say WHAT???

[gregb7]

If what is quoted below is true, am I the only one who finds it amazing that a company would ship a "new" version for reasons such as this? I, for one, will never purchase a product that Mr. Jim Rose has anything to do with, a pity given my interest in this game and the period in general. Not gonna reward
an admitted scam artist though. Nice to know nevertheless.



One of the main reasons we had several "versions" of TOAW and the >Campaign Series was to trick the stores into thinking it was a new version. >This way, when they shipped back the recently shipped version, we would >replace it with the "New" version.

[gregb7]

it's late. could the admin please move this to the distant guns board please.....my mistake.

[Don Maddox]

it's late. could the admin please move this to the distant guns board please.....my mistake.Topic moved.

If what is quoted below is true, am I the only one who finds it amazing that a company would ship a "new" version for reasons such as this? I, for one, will never purchase a product that Mr. Jim Rose has anything to do with, a pity given my interest in this game and the period in general. Not gonna reward
an admitted scam artist though. Nice to know nevertheless.Greg, this was an interesting comment on the developer's part. You could ask him to elaborate on what he meant rather than label him a "scam artist."

I have no idea what the retail situation was with TOAW. My own indirect experience is that working with big retail chains is a situation so unfair to publishers that many have simply abandoned it. I know once I started learning the details of exactly what kind of terms retailers force on publishers I was shocked. But I admit I don't know any more than you do about what the particulars of this situation were.

[Bloodstar]

If what is quoted below is true, am I the only one who finds it amazing that a company would ship a "new" version for reasons such as this? I, for one, will never purchase a product that Mr. Jim Rose has anything to do with, a pity given my interest in this game and the period in general. Not gonna reward
an admitted scam artist though. Nice to know nevertheless.


Gregb7,


And you like EA or others shipping zillion versions of Sims? Do you think that add ons, deluxe versions, GOTY versions are Talonsoft innovation? Hahaha.

Find almost every game and you will see Game of the Year version, Half life 2 for example... EA had DELUXE versions etc...and the add ons etc...


Mario

[Reiryc]

Gregb7,


And you like EA or others shipping zillion versions of Sims? Do you think that add ons, deluxe versions, GOTY versions are Talonsoft innovation? Hahaha.

Find almost every game and you will see Game of the Year version, Half life 2 for example... EA had DELUXE versions etc...and the add ons etc...


Mario

So you're a defender of 2 wrongs makes a right principle?

Or is that because so many do something that could be deemed 'questionable' that no one should comment on such behavior?

[dhuffjr]

It could be that the retailers constantly strive to have fresh product on their shelves. A game like TOAW is going to be a long term seller, not a high volume rush product but slow and steady seller, pretty much like any wargame is. The retailer forces the developer to make the product "fresh" via new versions/names (deluxe and other names mentioned) to keep their product before the general buying public. Dirty trick/business tactic...your choice I guess, my vote is business tactic/reaction to corporate decisions by the retailer in order to keep their product on the shelf and thus maintain sales.

I have no problem with the Matrix/HPS/others? model of "repackaging" a game and selling it as separate. In these cases someone (developer) is spending time and energy (thus money) towards developing new maps/scenerios/oobs etc and tweaking the game engine making it effectively a new game. Power to them and a hearty thank you for making games that wargamers love to play.

[Jim Cobb]

To quote Richard Berg, "Stores don't sell games; they sell space."

If I ever meet - or even hear of - a rich game designer, I'll question their marketing. Until then, more power to 'em!

[Bloodstar]

So you're a defender of 2 wrongs makes a right principle?

Or is that because so many do something that could be deemed 'questionable' that no one should comment on such behavior?


No, everyone can comment on anything. I am just for people using logic and not attacking developers all they way out. Harrasing developers for example because they used this or that copy protection is uselless. They used and so what? Those who are offended with that are free to not buy the game and voila. But, keeping this subject as a burning subject is also not fair to a) developers and b) those who don't mind that kind of copy protection and there are plenty of them as we see...

It's big business as we see and I doubt that those "offended" by copy protection doens't in fact have some kind of agenda because why they bring such a topic all the time - as I say if they don't like this kind of copy protection nobody is forcing them to buy this product. Spending so much energy on uselles debates pro et contra is really counterproductive...


SPEAKING about Gold, Deluxe, GOTY editions we can also speak about many things... You have HPS model which release "new" games but in fact many TOAW scenarios are in fact better games then HPS full prized products!!!

It's pure hipocrisy accusing Talonsoft and Jim Rose that they were scaming customers because they released TOAW, TOAW 2, WOTY, COW, battle packs etc... What about scenario editor in those games?

Another thing, Panther Games and Matrix - Matrix released Dreadnought game based on War in the Pacific game, someone can say that they released in fact MOD for a game and customers will pay for it :p:laugh::laugh:

Or Panther Games - with HTTR, Airborne Assautl and new games.... many releases and you will get ONE NEW BIG FEATURE WITH EACH NEW GAME.... (ENGINE IS IN FACT THE SAME - or almost!!! same thing that you object now in regard to TOAW!!!)

NOW read this again ONE BIG FEATURE WITH EACH NEW GAME.... Is this a scam also?

So just use a little logic here....


Mario

[Reiryc]

No, everyone can comment on anything. I am just for people using logic and not attacking developers all they way out.

That's good to read.

Then you are clearly for the logic that if everyone can comment on anything, this would include the logic that some are unhappy with copy protection and wish to discuss this subject on a medium designed for discussion... an internet forum.


Harrasing developers for example because they used this or that copy protection is uselless. They used and so what?

Define useless?

Have you ever heard the phrase, "squeaky wheel gets the grease"? It means that often those who complain the loudest get what they want. Now whether this happens on a future product by these developers or other developers who may be reading these discussions, who can say?


Those who are offended with that are free to not buy the game and voila. But, keeping this subject as a burning subject is also not fair to a) developers and b) those who don't mind that kind of copy protection and there are plenty of them as we see...

Discussing one's opinion on this subject does not have to meet the criteria of being 'fair' to a developer or to those that don't mind the copy protection scheme. Given that you are preferential to logic, surely you can see the logic of that statement. Addtionally, you can also apply your own logic to your statement and realize that those who do not wish to engage in the discussions, be they developers or other readers are "free to not click on the discussion thread" that involves such topics and "voila".


It's big business as we see and I doubt that those "offended" by copy protection doens't in fact have some kind of agenda because why they bring such a topic all the time - as I say if they don't like this kind of copy protection nobody is forcing them to buy this product. Spending so much energy on uselles debates pro et contra is really counterproductive...

Counter productive to who or to what? How is discussion about copy protection counter productive? Does it stop someone from giving an opinion? Does it stop someone from engaging or not engaging in such a discussion?


SPEAKING about Gold, Deluxe, GOTY editions we can also speak about many things... You have HPS model which release "new" games but in fact many TOAW scenarios are in fact better games then HPS full prized products!!!

Clearly a matter of opinion on what constitutes 'better', so I won't debate your opinion on the matter. I will simply state my opinion on this topic and that is that I don't think HPS should charge full price for their new releases as I'm simply paying for a new map and oob. I will say that I do buy the games through NWS so that it is approximately $20 cheaper than if I bought it a full price through HPS (after the new release discount ends). While I think $20 would be a more reasonable price, I also understand the needs they have to remain in business, but again, this is my subjective view on what I'm willing to pay for a product and in no way is meant to debate you on your view of what is better.


It's pure hipocrisy accusing Talonsoft and Jim Rose that they were scaming customers because they released TOAW, TOAW 2, WOTY, COW, battle packs etc... What about scenario editor in those games?

There is nothing hypocritical about it in the least.

It would be hypocritical only if someone were to say that they were comfortable with one company behaving in such a matter, but not with another company doing so. That is hypocrisy.


Another thing, Panther Games and Matrix - Matrix released Dreadnought game based on War in the Pacific game, someone can say that they released in fact MOD for a game and customers will pay for it :p:laugh::laugh:

Or Panther Games - with HTTR, Airborne Assautl and new games.... many releases and you will get ONE NEW BIG FEATURE WITH EACH NEW GAME.... (ENGINE IS IN FACT THE SAME - or almost!!! same thing that you object now in regard to TOAW!!!)

NOW read this again ONE BIG FEATURE WITH EACH NEW GAME.... Is this a scam also?

So just use a little logic here....


Mario

It may well be a scam and if you wish to discuss what matrix games has done, then feel free to start a thread discussing that subject. This thread however, was created to discuss how people feel about what jim rose said about talonsofts practices.

[Dan Neely]

Frankly I don't see what you're getting all worked up over. There're only 3 realistic business plans a developer can do with a game.

The first is to release a single version of the game and end major support for it once in the initial sales revenue stream dries up (~6 months). This is SOP for most mainstream games, but wargames haven't had the playbase needed to make this financially viable for over a decade.

Plan two is to precude user made scenarios and resell a scenario pack with a slightly tweaked engine every 3-6 months as a 'new game', and optionally funnel the engine tweaks into older versions as patches. This will allow the large initial cost of developing the engine over a much larger number of titles. (How many times has HPS reissued the same game engine with a new early american/nap/acw battle?) It also has the (theoretical?) advantage of being able to offer larger ammounts of pay for commisioned scenarios.

Plan three is to provide a scenario editor and periodically resell an updated version of the engine itself as a new game. This has the disadvantage of making it more obvious that you're being suckered into buying the same thing again, but you're doing that just as much in plan two so it's a moot point. It's main advantage is taht the open editor allows for a much wider pool of designers to try thier tallents and create labor of love scenarios for battles that would otherwise be ignored as too unimportant, along with massive labor of love scenarios that would require a degree of effort impossible to do commercially. The giant toaw scenarios fall into this catagory.

IF you want real ongoing updates to a game your only options are to either sell an enormous number to bank the funds needed for a long term maintaince campaign, or to create a recurring revenue stream by either repackaging the engine again and again. A subscription based setup with a monthly payment to play like the MMORPGs use would also be an option, but afaik no wargame's gone this route.

[Don Maddox]

I would tend to agree with Dan. All the wargame companies employ some variation of this strategy in order to produce a viable revenue stream. Many mainstream games do it as well, but some simply don't need to.

I'm also not sure what model some gamers might prefer instead of this. Let's use TOAW as an example. That title went through multiple incarnations that included some very significant additions and improvements to the original game engine. Should Talonsoft have simply created TOAW and abandoned it after that? In what way would that have A) been more ethical, and B) yielded any benefit for gamers? I don't see that it would have.

Jim Rose's original comment about how Talonsoft dealt with retail chains was an interesting one and I can certainly understand why people would want to discuss this. Some people might even listen to his reasoning and conclude it is not to their liking and follow up with some hard-hitting criticism about it. But I thought labeling the developer a "scam artist" before he was even asked about his comment was a tad unfair.

[timetraveller]

I would tend to agree with Dan.

Absolutely, me too.

But I thought labeling the developer a "scam artist" before he was even asked about his comment was a tad unfair.

Exactly right, and bordering on slanderous itself. Without all the underlying facts you shouldn't be labeling ANYTHING. Period. Same goes for labeling the copy protection scheme for a game that isn't even out yet. It's like giving one iota of credence to the idiots protesting a movie they haven't seen. For cripes sake, last week we even had our exalted and "learned" Usenet complainers here talking about DG and BIOS writes in the same sentence. Based on what? Hypotheticals. The honest questions got lost in the hypothetical conjecture-chaos. Good, the threads were dumped. Who needs it.

Yes, the "squeaky wheel" does get the grease. In some cases this is good, in some not so good. Sometimes you get the lowest common denominator instead.

TT

[JAMiAM]

And sometimes...the squeaky wheel gets thrown in a landfill, and is replaced with a shiny new one that is a lot less troublesome...:laugh:

[dhuffjr]

.....or a grease gun nozzle shoved into an orafice to admister a healthy dose of lubricant:eek: :crosseye:

Being that squeaky wheel may not be such a good idea after all...:whist:

[Lempereur1]

Everyone who bought earlier versions were given free updates. Nobody complained. The regulars understood that it was needed to keep it on the shelf.

The poster doesnt like me! I guess he never did.:smoke:

I am sorry he feels that way. He is going to miss out on the best new wargames to come done the pike since...well...since..... TOAW and WEST FRONT!

[Bloodstar]

[quote=Reiryc]That's good to read.

will reply to you when I find time if there is any to reply at all - that's also the case with devs regarding copy protection issue they don't have time for endless tirrades on this subject, like me.

[Marty Ward]

"One of the main reasons we had several "versions" of TOAW and the >Campaign Series was to trick the stores into thinking it was a new version. >This way, when they shipped back the recently shipped version, we would >replace it with the "New" version."

I don't get the complaint. Are you mad that you bought one version of the game and someone else bought a different one and they got 'more' than you did for your money?
As far as I know each version was a free standing game that was perfectly playable. I owned a number of them and I even bought East Front II after I bought East Front but I didn't buy it thinking it was a different game. I bought it because I thought the improvements were worth buying. I certainly don't EXPECT stuff like that for free.

[Mike Cox]

The main problem with the scheme was that different versions were not compatible with each other. If I had TOAW:COW and you had TOAW:GOTY even though both shipped with many of the same scenarios, we could not PBEM...

[Marty Ward]

I can see where that might be a problem in some cases but is that really the publishers fault? As long as all the versions are available then there is a solution. If you bought one version (say TOAW) a while ago and your friend got a newer version yesterday (say COW), how would that be the publishers fault that you couldn't PBEM? They are different titles. Now if you both bought TOAW and one was 'patched' and you couldn't play then I can see your point.

[Mike Cox]

Well it's ancient history now and not SES but Talonsoft. But as JR says, it was the same game with different box and a couple more scenarios.

[pad152]

I must say that I didn't like the version of the week game release method from Talonsoft. It always seemed Talonsoft would release a new version right after I made a purchase, which left me feeling like I just got ripped off. I also don't like the HPS model, six versions of the same thing. :(

I think the original Three-Sixty Harpoon game had a good model, you purchased the game, then a Battleset every five or six months which added updates to the main game engine and most important new content (maps and new units). This is like the Sims games, and it's expansion packs. I like this model because it adds new content to the game as well as supporting updates to the main game engine and you can buy only the add-ons you want and don't end up with six versions of the same game. ;)

[Warship NWS]

I also don't like the HPS model, six versions of the same thing.

I just wanted to reply to this comment;

I dont agree with this. With each HPS release you get a new order of battle, maps, and campaigns which basicly means a new game using a previously designed combat mechanics engine. They are not the same exact game over and over again, if that was the case then there would be no differences in the releases whatsoever. HPS is basicly taking different theaters of combat and covering them individualy in detail using an engine that works for them and then they go back and retroactively update the entire series when major improvements are released. Many companies, from board games to computer games, have published games in a series using the same or similiar combat mechanics engine.

Thanks.

[pad152]

This is OT, but my issue with HPS is you end up with 5 or 6 different versions of the same game! I would rather see a purchase of a single game (engine), then expansion packs for the new areas of operations, maps, units, etc. It feels like you are paying $49.00+ for an expansion pack. :eek: Even EA doesn't make people rebuy the game engine for the Sims expansion packs.

[Warship NWS]

This is OT, but my issue with HPS is you end up with 5 or 6 different versions of the same game! I would rather see a purchase of a single game (engine), then expansion packs for the new areas of operations, maps, units, etc. It feels like you are paying $49.00+ for an expansion pack. :eek: Even EA doesn't make people rebuy the game engine for the Sims expansion packs.

Again, your saying the "same game". When you change the entire OOB, maps, theater, and campaign its not the same game any more. Also, lets say you dont want to play a particular campaign or theater.. example, you dont want to play Bulge 44 but you do want to play Stalingrad 42.. should you have to pay for Bulge 44 which you will never play just so you can play an expansion that covers Stalingrad? Keep in mind also that the HPS designs usually come with more scenarios per release then most games that came out in the past including their expansions. Gettysburg for example came with 314 scenarios.. which has to be a new canned scenario record. Personaly I prefer the HPS route as that means that I can pick what theater I want to play without having to worry about having to load the start of the series CD every time I want to play and I can pick and choose which of the series I want to play as a full game, not just an expansion. I could name company after company that have used this business model to some degree so why just pick on HPS?

BTW, you can pick up HPS titles from our store for $29.99 .. not $49.99. ;)

[Marty Ward]

Again, your saying the "same game". When you change the entire OOB, maps, theater, and campaign its not the same game any more. Also, lets say you dont want to play a particular campaign or theater.. example, you dont want to play Bulge 44 but you do want to play Stalingrad 42.. should you have to pay for Bulge 44 which you will never play just so you can play an expansion that covers Stalingrad? Keep in mind also that the HPS designs usually come with more scenarios per release then most games that came out in the past including their expansions. Gettysburg for example came with 314 scenarios.. which has to be a new canned scenario record. Personaly I prefer the HPS route as that means that I can pick what theater I want to play without having to worry about having to load the start of the series CD every time I want to play and I can pick and choose which of the series I want to play as a full game, not just an expansion. I could name company after company that have used this business model to some degree so why just pick on HPS?

BTW, you can pick up HPS titles from our store for $29.99 .. not $49.99. ;)


I don't have a problem with HPS or any other publisher doing this. I believe it is the only way many can stay in business. I don't look at it as milking the title or anything shady.
I don't know how many copies of a particular HPS title have been sold but I would bet that it didn't cover the development costs at $50 a game. But then again if they charged $500 a game and actually began to come close to covering them they'd sell even less games. So I look at it as the 'game installment plan'. I get new wargames to choose from and they get to make a living. I may pay for something that has already been developed (the game engine) each time but until I buy a bundle of them I haven't paid the true cost for it either, I've gotten a hell of a deal!:)