Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Terminus

It became annoying after 17 pages of a small group of people repeating the same arguments over and over and over and over and over again. Price isn't going to change, and the publisher doesn't have to explain themselves to anybody on this forum. The end.

If only...

ORIGINAL: Titanwarrior89

The game does have a high cost.....but has anyone looked at Battlefront prices.  Their not cheap. 

They're not cheap, but Battlefront will discount (not put on sale, but actually lower the price permanently) after 12-18 months. Often multiple times.

Anyone reading this knows that it will take a minimum of 3-4 years (and probably closer to 5-7) for Command to go on sale. On sale.

ORIGINAL: Wiz33

Why is this thread still open?

If you think the price is set too high. You are wrong. Matrix have been in this business for a long time and I think they have the sales data to support their pricing structure or they would be out of business a long time ago.

If it's more than you can afford now. Save some money and get it later. Maybe you'll get lucky and there would be a sale or coupon.

If you can afford it and are on the fence. Wait a bit and watch some of the videos and read some of the AAR and reviews. Then make your decision.

Discussion closed.

A new PC wargamer, interested in Combined Operations, is lured by marketing for Command. It seems like the game he has always dreamed of. He then sees a price of $90 and walks away, never to learn more about the hobby.

Discussion open.

ORIGINAL: Tomn

I do agree that the publishers have no need nor obligation to respond to anything anyone says, but I don't see why this should prevent anyone from having their say, nor indeed why it should necessarily prevent the publishers from responding if they so will it.

People have had their say. And the publishers have responded. But if you look at the other threads, they have answered all the concerns.

How many times are they to reply to the same things? Going in circles may work for some, but they do have better things to do.

Claims get made that if they do this, then this will happen. But those claims do not survive critical thinking as they have *nothing* to back those up with. You can't tell a company that they don't know what they're doing when they have years of market analysis, growth, and sales that show that they *do* know exactly what they are doing.

ORIGINAL: Tomn

ORIGINAL: JDM

Tomn you seem like a particularly inciteful chap, particularly well informed about business practices. In the context of this thread I would be interested on your take on this article http://www.polygon.com/2013/8/15/462225 ... ort-groups

I believe I can say without any of my usual reservation that everyone here will heartily condemn anyone who thinks it'd be a good idea to send death threats to Matrix Games or the devs. Just not on, that.

And I'm extremely curious as to why anyone thinks that's a possibility here, let alone a probability.

Have there been such death threats? Or are you worried about them? If not, why post the link?

ORIGINAL: dutchman55555

ORIGINAL: Wiz33

Why is this thread still open?

If you think the price is set too high. You are wrong. Matrix have been in this business for a long time and I think they have the sales data to support their pricing structure or they would be out of business a long time ago.

If it's more than you can afford now. Save some money and get it later. Maybe you'll get lucky and there would be a sale or coupon.

If you can afford it and are on the fence. Wait a bit and watch some of the videos and read some of the AAR and reviews. Then make your decision.

Discussion closed.

A new PC wargamer, interested in Combined Operations, is lured by marketing for Command. It seems like the game he has always dreamed of. He then sees a price of $90 and walks away, never to learn more about the hobby.

Discussion open.

The more mainstream games like these become, the more dumbed-down and unrealistic they become due to large numbers of casual players (the majority) pressuring and influencing the developers through complaints to simplify / make the game easier- aka 'dumbing down'. I've seen it happen too many times before. No thank you.

ORIGINAL: JRyan

Oh and by the way, my wife was so glad it came out because she was tired of hearing about it. Maybe that would help in the future? I mean she wanted me to get a laptop and I refused until it was released. She thinks she won...hehe[:D]

Funny, when I told my wife there was a sharp, short of intake of breath. Followed by me saying "I know, right?"

ORIGINAL: Terminus

It became annoying after 17 pages of a small group of people repeating the same arguments over and over and over and over and over again. Price isn't going to change, and the publisher doesn't have to explain themselves to anybody on this forum. The end.

Again, with the most respect I can muster, you know where the door is. Let the small group of people mutter amongst themselves, what is it to you?

Again, this is far less to do with the price than it is to do with how the price will affect the hobby, now and in the future. If you don't see that, more power to you...I just don't see why you're here, then.

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

ORIGINAL: Tomn

I do agree that the publishers have no need nor obligation to respond to anything anyone says, but I don't see why this should prevent anyone from having their say, nor indeed why it should necessarily prevent the publishers from responding if they so will it.

People have had their say. And the publishers have responded. But if you look at the other threads, they have answered all the concerns.

How many times are they to reply to the same things? Going in circles may work for some, but they do have better things to do.

Claims get made that if they do this, then this will happen. But those claims do not survive critical thinking as they have *nothing* to back those up with. You can't tell a company that they don't know what they're doing when they have years of market analysis, growth, and sales that show that they *do* know exactly what they are doing.

This is a pretty good example of what I'm talking about, really. The argument goes in circles because the insistence is that "You've already been answered, and answered in such a way that you can't argue back, so why don't you just shut up now?" Yet we do NOT feel that our points have been answered adequately, nor that the reasoning put forward is flawless, and any attempts to point out any such holes in reasoning that we see is generally met by a response such as the one above: "You've already been answered, shut up." Is it any surprise under such circumstances that the discussion goes in circles instead of advancing?

As for the claim that nobody expect Matrix has anything approaching proof, well, I do realize it's a bit of an imposition upon your time, but I would ask that you look over my posts in greater detail - I try to explain why there are really a great many reasons and much evidence suggesting my point of view. If you insist, I can summarize them again in a new post, but I warn you that you would only be perpetuating the cycle unless you're willing to engage with that summary as it is instead of blowing it off as "Answered already, shut up." And as for the argument that it is impossible to tell Matrix that they might be doing something wrong, well, consider this thought exercise: If Matrix decided next week that their new cheapest price for any of their games would be in the millions of dollars, and that their highest price would be in the billions, do you think it would be right to object, protest, and point out why this is a bad idea, or do you think that, as they have years of experience and so on, they should know very well what they are doing and that it is impossible that they should be wrong on the matter? I think it's difficult to claim that the community would simply allow them to walk away from such a move! Their years of experience does not make them immune to error (as indeed nobody is), and if we believe they are making a mistake, why should we not speak up, and argue our point as best we can?

You seem to be arguing, as well, that the fact of their survival is proof positive that they've made no mistakes. Granted, their current course is a very safe one, but it also seems highly restrictive and limiting - there is no contradiction in saying that "Matrix is doing well now" and saying "Matrix could be doing much better if they changed." Simple survival, as we can see, is no proof against the error of leaving money on the table.

ORIGINAL: K 19
The more mainstream games like these become, the more dumbed-down and unrealistic they become due to large numbers of casual players (the majority) pressuring and influencing the developers through complaints to simplify / make the game easier- aka 'dumbing down'. I've seen it happen too many times before. No thank you.

Which explains why Paradox, with their complex games, isn't on Steam.

Oh.

Wait...

I guess what escapes me in all this is that this discussion seems to have been held multiple times. With both sides presenting the same or similar arguments.

What makes you think presenting the same material over and over is going to get you a different result? This goes for either side.

The big difference is that Matrix sets whatever price they like and we either pay it or we don't.

Good Hunting.

MR

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

I guess what escapes me in all this is that this discussion seems to have been held multiple times. With both sides presenting the same or similar arguments.

What makes you think presenting the same material over and over is going to get you a different result? This goes for either side.

The big difference is that Matrix sets whatever price they like and we either pay it or we don't.

Good Hunting.

MR

Yup, that's very clear.

ORIGINAL: dutchman55555

ORIGINAL: K 19
The more mainstream games like these become, the more dumbed-down and unrealistic they become due to large numbers of casual players (the majority) pressuring and influencing the developers through complaints to simplify / make the game easier- aka 'dumbing down'. I've seen it happen too many times before. No thank you.

Which explains why Paradox, with their complex games, isn't on Steam.

Oh.

Wait...

OH please....complex like "Naval War: Arctic Circle", yea, that was a masterpiece! Such support!

LOL

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

What makes you think presenting the same material over and over is going to get you a different result? This goes for either side.

Some would say it's the very definition of insanity.

I prefer to think of it this way:

Just what makes that little old ant
Think he'll move that rubber tree plant?
Anyone knows an ant, can't
Move a rubber tree plant!

ORIGINAL: kaburke61

ORIGINAL: dutchman55555

ORIGINAL: K 19
The more mainstream games like these become, the more dumbed-down and unrealistic they become due to large numbers of casual players (the majority) pressuring and influencing the developers through complaints to simplify / make the game easier- aka 'dumbing down'. I've seen it happen too many times before. No thank you.

Which explains why Paradox, with their complex games, isn't on Steam.

Oh.

Wait...

OH please....complex like "Naval War: Arctic Circle", yea, that was a masterpiece! Such support!

LOL

So Europa Universalis is an entry-level product? What about Hearts of Iron? Both available on Steam...

ORIGINAL: Aurelian
Never bought ammo online. Let's say that where I live doesn't rent to the most trustworthy people

Got it...

A good marketing company finds creative ways to make money and keep their customers happy. There are many ways to make money on games without charging an arm and a leg upfront. Train Simulator practically gives away the game and charges you for DLC. Paradox learned how to make money by charging reasonable prices for the base game and expanding the heck out of it to create ongoing revenue (which is my favorite model).
Matrix has decided that charging a premium and listening to many of their customers complain is their model. So far they have been successful. Let's see how many people keep returning to buy their games.
Only time will tell.

Well, like all software, eventually it goes on sale. Even at Matrix.

Thanks for all the good comments on this thread.

ORIGINAL: JRyan

ORIGINAL: Aurelian
Never bought ammo online. Let's say that where I live doesn't rent to the most trustworthy people

Got it...

Well, I guess I could send it to my mother's house. Something to look into

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

I guess what escapes me in all this is that this discussion seems to have been held multiple times. With both sides presenting the same or similar arguments.

What makes you think presenting the same material over and over is going to get you a different result? This goes for either side.

The big difference is that Matrix sets whatever price they like and we either pay it or we don't.

Good Hunting.

MR

Well, one side thinks that the truth of your last statement is going to change. And the other side agrees with your last

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

Well, I guess I could send it to my mother's house. Something to look into

I would those Mosins are fun to shoot and cheap (at least for now). They are now getting $150 for them. I am so glad I bought my 55 Polish carbine when I did...it has 20 rounds through her and she is cherry and a beast to shoot. er..if I had one, lost it in a boating accident.