Price a little steep?

[Arckon]

Once again this issue surprises me.

Couldn't agree Parusski with you more I have no hesitation in parting with my money for such quality games, everything from game play, to on screen info, to graphical look of the series shines.

Plus for those of you that have not yet tried the user made scenarios, they offer excellent quality and difference in theatre.
EG: Pacific Theatre for BIN: Luzon, MacArthur Master of Battles,
European Theatre for BIN: Rommel Master of Battles, Kursk, Patton Master of Battles.
Alternative Theatre for BIN: Crimea 1854

Would be extremely surprised if did not get similar quality with BII in terms of user made, though to be fair these are done by enthusiasts in there own time so no guarantees, but again would be extremely surprised if you didn't.

While other Companys do produce quality turned based wargaming products, this series really does have absolute overall quality plus, in my opinion.

[wodin]

Adam,

I cant recall the BiN debate. However BiN was a total engine change from KP whereas BiI is more of an enhancement of the BiN engine. So its not really the same issue.

Im not moaning or anything, I dont think it is very expensive to be honest and if I loved the system I'd pay out no problem.

I was just thinking about expansion packs etc. I really cant see my comment being at "disapointing to the game or the hobby in anyway.

Hey I pay out full whack for every new SB game and there is no real upgarde to the system in anyway.

I might even buy BiI as it covers a theatre that you dont see to often in wargames.

One thing I'd love to see in this game is simialr to what HPS do. Show the total casualties in manpower and vehicles rather. Adds to the immersion and gives a sense of the size of the conflict.

Finally I never started this thread I was replying to HercMighty.

[Kipper]

I would pay $100+ each for these games. It would work out at a few cents an hour for the enormous pleasure I get from them. And this BIT looks amazing, more like 3 games than 1.

Also I think SSG have posted some fantastic scenarios for free on their website... Husky, Luzon, Pacific Island Campaign, El Alamein, scenario variants etc. It's gaming heaven.

And no SSG are not going down the HPS route - sorry to sound harsh, but they were never on it at any stage as the HPS games essentially have no AI and are human play only. An important point if you are a greying person like me with sporadic opportunities for a wargaming fix (though I have the odd PBEM).

Just my 2c.

Kipper

PS Why are the best wargame makers - SSG and Panther IMHO - Australian. It has been something that has been on my mind this last while.

[wodin]

Yeah I agree with you. I'd pay well over the odds for COmbat Leader whne it gets released as I know I will love the game.

However I need to say this. The AI in HPS games is sound in the smaller the sccenarios ad good in SB.

Also the new AI in The first Bltiz is supposed to really shine.

John Tiller has learnt alot whilst working for the Military with regards to AI routines. HPS willl have credible AI's in the furutre Im sure.

Also I was talking about releasing the same game more or less but covering a different theatre similar to what HPS do. Nothing about the AI.

Finally the enhancements we see from BiN to BiI are what you might expect in an expansion rather than a full price game. HOWEVER due to the wargaming market and low sales then its only right that games come out full priced.

[Adam Parker]

ORIGINAL: wodin

I was just thinking about expansion packs etc. I really cant see my comment being at "disapointing to the game or the hobby in anyway...

Wodin you're definitely entitled to that opinion but I wonder if in the 60's when Stalingrad and DDay came out whether somebody bemoaned them as expansion packs? Same look counters, rules and board - just a different setting.

The whole concept of "expansion packing" in our hobby is imo just nonesense unless we are indeed talking about purposeful modules for existing systems. The Sims packs for example, Tropico Paradise Island...

In the case of DB or PzC though, we are talking complete games (ie: per multi-scenario release - not ATD). A core engine, modified with the progress of time but with plenty of work in scenario research, map design, playtesting and art.

ORIGINAL: Kipper

I would pay $100+ each for these games.

Who let this guy in? [:D][:D][:D]

[Kipper]

Who let this guy in? [:D][:D][:D]

Ops! Didn't think this was a closed shop forum! Back to lurking for me!

Enjoy the games!

Kipper

[parusski]

Arckon you are are totaly correct about other gaming company's. More often than not I have paid my $40 or $50 for a game and found it to be boring, buggy and lame. Matrix has a big chunk of my retirement money because of all the games I have bought. But I will retire a happy man with all those re-playable games.

I think Matrix does a better job than any other company when it comes to patches and support.

GOOD JOB GUYS.

[Zap]

Kipper, he was joking don't take offense. Adam, I'm sure will tell you that yes, you can post here anytime. There are light hearted spifs on occasion nothing that should keep you just lurking. I caught his joke. He was simply saying don't give Matrix any ideas.

[Erik Rutins]

Too late.. [:D]

Kipper, yes, please don't take things seriously around here.

Regards,

- Erik

[Hartford688]

[Deleted]

[Hertston]

ORIGINAL: Adam Parker

ORIGINAL: wodin

Looks like SSG is going down the lines of HPS. Same game different theatre full price. The expansion pack looks dead as far as wargames go.

Wodin that is such a disappointing approach to this game and our hobby and in fact, it surprises me that you still bring it up after the huge debate during the release of Battles In Normandy.

There is simply no logic to arguing this tact.

I'm not so sure. I'll talk HPS here as the case is rather more extreme.

Does "same game different theatre full price" really bring in more cash? I'm sure, as with this series, there are many wargamers who enjoy Tiller's games to the extent they happily buy each one in a series, but IMHO the majority don't. There is a reluctance to essentially buy the same game over and over, albeit with different scenarios. In my case, I have three Squad Battles games, one Panzer Campaigns and one Modern Battles. I have no intention of buying more full price games, BUT if, say, Panzer Campaigns was a modular system I would almost certainly have spent a lot more overall. The sort of model I'm thinking of would involve an initial purchase of the "system", with one scenario pack of your choice for full price, say $50. The additional (ideally, downloadable) scenarios would be, say, $20 each. OK, HPS would make less on each sale, but in my case I would probably have bought all the scenario packs for both series, so overall HPS would have had a lot more of my business. $20 isn't a lot; its the sort of cash you would fork out on each release without worrying much, but over time it adds up.

Granted, HPS are pretty good at upgrading earlier games as the system evolves, but the additional advantage (to them, as well as purchasers) is all that would need upgrading was the core system. That would continue to evolve giving gamers a better product with time and bringing a freshness with each update to all the scenario packs you have.

[Zap]

Go try and get a traditional war boardgame nowadays. Now that is sticker shock as their volume has got to be even much lower then PC niche wargames.

Mark Walker (doing Lock&Load) told me that more War Boardgames (in our niche market)are being sold than computer war games. I was surprised by that. He knows better than I since he has the numbers at his disposal.

[wodin]

I read that aswell.

Boardgames have a far higher market share than PC Wargames.

[EricGuitarJames]

ORIGINAL: Zap

Go try and get a traditional war boardgame nowadays. Now that is sticker shock as their volume has got to be even much lower then PC niche wargames.

Mark Walker (doing Lock&Load) told me that more War Boardgames (in our niche market)are being sold than computer war games. I was surprised by that. He knows better than I since he has the numbers at his disposal.

The only question I would ask here is 'define a computer wargame?'. Board wargames are fairly easy to define, but computer wargames?

[Zap]

I,m not sure what fit into MarkhWalker's definition. But I was referring to non RTS -Turn based IGO UGO or even Wego

[Adam Parker]

ORIGINAL: Zap

Kipper, he was joking don't take offense. Adam, I'm sure will tell you that yes, you can post here anytime. There are light hearted spifs on occasion nothing that should keep you just lurking. I caught his joke. He was simply saying don't give Matrix any ideas.

Oh indeed! Kipper I didn't think you took it the wrong way at all. I took your riposte as self deprecation too - loved it [:)] I'm humbled to be posting here myself! Kipper "come back" and bring Shane too. See that's another silly joke [>:] [:D]

ORIGINAL: Herston

I'll talk HPS here as the case is rather more extreme.

Does "same game different theatre full price" really bring in more cash? I'm sure, as with this series, there are many wargamers who enjoy Tiller's games to the extent they happily buy each one in a series, but IMHO the majority don't. There is a reluctance to essentially buy the same game over and over..."

Bring in cash or pay for the labor - the effort in bringing fresh research in a playable format with added chrome to the engine, art, writing and map to the market?

ORIGINAL: Zap

Mark Walker (doing Lock&Load) told me that more War Boardgames (in our niche market)are being sold than computer war games.

I wouldn't be surprised by that at all. Board games still have huge advantages over PC's - great art, easy DYO, house rules, paper manuals, cardboard charts, unhidden math and seeing the map all at once true size.

PC war games take their strength from AI, FOW, no cut n' trim, more complex computer assisted math, computer assisted LOS and no mess/spilled stacks/huge floor-sized maps!

So what's let the PC war game market down over these past 10 years then? Bugs, poor AI, shoddy rule books, incomplete rules (remember East Front 1?), the poorly marketed trend to e-manuals and the lack of easy DYO.

Happy gaming everyone!
Adam.

[Reiryc]

ORIGINAL: Kipper

I would pay $100+ each for these games.

Then allow me to buy the next one and sell it to ya... [:'(]

[ravinhood]

Me, I'm just waiting on Schwerpunkts game AGW coming in August that will offer what BIN and BII and probably BIA (Battles in Africa) offer for one low low price of a mere $29.99 One game to "bind them all into one nice package deal".

[Hartford688]

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

Me, I'm just waiting on Schwerpunkts game AGW coming in August that will offer what BIN and BII and probably BIA (Battles in Africa) offer for one low low price of a mere $29.99 One game to "bind them all into one nice package deal".

I'm very much looking forward to AGW too, and the price is very low. But the scale is different so I'm not sure it really replaces DBS...

Just as RGW and KP are not interchangeable.

[Adam Parker]

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

Me, I'm just waiting on Schwerpunkts game AGW coming in August that will offer what BIN and BII and probably BIA (Battles in Africa) offer for one low low price of a mere $29.99 One game to "bind them all into one nice package deal".

[:)] Well here's Battles In Normandy ala Schwerpunkt! If Ron Dockall nails the interface and severe scroll lag this time, he's in with a chance - he'll have a rip roaring Divisional level sim with beautiful maps and the best counters information-wise in PC war gaming . But SSG still holds the Regimental level genre as does HPS the batallion level. True Ron may potentially have a great all in one package but SSG and HPS with their smaller scales will hold the market for multi-scenario, campaign based operational gaming.

If Ron get's it right this time I'm in with ya! Best of luck Ron. Hope you can pull it off.