Supreme Cmdr

I am working on two tutorials which used two of the Instant Action scenarios. They should be online later this evening - all things being equal.

quote: Originally posted by Werewolf: x) The UI. Take a look at the options menu at 1280x1024 and you see what I mean. Texts overflowing the (fixed size) dialogs does not look professional. It sounds like the fonts are not being positioned according to the screen res. Up to what res can you run before you notice this? 1024x768? I am currently running it as 1280x1024 and everything looks fine. This could be a driver or font issue. The registration DB is going online in a bit, at which point you can add your system specs to sig and open a problem report so that this can be investigated. The HUD system dynamically scales and positions text based on the screen res. If thats not working, then its either a driver of font issue. quote: Things like the Logistix and Tactical computer could be merged into one screen.They are two computer systems which do completely different things. You are encroaching in design issues which go back to the legacy days. With all the changes that the series has gone through, if I had found that it was necessary to merge the two, I would have. You have to understand and accept the fact that they are two COMPLETELY DIFFERENT systems. I didn't create two systems just to make more work for myself. quote: x) The options. There's no support beyond 1280x1024, and especially no widescreen support. And the problem is what? I guarantee you that you that during a major battle, you won't even be able to run the game at anything higher than 1024x768 with all options turned on, let alone 1280x1204 or higher. The screen resolution can go higher, its just not supported because the text and fonts are not guaranteed to upscale and position correctly. This is documented in the FAQ. e.g. to change the res to 1600x1200 or higher, you have to use the same method described in the FAQ. Why should it support widescreen? Are you kidding me? The thought never even crossed my mind and it never was in my design to begin with. quote: The latter is excusable for some older opengl games, but under D3D there's no real reason.Really? How many games actually do support widescreen? And why? quote: There's no global mouse invert that I could find. I can toggle the y-axis invert option on and off, it has no effect on first person mode for example.The y-axis toggle should do that and if it not effective in fp mode, I have to look into that. quote: Sounds. They're mostly low quality, some are outright annoying, and almost all samples have been preprocessed with some reverb.They were sampled in order to process correctly under DirectSound positional and so that they still play correctly when mixed in with several simultaneously playing sounds. quote: Trees. Ok they are there, but they look like what I did in my games back in 2000. The upside is that they don't use much processing power of course. It's good that they're there, they just don't look exceptionally nice.If they were any higher quality - given the scope of the planet, you'd never be able to run the game. Most games with lush vegetation take place in a limited boxed environment. You can turn them off in CONFIG - and thats exactly why I added this toggle in the RC2 build. quote: x) First person mode. yet the biggest gripe I have is the fact that the whole fps-episode just doesn't "feel right". Please explain. And remember, this is not - and never was - a dedicated fps. The fp mode is just another feature in the game and since BCM has done exactly what it was supposed to do, albeit its more advanced in UC. And how many IA scenarios in fp mode have you played, in order to come up with this conclusion? quote: The collision detection is shaky, and one never knows what units one can enter. Simple optical cues could tell you that, for example.If you read the manual it would tell you what units you can enter. I can't think of any game that gives you a visual cue to tell you what units you can/cannot enter. quote: Some features are really useless IMO, Such as? quote: like the ability to look around while keeping the current heading. You can turn your viewpoint and look into your own head, whee The camera is at your own head. Its an out-of-head camera. In fact, you don't even need that camera because you can still be moving in one direction (e.g. W to go forward) while using the mouse to glance elsewhere (e.g. to the right). You don't need to use mouselook. quote: x) Some CTDs. But that's to be expected. Entering ground vehicles and installations seems to be very crash-prone.No, CTDs are NOT to be expected. There were no reported nor recorded CTDs when the game went to replication. And AFAIK, entering ground vehicles (you can't enter ground installations, so I have no clue what you're talking about) should not cause a CTD. If it does, open up a problem report and it will be investigated. quote: Originally posted by Scarlek: Negatives on foot: Shaky camera again and a tad annoying when you approach a vehicle/building and bounce back. I'd prefer it if the player simply stopped when collision was detected. You are 100% right about this. I find it annoying too. The reason it bounces back is to give NPCs the ability to alter their direction. If there was no push back motion, then they would repeatedly collide with the object if they tried to turn while still close to it. Know what I mean? I need to rethink this a bit and I will probably disable the bounce back for the player. quote: When the camera is playing nice, the combat is great...when it steers off to the left or right on it's own, I get a little dis-heartened. Its your mouse Since it controls the camera, any slight movement will cause it to shift. This is EXACTLY why I was hesitant to revise the way it worked in BCM/BCMG btw - but everyone beat me up over it and so I conceded and a new method was implemented. Speaking of combat, have you played IA0114? Your thoughts? HINT: Try using the /i commandline cheat the first time you try it - or you'll die. A lot. quote: My only problem, and this is from a newbie standpoint: Setting up and deploying troops via shuttles...not easy but I'll learn and that really is an issue for me to learn how to do properly. Tutorials coming up. Hang in there n00b

DC wanted to keep the page count down, so there was no chance of adding tutorials to the manual as we did for BCM Gold. If you just posted what sort of help you are looking for, someone will pitch in. I will look into providing the BCM Gold tutorials for download, though you will have to adapt to the fact that they won't be quite straightforward since they are for a different generation of the game.

Please post your game impressions over here and leave this thread for shipping discussions only.

Registration on the board is open again. Mods please be deligent and do not hesitate to delete and ban the profiles of offenders. No need to run it by me first, just do it.

Given the decision of the judge in the injunction, the game is going to be sold for $19.99. So, I see no need to release a public demo at this time. Topic closed.

Post your thoughts here. And please, no fanboy stuff. Keep it real. Keep it focused. Say what you like, don't like etc etc otherwise, there won't be the add-on we are working on, nor the sequel.

The judge's decision came in. We were not successful. You can read the decision over here. We were not successful in obtaining an injunction primarily due to the fact that the performance of the product in the market at $19.99 instead of $39.99 can be tested and we can seek to sue for damages if the product does not perform as stated by the publisher. The judge is basically saying, wait and see the outcome and if you're still not satisfied with it, sue them for damages. Preventing the game from being sold, will not provide that market test etc etc. What this all means is that, the judge is saying, they can go ahead and ship the game at $19.99. And if it does not perform as our projections and contrary to what Dreamcatcher stated (they said that lowering the price by half will double the sales - see their affivadit for more on this), then I can sue for damages. We can also sue for the inaccuracies and false statements in the DC affidavits etc etc. Small bump. But I've only just begun. EDIT: I have spoken with my attorneys and a fresh batch of lawsuits are going to be filed against every officer in the company, Robert Stevenson (for making false statements in an affidavit). And we are going to seek to terminate the contract for breach in several areas (cited in the affidavit for injunction). [ 02-04-2004, 05:10 PM: Message edited by: Supreme Cmdr ]

I have a dormant PayPal account. But lets not jump the gun just yet. If you see the game for $19.99 and wish to buy it, its your right to do so. If you want to send us $10-$20 (via a Paypal payment), you are also free to do so. As I said, lets not jump the gun yet. [ 02-04-2004, 02:00 PM: Message edited by: Supreme Cmdr ]

BoFa calls for Take Two chairman ouster

I just wanted to be clear that anyone who ends up with the game at $19.99, will not be penalized by us in ANY way, shape or form. This is not your fault and I understand that. We will support the game with the best of our abilities and with what resources we have. Just remember, if it wasn't for me, you'd have an INCOMPLETE and terribly buggy game right now, even at $19.99. Remember that. Obviously given the circumstances and the lack of income derived from this game, we won't be able to put as much effort into support as we normally would. Now we have to look to focusing on our other properties for future income. I have updated the VCF and FAQ files on the downloads page. They contain everything you need. The product registration DB has been temporarily taken offline, so don't bother registering. Further, we are no longer accepting new registrations on the board. If you were a fan of our games prior, you should already be registered to post here. If you need tech support, please turn to p94 of the manual. Go there.

*forum links updated* EDIT: It all started over here and ended here. I am going to be using this thread to generate a play-by-play accounting of the events as they come in. But for those of you who missed it, here is a quick summary. Here is the Cease & Desist letter sent to them by my Canadian attorneys. Their response was unsatisfactory and frought with delaying tactics. So, true to my threat, I instructed my attorneys on Friday January 30th to proceed with materials for an injunction petition.They worked on that day and right through the weekend. Pouring over hundreds of pages of material spanning a full year since we signed with DC. On Monday February 2nd, the injunction was filed in a speedy fashion and the judge notified of the urgency. You see, Dreamcatcher started employing delaying tactics in an attempt to start shipping the game (which went into production on January 27th) into retail. Their response to our C&D letter was asking my attorneys to excuse themselves from the case because they [my attorneys] had dealth with Dreamcatcher before in a prior issue. My attorneys shrugged that one off, recognizing it for what it was. A delay tactic. You see, once they ship the game prior to an injunction, lawsuit or whatever, even if an injunction is granted, the genie would already be out and it would be a more messier and difficult situation for me to enjoin the retailers and prevent them from shipping the game - which I'm quite certain some have paid DC for. The judge heard the case yesterday and most of the afternoon was spent in testimony. Yesterday was the longest day of my life, as I sat around while my attorneys did battle with DC attorneys over the granting of the injunction. Of the 100+ pages of documents submitted to the judge, DC never produced ANY tangible material, other than ad hominem responses. The judge wasn't very impressed to say the least. Once they figured that the judge wasn't buying that their reason for reducing the game from $39.99 to $19.99 was because of the quality, they didn't raise Robert Stevenson (the producer hired by DC just before E3 last year) testimony in court because there were *no* documents, emails, faxes or anything out of DC - for a whole year - which would support their claim that they reduced the price because of the quality. Again, the judge wasn't very amused. Asking that if the game was of low quality, why did they try to ship **incomplete** at $39.99 in December 2003. Not to mention Robert Stevenson clearly caught lying in his affidavit.Unknown to him (since he wasn't in court, hence the affivadit), we already had the MSN logs from the day I discovered the price drop. Those logs contrast his affidavit in which he clearly states that *he* recommended that the price of the game be dropped. Yet, he pretended to not know anything about the price change - instead - blaming it on the retailers. They brought in some guy - whom I'd never heard of - called Paul Kohler - submit an affidavit about production quality of indie games, the MSRP price setting etc. You can read the entire rubbish in his affidavit and judge for yourself. It is an insult to indie devs everywhere. There are several other affidavits which I will be posting during the course of the day as I update this thread. Which brings me to this. The DC counsel asked that the proceedings be sealed. They obviously didn't want dirty laundry getting aired. Which is rubbish. With the 100+ pages of material which we submitted and which shows how DC treats their developers, they probably didn't want others (e.g. Jane Jensen) to see it. The judge said that they won't be sealed. It is a public matter which should interest both publishers and indie devs.DC weren't too happy about that. At the end of the day long hearing, the judge said that he will give his decision in the morning. We're keeping our fingers crossed. EDIT: I have uploaded a text containing our responses to parts of the affidavits submitted by DC. If you have already received a copy of the game from early retail shippers, please read this. EDIT: The judges ruling in this matter can be found in this post. [ 06-06-2005, 08:14 AM: Message edited by: Supreme Cmdr ]

quote: Originally posted by Kalshion: I might be misunderstanding you SC, but are you saying that we shouldn't get the UC thats out right now? Didn't I already answer this question lots of times already? DO WHAT YOU WANT. IT'S YOUR MONEY

quote: Originally posted by cpaek: Well, just wanted all of you to know that UC shipped from EB today. Should be on store shelves tomorrow if now already. I hope all of this with DC gets sorted out, but it doesn't look good since it's now out. SC, I hope you get what you deserve, because I know you put a lot of hard work into it. Take care. CPAEK Yeah, we've been getting reports of that. This has nothing to do with the court case. DC told the court that the game won't be shipping until 02-07, which was probably just another lie in order to get the game shipping before the judge made a decision. The case for an injunction was heard today and the judge heard both sides. At the end of the court day, he said that he would make his decision in the morning. If the some orders do ship, and an injunction is granted, DC will have to notify the retailers not to ship the game. Its their liability, not mine. But if the injunction (against shipping it at $19.99) is denied, then I have no choice but to proceed with the damage part of my claim, since it would now be after the fact. Neither of the above situations bodes well for those who get the game early and end up being caught in the middle. But make no mistake, we're going to fight this to the very end.

They heard the case today. The judge is going to give his ruling tomorrow morning. If he grants the injunction, then DC cannot release the game at $19.99. If he doesn't grant it, then they can go ahead and the only recourse I would have at that point is to proceed with damages as per the current facts of the case.

The personification of geek. Just look at that mug

I bought a Dell Inspirion 8500 full loaded, last April (for E3). And its still kicking.

quote: Originally posted by DeepFreeze: Oh, and it would be pretty neat if the AI fought large scale battles on their own, instead of those little 2-ship skirmishes that happen all over. But thats about it. He's not playing the same game as us, is he folks?

Take Two financial results. ooops

quote: Originally posted by Cideafex: I bought BCM and I feel like it was pretty enjoyable. I also think that UC is going to be awesome with its more action oriented play. I have a few questions about UC that I was hoping that someone could answer. Go here Not in the game. You can change it in your mouse control panel applet in Windows Unless you are talking about civilian buildings (like you see in cities), no, they serve no purpose other than to populate the scene. ALL the other builds (e.g. bunker, barracks, radar C&C, starbase etc) ALL have a purpose - as they always did, since BCM. No No Not really. But with GBS-III, you can create new scenario scripts etc. Go read the GBS forum

This is freaking hilarious

Really whacky stuff

Wow! Just wow!

Please read this and this. NOTE: TSS is a game publisher Looks like the board is down for maintenance. Anyway here are the contents of the first link. quote: just wanted to thank all of you sensible ones for throwing your own 0.2c into the ring - and for not rising to the flamebait being tossed about. I have full confidence in the abilities of the GG mods, hence the reason I have refrained from responding. I just wanted to point to this thread in which I talk about the price of games and the impact of selling this game for $19.99, as well as DC's latest statements related to the price of $19.99. Please pay close attention to posts by TSS, a game publisher. If they had the consumer in mind, they would not have attempted to ship a NON WORKING and INCOMPLETE game into retail. That move cost me several thousands of dollars in attorney fees. I prevailed. The action which I have now started last week, is going to cost me probably 4x if it goes into litigation. As to the support of the game. If it ever gets released at that price and court decides that Dreamcatcher will prevail, we [3000AD] will support it to the best of our abilities, given the limited resources we would have. It is not like 96-97 where we had only one game to focus on. Times have changed and we not only have five games now under our belt (two of which, BCM/BCMG, are still being supported), but a third (UC) will join. Then we have three games (BCO, KnightBlade our Xbox game and the planned UC sequel/addon) as well. As such, the significant reduction in our payment on UC would severely hamper our ability to support UC to our fullest extent. But we will support it nonetheless because that is our history. It is our product. It is ours. We care. you will decide - given the circumstances - if you would rather give your money to DC, knowing that we won't benefit from it, of if you will save it for the next product that is to come from us. That is all I wanted to say. But make no mistake, even if this legal action costs me what the game UC cost to develop, I will pursue it to the very bitter end. The Cease & Desist letter was just a first step. What happens today/tomorrow in the Canadian courts, will serve to prove just serious I am to NOT let another publisher put my gamers, my IP and my company at risk. I am also going to be hiring a PR company today (negotiations were underway on Fri/Sat) to bring awareness of this to the general gaming public and I am also going to be hiring another large lawfirm here in the US to tackle the retail side of this issue. If this game - after an injunction is served (assuming it is successfull) - ever gets on the retail shelves prior, they will be removed until a formal legal resolution is reached. I will spare NO EXPENSE in my pursuit of this. Make absolutely NO mistake about this. What the world doesn't know is that I have a lot of resources and backers who have just been waiting to have at the very least, one publisher nailed to the wall for unscrupulous acts against indie devs. This simply cannot be allowed to continue because far too many indie devs have suffered worse at the hands of such publishers. My post in the thread about the cost of games quote: /stepping on box Originally posted by Tim Frederick: I have to agree with the people that feel lowering the cost to $20 would hurt the quality of the games. Why does the local artist not get to sell their cds for $50 because they sell less? Because their cds cost very little to make! If you think about it, a good selling video game sells over a million copies, a top-selling computer game sells a couple-hundred thousand copies. Since most high-profile titles cost at least $2 million these days, and there is a HUGE risk factor in game sales, you have to make a good profit on the ones that do well in order to survive. Exactly. Which is why, even if this looming lawsuit against Dreamcatcher costs me as much as I would have made, I'm going to pursue it to the VERY BITTER END. Apart from the reason being that publishers should never have to piss around with properties the DON'T OWN, but also because its about time they quit screwing around with indie dev's livelihood. Fact is this. Games are NOT cheaper to make. Case in point, BCG (now UC), cost me - personally - approximately $750K in calculated costs, to develop. And thats because I run a tight ship, have very little overhead and didn't license any third party tech. Factor in Dreamcatcher's end of the deal (COGs, content advancements and whatnot), and you're looking at $1m+ (for NDA reasons, I can't give exact numbers on their end). The same game, developed over the same period of time, by a medium sized studio, would cost close to $2m easy. Ask any one who knows the industry. And the game is not even in the triple-A league as say, Doom 3, HL2 etc If a publisher spends, e.g. $250K on a game, over a one year period, they can afford to sell it at $19.99 and not lose any money. Period. Going in, you set a budget for the type of game you want to develop. When Activision Value, Trisynergy, Strategy First etc release games for $19.99 to $29.99, do you think it cost them $1m to develop? Let alone two years? No. So, when you decide you are going to spend two years on a game and its going to cost you $2m to make, you also HAVE to set a price projection in order to determine how many units - worse case scenario - you have to sell in order to recoup and turn a profit. If you figure that it is a mass market title that everyone is going to buy, you STILL don't go out and price it at $20 just because you can. You price it based on market conditions, the type of game, and its target audience. There is a damn good reason why cheap games don't sell any better than their pricey counterparts. Its because the price automatically throws into question, the quality. Why? Because, believe it or not, people equate the price of something - ANYTHING - with their quality. Nice titles are a completely different ballgame. I wrote an article about this back in 2001. The math is NOT as cut and dry as some would like to think. And the gits who wrote that fairplay petition, must be on acid because they clearly have NO clue. You're not going to spend $2m on a quality triple-A title and expect to recoup your costs and post a profit, by selling it for $20. Thats just stupid math. So, if you're not going to spend that kind of money on a game, you could easily spend $250K and sell a game for $20. Then you - the consumer - have to ask yourself, what sort of quality, gameplay, support etc, do you expect from a game that cost $20. Then there's overhead. Companies like EA have more overhead than say, 3000AD Inc or Matrix Games. So, they former has to maximize the price of the game in order to max out their profits. The price of games may drop (e.g. $49.99 reserved for top-tier games, while $39.99 for mid-range etc), but the cost of developing games isnt'. Unless you fire all the high priced and experienced US developers and hire developers from a country where the cost of one of my cars is their GNP. They'd be HAPPY to work for you. To wit. There is a big thing going on in the US right now because more and more corps are exporting jobs, leaving ABLE Americans out of work. Thats EXACTLY what some publishers are also doing and thats the #1 reason why there are so many publishers signing foreign developers who (a) cost less ( can be pushed around - and can't do a DAMN THING about it. This is NOT a slight against foreign developers - some of who are exceptionally talented (e.g. CCP, Croteam, the Max Payne devs etc) - its just the facts. So, since the cost of developing games is not getting cheaper, how on Earth is the price of games supposed to be lower? Even the $39.99 price point for games is average, because some triple-A games can easily command $49.99 from day one. Also, game prices do get lowered at some point. The key factor is the initial sell-in period. If you don't make at the very least, 75% of your money within the first 30 days, your game is a loss leader. Once the price starts going down, all you should hope for is to recoup costs and not lose money. Another example. When I signed BCM Gold with Dreamcatcher in Dec 2002, it was just a throw in. I had made all the money I need to, on its 2001 predecessor, BCM. A year earlier!! The four months of work that went into the aspects of the Gold release, could easily have seen the game sold for $19.99 and without a peep from me. It was priced at $29.99, was released at that price (in March 2003) and is still holding at that price. The publisher has - I kid you not - almost quadrupuled the costs of that four months of work. OK, so, BCM Gold, four months of work, went out at $29.99. UC, with two years and $1m plus, goes out at $19.99. Whats wrong with this picture? I'll tell you whats wrong. I didn't sit down and say hey, I'm gonna spend two years (the dev period for my mainstream releases) on this NICHE GAME so that I call sell it for $19.99 and LOSE MONEY. Up until the name and focus change were done in August of 2003, UC was still (and still is, come to think of it), a BATTLECRUISER TITLE. Given that, who on Earth is going to expect THAT game - or its ilk - to sell TWICE its projected numbers, in order to recoup its costs, let alone turn a profit? I'll tell you. The publisher - whose only investment is probably equal to what the legal action I have taken, is going to cost me. But even then, if the game goes out at that price, I can 100% guarantee you, its because I've got a large compensatory check and/or a royalty boost. No question about it. When you make it require TWICE as many sales for a developer to see cent one of their investment, you clearly threaten to put them out of business (heh, not me, obviously) and NOT PAY THEM ANYTHING. So, reducing the MSRP from $39.99 to $19.99 does NOT mean its going to sell more. Thats just pure and utter RUBBISH. The Adventure Company (a div of Dreamcatcher) can afford to sell those games at that price because its not like the adventure game genre is on fire. Plus, go take a look at the developers of those games. MOST are foreign developers. Jane Jensen (who I met with and spoke to at E3 - awesome lady!!!) signed on to do GN4 with The Adventure Company, they will probably sell her game at $19.99 but it is highly unlikely. Why should they do that, when they've got HER name on the box. HER rep? They can sell it for $29.99 and make a ton more money than at $19.99. Publishers a GREEDY BASTARDS and they NEVER EVER have the consumer's best interest in mind, which is why the suit at Dreamcatcher who released this rubbish about the UC pricing, probably won't have a job in the short term. Our pricing strategy has been set in the best interests of the title and more importantly the consumer. Universal Combat provides terrific value to the consumer at $19.99 and we are happy to be able to deliver that value. The best interests of the title? More importantly the consumer? Why doesn't SOMEONE ask them about their other indie devs? For e.g 4Drulers (Gore), Digital Reality (Hegemonia) etc? Do you see ANYTHING in the excerpt about about US the developers who OWN the IP, source code, materials EVERYTHING?!?! No. They don't give shit about us. In their press release of 2003, why weren't they thinking of being happy to give that valuewhen they were marking the game's price at $39.99? What? Did some exec get visited by the ghost of Christmas past or something? Why didn't they bring this up last December when they ILLEGALLY tried to ship a game they KNEW was not FIT for retail release? An action I - Derek Smart - put a STOP to. I did THAT in the best interest of the consumer. MY FANS. Why? Because I care. I could've shut up, taken the money (the game was $39.99 then), and released a patch. So, WHY did I not do that? Because I CARE and despite what most think of me, when it comes to business, my business ethics are unquestionable. Which is why - gasp - I am able to continue signing deals. If I hadn't signed with Dreamcatcher, I would have once again self-published BCG and made 3x more money that I'm going to make now. I ONLY signed because after the BCM exclusive with EB, most of the retailers were pissed. I wanted to smooth that over, which is one of the reasons why BCM Gold was even released, since not all retailers got to release BCM. One such retailer was GameStop. So, I needed to do the deal for that reason alone - which is why, to me, BCM Gold was a throw away title. It just so happened to - surprisingly - make money, with the majority of its revenue coming from International sales. Publisher don't care. Period. So, if they sell a game at $49.99, they will. Unless and until marketing conditions dicatates otherwise, that is NEVER going to change. Period. And if they sell a top quality game at $20, its because they paid ****all for it or don't intend on paying the developers for it. As I sit here, I know of no less than nine indie developers who have released games through some publishers and never got paid a DIME as they were supposed to. NINE developers. I apologize for using my title as an example. I do this because it is the only thing that I have factual data on and I am not in the position to speculate about other publishers and/or devs. /me steps off box And one of TSS posts in response quote: Originally posted by Derek Smart: Fact is this. Games are NOT cheaper to make. Case in point, BCG (now UC), cost me - personally - approximately $750K in calculated costs, to develop. And thats because I run a tight ship, have very little overhead and didn't license any third party tech. Factor in Dreamcatcher's end of the deal (COGs, content advancements and whatnot), and you're looking at $1m+ (for NDA reasons, I can't give exact numbers on their end). The same game, developed over the same period of time, by a medium sized studio, would cost close to $2m easy. Ask any one who knows the industry. Nothing is cheaper to make these days in most software engineering. BC is certainly an enormous effort. I have no clue as to how many lines of code you made or how many meg/gig of datum or even if the core engine has been completely re-done over the years. At 750K I presume thats a raw estimate, engineering hours etc not taking into account whats been tax deductible etc against positive revenues. A $2 Million dollar game is certainly at the high end of scale. This would be in the Knight Of The Old republic area. But, with such "AAA" titles alot of work gets sub-contracted and thus large segments of that expenditure become write-off's in taxes. With the >$1m games also the game engine need be factored and this is also the case to a lesser extent with lower budget development. That engine may well be re-used or license sold again making positive revenues against the original development costs. Originally posted by Derek Smart:... You price it based on market conditions, the type of game, and its target audience. There is a damn good reason why cheap games don't sell any better than their pricey counterparts. Its because the price automatically throws into question, the quality. Why? Because, believe it or not, people equate the price of something - ANYTHING - with their quality. This is 101% on the money at least in America. While I could argue that a $2mill "PC ONLY" game would ever make back a positive revenue I am sure some have, sure many have not. Again it depends how one factors that money. Reuse of code etc. from prior projects. Americans equate everything to numbers which is somewhat funny since most could not pass 10th grade math (just a fact). The average $20,000 car costs under 1/3rd that to manf. so at least in my case I dont concern myself about $20 vs $40 expenditures for a game. A $90K house over a 30 year mortgage will run well in excess of $200,000 so I focus on getting that DOWN. I had a 30 year mortgage and just by being smart now have it down to 16 years and have owned the house for 4. Americans equate quality to price. A PC game at $20 vs $40 quality or not is moot. We aer talking what in "games or software engineering" is rapidly becoming a vertical market. Asking why console games with a much larger market retain a higher price point and shelf life would be a better arguement. Well, not really an arguement, simple market actually. Get the most one can get as long as one can get it. For example I dont see workers in America saying, "Geez... I make enough to take a vacation and have $3000 of extra cash each year... I think I dont want it so we should all refuse it so the products/services our employers make can be cheaper for the consumers" Originally posted by Derek Smart:You're not going to spend $2m on a quality triple-A title and expect to recoup your costs and post a profit, by selling it for $20. Thats just stupid math. Again Derek, you have about 5-7 people at this site who are active posters that have industry experience. I'm not talking just games but software engineering. Of course its stupid math. Its one of the things that murders this particular industry (PC Games). People who judge the industry, judge the titles etc. often have absolutely no idea in any way shape or form how it works yet stand in judgement. Originally posted by Derek Smart:Then there's overhead......... Unless you fire all the high priced and experienced US developers and hire developers from a country where the cost of one of my cars is their GNP. They'd be HAPPY to work for you. To wit. There is a big thing going on in the US right now because more and more corps are exporting jobs, leaving ABLE Americans out of work. Thats EXACTLY what some publishers are also doing and thats the #1 reason why there are so many publishers signing foreign developers who (a) cost less ( can be pushed around - and can't do a DAMN THING about it. This is NOT a slight against foreign developers - some of who are exceptionally talented (e.g. CCP, Croteam, the Max Payne devs etc) - its just the facts. Alot of overhead results in tax deductions again but this is the case in all indsutry. As to the developers deal... sad is'nt it? Yes, companies all over America are trashing software engineers, hardware engineers and then some. They hire in sub-contract coder's from mainly Asia and take/devalue the skilled trades. Your right, the developers are extremely talented in many cases. What comes out of China now are people who are completely focused. Its not like the US where "Well I was a teacher turned author, turned game maker, turned developer". Nope. Instead its "This is what you are. This is your trade for life". They get a living wage and the rest goes "Syonara" to China. Its not just a jobs export its also the actual wage earned export. This is NATIONALISM on the part of China. We dont have it here. Not at all. Here we have "I want all that I can obtain as cheap as I can obtain it". If consumers in the USA simply balanced spending, "65% of everything I buy be US made, 35% import" our economy would be BOOMING ALWAYS. I've attempted numerous times to explain to this user base the effects just of the illegal replication/resale of current popular games. Figures in PC Games vary from 3 Billion - 6 Billion last year. These are exacting replications manufactured mainly in Asia. 3-6 BILLION is a HUGE amount of money. That sort of money infused back into PC Games would have just an ENORMOUS effect. Many email me to discuss further, most however could care less. They want as much as they can get as cheap as they can get it. This is human nature of course, nobody "at fault" for it. Originally posted by Derek Smart:Also, game prices do get lowered at some point. The key factor is the initial sell-in period. If you don't make at the very least, 75% of your money within the first 30 days, your game is a loss leader. Once the price starts going down, all you should hope for is to recoup costs and not lose money. Exactly. Did not used to be this way. Shelf life of PC Games is approcahing that of fresh produce Losses of course assuming a profitable publisher may result in write-off's in taxes against positve revenues. Still, money in the hand is better (at least for most) than a tax deduction. To boot, the hardened PC Gamer and the mass replications (pirated) has caused a very vicous circle. Retailers/Resellers are not ordering the quantities they used to. They dont order because the volume has slid they sell. Meanwhile right "in kind" the amounts of money ending up transferred for exacting replications has jumped in kind. Publsihers price drop faster in attempt to move a lions share to recoup total COG. Consumers who will only buy from known retailers be it CompUSA or EB Online etc. now EXPECT price drops, so they wait. Thus a very vicious circle is created. In that circle the only winners are the pirates who mass replicated, made tons of money for no work. The consumer "got a deal" be it from the exacting replication or rapid price drop. Ulitmately however they kill the entertainment they enjoy. There are really no "less" PC Gamers now than 5 or 10 years ago. The numbers of people are still there. If those people got motivated to take a stand against the mass illegal replications and resale they could turn the industry about. I suspect if this were to occur that shelf-life's would go back stronger and of course price points would not see the rapid price drops. So is it to a consumers "raw" advantage. No. To the industry? Yes. So we have a paradox. The result of this will end up being down the trail in online gaming so reoccurring billing models take the stage. Then consumers will be screaming murder when a game that takes 60 hours to complete costs them $5 per hour of play. ---- As to the BCM / UC stuff... Man, sorry to hear your getting the Publisher Push-About. Thats what we used to call in internally back when I was coding games oriented code. For the most part I and my brother were brought in for contract work so we were able to set some ridgid terms up front. I'd have thought with your experience with "time in" the games industry you'd might have expected it. This is a shame Derek. I sure wished we'd spoke with you before hand. We do know some indie pub's that are not the corporate model. Replication, packaging and distribution. I bought your BCM at Gamestop I believe, have not even played it, little time on hand. I'm like you, in fact your probably the only person I know of with more games than me While the folks we know do not have any form of agreement I am aware of with EB or Gamestop, BestBuy etc (mainstream). They do have agreements with places like BJ's Wholesale club, Amazon, Sams Club, Big Lots and other retailers in addition to myriads of online resellers and even a global presence of sorts. I dont know what the contract deal you have is. Do realize however that while the mainstream publishers enjoy the top retailers and the status quo apparently (if I read you correct) in indie development w/ mainstream publishers has not changed in the past 10 years (I stepped out of it early 90' (contract work)). Am I right? I mean I know you cant "slap it all down in a thread" but I get the impression via your message that this is the case? The dinosaur is still the dinosaur, the double edged "work with us get #'s of scale" or do not and "work thy perverbial tail to get volume sales"? If this is indeed the case, then you may have missed a boat. That is to say that there are indie publisher and NO not doing games distrib. that have over years of work established decent distribution. They are much more reasonable. While no you may not see a title appear in every games store you can still sell considerable amounts and get a better shake on your rev share. You also enjoy a longer product life. With some we know if your title is selling they'll still be selling it a year, two years... As long as it moves they will peddle it. Your not privvy to what we see as we are now in resale as well. We still do dev work but not games. I see LOTS of indie firms release under their own branding. Every liquidator we work with in purchasing will opt into these titles and distributions will vary. For example, language titles. I have saw upstarts that have run their own show and now enjoy distribution thats constantly on the grow. You have one title so that makes it hard for you to really get a fair shake even in independent distribution. Not like having CD's of 80 world languages which are also timeless, as useful today as two years from today. This is not however to say that many of these companies would NOT be interested in your software. They are interested in money, your interested in money, we're interested in money, resellers are interested in money. Best Buy, EB, Gamestop on & on all interested in money too but a product is a product. They dont care if its yours or someone elses. Their long term revenue model comes from high turn-over and constant new items to keep that engine going. The indie's on the other hand dont have that high a turn over but will sustain a longer revenue model and unlike mainstream they WORK to grow the distribution. Publishers are not going to "sheep their pants" when mainstream retailers opt away from stocking the PC Games model. On the present course of PC Games due to the "vicious circle" noted above its not an "if" it will happen but "when" as retailers opt more into console, dvd, shelf-life and thus a better revenue model, a stable one. They wont sheep their pants as the consoles will keep them in money irregardless of a 2% PC market. Again, dunno what your deal you've got going is. The "third party" and midstream retailer market HAS grown. It used to be a nuthin'. Its a measured thing to think about. You can sell what oodles will sell via Gamestop and whatall mainstream DC has moved the work through. You can get your royalty which I presume is around standard rates. Once the shelf life falls off done is done. I presume they retain rights for some term after. Or, you look to long term sales, get a better rev share, probably a lesser price point and your title appears at Sams Club's, Media Play, our store, CD Access, Amazon and others. Its something you might like look into. Self-distribution is a tough row to hoe. Mainstream means instant volume, instant money then product death. The indie pubs lend a long term model and a flexible one w/ decent distribution. -------------------- Rick President The Software Society http://www.rochnet.net [ 02-02-2004, 08:03 AM: Message edited by: Supreme Cmdr ]

Given the current events with Dreamcatcher and the inevitable delay of the game's retail release, I have made the decision to release the UC game demo only to existing owners of BCM or BCM Gold. We are working on a server backend which will provide a download link once you have entered your game CDKEY. More on this later. But in the meantime, it will be made available to the official Beta testers by mid week.