you, great for you. But just don't think that it is good way to follow. Some middle ground is maybe better.
Nobody expect from you that you put UT 3 engine into CC: CoI but some will not look nicely toward remakes that use dinosaur graphics but have a price tag of 40$. That is just way things work. If you are satisfied with that small circle ok, but we will see how in the end that will give ongoing support for future development. Human nature is just like that. So it is a question will those higher prices get enough revenues like sales of modestly prized games. There is also a matter of reputation etc...
Even new games many times not sell enough to cover development costs and what publishers need to sell next game for 99$ to cover losses? They cannot do that.
I just stay with my opinion that remakes should be priced lower. Matrix Games just needs to find a way to sell more quantities, pumping up the price will not do you good. But, of course feel free to disagree.

[Shaun Wallace]

See, I am not part of the problem. With or without Matrix Games I have plenty of entertainment. So, you don't need me, and I don't need you

So no problem at all. I will relocate me and stirr no trouble no more. I will certanly not build golden statues because I worship Matrix. And I don't. It's kind of funny when Eric say that Close Combat: Cross of Iron should have cost even more. Well, maybe those who bought it can donate 50$ more as a thank you sign. (irony).

And one more thing about the game, market will say last word. And as entertainment is so strong with PS3, PS2 games, Xbox360, Wii, other PC games, this of course will stay on the margine. Yes, even at 20 $ will be on the margine but at least some customers would not feel that they are paying over the top.

What's wrong with Paradox? Now I start to respect those guys. I give them 40$ but I get new game. And that is a difference. And EU 3 is not so big game like those of Activisions, they also have their download hube so comparable to Matrix Games.

Hia MB (now there IS Irony!)

As the developers of CC now that Atomic Games are no more than a brand name, Simtek chose to re-release CC while at the same time developing the next generation CC. (CC6) As has been pointed out there are many here who would have never played CC before and many who wanted the enhancements. This does not mean you have to buy the game or agree with the price etc. We set the price with the publisher and are happy that it is in the correct area. We know how much work went into it and how much work is going into CC6. As Erik has pointed out very cogently this is a discussion and everyone will have differing opinions.

Many people here have played CC before and some I even remember from the CC Gaming Zone on MS, who recognise the chnages made and the flexibility we have built into CoI to make the mods much more accessible to a much large audience. Those who have played CC alot can see the changes made to the game. PC wargames developers and publishers are small and getting few and far between. It needs companies like Matrix and Paradox to publish these games as if it was down to Ubi/EA/Atari you can be sure they would never see the light of day. Simple ecenomics dicates that.

Also as Erik points out we at Simtek have done a large amount of work for the military utililising the CC engine (even earning a commendation from the Commandant of the USMC) which has made a large part of what we aim to do with CC possible. The military are now using a brand new (we only finished it this month) version of CC that is for use as an AT trainer for their FAST teams. This is because the tactical engine within CC is so good. Just because something is old does not automatically make it bad. The AK47 is an old Assault Rifle, but still holds its own against much newer weapons (ok no tangent guys! <G>), the same goes for the CC engine. If it aint broke don't fix it, but build on what is good and solid to make it better, which is what we are trying to do

Many out there will I know have fun with the game, both old and new players, but there will always be those that do not agree or are not in agreement with you, as has been said thats fine, its discussion and points of view.

Cheers

Sulla

[Monkeys Brain]

ORIGINAL: Shaun Wallace

See, I am not part of the problem. With or without Matrix Games I have plenty of entertainment. So, you don't need me, and I don't need you

So no problem at all. I will relocate me and stirr no trouble no more. I will certanly not build golden statues because I worship Matrix. And I don't. It's kind of funny when Eric say that Close Combat: Cross of Iron should have cost even more. Well, maybe those who bought it can donate 50$ more as a thank you sign. (irony).

And one more thing about the game, market will say last word. And as entertainment is so strong with PS3, PS2 games, Xbox360, Wii, other PC games, this of course will stay on the margine. Yes, even at 20 $ will be on the margine but at least some customers would not feel that they are paying over the top.

What's wrong with Paradox? Now I start to respect those guys. I give them 40$ but I get new game. And that is a difference. And EU 3 is not so big game like those of Activisions, they also have their download hube so comparable to Matrix Games.

Hia MB (now there IS Irony!)

As the developers of CC now that Atomic Games are no more than a brand name, Simtek chose to re-release CC while at the same time developing the next generation CC. (CC6) As has been pointed out there are many here who would have never played CC before and many who wanted the enhancements. This does not mean you have to buy the game or agree with the price etc. We set the price with the publisher and are happy that it is in the correct area. We know how much work went into it and how much work is going into CC6. As Erik has pointed out very cogently this is a discussion and everyone will have differing opinions.

Many people here have played CC before and some I even remember from the CC Gaming Zone on MS, who recognise the chnages made and the flexibility we have built into CoI to make the mods much more accessible to a much large audience. Those who have played CC alot can see the changes made to the game. PC wargames developers and publishers are small and getting few and far between. It needs companies like Matrix and Paradox to publish these games as if it was down to Ubi/EA/Atari you can be sure they would never see the light of day. Simple ecenomics dicates that.

Also as Erik points out we at Simtek have done a large amount of work for the military utililising the CC engine (even earning a commendation from the Commandant of the USMC) which has made a large part of what we aim to do with CC possible. The military are now using a brand new (we only finished it this month) version of CC that is for use as an AT trainer for their FAST teams. This is because the tactical engine within CC is so good. Just because something is old does not automatically make it bad. The AK47 is an old Assault Rifle, but still holds its own against much newer weapons (ok no tangent guys! <G>), the same goes for the CC engine. If it aint broke don't fix it, but build on what is good and solid to make it better, which is what we are trying to do

Many out there will I know have fun with the game, both old and new players, but there will always be those that do not agree or are not in agreement with you, as has been said thats fine, its discussion and points of view.

Cheers

Sulla

Hehehe, Hia Sulla,

I am doing this rarely and put a ashes on my head. [:D]

After a meditetion tomorrow I will decide will I buy this game but I know that it will be hard to resist. I am sorry. But, on some things I am staying with my principle however wrong they may be.

But, as a sign of respect toward you I will bury tomahawk toward Matrix hehe even for a while. lol

I didn't know that you are developing CC6? What's happened with Red Phoenix that Atomic Games worked on? I know that it was based in North Korea (I did read your forums, plenty of fun there!)

I am big fan of CC, played 3, 4 and 5 and 2 (a little less). Liked 3 mostly.


Monkey Brain (if i buy the game that would be no nick for multiplayer as many would want to kill me hehe)

[undercovergeek]

its not a re-release for me - its a new game - i missed it first time round and CAW, and as such i expect to pay for a new game - besides which exchange rate makes it just over £20 -bargain.

[old man of the sea]

undercovergeek has it, this game was released 10 years ago. The average gamer is between 22 and 38 years old. That means that the average 28 and under gamer most likely never saw CC3. Half the market. It makes it a great idea to re-release it.
&nbsp;
E

[Llyranor]

I don't see how paying a meager 10$ extra to support a franchise (including CC6 down the line) featuring a rare breed of gameplay is compromising any sort of principle.

If that 10$ means I can play something other than just another mainstream RTS, I'm in.

[Beeblebrox]

this game was released 10 years ago. The average gamer is between 22 and 38 years old. That means that the average 28 and under gamer most likely never saw CC3. Half the market. It makes it a great idea to re-release it.

This was EXACTLY my original strategy.
&nbsp;
Despite all the hoo haa about features and presentation and value for money and blah blah blah, it is my opinion that re-releasing the "Classic" Game around a decade after original release is enough Merit on its own.&nbsp; This is not just any old game, niche market though it may be.&nbsp; This is a class production and a Classic Game, winning some major awards, and still holds it head up with ANYTHING else out there, despite it's dated graphics.
&nbsp;
Whether ot not a Grog will buy a re-release is not the most significant item on the commercial agenda.&nbsp; To be honest what they (Grogs) really want is a *new* release.&nbsp; However, we took the opportunity to complement CC3 with additonal features and services.&nbsp; Whilst this has gone down quite well with some (as seen by posts on this and CSO Forums), I am not convinced that this will make as much difference to potential new players as some would have us believe.&nbsp; To a new player, CC3 is&nbsp; new game, so what's the difference?&nbsp; In fact you could argue that what has been done has effectively seperated 2 sets of gamers.&nbsp; The CC3 and the CoI Players.&nbsp; CoI will not H2H with CC3.&nbsp; So all new players are not going to be able to fit in seamlessly with the established Community.&nbsp; Take MMCCIII.&nbsp; Because the Battles are actually fought by H2H in the nromal way, that means plaers with CC3 cannot join in the CoI Campaigns, and vice versa.
&nbsp;
Sure, we would like all CC3 players to buy CoI, but they won't, and I have nothing to say against them for that.&nbsp; I wonder whether the 'extra' sales to established CC3 owners will be anything more than nominal.&nbsp; Maybe I'm wrong, but either way, re-releasing CoI as basically a tech upgrade to CC3 would have perfectly valid in my opinion.&nbsp; Just goes to show that we do not always get what we want... c'est la vie! It's now out there, and I am happy about that! [:)]
&nbsp;
&nbsp;