Poland as a new civ in Conquests

[The Mad Monk]

[The Mad Monk]

Why should they even have a Civ4?

They've already said there are major changes in this "expansion", which will certainly be full price; all they have to do is put out another expansion every year or so, Evercrack style, and let the game evolve that way.

Civ 4 need not appear, ever.

[Heresson]

Civ3 needn't have appeared.

[sabrewolf]

Originally posted by The Mad Monk
Why should they even have a Civ4?

They've already said there are major changes in this "expansion", which will certainly be full price; all they have to do is put out another expansion every year or so, Evercrack style, and let the game evolve that way.

Civ 4 need not appear, ever.

well, gameplay may not always get better, but graphics, sounds and ideas can. e.g. the culture borders is imho the best idea since the original idea of civilization.

but even with a yearly expansion, sooner or later you need a new version.

as long as they don't fück up the game by changing a wonderful idea and giving it tons of 3D-graphics. prince of persia 1 was great for it's time. prince of persia 3D sücked because the visuals where too much...

keep it simple, but make it nice...

[Jeff_ATARI]

Originally posted by The Mad Monk
...They've already said there are major changes in this "expansion", which will certainly be full price...

For the record, we've already announced that the suggested retail price of Civilization III: Conquests will be $29.99 (USD).

Best,
Jeff Foley
Atari

[sabrewolf]

jeff,
if c3c keeps it's promises and has some more surprises, you can charge 49.99

the game shops here anyway add on their 50%

[The Emperor Fabulous]

there's no way they'd get away with a 50 dollar expansion pack...

[The Mad Monk]

For me, $29.99 is full price.

[Rhothaerill]

Originally posted by The Mad Monk
For me, $29.99 is full price.

And that's one of the reasons it isn't $50. Many people could afford that and would pay it (like me if it were that much), but many others couldn't. By pricing it for the ones who can't they'll sell more in the long run.

[vmxa1]

I think you used the wrong term. It is not can afford or can not afford as much as it willing to pay that amount.
Some could afford to pay $100, but they won't do it.
It seems he market place as choosen $29.99 as the break point, unless you are Blizzard.

[Rhothaerill]

Originally posted by vmxa1
I think you used the wrong term. It is not can afford or can not afford as much as it willing to pay that amount.
Some could afford to pay $100, but they won't do it.
It seems he market place as choosen $29.99 as the break point, unless you are Blizzard.

Hmm, you're probably right about it not being the right choice of wording. I would be willing to pay $50, but it's not worth $100. It would be bad marketing to set it that high anyway though.

EDIT: Sorry for the threadjack.

[The Mad Monk]

What threadjack?

[Rhothaerill]

Originally posted by The Mad Monk
What threadjack?

The original thread was about Poland as a civ and it turned into pricing for Conquests.

[The Mad Monk]

For all of seven posts, then it turned to Polynesia, then back to Poland, Ukraine, Poland, Polynesia, Civ 4, etc.

[Hagbart]

I also think that Poland is an obvious choice for the next XP... but please don't put Prague as a polish city, I think that could make some problems.