The wargaming thread of war. And games.

CoE 3 is on Steam as of last week, selling for $9.99. I imagine they would have to work something out with Shrapnel to even get a chance to try and put Dominions 3 on Steam.

It very much depends on the details of the contract they signed. My understanding is that publishing contracts typically include an expiration for such "exclusive" rights, which for a 6 year old game would probably have expired.

I guess it's possible they didn't negotiate though. :-(

I know what I'm going to do tonight!

Seriously. When CoE3 came out, I was all, "Sounds cool, but I don't know if it's worth that much to me." And now I've paid the developer some fraction of $10 I wouldn't have otherwise paid.

I should also mention that if you bought CoE 3 from some other outlet you can use your key to add the game to the Steam library. This definitely works for it being purchased from Desura, and I believe I have seen someone else mention that it worked for another retailer as well.

I'd love Dom3 to get on Steam for a reasonable price because I'd snatch it up in a heartbeat. I'm pretty close to the ideal buyer demographic, but there's just no way I'm paying $55 for the game. Most times when I've paid what I call an "artificial premium" on a game, I've been disappointed. For example, I have War in the East and as a simulation it's brilliant - but as a game it pretty well sucks. I forked over $80 for Distant Worlds and I haven't gotten my money's worth (yet, though there's still hope for it). Historically that list is pretty long, but it gets shorter every year. It becomes harder and harder for me to justify those types of expenditures when I can get hundreds of hours from a game like Terraria ($3.50).

On the other hand, I've purchased literally dozens of games on cheap sales that I haven't hardly played, but don't regret the purchases. For example, let's take my Steam 2011 Christmas sale totals:

Tropico 4 - $5 via Amazon
Terraria - $2.50
Orcs Must Die - $4
Dungeons of Dreadmor - $1.25
Just Cause 2 - $5
Avadon - $2.50
Limbo - $2.50
Fate of the World - $5
Cities in Motion & DLC - $10
Warhammer 40k Retribution - $10
Europa Universalis 3 Chronicles - $12
Defense Grid - $5
Rise of the Samuri DLC - $2.50
Hearts of Iron 3 Complete - $11 via Amazon
Gratuitous Space Battles - Free

Of those games, I've really only played EU3 (estimated 20-30 hours) Tropico 4 (15 hours), Terraria (for close to 100 hours) and Limbo (3 hours). Orcs Must Die, Defense Grid and Dungeons of Dreadmor both got a couple of hours of play, but not much. The rest of them got virtually nothing - just a few minutes to toy around with them, but nothing substantial. Do I regret the purchases? Not really, because I figure the gamble was worth it. Also, my experience with EU3 encouraged me to buy Crusader Kings 2 (on sale). Tropico 4 netted a DLC purchase. So some of these sales spurred more sales.

The problem with Shrapnel Games is visibility. The ratio of people who know and use Steam is probably a hundred or thousand-fold more than those who even know of Shrapnel games. So lowering the price on Shrapnel nets only some benefit. Putting it on Steam and lowering the price nets a huge new audience. So if Dom 3 hits Steam for $19, I'm all over it and I bet there are a whole lot more people like me than there are willing to fork over $60 for it. I'd place dollars to donuts that one day of a Steam sale for Dom 3 would net more gross sales than all combined Dom 3 sales on Shrapnel to date.

I think that might be overselling it a bit, and that Dom 3 likely sold better than you realize. I'd be surprised if one day of a Steam Sale for Dom 3 eclipsed all previous sales.

It would definitely be extra money though!

I'm sure Dom3 sold well for a Shrapnel title, but imagine even 10,000 extra sales. That's a huge number. And with no real method behind my guess, I highly doubt Dom3 broke 100,000 sales.
I do think it was worth $55, too. That manual was (before it became obsolete) a thing of beauty. And the strategic options are still staggering to me. But dammit, I tried SO HARD to get people to buy it and they just wouldn't at $55. And their idiotic sales, "take $6 off!," did nothing but make these folks more angry.

But really, until one of these games gets released on Steam and deeply discounted (as Unity of Command and CoE3 did) and we see the results of their sales, I can't imagine Matrix or any of the other war game pubs doing anything differently. If they're succeeding with their model, why change the model? (We know the answer, of course.) And how do we, as consumers, force these companies to change their models?

Well, the way we have a say is with our wallets. As most of us seem to do already, we avoid non-discounted Matrix games. But I guess we need to let Matrix know we won't buy their games until they're deeply discounted or on steam (and deeply discounted).

It's an anecdote, not proof, but I'd buy the shit out of all the Close Combat games for like $10 each. And ToAW for $10? Sold. Distant Worlds... that's an argument we don't need to rehash, but it'd sell boatloads with the right marketing and a nice discount. But we need a unified front to let these companies know what we want and what we won't accept. Doing individual boycotts, on the other hand, won't affect too much. Boycott + information is what would be needed. But who cares enough to devote much time to it?

The latest Matrix newsletter has a $20 off coupon code for Conflict of Heroes. It also announces a new title to be released soon in the Scourge of War series, SoW: Chancellorsville.

Nerd boner right here - cockblocked by Matrix.

Things will start to change when a spoddy wargame does well on Steam and the developers revel in it.

Thing is, right now there ARE games I would consider "wargames" of the grognardy flavor on Steam - Unity of Command for one (tho new, obviously), but often the "no true Scotsman" fallacy rears its head and we are told "we'll, that isn't reaaaally the kind of niche wargames we sell!"

But, in due course, evidence will mount. I would love to hear the UoC devs talk about steam - especially post their first big sale. I would then love to see people point out how many other wargames-in-sheep's clothing are doing well on Steam (defcon, ....?) and we can stake this vampire and all be happier (cheaper games, wealthier devs).

The UoC guys have made a couple of comments on twitter about being on Steam.

That's fantastic.

Are we all applauding a Valve monopoly?

No, we're applauding the END of the Matrix/insert other stupid wargaming company here monopoly.

I am not necessarily applauding a monopoly, but that gamers like good games. If you make a good game and price it right gamers will pick it up, regardless of genre. It helps to have vast reach and a non-godawful website and distribution methods.

I know that a cheap wargame is definitely tempting for me as I am likely to be able to get a mate to pick it up as even if they only play it a couple of times (multiplayer) they will feel that they got value out of the game. Same goes for me, sometimes even though will love a game the complexity is something I only want to tackle once or twice. I bet this is true for many gamers.

It's not a Valve monopoly at all. Matrix is a wargame publisher whose pricing practices drive me crazy and price people out of the hobby. Valve is a very nearly transparent middleman between me and the developers of games I like, I think. I don't actually have any games published on Steam (or indeed any games published, or any games) or any insight into what level of control they exercise over prices, if any.

If it's got to be somebody, let it be Valve.

From what I have read, they will very strongly suggest to you what your price point should be, based on past experience / similar games etc. So if you say you want to put your indie war game on for $50, they will tell you, no we will all make more revenue if you price it at $20. and then don't take no for an answer.

They do kinda know what they are talking about I guess!

Lots of good wargamery stuff on RPS. Of interest, a new Panther Games game. Still published by Matrix so I'll never buy it.

That's more control than I thought they had, but

Unless you are activision. Then apparently it is OK to price anything Call of Duty at $90 - $100 for Australians on release in the insane thought someone might actually buy it by accident.

I didn't realize that wargamer.com was continuing to implode. What a train wreck that's been.

I imagine big publishers have more leverage for things like regional pricing.

It's only a monopoly if other publishers let it be. Wargame publishers like Matrix and Shrapnel could easily adopt Valve's pricing policies. So long as they don't, I can hardly blame developers for going somewhere else to make more money. And that ends up working for me, too, because: lower prices!

Sometimes monopolies are naturally occurring, simply because one option is that much better than all the rest.

For those not keeping up with exchange rates, an Australian dollar's worth 1.04 USD atm. That kind of stuff makes you wish capitalism had an ombudsman or something.

For extra f you, everything is actually still sold in $US on steam for Australia.

But anyway I actually love valve and what they have done with pricing. I buy so many more games now.

It's just the dinosaur publishers (activision, THQ) that have to catch up.

You guys are all making me want to find a good, cheap wargame. UoC is definitely on my list... But my general disinterest in Panzer General type games prevents me following through.

People's Tactics! It's free! It's relatively small, relatively simple, but with enough meat on it to make it a "real wargame", and it's not a Panzer-General-alike!

http://www.advancedtactics.org/

...the link is hidden down in the bottom-right corner. The designer has gone on to make a bunch of other games that you have to pay for with money, which have generally been praised &c &c, but PT is IMO still great!

Advanced Tactics Gold is one of my favorite games.

But, Matrix.

If you're going to suffer Matrix pricing I'd buy The Operational Art of War 3 instead, for the same price. One of wargaming's classics, and TONS of scenarios. For some people it's the only wargame you'd ever need. $40 isn't TOO awful for it, even though the core game is over a decade old.

I can't disagree, Hawkeye. Advanced Tactics is a lighter game, more like a 4x engine that is pretty versatile in terms of scenarios. But TOAW3 is also lite and has way more scenarios.

But again, both are Matrix. People's Tactics is, of course, free.

Speaking of Matrix pricing - the Scourge of War games are actually pretty reasonable. $30 for the core game is an absolutely fair price, and the expansions aren't badly priced either if you want more battles.

Matrix Games Sale! About 30-35% off on a bunch of stuff.

The Operational Art of War 3 is $26, in case anyone was tempted by my current LP.

Command Ops is down to $40, and it's less than a month to the 68th anniversary of the kickoff to the Battle of the Bulge.

But it's not simply a price thing. A lot of the Matrix games are simply unacceptable, in terms of their UI and clunkiness, at any price, and the same goes for John Tiller. Price is the least of my concerns. (Note that the Slitherine-produced games are of a uniformly much higher level of polish, at least in terms of UI, than those from the other side of the company).

Can you imagine if they sold TOAW III on Steam? Completely aside from the price, you'd have people attacking Valve with torches and pitchforks. And justifiably so.

I've had this conversation with one of the Shrapnel guys also. My interpretation is that they (and Matrix) take it as an article of faith that the market for wargames is (a) vanishingly small , (b) already buys everything they make and (c) can't be grown. If you believe those three things are true, then their position is rational. But, of course, they're wrong.

Actually, they're sort of half-right IF you also make the fourth assumption (4) The only games that are "wargames" are ones that have shitty UI and are overcomplicated and are completely unfun. I think they do in fact make this assumption, because a number of neckbeards who buy their games claim to want that type of game, and complain whenever anyone makes a game that is better. In the long run, I think basically these guys get their lunch eaten by developers such as the authors of Unity of Command, who not only are selling in a different way, but are in fact selling a better game to a larger market.

I feel strongly about this, can you tell?

Very very related: http://tleaves.com/2010/12/31/a-battle-lost-through-attrition/index.html

Sounds very much like the death of the golden era of flight sims. For those who don't remember what the golden days were like - I wrote a strategy article for Computer Gaming World one month in which I was providing tips and strategies for WWII sims (e.g. how to attack a group of bombers, tips on when to B&Z vs. getting into turning battles, etc.) I used 4 different flight sims to illustrate the points, all WWII flight sims that were current and popular and on the market at the same time.

But then the rivet counters came out and started publicly attacking the developers and claiming a sim was not playable or "arcade-like" because the font on the altimeter of the -G model of a fighter was the wrong font, and you had people who had never sat in a cockpit complaining about how completely "fake" the flight physics were at 123.7 meters off the ground, etc. They were so loud and prevalent they drove some great developers out of the genre. They also pushed some sim developers into ridiculous decisions, like eliminating the option for a padlock view, etc.

Any recommendations regarding the Matrix sale?

Particularly ones that don't have awful UI's (so that should get rid of 2/3rds of them).

There is plenty of crap that makes it onto Steam so it isn't like it would be breaking new ground.

Have you played Advanced Tactics? It's awesome. I'm tempted to get that developer's other game, Decisive Campaigns... WE SHALL SEE.
And of course, TOAW is awesome.