Battlefront Reveals Course of CM x 2--Including WW II

[hirr]Leto

Varmint Croonie
Joined
Jan 29, 2008
Messages
1,124
Reaction score
13
Location
Saskatoon
Country
llCanada
Lots of good points here.

I don't think BFC is scared of PzC. PzC is too close to what they consider too outdated game-wise. And PzC is successful because of factors BFC will never explore, in particular moddability. They might be scared of Matrix, though. Imagine that CMC had started based on PzC and under Matrix publishing, they whole interface mess would be a no-brainer.

BFC is scared because of lousy CMx2 sales, very simple. There's strong indication that it's bad, just for starters the time it took until it was bargin-binned in major stores.

Their forum turned from the detail-bashing of the CMBB days into half silence and half "this game is no fun", which is very dangerous. On top of that, the distributors they now work with really, really don't appreciate technical problems, in particular on high-end machines.

Personally I knew the party is over when they made our own Michael Dorosh a beta-tester and it still didn't shut him up :) (just making fun here, but there's some truth in it)
Why do they continue with CMC then? Is there no salvation in the fact that we may get some updated features within that to keep CM alive for some time yet?

I know its been in development limbo, but this is all we really have left to look forward to, from a pure CM point of view.

Cheers!

Leto
 

Batou

Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2007
Messages
409
Reaction score
2
Location
nowhere
Country
llUnited States
I'm a big fan of the CM1 games, but CMSF was a big step backwards, campaigns have always been the weak spot with the CM games, quick battles made up for it. In CMSF not only has the same old crappy campaign system they completely trashed quick battles and have a very poor and limited order of battle to boot. The expansion pack(s) will address the limited order of battle some what, but without a CM1 type quick battles and/or a good campaign the game will still have little replay value.

Even when you create your own battle have to delete 90% of the stuff just find the one unit you do want, and in Quick Battles you can't even select units.

I think Battlefront still hasn't figured out a good campaign system and now has gone backwards on their quick battle system. They need to figure out one of both or their next CM2 game won't be any better the CMSF.

I still think CM needs a CC type of campaign. CM Campaigns was a good idea two or three years ago and today it's still nothing but a good idea a little to late. I think it's clear a good campaign system needs to be part of the original game and not an add-on. How many are willing to buy CM2-WW2 plus three or four expansion packs to get half of the stuff you got in one CMX1 game?

After Theatre of War and CM Shock Force, Battlefront is gona have to try a lot, lot harder to get my money in the future.
 

ER_Chaser

Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2002
Messages
2,962
Reaction score
1
Location
NYC
Country
llChina
I'm a big fan of the CM1 games, but CMSF was a big step backwards, campaigns have always been the weak spot with the CM games, quick battles made up for it. In CMSF not only has the same old crappy campaign system they completely trashed quick battles and have a very poor and limited order of battle to boot. The expansion pack(s) will address the limited order of battle some what, but without a CM1 type quick battles and/or a good campaign the game will still have little replay value.

Even when you create your own battle have to delete 90% of the stuff just find the one unit you do want, and in Quick Battles you can't even select units.

I think Battlefront still hasn't figured out a good campaign system and now has gone backwards on their quick battle system. They need to figure out one of both or their next CM2 game won't be any better the CMSF.

I still think CM needs a CC type of campaign. CM Campaigns was a good idea two or three years ago and today it's still nothing but a good idea a little to late. I think it's clear a good campaign system needs to be part of the original game and not an add-on. How many are willing to buy CM2-WW2 plus three or four expansion packs to get half of the stuff you got in one CMX1 game?

After Theatre of War and CM Shock Force, Battlefront is gona have to try a lot, lot harder to get my money in the future.

your response and NL's similar response, and, I guess, perhaps many other customers' similar sentiment shows only one thing: credit is everything about a business, once you lose it, getting it back is 10x harder or more.

With so much ego in our friend Steve's physical, I doubt he would have listened more to his employees than to the customers. And from his employee's stand point of view, well, as long as he gets paid, why would he bother to piss his boss off? If the company does not run, he can always simply find another job ---- there is nothing big deal to lose anyways. So who is it to fool around and tell oneself that he is the best in the world?

To answer mike's question: the other guy is an owner of big Chinese website, do not get me wrong, the dude is very smart and knows a lot of things... but on the frontpage of his website/forum, he put on this motto(in Chinese, but roughly means:)--- "I thank you for all you warmhearted people, but NO, do not try to tell me how to behave or how to run my forum!" :)
 

Redwolf

Member # 3665
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Messages
5,113
Reaction score
43
Location
MA, USA
Country
llUnited States
[hirr]Leto;990641 said:
Why do they continue with CMC then? Is there no salvation in the fact that we may get some updated features within that to keep CM alive for some time yet?

I know its been in development limbo, but this is all we really have left to look forward to, from a pure CM point of view.
I suppose one reason why CMC doesn't switch to Matrix is some of that contract stuff that people sign when working with publishers and other developers.

Also, having read more about the CMC developers I don't think they are extremely level-headed either.
 

KG_Jag

KG Vice Kommandir
Joined
Aug 5, 2002
Messages
1,782
Reaction score
180
Location
New Braunfels, TX/Reno, NV
Country
llUnited States
The way I read the tea leaves, BFC is plenty worried and they should be. They see a light at the end of the tunnel and they know it's a bus with "Matrix" painted on its side.

Back in about 2003 BFC was the gorilla on the block in 3D tactical wargaming. This was especially true in the WW II market, by far the most important of any historical era. True they had lost (or were about to lose) their distribution contracts, such as the the one with Panther Games, which brought them important secondary income. But they were solid in their core business and had established an outstanding reputation with their customers and in their professional community. There core customers anxiously awaited the CM x 2 engine, which was to take CM x 1 into the next generation of computing; add features; fix the (relatively) few weaknesses and limitations of CM x 1; and be a construction kit that would allow them to enter not only other historical eras, but new genres, such as fantasy war games involving space lobsters.

But somewhere along the way BFC got greedy and also failed to properly access their limitations as a small company capable of developing only one significant game engine every three to five (or more) years. The decided that the money in PC games, both in terms of commercial volume and in government contracts was in RT play and more in the direction of FPS games. To attract a military contract they had to put themselves into the near future and into the next hypothetical war in which the U.S. military forces would be likely to engage. Their customers had virtually no interest in such a concept, but it could also appeal to the RT/FPS market to which they wanted to migrate because CMSF would feature powerful modern weapons and lots of bad guys could go "boom" in new and exciting ways. Further a desert environment with limited scope and not a drop of water in sight would be the easiest to create. BFC could lead their customer base on with "CM x 2", which was not really CM at all. They would give BFC pre-order money based on a mostly hidden design of what CM x 2 was to be (a single player RT game), and provide the cred BFC would need to secure a distribution deal with a major game distributor. Hopefully the CM x 1 players would follow BFC into their RT SP small unit world, but ultimately they were expendable because BFC planned shift its core market to military and young men who enjoy RT and FPS games.

Then the wheels started falling off the BFC wagon, despite whatever Steve is still trying to sell about how rosy things are with BFC and CM x 2. No military contract was secured. The RT/FPS market found CMSF boring and very forgettable. BFC's distribution deal caused a late alpha or early beta public release of their first game using the CM x 2 engine. This early release; deception of their pre-ordering customers; misrepresentations and spin lacking credibility resulted in the loss of their unique and positive reputation and good will with their customers and in their industry. BFC's core customers, as expected, did not like CMSF and CM x 2 very much. They liked the way that they were treated by BFC much less.

Enter the big dog on the block, Matrix, with a product that looks far more like what the CM x 1 players were expecting CM x 2 to be than the CMSF that BFC produced.

So now BFC is at what might be their final crossroads. Do they continue with their master plan and design for CM x 2, or do they try to move CM x 2 into something that really is more of a next generation CM x 1 +? Based on Steve's post, it appears that they might be trying to go in the direction of the latter course. Matrix is making them brown their drawers. If Matrix becomes the big dog in the market BFC ruled not too long ago with CM x 1, BFC know it's toast with a gaming engine that really appeals to almost no one and more importantly to no significant or long term market.

What I expect to see is that BFC will make a halfhearted attempt to woo back its CM x 1 customer base with some changes to CM x 2 in its WW II releases. I also suspect that these changes will not be enough to win back their once loyal customer base. BFC will not move CM x 2 close enough to the core CM x 1 features of WeGo, QB's, improved campaigns, force size and variety, modability, friendly map, battle and op editors, real PBEM and improved MP play (to name a few) that are needed to win these customers back. Further the smallish scope of their games and necessity to buy additional modules, even to get you through the summer of months of of 1944
in France will weaken their effort--especially in Europe. If BFC is not successful upon its return to WW II, turn off the lights--the party will be over. It will be over very quickly if Matrix is successful in filling the void that BFC intentionally left in this market.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2003
Messages
1,884
Reaction score
4
Location
England
Country
llUnited Kingdom
Steve of BF quote in earlier post - "For the day and night testing shifts we have a bunch of volunteer testers who were hand picked from this Forum"------------------------------------------------------------------


When I volunteered a while back I was ignored despite my iimpeccable credentials, BF mumbled something about my "attitude".
My take on it is that they prefer a bunch of yes-men testers and they knew from my reputation that I certainly wasn't one of them..;)
 

Redwolf

Member # 3665
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Messages
5,113
Reaction score
43
Location
MA, USA
Country
llUnited States
KG_Jag,

I think the most important point here is the apparent aim for a military contract. I could have told them that's no going to happen, the militaries want large large large maps and (less important) direct N:M multiplayer and a whole bunch of other stuff not currently associated with CMx2.

Otherwise I think things are simpler than you imply.

BFC has two ways to go from CMx1:

1) Larger forces, larger maps, multiplayer. Keep the point-like tanks and don't do true 1:1 infantry (maybe draw 12 figures but keep a squad or team acting as a point-like entity). Keep the tiles and patchwork terrain.

2) Real 3D vehicles, more terrain detail, true 1:1, limit force to less than CMx1.

With the exception of crying for 1:1 I haven't seen CMx1 fans favor the second version, and those that wanted 1:1 wanted the optical part only, which you could have given them without going TacAI for each 3D figure. Some wanted ammo for different weapons tracked separately. Fine. Otherwise I have only seen people express wishes to go to variant 1)

Myself, I have publically predicted the mess that 1:1 would make. The problems with the TacAI you'd have to write for it to work well are obvious, and the amount of data tossed around is now hosing PBEM and WEGO TCP.

Of course there is tons of additional items that BFC did that alienate the exiting userbase:
  • No more usable quickbattles, much less with computer-generated maps.
  • No self-pick of units.
  • No real OOB and no unit database display. Personally I'm stunned about this.
  • [add yours here]
  • Real-time. I don't see this working out no matter what Steve says.
This is also why BFC doesn't really fear PzC, PzC moves into neither of these directions and does very little new compared to CMBB, and on top of it it lets the users mess with the engine (gasp, nightmare). BFC has decided that this isn't going to work commercially.

BFC obviously has a sales problem with CM:SF, and I think it's mainly due to a reason not even mentioned above: those people who stayed onboard despite all the above ended up saying "this is no fun", and that's a direct quote.

I really really want BFC to stay in business and I will buy any CMx2 even if I don't play it (I kinda did outside of testing). But as far as I am concerned they should do development and let Matrix do the publicity and the priority-picking.
 

Kineas

Colonel General
Joined
Jul 21, 2006
Messages
153
Reaction score
0
Location
n/a
Country
llHungary
Don't worry, wargaming is forever. It's a good thing that boardgaming is in resurgence.
But a boardgame can never contend with game softwares. The real FOW, the ability to learn in the rulebook gradually, save button, sounds, 3d graphics and a clever but beatable AI opponent are features you will always miss.

Besides, boardgaming is already at the verge of its capabilities, but we ain't see nothing yet from what the computer and the internet can offer for tactical wargaming. Real 3d environment with 1:1 representation is entirely doable, online teamplay is doable, neat abstractions will be invented etc.

Finally, you can't really compare a new boardgame design to developing a commercial grade software product. It's entirely normal for good niche games to be played for 10 years. I guess CMx1 is at half of its lifetime. We should be happy that the market is big enough for new products to crop up every 1-2 year.
 

[hirr]Leto

Varmint Croonie
Joined
Jan 29, 2008
Messages
1,124
Reaction score
13
Location
Saskatoon
Country
llCanada
Don't worry, wargaming is forever. It's a good thing that boardgaming is in resurgence.
But a boardgame can never contend with game softwares. The real FOW, the ability to learn in the rulebook gradually, save button, sounds, 3d graphics and a clever but beatable AI opponent are features you will always miss.

Besides, boardgaming is already at the verge of its capabilities, but we ain't see nothing yet from what the computer and the internet can offer for tactical wargaming. Real 3d environment with 1:1 representation is entirely doable, online teamplay is doable, neat abstractions will be invented etc.

Finally, you can't really compare a new boardgame design to developing a commercial grade software product. It's entirely normal for good niche games to be played for 10 years. I guess CMx1 is at half of its lifetime. We should be happy that the market is big enough for new products to crop up every 1-2 year.
With less and less spare time, the resurgence of board gaming will reach a zenith quite quickly... as it is only for the die hard gamers and grognards. The typical CM player may not have much more time than getting out 5 turns a week, and thus captures a much larger audience of time constrained wargamers.

I think the technology infrastructure will automatically dictate the playability lifetime of CM. That being said, CMC is really the only thing to look forward to if you are a hardcore CM player and like neither CMSF or Panzer Command. IT may also provide a longer half life if the technology is upgraded along with it... TBH, CM is just in a league of its own...

Cheers!

Leto
 

Batou

Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2007
Messages
409
Reaction score
2
Location
nowhere
Country
llUnited States
CMSF - real time, it's ok for a small number of units but, I don't see how to pull it off or want to play it with something bigger than a company size battle without it turning into sudden strike (units a 1/4 size of CM Shock Force). Not to mention that the AI is very very limited in RT games. Will players be happy with a CM game limited to company size battles?

I think most people would be happy with a CM turn style game with better graphics, maps, destructible terrain and a real campaign system. Maybe it's gona take someone else besides BattleFront to figure that out!

I once thought that maybe CM Shock Force or Theatre of War would evolve and take real time games to the next level. :crosseye: The CM2 engine that was suppose to be more open and flexible now seems much more limited due to the real time constraints.

Now if only the makers of the Panzer Command Series could figure out how to model infantry and few other things!
 
Last edited:

Bloodstar

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2003
Messages
1,474
Reaction score
1
Location
Zagreb, Croatia
Country
llCroatia
The way I read the tea leaves, BFC is plenty worried and they should be. They see a light at the end of the tunnel and they know it's a bus with "Matrix" painted on its side.

Back in about 2003 BFC was the gorilla on the block in 3D tactical wargaming. This was especially true in the WW II market, by far the most important of any historical era. True they had lost (or were about to lose) their distribution contracts, such as the the one with Panther Games, which brought them important secondary income. But they were solid in their core business and had established an outstanding reputation with their customers and in their professional community. There core customers anxiously awaited the CM x 2 engine, which was to take CM x 1 into the next generation of computing; add features; fix the (relatively) few weaknesses and limitations of CM x 1; and be a construction kit that would allow them to enter not only other historical eras, but new genres, such as fantasy war games involving space lobsters.

But somewhere along the way BFC got greedy and also failed to properly access their limitations as a small company capable of developing only one significant game engine every three to five (or more) years. The decided that the money in PC games, both in terms of commercial volume and in government contracts was in RT play and more in the direction of FPS games. To attract a military contract they had to put themselves into the near future and into the next hypothetical war in which the U.S. military forces would be likely to engage. Their customers had virtually no interest in such a concept, but it could also appeal to the RT/FPS market to which they wanted to migrate because CMSF would feature powerful modern weapons and lots of bad guys could go "boom" in new and exciting ways. Further a desert environment with limited scope and not a drop of water in sight would be the easiest to create. BFC could lead their customer base on with "CM x 2", which was not really CM at all. They would give BFC pre-order money based on a mostly hidden design of what CM x 2 was to be (a single player RT game), and provide the cred BFC would need to secure a distribution deal with a major game distributor. Hopefully the CM x 1 players would follow BFC into their RT SP small unit world, but ultimately they were expendable because BFC planned shift its core market to military and young men who enjoy RT and FPS games.

Then the wheels started falling off the BFC wagon, despite whatever Steve is still trying to sell about how rosy things are with BFC and CM x 2. No military contract was secured. The RT/FPS market found CMSF boring and very forgettable. BFC's distribution deal caused a late alpha or early beta public release of their first game using the CM x 2 engine. This early release; deception of their pre-ordering customers; misrepresentations and spin lacking credibility resulted in the loss of their unique and positive reputation and good will with their customers and in their industry. BFC's core customers, as expected, did not like CMSF and CM x 2 very much. They liked the way that they were treated by BFC much less.

Enter the big dog on the block, Matrix, with a product that looks far more like what the CM x 1 players were expecting CM x 2 to be than the CMSF that BFC produced.

So now BFC is at what might be their final crossroads. Do they continue with their master plan and design for CM x 2, or do they try to move CM x 2 into something that really is more of a next generation CM x 1 +? Based on Steve's post, it appears that they might be trying to go in the direction of the latter course. Matrix is making them brown their drawers. If Matrix becomes the big dog in the market BFC ruled not too long ago with CM x 1, BFC know it's toast with a gaming engine that really appeals to almost no one and more importantly to no significant or long term market.

What I expect to see is that BFC will make a halfhearted attempt to woo back its CM x 1 customer base with some changes to CM x 2 in its WW II releases. I also suspect that these changes will not be enough to win back their once loyal customer base. BFC will not move CM x 2 close enough to the core CM x 1 features of WeGo, QB's, improved campaigns, force size and variety, modability, friendly map, battle and op editors, real PBEM and improved MP play (to name a few) that are needed to win these customers back. Further the smallish scope of their games and necessity to buy additional modules, even to get you through the summer of months of of 1944
in France will weaken their effort--especially in Europe. If BFC is not successful upon its return to WW II, turn off the lights--the party will be over. It will be over very quickly if Matrix is successful in filling the void that BFC intentionally left in this market.

I can say only one word: NONSENSE.

It's not Matrix at all that driving Battlefront.com to changes something but
their customers. I told them myself that I will not buy CM: SF and I am
certain that many others did not buy this because it is a modern.

What I do mind is this so called analasys and in any analasy of this kind -
it is this apocalyptic feeling. As a one side shot at the market - I doubt
that CM: SF was a commercial failure as someone wants to say. Until somebody
present me with sales data I am saying: bollocks.

I would really like to see that thriller in what PALE COPY of Combat Mission
manages to win over fans of Combat Mission BB. Then we can expect end of the
world.

If Matrix bus of leading is that they urge their developers to copy paste
popular designs from another succesful company then that really says it all
about miserable state of wargaming "market".

What I would like to see a new original designs... Of course War in Russia
by Gary Grisby will be influenced by his earlier games but it will be new
game with new features.
And I don't like too much Combat Mission anyway.

The guy who wrote this article really should take a chill pill. He is
digging grave to put Battlefront in there while they are still alive.

Every succesfull game has it's copy. There was Age of Empires for example
and later there were dozen of copies, and nobody dig a grave for Ensemble
Studios. So again, this is nonsense, I woul like to see that wargaming
companies orientate themselves and hear what public wants not what they can
easier make. That's why there is absolutely nothing from Matrix Games that I
would buy this year. That line up wanna make me puke :(
Until 2009. I will wait that bus with Matrix logo LOL



Mario
 

thewood

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2004
Messages
2,594
Reaction score
12
Location
Boston
Country
llUnited States
Regardless of original design or not, PCK would not have seen the light of day if CMBB was still supported or people saw the potential in CM2. There are always pockets of stubborn boardgamers that just didn't like CM or hated Steve/BFC, but it seems to me most of the interest generated by PCK is that it can go where BFC just refused to go.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2003
Messages
1,884
Reaction score
4
Location
England
Country
llUnited Kingdom
CM1 will go on forever, it's that good..:)
For example my recent Tourneys at another club drew an astounding 22000 thread views total over their 6-week duration and set the CM community buzzing because of their refreshingly unorthodox format..

TRIDENT TOURNEY (Cmak) - http://www.theblitz.org/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=44093

MALITZ TOURNEY (Cmbb) - http://www.theblitz.org/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=43407

BRITS v 21PzDiv TROPHY (Cmak) - http://www.theblitz.org/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=42413
 
Last edited:

Redwolf

Member # 3665
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Messages
5,113
Reaction score
43
Location
MA, USA
Country
llUnited States
Regardless of original design or not, PCK would not have seen the light of day if CMBB was still supported or people saw the potential in CM2. There are always pockets of stubborn boardgamers that just didn't like CM or hated Steve/BFC, but it seems to me most of the interest generated by PCK is that it can go where BFC just refused to go.
Actually, my (of course entirely unselfish :)) idea was to just OpenSource CMBB and CMAK.

BFC would have left "scorched earth" behind them that no commercial developer with a single programmer could ever fill. And the OpenSource guys would have moved off to bigger battles and multiplayer and not have upgraded CMx1 to CMx2.

Unfortunately that's about the opposite of what Steve's thinking is but as an idea I liked it.
 

Redwolf

Member # 3665
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Messages
5,113
Reaction score
43
Location
MA, USA
Country
llUnited States
Bloodstar, sales info is hard to come by.

The nearest thing we have is Amazon's sales rank, which of course doesn't directly translate to units sold. Game #3001 might sell 1% less than #3000 or 1/10th.

But anyway, here it is:
CM:SF: #5,843 (already bargin priced)
CMBO: #8,622 (although it is not currently available from Amazon)
CMBB: #9,566 (although it is not currently available from Amazon)
CMAK: #10,000 (although it is not currently available from Amazon)
CMx1 antology: #11,480

Matrix cross of iron: #10,745
Matrix PzC WS: #9,326 (full price)
Matrix TOAW: #9,222
Matrix Korsun Pocket: #4,568

The Matrix 2D games obviously have a larger percentace of electronic sales, CM:SF was push into retail much harder than Matrix had pushed anything, ever.

So, CM:SF doesn't even beat a 4(?) year old Matrix release, and it is about as well-selling as all CMx1 and that is even though the latter can't currently be ordered.
 

Michael Dorosh

der Spieß des Forums
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
15,733
Reaction score
2,765
Location
Calgary, AB
First name
Michael
Country
llCanada
CM1 will go on forever, it's that good..:)
For example my recent Tourneys at another club drew an astounding 22000 thread views total over their 6-week duration and set the CM community buzzing because of their refreshingly unorthodox format..
You had at least seven different identities at the battlefront forums, and engaged in entire conversations with yourself before you were discovered and banned. You applauded ravinhood for doing the same thing just a week ago. Why should anyone believe that those 22,000 thread views were from anyone but you? You can't be trusted with your track record. Once a liar and a fraud, very hard to convince anyone of anything else.
 

[hirr]Leto

Varmint Croonie
Joined
Jan 29, 2008
Messages
1,124
Reaction score
13
Location
Saskatoon
Country
llCanada
CM1 will go on forever, it's that good..:)
For example my recent Tourneys at another club drew an astounding 22000 thread views total over their 6-week duration and set the CM community buzzing because of their refreshingly unorthodox format..

TRIDENT TOURNEY (Cmak) - http://www.theblitz.org/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=44093

MALITZ TOURNEY (Cmbb) - http://www.theblitz.org/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=43407

BRITS v 21PzDiv TROPHY (Cmak) - http://www.theblitz.org/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=42413
What does this have to do with this thread?


Cheers!

Leto
 

[hirr]Leto

Varmint Croonie
Joined
Jan 29, 2008
Messages
1,124
Reaction score
13
Location
Saskatoon
Country
llCanada
Bloodstar, sales info is hard to come by.

The nearest thing we have is Amazon's sales rank, which of course doesn't directly translate to units sold. Game #3001 might sell 1% less than #3000 or 1/10th.

But anyway, here it is:
CM:SF: #5,843 (already bargin priced)
CMBO: #8,622 (although it is not currently available from Amazon)
CMBB: #9,566 (although it is not currently available from Amazon)
CMAK: #10,000 (although it is not currently available from Amazon)
CMx1 antology: #11,480

Matrix cross of iron: #10,745
Matrix PzC WS: #9,326 (full price)
Matrix TOAW: #9,222
Matrix Korsun Pocket: #4,568

The Matrix 2D games obviously have a larger percentace of electronic sales, CM:SF was push into retail much harder than Matrix had pushed anything, ever.

So, CM:SF doesn't even beat a 4(?) year old Matrix release, and it is about as well-selling as all CMx1 and that is even though the latter can't currently be ordered.

CMSF 5843 games sold at let's say 40 dollars a pop (full price) = $233720. I would think that if this is the case, revenues would have to be AT LEAST in the 2 million dollar range for BFC to stay afloat... so they would have needed to sell 58000 copies. Anyone think that is doable (or was done)?

Remember, that is revenue, not profit. I'm sure that licensing fees, distribution costs, fixed costs, and direct variable costs into the game really would cut into that 2 million bucks... but then again, BFC is just 6 guys, right?

Cheers!

Leto
 

[hirr]Leto

Varmint Croonie
Joined
Jan 29, 2008
Messages
1,124
Reaction score
13
Location
Saskatoon
Country
llCanada
BTW, what kind of money would we be talking about if someone WANTED to contract BFC to upgrade the current CMx1 engine (better graphics, new toys, old bugs squashed, new features, but basically still all CM x1)?


5000 of us at 50 a pop pre order?


: )


Cheers!

Leto
 
Top