The price

[Pustov]

Actually what I'll like to see is something like a mix between what Matrix is doing, and the way that Shrapnel Games sells it games { CD in a manual } and I usually get it in two to three days. Games like War in the Pacific desperately needed a printed manual. A PDF manual is nice for a backup and that's about it. Imagine try to learn HTTR with out a printed manual...

I may be giving some unwanted advice to Matrix, but if I were them... I would put a whole lot of advertisements in their next game { G.G. World at War}. and would release at lease one game every other year to retail, and never drop the prices of their downloaded games.

As for me..I can't wait for BiN to be release....Long Live SSG.....Hu.Waaa...

[TheHellPatrol]

IMHO the price is TOO low, i want to rest assured that there will be more to come in the future, and not quibble about the here and now. They make money "now", we "play" later...capiche?[:D]

[mbMike]

Well, you don't want to "price out" the riff-raff.

The price IS high for what video games retail at. You could price WitP at $120 dollars and you would still get the same 3,000 people to buy it because they wanted WitP. But Battles in Normandy, while still a tabletop wargame niche, is about Normandy. That's usually enough to bring out the casual gamers in the US and Europe to take a closer look, but the price may hold some back.

I don't really know, however, I'm no economist.

[Taiko]

I really fail to see what people complain about. When I bought my first REAL computer game, Ultima 4, I paid how much? You guessed it!!! $50!!! and this was back in 1985. I bought my first comic book for $.35. What do you get for that now? Movies when I was growing up were $1.25 Matinee.

So I pay the 60$ for a game that will definately rock my socks. I played Doom3, not very impressed compared to Dues Ex or System Shock. Not to mention the game they ripped off to make it, Half-Life.

Complain all you want; KP and BiN are instant classics. They belong up there with S.P. 1, X-Com, and Panzer general for "funness".

Edit : grammer

[rwenstrup]

I've been playing SSG wargames since their first game...and computer games since the start. I've got to say that the Decision series and Steel Panthers are the two game series that are worth the money.

These guys have earned our support.

...kinda like the UV/WitP series too...but it sure has a high learning curve.

By the way...I love the ability to download the game immediately and play it the same day!

..just my two cents...

[Montbrun]

...I'm willing to pay alot more than $59.99 for a quality product in this genre...

Brad

[Capitaine]

Agree that ~ $60 for BiN is very much worth it for the nature of the product. We, the wargaming community, must be willing to pay more for our high quality content than the average arcade gamer does for his simply due to the respective markets.

Keep the great games coming, SSG!

[Sarkus]

I'm glad to see my post generated a discussion.

While there is no doubt that many hard-core wargamers are willing to pay $59.99 for BiN, my fear is that it's too high a price for more casual wargamers and too high for those thinking about getting into the hobby. I've been watching this hobby get less and less mainstream with each passing year so Matrix's apparent strategy to just go after the existing market bothers me as short-sighted.

In addition, two other issues come to mind in response to some of the comments above. First, I don't buy the "gamers demand better graphics" argument. While it's true that BiN is more graphically advanced than many past wargames, I really doubt that it required the level of graphics modeling skill of something like Combat Mission, let alone a mainstream title. Wargames are still produced with relatively tiny development teams, so it's not like the cost has risen like it has with other types of games. Too argue that the price must go up to compensate strikes me as flawed.

Second, I thought the whole point of selling wargames online was to get more money to the developers? So, SSG is avoiding a greedy publisher's cut, a retail cut, and the cost of producing physical copies of the game, manual, and box, and they're still gonna charge more than what is the accepted price of a computer game? IMHO paying $50 under these circumstances is more than enough fan support.

Sarkus

[Fred98]

In Australia, the price of a first release good quality computer game, is AUD$89.00

It has been that price for 10 years.

BIN at USD$59.99 – comes out at about AUD$85.00 – a bargain!

[aysi]

Good call Joe

Dont forget the latest ps2 game clocks in at AUS 99.00,Maddern 2005 is that price and they will sell bucket loads,so many more than Bin i am afraid.so as i said before this is just the normal price,and cheap for a niche product like BIN

[Adam Parker]

ORIGINAL: Joe 98

In Australia, the price of a first release good quality computer game, is AUD$89.00

It has been that price for 10 years.

BIN at USD$59.99 – comes out at about AUD$85.00 – a bargain!

Joe, that includes the costs of shipment and storage in store, merchandising, producing the physical medium and don't forget the Liberal's extra. There's also a myriad of currency conversions between place of shipment and place of retail.

Wouldn't you kind of expect some flow-back of these to the consumer by Digital Download?

Btw - what's the dollar today [;)]

[JSS]

Adam,

BiN's price is an incredible value for what you're getting. I really think it's worth more than US$100.

I'm REALLY glad companies like SSG, 2by3, and Matrix still make/sell wargames worth buying. [&o]

JSS

[Kung Karl]

The use of digital download is great even if I would like to have the box with my other games instead of burnt cd without cover.

[2gaulle]

ORIGINAL: Sarkus

I'm glad to see my post generated a discussion.

While there is no doubt that many hard-core wargamers are willing to pay $59.99 for BiN, my fear is that it's too high a price for more casual wargamers and too high for those thinking about getting into the hobby. I've been watching this hobby get less and less mainstream with each passing year so Matrix's apparent strategy to just go after the existing market bothers me as short-sighted.

In addition, two other issues come to mind in response to some of the comments above. First, I don't buy the "gamers demand better graphics" argument. While it's true that BiN is more graphically advanced than many past wargames, I really doubt that it required the level of graphics modeling skill of something like Combat Mission, let alone a mainstream title. Wargames are still produced with relatively tiny development teams, so it's not like the cost has risen like it has with other types of games. Too argue that the price must go up to compensate strikes me as flawed.

Second, I thought the whole point of selling wargames online was to get more money to the developers? So, SSG is avoiding a greedy publisher's cut, a retail cut, and the cost of producing physical copies of the game, manual, and box, and they're still gonna charge more than what is the accepted price of a computer game? IMHO paying $50 under these circumstances is more than enough fan support.

Sarkus

You are my voice!

[Kung Karl]

ORIGINAL: 2gaulle

ORIGINAL: Sarkus

I'm glad to see my post generated a discussion.

While there is no doubt that many hard-core wargamers are willing to pay $59.99 for BiN, my fear is that it's too high a price for more casual wargamers and too high for those thinking about getting into the hobby. I've been watching this hobby get less and less mainstream with each passing year so Matrix's apparent strategy to just go after the existing market bothers me as short-sighted.

In addition, two other issues come to mind in response to some of the comments above. First, I don't buy the "gamers demand better graphics" argument. While it's true that BiN is more graphically advanced than many past wargames, I really doubt that it required the level of graphics modeling skill of something like Combat Mission, let alone a mainstream title. Wargames are still produced with relatively tiny development teams, so it's not like the cost has risen like it has with other types of games. Too argue that the price must go up to compensate strikes me as flawed.

Second, I thought the whole point of selling wargames online was to get more money to the developers? So, SSG is avoiding a greedy publisher's cut, a retail cut, and the cost of producing physical copies of the game, manual, and box, and they're still gonna charge more than what is the accepted price of a computer game? IMHO paying $50 under these circumstances is more than enough fan support.

Sarkus

You are my voice!

Mine too!

We customers lost and Matrix won when they dropped the retail chain. At first I thought that the price would drop when the middle hand was taken away. Boy was I wrong, it went up instead!

I would like to add that I dont have any anger against Matrix. If the world was a game money would be victory points and they are just trying to take as many they can from us.

[scout1]

Guys,

As a consumer, I too will always wish for a lower price. I have seen threads in just about every game forum on this website concerning price. Almost universally, these are
all negative.

Frankly, I think you are all missing the point. This is a free market society. If a seller,
in this case Matrix Games, though they could sell a product for $250 each and have sufficient sales volume, this is EXACTLY what they'll do. Now if as a consumer, you really want to get the product but feel it is not appropriately priced, then DON'T buy it. What's the point of complaining, Matrix Games/2 by 3, like any other supplier will attempt to
maximize their profit. If they over price, the product doesn't sell and either they change their ways or they go out of business.

So, I would love to see their games priced equivalent to all the mass market games, but this is a niche market. They are free to approach their product and future in a manner that fits their plans.

So go ahead and price your games anyway you choose. I just hope for my selfish reasons that
a) I can afford them and,
b) it keeps a company that produces a product that I like stays in business.

Happy gaming !

[mbMike]

I think we defend Matrix because we know the people who are Matrix. If we didn't know them, nobody would defend these outrageous prices.

But like I said in another thread, if you are poor or can't afford it or simply won't pay for it, Matrix is one of the only companies I know that has quality products in the same genre for free. That's right, for free.

They are not shutting you out by making the price $60USD, they are simply limiting your choices. And if there was a comparable wargame down the street at the next web site, and they sold something just as good for 49.99, I'd go there, but guess what? There isn't another web-site. So you suck it up and pay the price and enjoy it.

[marc420]

I'd say I probabaly own a smaller percentage of games that Matrix publishes than from most other publishers I like. Usually when I find a publisher that publishes games I like, I buy most of what they offer. Typically I find one game I like from the publisher, and then just from being around the forums and websites of the publisher I end up ordering a lot of their other stuff as well.

With Matrix, everything is priced at the very upper limit. And now with no retail sales, there's never anything in the discount bin from Matrix. So for everything on Matrix's site, its a very hard choice as to whether to buy the game or not. Therefore I make much fewer impulse buys from Matrix and end up owning fewer games from Matrix.

Also, since everything is priced at the upper limit of how much money they think they can take with people, to me there's a certain bad aftertaste from buying games from Matrix. If the game is good, then its just a matter of low-level grumbling about how much I paid for it. But if its a game that has problems or in which I lose interest in a short while after buying it, then I end up with a bad feeling about how much I paid.

Not to mention that with these prices any purchase from Matrix pretty much cleans out the game buying budget for awhile.

Either way, whenever I buy a game from Matrix, the high price means I'm almost always going to be saying that this is it and I won't be back to buy more for at least awhile.

Its just an impression, but for me I think Matrix ends up getting less of my money because of the high prices. Look at it this way.

BIN -- Matrix will get their $60 from me.
Campaigns on the Danube -- won't buy now. Normally might be interested, but BIN will strip budget. Anyways, I have doubts about the game from what I've read. Mainly about how much interest I'd have in the game longer term. With no discount bin, I'll probably never get this game.
WITP: At a lower price, I'd buy this game. But having cursed Grigsby's interfaces and game designs before, I simply won't pay $70 for this.
Starshatter: This is a game I might buy just to check out. Its not really a game I'm interested in, but close enough that I might check out. But not at Matrix's prices and the dent Matrix is putting in my budget with BIN.

So Matrix will get $10 to $20 extra from me for BIN. But there's at least three other games in their catalogue that I won't buy largely because of the way Matrix prices games.

[jungelsj_slith]

$60 for a single downloadable scenario and another scenario that I've already played 3-4 times. Ouch

What happens if I don't like that particular scenario?

I can't think of any other game that spends the time to build an entire engine and then hinges the success of it on a single experience. I hated the main scenario in Korsun Pocket, and I got burned because of it. I could see the potential for the engine, but just had zero interest in the main battle. Perhaps if Matrix purchased some of these great user-made scenarios and ported them to the new engine for inclusion in the release.. but to ask $60 for a single downloadable chance at fun (however long the scenario lasts) is just asking too much of this consumer.

Hmm, now I'm sounding bitter.

[BravoZulu]

OK, first, it is clearly up to Matrix and SSG to do what is best for them to maximize profits. Second, I think most would agree that there is a set of fans that will buy this game at $40 or at $80, the price is immaterial.

But let me say that I'm the example of the risk they are taking (calculated though it may be). I have been sitting on buying KP for about 2 months now, knowing that BIN was "imminent". But without a demo, without a "hard" cd and manual (at least w/o paying even more) and at a premium price, I'm struggling to make the purchase (ok, I *will* struggle when it's available). Sure, I can play TAO1 but I seriously doubt they want that to be representative of their brand spanking new $60 beauty.

So while they will certainly maximize the profits on the given purchasers, it will be very interesting to hear how they do with fencesitters such as myself. Furthermore, it doesn't exactly help to "expand the base" of wargamers when the cost of entry is so high. This may, although not certainly, impact the long term value of wargames -- I don't think anyone would argue that pricing WITP has this effect due to its grognard level.

Again, none of this is to say that Matrix is evil or any of that junk, just that I think there are some questions about the strategy. Frankly, given all of the above, it's amazing that I'm still on the fence. That is a real testament to the "word on the street" of KP, BIN and all the other Matrix games. I have HTTR and have enjoyed it tremendously (even if I stink at it) but atm I'm awfully hesitant to take the plunge.