ORIGINAL: ZOOMIE1980
Valid point, Jim, concerning the market for these games. The only place one can then legitimately affect the bottom line is the labor issue. Only through the introduction and incorporation of new design, coding and management techniques can the amount of time and effort to produce a top quality title be reduced, thereby making it more attractive to more developers entering the industry. And that may be part of the problem.
The money is so tight in this genre, that it simply does not attract enough new talent with new ideas. Or, on the other side, it pays so poorly that only entry-level types tend to do it, and as family needs grow, they move on to higher paying business jobs. And then you are left with the only senior people in the business being the truely religious die-hards that do this out of nothing but love for the genre. And those folks tend to get stuck in a developmental rut quite often. Ala Gary Grigsby. Trying totally new developmental techniques is obviously too much of a risk in such a marginalized business, I suppose.
And my impression may be all wet, but I have this picture of this genre basically being run by the senior die-hards who came up in the early days of computer gaming who have stayed around out of love, not money, managing a small number of most young, entry-level programmers (kids with les than 5-7 years of experience, mostly in the 20's and early 30's) and designers who learn to do things a certain way. When I can finally extract an answer from a real developer concerning a "why do you do it that way", that answer tends to be along the lines of "we've always done it that way...". And that is always a sign of a stagnation of ideas from a development perspective.
I agree with you that labor issues and redundancies in development processes can help the bottom line, but I think the real problem lies with us the marketplace itself. Matrix decided to charge $70.00 instead of $59.95 or whatever some of their past titles cost and the resounding cry of foul from the cheapskate wargaming community was deafening.
We keep shooting ourselves in the foot by forcing companies to charge similar prices other companies charge for games that sell in excess of 500,000 - 1,000,000 copies easily. And when a company like Talonsoft goes under we bemoan the death of our hobby and wonder why no company wants to touch a wargame these days.
For an intelligent bunch of guys we can be pretty dumb sometimes. If you bought UV 2 years ago how many hours of fun do you suppose you got out of it these past couple of years? 100, 200, more? For the price you paid I’d say it was probably the best bang for the buck you got out of any entertainment related purchase you made for either of those years.
If the wargamers would step up to the plate together as a group and support higher prices for our desired games, I bet we’d see an influx of wargames similar to the flood that hit the board game market when SPI started publishing back in the 70’s. This is our hobby, and I think those who work so hard to bring gems like UV and WitP to us deserve the same success any other professional deserves at their jobs of choice.
Let them charge $100.00 or $150.00 for a massive project like WitP and I bet you’ll see development schedules fill up with wonderfully inspired future projects overnight. Some people pay thousands of dollars to support theatre, opera, ballet, golf, etc. Why shouldn’t we try to support our chosen interests with the same kind of good will?
Jim