Regular expansion packs are good!

[Owllord]

Having read Iain's response in this (http://steamcommunity.com/id/Darkplayer ... ed/321410/) thread on Steam, I felt that it was worth a shot voicing my opinion regarding the DLC/expansion matter, as it are often the discontent people who raise their voices, while those that are happy with how things are don't necessarily feel a need to state so.

That being said, I am happy with the state of affairs of there being expansions put on sale that introducing new features quite regularly to new players. Given that Iain said: "We're finding people don't really like this model though so we think we'll look for a more traditional approach going forwards", I am a bit concerned that a vocal minority on Steam might affect how often we are exposed to new features, because some people would feel more happy paying for a full-priced product every few years instead of more regularly paying for smaller content packages (which might in the end amount to the same amount of money spent). I think this would be a shame, as this would spread the time between major new features being introduced to the CMANO franchise (and I am also thinking about things like scenario compatibility with new versions).

Ultimately I will buy whatever Command products will come out, and if it is financially more viable to discontinue DLC, then that's sad, but oh well. I just felt like putting it out there that some of us are actually happy with how things are and would much prefer a persistent progress model instead of waiting for milestones because certain people perceive to have been "cheated" by the introduction of optional DLC (the whole misrepresentation of the laser issue by some reviewers comes to mind).

[ClaudeJ]

Content with the current model and I feel concerned too by that vocal minority shaking things around. Would be awesome to see all that energy translated into constructive suggestions.

Would buy nonetheless though, in whatever form that makes things viable for everyone involved behind the scene.

#happyvoice

[SSN754planker]

Cheated? How can someone feel cheated by DLC in this sim? The database alone is worth the price of admission. For that price, and even less if you happened to buy when it is on sale, you get a HUGE amount of information. The current copies of Janes All The Worlds Ships and All The Worlds Aircraft if bought together would cost you over $2,800! And here you get all of that information and get to actually simulate realistic operations with it. When people feel cheated about how CoW is forcing them to buy DLC, i can only disagree. One could say that the generosity of our Dev team, not to mention the hard work and dedication to a vision they had to create the best military simulation they could, has led people to believe that ALL updates should be free. Again, i disagree. CoW is at a fair price point, brings much more to the sim than the "live" scenarios do (and those are amazing) and ive seen DLC on other games priced higher and bring less to the table.

Vocal MINORITY is right. I'd say 9 out of 10 people in our community are happy with the DLC and are eagerly devouring all it brings to the sim. I personally love it, and have bought it twice. One for my steam version, and one for my Matrix version.

[CCIP-subsim]

Honestly, it's also important to put context to the numbers/costs. Sure, there is now one DLC that costs $20 which will soon be a de-facto requirement.

On the other hand: there's been 3 years of constant updates, not just feature-fix patches, but several generations of updates with a ton of new functionality. I got into the game later than I should have, but if anything, I was taken aback by just how much work was being done on it over this time - it ain't the industry standard to keep products this well supported, I'll tell you that, and someone who's used to getting games on Steam should know this well.

So where someone just jumping in now and seeing an expensive game and expensive DLC might be seeing way too much being asked, I'm more of a glass half full person, and I see a game that got years of free support.
Plus, the glass is a lot more than half full! I got it at full price, and would buy it multiple times - just for the amount of content you get with it.

Then again, perspective. One of my other hobbies is flight simulation, and in terms of the add-on software for my MSFS install, I've spent well south of the $1k figure in the last few years. And that's just the software. And I even consider that a perfectly reasonable cost for what I got, so I don't know why people are up in arms about a game that you can easily get all the content for at much less than $100 when it's on sale [:D]

[gosnold]

Frankly, I think spending 20$ every year in Command is entirely justified by the database updates alone. Since we additionally get Command Live scenarios, full campaigns and new features, I'm very happy with the way things are done currently.

[Cinnamon]

I concur, I much prefer frequent content that users have the choice to get, rather than waiting long periods between releases at more significant price points.

[Gunner98]

Just want to add my voice to the choir.

COMMAND is the best gaming investment I have ever made in terms of hours/$, enjoyment, proactive support by the Dev team, community involvement and knowledge gained. (not saying that I'm old but I've been buying games since the mid 70's)

I truly don't understand the gripes - except that some people enjoy griping I guess.

In order to protect the silent majority, I suggest that a comparison of 'sales vs. gripers' would be a good gage and if the ratio is less than 10% you're doing well - my guess is that its probably less than 1%. A measurement of how many base games vs how many DLC's are sold may also be a decent indicator of residual interest over time - and I suspect it is high.

Please keep on the current course - 'Steady as She Goes Capt'n'

Just my $.02CAD.

B

[Mordwand]

I think what the naysayers are missing also is that CoW, and NI before it, are offered as stand-alone games, letting you experience Command at a much lower price point. You don't need the 'base' game, nor are you obliged to buy it. Personally, I think the 'mix-and-match' model is a great approach.
NI is what tempted me a few years ago, and from there, I had seen enough to shell out for CMANO full. And I'll probably get CoW... when I've exhausted the already huge variety of scenarios in what I have already!

[ParachuteProne]

I have no problem at all with the $20 expansions. And I have another $20 or more for ground combat to be improved

[Doctorwarthog]

ORIGINAL: ParachuteProne

I have no problem at all with the $20 expansions. And I have another $20 or more for ground combat to be improved

I'd pay $50 for a Command: Ground Combat made with the same love as the rest of the expansions. [8D]

[stilesw]

I completely agree with these comments. As is too often the case in real life, the folks that are happy with a situation will tend to not vocalize about it. Those who perceive some imagined slight or something that does not measure up to what they want will rant about the whole system's failures.

Expressing a desire for an added feature or finding a legitimate problem is a good thing and should be encouraged. But, constant whining does nothing but alienate the rest of the world. Especially when an explanation has been provided. Dead horse...

So, for the malcontents, get over it. CMANO is a supurb product with many thousands of hours of thought, design, coding and customer support. The simulation has many, many features with more continually being implemented and/or fixed as the result of community ideas as well as those of the developers. The basic product is great as are the newer DLC and regular feature updates. Also, DLC is, after all, optional. New features are explained and the potential user is free to make a choice to get it or not. Very much like buying a car - there is the initial purchase and there options for other features. You are not mandated to get a radio or air conditioning or a convertible top but they are there if you want them but at an additional cost. However, if you live in Las Vegas, I do highly recommend the air conditioning!

My two cents for which I'm sure I'll be castigated by the lurking trolls who complain but don't contribute.

[AFIntel]

The current DLC model, in my opinion, is perfect. I never expected to get upgraded games, for free, year after year. I AM pleasantly surprised at the number of upgrades we DO get for free.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and here is mine: if you enjoy the game and want the "latest' features, you guys can skip that latte at the coffee shop a couple times a month to afford the latest DLC. The fact is you're getting better support from this company per $/€/£ than almost any other product out there.

[Raptorx7_slith]

I have no problems continuing to buy expansions like COW as long as they keep providing quality content and updates. The fact of the matter is people have to eat and that money has to come from somewhere, I can think of far worse people to be giving my money to than the CMANO devs[;)]

[.Sirius]

Hi guys
thankyou for all your support and kinds words, glad you like Mikes DLC , and yes we do like doing DLCs [:)]

[Zaslon]

Yeap, I agree, DLC approach is good IMHO. We are still waiting for a 198x Cold War campaign. Surely a superhit![:)]

Another approach is release Payware modules and continue with the development method (standalone expansion, payware scenarios and payware campaigns).

Payware modules like an hypothetical WEGO module, Real time Multiplayer module, Space ops module, WWII module and Ground Warfare module for example.

My biggest concern at this moment is the compatibility between CMANO and CoW scenarios. It should be automatic turn ON/OFF CoW features when a scenario is loaded. If you have CoW, CoW features activates under the hood. If you are using a CMANO vanilla, CoW features turned OFF.

[.Sirius]

ORIGINAL: Zaslon

Yeap, I agree, DLC approach is good IMHO. We are still waiting for a 198x Cold War campaign. Surely a superhit![:)]

Another approach is release Payware modules and continue with the development method (standalone expansion, payware scenarios and payware campaigns).

Payware modules like an hypothetical WEGO module, Real time Multiplayer module, Space ops module, WWII module and Ground Warfare module for example.

My biggest concern at this moment is the compatibility between CMANO and CoW scenarios. It should be automatic turn ON/OFF CoW features when a scenario is loaded. If you have CoW, CoW features activates under the hood. If you are using a CMANO vanilla, CoW features turned OFF.

Yeap, I agree, DLC approach is good IMHO. We are still waiting for a 198x Cold War campaign. Surely a superhit!

dont tempt me [;)] why dont you put a poll up on what DLCs you would like to see

[Zaslon]

Great idea Paul.
But as far I know, users cannot post polls, only mods and admins.

There are some interesting campaigns.

Vietnam - Rolling Thunder
Vietnam - Linebacker I&II
Iran-Iraq (there are some interesting campaigns)
Suez Crisis (1956)
Yom Kippur War
1971 Indo-Pakistan war
1965 Indo-Pakistan war
Hypothetical 2015 or 2016 Indo-Pakistan war
Operation Seelöwe (requires WWII stuff).
Operation Overlord. (requires WWII stuff).
Operation Bagration. (requires WWII stuff)

[.Sirius]

There you are all done sorry I cant fit the last one in

[Sniper31]

Let me add my voice to everyone else and say that I am very happy with the DLC model as well, as well as the pricing. I think we get lots of content for the money, and is absolutely worth the cost. Please keep the DLC content coming!

[kevinkins]

I do not think the cost to players is an issue. Those who purchase the base product and get hooked - are hooked. I think the issue is widening the appeal of this complex product which has a very steep learning curve. My fear is that older wargamers are not being "replaced" and Command might box itself out demographically. At 58 years old, and using reading glasses, the screen tires my eyes. The C# interface is due for a face lift. Additionally, we really need an easy to set up multiplayer option to attract and keep the new generation of gamers. Even if this amounts to a subset of the current DB with "hard coded" scenarios. Attracting the maturing first person shooter crowd to a cerebral game like Command would be a major success. Command is not getting any easier to negotiate. I have been at it constantly for almost a year now and still get lost at times.

Kevin