Column #108; By korn469

[DanQ]

This week's installment of the "The Column" comes from an author we first encountered just six weeks ago. korn469's second expose is solemnly entitled "<A HREF="http://apolyton.net/misc/column/108_death.shtml">Death of Game</A>". He asserts that both Firaxis and Activision can learn from some invaluable lessons from MicroProse as what NOT to do in terms of product support.

Speaking of "The Column", we are running severely low on articles -- in fact, we have one more in the queue to be published. <A HREF="http://apolyton.net/misc/column/submit.shtml">Follow this link</A> to submit your written masterpiece today!

Comments/questions (on the article, naturally) are welcomed!

-----------------
Dan; Apolyton CS

[War4ever]

Korn excellent article and i agree with you 100%..... its a real shame for me especially that civ2 has had no new patches for MP especially since we all seem to agree that civ 3 is still a year away maybe even more....

Plus its been about a year now since the last patch.... and for me the game is just getting better....

Its also unfortunate for SMAC that the support wasnt' there either..... SMAC is a great game and maybe if it was based on earth i would like it more than civ..... but alas it is civ in space to me and with my limited time and problems with huge world SMAC multiplay, it gets very little rotation in my tray

I wish companies realized like you stated that just because the game appears dead on the charts, it doenst mean that we are not still playing it

I would have thought the smart folks at microprose would have realized that the sequel to the best selling at the time civ1 would have just as long a lifespan as the origional..... alas i was wrong and greatly disappointed.

Owning all the expansions and having to buy MPG just for the net play pissed me off and i felt ripped off..... it should be mandatory that gaming co. include MP options with all games..... i for one will never buy a game without this capability ever again.

Again good article and i have also enjoyed many of your ideas regarding civ 3..... cheers and until we talk again..... SMAC on

[Scouse Gits]

Well done! I know very little about the gaming industry, and found the article informative. Civ 2 is the only game I have played since the days of the Sinclair Spectrum!

I am hoping that the Civ addicts on this site will have a chance to beta test Civ 3.
Am I be being realistic?
_________
SG (2)

[Scouse Gits]

Excellent article, I just wish I could feel more optimistic
The realities of politics/economics mean that game support simply is not worth the money spent on it to the games companies. In fact the reality is that getting people to stop playing a game as soon as possible after they have bought it is the way to maximise profits...
As a gamer - I wish i could think of a way to circumvent this economic truth.

------------------
____________
Scouse Git[1]

"CARTAGO DELENDA EST" - Cato the Censor

[Sieve Too]

I have to disagree that the MPS CivII patches were just an attempt to cash in. Remember that the CivII was released at a time when multiplayer and such were still fairly rare. Let's look at each upgrade:

1) CiC: added events to scenarios. This one change has made a huge difference to the life span of the CivII product.

2) FW: More unit slots, more tech slots, more events. "World of Jules Verne" and "Migard" were excellent. "Age of Reptiles" and "Mars" were just plain fun. FW simplified some aspects of scenario creation with their editors.

3) MGE: Mulitplayer capability plus more event space. Followed up failry quickly with patches to fix bugs.

4) ToT: Ok, you got me on this one.

You also note that "The completely free scenarios available for Civ2 are great" - yes they are! Too good really. MPS doesn't earn a penny from them, nor does it earn money everytime you fire up the game, or when you play it online. But yet you demand more "support" from them to make your gaming experience better. What is their incentive to do this?

Finally, you assert that the lack of multiplayer killed SMAC. Perhaps. Personally, I don't give a fig about multiplay. However, I would enthusiatically pay full price for a new version SMAC, CivII, CTP or whatever if someone told me that the AI presented a decent challenge. Of course, YMMV.

[Steve Clark]

I think there are two types of hard-core gamers (generally): those that play the latest-and-greatest games until the next one comes out, and those that replay favorites, esp. with new scenarios and levels. The former is where the game publishers make their money, with the exception of a few expansion packs. Myself and many others here are not good gaming customers because we are STILL playing Civ2. They(?) wanted us to stop playing Civ2 when all those inferior (IMHO) sequels came out and when we got tired of those, then buy all of the latest RTS crap.

After subscribing to gaming magazines for 10 years, I stopped last year. It got to the point where it seems that the focus of their ads/reviews/articles were geared toward 1) 15 yr.old boys, 2) the latest 3D action or RTS titles, and 3) hyping multiplayer. None of those appealed to me, thus they don't miss me as a customer.

The one thing that korn missed in his description is the relationship between the game publisher and the developers (usually sub-contracted). Financial pressures (esp. in matching the release of a game to the time of maximum advertising) can cause the game to be released prematurely (all of us can site numberous examples). The key is what happens after the initial release. If the game publisher has enough money budgeted, they can keep the developers under contract to do bug fixes. That is typically not a profitable thing to do, but for the sake of a long-term customer base, it may be the prudent thing to do.

Also, keep in mind that when you and I buy a game off the shelf, that does not count as a sale for the publisher. They sell to warehouses and distributors. That is where you get alot of the sales figures from, for example, the 12,000 units that BestBuy bought of game X. The final sales are determined by those intial orders (and re-orders) minus what was returned to the publisher. It is a testament to Civ2 that you still see new stocks on the shelves. Very rarely would you see games 12 months or older on the shelves, which also lends to the short-term marketing and buying cycle of a game. If BestBuy deems that game X is not a hot seller the first 4-6 weeks, they won't reorder and will remove it from all but 1 copy from the shelves to make room for more deer hunter games.

korn: Good job, hope you didn't mind further opinions.

[Sirotnikov]

korn469, nice post. very true.
personally i think civ2: ToT has killed civ2. I now have no desire to play civ2. ToT is nothing in a pretty package. it made people think bad thoughts about civ2. As if the civ2 programmers were so tired, and the genere is exploited to the full. As if nothing better can come out. very bad. shame on you MP!

Steve Clark, also a very inlightning post.