Getting A Copy

[JeremyScott]

Hi Guys

Please forgive me if I seem redundant. Ive posted this basically in the other groups as well. I just bought a new laptop recently and have gotten back into war gaming. Where can I get a copy of BCT and ATF? Im looking for games that will challenge me and not become a clicking frenzy like Blitzkrieg and those other RTS games that the huge conglomorate retailers try to push on you. Why did this game and the others not make it on to the shelfs?

[Pat Proctor]

Well, I hope they will fit the bill!

ATF

http://www.gamersfront.com/cgi-bin/store/category.cgi?item=00006&type=store

BCT Commander:

http://www.gamersfront.com/cgi-bin/store/category.cgi?item=00002&type=store

Raging Tiger:

http://www.gamersfront.com/cgi-bin/store/category.cgi?item=00106&type=store

Enjoy!

[CPangracs]

...Why did this game and the others not make it on to the shelfs?
Very simply, Jeremy, retailers require exhorbitant prices from game producers to place their titles on the shelves, and even more to advertise them! For small, independent developers and publishers to do this, the games you now see for $44,95 would be close to $100 to pay for the advertising and shelf space.

Personally, I like to think that these games are like rare gems, waiting to be discovered and then excited whispers pass from one person to another about their valuable find!

I know, that was corny, but not far from the truth! I hope you find what you want from the selections Pat gave you, and remember to tell others if you like the game, as WoM is 60-70% of the success for most indie wargames!

Curt

[Ivan Rapkinov]

You're right = that was corny ;)

gotta love the Benny Hill quote too - more and more insights into Curt's psyche :D

[JeremyScott]

You gots to forgive CP, he is a yankee.

[CPangracs]

You gots to forgive CP, he is a yankee.
Nope, born and raised in California,...but don't hold that against me!:D

[kbluck]

Major game publishers are much like network television executives: they hate "risk". Their usual system for eliminating "risk", also just like nework executives, is to produce near-clones of whatever game was "hot" last year.

They are also intoxicated with special effects, much like their Hollywood movie-maker brethren. For example, notice how they recently ruined a perfectly good collection of Asimov short stories with overpowering gee-whiz effects. After all, audiences don't want subtlety in their examination of the true nature of human consciousness; they want kung-fu robots!

Since game producers assume that means *every* game *must* have those super-duper 3D graphics and motion-picture soundtrack and whatnot or it will be dissed by the fans, their games are very expensive to produce. Therefore, they won't touch a title that is not judged to have "mass-market" appeal. They're simply not interested in a niche game that won't likely sell at least hundreds of thousands of copies; even if the game doesn't cost millions to produce, its potential profit from sales of a few thousand copies will be completely eaten by marketing costs and overhead.

So, again much like show business, it falls to the "indie" to produce niche titles. And, just like most indie movies never make it into your local 18-screen multiplex, most indie games never make it onto the store shelf. Its not a reflection of their relative artistic virtues or entertainment value; its simply the economics of mass marketing.

--- Kevin

[Ryan_ Murphy]

This explains why Avalon Hill was still turning out junk as late as 1980 (and may still be) and games like Anzio were dumped.

[Cabron66]

This explains why Avalon Hill was still turning out junk as late as 1980 (and may still be) and games like Anzio were dumped.

And don't forget the tragic saga of the late lamented Harpoon IV so cruelly cut down in the prime of its life by UBISOFT.

Oh well, Ghost Recon was a pretty good game. I guess they can't be all evil over there.

Cheers

Paul

[kbluck]

And don't forget the tragic saga of the late lamented Harpoon IV so cruelly cut down in the prime of its life by UBISOFT.

As disappointing as it was, I think Harpoon 4 was more stillborn than killed. Ubi Soft was just the last in a surprisingly long line of failed development efforts for Harpoon 4.

Work started with SSI in 1997. Then in 1998 they fired the original developers. Then SSI got sold like three times in a year and ended up with Mattel. The project continued, but just couldn't seem to deliver. SSI was sold yet again to Ubi Soft in 2001, which promptly cancelled the project. Later that same year, somebody convinced them to start it up again. After two more years of fruitless work, they finally pulled the plug again in 2003 after determining that the latest group of developers still seemed unable to produce a shippable game. Supposedly the rights are still being shopped around.

Sometimes, killing a flawed project is for the best. POA-2 is a good example of what happens when a not-ready-for-prime-time product gets rushed to market. Its not a good experience for anybody.

--- Kevin

[Cabron66]

As disappointing as it was, I think Harpoon 4 was more stillborn than killed. Ubi Soft was just the last in a surprisingly long line of failed development efforts for Harpoon 4.

Work started with SSI in 1997. Then in 1998 they fired the original developers. Then SSI got sold like three times in a year and ended up with Mattel. The project continued, but just couldn't seem to deliver. SSI was sold yet again to Ubi Soft in 2001, which promptly cancelled the project. Later that same year, somebody convinced them to start it up again. After two more years of fruitless work, they finally pulled the plug again in 2003 after determining that the latest group of developers still seemed unable to produce a shippable game. Supposedly the rights are still being shopped around.

Sometimes, killing a flawed project is for the best. POA-2 is a good example of what happens when a not-ready-for-prime-time product gets rushed to market. Its not a good experience for anybody.

--- Kevin

Possibly, although I sometimes get the impression that the problems arise from the constant conflicts between the developers and the various software companies that have picked up the project. The developers (the guys that have been at this project since it was a boxed pen and paper game) have always wanted it to be as close to realistic as possible. It's hard for me to imagine that either SSI or UBI would have had the same vision.

Of course, I really have no idea what happened. I wasn't there and don't know any of the players. That's just the impression I got from the press releases.

Cheers

Paul

p.s. No kidding about POA-2. I don't think I've ever gone from excited to disappointed in such a short space of time. In fact, I hate to say it, but HPS has made quite a few if these questionable products. A lot of which I made the mistake of paying for.