Matrix: Last hope for Strategy gaming

[String]

ORIGINAL: Pippin

If not excellent, hmm. Now I would HATE to see what he considers a POOR game to be

The excellent ones i reffered to were EU2 and HoI2.. bot very good games in my eyes. However CK was quite boring imo, Victoria rather poor and HoI 1 ..

[Lucifuge]

My niche has been flight, chopper, tank, naval surface, sub sims & of coarse Steel Panthers WAW. I'm looking at a few other Matrix Games, I like being able study games before I buy.

Speaking of tank sims...where are they? I know T-72 is due out sometime this year and Steel Beast 2 but man are there any other tank sims? I still want a cross between SH3 and Dangerous Waters though. As far as strategy games go, there will always be small developers putting out titles for us because we are a small but rabid group who generally will pay whatever for a quality game...case in point WiTP.

[ioticus]

ORIGINAL: Joe 98



As to the future, I look forward to computer Rise and Decline of the Third Reich, and the next game in the Airborne Assault series and SSG’s next game, Battles In Italy.

All to be published by Matrix [8D]

Where did you read Matrix will be publishing Third Reich?

[jnier]

ORIGINAL: ioticus

ORIGINAL: Joe 98



As to the future, I look forward to computer Rise and Decline of the Third Reich, and the next game in the Airborne Assault series and SSG’s next game, Battles In Italy.

All to be published by Matrix [8D]

Where did you read Matrix will be publishing Third Reich?

I think he means Bruce Harper's "A World at War," which was the succesor to third reich. Very similar games, only AWAW is much, much bigger than 3R (it includes the pacific theater as well). Also, Bruce Harper's AWAW shouldn't be confused with Gary Grigsby's World at War.

Here's the link: http://www.aworldatwar.com/

Here's the press release from the developer: http://www.magnetargames.com/News/20041119.htm

[Fred98]

Yes, but the phrase "A World At War" will confuse people - so I didn't use it.

I suspect there will be a number of scenarios and one will be the "Advanced Third Reich for computer"

-

[JosephL]

The Size of the Strategy Market:

For the record, I like Matrix Games too, but I am sure everyone just thinks am paid to say that

Zap asked what the state of the strategty market is, in general. Since its my job to know, roughly speaking, these things, I may as well give an answer!

In the late 90s the strategy market fragmented into two parts, and if you return to some other thread going some would classify these as RTS and TBS (Turn Based). However, it is more accurate to describe them as action-strategy and tactical-strategy. Yes, a few games overlap those definitions but lets just leave it like that.

My disclaimer is that market fragmentation isn't bad, it allows smaller companies an opportunity to compete, and this is where Matrix has found a strong foothold. The action-strategy genre experienced exponential growth during the late 90s and early 2000s. Their advantage is a youthful audience (high disposable income) and graphical superiority to the tactical bretheren. However, in looking back we can see that this was the beginning of the end: The Action-Strategy genre stopped growing because innovation slowed down and the continual advancement of graphical interfaces was causing the development costs to increase. What you now see in this fragment of the market are those that invested most heavily into it are either diverging (World of Warcraft) or liquidating (Strategy First). The "RTSs" are going to settle into the same 'trend' as TBS games in the near future, with a small (relative compared to the RTS boom) and loyal fanbase.

The older market, tactical-strategy games, has a few advantages. A) An older audience, which is subject to a higher level of repurchase (Older people, in general, trust a company they know to release a good game). B) A low development cost (relative to action-strategy games, on average). I believe this market growth is below the average for all PC Games, however, I do not believe it to be in decline (As, for instance, Adventure games are and have been for years).
On the same note, related to Matrix, without doing any analysing, I believe Matrix Games is currently growing in both profits and market share faster than the average market growth for our industry.

What that means: It means Matrix Games will continue to grow and (consiquently) bring the best strategy games to our fans. While the industry may be in a level of slow growth, Matrix Games is not. As for our competition, I have no idea, you'll have to ask them yourself


However, my final note is: Matrix Games publishes strategy games. Our focus has been (and will continue to be) tactical strategy games, but when a great action-strategy game comes along (some would consider HTTR, but right now I am talking about I of the Enemy and Starshatter) we don't hesitate to bring that to our fans as well. The best way to protect yourself in ANY investment (this is important for all you people with investments) is to diversify your portfolio, otherwise you'll end up in the current position of SOME strategy publishers, with rising costs, a stagnent market, and a falling market share.

I bet nobody figured that question would get answered, but there you go!
-Joe Lieberman

[RBWhite]

Hi JosephL

I read your post and found it very informative.

I fall into that older audience. My kids bought me for Christmas, Axis & Allies and BattleField Vietnam (I'm a Vet of that war) I wish that they had asked for hints prior to purchasing those two games. Just don't like either style of play. The Battlefield series games remind me of DOOM & Wolfinstien, made these old eyes hurt and upset my stomach.

I do have the Starshatter & I of the Enemy demos. Starshatter I like it puts me in mind of the BattleCruiser series, also I enjoy spacewar & exploration Scfi. For some reason my opinion is still out on I of the Enemy. For some weird reason it reminds me of Axis & Allies??

But all in all I have found Matrix Games as the anchor or pivot point of todays wargaming market, which I feel makes their competion strive to keep doing better.

Thanks for the info.

Very Nice

Rick White

[Zap]

JosephL, thank you for your prompt reply. Yes, I found it very informative.
I have asked that question several times in other posts. Not for any other reason then to be informed.

Because as a strategy gamer, I feel we have the same interests at heart. The success of the strategy wargame.

I, like RBWhite, fit into the latter category I'm in my early fifties(52). So I have been a part of the strategy wargame phenomenom since I was fourteen. Somehow I feel a kinship to Matrix and other strategey wargame companies.

[JosephL]

Any time guys! If you've seen my pictures I, of course, do not fall into the older age catagory, but I have been playing strategy games since the age of 10. Still not quite as long as some of you . I've studied the game market very intently for many years now, so while I certainly am not a one-man marketing research firm (as in, I can't give you specific numbers) I am glad to share general industry trends should you ever have a burning question on video games in general. To me, it is fascinating... I'm particularly fascinated by Massive Multiplayer Online Games. Doesn't mean I play them (actually I have never found a MMOG I liked since 1994 and the Kesmai series) but I find the marketing that goes on both inside and outside them fascinating.

Lets just say, there is no other market in the world where a product can launch and in a single week capture 20% of the market (World of Warcraft). A NORMAL product launch has goals like "5-10% of the market in 5 years." It took Anheuser Busch someodd 100 years of business to reach their current state of 50% market share (domestic US)...

Interesting to me at anyrate and now back to the show!
-Joe Lieberman

[ravinhood]

The "RTSs" are going to settle into the same 'trend' as TBS games in the near future, with a small (relative compared to the RTS boom) and loyal fanbase.

Thank gawd for that.

I also am one of the old timers, 49 almost (come May). I can't stand rts games, except for a handful that figured out if you slow down the pace of the game, some of the turn based gamers will try it out, some will like it. That's me. As long as I don't have to move my mouse faster than I want to think, I'll try it and play it. As soon as it becomes a clickfest, it's tossing time.

But, even as an avid TB player, I don't like all of Matrixgames titles. I loathe "eastern front" games. I think I played Stalingrad too much as a teenager and just burnt myself out on that part of the war. Plus I don't care for RUSSIANS (in a wargame now, so don't any russians get ally pissy on me hehe). I don't like playing the Germans all that much either. I'm a Western Allies type of fan and those are the games that interest me most in the WWII series. WWI airware interests me, but, there aren't any decent turn based airwar games to buy. ;( Key word I used there was "decent", so before anyone throws that France:April 1918 or whatever the title is, I tried the demo, it suks. lol I don't like naval games either. And I don't like monster games like WitP and I guess the new version of "War in Russia" that they are working on. So, we are all unique, not going to like "everything" published, even if it is a turn based wargame. And I particularly don't care for anything FPSer. Battlefied 1942 is the only one I can muster for a couple of scenarios, then it goes back into the might play sometime next year. lol

Thing is though, I'm getting rather tired of WWII titles altogether. I'm glad they picked up Koios. I'm looking forward to their Caesar game, though I wasn't interested in Alexander that much. But, at least it was a welcome change.

What I'd really like to see is more civilization type games without any historical value, but, the AI plays a warmonger. I just found in Civilization III the AI wasn't as warring as it was in the first version or CIV II. I like warfare. It doesn't have to be "history" for me to enjoy a "WARGAME". Alpha Centauri was about the best one I played, no historical value at all, no real realism to have to contend with, just a good all out space wargame giving the player the ability to design his units. I'd like to see more games like it. And more games like X-COM. I like Spartan because it plays like a "wargame", not really historical at all, but, a hell of a lot of fun trying to stay with the AI on those higher difficulties. Slitherine is doing it right for me now.