RE How to Kick the Retail Habit

[Dave Erickson]

Here's my response to Richard's Blog entry of 3-19: How to Kick the Retail Habit (wherein he equated developers going to mainstream publishing with drug addiction):

It�s not only developers who are addicted to the mainstream, it�s consumers and website operators too.

For example, I can go to Warfare HQ and find a review of Aliens vs. Predator. At Wargamer, I find a review of Ubi Soft�s latest first person shooter. In their forums, I can talk to others about my passion for Talonsoft and Close Combat (Some mainstream junkies are beyond help. The best we can do is to just make them comfortable in their last moments with their mainstream titles), or I can discuss the latest former mainstream developer to test the quasi-indie waters. When questions appear on the forums such as �What turn based wargame should I buy?� the answer comes back �Conflict Middle East.� Yes, sports fans, Conflict Middle East, circa 1991. So utterly addicted are we to the crack of the mainstream that we feel we must dig out old DOS and Windows 3.1 games, despite the multitude of great indie wargames released over the past 5 years or so. V for Victory, anyone?

No wonder indie developers are tempted by mainstream dope. What these poor souls need is an intervention, a halfway house, a world where their wares are seen as more than just obscure games with bad graphics.

What is needed is the promotion of an indie community, a website, say, devoted exclusively to indie wargames, by indie wargamers, for indie wargamers. I would like one day to be able to go to a site and find a preview of Salvo (What�s a Salvo?), an objective review of Campaign on the Danube (Say what?), and a strategy analysis of the Stolberg Corridor scenario from CC2: Danger Forward (Now you�re just making stuff up!). Then we can go to the forum and discuss the next installment of the Horse & Musket 2 series or how the upcoming Defend the Alamo 2 might differ from the original. (Hint: I bet it has better graphics.)

Seriously, I don�t think there�s a developer in the world who wants to be associated with junk basket shovelware. Credibility is hard enough to come by as it is. Instead, why not get out there and promote the coming together of a real indie community of gamers, developers, and writers? Then we�ll really have something of value.

[Joe 98]

Dave Erickson said:
Here's my response to Richard's Blog entry of 3-19:

Your post begins wuith an attack of Wargamer.

Then it ends with a question as to why people don't discuss certain poor wargames. The question answers itself.

If you want to discuss independant developers, how about discussing SSG or Gary Grisby?

Both have made fantastic wargames over the last 3 years. Neither have been mentioned at Shrapnel because both have been published by the opposition.

Shrapnel might one day actually have a good wargame but I'll wait for the review at Wargamer before I hand over my money.

Wargamer has never attacked Shrapnel - ever.

[Tim Brooks]

Joe98:

Your post begins wuith an attack of Wargamer.

Attack. I think he stated facts about the wargamer. How is that an attack?

If you want to discuss independant developers, how about discussing SSG or Gary Grisby?

I think that would be more appropriately discussed at the Matrix forums or an independent site like the wargamer forums. We don't mind our forum members letting others know of a good game. However, getting into big discussion of them on Shrapnel's forums is inappropriate, since we don't publish their products.

Shrapnel might one day actually have a good wargame?

Opinions vary, but I wouldn't expect any different from you, as you have showed yourself here, as a true Matrix / Wargamer fan. In fact I think it says alot that we let you continue to post when everything you say about Shrapnel, our games, and our developers is negative. Have you thought of applying for work with Matrix?

Wargamer has never attacked Shrapnel - ever.

And we haven't attacked the Wargamer. Why are you so threatened by us?

[Dave Erickson]

Joe 98 said:

Shrapnel might one day actually have a good wargame but I'll wait for the review at Wargamer before I hand over my money.

I don't want to confuse the issue with facts, but both Combat Command 2: Danger Forward and Dragoon: The Prussian War Machine won awards from Wargamer.

[Gandalf Parker]

Dave Erickson said:
When questions appear on the forums such as �What turn based wargame should I buy?� the answer comes back �Conflict Middle East.� Yes, sports fans, Conflict Middle East, circa 1991. So utterly addicted are we to the crack of the mainstream that we feel we must dig out old DOS and Windows 3.1 games, despite the multitude of great indie wargames released over the past 5 years or so. V for Victory, anyone?

Im not sure thats a mainstream addiction. But it does point out that now is a good time to push forth the indie developers. In the gaming newsgroups (strategic, rpg, war-historical) there has been a slump which everyone is noticing. Nothing new to kick up conversation about. When someone asks for suggestions on their next game, or on whats coming up, all that gets responded are games that are 3 or 4 years old and the upcoming attractions all seem to be long awaited sequels of those same older games.

But its not just old shelfware stuff. Games from both Matrix and Shrapnel get recommended often. In that area at least it seems a beneficial situation since we arent seeing the graphic/sound comparisons to new shelfware (very irritating) but rather a recognition that here are the tried and true fallbacks we bring up whenever there is a slump in the new-games market.

It does strike me however that now is a good time to put forth the indie developers for more recognition.

[Instar]

Frankly, I don't see "mainstream" as an addiction. I buy most games at a store, so what? Independent developers are great too, so I'll buy their stuff too.
Maybe I'm missing the point, but I'm left with the feeling of "who cares?".

[Joe 98]

Dave Erickson said:
How to Kick the Retail Habit....

All games should be available via download.

I will not buy via mail order and a game arrives on a shop shelf here some 3 months after release.

[Instar]

Joe 98 said:

All games should be available via download.

I will not buy via mail order and a game arrives on a shop shelf here some 3 months after release.

What are you talking about? Delivery takes a week, tops, depending on where you are.

[Joe 98]

I don't trust mail order so delivery time is irrelevant.

And I am in Sydney.
-

[Leslie]

I am with Joe in that I think digital download has promise.

But, I don't have ANY problem with the speed of the common no frills mail service. I mail things private mail all the time. It always gets to my friends rather fast.

I love several products from Matrix Games. I have personal issues with some of their forum community. It balances out. I just buy their games now. I talk about their games somewhere else is all.

I think Hubert Cater is an awesome designer. His Strategic Command was a very impressively priced, incredibly easy to play, superb example of how you can make a great game solo.
I like Battlefront products. But I found grief with their forum community, and so I decided to talk about their games somewhere else.

I suppose that example could occur anywhere with anyone.

I feel "uncomfortable" with Wargamer having so many in your face ad spot micro forums.
I suppose those ad spot micro forums pay the bills.
Wargamer almost went down the toilet for inability to pay the bills.
It's like the ads in a magazine. You can't really get around them.
The alternative is a magazine that looks like the ASL Annuals or ASL Journals. No advertising, and a real kick in the chops price tag.

Retail shelf space will always only work with products that are mass appeal. If you are not shovelling the product out the door in Hasbro type numbers, chances are a retail shelf spot means you had to give your product away for peanuts.

I don't think PC games are dying (where retail shelf mode is concerned), I think PC games are evolving (where retail shelf mode is concerned).
It's not like the PC game or the console game (as we know them today) have been around forever.

The internet has not yet been fully realised yet either I think.
We have too many modes, all trying to be everyone else.
I can play a game on a pda, a hand held console, a console, a PC, a cell phone, about the only thing left is my frig. And even that can order my groceries.

I can watch tv on my computer, play DVD on my dvd player, or my game console, or in my car (well the kids can ).
I understand dvd players are now expanding formats to allow DivX. That means you might not even eventually require dvds.

Our tech is just about ready to unify I think.

I am waiting for when it all starts merging.
Given enough time, eventually everything will be mainstream, and there won't be any need to use the term mainstream.