Pricing Suggestion

[Hexagon]

Yep, Matrix has the "truth" and customers are wrong, and when Matrix do another step on the price and set 63 euros + taxes as the basic price for their games (sorry, i want say the games of others guys that they sell) we can apreciate more their job [:D]

Is curious how some customers send their interests through the window to defend pay more for same products... "shut up and take my money" syndrome??? and man dont say is to support devs because i have serious doubts that devs see a single penny from the extra money we pay.

And talking about support, i have a lot of games from Matrix and in some of them support is bad, i wait for some patches YEARS and one of them miss a patch in the begining of this year and you know what say matrix??? devs problem them for me is clear that Matrix sells games if games have good support is not thanks to matrix.

EDIT: i dont defend see these games on Steam, i defend see a MODERN wayt o sell them, we talk about downloads, no physicall games and i dont see reduction in price for games that dont have production cost, no DVD boxes, printed manuals... for example now i need pay around 40 euros to buy an AGEOD game only download version when some years ago i pay 20 euros and have it in physicall version with printed manual translated to my language... 100% increase in price??? [:-]

[Alchenar]

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

Good grief this thread is still alive?

Dang folks get it right, if you don't like the price don't buy it. If you don't like Matrix, well there is the door.

Ok just on this - back when there were brick and mortar shops I could pick up a game, walk to the counter, say "You want how much?" and then put it back down and walk away. And the shopkeeper can see how many people do this.

On the internet that just doesn't happen, so the only way to provide meaningful feedback to Matrix is one of these threads. Why haven't I bought CANO yet? 1) No Demo. 2) No reviews. 3) The price is extortionate. Now they know that for some people at least this is a problem. I don't want to 'walk out the door'. I do actually want Matrix and the developers to get my money. And that's why I think it's important that they're at least aware of why I haven't spent my money yet.

Other people seem to think that this is greedy or entitled in some way, so we have these long threads where we try to explain that many of the reasons that Matrix give for their business practices have been proven not to be true by other bodies in the industry.

Finally, these threads aren't pointless. The last big thread on prices resulted in the weekly sales, which have been going on long enough to indicate that despite everything Matrix claims about the magical Wargame sales model, actually there is a revenue bump from even the minor discounts they're going for.

[aaatoysandmore]

i defend see a MODERN wayt o sell them, we talk about downloads, no physicall games and i dont see reduction in price for games that dont have production cost, no DVD boxes, printed manuals... for example now i need pay around 40 euros to buy an AGEOD game only download version when some years ago i pay 20 euros and have it in physicall version with printed manual translated to my language... 100% increase in price???

What yer leaving out here is inflation. The prices went up due to production costs not because of reduction of cd's and manuals. If those things were still in games the prices would be much higher due to inflation. You'd be seeing $80-$100 games if they weren't digital. Look at the price for a boxed game and cost of shipping it's nearly $30 more. Same just about anywhere you shop and want a game box, cd, and colorful printed manual or even a black and white one and shipped to your door parcel mail. Go price some games physical at Battlefront. I was going to order Strategic Command II Gold and to have it all shipped to my front door was going to cost me $75 but to digital download it only was about $45 see the savings that digital did. Everything costs money these days. Postage, employees screaming gemme a raise and on and on. Prices aren't going to stay like this forever. In fact we've been getting great deals with these $19.99 games and you want even more discounts? LOL

I mean I like to save money too but I'm not unhappy with Matrix/Slitherine price policy. They have their sales now and I no longer have to wait until Christmas to get some games. I will still wait for a discount though, but, I'm not going to look a gift horse in the mouth.

[Hexagon]

Well, i see this from my point of view as buyer and i see a price over console games with no DVD box, no DVD and no printed manual (yes, i know that today manuals are [8|] but not all games have single page manuals) and of course no marketing campaign (main part of the price in a console game) and my last console was a NES because i buy a PC around middle of 90 and find cheaper games with a more interesting point for me but now i find the games i like with prices over console games and only in download version.

Battlefront... where i say i buy Battlefront games??? apart a little high prices for my taste they use a s***t DRM i buy one game from them and first and last i buy and i can add other examples here but i dont remember see people complain for Matrix protection system but do fine in one point doesnt means do fine in all points.

If is a question of support why no create 2 versions??? silver and gold version, gold version give you early access to beta and your name appear in the game credits and you receive a certain discount if you buy the physical version ... for example, in my case i buy a game and i think do it is enough but pay a premium price only to have the game...

Discounts are a bonus to buy a game (independent of game price) every euro i save is an euro for a future game or other things again, in my case i plan buy 1 game on this 2 crazy months, i add later CMANO and the 2 AGEOD games but now with the prices maybe i can finish with 0 buys and the 150-175 euros i farmed used in other games or books (i have 2 in mind now).

You are right and no here "Prices aren't going to stay like this forever" because compared with other games prices are same in the last 10 years and discounts... they dont reduce game prices??? you think that a game with a discount means lose money???.

I have my point of view, i mix game quality and price and have the price i want pay its something personal, if you see price ok buy it but if in 3-4 years we see another 20 euros increase in price lets see if you think the same.

[Koesj]

ORIGINAL: flanyboy

yet the console customer base wouldn't be a fit at all for Matrix.

With more than one console game bought per year I'd say I'm part of that customer base [&:]

[histgamer]

ORIGINAL: Koesj

ORIGINAL: flanyboy

yet the console customer base wouldn't be a fit at all for Matrix.

With more than one console game bought per year I'd say I'm part of that customer base [&:]

In General. I play consoles too but I don't believe there is a substantial market there for their games. Doesn't mean they wouldn't sell some games. Plus I think most of their games UI's dont' work well without a mouse keyboard and I don't like having to fiddle with one for my PS3.

[aaatoysandmore]

ORIGINAL: Hexagon

Well, i see this from my point of view as buyer and i see a price over console games with no DVD box, no DVD and no printed manual (yes, i know that today manuals are [8|] but not all games have single page manuals) and of course no marketing campaign (main part of the price in a console game) and my last console was a NES because i buy a PC around middle of 90 and find cheaper games with a more interesting point for me but now i find the games i like with prices over console games and only in download version.

Battlefront... where i say i buy Battlefront games??? apart a little high prices for my taste they use a s***t DRM i buy one game from them and first and last i buy and i can add other examples here but i dont remember see people complain for Matrix protection system but do fine in one point doesnt means do fine in all points.

If is a question of support why no create 2 versions??? silver and gold version, gold version give you early access to beta and your name appear in the game credits and you receive a certain discount if you buy the physical version ... for example, in my case i buy a game and i think do it is enough but pay a premium price only to have the game...

Discounts are a bonus to buy a game (independent of game price) every euro i save is an euro for a future game or other things again, in my case i plan buy 1 game on this 2 crazy months, i add later CMANO and the 2 AGEOD games but now with the prices maybe i can finish with 0 buys and the 150-175 euros i farmed used in other games or books (i have 2 in mind now).

You are right and no here "Prices aren't going to stay like this forever" because compared with other games prices are same in the last 10 years and discounts... they dont reduce game prices??? you think that a game with a discount means lose money???.

I have my point of view, i mix game quality and price and have the price i want pay its something personal, if you see price ok buy it but if in 3-4 years we see another 20 euros increase in price lets see if you think the same.

You need to go back and look at game prices in the 80's. The prices today are very simuliar to them $30-$60 now you know as well as I do that inflation has caused most items and prices to go up. A loaf of bread name brand is about 100% increased in price cost to consumer, a movie another form of entertainment that you get nothing back from except a memory and one night of entertainment if that. And you want gaming prices to remain the same or less than what they were in the 80's? You've gotta be kidding me.

If anything a lot of these games should be $80-$150 War in the East should easily be $150 maybe discounted some day to $75 same with War in the Pacific AE. You think these games grow on trees. You think these developers do it for nothing? A $150 to $5 just because you want it that way is rediculous and as a business owner I sure wouldn't cater to your customer kind. I'd have gone out of business long before retirement.

Nope everything has to work with checks and balances in its own time not yours or mine or anyone else's. It boils down to once again you pay or you don't pay and you get or you don't get, but it certainly never boils down to you make the rules. lol

Now, of course it is ok to ask about the rules and to attempt to change them as a customer but demanding them....lol......that will get you nowhere fast. Most consumers never see the whole picture or take it into account or want to they just want what they want and a lot of them want it for nothing....that is one of the reasons why there is software piracy and music video piracy and media piracy. People who want what they want and don't care about anything else are usually this type of people.

But, good luck on your endeavor to change Matrixgames pricing policy. lol I think you will lose. :{P

[Alchenar]

I don't think anyone's making the claim that wargames would work on the console market (although XCOM sold well enough, it's a matter of whether you can structure the UI to make it work). But I don't think you can escape that Eyeballs * Conversion Rate = Sales formula. Steam gets you more eyeballs than anyone else on the internet can. Even if your conversion rate is absolutely pathetic, you have to do very badly not to do well from going on Steam. And I don't think anyone's claiming that every wargame must go on Steam, but the recent run of releases include a high proportion of games that seem like they should be able to get on and do well.

You don't really need to see the data to know that when someone doesn't appear to be working to get as many eyeballs as possible onto their product then there's probably something wrong with their strategy.

[aaatoysandmore]

The developers that go on Steam are one of two things either greedy for more money (CA, Paradox) or desperate to just get their game out there( unbridled indies).

I overlook games on Steam all the time because it's like the Library of Congress if you spent your entire time looking through it you'd never have time to read/play anything. In this case play anything. With Matrixgames it's like a comic book store or wargame plaza in the mall, it only caters to a few products and I don't have to look or search all over the place to find a copy of Spiderman 100th issue same with their wargames. They don't get lost in the mix.

When I come to Matrix I can open up the forum page and go right to the game of my choice. I like being able to just browse the wargame dept. can you do that on Steam? No the games would just get lost in the sea of STRATEGY games section. Even Amazon.com is like that. Wargames in the Strategy Game section not seperate. And they put RTS games in that section and call them wargames gaaah that's even a worse crime.

With Steam I have to jump through hoops and ladders to find a game I'm looking for there's so many types of games there. Then too if I'm looking for a particular game on the $5 sale I better had know the name of it and when it's onsale. At Matrixgames you don't have to worry about that because there's very little sales going on. :{P

Matrix does the right thing for Matrixgames wargames. If it were mainstream stuff I might agree with you but since it is so niche I like the little store comic book store feel to it. Get in get out no waiting no fuss. Buy when the price IS right and walk away when you don't like them I always do. It's like the Big Bang Theory tv show when the guys all go down to the comic book store it has a nice feel to it. I'm glad it's not some huge shopping mall like Steam.

Yeah you can always make exceptions and new rules and if's and but's but if if's and but's were candy and nuts we'd all have a merry Christmas anyway. :{P

[histgamer]

I'm not arguing about the eyeball to conversion rate but I also think you may be overstating it. At least the way you're writing it you make it sound like every single game is a success on steam and that simply isn't the case.

Also I wonder if a more valid debate might exist between the differences between wargames and strategy games. Often strategy games cover military topics but they are typically unique from strategy games. Xcomm in my mind, and MOST Parradox games are Strategy games but they are not wargames, even if they have a military topic.

I think it might be fair to consider Panzer Corps a strategy game more than a wargame fwiw, so I'm not saying Matrix is ALL wargames either.

ORIGINAL: Alchenar

I don't think anyone's making the claim that wargames would work on the console market (although XCOM sold well enough, it's a matter of whether you can structure the UI to make it work). But I don't think you can escape that Eyeballs * Conversion Rate = Sales formula. Steam gets you more eyeballs than anyone else on the internet can. Even if your conversion rate is absolutely pathetic, you have to do very badly not to do well from going on Steam. And I don't think anyone's claiming that every wargame must go on Steam, but the recent run of releases include a high proportion of games that seem like they should be able to get on and do well.

You don't really need to see the data to know that when someone doesn't appear to be working to get as many eyeballs as possible onto their product then there's probably something wrong with their strategy.

[Vyshka]

ORIGINAL: flanyboy

ORIGINAL: Challerain

Didn't they also try and get Panzer Corps on Steam Greenlight and it failed?

That's what they said. According to Iain I think something like 50% of the votes for the game were against it being included. Of course the tone of this thread is people wouldn't believe that but it's not like we have anything else to go on.

Wow, hehe I don't think I've ever heard of someone voting against a game in greenlight. It is still up there for people to vote on it, so it might eventually make it on there especially if Steam continues to relax whatever strange requirements they have on greenlight admission.

[Alchenar]

ORIGINAL: flanyboy

I'm not arguing about the eyeball to conversion rate but I also think you may be overstating it. At least the way you're writing it you make it sound like every single game is a success on steam and that simply isn't the case.

Also I wonder if a more valid debate might exist between the differences between wargames and strategy games. Often strategy games cover military topics but they are typically unique from strategy games. Xcomm in my mind, and MOST Parradox games are Strategy games but they are not wargames, even if they have a military topic.

I think it might be fair to consider Panzer Corps a strategy game more than a wargame fwiw, so I'm not saying Matrix is ALL wargames either.

This is a bit of a tangent but's a fun non-partisan argument so I'll take it up: I consider wargames to be in video game terms a subset of the strategy genre (obviously your view will be different if you think of them as an electronic evolution of the historic board wargaming hobby and not really part of the pc games market, as I've seen suggested). It's tempting to say that wargames are more complex - but I think that's actually a bit of a lazy characterisation. Civ and XCOM are both very deep games, they're just easy to play because they're designed well. Sourge of War is a great wargame - but all the player actually needs to do it move his regiments around and they will sort out the fighting bit themselves. I'd call Decisive Campaigns as being somewhere middle-of-the-ground in terms of complexity, but it has a 'movement and fighting are the same resource' system that means once you get over the inital hurdle it's actually very easy to play.

X-COM is actually really important because it brought back to mainstream gaming the idea that 'failure is possible and something you have to deal with', which I think is something that's also an essential element of any good wargame. Note that neither of us have really put out a full definition of what makes a 'wargame'. We need to make sure your starting position isn't a hazy 'games that mainstream people don't buy'!

Therefore my natural assumption is to look at the really quite good sales for Civilisation and XCOM (AAA games designed and marketed to be as accessible to the mass market as possible) and say 'a decent proportion of these people would potentially be interested in buying more turn-based strategy games - so Panzer Corps and Unity of Command are obvious choices (I wouldn't put Panzer Corps being rejected from Greenlight as being the end of the story - one of the things Valve can be criticised for is that their game acceptance process pre and post greenlight has been a complete mess). Scourge of War is another - I know Take Command 2 was on Steam back when Norb was with Paradox and that apparently didn't work out, but it's already at a price that would probably be okay for Steam and already has a demo, so is probably best placed to take advantage of the aforementioned awesome conversion rate Steam gets you.

A thing that we think is another problem with the Matrix strategy and has been brought up before is that there isn't currently a clear entry-path to wargaming from those people who clearly have an interest in something a bit more intellectual. Part of that is eyeballs, part of that is price.

[histgamer]

This is actually a great topic. I've been wanting to make a YouTube video about what makes a Wargame a Wargame and how is it different from a Strategy Game or as you suggested is it a subset. I'll probably get around to it in the next few days.

Also was Take Command 2 on steam? I know it was on Gamersgate but I don't remember seeing it on Steam. I could be mistaken here. Scourge of War Gettysburg was also on GG for awhile too.

With that said I'll respond to you but I really can't right now as I need to head to my Math class. [:D] After classes perhaps.

[TheGrayMouser]

That a good question... I tend to think its about marketing. Axis and Allies is no doudt marketed as a family friendly Strategy game by Milton Bradley and lumped together with games like Life or Monopoly.

My own definition: if the question asked is "does the game incorporate strategic, operational or tactical gameplay elements"? , and the answer is "yes" to at least one, then its a Wargame. If no,then its a strategy game.

[aaatoysandmore]

The thing about wargames and strategy games is they do cross over the lines from time to time and one becomes the other. I always felt a wargame dealt with a war or a battle of a war with lots of details and complexity.

Civilization and X-Com though great games are not wargames.

Paradox games are one of those that cross over that line though being strategy and a wargamelike endeavor afterall you do fight wars and bsttle and skirmishes in them but they aren't historical ones. They are just generic battles, even HOI you don't fight historical battles but you do fight an historical war. That's why it draws a fine line of a wargame strategy game. But, lots of the Matrixgames line are actual historial battles like Kharkov and because they are turn based and not some rts clikyfest then those to me are wargames.

Just because you throw some real time moving units into an historical area doesn't make it a wargame. The TW's are not wargames they are just close cousins, more rts strategy with a lil turn based gameplay along side of it.

Now Norbsoft's Civil War series I consider a wargame and a strategy game even though it is real time because everything moves in real time and the OOB is made up of realistic oob's of the time. It's still more strategy than real warfare because there's no supply rules, no reinforcements, just everything thrown out there for you to use if you want to, excluding the independent scenarios (does anyone play those things?)

But at any rate the majority of the Matrixgames Library are wargames. I'm not really happy calling rts clik fests wargames and never will really until they start to feel like a wargame and not a TOY. That's what most of them are that move at the speed of light.....TOYS. Wargames require "thought' and "time to think".

TOYS are made to play with and makeup stuff. Wargames do not fall into those catagories. Wargames are chesslike once again taking thought and time based on real war battles or real wars periods. RISK though is not a wargame nor is Axis and Allies type games or Battlecry just because they are turn based and you do sit and think. To me Tactics II was not a wargame but a strategy game using warlike units. QQP's Perfect General was not a wargame though it used tanks and infantry, true yes Panzer Corp is not a wargame either, Close Combat draws one of those fine lines because of it's unrealistic nature of things (armor penetration, ai stupidity, microscopic units etc.) On the other hand John Tillers stuff were and are wargames to me. A lot just depends on the nature and way to play the game that makes it a wargame and not a strategy game or strategy wargame. Pittsburg just went up 2-0 on 2 back to back home runs YAY!

[histgamer]

Is it fair to call wargames their own genre then? Or are they merely a sub genre of multiple other genres?

Sid Meier's Gettysburg is a wargame imho but probably also a RTS.

[aaatoysandmore]

I'd say they are a sub genre of strategy because they do have strategizing in them if given the time allotted to think. To me that's the key point the thinking time and part. If you don't have time to think about what you are doing then it's not a wargame to me it's a simulation of what it feels like to be in a battle with all the stuff going on that you can't keep up with but without the details of supply, terrain, soaking off's (a real wargames component), reinforcements, zones of control, hidden movement, opportunity fire and above all an actual real battle of the era not some made up something then it's not really a total wargame it's just make believe and watch me go pew pew the bad guys lol. We can get into Whatif's later but that's where wargame/strategy comes into play.

But they should be separated from just strategy games and strategy wargames in a wargame section. I don't want to see Battlefield Academy in with Battles from the Bulge or D-Day.

It should be like 1st Folder: Strategy

2nd folder: Strategy Wargame

3rd folder: Wargames

[TheGrayMouser]

from Merriam-Webster:

strat·e·gy
: a careful plan or method for achieving a particular goal usually over a long period of time
: the skill of making or carrying out plans to achieve a goal

war game
noun

: a military training activity that is done to prepare for fighting in a war

full definition:

: a simulated battle or campaign to test military concepts and usually conducted in conferences by officers acting as the opposing staffs

: a two-sided umpired training maneuver with actual elements of the armed forces participating


So, it likely MOST games we consider wargames really arnt (sadly even TOAW III)

[aaatoysandmore]

look up tabletop wargame or board wargame you are looking at the generic term.

[Alchenar]

ORIGINAL: flanyboy

This is actually a great topic. I've been wanting to make a YouTube video about what makes a Wargame a Wargame and how is it different from a Strategy Game or as you suggested is it a subset. I'll probably get around to it in the next few days.

Also was Take Command 2 on steam? I know it was on Gamersgate but I don't remember seeing it on Steam. I could be mistaken here. Scourge of War Gettysburg was also on GG for awhile too.

With that said I'll respond to you but I really can't right now as I need to head to my Math class. [:D] After classes perhaps.

See this is an important question because there's the suggestion floating around that Wargames are somehow a unique and special genre with a unique and special customer base and I just don't think that's true. I think that there are specific wargames with very limited appeal, but that's because of questionable design choices rather than anything inherent to the genre.

If a wargame is just 'a strategy game that's set in a specific historical war or battle' then there's no reason why they shouldn't be accessible at all.