The "Uber" Command: Modern Air/Naval Ops Thread

[Dimitris]

It was a feature that, from the feedback we had, was used very little by commercial players but very much appreciated by professional customers. So we decided to reserve this for the professional version moving forward. There were several candidates for this "fate", and you probably would not have been happy with any of the others missing.

These decisions are never easy.

[Grim.Reaper]

Just curious, why does any existing features of consumer version have to be taken out because of your professional version?  Why can't they coexist?  Hope not much else gets removed from a version people already paid for.

[MikeGER]

Even so i seldom used it, taking away a feature from a customer who had paid for that feature , just to separate a commercial edition form a professional edition leaves a very bad taste. 

adding a new feature and making that exclusive just for the professionals is a different story.

Just imagine you had bought a Porsche (form all the money you made with CMOANO professional version  ^-^) then you see the Porsche-dealer authorised garage for a scheduled inspection and they tell you ... well, by chip-tuning (today cars has software too)  we decided to removed the speed above 130 km/hm cause we will sell that feature of 'going racetrack speed'  to the professional race drivers doing their sport events on the circuits  ...well, but you don't have to do the service inspection of course
How would you feel?

   
     

[Dimitris]

Just curious, why does any existing features of consumer version have to be taken out because of your professional version?

So that those who use and need it most will pay for it.

Why can't they coexist? 

For the same reason that higher-end versions of e.g. MS Windows have features that the lower-end versions don't.

Hope not much else gets removed from a version people already paid for.

You mean a version we released 3.5 years ago and have steadily supported with regular _major_ updates (features that would _easily_ justify a new full-price SKU) released for free? That one?

In addition, we are not forcing anyone to lose their suddenly-now-favorite feature. Can't live without record & replay? Stick with v1.11 SR6. There's no built-in expiration or crappy DRM so it will work in 10 years just like it does right now.

[RyanE]

I think the point is why remove a feature that was working perfectly fine with no discussion with your customers.  To me, the feature was a major game feature.  Maybe it wasn't the common feature used, but seems rather arbitrary.

Frankly, I expected the devs to come back and say it was some super-hard to fix feature that was overwhelmed by the advance of the engine.  But to just remove a feature  randomly, from a customer's perspective, so that it is different from a version of the game you see more revenue potential from sure seems to be heading the future development of the game down a dark path for consumers.  Very e-sim-esque.

[Grim.Reaper]

Just curious, why does any existing features of consumer version have to be taken out because of your professional version?

So that those who use and need it most will pay for it.

Why can't they coexist? 

For the same reason that higher-end versions of e.g. MS Windows have features that the lower-end versions don't.

Hope not much else gets removed from a version people already paid for.

You mean a version we released 3.5 years ago and have steadily supported with regular _major_ updates (features that would _easily_ justify a new full-price SKU) released for free? That one?

In addition, we are not forcing anyone to lose their suddenly-now-favorite feature. Can't live without record & replay? Stick with v1.11 SR6. There's no built-in expiration or crappy DRM so it will work in 10 years just like it does right now.

Pretty overly aggressive response to a customer who has bought everything you released who simply asked a question out of curiosity and hoped other features would not be removed.  Not seen many companies remove features from a purchased version of software via a patch.  Yes, it happens when new features introduced or new paid versions released.

Regardless, based on your response to me, likely will rethink my future support anyway.

[Dimitris]

Even so i seldom used it, taking away a feature from a customer who had paid for that feature , just to separate a commercial edition form a professional edition leaves a very bad taste. 

See below.

adding a new feature and making that exclusive just for the professionals is a different story.

Take a look at the extra features of the pro version: http://www.warfaresims.com/?page_id=3822
As you can see, Command-PE already has a ton of features that you have never seen on the commercial release.

Just imagine you had bought a Porsche (form all the money you made with CMOANO professional version  ^-^) then you see the Porsche-dealer authorised garage for a scheduled inspection and they tell you ... well, by chip-tuning (today cars has software too)  we decided to removed the speed above 130 km/hm cause we will sell that feature of 'going racetrack speed'  to the professional race drivers doing their sport events on the circuits  ...well, but you don't have to do the service inspection of course
How would you feel?

Not quite a valid example, I think. A Porsche being speed-limited is a crippled Porsche, no ifs and buts, because going fast is one of its prime selling points. The recorder+reply ability was never strongly registered in the wild as a crucial feature of CMANO (litmus test: go check all the reviews out there and see how many even mention it in passing, let alone emphasize it), whereas on the professional space its functionality was highly praised.

A better car-themed analogy: The company used to make only small hatchbacks until now and one of its features was a very nice cup holder which was mostly ignored by the customers. The company has begun selling a more expensive sports sedan and has decided to reserve the nice cup holder for the latter, since the people who buy sports sedans pay more attention to things like that. The hatchback customers can either continue to enjoy the years-long free car service that the company provides to its existing customers (a rarity in the industry) but lose the cup holder, or retain the cup holder if they so desire but lose the free service.

[RyanE]

"So that those who use and need it most will pay for it."

Just thought about this one...I would think a feature that has been in for over three years would have already been paid for.  What other features are at risk that have been in since day and might be needed to differentiate your pro version and retail version?

If you come to me and say thing like comms jamming are pro-only, because they haven't been put in yet, I am kind of OK with that.  So other than buying a new version of the game as a pro, I assume more and more features will be disappearing.  If you came to me and said we want to charge for a feature expansion pack that includes comms jamming, time-on-target planning, etc.  I am OK with that.  But saying you are removing existing features is a little troubling and changes my view of the entire product.  I bought the original on release, NI, and all the Lives.  Again, if development costs are so touchy, start charging for all the work you are doing to enhance the product.  Its crazy not to.  And if this is the result, I am more than a little concerned the retail side is going to eventually  get cast aside for the sake a defense contract.

When I saw you had started working towards a defense contract, based on what I see with eSims, I said to a friend of mine that this might be the demise of the commercial Command project eventually.  I am worried this is the start.

[Dimitris]

Frankly, I expected the devs to come back and say it was some super-hard to fix feature that was overwhelmed by the advance of the engine.  But to just remove a feature  randomly, from a customer's perspective, so that it is different from a version of the game you see more revenue potential from sure seems to be heading the future development of the game down a dark path for consumers.  Very e-sim-esque.

Let's agree to disagree. We have to make decisions based on what we consider the best outcomes for the game and the company. And we have to live with those decisions.

[RyanE]

I'll say it again for emphasis and clarity...

No one begrudges you making money and charging for what you do.  Don't ever say we on this board don't want you to succeed.  We love the game.  We paid a lot of money for it relative to other games.  Some of us have been pretty consistent that you probably aren't charging enough for all the things you are adding.

But if taking out already implemented features for no other reason than to prop up the pro product is a the way you want to treat the loyal retail customer you have had since inception, then I think you might need to REALLY rethink your business model.  I view it as a very slippery slope.  I don't see how taking out a 3-year old feature helps with your cost position.  Maybe I am not as good at business as I thought.  Please explain it to me.

[RyanE]

Its also kind of cool how you slipped it into the middle of the release notes.  I would think that, beause you are actually removing something, it would be something to make sure gets out there.

Again, are you planning on removing any other features.  Is it going to be give us one and take away one?   I would gladly pay for any removed features to be left in.  It would seem to be a big win...all margin.

[MikeGER]

We have to make decisions based on what we consider the best outcomes for the game and the company. And we have to live with those decisions.

wo is we?  WarfareSims Ltd. ?
is that decision coordinated with Slitherine Marketing Department and JDM

"Slitherine Games, You can never be sure an existing feature will get removed from your game you had paid for later with a service patch"  

.... i guess that's not the slogan they want to be seen in the market and the headline in the gaming mags

[RyanE]

By the way...something small businesses forget.  We live with the decisions too, as customers.  We, as customers, do what we can to support companies that make good products.  But that also means reacting in disbelief when those same companies do something illogical from a customer standpoint.

Oh well, I guess the tide has turned for another customer-centric company.  Hopefully another is on the horizon.

[Zulu1966]

Just curious, why does any existing features of consumer version have to be taken out because of your professional version?

So that those who use and need it most will pay for it.

Why can't they coexist? 

For the same reason that higher-end versions of e.g. MS Windows have features that the lower-end versions don't.

Hope not much else gets removed from a version people already paid for.

You mean a version we released 3.5 years ago and have steadily supported with regular _major_ updates (features that would _easily_ justify a new full-price SKU) released for free? That one?

In addition, we are not forcing anyone to lose their suddenly-now-favorite feature. Can't live without record & replay? Stick with v1.11 SR6. There's no built-in expiration or crappy DRM so it will work in 10 years just like it does right now.

Pretty overly aggressive response to a customer who has bought everything you released who simply asked a question out of curiosity and hoped other features would not be removed.  Not seen many companies remove features from a purchased version of software via a patch.  Yes, it happens when new features introduced or new paid versions released.

Regardless, based on your response to me, likely will rethink my future support anyway.

Yeah. Would agree with grim. Piss poor decision and even poorer response. Let's face it. Removing features from a game people have already paid for stinks. Saying  peoplet can rollo back to an earlier version stinks. All round pretty poor. If your ability to differentiate the two products relies on removing features from the product you have already taken money for then perhaps it is your business model that is at fault not those questioning the morals of doing so. If you had also been more explicit about it rather than simply including it in a release note suggests a certain acceptance that it is something you wanted to do and hope no one would notice. Seriously.  Seriously bad move

[Jarhead0331]

I'd just like to note that there would be no PE version if it wasn't for the consistent support of the commercial version. Serious recreational users made the PE version possible.

I called it when you guys started charging for "premium" scenarios. The concept just didn't sit well for me and I sort of saw the writing on the wall, eventhough others felt it more than reasonable. This, however...removal of features that owners have already paid for long ago? That is pretty unprecedented. The thinly veiled threat there were other features that were on the chopping block, and that we should be grateful that they were not removed is deeply troubling and very out of character for you Dmitiris...at what point exactly did you turn against your main customer base? Was it when we were no longer your main customer base?