Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Bingeling
A chance review on a minor site for the original game. And an excellent AAR by Das gave more understanding of the potential of the game, and made me stick around.

I swear, several publishers owe Das some serious royalties for his Let's Play videos!

ORIGINAL: Cauldyth

ORIGINAL: Bingeling
A chance review on a minor site for the original game. And an excellent AAR by Das gave more understanding of the potential of the game, and made me stick around.

I swear, several publishers owe Das some serious royalties for his Let's Play videos!

But it was not a video

I fooled around and got my money's worth. Then I read this one:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2495880

I am very pleased to hear about the imminent release of Universe: bring it on!

I can understand that for the bulk of Matrix's catalog Steam may not be a good idea: all serious war gamers know about this community and would be here anyway so why give Steam a 30% cut and enrage customers who hate Steam into the bargain? The point is that DW is *not* a war game and there are millions, literally, of Steam users who would not play a hard core war game but would be very interested in DW who won't ever buy it because a) they don't know about it, b) it's far too expensive, or c) it's too much hassle to set up Matrix account, download/install etc.

With regard to the value of the expansions (Vs the average DLC etc) I can't comment because I haven't played them - but that's not the point. I would be quite happy to buy the base game now for $30 now and pick up the expansions as and when IF the base game included the numerous tools, UI improvements and quality of life tweaks that have accumulated over the years that I have learned of through Das's videos. But from what Das says I understand they are not, you have to buy the whole package.

Again the comparison with Paradox is instructive: Paradox introduced a number of important, nay "must have", tools and QoL improvements to Hearts of Iron III that you could only get if you bought the expansions. Everyone bought them, of course, but a lot of people were pretty angry at having their arms twisted up their backs to do so (especially since they would have bought them anyway since a lot of Paradox fans want to support the company as much as possible). Paradox listened. For EU4 with each expansion there is also a mega-patch containing all the QoL and AI tweaks developed for the expansion automatically downloaded to everyone's base game via Steam at no charge. Most people think this is awesome and it just makes you feel like heading over to Steam to buy some more Paradox games and expansions.

On the matter of changing publishers I recall an interview with Elliot and Erik where they basically said that Matrix is also involved in the development process and provides beta testers so I imagine just going indy or switching to another publisher wouldn't be very prudent unless they can offer similar services to Elliot.

ORIGINAL: akvilonn
Steam publishing

you know what i want to do with peoples,that inserting word "Steam" everywhere they can ?
throw them out of the AIRLOCK.

I hate to sound like a Matrix fanboy, but I'm completely happy with them. They (and Codeforce) have continued to support and expand the game far beyond its roots.

There is no reason every game needs to be on Steam & its clones.

ORIGINAL: Gregorovitch55
why give Steam a 30% cut

Why indeed?

I would guess that Erik's analysis ended there. If there's little to gain from Steam distribution and the costs are significant, why bother? I trust that he crunched the numbers with due diligence when he investigated Steam distribution. His analysis - and he has all the information necessary to make a reasonable decision - was that it was not sufficient to justify getting into bed with Steam.

Whatever you might argue pro-Steam, one indisputable fact remains - that Erik has the facts and you do not.

ORIGINAL: Gregorovitch55
...there are millions, literally, of Steam users who would not play a hard core war game but would be very interested in DW who won't ever buy it...

Millions? You're sure of that estimate? Please cite your source. Erik used to run a network gaming site, back in the day, and has all sorts of demographic information. Please be so kind as to cite your source for your "millions" claim.

ORIGINAL: Gregorovitch55
a) they don't know about it

Granted, Matrix needs to do more marketing. But it's a cost-benefit analysis. Only Erik has the numbers to decide how much marketing budget is worth expending, so I don't think you or I can comment on this. But with that said, he seems to be more aggressive in reaching out to bloggers and gaming sites than he has been historically. It's getting better.

ORIGINAL: Gregorovitch55
b) it's far too expensive

I strongly disagree. In terms of hours-per-dollar spent, DW is one of my best purchases. There's no need for a new customer to buy all the expansions all at once. They can buy DW vanilla for about $30 and expand on that as they deem worthy of their dollar.

It seems fairer than companies which charge $60-80 for a game which you play for 3 hours, encounter game-breaking bugs and then shelve it indefinitely due to their lack of willingness to maintain the game.

ORIGINAL: Gregorovitch55
c) it's too much hassle to set up Matrix account, download/install etc.

I give this statement zero value. Online purchasing is becoming ubiquitous these days.

ORIGINAL: Gregorovitch55
...IF the base game included the numerous tools, UI improvements and quality of life tweaks that have accumulated over the years...

So, you're saying - "I want all the development work done on DW and all it's expansions, but I only want to pay for the base game"? Is that it? Matrix and CodeForce had done a fair bit of work on DW since it's initial release... and you want all that work... for free?

I don't think I need to point out how absurd this sounds.

ORIGINAL: Gregorovitch55
Again the comparison with Paradox <snip>

You have nothing with which to judge the effectiveness of Paradox's decisions and their effect on profitability. Any reference to Paradox is without value.

I for one love steam. Also, as soon as a game has multiplayer but not via steam its almost an instant no-go, as organizing MP via steam is so much easier that no-one in my group of friends will consider playing something archaic like PBEM. Lazy? Maybe, but why bother if there are so many other awesome steam-enabled games to be played!

ORIGINAL: hewwo
organizing MP via steam is so much easier

Going to McDonald's is much easier than the Italian bistro hidden off the main streets down-town, that I found.

But guess which serves better food?

If you're happy with Big Macs, then good for you.

I, for one, am grateful that this isn't a Steam-game. I don't like Steam and I don't care for that particular business model. If I buy a game then I, and only I, decide if and when said game gets patched and to what version it gets patched. If I buy a game then it is mine to use on my computer for as long as my operating system allows it, and telling me that I can't use the game I bought unless I'm authorized by the publisher is a load of crap that I refuse to accept. Consequently I don't buy from Steam and if a game is Steam-exclusive then that's just too bad.

It may sound a bit ideological to some people, but the way I see it, it really isn't all that extreme. If a developer won't let me play a game permanently offline and won't let me control what game version I'm playing then said developer simply doesn't want my money. Developers make their choice and I make mine.

ORIGINAL: Spidey

I, for one, am grateful that this isn't a Steam-game. I don't like Steam and I don't care for that particular business model. If I buy a game then I, and only I, decide if and when said game gets patched and to what version it gets patched. If I buy a game then it is mine to use on my computer for as long as my operating system allows it, and telling me that I can't use the game I bought unless I'm authorized by the publisher is a load of crap that I refuse to accept. Consequently I don't buy from Steam and if a game is Steam-exclusive then that's just too bad.

It may sound a bit ideological to some people, but the way I see it, it really isn't all that extreme. If a developer won't let me play a game permanently offline and won't let me control what game version I'm playing then said developer simply doesn't want my money. Developers make their choice and I make mine.

Doesn't sound extreme to me, it's just basic freedom of choice. I don't mind Steam - virtually all my games are on Steam nowadays - but I understand why people don't like it, and respect their opinion. What worries me is that we're moving to the point where there will be no choice. Actually, that's not quite right. There will be a choice, but it will be (1) play games via an on-line connection, or (2) don't play them at all.

Many Indie Games nowadays go with a Steam version and a non-Steam version. Distant Worlds Franchise can go both way too.

@Kayoz
Matrix has Steam Greenlight for Panzer Corps since December but they didn't even released it yet on Steam. So they actually have no numbers what impact a Steam release on a Franchise/sales has.

ORIGINAL: Flinkebeinchen
Many Indie Games nowadays go with a Steam version and a non-Steam version. Distant Worlds Franchise can go both way too.

I think you're confusing "could" with "is profitable to do so". Erik et al are running a business. A business with the explicit objective of turning as much of a profit as possible. I rather suspect Erik's decision was based more upon the latter than the former.

ORIGINAL: Flinkebeinchen
@Kayoz
Matrix has Steam Greenlight for Panzer Corps since December but they didn't even released it yet on Steam. So they actually have no numbers what impact a Steam release on a Franchise/sales has.

I disagree. They make projections based on their business plan. It's a rather standard part of managing a business. I don't think I'm being unreasonable in assuming that Erik worked out some careful projections before making his decision.

Also, I seem to remember him stating it wasn't a good fit for DW at the moment. If you read between the lines, he quite specifically did not apply the statement to other Matrix games. Nor did he exclude a future Steam release for DW. As the business terrain changes, I'm sure he'll position his assets accordingly.

Call me a fan-boi of Matrix, but I think you're underestimating the business acumen behind the company.

The major issue I have with Steam is when your internet is down no gaming. They have an off line mode but it likes to kill it self off very frequently to where you MUST contact the steam servers to access any games you have on it. If Matrix goes under I still have all my Matrix games. If Steam goes under I have NOTHING. Steam does/used to promise that if they went under they would make their games stand alone but they have become so big with so many titles so tightly integrated with steam works it just wouldn't be feasible to recode every game on steam to rip out steam works and have a stand alone version. Some of the developers don't even exist any more. And while you might like a world where the only place to shop is Wal-Mart some of use do like to shop else where. A single source for ALL PC games wouldn't be any better for gamers then only having Wal-Mart for shopping would be good for all consumers.

ORIGINAL: mullk

The major issue I have with Steam is when your internet is down no gaming. They have an off line mode but it likes to kill it self off very frequently to where you MUST contact the steam servers to access any games you have on it. If Matrix goes under I still have all my Matrix games. If Steam goes under I have NOTHING. Steam does/used to promise that if they went under they would make their games stand alone but they have become so big with so many titles so tightly integrated with steam works it just wouldn't be feasible to recode every game on steam to rip out steam works and have a stand alone version. Some of the developers don't even exist any more. And while you might like a world where the only place to shop is Wal-Mart some of use do like to shop else where. A single source for ALL PC games wouldn't be any better for gamers then only having Wal-Mart for shopping would be good for all consumers.

Indeed. The other issue is that if Steam goes under, transferring your games to a different computer will be difficult (if not impossible - I don't know). The only reason it doesn't bother me is that I have no games on Steam that I couldn't live without.

Osito

@mullk
As a long time steam user who plays nearly every day I must say the steam downtime is maybe ~1 day/year, at last in my region (Germany). Besides that steam offline play works fine but games that use build in online features just don't work when your internet is down. I don't think thats steam fault when your game needs inet to play.

Even when you own a game you only bought the right to use it. When Matrix goes under and a new publisher buys their games they can deny your access to them if they want to. Still playing would be illegal then

@Kayoz
Time to think about changing the goals of their business plan then maybe.

For example let's take a look at Defender's Quest from Level Up Labs

1.) Defender's Quest by the numbers - Part 1
2.) Defender's Quest by the numbers - Part 2 (3 months after Steam release)
3.) Lars Doucet (LUL) talking about Digital Distribution

ORIGINAL: Flinkebeinchen

Even when you own a game you only bought the right to use it. When Matrix goes under and a new publisher buys their games they can deny your access to them if they want to. Still playing would be illegal then

Are you saying that if I buy a game on a dvd which can be played without any connection to the Internet, the copyright owner can subsequently revoke my right to use that game, and that I'm in breach of copyright if I play the game on my computer? Hmmm, I'd like to see that one play out in court.

ORIGINAL: Osito

Are you saying that if I buy a game on a dvd which can be played without any connection to the Internet, the copyright owner can subsequently revoke my right to use that game, and that I'm in breach of copyright if I play the game on my computer? Hmmm, I'd like to see that one play out in court.

Sad but true

ORIGINAL: Flinkebeinchen

ORIGINAL: Osito

Are you saying that if I buy a game on a dvd which can be played without any connection to the Internet, the copyright owner can subsequently revoke my right to use that game, and that I'm in breach of copyright if I play the game on my computer? Hmmm, I'd like to see that one play out in court.

Sad but true

I believe you are mistaken in your assertion.

Cheers

Pip