Pricing

[Deomrve]

I don't think the problem with PON is the price that Matrix charges now or what it's been in the past or even the interface (which is average). It's the length of time needed to process turns. Someone like me who is interested in a detailed TBS game of this era, but has a limited amount time (between 12 - 15 hours a week) can not be spending 2/3 to 3/4's of my time waiting for a game to process turns. Ageod made the mistake of using an old engine that was not designed for a game with this much detail and made inefficient use of multiple threads. I think Matrix will find that this game just isn't going to sell very well regardless of the price point and will most likely not commit resources to another patch. Hope I'm wrong, but I don't think I am. I would love to see PON get the turn processing down to less than a minute even in the late game stage.

[rodney727]

Go back and re-read this thread if you simply don't understand. I don't know what more I can tell you. When you use terms like "wtf". I really can't take you seriously anyway.

ORIGINAL: DBeves

ORIGINAL: rogo727

You almost make me feel guilty for buying this game at 1.99. I did mess around with it and told myself no big loss. I see I have missed some updates for this game. And what you say is also true about life in general....to get out what you but in.

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

Rogo remind what price you bough the game at.

One of the things we have found is that demos for these huge games don't work well. The reason is that these games take a lot of effort to get you going. You need to put in the time to get something out but when you do you're rewarded with an extremely deep and fulfilling experience. When you pay for something you're willing to invest that time and push through a certain amount of frustration. When you get something for free you are much more likely to give up at the first hurdle or point of frustration as you've lost nothing. Someone who would enjoy the game if they paid for it, does not enjoy it if they get it for free as they never get into it enough.

Taking that a step further, someone who only paid a few dollars for the game is less likely to put in the effort required to get the most out of it. I'm wondering if this is where you are right now. If you had paid $24.99 would you have persisted when you gave up because you paid less?

Well no, surely the point with you is that you have said several times you bought the game for the ridiculous price of 1.99. You then come here spouting pages of vitriol at matrix for increasing the price. But if you already bought the game at 1.99 WTF, exactly, is your problem ? Not only is no one asking you to buy it again - but you already have it.

[Twotribes]

ORIGINAL: rogo727

Go back and re-read this thread if you simply don't understand. I don't know what more I can tell you. When you use terms like "wtf". I really can't take you seriously anyway.

ORIGINAL: DBeves

ORIGINAL: rogo727

You almost make me feel guilty for buying this game at 1.99. I did mess around with it and told myself no big loss. I see I have missed some updates for this game. And what you say is also true about life in general....to get out what you but in.

Well no, surely the point with you is that you have said several times you bought the game for the ridiculous price of 1.99. You then come here spouting pages of vitriol at matrix for increasing the price. But if you already bought the game at 1.99 WTF, exactly, is your problem ? Not only is no one asking you to buy it again - but you already have it.

Twice you said you were done with this thread yet you keep posting in it. You have no point. YOU already own the game so it matters not one bit what matrix charges for the game to you. yet you come here and attack the company over and over. Grow up and get a life.

[rodney727]

I only come back when people like you come back an attack me. So I disagree with slitherines business model now I need to grow up. Priceless. For someone who has the American flag in his pic maybe reading the amendments again wouldn't hurt. It's time to lock this thread[>:]. Last time I checked it is my right to have an opinion. I'm not attacking the company just trying to make them better.

ORIGINAL: Twotribes

ORIGINAL: rogo727

Go back and re-read this thread if you simply don't understand. I don't know what more I can tell you. When you use terms like "wtf". I really can't take you seriously anyway.

ORIGINAL: DBeves




Well no, surely the point with you is that you have said several times you bought the game for the ridiculous price of 1.99. You then come here spouting pages of vitriol at matrix for increasing the price. But if you already bought the game at 1.99 WTF, exactly, is your problem ? Not only is no one asking you to buy it again - but you already have it.

Twice you said you were done with this thread yet you keep posting in it. You have no point. YOU already own the game so it matters not one bit what matrix charges for the game to you. yet you come here and attack the company over and over. Grow up and get a life.

[tevans6220]

I bought PON 3 years for $19.99 so other than a few comments I'd like to make, I have no horse in this race.

To Johan: Since you're basically saying the same thing about PON that I was saying 3 years ago when it released, maybe you could see your way to unban me from the Paradox forums.

To Iain/Eric: I've been a loyal Matrix customer for a long time owning 34 Matrix titles. But sadly that loyalty has come to an end. Part of it is due to pricing. While you have every right to charge whatever you want, I also have a right to shop around for the best price and value for my money. Just an FYI, paying more doesn't mean I put more value to something especially a computer game. I bought WiTE for $80 and EiA for I think it was $70. I don't put anymore value on them than other titles. But like them or not I feel a certain obligation to play them just so it doesn't seem as though my money was wasted. Games are supposed to be a form of entertainment. I shouldn't feel as those I'm obligated to play a game just because I paid a higher price for it.

That brings me to my second and most important point. Matrix has lost my loyalty and my patronage due to the fact that almost every product I buy seems to be a work in progress. While some say supporting a 5,6 or 7 year old game is good customer service, I don't see it that way. I see it as products not completely finished and released too soon. The only types of patches I want to see after 5 years are patches to support new video cards or OS'es or something like that. I don't like seeing a game I bought 5 years just now getting around to getting all the bugs worked out. Case in point, WiTE and EiA to name just 2 games. Ageod games are the same way. I think ACW has had somewhere around 16 or 17 patches. PON has had 3 and 1 quickfix that I'm aware of and it still runs slow as molasses on my quad core system. Like I said, it just seems like I'm buying works in progress and it gets tiresome. I understand software has bugs but just once I'd love to buy a game and not have to wait several years for it to be in a relatively playable state. Imagine buying a car and having Ford tell you that while you can drive your car off the lot today, it won't actually be finished for a couple of years. Not too many people I know would settle for that. Why should computer games be any different.

I wish you guys all the luck in the world but like I said, I'm done with Matrix and possibly computer gaming altogether. Board games give me just as much entertainment without all the headaches.

[Hanal]

I have no problem with games being patched to fix or improve gameplay...hell back in the day, one of the main reasons I would buy The General or S&T magazines was to get hold of the errata sheets, counter replacements and map corrections for the many wargames I bought...you see, board games were and still are no different than pc games as neither format is always perfect at initial release..that is something that I learned to accept a long time ago....

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: J P Falcon

I have no problem with games being patched to fix or improve gameplay...hell back in the day, one of the main reasons I would buy The General or S&T magazines was to get hold of the errata sheets, counter replacements and map corrections for the many wargames I bought...you see, board games were and still are no different than pc games as neither format is always perfect at initial release..that is something that I learned to accept a long time ago....

warspite1

Absolutely right. Not happy about it of course but it is what it is.

[loki100]

agree, equally the approach of most computer game companies to patching is exemplary compared to the old map and cardboard games. SPI produced many a gem, but many that were broken beyond play, so its not a case of some long gone golden age before these computers mucked it all up.

As to late patching, why not? One reason is intensive play and in particular intensive play in various MP modes (where players deliberately or inadvertently find unintended advantages) that no amount of beta-testing will sort out. Releases of the 'standard' of say SOTS2 are fortunately rare, but I'm relaxed that a game I buy before or close to release will need more care and attention.

AGEOD, as one example, put out a sequence of final patches to a load of games last year, basically embedding the latest AGE engine changes. Seems a sensible way to draw the line under those games' development cycle.

[DBeves]

ORIGINAL: Alchenar

ORIGINAL: DBeves
Well - yes and no. Fundametally they are different, yours are shooting aliens or slaying dragons. Its simply a fact that those two things have a much bigger market - precisely because that is what they are about - than a simulation of the military situation in 1700's prussia. Thats entriely the point and you are to a large extent comparing apples with oranges.

Nah you've confused 'fundamentally' with 'superficially'.

What's a person playing XCOM doing? They're calculating risk with hit percentages and cover. They're positioning units to flank enemies and support each other. They're planing contingencies for enemy moves. Strip away all of the graphics and all they're really doing is moving counters on a grid. And those counters could be anything - soldiers and aliens, wizards and dragons, regiments and brigades. Fundamentally it's the same kind of game, you just have to present it the right way.

Well no - I havent "confused" anything - its you who have confused that "superficiality" as you term it as not being of primary importance. Why do you think Games Workshop Built a business on fantasy and science fiction. By your reasoning they could just have easily built a business of similar size on the napoleonic wars ? Thats patently not the case and therefore again - you are simply making an argument that only works by diminishing its single most important factor to a point of irrelevance.

[DBeves]

ORIGINAL: rogo727

Go back and re-read this thread if you simply don't understand. I don't know what more I can tell you. When you use terms like "wtf". I really can't take you seriously anyway.

ORIGINAL: DBeves

ORIGINAL: rogo727

You almost make me feel guilty for buying this game at 1.99. I did mess around with it and told myself no big loss. I see I have missed some updates for this game. And what you say is also true about life in general....to get out what you but in.

Well no, surely the point with you is that you have said several times you bought the game for the ridiculous price of 1.99. You then come here spouting pages of vitriol at matrix for increasing the price. But if you already bought the game at 1.99 WTF, exactly, is your problem ? Not only is no one asking you to buy it again - but you already have it.

surely the point with you is that you have said several times you

#

Well - I did read the thread - which is how I know you are here complaining about the price. The only thing I dont get is why you are complaining about the price. Nothing you said in any of your crass verbiage actually addresses that point - so why dont you instead of making somewhat cihildish and pathetic attempts to to avoid that actually answer the question ?

So ... once again for you and the other guy ... if you already have the game and got it at a stupid price - what, exactly, are you so vocally complaining about.

[tocaff]

Gentlemen, the price is what it is. Any company has the right to price their product as they see fit. You in turn as the consumer have the right to buy or not to buy that product.

Very detailed games that run a very long number of turns present a large problem in play testing. We, as the players get deeper into the games than the testers ever can. When we report a bug and the company does a patch we should be happy for the support, especially when it's a bit down the road from the release date.

The engine used is what it is and to introduce the game with a new engine is to release a new game. At the moment the lag between turns is what's putting me off from buying it, though I'm sorely tempted.

[Deomrve]

I agree, price isn't the problem with PoN it's the lag between turns. It get so long that it is a game breaker. Unless you are willing to put up with turn processing that will take up 50% or more of the games time then it's a no buy at any price.

[Twotribes]

You guys must hate Advanced tactics then. LOL

[Aurelian]

Sure, the turn lag in the late game can make molasses look fast, then again, it's still quicker than PBEM

[tocaff]

The AI is a learning tool in these games and PBEM is the real test.

[vonRocko]

ORIGINAL: tocaff

The AI is a learning tool in these games and PBEM is the real test.

The mantra of all lazy programmers![:)]

[tocaff]

But, I'm not a programmer, just a player. If you want a really good game you must play against a human. They will do the 1 thing that you didn't think of.

[Hanal]

ORIGINAL: vonRocko

ORIGINAL: tocaff

The AI is a learning tool in these games and PBEM is the real test.

The mantra of all lazy programmers![:)]

+1 x 1,000,000! This is a tired and lame excuse used to justify many IOS games with an AI too!

[dutchman55555]

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

nobody has the right to sell the games any more except us. We own them exclusively now. We are the only place it can be legitimately bought. All other sellers have been contacted and asked to remove the games from sale. If we allow others to sell it will be at the same price as us.

and

I'm sure once you look at the big picture you'll understand the logic and why sensible prices are needed to ensure ongoing development. After all there is a reason that Paradox split from Ageod - their business model just didn't work and was losing money every month. If you want these type of games you need to expect to pay a reasonable price. That's just common sense.

Thanks for you understanding while we move to rationalize the pricing and remove the games from sale on other sites. In the next couple of months everything will be completely unified and we hope to have the games removed from sale everywhere else.

The above is a monopoly.

I can think of no situation where a monopoly benefits the consumer. Claiming it is "the big picture","logical", "sensible", and "rationalized" makes it no less of a gouge and explains why I have nearly 300 games purchased from Steam and Gamersgate (at least a third of them at full price) and less than 10 games purchased from Matrix (and none of them purchased at full price).

Your choice to deny yourself freer access to my wallet is sad, but unfortunately completely predictable from a monopolizer's viewpoint. Short-sighted, and in the long run damaging to you and your company.

[Gizuria]

In this case, this 'monopoly' has probably just saved a great wargames company from going out of business and I, for one, am grateful and will continue to support AEGOD by purchasing games from them at the full price. I bought 'Rise of Prussia' last weekend at the full price directly from the company and will probably pick up 'Revolution Under Siege' at some point in the next couple of months too. I'd much rather pay the full whack and support the company knowing that they'll go on to produce more fantastic wargames in the future than save some money and see them go out of business and lament their demise afterwards. And who will create these games for us when they don't make any money? The customer wins something small in the short term but loses big in the long term.