The Good Health of the Wargaming Niche

Gamers can also use this forum to chat about any game related subject, news, rumours etc.

Moderator: maddog986

Konrad_Novak
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 5:33 am

RE: The Good Health of the Wargaming Niche

Post by Konrad_Novak »

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil
A demo or not? It’s certainly true we don’t make a demo for every game and there are varied and complex reasons for that. As a general rule for games that you can pick up and get into quickly, such as Battle Academy or Panzer Corps we do make demos. For games that require an investment in time we generally don’t. Here we believe demos are counterproductive as more time, effort and exploration is needed by the player to get into the game than is generally allowed in a demo.

Iain, if you so "religiously" oppose the idea of demos for the majority of Matrix's games, why not make a couple of Youtube videos for each game (even old ones), extensively covering major aspects of gameplay? It will:
- take a minuscule amount of time (especially if you compare it to the time needed for demo-making),
- have a zero possibility of pirating the game in any sense known to man,
- give potential customers more than a general idea of gameplay,
- promote wargames among potential wargamers (people, which don't know yet that they're wargamers),
- as an added bonus, these videos can be made as a tutorial (Command Ops tutorial immensely helped me in learning the ropes of that gem).

Ok, there are a lot of amateur videos on youtube, covering many of Matrix's games. Unfortunately, some of them are downright boring and others have bad quality. A professionally made gameplay-heavy (NOT a teaser\trailer) video will go a long way toward promoting the game and highlighting its major advantages. Bonus points if the video is released before the release, thus aiding in marketing campaign.

If you're not willing to commit resources and time to making such videos, consider outsourcing the work to some of the fans. There are a lot of dedicated customers here, which love games they play, even if they're outdated. I think they will wholeheartedly support this idea and do these videos for free. Give them some guidelines of the "Ideal Gameplay Video" as you see it. For a more widespread effort, try rewarding better videos with discount coupons\free games\gift cards.
User avatar
JudgeDredd
Posts: 8356
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 7:28 pm
Location: Scotland

RE: The Good Health of the Wargaming Niche

Post by JudgeDredd »

Read it.

Agree with some of it and hugely disagree with others - but it's your company.

Can I just ask/suggest a few things
1. Perhaps sales of iOS/tablet have increased because a) you don't sell them at the price you sell their PC equivalent(?) and b) the interface is so much slicker

2. Demos - they do work. Think what you like - and I take your point that you ask people to heavily invest time in a demo FOR it to work. But if a demo is done right it can work. The alternative which you are doing) is to ask people to take a punt on a game at £60 - which is a hell of an ask.

3. Your company needs more advertising. You just read a guys post on this very thread - he stumbled across you - as I did many years ago with Matrix and as many other likely do.

4. If your sales are up by such a huge margin - why in god's name are you holding on to archaic games at a large price

5. @DBEVES - you state people hold on for sales for holidays and flights. Have you been around when Matrix have their sale at Christmas. SO many people post about how they wanted a game but waited for the sale. So Matrix do suffer from people who hold off anyway. Perhaps what they should do is provide games at launch at a reduced cost to get early adopters or have random sales or reduce the price of their games when a sequel comes out. OOTP do it rather successfully I believe - and you could argue you can't get much more niche than providing ONE game (I know they do others - but OOTP is their flagship)

6. Why exactly is WitP £60+ when WitP:AE is £80? Sure - WitP is a huge game - but it's old and shows it in it's interface

Anyway - I'm done. Said my piece and you've said yours.

And DBEVES - there's really no point in talking down about people complaining about price. For a start - THAT is information ANY company would want - along with other feedback. Secondly - no-one was suggesting they know how to run a company better than Matrix. They were just saying "in their case" and that's all they can give. In MY case - a demo would work. In MY case, a very cheap game saw my entry into the wargaming world and helped me find Matrix Games and from their I've bought a fair few titles from them and other wargaming outlets.

And lastly - I don't think people want everything for nothing. The phrases you used like "blabbing", "know it alls", "spout off" and "most all of em want something for nothing" and "shut up" are exactly why those threads go on and on and on and bloat over into mud slinging
Alba gu' brath
User avatar
IainMcNeil
Posts: 2784
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 10:01 am
Location: London
Contact:

RE: The Good Health of the Wargaming Niche

Post by IainMcNeil »

Agree completely on the videos - more videos is something we've been working on so expect more in future.
Iain McNeil
Director
Matrix Games
User avatar
JudgeDredd
Posts: 8356
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 7:28 pm
Location: Scotland

RE: The Good Health of the Wargaming Niche

Post by JudgeDredd »

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

Agree completely on the videos - more videos is something we've been working on so expect more in future.
^that is most definitely a step in the right direction to get exposure. But don't make it like your Panthers in the Fog teaser trailer pls [;)]
Alba gu' brath
User avatar
jday305
Posts: 161
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2013 10:43 am
Location: Northeast Indiana

RE: The Good Health of the Wargaming Niche

Post by jday305 »

As a recent newbe into the computerized wargames that Matrix and AGEod offers its good to see that it is a growing industry as I was a big fan of the old style counter-wargames in the 80's. I was a big fan of the Squad Leader series among others. Unfortunately, life gave me little time to set up and play these games through the 90's and soon lost interest. With discovering the computerize games like Advance Tactics and Decisive Campaigns, I have the best of both worlds; the style of games I grew up on in the 80's but the ability to play when I have the time and save the game for a later time. I would guess that part of the recent growth has been through oldtime wargamers like me who are rediscoveriing these games and also gettting tired of the current popular first person shooters. Though I will always enjoy the Civilation and Total War series, my future purchases will be more towards Matrix and Ageod games. Except, I have to say that I agree with Josh that any Fall Out games will be immediately purchased. LOL
RebelYell

"Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it."
“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”
Edmund Burke
User avatar
wodin
Posts: 10709
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 3:13 am
Location: England
Contact:

RE: The Good Health of the Wargaming Niche

Post by wodin »

I didn't read all of it as I didn't have time..I just skimmed it...and what I saw was pretty much what has been said before. I understand their stance and it hasn't chnaged.

It took Tim Stone to do an article on it and that article was quite scathing..yet he got a thanks from Iain? I'm sure if I had posted something similar I wouldn't be thanked for it. I do know I'm see as abit of a trouble maker here..but honestly my sole interest is for wargamers and keeping the hobby going. I know Tim shares the same concerns. Maybe if I had lots of spare money I wouldn't comment at all..but thats unlikely because I'm not a "I'm allright Jack kind of person" and also I want the genre to grow or at least survive once all us 35+ wargamers die off..

The sale with RPS sounds good and Tim is waiting for contact from Iain.

Judge Dredd said I better than I can anyway.


As I said though and will state again I have no issues with new games and Slitheirnes pricing policy at all...it's only games like SSG's battles in series and as JD said WITP at such a price it makes no sense to me..For starters the SSG series games can't even do widescreen. The engines are dated but the games are great and finally they are well past their shelf life for constant sales. Who would buy WITP when for $20 you can get WITPAE? Now reduce WITP to around $20..watch it sell again and no doubt bring new people to WITPAE as they love it.

A problem we have to face is the aging population of wargamers..so new blood really is needed..and that means things have to be done to entice it in..so sell the old games cheap..people will take a risk..and viola your going to start getting new baby wargamers..which will help in the long run.

When I look at all those boardgame publishers..and wargame societies and especially the mini's genre there is a big market out there..what restricts it is no entry level price good wargames (this is where the old games selling cheap come in). People will be willing to throw some money on it..build the market up.




ORIGINAL: flipperwasirish

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Hi Wodin,
I haven't read all of Iains response...some bits I saw surprise me..

I'd strongly encourage you to read the whole thing through. I realize it's a bit of a wall of text but given your very active involvement in this discussion I think it would behoove you to give it a full read.

Regards,

- Erik

I LOL when I saw that Wodin commented that he hadn't read the text, but still commented anyway.
DBeves
Posts: 400
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2002 5:11 am

RE: The Good Health of the Wargaming Niche

Post by DBeves »

ORIGINAL: Ashcloud

Good post, I fully understand the position from a Developer viewpoint but TOAW3 wasn't developed by matrix and yet the price is very high - in South Africa it amounts to almost R400 (that is a hefty amount for an old game no matter how much content you get). Why so high?

Lastly, Steel Panthers World At War General Edition - how about a sale?

But what you fail to answer is why ? If I write to ferrari and tell them I really like their cars but they need to reduce the price before I will buy one what do you think they will say? You are not entitled to anything. Despite the fact that Matrix have told you repeatedly that their back catalogue still sells and at the moment at least their pricing strategy works - because they have the numbers to tell them that people still insist they are entitled to a discount. The price is so high because thats the price. What precisely is your argument for matrix reducing it when they have said as far as their business is concerned they dont need to.
User avatar
wodin
Posts: 10709
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 3:13 am
Location: England
Contact:

RE: The Good Health of the Wargaming Niche

Post by wodin »

DBeves..to bring new blood into the wargaming genre..which wont happen unless something is done..reduce the price of the old games (we can only take their word they sell...but I have my doubts there selling alot and to be honest I think their mainly concerned with the big sellers). You reduce the price of the old games at a price people will take a risk in forking out for..even those who have never bothered with the genre before. Thats how you get new people into the hobby..and when your new games come out at full price you have even more people buying them.

Slitherine say's it works..fair enough..but they have nothing to compare it too..they don't know what happens if they did drop the prices of the old games or sold them in bundles at a low price..maybe..just maybe..they suddenly see an upsurge in sales of those games..and also notice an upsurge in the sales of the newer games as new people get into the genre. Until they try it out they really can't say they have the better system. Which for a long term aspect I don't think they have..as we need new wargamers..and younger wargamers too..and they are out there. lads still enjoy war films..games like Panzer Corps and Total War sell loads..and I reckon a good amount of those players would enjoy the more indepth games. Our generation "35 upwards" isn't special in that only us who where bron at a certain time will enjoy wargames.
DBeves
Posts: 400
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2002 5:11 am

RE: The Good Health of the Wargaming Niche

Post by DBeves »

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd



And DBEVES - there's really no point in talking down about people complaining about price. For a start - THAT is information ANY company would want - along with other feedback. Secondly - no-one was suggesting they know how to run a company better than Matrix. They were just saying "in their case" and that's all they can give. In MY case - a demo would work. In MY case, a very cheap game saw my entry into the wargaming world and helped me find Matrix Games and from their I've bought a fair few titles from them and other wargaming outlets.

And lastly - I don't think people want everything for nothing. The phrases you used like "blabbing", "know it alls", "spout off" and "most all of em want something for nothing" and "shut up" are exactly why those threads go on and on and on and bloat over into mud slinging

Well - your entire post was basically, again, ignoring everything someone who is running a games company said and simply stating he is wrong about most everything. So - suggesting you do know how to run a games comapny better than matrix is entirely what you were doing.

And my language refelcts entirely what I think those people are doing - and it seems to me your view of "talking down" is directly related to the fact I disagree with you. You are doing exactly the same only from the opposite point of view. your entire rationale is to ignore everything the people who have the numbers say and simply say they are incorrect.

User avatar
Ashcloud
Posts: 133
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 5:19 am
Contact:

RE: The Good Health of the Wargaming Niche

Post by Ashcloud »

Good point, I guess we are not entitled to anything as they are a business trying to turn a profit. Would be nice though, and I also want an Age of Rifles remake - might as well ask, never get anything if you don't ask...

So, I guess that is the point of my post - you don't ask you don't get, if you do ask you might on a minuscule level influence someone to give you what you want.
DBeves
Posts: 400
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2002 5:11 am

RE: The Good Health of the Wargaming Niche

Post by DBeves »

ORIGINAL: wodin

DBeves..to bring new blood into the wargaming genre..which wont happen unless something is done..reduce the price of the old games (we can only take their word they sell...but I have my doubts there selling alot and to be honest I think their mainly concerned with the big sellers). You reduce the price of the old games at a price people will take a risk in forking out for..even those who have never bothered with the genre before. Thats how you get new people into the hobby..and when your new games come out at full price you have even more people buying them.

Slitherine say's it works..fair enough..but they have nothing to compare it too..they don't know what happens if they did drop the prices of the old games or sold them in bundles at a low price..maybe..just maybe..they suddenly see an upsurge in sales of those games..and also notice an upsurge in the sales of the newer games as new people get into the genre. Until they try it out they really can't say they have the better system. Which for a long term aspect I don't think they have..as we need new wargamers..and younger wargamers too..and they are out there. lads still enjoy war films..games like Panzer Corps and Total War sell loads..and I reckon a good amount of those players would enjoy the more indepth games. Our generation "35 upwards" isn't special in that only us who where bron at a certain time will enjoy wargames.

But why is it matrix's job to bring new people into the hobby (irrespective of the fact that from ians numbers it would suggest that is precisely what they are doing) ? Fine if that suits them business wise - but they have no moral obligation to do so. You are suggesting they do that by reducing the price of games they dont want to reduce the price on. Again - you simply ignore their argument that those back items do sell and imply they are lying about the numbers. Why would they do that ? If your premise worked why wouldnt they reduce the price if it made more money? I would suggest that its because they have the numbers and see that it doesnt.

You all jump on them quick enough if they dont give you triple A service in support etc but when they act like a business and not some altrusitc charity in giving games away cheaper then they want to sell them you cry foul. And that is essentially the point - if they dont want to sell those products for a price you think they should be sold at you really have no fundamental right whatsover ever to demand it. Which is what you are doing and which is the fundamental point I disagree with. I hold the point of view that wargaming will be more successful when it acts like a business and not some back street hobby and that means acting in a business model that works - which seems to me precisely what matrix are doing. Again - your entire rationale is simply to ignore evrything thats been said by matrix (a very long post by ian giving all kinds of detail) and simply insist that you are right. The entire commercial world runs on a principle of selling things for as much as they can get for them yet you expect matrix to act in a way that is completely contrary to that ? Other companies have sales because on balance it brings in more sales revenue - your only answer to matrix telling you that the numbers dont work in this particular case is to say Nah ... I know better. The argument is devoid of any sense.
Konrad_Novak
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 5:33 am

RE: The Good Health of the Wargaming Niche

Post by Konrad_Novak »

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

Agree completely on the videos - more videos is something we've been working on so expect more in future.

Please oh please don't make them of teaser\trailer variety with those title drops, confusing cuts, historical B&W video and 1 minute of actual gameplay. My advice is to think along the lines of "Let's Play" genre - A LOT of gameplay with comments. Preferably from developers (they provide very interesting insights, often unintentionally), but a hardcore fan\beta tester is alright too.

I don't know if there's a Matrix Games dedicated video channel on Youtube (I haven't found one). If there isn't one - definitely create one, with separate playlists for each game. IMHO, Youtube is more functional than uploading new videos on matrix servers. Even Youtube subscribers that are not familiar with specific game often watch a couple minutes of the videos in the subscribed channel - just out of curiosity. The probability of downloading videos of unknown game from matrix servers is much lower.

Well, it's all very simple. I think that you've thought about it already :)

Update: Oh, found the Youtube channel. A very quiet place :( BTW, take a look at the Commander The Great War Features video and Close Combat PitF trailer. These are exactly what I'm talking about - a lot of work time spent on doing those, but they came out simple as "video announcement of news".

There's no need for such videos - they simply duplicate the "News" section of Matrix Games main page. But in a very expensive and time-consuming (for the person who works on them) way.

Update2: Now, this "Let's Play" of Decisive Campaigns: Fall Blau is MUCH better. A person who did that had done a pretty good job - he has explained rules, gave a description of icons, gameplay etc. Add a couple of "insider's insights", some anecdotes, explanation of several designer's decisions - and you'll have a hell of a promotional video. It doesn't have to be THAT long (41 min.) - you can cramp a lot of info even into 10-minutes video.
Tomn
Posts: 148
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2013 11:10 am

RE: The Good Health of the Wargaming Niche

Post by Tomn »

Hello, chaps. It's nice to see an official statement on this matter, and I do applaud your willingness to try and engage with what is, I will readily admit, the sometimes fickle and volatile public. That being said, I must respectfully confess to some skepticism regarding some of your beliefs (and let me state for the record, in case there’s any confusion amongst more ardent defenders, that I entirely recognize that I am pitting my opinion against theirs and that theirs has more hard data behind it – I simply hope to present a perspective they may not have considered).

The biggest point of disagreement, I think, is the question of how much untapped demand there is. If there is a large pool of untapped demand, then lowering prices (permanently for all new and old games, not as a temporary discount) will produce additional profit for Matrix and their devs and keeping them high is essentially turning down that extra profit. (For those who think that higher prices automatically lead to higher profits – there’s an optimum price point at which extra customers coincide perfectly with profit per sale to create the maximum profit for that company. Pricing above this point leads to more lost sales than profit per sale justifies, while pricing below it leads to more lost profit per sale than the extra sales brings in.) If, however, no such pool exists, then lowering prices simply lowers profits. Iain apparently doesn’t believe that pool exists, and if he is correct, his position is unassailable. But, not to put too fine a point on it, I have my doubts on the matter.

To explain my position, let me turn to Steam. Steam is commonly thought of as the Holy Grail for a great many indie niche developers – successfully getting onto Steam is something of a springboard to fame and fortune undreamed of in bygone days. Why is this so? It’s not simply because Steam prices low – rather, it’s because Steam offers unmatched visibility. Steam processes an enormous amount of customers and players, almost all of whom check the Store page for new releases. Unlike a traditional retail store, Steam has no limit on storefront – any new release, no matter how small and niche, will be on the front page for a significant amount of time, waiting for anyone curious enough to poke through it. As such, tiny niche developers who would normally have struggled to find customers will find that even 1% of a very large number is still quite large and very, very profitable for them. The revolution Steam provides doesn’t simply come about “because it’s digital” – it’s information-based. It effectively provides its games with enormous amounts of free marketing. Many customers are paired with something they love which they would never have found in a traditional retail store.

This is key. The problem with all but the most truly obscure niches is that they can’t easily find prospective customers, but the vast visibility that Steam (and others) provides ties that problem up quite neatly and throws it away. Even small niches balloon remarkably when exposed to the gigantic billboard that is Steam’s front page. And wargaming is not a very small niche at all – after all, it can clearly support an entire major publisher dedicated to it. To claim, then, that Matrix Games has ALREADY captured the vast majority of anyone at all who might be at all interested in more complex wargames seems a little far-fetched to me – was Matrix Games’ marketing so efficient and so well-targeted as to have successfully found and scooped up everybody willing to put down money on wargames in the pre-Steam age?

The Steam Greenlight you brought up actually suggests otherwise. Certainly you’ve gotten a lot of “downvotes,” but it’s important to realize what those downvotes mean – nothing more than that those people would not be interested in buying the game. As a niche publisher, this should be familiar territory – nobody is expecting you to outsell Call of Honor Effect 4, after all. What is much more important is how many people voted yes, they would buy the game. 40% or even 20% of enormous is still quite significant, and very strong for a “niche” product. How does, for instance, the number of upvotes compare to your sales figures for the game? If they approach parity, that’s tremendously good news. Even if the upvotes don’t come close to your actual sales figures, it’s worth remembering that Greenlight, after all, represents itself a fraction of total Steam customers who bother to muck around with Greenlight and who were fortunate enough to come across the game. As those upvotes represent your potential customers, they are what truly matters, while downvotes simply denote how many people would prefer to see something else produced – and since you were never hoping to win over everyone who ever played games on the PC, they’re irrelevant. It’s worth noting, for instance, that Steam itself states that they select games not based on some upvote/downvote ratio, but simply based on how many upvotes they got.

Not only that, but as you say, you've managed to gain an extremely impressive 44% growth figure. That is, of course, excellent news and very promising as far as the future of your company goes, but doesn't it also suggest that there are a significant amount of new customers to be found outside of your existing fanbase? Where, if not, are these new sales coming from? And can more be lured in with a price more competitive with industry standards? Such questions seem like they could be very interesting to your company's bottom line if answered fully.

I believe, then, that the possibility of a large untapped demand cannot be easily dismissed, and if this is so, the possibility that Matrix Games could garner more profits and greater success through lowering their prices to something more in line with industry standards cannot in turn be easily dismissed. It isn’t a matter of being “niche” and not “mass market” or any other such distinctions, but rather a simple question of “How many customers who would have bought and enjoyed the game are turned off by what are ridiculously high prices by industry standards?” It is my opinion, backed by what I have mentioned above, that the answer is “enough to justify a lowering of prices.”

But of course, you can’t rely solely on one verbose stranger’s opinion to run a business. Harder facts are needed before one can justifiably make a decision. As such, I am happy to hear that you’re willing to undertake such experiments as Steam Greenlighting and a sale of older games with RPS. I think you will find that in this bold new age, you will be pleasantly surprised by how many old assumptions have been overturned. I do ask, however, that in your cooperation with RPS, you do not rely WHOLLY on RPS. For a niche such as your own, visibility matters. Prepare the sale and shout it loudly on the streets, talk up anyone you can grab hold of no matter how confused and tell them all about your brave new experiment in lower pricing. If you dare, you could even hint that success in this experiment could lead to further and more permanent changes to the pricing system. Don’t just throw it at RPS and sit back and say “Well, I guess we’ll see what happens,” march forward and push it to the limit! I’m hardly an expert, but I strongly suspect that the response to such would be remarkably positive – I know mine would be.

That’s the main thing I want to say, and I hope you didn’t find it too presumptuous – if you did, of course, you can simply ignore me. That being said, there’s a few lesser points which I’d like to touch upon in passing.

- People who bought a game “because it’s cheap” tend not to badmouth a game very much, actually, in my experience. What they tend to say is “Eh, you get what you pay for” and move on, chalking it up as a loss and forgetting about it. They might even say “Well, it’s not for me, but maybe some more hardcore RPG/strategy/wargame fan like my friend here might like it.” It’s when the price is high and they’re forced to justify their expenditure where they start getting nitpicky and violent about problems (“Dangit, I did NOT pay sixty bucks to wait ten danged minutes for every turn to load!”)

- While there MAY be something in people valuing what they pay more for, I have to ask – are you really using cognitive dissonance to improve customer perception of value?

- What, ultimately, is more important to you - customer perception of value, or developer income? That is, if it should turn out that lowering prices can dramatically improve sales, would you be willing to do so even if it turns out that existing customers may suddenly start valuing the game less than they used to?

- I couldn’t help but notice that your essay had a certain level of “us vs them” thinking – “they” said we were wrong, “they” said we couldn’t make it, “they” said we were doomed, but we showed them all! Now, I imagine this sort of thinking is quite justified if you’ve been taking a lot of flak for various reasons and have nevertheless managed to turn a profit , but do you feel that this sort of “siege mentality” might be affecting your ability to make a rational and objective analysis of your situation and your options?

Thanks again for listening, and taking the time to answer. Good luck in your endeavors.
MikeAP
Posts: 266
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 2:28 am

RE: The Good Health of the Wargaming Niche

Post by MikeAP »

ORIGINAL: Konrad_Novak
why not make a couple of Youtube videos for each game

This. I dont play demo's. Mostly because I don't have time to download stuff and whatnot. I prefer videos, and I'm surprised that companies aren't going with comprehensive videos that cover their gameplay features.

ORIGINAL: Konrad_Novak

Please oh please don't make them of teaser\trailer variety with those title drops, confusing cuts, historical B&W video and 1 minute of actual gameplay. My advice is to think along the lines of "Let's Play" genre - A LOT of gameplay with comments. Preferably from developers (they provide very interesting insights, often unintentionally), but a hardcore fan\beta tester is alright too.

And this...
Alchenar
Posts: 359
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 11:17 am

RE: The Good Health of the Wargaming Niche

Post by Alchenar »

ORIGINAL: Ashcloud

Good point, I guess we are not entitled to anything as they are a business trying to turn a profit. Would be nice though, and I also want an Age of Rifles remake - might as well ask, never get anything if you don't ask...

So, I guess that is the point of my post - you don't ask you don't get, if you do ask you might on a minuscule level influence someone to give you what you want.

Nobody's arguing they're entitled to anything, DBeves just likes that strawman because he doesn't have any actual arguments.

I mean, this is a guy who thinks that Valve's pricing strategy is about trying to get a dollar here and there.

And who is literally asking "why would Matrix want more people playing wargames?"


e: the actual argument on entitlement cuts both ways. I won't spend £60 on a single game more than once or twice. But I'll happily spend £20 on a different game over and over again if it looks somewhat interesting and worth a punt (case study: I happily snapped up both Decisive Campaigns games in the bundle because individually each game fell below my price threshold - despite the fact that I paid more for both than I would have if I'd just bought one). At the end of the day I think there are a substantial number of people like me who are customers in potentia but who never buy because of a price point that never shifts.

e: also I agree with literally everything Tomn wrote.
DBeves
Posts: 400
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2002 5:11 am

RE: The Good Health of the Wargaming Niche

Post by DBeves »

ORIGINAL: Alchenar
ORIGINAL: Ashcloud

Good point, I guess we are not entitled to anything as they are a business trying to turn a profit. Would be nice though, and I also want an Age of Rifles remake - might as well ask, never get anything if you don't ask...

So, I guess that is the point of my post - you don't ask you don't get, if you do ask you might on a minuscule level influence someone to give you what you want.

Nobody's arguing they're entitled to anything, DBeves just likes that strawman because he doesn't have any actual arguments.

I mean, this is a guy who thinks that Valve's pricing strategy is about trying to get a dollar here and there.

And who is literally asking "why would Matrix want more people playing wargames?"


e: the actual argument on entitlement cuts both ways. I won't spend £60 on a single game more than once or twice. But I'll happily spend £20 on a different game over and over again if it looks somewhat interesting and worth a punt (case study: I happily snapped up both Decisive Campaigns games in the bundle because individually each game fell below my price threshold - despite the fact that I paid more for both than I would have if I'd just bought one). At the end of the day I think there are a substantial number of people like me who are customers in potentia but who never buy because of a price point that never shifts.

e: also I agree with literally everything Tomn wrote.
But why is it matrix's job to bring new people into the hobby (irrespective of the fact that from ians numbers it would suggest that is precisely what they are doing) ? Fine if that suits them business wise - but they have no moral obligation to do so

What I actually said.
But why is it matrix's job to bring new people into the hobby (irrespective of the fact that from ians numbers it would suggest that is precisely what they are doing) ? Fine if that suits them business wise - but they have no moral obligation to do so

what I actually said.
fact is it doesnt matter to them what they sell it at because even if they only make a buck - that buck is pure profit in relation to what they have put into the game.

So given you had to resort to lies and deliberate misquotes its obvious thats the only way you can counter my argument.

e: the actual argument on entitlement cuts both ways. I won't spend £60 on a single game more than once or twice. But I'll happily spend £20 on a different game over and over again if it looks somewhat interesting and worth a punt (case study: I happily snapped up both Decisive Campaigns games in the bundle because individually each game fell below my price threshold - despite the fact that I paid more for both than I would have if I'd just bought

Yet another one who thinks they are so important they extrapolate their own personal opinion into a statement of absolute fact of life.
User avatar
IainMcNeil
Posts: 2784
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 10:01 am
Location: London
Contact:

RE: The Good Health of the Wargaming Niche

Post by IainMcNeil »

Another useful stat. Demographics of our user base on Matrix from 2012. Slitherine has a slightly lower average age because of the type of games and platforms with only 7.2% over 55.
11.2% - Under 25
19.3% - 25-34
36.8% - 35-44
22.7% - 45-54
9.2% - 55 & above

We don't have historic data for this unfortunately so nothing to compare with.





Iain McNeil
Director
Matrix Games
User avatar
IainMcNeil
Posts: 2784
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 10:01 am
Location: London
Contact:

RE: The Good Health of the Wargaming Niche

Post by IainMcNeil »

The invitation is open and he knows where we are :)
ORIGINAL: wodin
The sale with RPS sounds good and Tim is waiting for contact from Iain.
Iain McNeil
Director
Matrix Games
User avatar
Perturabo
Posts: 2461
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 5:32 pm
Contact:

RE: The Good Health of the Wargaming Niche

Post by Perturabo »

ORIGINAL: wodin

DBeves..to bring new blood into the wargaming genre..which wont happen unless something is done..reduce the price of the old games (we can only take their word they sell...but I have my doubts there selling alot and to be honest I think their mainly concerned with the big sellers). You reduce the price of the old games at a price people will take a risk in forking out for..even those who have never bothered with the genre before. Thats how you get new people into the hobby..and when your new games come out at full price you have even more people buying them.
That's what demos are for. I started PC wargaming from demos.

ORIGINAL: DBeves

But why is it matrix's job to bring new people into the hobby (irrespective of the fact that from ians numbers it would suggest that is precisely what they are doing) ? Fine if that suits them business wise - but they have no moral obligation to do so. You are suggesting they do that by reducing the price of games they dont want to reduce the price on. Again - you simply ignore their argument that those back items do sell and imply they are lying about the numbers. Why would they do that ? If your premise worked why wouldnt they reduce the price if it made more money? I would suggest that its because they have the numbers and see that it doesnt.

You all jump on them quick enough if they dont give you triple A service in support etc but when they act like a business and not some altrusitc charity in giving games away cheaper then they want to sell them you cry foul. And that is essentially the point - if they dont want to sell those products for a price you think they should be sold at you really have no fundamental right whatsover ever to demand it. Which is what you are doing and which is the fundamental point I disagree with. I hold the point of view that wargaming will be more successful when it acts like a business and not some back street hobby and that means acting in a business model that works - which seems to me precisely what matrix are doing. Again - your entire rationale is simply to ignore evrything thats been said by matrix (a very long post by ian giving all kinds of detail) and simply insist that you are right. The entire commercial world runs on a principle of selling things for as much as they can get for them yet you expect matrix to act in a way that is completely contrary to that ? Other companies have sales because on balance it brings in more sales revenue - your only answer to matrix telling you that the numbers dont work in this particular case is to say Nah ... I know better. The argument is devoid of any sense.
Not to mention, that it is good and just when people who make good wargames earn a lot of money.
User avatar
Vasquez
Posts: 468
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 10:00 am
Location: München, Bayern, Deutschland

RE: The Good Health of the Wargaming Niche

Post by Vasquez »

Wargaming is indeed a niche. The success of Panzer Corps means nothing since it is more or less a mainstream startegygame.
 
I am a supporter of the idea to lower the Prices of older titles of course. But would that get more blood into the genre? I doubt it. As someone mentioned take older SSG titles as example. They have fixed resolutions and they arent loooking very good on nowadays widescreen TFTs. Same goes for a lot older Matrix Games (Crown of Glory etc). I fear those games would scare more people away instead of broading the audience. Lowering the prices of those games would help us (wargaming geeks) but not the genre as a whole.
 
Two more interesting examples:
 
1. One year ago a retail gaming store (in germany) announced their cessation of Business. They had offered a half dozen boxed Version of Battles in Italy (German retail Version) for 1 (one) Euro each. 
One months later they had not sold one of them. So I bought them all and made a giveaway on my gaming site. We have some wargamers over there yes, but the majority are shooter fans (since 7idGaming is focused on e-sports and we are hosting servers for ArmaII and such games). Anyway. In short: No one wanted Battles in Italy. Neither for 1 Euro nor for free.
 
2. Some weeks ago a friend gave me five gamersgate keys for a almost brand new wargame. So I announced a contest again. The only requirement was to like the developers Facebook site. My article had 280 hits but only three guys were interested enough to like the page for a free copy.
 
The price alone does not turn average Jon Doe into a wargamer. 
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”