Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

You do understand that asking that in the Dominions forum makes it likely that most people will not agree with you?

But even in the usenet strategy forums I had the same conversation. The person there also was not able to swing a majority.

I really do understand your viewpoint. As a player viewpoint I think its valid. But trying to sound like a nice guy talking to the publisher on a peer level, I dont really think so. It has a chance for some gains but I still feel it would be a risky thing for Shrapnel to try with this version of Dominions. This is a major release both for Illwinter and for Shrapnel. Gambling with pricing might not be a very responsible thing for them to do right now.

I wish I was better at math to put this in a formula but I now that you are talking about cutting their profits probably more than half (at least). And I know that it would take twice as many new buyers to make up that difference, much less make a gain above that to make it worthwhile.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

First of all I choose to believe that Talleyrand is not trolling at all because he hasn't said anything inciendiery and seems just to be speaking (typing?) his/her mind.

I think it's rather simple in the short run why they would keep prices high. Shrapnel knows its audience. The turn based strategy market is small, but I'm gonna take a leap of faith and say that it is older, which means it has more money. The kind of person who is going to buy this game is also the kind of person who is willing to pay a premium to fit their specific needs. In other words, lowering the price to go after a more casual gamer (in other words a gamer that is less inclined to buy this game, evidenced by them not buying at the higher price) is an illogical thing to do. Think about it: the more casual gamer that would be attracted by a lower price is exactly the kind of person to be put off by the graphics and complexity. In other words you're lowering your price to chase after a market that isn't there. In the meantime the folks that were going to buy it anyway at the higher price after being introduced to it are giving you less money.

There is no reason for them to simply follow suit with retailing practices for mass-market games because they are not selling mass-market games. They have no pressing need to clear inventory like a retailer (not to say they have no need at all to clear inventory but it isn't nearly the situation with a retailer where old product competes with new product).

There is also the following problem which has been alluded to but I guess I'll illustrate. Let's use some made up numbers and say that for the first 10000 games printed, the cost of the game to Shrapnel is 30 dollars including manufacturing. If they charge 40 dollars they make 100000 dollars in profit. If they charge 55 dollars they make 250000. That's hugely substantial. So that explains why they would start out at 55.

Now since this is software adding more copies sold decreases the cost per unit fairly substanially when compared to more "hard" goods like say a television. However Shrapnel, the folks with the data on sales and on their customers, have determined that the increase in sales for a lower price point doesn't make up for the loss in profitability even after the initial rush. If there is a market of 25000 copies at 40 dollars and a market of 15000 copies at 55 (assuming a cost of 30 per unit) it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that you come out ahead charging 55. In fact the gain is 125000, a number which probably offsets the average cost decrease (the assumption of 30 per unit is not valid because the cost per unit is going to be less for the 25000 than for the 15000). Now these numbers are all made up but the point is that Shrapnel has numbers that *aren't* made up.

Of course the counter-point to all of this is, considering the steep marginal cost decrease once you recoup development costs, why not try and cash in? They lost money not charging less for Dominions 2 leading up to Dominions 3 if they had *any* inventory left, because the sales of Dom 2 after Dom 3 have got to be practically non-existent. They don't have any inventory left of course so that is a moot point Vhttp://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smile.gifV

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

Talleyrand - You said that the manual is just a manual. Based on a small sampling (one scanned image, my preorder shipped today and obviously is not in my twitching hands) it seems to me that the manual is less of a "push these buttons, make game work" manual typical of games these days, but more of reference guide to the features (features = units, spells etc in this context) more similar to a programming language reference guide or an extremely well written after market strategy game guide.

You have discussed production value. I am in the initial planning stages of a small business. One of the most important things I am trying to determine is what my minimum sales volume needs to be to not lose money (I want to start very small and continue to remain employed full-time). This very planning makes me poignantly aware that Shrapnel, having much smaller sales volumes than someone like Atari, or even Atari games sold just at Wal-Mart, must do a similar analysis, only they need to make money beyond their cost of production in order to pay their employees.

Based on my perception of the tone of the forum posts of Shrapnel staff, it seems that they are surprised at the level of success that Dom3 is garnering for them. I agree with the poster who mentioned that from an economic stand point this means that the game is perhaps underpriced.

Lastly, just from playing Dom2 (which I caught on sale at $32.95 - Shrapnel does periodically reduce prices) I would say that the replay value is definately in the top 5 games that I own. In making this assessment I am combining price per unit time spent playing the game as well as the intangible of personal sense of enjoyment per unit time spent playing the game.

Thank's for letting me share my thoughts regarding this thread.

lowering the price
 

One thought on lowering the price after a certain time period:

Some people that would buy the game now would instead wait until the price is lowered. Knowing that the price is not going to be lowered means you do not have any reason to not buy the game now.

Re: lowering the price
 

I do think that Dominions 3 is worth the price, and I personally think an actual manual is a real selling point.

However, I agree with Talleyrand that keeping Dominions 2 at full price for so long is rather unreasonable, and they lost a sale in my case.

I discovered D3 a few months ago, I had been looking for D2 for a long while (I just knew of a screenshot and some details, but not the name).

I myself would have snapped up D2 in a second for $20 while waiting for D3. But their "reduced" selling price was at $40, something I am just never going to pay for a game that is a few years old.

But $60 for an excellent new product by an independent developer, despite the lower production values? No problem here.

Re: lowering the price
 

Indeed. Which is why it can make sense for a company that's somewhat insulated from direct competition, as Shrapnel as an exclusive publisher of distinct titles in a small niche is, to have a stated policy of not downpricing old games. While it might lose some of the fence sitters, others of them will buy the game at a higher price than they otherwise would and, just as importantly, they'll buy the game earlier after launch, at the point where there are bills to be paid. (Cash-flow is often just as important as net income.)

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

It depends upon the situation. Dealing with a publisher is not the same as dealing with a distributor or a reseller. When dealing with the publisher, their cost of making the game is not going to diminish over time. As a result, the price is going to stay constant.

A distributor or retailer is a completely different animal and they are looking for turns on their inventory dollars. Therefore, after a game has been on the market for so long, they lower the price to recoup some of their initial investment.

Now, sometimes the original publisher will reduce the cost of their game due to inventory issues, but that depends upon the size of the publisher and other factors. Not knowing how much it cost to make Dom 2, I have no basis for why the cost of the game has remained high. I do know that for the past few weeks, it has been backordered, which means they don't have any copies available. Since the release of Dom 3 was imminent, I am not surprised the cost shown remained high.

I'm going to give you an example here:

A supermarket buys cans of Super Deluxe Root Beer for $.20 per can. They sell it for $.40 per can. They sell about 100 cans per week. Most Root Beer sells for $.30 per can. A customer comes up and tells the manager of the store that he won't buy the Super Deluxe Root Beer for $.40 per can, but he would at $.35 per can.

At 100 cans of sales per week, the supermarket makes $20 per week off of the Super Deluxe Root Beer. If they sell 101 cans per week at $.35 per can, they will only make $15.15 per week. To gain the one extra customer, they sacrificed $4.85 to the bottom line, not good business.

The reason why many people have brought up the manual is threefold. There were legitimate gripes about the manual for Dom 2, and there were plenty of people (i.e. more than one or two people) that claimed they stayed away from the game because of the manual. Second, the quality of a manual is one of production values that you said the game did not have a lot of (a 300 page reference book/manual for a game of this type is a must have to plan what you are going to do, much easier than searching for everything in game). Third, the cost of the manual has a direct impact on the cost of the final product. If a 300 page manual costs $20 per game (which would not surprise me, depending upon the quality of the graphics, etc.) then the price of the game is going to change accordingly.

I don't know exactly what you want to hear in answer to your post. You have bypassed several direct answers to your concerns or questions, yet you still say the same thing. If you are trying to get the price of the game reduced, it isn't going to happen at this point, and I highly doubt one person is going to make a difference to a price policy for a company (not a well run company at any rate).

I am not trying to be a fanboy or anything else, this is the first game from Shrapnel that I have bought. However, I completely understand how pricing is determined for products as I am the Sales and Marketing Manager for the company I work for, so I understand why many of these decisions are made.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

Practical business says you charge what the market will pay for it. It's better to sell three copies for $50 each than 6 copies at $20.

Two things:

1. Price drops in shops are usually the retailer's perogative, the loss is kicked back to the publisher. Given the choice, most publisher's wouldn't lower the price at all - look at other online only stores/distribution services, most keep the price steady since they can afford to set the initial price lower than other sources. The fact is that it's the retailer's stranglehold that allowed the practice to start in the first place (since you either agreed with them, or you didn't see your title on the shelves)

2. Shrapnel are a small publisher. Larger publishers can afford to spread their costs. To a company like EA, it doesn't matter if they lose a few thousand on one or two titles when they can rake in a few million with another title. They know they'll make huge profits on a couple of franchises which will more than cover the losses they make on the majority of their other games. For a smaller company with a smaller audience you just don't have that flexibility.

Only if they were counting on your money. Since the game has already broken the pre-order record (given the work they've had to put in to ship the pre-orders, I suspect it nearly broke their capacity too!) they're still getting their money, it's you who loses out on a great game http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

Probably not (though EU did quite well commercially). The thing is, I wouldn't consider either game to be worth the same price. I didn't buy EU until it was in a sale. I'm more than happy to pay full whack for Dominions though, which to be honest is probably the first time I've said that for a while. It's somewhat silly to base how much your willing to pay on the production values rather than the quality (i.e. the value to you) of the product. Many premium products don't cost significantly more than their counterparts to produce, however they sell for a lot more because people are willing to pay much more due to it's percieved value or quality. It's simple economics again, if a great game costs $10 to make, people are going to be willing to pay more than they would for a poor or mediocre game, even if it cost substantially more to produce.

Actually, CD Rom provides a good example for those old enough to remember when they first appeared. It's way cheaper to produce a game (or audio for that matter) on a CD than it was to produce it on diskette or audio cassette. You wouldn't have thought it from the price they sold at though, since CD was always more expensive than it's counterpart.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

I'm still trying to figure out what "less" is actually supposed to mean here. I'm not paying "more" to begin with. $54.95 is about standard median price between my XBox 360, computer and PS2 purchases. So I'm paying about average.

As for less, most computer games offer me considerably less in the way of strategic options and replay value(I paid full price for Master of Orion 3 and Civ IV, neither of which hold a candle here). As much as you seem to dismiss the manual as a value-add, the fact is that most of us DO see it as one because, as has been noted earlier, it's the equivalent of what most companies put out as strategy guides at $20 a pop. We get "less" in the way of graphics, certainly, but I won't launch into my rant about how I'd trade polygon count for a game that breaks molds and forces me to think. I've had enough beautiful FPS and RTS games all cut from the same cloth to last me a lifetime... or at least until Halo 3 and Bioshock come out. *ahem*

And, of course, there's the small publisher angle. I grit my teeth at buying an EA or Rockstar product at full price. I actually find that, despite their huge budgets, their QA tends to be atrocious by comparison to smaller companies and I hate their corporate politics. I love the fact that Illwinter is essentially two guys (and a few helpers) who love what they do and do it as best they can in their spare time. I love that Shrapnel is a small company that continues to pump out complex games in a market that's increasingly shy about them because of their lack of mass appeal. And I'm willing to pay $55 (although I paid only $48 due to their pre-order special) to go ahead and show them the love they deserve.

If you don't feel the same, that's fine. But one play of Dominions 3 has already convinced me that I'm never going back to Dominions 2 except for the occasional nostalgia play. Already, I'm convinced it's THAT much better. I wish you the best either way.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

Part of this reason is that the only strong suit of many games is high-end graphics. Which after a year becomes not so high-end and a bit later it becomes just outdated. Without anything else to offer the value of those games falls to pretty much zero.

Dominions don't suffer from it, because they start with outdated graphics and the gameplay content doesn't deprecate with time. At least until they get some competition, which so far was non-existent.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

You're also paying to support developers and a publisher who don't simply release a couple of perfunctory patches before releasing a somewhat-debugged and slightly-expanded version as a $$$ sequel or expansion just months later... followed by a $$$ 'Gold Edition'... and who actually take into account user feedback.

If you look at EU, for instance, what was the length of the gap between EU and EU II? And did the publisher and developer show any inclination whatsoever to deal with major issues such as the AI's tendency to fixate on particular provinces, its blatant cheating with respect to (complete immunity to) fleet attrition, or so forth?

If you take developer responsiveness into account, you'll often find better value with, say, Illwinter, Malfador Machinations, Battlefront, HPS Simulations...

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

I think the previous posters in this thread explained it pretty well, but I'll sum up why it's okay for dominions 3 to be $55.

First of all, it's the niche market that dominions caters to. D3 will only sell a few thousand copies to a select few hardcore TBS and fantasy/myth fans... there's no way illwinter/shrapnel can make any kind of profit (and therefore continue to make games) if they sell it at less then $55.

Secondly, the 300 page spiral bound printed manual costs ALOT to produce. The manual alone adds at least $10 to the price and is well worth it.

Thirdly, let's look at what the game features shall we:

Over 1500 different units...all with unique abilities and strategies for using them, 600+ spells.. and not just a bunch of spells that are just the same spell with varying power, but unique spells with unique effects and unique descriptions.... FIFTY unique nations to play as with wildly differing strategies... add to that all the choices you have in a single turn, multiplayer support, modability, improved AI (which is a feat for this level of detail), and oh yeah, a 300 page manual...

Now tell me this game isn't worth $55 to a fan of this type of game...

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

A couple things:

1) I agreee with Morkilus the wise, sitcky this!

2) The OPer is not trolling. Let's not start a witch-hunt here. The person has every right to not only speak his mind politely, but also pose a difficult question.

3) "More for less" has been adequately explained. He means more as in the price compared to Dom 2, and less meaning lower production values than larger development schemes.

@Talley
Everything you have brought up has already been addressed eloquently by people with very piquant points. You are priced out, and that's all there is to it. You will overcome your perceived dillema with the game's price or you won't.

**Tries to use hypnosis -- "You will get over your dillema..."**

Shrapnel's current goal is to run a business. Maybe the business owner(s) possess the utlimate goal of helping good games reach people, or maybe not. Trying to find their proper place in the market is probably a good way to achieve a goal like that though, even if many are priced out. Don't be convinced by convention that they are making a bad decision here, when it could very well be the best one to reach their goals. Then again, maybe not. Maybe they are shooting themselves in the foot. We'll probably know for sure in five years.

=$=

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

Digitalize everything =). Save the production cost, save the manual cost. Lower the price, easier accessibility, HURRAH FOR ALL!! Except for the people who have to do the extra work of the digilitalizing =).

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

One problem with digital-everything: it becomes trivial to put an essentially identical distribution onto, say, P2P systems. For a game that offers a decent single-player mode and does not involve heavy copy protection with online activation or so forth, this is risky. While a physical manual can be scanned (although one can make this harder, through the use of extremely ugly color schemes -- SimCity copyright sheet, anyone? -- 300 pages of that would be insane), at the least it's something that differentiates the licensed from the non.

One of the more common arguments you'll hear about P2P music is that if the studios don't want people to simply download their music for nothing, they should offer extras -- the experience of a performance, goodies with the physical CD, et al. From a pragmatic point of view, this is not unreasonable in either music or software. A good bound manual would seem to qualify so long as the users are willing to absorb the cost.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

We can't, since the manual rather directly affects the manufacturing costs of the game.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

Well, let's see...

If I require 4 strategy games with high production values at average market price to keep me entertained for 6 months, but only one strategy game with decent production values at 1.25 times average market price to entertain me for a year...

I've always regarded Shrapnel as the game industry equivalent of one of those rare import furniture/home decor stores. The stuff is kinda expensive, but you can't get it anywhere else, and it's damn sure cooler than anything you could ever buy from Sears or Target.

Good strategy and war titles are a rarity these days, after all, so I feel the little bit of extra money spent is well worth the product that Shrapnel delivers.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

50€ is about four months of WoW (if you don't count in the initial purchase, which at the time when I bought the game was 55€ but seems to be now 25€). I've played WoW for 18 months. Sure, graphics are cuter in WoW than in DOM, but graphics has never been the reason for me to play games.

I presume I will be playing DOM3 (just as I did/do play DOM2, or EU2 or CK) for years. Most likely not as horribly much as I played WoW, but neither is the price that much compared. When I evaluate "Bang for Bucks" I would dare to say DOM3 has a much higher BfB factor http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

Yup only Eu2 comes somewhat close to Dom2 for me.
And Dom3 adds lots of new nice stuff.
Dom3 is simply the best turn based strategy game i know, and turn based strategy games are my favourite genre http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif.

And the dominions community is fantastic too http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif.
I have started recently playing Eu2 in MP, 2 of the 3 games i participated ended because the players started to argue and the 3rd game is currently in this phase too and it is uncertain whether we can continue it.
I played at least 20 dom2 longterm mp games which take as much or more time as an eu2 mp game, almost all of these games were finished and normally the players all behaved very fair and mature.
In my eu2 MP games though whining and *****ing is too common for my taste http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/biggrin.gif.

If you love turn based strategy games then consider that you will play Dom3 probably longer then the time you played your 3 (or more) favourite other turn based strategy games.
If you bought those other turn based strategy games on release they costed you at least 3x40$. Compare that to 55$ for Dom3.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

Exactly http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif.

When i still played Dom2 blitzes i always thought if my companions already had Dom3 this would be even more fun.
Fortunately this is now over almost and in a week i hope everybody has their copy of Dom3 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/biggrin.gif

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

I think he refers to the other games in general, not to Dominions II. "More for less", or "more money for something that won't be as polished and bug-free and won't get its bugs squashed as quickly as a bigger company could make it happen".

"More" isn't about the starting price, but the price you can eventually buy the game at. I don't have any consoles, but I've understood that it's standard market practise for everything to considerably drop in price as time goes by, from consoles to games to accessories.
"Less" isn't about the improvements from DomII in this case, as far as I've understood Talleyrand's intent.

However, as other posters have noted:
1) Shrapnel Games does very good work in customer service, even though (or because?) they are a small company.
2) Dominions II was enjoyable for a long time, and Dominions 3 will probably be the same. The series beats many competitors in this amount, but as I haven't actually played many strategy games besides Dominions, I can't comment on that.

The manual is a hefty issue. I actually predicted this earlier in this thread. The manual lists summons, items and spells, and I understand it does this much better than Dominions II manual did. I understand it also offers simple strategies and playing hints and goes into more detaile when explaining the mechanics; could anyone who actually has the paper manual comment on this?
The game can be hard to get into. The manual makes it easier to get into the game, making more people who buy the game able to enjoy it. Perhaps it's better this way than if the game was sold without the manual, and people were left confused?



BigJMoney is right. The only troll in here is in Leif's avatar. I enjoy this discussion, even though there are too few people arguing against Shrapnel's policy to make this really enjoyable debate.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

Thank you to the kind poster who stated that Talley is not a troll. I thought twice about posting, as the bulk of readers are very much against him. However, I support Talley.

The discussion has focused on Dominions and could have included SEIV, which was another excellent game. The majority of buyers will agree they are excellent products and probably worth the price. With that said, despite owning Dom 1 and 2, I have yet to order Dom 3 and certainly refused to pre-order it. Why?

Shrapnel’s pricing policy applies to all their games; they keep prices high and rarely relent. I put my faith in Shrapnel and pre ordered Coliseum and bought the War Engine blind. The prices were high, but I figured Shrapnel only backed good games. I was wrong.

Some of the games are of very low quality and one of the recent releases is far outclassed by a freeware game in exactly the same niche. Yet the prices remain high. Essentially, Shrapnel uses the same strategy for all their games, regardless of the quality. I deeply honour their right to make money and wish them luck (due to their support of good games) but I do not trust them any more. I will wait until I am sure the game is good (as seen in the forums) and I have a chance to play the demo.

My second point has been touched on by others. Old games do go down in price on the market. Victoria, EUII, and Hearts of Iron are all games in a similar niche and all have their prices decline over time. I get similar replay value from them as I do from Dom II, yet got them at much lower prices. Paradox provides excellent patches and support, equal to or better than anything else on the market. Again, while I honour Shrapnel’s right to make money, my experience with the rest of the games market is that prices decline, no matter the quality of the product.

If Shrapnel can buck the market and make a living, well, good for them. That doesn’t make me approve of their pricing system or want to take part in it. From the good reviews of Dom 3, I will have a look at the demo and I might get the game. But the pricing model they use on all of their games ensures that I will think a lot harder about it than otherwise. Maybe I am that person right at the intersections of the pricing curve, the marginal one who will go either way. Or maybe my past experience of their pricing model has made me a much pickier buyer of their products.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

I still remember dishing out $80 for Dungeon Master on SNES and loving that game to death. So $55 doesn't seem like too much for a game - the first game in years - that really evokes that same sense of discovery and recaptures the joy of those early gaming experiences.

Most everything since the early days has been streamlined interfaces, pretty graphics, crap gameplay, and no actual improvement on the great ideas that were floating around not so long ago and seem all but lost in today's Hollywoodesque gaming market.

And then I stumbled upon Dominions a couple of months ago. $55 is nothing, and as so many have said, it's probably Shrapnel's optimal selling price.

I wouldn't pay $5 for Disciples 2 on Amazon, but I gladly paid $35 for Dominions 2 even knowing that Dominions 3 was just around the corner. That's value.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

Yep. Since Doms 3. is an unique game on the strategy market, I don't see any problems with the high price of the game.
Not to mention that I can tell you the same like JPSeraph.
I wouldn't pay 5 euros for NHL 07 for example, but I would glady pay 100$ for Dominions 3.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

A couple of comments on this discussion ...

$55 is a very high price for a game. That price will certainly effect my decision whether to buy or not. Since I already own Dom2, much of my decision making will be whether the game is sufficiently better than Dom 2 to justify spending $55 to buy it, or if I'd rather not just fire up Dom2 and play it again.

Please don't tell me that this price is this high because of a manual and the decision to print it for each purchase. If that is the case, then Shrapnel really should offer two purchase options ... one with a printed manual, and one where the manual comes with the game in electronic form.

I would never ever buy a game because someone says there's a big thick manual. I've bought a lot of games in my life, and rarely is the manual even touched a week after buying the game. Regardless of the thickness of the manual, it has been a long, long, long time since I've seen one where the content justified paying much attention to it. Typically the content level of game manuals is extremely low.

An example of what I mean would be many, many pages devoted to such complicated and intricate topics such as pressing the button marked "New Game" to start a new game, pressing the button marked "Save Game" to save a game you are playing, etc. Usually the thickness of the manual comes from the fact that not only was text needed to explain these functions in depth, but screen shots are also required!

When someone tells me I'm paying $55 for a manual, I know from personal experience that I'm extremely unlikely to read it more than once, and that after a week it will be laying around my house unread. Eventually it will get picked up from the floor near the computer, where it will be sitting gathering dust and serving as a coaster, and be placed on a bookshelf.

Oh well, main reason I came here was to see if there was a demo out. I didn't know the price, but that makes it even more important for me to see the demo before buying. And like I said, the main question I'll have is whether its worth $55 to go from Dom2 to Dom3. And I'd have to say I'm starting out sceptical about that one.

And since Shrapnel has the policy of not lowering the price over time, then it means that if the game fails that test, then I'm unlikely also to buy it in the future. There is a certain logic in offering the game for a lower price as time passes after release. I may or may not feel the game is worth $55 to upgrade Dom2 to Dom3, but there have been many games I've bought for $9 or $19 later. It becomes a different decision at that price.

Oh well, this being a game message board, I'm sure I'll be flamed for daring to have my own opinions and judgements and for not just running lemming-like to give my money to other people.

And oh yeah, its pre-Christmas. Given the huge amount of junk pushed on the market by other game companies at this time of year (I'm not saying that this is true for this game, after all there's no demo to see yet), I've become very sceptical about buying any game that's released between now and Christmas. Its definitely the time of year to remind myself to go into "game buying quarantine" mode. And then just wait and see what's out and what state it is in.

The bean counters at any game company want games released and on the shelves by a certain date for this time of year. In some (ie, many) companies (maybe or maybe not these guys) that's been known to override any logical decisions about whether the game is really ready to release. By doing this, the game industry as a whole has made me very, very sceptical about buying any newly released game at this time of year.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

Very nice post. I certainly hope you aren't flamed, but I'm afraid your message will be flooded. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

The Pre-Christmas release is also a good point. I don't think anyone else brought it up yet. I think many feel this is an extra Christmas rather than a great Christmas gift, though... In the materialistic sense of the word, of course.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

With regards to music, I know of bands that made a great deal of money by letting music be downloaded or traded for free. Then they make their money by selling concert tickets to the people who liked what they heard.

Ever hear of the Grateful Dead? In terms of concert tickets, they were annually either the highest grossing band in the world, or very near the top of the list. At their peak, they could easily sell out 80,000 seat football stadiums for multiple shows several days in a row in the same city, with little or no marketing or advertising costs.

What they did was early on they decided it was perfectly ok for fans to bring recording gear to concerts and record their shows. And that as long as these recordings weren't being sold for money or profit, that it was perfectly ok for fans to share and trade these recordings. So these recordings always circulated amongst their fans, and to friends of fans as an introduction to their music. When Mp3 and the internet came along, they were all freely available there ... as long as the websited didn't charge for them. You couldn't even have advertising on your site if you had their music up there. But if you just put it up for free and weren't making any money from it, the band was very happy to let anyone do that.

They also always kept their ticket prices near the minimum possible price. For someone who bought tickets to different bands that came around, the Grateful Dead usually ran at about half to two thirds the price of other shows. And they've never hit the triple digit gouge pricing of other shows ... unless its a charity benefit and even then that price usually includes a reception with the band before the show.

All of this sounds counter-productive ... give your music away for free, price your shows as cheaply as possible instead of as expensively as possible. It sounds crazy ... until you see 200,000 fans all trying to get tickets in an 80,000 seat stadium ... and again with almost zero costs in local marketing or advertising of the show. Because of the decisions they'd made that seemed very counter-productive, about all they had to do was to rent the stadium and haul their gear and crew around. Set up to play, then watch the people flow in and the money hit the till. That, combined with the fact that they produced amazingly good music, made those guys all very, very wealthy. (they also kept most the middle-men out ... they either were their own concert producers\promoters ... or they worked with people they knew and liked in different cities. Even today, they are one of the very few groups of musicians that still own the rights to publish their own music as audio, video or sheet music.)

The middle-men part might be relevant to this discussion. Remember, there's two companies that need to try to make money from your Dom3 purchase, not just one.

Just a note that there are other models for making money out there rather than "grab as much money as possible on every transaction". Don't know if that applies here ... just adding some thoughts that came to me while reading the discussion above.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

Actually a couple of very good games will be released until X-mas. marc420, your statement is not very correct. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smile.gif

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

I agree, I have never bought a game just because it has a manual, but I have opted to not buy games because the manual was terrible. Shrapnel made a business decision and opted to print the manual. Also, there are costs that are associated with a digital release as well. Often times there are issues therein, which causes much more damage to the company than charging more for a regular release (I have been there with both SI Games and Stardock, luckily for them in both cases the games rocked after I got everything sorted out).

However, you mentioned something that is very smart. Wait for the demo, and then decide whether or not the game is worth $55. I played the Dom2 Demo recently and have been playing it to death. For me, the $55 is worth it because I do not have Dom 2. However, I can understand the debate if someone does own Dom 2 in waiting before they decide to drop $55 on a game. I love FM2006, but am probably going to skip FM2007 for the same reason.

Regarding the decision of Shrapnel to not reduce price on their games, it is a decision that is up to them. They have decided that their business model is best suited by not cutting price. Cutting price is typically indicative of a poor business model because you bought too much supply and must dump it to recoup some of the expense of making it.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

I wasnt sure why they didnt cut the price of Dom2 about 6 months ago. I think they could have benefited by cutting it down to almost production costs and building up the player base in preparation for Dom3.

But thats about the only point I can really concede on. Digital isnt ready yet, and Dominions is a major item for Shrapnel so I wouldnt experiment with digital on a Dom release.

As for costs, keep in mind that besides a profit for Johan and Kristoffer, Shrapnel needs to make a profit AFTER costs. Besides production costs Shrapnel has multiple employees. At least 7 that I know of and thats just department heads. Scott Krol is one that many dont know of but he does the PR releases. I set up auto-emails when things that interest me hit the newswires and Ive seen steady traffic concerning Dominions 3 and Rising Star. Scott is doing great work for the developers.

Also there are the servers. The ShrapnelGames main server, the ShrapnelCommunity one (these forums), GamersFront (the store), backups, mail, accounting.

Its not like its a 50 cent CD (as one person said). And its not greed. Read the "About Us" page on ShrapnelGames.com and get a feel for the companys direction.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

I think you took my post out of context.
What I said was that the cost of making a game CD itself are very (very!) low, unlike costs for a manual, which can be many many times more expensive. This is to say that the cost of actually producing a copy of dominions 3 is probably much higher than other commercial games with crappy manuals.
Obviously, on top of that there's employee's wages, paying Illwinter and other costs.

Another point I'd like to make (specifically to marc420) is that the Dominions 3 manual is very different from other manuals. It isn't the usual 10 pages of "Press the left mouse button to 'click'".
This is what I know about the manual from what has been said on the forum:
1) IIRC it was written by game guru Bruce Geryk.
2) It contains pages of reference sheets and lists that are very handy in playing the game. Viewing every item in the game for example can be very helpful when deciding if you want to empower that mage for forging.
3) It explains the game mechanics, which is obviously very useful.
And I suppose there's lots of other stuff I don't know about (or that my puny brain has filtered out)

All of these help to make sure this manual is a keeper, rather than a coaster.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

I bought Dom2 at regular price after reading many glowing recommendations from Gandalf Parker on this and other forums. About a month after I got Dom 2 they announced Dom 3 pre-orders. I gladly purchased it (got it day before yesterday, woot!).

I have no problems with the pricing when I look at the hours and hours of enjoyment I have had with Dom 2 and will have with 3.

For fun per dollar the game is a bargain http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

When I read this, there is one thing that constantly surprises me. It's how much people allow themselves to be influenced by convention. I don't think $55 is a high price, and many people have also given examples of why they don't think so, either. I do think $55 is a lot of money, especially to me. So far, everyone who has said that it is "too high" for their taste have been using other games/trends examples. Who cares about other games? Dominions 3 is not other games. This argument is skating the edge of the attitude that says, "The world owes me a living." Look at Dominions 3 and make your own intellectual decision about whether you feel it will be worth your $55. It's as simple as that. Not even other games sold by Shrapnel in the past need to influence your decision. Are we paying more for less? My vote is no, and to those of you who want to like the game, but are stuck in a mental bind on its perceived value, I pity you.

=$=

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

Thanks to the exchange rate, Dominions actually cost me considerably less than the majority of mainstream games. Of course, with the p&p costs it was back on equal terms...

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

Same here.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

I don't know, as a Strat fan I have to agree it is a bit high for even my blood. I mean to me it comes down to paying nearly as much as I could for a 360 game (and yes there ARE some enjoyable, long playing games on the 360, I'm STILL playing Star Wars Legos and Dead Rising, plus some others) for a 4X fantasy game with poor graphics, etc. And before anyone bashes me on wanting good graphics I have to ask when the last time YOU bought a video card considering they are up ~$200 for a midline one, yeah I want my game to utilise it to it's fullest ability if I am paying that much.

Or I could simply wait one more month and getting Medieval 2: Total War which is largely the same thing, sans magic/random maps but has far better graphics, and realistic ground battles with 10k+ men on the field per side which you can actually control that takes everything into account just like in real life (with some exceptions with playability). And a relativly deep political/diplomatic interplay (compared to the Dom series) between all of the nations allowing you to turn nations against one another, play all the sides, etc., rather than simply "must destroy everyone" like in Dom3. AND pay only ~$40 for them. Not to mention the mods which will add the fantasy elements to it, like the already released Middle-Earth mod for R:TW.

And as for discount games, yes I bought EVERY single TW game when they hit the bargain bin and I STILL play all 3 of them and their expansions to this day on a fairly frequent basis. M2 is going to be the first I buy on release day because of CA's production values.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

I'm not sure what to tell you Mltdwn. So much of this discussion seems to boil down to "I'm totally going to buy this game" or "I'm definitely not buying this game". With so little room in-between, all we can really do is wish each other the best with our respective choices.

If the price point is the straw that breaks your camel's back, so be it. If Shrapnel feels that the price point is hurting them, I'm sure they'll adjust their market strategy. In the meantime, I guess I just need to spend less time trying to convince you of why it's worth $55 directly and more time just enjoying my new game. If I write enough about how great it is as I'm experiencing it, maybe you'll come around. And if you don't, we'll miss having you.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

I see your point Jayd.. My whole problem is while I like the idea of Dom3... It doesn't really strike me as worth the money when another company is providing essentially the EXACT same game in most respects, with higher production values, more gameplay options, and have made a fortune off of 4x games and proven it is anything but a "niche" market with reasonable prices... Basically what I am saying is with the competition releasing the same game in a month with all of those added abilities and production values for a lower price point what makes Dom3 worth it as it adds nothing different really (other than sprite based ground combat you can't control) to the gameplay.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

Illwinter would need a lot more crew if it would wish to make a game up to date with graphics, and it would mean they would have to most likely cut down the amount of content.

More crew would need more money etc.

And MTW:2 is hardly equal to Dominions 3 and I doubt a middle earth mod for it will never reach even a quarter of the features that make Dominions series superb and creative fantasy games. MTW:2 will be prettier yes, will have nicer sounds etc. but Dominions series will be the massive fantasy game where your aim is godhood, and this puts it largely into a niche.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

So don't buy it. It's really that simple. Dominions is certainly a niche game -- heck, these days it's almost a niche inside a niche -- and unless the "nicheness" has extra value for you then Dominions III isn't worth $55 to you. To me that niche has a lot of value, which is why, for me, Dominions III is worth $55 and Medieval 2: Total War is not worth £30.

Is Dominions III an expensive game? Yes, it is. Is it worth $55? It is to some of us. It won't be for many others. Is it too expensive? Judging from the pre-orders, it would appear not.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

What Leif said.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

I guess I don't follow. You say it's the "same game" but earlier you mention that it comes sans the magic/random maps system. Putting aside how fun it is to be able to play with the random maps (I made a random map today and started playing with the map editor to make it a fun custom game scenario), the magic system IS Dominions. It's kind of like saying Dominions is a fantasy-themed Civilization without the technology tree. I like Civ a lot and love learning technologies, so I wouldn't buy Dominions if that was the primary draw of the game for me.

On the other hand, I love magic and fantasy-based games. I also love the hands-off strategic element of battle in Dominions that rewards planning as opposed to twitch. I also love supporting small devs who patch often and do their best to encourage modding in their creative and motivated community. I'm sure you can find things to sell me on where M2:TW is involved. But I don't so much see how we're not talking apples and oranges here.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

OK answer me this, what features and abilities does Dom3 add that M2TW doesn't? I'm trying to compare the two and decide which I should invest my money into because other than the "magic" aspect I really can't see what Dom3 brings to the table that is different or better... From what I understand the diplomatic functioning is much more limited due to being primarily a go to war with everyone game, the politics aspect is largely non-existant due to the nature of the game (as opposed to having to deal with the Church, the various other nobles, Crusades, Jihads, Briberies, assassinations, etc.), and the combat is largely more of simply choose the right groups and outnumber the enemies hoping for good enough "rolls" rather than being able to use actual tactics like flanking, luring, ambushes, etc.

Basically what makes Dom3 "better" in terms of features and gameplay?

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

From the sounds of it MTWII has more fantasy elements than Dominions already http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif
Last month. Your missing the point though - if I want to see how much I can push it, I'll load up Oblivion, Farcry or similar, not Dominions. To be honest, if all I wanted was a good looking picture on the screen you can download any number of graphical benchmarking demo's which are ten times prettier than anything the games market is likely to produce for a while. Thing is, I buy games to play, if all I wanted was to watch the eye candy I'd just put a DVD on.

edit:
Kinda depends on you.Personally I don't like the total war series all that much.
Although you did offer your own argument - if you bought Dom 3 now, by the time you can afford Medieval 2 it'll likely have dropped in price...

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

Where to start. Actually, I won't even try. I suggest you wait for a few days until they demo version is ready and try it out for yourself. It's quite possible the game won't be to your liking, but I can promise you that it will be an entirely different game than M2TW.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

I know he is being really obvious about promoting another game and they are usually subtle, but even so I still think Mltdwn is likely to be a Guerilla Marketer.

GM12

Don\'t get me started on CA/Total War.
 

Shogun:TW would have been more interesting if

- it didn't require very particular and sometimes quite dated drivers when played with an nVidia card
- it didn't completely break when I upgraded to Win2K from 98
- it allowed the disabling of the extremely absurd geisha super-assassins
- the AI didn't blatantly cheat with respect to knowing what your moves where going to be when it "simultaneously" planned its orders, getting information that was -impossible- for the human to get through any amount of spying
- one could both build and recruit in the same province at the same time
- cavalry archers could actually... shoot when moving
- they ever fixed the widely-reported and serious bugs with completely inexplicable routs
- it mattered what direction one attacked a river province from -- even if you attacked a province from ALL SIDES AT ONCE you still all started on the wrong side of the river at defended bridges

But I'll agree that the video sequences were decently well-done, and that the smoke from a simulated mini-Gettysburg with 1600 muskets was impressive, if completely FPS-demolishing at the time.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

$55 is like what? £30? Thats average game cost for customers here in the UK. No way is it a rip off. Most these new "games" that devolpers are pumping out are not even worth £5 in my opinion. Abit chuffed theres people whining about the costs of one of the most indepth games ever.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

But that statement couldn't be any less true. Because...

Don't get me wrong - I'm not trying to belittle you for not understanding how important magic is to Dominions, because you have to really get into the game to see how important it is.

Magic, the way it is implemented in Dominions, makes all the difference in the world. I do know some people who were looking more for M:TW when they tried Dominions2. They wanted to build big armies of infantry, archers, knights and such. They got quite turned off when their opponent showed up with some powerful summoned creatures backed by mages casting potent battlefield spells, and wiped their "normal" army right off the map. That's OK - M:TW is the game for them, and that's fine.

But for me, the real game, the enormous strategic depth of Dominions comes from the magic. What spells should I research, so as to maximize the impact of my mages? What magic items do I put on that specific commander to either take best advantage of his strengths or cover up for some weakness that my opponent is exploiting? What kinds of creatures should I summon, and what kind would be a waste of resources (because my opponent can easily counter them)? The list of strategic questions goes on and on. Indeed, there is at least one important strategic decision to make very nearly each and every turn (and by late game there are many, many such decisions to make each turn).

It isn't for everyone, but it sure is grand for those that get into it.

Re: Are we paying more for less?
 

Yup, that's me, a guerilla marketer... Forgive me for wanting to make an "informed" decision based on people with knowledge of the game before spending my hard earned money. I played Dom2, and while I enjoyed it tremendously at first when I came across the TW line it basically turned me off of Dom as it was the same thing done better for the most part with a greater amount of depth in all aspects. Now Dom3 is out, is the price of a triple A X360 title, and doesn't seem to add anything really over Dom2 or the competition; however, that is going solely off of the limited features posted on the site. So I figured, since the game was out already I would ask those who have played it their input as to how it differs from other games in the same vein from an "objective" point of view. While yes I will admit and apoligize for perhaps going about it the wrong way, the question still stands... What does it bring to the table that isn't already out there for less which is of higher quality in production values, features, and gameplay value.

BTW Ron thank you for posting that viewpoint... And that answers alot of questions for me... While I can see the enjoyability in that then I have to say with that being the primary selling point it perhaps isn't the game for me as I like (personally) to simply have more strategic options. And that is just me, you answered alot with that simple statement and thank you.