Conflict of Heroes: Storms of Steel

FrontierCybrarian · November 20, 2013, 10:56:14 AM

According to a Nov 11, 2013 news release Matrix announced that the Storms of Steel DLC (also stand-alone) for the Conflict of Heroes series would be released Nov 20, 2013.

Can't find it on the Matrix page as such. Does anyone have current news about this?

http://www.matrixgames.com/products/473/details/Conflict.of.Heroes:.Storms.of.Steel

FrontierCybrarian · November 20, 2013, 11:44:44 AM

Looks like Matrix just updated their Storms of Steel page. With a $40 download fee and $50 boxed version price I feel I'll pass on this until lower prices. Sorry to hear it's such a costly game, at least for my budget. Others may welcome this no matter the cost and that's okay, too.

http://www.matrixgames.com/products/473/details/Conflict.of.Heroes:.Storms.of.Steel

Lord Zimoa · November 20, 2013, 12:03:07 PM

Conflict of Heroes: Storms of Steel released:

http://www.slitherine.com/games/coheroes_ss

Lord Zimoa · November 20, 2013, 12:05:27 PM

Sorry guys, apparently we have two topics up about the game, only see it now, so Moderators, please merge or delete, my apologies...

Lord Zimoa · November 20, 2013, 12:14:10 PM

Customers who already own Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear can use their Awakening the Bear serial number as a coupon to get a $10 discount on Storms of Steel!

Conflict of Heroes: Storms of Steel is a stand-alone game and DOESN'T REQUIRE ownership of Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear. It will also work as an expansion if you already own Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear.

tgb · November 20, 2013, 02:26:48 PM

It's $30 after the discount - TWICE the price of Ghost Divisions, and the same price as the base game. Outrageous. I was going to buy this today. Now I'm not.

JudgeDredd · November 20, 2013, 04:49:36 PM

Well it's not an expansion. It's a stand alone game. The boardgame was the same - AtB was sold full price as I believe was SoS.

$30 isn't a lot for a stand alone game...is it? And even though you don't have to own AtB, they're still letting you use the code to get $10 discount. I've been a critic of MG recently - but I don't think $30 for a new game is too much.

Arctic Blast · November 20, 2013, 05:47:10 PM

Yep, Storms of Steel was a completely separate game. Makes sense that the computer version would also be a completely separate game, and that price isn't bad at all.

tgb · November 20, 2013, 07:06:08 PM

Matrix has repeatedly stated that if you own AtB and buy this you are getting DLC - not a stand alone game. $40 is not too much for a stand-alone product. $30 for DLC is.

QuoteConflict of Heroes: Storms of Steel is a stand-alone game and DOESN'T REQUIRE ownership of Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear. It will also work as an expansion if you already own Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear.

Ghost Divisions sells for $15, contains two campaigns made up of 10 new scenarios, so you are paying $1.50 each. Storms of Steel contains 15 new scenarios, plus the original game. So for $30 you get a bunch of stuff you already have, and 15 scenarios at $2 each. I still say it's a crummy deal for people who own the base game. Matrix is forcing you to repurchase what you already own.

Arctic Blast · November 21, 2013, 05:09:48 PM

Enough with this mathing out of games in some attempt to calculate 'value'. Apologies if this seems like a shot right at you tgb, but I'm tired of seeing this nonsense in general.

QUALITY of game counts. QUALITY. Yet I keep seeing these simplistic posts across the Internets about how 'such and such is a longer game', as if that makes it better somehow. 40 hours of boring crap is not better than 10 hours of really well done content.

Nefaro · November 21, 2013, 05:22:13 PM

In his case, he has something to compare it to. It's not the first time some company changed it's tune and switched what they originally intended to be a DLC/Expansion into a standalone product so they could get an extra twenty or thirty bucks out of their customers who already owned the base game.

I think this marketing switcharoo act is the issue at hand, and a valid complaint. Value is different for everyone, and malleable, but the marketing strategy isn't.

Arctic Blast · November 21, 2013, 05:28:21 PM

Quote from: Nefaro on November 21, 2013, 05:22:13 PM
In his case, he has something to compare it to. It's not the first time some company changed it's tune and switched what they originally intended to be a DLC/Expansion into a standalone product so they could get an extra twenty or thirty bucks out of their customers who already owned the base game.

I think this marketing switcharoo act is the issue at hand, and a valid complaint. Value is different for everyone, and malleable, but the marketing strategy isn't.

Yep, and that's fine. I'm just sick and tired of seeing 'that's this many $ per hour of play' or 'that works out to this many $ per scenario' as if that's a valid argument. It isn't.

Now, did they originally talk about Storm of Steel as purely an expansion for the first game? If so, it's the latest example of why I laugh whenever I hear Slitherine talk up their marketing as a reason that devs should sign with them. But if they were clear that it's both an expansion for the first game AND a standalone game, I personally don't see the problem.

FrontierCybrarian · November 21, 2013, 06:20:24 PM

Quote from: Arctic Blast on November 21, 2013, 05:09:48 PM
Enough with this mathing out of games in some attempt to calculate 'value'. Apologies if this seems like a shot right at you tgb, but I'm tired of seeing this nonsense in general.

QUALITY of game counts. QUALITY. Yet I keep seeing these simplistic posts across the Internets about how 'such and such is a longer game', as if that makes it better somehow. 40 hours of boring crap is not better than 10 hours of really well done content.

I apologize if my thread on Storms of Steel causes controversy amongst our members. I'm betting the game is high quality and at this stage worth the price. It's just that I'm on a very limited income and will have to wait for a price drop. If not, then I'll have to save up for a couple of months to purchase the game. OR just pass on this expansion/standalone. Life priorities will determine the outcome. It appears the COST on certain TITLES does stir strong emotions with some and it's based on several factors. QUALITY of a game is a high priority as is ENTERTAINMENT VALUE.

My rich son doesn't mind paying $60 for a 4 hour fps but I want way more single play hours than that out of an expensive game. He buys about 15 games every month. I don't buy that many in a year. Therefore I like mine to provide quality entertainment for awhile. That's just me and no criticism is directed to anyone with differing gaming purchase criteria.

Take care all and enjoy what you have and hopefully obtain funds to purchase the game(s) of your dreams! GAME ON!

Actually, I started the thread to see if any readers purchased the pc game and would be willing to share their thoughts about it.

Arctic Blast · November 22, 2013, 12:00:20 AM

Absolutely nothing wrong with that, FC. Of course you should analyze where to spend your gaming dollars. That just makes sense. There's nothing wrong with being choosy, something I am increasingly forcing myself to be...slowly... ;D

Everyone decides for themselves what makes a game worth it for them. And that's fine. I think what bothers me when I keep seeing this value judgement based 100% on cost vs. hours played is that they ignore something far more important : time. People will blather on and on about how many dollars such and such a game costs, and ignore whether or not it's worth the TIME they're spending on it. What good is a $50 game that gives 80 hours of gameplay if that 80 hours is pretty bland? While money is important, I care a lot more about spending 80 hours of my dwindling free time on a crap game.

This isn't a shot across the bow of yourself or tgb or anyone else. I just don't get why it always seems to come down totally to money vs. time investment. We don't place nearly enough value on our time, and that's really a shame.

tgb · November 22, 2013, 12:30:23 AM

Quote from: Arctic Blast on November 22, 2013, 12:00:20 AM

This isn't a shot across the bow of yourself or tgb or anyone else. I just don't get why it always seems to come down totally to money vs. time investment. We don't place nearly enough value on our time, and that's really a shame.

It doesn't. My point is that the new expansion a) is twice the price of the previous expansion because b)it forces owners of Awakening the Bear to re-purchase product they ALREADY OWN.

Length of the game has nothing to do with it.