Middle East campaign series releases sep. 24

[Tuna]

In response to statements like "AGEOD is relatively new" I'll just point out that AGEOD's Birth of America was published in 2006 making it a "nearly 10 year old engine." The engine in Thirty Years War is exactly the same engine, just polished up a bit and with new content.


Thirty Year's War retails for $29.99. I believe the next AGEOD game in the pipeline is Wars of Napoleon, which is a remake of the 2007 title Napoleon's Campaigns. Matrix/AGEOD recently released Revolution Under Siege Gold, priced at $19.99. However, if you own the previous game, you get an 80% discount off of RuS Gold, making it $5. They did exactly the same thing for Rise of Prussia Gold.


The real world evidence is that older games are remade and released all of the time. Matrix frequently provides discounts on these games. Jomni himself bought Pike and Shot, and then about a year later bought Pike and Shot Campaigns - which is exactly the same engine with a not very sophisticated campaign system grafted on to it, but which significantly added to the number of scenarios and army lists available. The game engine in question is the Battle Academy engine, which is also older at this point. Again, for people that owned Pike and Shot, Matrix offered a great discount and the new game ended up being something like $5.00.


So here we have some developers that have come to the forums to share with us all of the very cool things they are planning to do with the game engine in the future. In fairly short order the discussion devolves into statements about how "people are not going to buy that" and "customers don't care how long you worked on it or if you added a bunch of content." Of course, a developer that showed up and said "We have a new engine but the content is exactly the same as what you had ten years ago" would get piled on about having no new content (and rightfully so, IMHO). 


The damn games aren't even in development yet. The developers have said that Vietnam and Cold War are the next targets, with Vietnam definitely being completed before the WW2 games. Matrix hasn't put forward any pricing. No one from the publisher has announced that there will be no upgrade pricing. One developer speculated that they might price the games similarly to other new games they sell, in the $30 to $40 range (you know, like Thirty Years War at $30).


But some of you guys already know that you are going to buy the game because the non-existent no-upgrade pricing "turns off some of the buyers." Seriously? You can't fathom why a developer of CS would do exactly what AGEOD and a ton of other publishers have obviously done in remaking a game using the same engine because it "competes with the existing game." Despite the fact that you, yourself have demonstrably purchased games that have done exactly this.


I give.

Take a look at Birth of America, then take a look at Thirty Year war.. Big difference.... and I don't own Thirty Year.. I'm just looking at the screen shots and saying "Wow"! This games screen shots do not make me say Wow.. and when my eyes bleed it takes a lot of enjoyment out of the game (and I used to love the game, spent many hours in it). Sounds.. Music.. also can be a turn off.

I'm not slamming the developer and not slamming the fans.. I'm just telling them why they 'might' lose some sales. And someone did mention pricing that is why I responded. No need to get 'angry'.. that is one of the reasons I was glad to find Grogheads, people could speak freely without worrying about getting trampled on for having an opinion. One reason I left Matrix and Wargamer.

[dinsdale]

In response to statements like "AGEOD is relatively new" I'll just point out that AGEOD's Birth of America was published in 2006 making it a "nearly 10 year old engine." The engine in Thirty Years War is exactly the same engine, just polished up a bit and with new content.

Thirty Year's War retails for $29.99. I believe the next AGEOD game in the pipeline is Wars of Napoleon, which is a remake of the 2007 title Napoleon's Campaigns. Matrix/AGEOD recently released Revolution Under Siege Gold, priced at $19.99. However, if you own the previous game, you get an 80% discount off of RuS Gold, making it $5. They did exactly the same thing for Rise of Prussia Gold.

The AGEOD engine was upgraded significantly to a new version several years ago. I don't know how much changed, but it is definitely not the same as BOA internally. Externally, the graphics and UI are significantly different, I don't know if I would describe them as better as I loved the BOA style, but they are different.

The real world evidence is that older games are remade and released all of the time...

Your examples aren't really good for demonstrating the point. Pike & Shot essentially bolted a new component on a 1 year old game and gave it away for nothing, either included in the price of the game or a nominal upgrade fee. AGEOD's updates were also a nominal fee for owners of the original game.

You could have gone with Football Manager or the EA Sports games which sell incremental upgrades for a premium price, that would at least illustrate that some games are able to maintain a price point above the norm.

But some of you guys already know that you are going to buy the game because the non-existent no-upgrade pricing "turns off some of the buyers." Seriously? You can't fathom why a developer of CS would do exactly what AGEOD and a ton of other publishers have obviously done in remaking a game using the same engine because it "competes with the existing game." Despite the fact that you, yourself have demonstrably purchased games that have done exactly this.


I give.

Personally, I think the Tiller games would have to be at full price because the new market for a 20 year old (not 10) game is marginal. However, many of the discussions I have made about price are not to get a cheaper game, but to hopefully see the folks at Matrix et al realize that the world has changed and that the market for full price games is not what it was 10 years ago.

Hardcore flight simulators, RPGs, adventures and just about every other genre have been able to take advantage of a new digital market where certain price points stimulate purchases and increase profit. For some reason, wargames are special, wargames are only for a select few, wargames need to be sold at $80 or $40 because..... well just because.

I hope the JTSC team make money, I hope the games are wildly successful, they absolutely deserve a great deal of credit for what they have been able to do, and I hope they find a way to continue. But being outraged, or shocked because prices are a discussion point is to ignore that it is 2015 and that the game market, including for wargames and strategy games, has changed significantly.

[mirth]

I hope the JTSC team make money, I hope the games are wildly successful, they absolutely deserve a great deal of credit for what they have been able to do, and I hope they find a way to continue. But being outraged, or shocked because prices are a discussion point is to ignore that it is 2015 and that the game market, including for wargames and strategy games, has changed significantly.

+1 Complete agreement. For the record, I own JTCS and I've held off on this purchase because of the price. I'll wait and pick it up on sale at some point. If that means I wait a year or more, so be it. I have a huge backlog of other games to fill the time.

[Jason Petho]

I know I'm not shocked, or outraged, by a frank discussion on cost.

It's quite informative!

Thank you for everyone's input so far!

[dinsdale]

I know I'm not shocked, or outraged, by a frank discussion on cost.

It's quite informative!

Thank you for everyone's input so far!

Hey Jason, just think, 20 years ago you could have done 1/3 of the work and put this into a dozen brick and mortar stores for 49.99 or 59.99! It's really not fair, your team has transformed this title and made it practically a new game.

You could do the Paradox thing; sell the game and 10 scenarios at 20, then 5 expansions at $5 each, and we'd moan. Or you could sell them for $40 and we'd moan. Or, make it free to play and charge money for armoured vehicles or extra ammunition :)

Whatever you do, I wish you all the very best

[Jason Petho]

Thank you for the encouragement!

Happy thoughts and positive vibes.

On top of the hard work and dedicated support, of course!

[Cyrano]

Someone in this very thread, whose name will not be spoken, indicated a dislike of the 2D counters in CSME.  This is grievous heresy.  I'm sure these ill-considered words were spoken in a moment of weakness.  Let us think of them no more.

As to the price, it's evident that the developer and the publisher are reading and watching.  I trust that they are not fools and if they thought they'd make up in volume what they'd lose in price, then they would adjust the price accordingly.  It can, as mirth intuits, be no joy to be a niche developer in this day and age when so many other amazing games compete for our attention, groggy and otherwise.

The Paradox comparison is an interesting one as it raises a basic and substantive issue re: price, viz.:  you have to like the game.  I haven't liked EU since II.  Yeah, I know, I know.  I've enjoyed MoE -- a lot actually, but it's Napoleonic -- and have never been able to get into CKII.  HoI is definitely on my radar but, directly to the point, there's no way I buy it at full price.  The AGEOD system is an utter loss to me.  You'll always early adopt the stuff you love which is why I'll be standing outside the door on the day the updates to the CS are released demanding that they take my money.

And besides, while I'll stipulate that much of what Paradox does is groggy indeed, comparing its corporate resources -- and the ability to absorb discounts -- to the structure behind CS:ME is a bit much.  Perhaps, in this grand time, we now need "niche" and "niche-niche".

Best,

Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)

He of the Knights Who Say "Niche"

[mirth]

He of the Knights Who Say "Niche"

<chuckle>

[mirth]

And let me be clear. Though I may balk at the price, I wish the dev team nothing but success. They've clearly poured their hearts and souls into the game (and the entire series) and deserve to be compensated for that effort. And for those of you have already dove in and purchased the game, I am a tad envious.

[Boggit]

I hope the JTSC team make money, I hope the games are wildly successful, they absolutely deserve a great deal of credit for what they have been able to do, and I hope they find a way to continue. But being outraged, or shocked because prices are a discussion point is to ignore that it is 2015 and that the game market, including for wargames and strategy games, has changed significantly.

+1 Complete agreement. For the record, I own JTCS and I've held off on this purchase because of the price. I'll wait and pick it up on sale at some point. If that means I wait a year or more, so be it. I have a huge backlog of other games to fill the time.

I'd merely observe...

• I have both JTSC, the original Divided Ground, and ME48-85, so can speak with some knowledge on the subject
  
• ME48-85 is graphically an improvement over both Divided Ground and JTCS
  
• Jason and his team have improved the game engine in several respects, and has done a lot of work on the Divided Ground scenarios (plus some new ones too IIRC)
  
• If you like Tiller games, then you'll probably like this, but your expectations may fall somewhat short if you're not into Tiller games.
  
• The one thing I really miss both in JTCS and in ME is the lack of a variable turn ending option, as seen with later John Tiller games published by HPS or JTS - which usually gives 4-6 bonus turns to a game making a scenario a bit more flexible.

[/list][/list][/list] That's just me screwing up the formatting!

All in all I think Jason and his team has done a good job, but I'm glad to learn it's still a work in progress. O0

[Jason Petho]

FYI

All the divided ground organizations, scenarios, maps and campaigns were scrapped.

Everything has been rebuilt to reflect the enhancements to the engine.

It really is a whole new beast.

[Boggit]

FYI

All the divided ground organizations, scenarios, maps and campaigns were scrapped.

Everything has been rebuilt to reflect the enhancements to the engine.

It really is a whole new beast.

At first sight there are a lot of similarities with JTCS and the original DG, but indeed there are a lot of game enhancements, and the graphics are much improved. I've been messing around with it and JTCS quite a bit over the last week or so, and the more I play with it the more nuances I've seen.

In my opinion, I can tell a lot of work has been put into it, and is a credit to you and your team. O0

[Jason Petho]

Thank you, the kind words are appreciated!

[dinsdale]

SI trust that they are not fools and if they thought they'd make up in volume what they'd lose in price, then they would adjust the price accordingly.

I've noticed a big change in their price scheme the last 12 months, they are moving some games toward steam-like pricing. I hope it works out for them. At the same time, they are selling Maximum Football from 2006 at a higher price than EA football games from last year.

To be clear though, I think the 40 per game for Tiller to be about the only way they can go. There isn't a great deal in these games for casual players and they have to make money off their audience.

And besides, while I'll stipulate that much of what Paradox does is groggy indeed, comparing its corporate resources -- and the ability to absorb discounts -- to the structure behind CS:ME is a bit much.  Perhaps, in this grand time, we now need "niche" and "niche-niche".

Paradox were close to going out of business and the CEO bought them very cheaply. I think it took them some years of following this strategy for it to pay off, but they've turned a game about medieval inheritance into a mainstream hit.

While the DLC quantity rivals a butter mountain, they have been able to bring people into the game who would not have bought it for $50 and make money off DLCs and sales. The fact that we can consider the company making Victoria and EU to be not quite so groggy anymore is amazing, they are the cheap heroin street dealer of strategy and it gives us some good games.

Though IMHO, EU hasn't been the same since EU2, but it's still a decent enough game. Sadly they couldn't survive without the changes, so I have to compromise my expectations in the products they put out now.

[jomni]

Someone in this very thread, whose name will not be spoken, indicated a dislike of the 2D counters in CSME.  This is grievous heresy.  I'm sure these ill-considered words were spoken in a moment of weakness.  Let us think of them no more.

That's probably me.  My reasoning is I've been playing Campaign Series for a long time already and really like the plastic toy soldier images. I would like to play more of it.
If it becomes 2D then the game reminds me of JohnTiller Panzer Campaigns or Panzer Battles (same scale) and loses the original Campaign Series feel.  So devs, please don't forget to give the 3D spites some love.