Re: Discount on new DLCs

[Aces]

Hi Andrey,

Whilst everyone likes a bargain it is a bit annoying when "new" DLCs are discounted so heavily such a short time after release. I've bought both these products (and all other DLCs plus the original Achtung Pabzer APOS/GTOS and Steel Fury games) on or very close to their release dates. It seems that early adopters are, financially-speaking, the loosers here. Next time I'll wait a week or two and spend half the money or less. Many of us would happily pre-order Graviteam products for a suitable discount and it is fair to discount older software releases but, IMO, not so for very new products.

Kind regards

Aces

[andrey12345]

Hi Andrey,

Whilst everyone likes a bargain it is a bit annoying when "new" DLCs are discounted so heavily such a short time after release. I've bought both these products (and all other DLCs plus the original Achtung Pabzer APOS/GTOS and Steel Fury games) on or very close to their release dates. It seems that early adopters are, financially-speaking, the loosers here. Next time I'll wait a week or two and spend half the money or less. Many of us would happily pre-order Graviteam products for a suitable discount and it is fair to discount older software releases but, IMO, not so for very new products.

Kind regards

Aces

This is the modern tendency to make discounts to attract attention. But as always someone waiting, someone once bought, and someone makes pre-order.

Look at it from another side - if you buy at once, you're already playing, as if waiting for discounts, it is unclear when you can play?


P.S. But there will always be unhappy players - someone unhappy that there is no discount and expensive, the fact that someone bought it at full price, and then will be ​a discount  .

[Aces]

Hi Andrey, I'm not an unhappy-player, quite the reverse, I much enjoy playing your products and the admire the quality and accuracy of them and the fine quality product support that you offer.

Why not offer a pre-order discount for Graviteam enthusiasts such as us or a limited time release discount or even keep the original release price for a reasonable while before reducing the price. Any of these would be fairer on Graviteam supporters that reducing the price so drastically so shortly after releasing the products at full-price IMO. I'll happily continue to pay full price because the software is fairly-priced on release IMO and very good value for money given the quality of the product.

Regards

Aces

[andrey12345]

Why not offer a pre-order discount for Graviteam enthusiasts such as us

Yes, it is a good idea. Perhaps in the future we shall achieve it, if we can negotiate with the GamersGate.

or a limited time release discount or even keep the original release price for a reasonable while before reducing the price.

It so happens, the game started acting permanent discounts after a ~1.5 years after the release. And the prices for DLCs fall after releases of some new DLCs .

But that does not stop to make periodic short stocks (up 3 days), like is now.

[Aces]

Thanks Andrey,

I wish Graviteam only good things, you guys are one of the very few software devs. nowadays that offer such consistently high quality and historically accurate products and support.

Kind regards

Aces

Edit for spelling

[Dane49]

I would have paid twice the price($15.00 USD) for Hooper.

As far as I'm concerned I got a great deal(less than the price of a home ordered Pizza).

I was looking at the Combat Mission-Gustav Line forums earlier today to see what if any graphical improvements they are making to that series(slight improvement still sub standard)but they want $35.00 USD for a pre order of that module of Fortress Italy and want $55.00 USD for that.After seeing that price for that game I do not feel slighted at all.

I've already got more than my monies worth out of Hooper and I haven't really even started into the campaigns yet(finished the 1st one haven't started the other two yet).

I read on the Russian forum that the tank texture DLC was upgraded also and includes a few more vehicles that weren't included in the 1st release.

I'm a pleased customer,this is high quality cheap entertainment.I wish everything was this reasonably priced.

[Aces]

I fully agree with you Dane.

Although my interest isn't in modern-day combat I bought Hooper and I have played it a little and I'm more than happy to support Graviteam.

Regards

Aces

[chashka17]

A quick 10c - as this thread made me think about general pricing of games & how buyers often get shafted by some devs...
.
It does hurt when you pay a higher price just before a price drop, I console myself with the following: -
 - If you get your moneys' worth & can afford it GT has to be one of the best buys.
 - In comparison to things like the Total War series, early purchasers of GT stuff do pretty well.
Consider elevated prices & massive patches to fix bugs (& not upgrade/alter the game) & the community generating content to try & get it to work only to find that just after the patch process has got the game working  as it should, it's in a steam sale for 10% of it's original (beta  ) release price.  I read their forum when Shogun2 was released & my impression was one of virtually non-stop griping & requests for refunds. Don't see that here so much.

There is also something to be said for periodic lower pricing to encourage uptake in poorer countries, & for students & unemployed people etc in a global recession. 

As regards BFC & the new CM - has everyone seen the new 'war movie' gfx mode?  I was surprised to see what is surely a take on SweetFX employed as a feature of the new release.

[Dane49]

Yeah,I watchd the 3 Youtube clips of their "War is Hell" videos.
looks good at ground level,not great but good.(Still not anywhere near GTOS quality) and I always liked the CM infantry modeling as long as I don't watch them run.The running at port arms on the invisable uni-cycle always drove me nuts!

Vehicles and guns need some major texturing,and the whole terrain map and color scheme is always an eye sore after playing on the APOS-GTOS maps,very cartoonish and water color like.Explosions,vehicle hits, smoke and dust,all very sub standard and an immersion killer.

From what I understand after BF refilled everyones glass of Koolaide and convinced them that they are playing the best tactical game ever is that if you want all the micro management that the players demand than you will have to suffer in the Graphics dept. as a trade off.

Don't know if I believe that,but if those guys are willing to chase that line of reasoning with a healthy dose of Koolaide than more power to them.

I've played both CM and APOS and I know which game I'd rather spend my free time with.I'm just happy that at least  I have a choice between the two games.I like where Graviteam is going and for the price and the service I'm a happy camper so to speak

[chashka17]

Yeah,I watchd the 3 Youtube clips of their "War is Hell" videos.
looks good at ground level,not great but good.(Still not anywhere near GTOS quality) and I always liked the CM infantry modeling as long as I don't watch them run.The running at port arms on the invisable uni-cycle always drove me nuts!

Vehicles and guns need some major texturing,and the whole terrain map and color scheme is always an eye sore after playing on the APOS-GTOS maps,very cartoonish and water color like.Explosions,vehicle hits, smoke and dust,all very sub standard and an immersion killer.

From what I understand after BF refilled everyones glass of Koolaide and convinced them that they are playing the best tactical game ever is that if you want all the micro management that the players demand than you will have to suffer in the Graphics dept. as a trade off.

Don't know if I believe that,but if those guys are willing to chase that line of reasoning with a healthy dose of Koolaide than more power to them.

I've played both CM and APOS and I know which game I'd rather spend my free time with.I'm just happy that at least  I have a choice between the two games.I like where Graviteam is going and for the price and the service I'm a happy camper so to speak

I have CMSF & enjoy it.  WW2 is my favorite period & I was disappointed by their new WW2 game.  It feels clunky to me & I expected more of an advance.  BFC did define the sim genre at one point, but I don't think they do now.  I thought the charge for the 2.0 upgrade patch was a bit harsh.  Particularly given GT are giving their upgrades to existing customers FOC regularly.  Given the state of the world economy I guess there are gonna be more of these discount vs hike curve balls.

I think the CM engine capability vs gfx may be a bit of a cop out.  The devs have apparently spoken about accessing multi-cores as being a programming nightmare, & then I hear GT is using the gpu to go the extra mile.  (I recall ToW2 was written for only 2 cores in the end & that could have used more horse-power.  IMO it never failed on gfx tho.)

Doesn't add up for me.  I suspect its a trade off between being totally dedicated to/invested in their existing "brand & style" rather than actual impossibility to bring gfx & real-time calculations together at the highest levels.
Never regret having had hours on CMSF but I doubt I will go back to BFCs interpretation of how war sims should be, in the future.

[Flashburn]

Yeah,I watchd the 3 Youtube clips of their "War is Hell" videos.
looks good at ground level,not great but good.(Still not anywhere near GTOS quality) and I always liked the CM infantry modeling as long as I don't watch them run.The running at port arms on the invisable uni-cycle always drove me nuts!

Vehicles and guns need some major texturing,and the whole terrain map and color scheme is always an eye sore after playing on the APOS-GTOS maps,very cartoonish and water color like.Explosions,vehicle hits, smoke and dust,all very sub standard and an immersion killer.

From what I understand after BF refilled everyones glass of Koolaide and convinced them that they are playing the best tactical game ever is that if you want all the micro management that the players demand than you will have to suffer in the Graphics dept. as a trade off.

Don't know if I believe that,but if those guys are willing to chase that line of reasoning with a healthy dose of Koolaide than more power to them.

I've played both CM and APOS and I know which game I'd rather spend my free time with.I'm just happy that at least  I have a choice between the two games.I like where Graviteam is going and for the price and the service I'm a happy camper so to speak

I have CMSF & enjoy it.  WW2 is my favorite period & I was disappointed by their new WW2 game.  It feels clunky to me & I expected more of an advance.  BFC did define the sim genre at one point, but I don't think they do now.  I thought the charge for the 2.0 upgrade patch was a bit harsh.  Particularly given GT are giving their upgrades to existing customers FOC regularly.  Given the state of the world economy I guess there are gonna be more of these discount vs hike curve balls.

I think the CM engine capability vs gfx may be a bit of a cop out.  The devs have apparently spoken about accessing multi-cores as being a programming nightmare, & then I hear GT is using the gpu to go the extra mile.  (I recall ToW2 was written for only 2 cores in the end & that could have used more horse-power.  IMO it never failed on gfx tho.)

Doesn't add up for me.  I suspect its a trade off between being totally dedicated to/invested in their existing "brand & style" rather than actual impossibility to bring gfx & real-time calculations together at the highest levels.
Never regret having had hours on CMSF but I doubt I will go back to BFCs interpretation of how war sims should be, in the future.

Likly failure to invest in time to either get new people who can do it OR RETRAIN team in new tech.  Also easier to delude self than invest large amount of time and energy.  I liked some of the CM stuff.  TOW series had issues but could be fun.  Both seem SO yesterday now.  Weco system would piss me off now. 

[Dane49]

I never liked WEGO at the tactical level,that's more of a board game or operational level mechanic.

For me real time simulation only at the tactical level.No sitting back and studying and calculating  your next turn from every possible angle and then formulating a plan,that's garbage and completely unrealistic.

If the AI was better in these types of games I would eventually like to do away with the pause feature during my game play,but I doubt a credible AI is possible at least not in the near future.I can get away from using it in the small battles but if I have 3 or more platoons on the map and multiple support aassets,I find the pause button to be a necessary evil,especially when first contact is established with large enemy units.

[Tanker]

Ah, it all comes down to different strokes for different folks.  Wego is really not any more unrealistic than a WW2 commander flying around like a bird to every part of the battlefield and doing every Sargeant's job.   I like both forms of gaming.  WEGO is cool when you can lovingly reconstruct each nuance of a tactical battle, watching and reveling in how your Sherman snuck around to shoot that Panther in the engine.  PBEM is great when you don't have an hour or two to sit down and devote to an online real time game.  GTOS is the best real time tac game in my opinion but it has one glaring draw back.  No multiplayer.  No AI can equal matching wits with another person.  It's also much more visually rewarding.  I always found CM2 textures and landscape to be washedout and lacking in any detail.

[Dane49]

Multi player is a feature that is sorely lacking for this game.

The options menu alludes to a possible  multi player feature though the options aren't active.

Andrey once stated that the demand for this feature isn't high enough to warrant the expenditure to implement it though.

He also mentioned if this feature was ever to be added that it would be for Quick Battles in real time.

I would love that option and hope one day the series will become profitable enough to include the multi player feature at a later date.Only then will the culmination of all my wishes for this game be complete.

[Tanker]

I doubt GT really has market data showing multi-player demand versus single player.
Most games of this type have an MP component.  GTOS is the odd man out in that regard.
One of the strong features of Shogun2 TW is it's MP component, as an example.  There are always plenty of opponents available for that.

[Dane49]

Insert Quote

I doubt GT really has market data showing multi-player demand versus single player.

That was most likely a convenient excuse.

They probably either don't have the funding or a major backer to administer an MP network yet.

Another reason may be that this game isn't ready for that kind of treatment yet.It's still a diamond in the rough and needs more polishing before being considered worth expending the time money and energy it would require to make MP a credible and enjoyable experience for this series.