Wade_Smith Wade_Smith

Would you purchase a $20 multiplayer-only expansion pack for Galciv II?

▼

Would you purchase a $20 multiplayer-only expansion pack for Galciv II?

from GalCiv2 Forums
At first I thought "No" unless it included other treats; but then thats redundant because it would then be a traditional expansion. Well, now I voted yes. I might want to try this game in multi-player but it's not a priority. $20 bucks...mmm...I have a job.Sure.So,Stardock, what are your plans now that you're getting the results of this pole?

-Wade
25,054 views 38 replies
Reply #26 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Well let now look at it from a personal point of view but from a business point of view.

First lets look at the voting poll, this is a good indicator whether it is worth the time to consider development or not.

The poll asks quite specifically whether we as viewers of the site, not necessarily as good owners but as visitors, if we would pay $20 (£15) for an expansion pack that provided multiplayer features.

The polls results are as follows (at this point in time): Voters 1528 - 1000+ for NO, 400-500 for YES.
This is of course only a rough guess of percentages based on the length of the graphs.

I'd go for a 60-70% No / 40-30% Yes split.

Now though the poll clearly shows a good double amount of people think an expansion is a bad idea that still leaves a massive 30%+ that feel that it is worth doing.

Now lets look at the realistic situation of common game development and retail. Upon developing a game you sell X amounts of the game, if it is successful, you cover your R&D costs and make a profit. If it is REALLY good you cover part of the R&D for an expansion or a sequel. In terms of GC2, it has sold out faster than it could be published which indicates it must of achieved its goals in terms of profits and then some.

But the question now is does the extra profits and the desire for additional feature justify the cost of R&D an expansion or a entirely new sequel. Now it is safe to assume that NO expansion can ever out sell the original good simply because you need the original to play the expansion, however, it is also safe to assume that expansion also sell at a rate % of the originals retail. i.e. if you sold 40,000 copies of the original you'd sell maximum barring divine help, about 25% as an expansion. So really you can hope for the equalivent retail of an additional 10,000 units of the game in effect. There is also the secondary sales to be considered, which are people that like the principles behind the expansion but then buy the original to play it.

This in turn can help milk the original games sales a little more.

So what is it that I'm trying to get at, the problem here is that the purposed expansion module is not a simple add a few units and a new campaign mode to the game type of expansion but a big hefty new not even been looked at yet MP system that adds sod all to the original game in terms of content but however adds another layer of inaction to the game.

The trouble begins when you look at the R&D costs in comparison to expected sales for the expansion, now if you take the poll for a rough indication of expected sales for the MP expansion pack, then you would be getting at least 30% of your original game sales back.

But then you have to consider the BS factor, at least 50% of all the poll is complete BS and not worth a damn, which means if you take the 1500 and make that 100% and say half of them are talking out their *** then the true figure is 50% now assume that half of all the people that brought the game care about it, just for the sakes of arguments. The other 50% are the BS crowd, then that means that the total % of people interested in the MP expansion isn't really 30-40% but infact half that at 15-20%. Now this is still a good % considering the number of expansions sold versus original games. But it is far to fewer number to really justify the R&D budget for the work, USELESS, you factor into this the number of originals GC2 sold to date. If the number of GC2 is around 100,000 copies, then 15% would be about 15,000 copies of the expansion, and at $20 a time minus obvious costs, you could still be looking a $100,000 return. Now thats really how SD need to look at it. Now we know Frogboy i.e. CEO/Pres of SD is very anti-mp on the basis of experience and profitability and for that I can't fault him, since writing this I have come to the same conclusions.

However, I am a very vocal adavocate of mp being a feature of this game, but now I am actually thinking about it not in terms of this game or an expansion but in terms of a sequel. GC2 and SD have made a great impact in the world of TBS's but I think now instead of making working on expansions and milking the original sales with expansions and wasting the profits they have gained, they should only patch the game and then get immediately cracking on with GC3 using what they have learned from GC2.

To that ends though I want MP very badly, for the benefit of all I really think SD should put it in the CORE design of the sequel and immediately capitalise upon their current success and get a move on with a brand new sequel. That way they really utilize their success from the current sales and guarantee even greater success in the future.

Sorry for the waffle but I really wanted to let people know what I thought on this poll.

To recap; GC2 good, but not fantastic, expansions bad idea so is mp in current gc2 platform, instead patch it and work on gc3 with mp as part of core design.

-J

Let the ripping beginning.
Reply #27 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I basically don’t get a multiplayer feel for this title. As much as I try and really want to get that vibe it I simply can't. It is reminiscent of Civilization to me. When it went MP that ubiquitous special feeling I had towards for years vaporized. I think the single best selling point about this game is the superior SP experience. Furthermore it is in a class by itself now so to alter it may be playing with fire.

If going MP is a desired venture I suggest doing a variant but I simply cant see it holding well with the current "look & feel".
CursorFX - Customize your Windows cursor
Reply #28 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I for one am a single player junkie. The only multiplayer games I have played include Planetside and SWG. I like a persistant gameworld and could never see myself playing a game like GC2 as I like to take my time and play the game. Nor do I have the time to spend playing online, just give me a great SP game which you have and throw the MP out.


A persistant realtime, GC2 style universe with players battling constantly in a galactic struggle for dominance!!! OMG that sounds like a dream come true!

Anyone played Mankind by any chance?

Now imagine Mankind type game with GC2 features but in realtime and with 10 races across a galaxy and dear lord that would be a game I'd pay to play.

-J
Reply #29 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
One of the best parts of CivIV is fighting it out online with a few buddies. I would def. pay 20 bucks for a MP expansion.
Reply #30 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
General Mobius, what world do you live in?

The one I live in has things called copyrights and intellectual property. The one that the people at Stardock live in does too. Stardock would be sued right out of existence if they put in anything from Star Wars, Star Trek, Stargate, Battlestar Galactica, or any other intellectual property. Only the player community can make anything that copies, imitates or even resembles too closely any copyrighted material, and nobody can charge for it. Even posting anything made by a player on the Stardock download site is treading on the fine edge of legal risk.
Reply #32 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
No,..donlt think I would.Rather they make more the actual game,single player than waste resouces on that.Not that I don't like multiplayer games,..but well,..their just far too common these days and alot of games donlt even bother working on single player mode much at all.Oh and turning this game into an RTS is a big no,..no.Maybe a hybrid I would would accept,..kinda like the Total War games,..but still I'd rather even the battles were they were to be fleshed out to be tactical turn based really.The fact of the matter is that Turn based games are awsome and a highly unsupported genre of games,..single player games are also becoming rarer,..and making this game into just another game like everybodies elses is by the poorest choice the Stardock could make,I think most real gamers have recognised that is one the biggest problems with games to day,...no variety,...everything is like everything you're already playing because everything is being watered down to not appeal to gamers anymore,..and instead to the mainstream.True being a mainstream game makes a dev have more sales,..because dumbing something down makes it more apealing to more people,but it does so at the cost of basically gutting the game from what it may have been originally intended to be.
Reply #33 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I for one tried a TBS @ a LAN party within 5 turns people were bored so we jumped back to RTS/FPS

The TBS game btw was diciples 2.
Reply #34 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

nope, just not into MP games
Reply #35 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I've played and enjoy multi-player games, but I don't think GalCiv2 would be one I'd enjoy. For multiplayer I like quick pick-up games like FPS or card games.
Reply #36 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
To recap; GC2 good, but not fantastic, expansions bad idea so is mp in current gc2 platform, instead patch it and work on gc3 with mp as part of core design.


I now agree with this. Go Stardock onto Galactic Civilizations 3 !

-Wade
Reply #37 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Yep, you bet I would pay. My wife and I have played Alpha Centauri on a LAN for years, so I know we would enjoy this too.
Reply #38 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
YES!