Was there undue pressure to realease the game while not ready?

[unmerged(15243)]

...
But if the sales are down then either

- the game sucked
- the pirates took away too much revenue
- the "wait until patch 5 brigade" were in the majority
- no one could find it

I suspect its a combination of 2 & 3

At least in the US Derek... it was definitely almost 100% number 4.

As I stated before... the stores where most people buy software do not carry Victoria, not even through their wider online selections, and especially not in their brick and mortar stores. In the US these are where most people go to get their (non-console) games and other computer software, especially impulse buys.

There are only two little hole-in-the-wall national store chains in the whole US that are carrying Victoria, and both keep no more than 1, if any, copies on the shelf.

This is no fault of Paradox, but a combination of flaws with distribution companies and the retailers.

This limits sales of Victoria to people who are specifically looking for the title and willing to go through a lot of time and effort to locate it. I had to call and go to several locations before finding it, and I live in a VERY major city.

I'm sure many people were interested in buying it, and unable to find it...
And I'm sure many others would have found it intriguing enough to buy it if they happened upon the box on a shelf while seeing what strategy titles a store had. Yes... it is available a lot of places online... but again, that restricts its sales to those looking specifically for it, as people generally don't impulse buy online. Not every company can pull off Battlefront.com's online only distribution method.

All in all it's lack of distribution was a bit surprising to me... since Strategy First which has so far distributed most/all US and Canadian versions of Paradox games has gotten EU and HoI at least to major retailers' shelves. For some reason, deliberate or not, StrategyFirst really limited the number of sales Victoria got/will get in North America by not making it readily available.

So while piracy and patch waiting might have contributed a little to poor sales on this continent, they sure weren't the deciding factors. The primary reason is that you can't sell a game that can't be found... To reach the masses you have to go where the masses are (physical, not philosophical, location).

-Andy

 

[Dinsdale]

But if the sales are down then either

- the game sucked
- the pirates took away too much revenue
- the "wait until patch 5 brigade" were in the majority
- no one could find it

I suspect its a combination of 2 & 3

Of course you would, that absolves any blame for sales from those responsible. Did you have to buy the game? Do you know how much of a struggle it was to actually find? Have you seen more than 1 copy in any store you've wandered in over the last few weeks?

I'd wager that poor reviews and great difficulty in finding the game are the two most significant problems, though I'd add a hangover from HOI as well. There's quite a bit of hostility towards Paradox over the state that game shipped in.

As for the "wait until patch x brigade," well I have some sympathy for them. Game balance should always be secondary to bug fixes in the early period of game release, that way you don't leave Paradox open to the charge of "it's half finished" or "I'll wait until next year to buy." Instead, the game as it is now (1.02) has as many, if not more bugs than the original release version; that's something which someone needs to take responsibility for.

Italy and Germany not forming are secondary issues when there are new posts asking "why am I attacked every week by Russia etc" and IMHO Paradox needs to ensure a couple of things are taken care of to sell more games and to capture a large portion of this niche market which others appear to be able to do:

1) Get the game in stores when it's released
2) Find the key to decent reviews (UI and manual)
3) Patch the bugs quickly

and not worry about balancing a game until those have been achieved.

 

[Theodotus1]

I rest my case - what is Pike's Peak? For the love of god - can't you see that its not world shattering outside of USA.

It's not a game breaking omission

The American-Mexican treaty was a judgement call in the end and it was decided not to go with it.

Criticise the interface, the design concept but please don't damn the game becuase it missed out a gold strike in America

This demonstrates a fundamental lack of business awareness. If your product is released first in America, and your future sales are affected by the response in America, then you'd best care a whole lot about what people think in America.

It's not like the game was released all over Europe first, and then came to America.

(Besides, the gold strike is only an example of something that about 60 seconds of internet research will reveal. What's damning is the lack of understanding of fundamental business principles. But, frankly, significant historical omissions are worse than interface problems in a game like Victoria, because games like Victoria are sold on content, not interface. If it were some resource other than precious metals I would agree it was trivial. There are immense numbers of resource inaccuracies in the game, and most are indeed not game breaking. But a gold strike can affect balance.)

The real point is that Paradox had best invest in some in-depth market research before changing course with its business. Changing course without such research is like trying to drive a car blindfolded. And it doesn't sound like anything other than emotion is at the wheel right now.

Beyond that, I have no intention of damning the product. Victoria is magnificant, despite some omissons.

 

[Judge]

I would hazard a guess that what Johan means by "easier to play" means less detail, more gameplay. To offer my own (unofficial, non-Paradox sanctioned ) example the POP system in Vicky could be abstracted by % for each class / culture. The player would have no control over the allocation of these wokers to their factories but would recognise that more craftsmen/clerks and more national culture workers would mean more income. More profit would automatically increase the literacy and number of middle class / artisans in the province / state / nation. So the economy is just the EU2 approach of moving 4-5 sliders about. But you've got the added bonus of the government policies and elections etc. No POP management.

Would that break Vicky - I don't think so. Would it be less complex - yes. Would some people bitch about it - yep. But its more accessible. And I'd still buy it.

Exactly my thoughts when I thought about all the Vic bashing that’s going on and what you could have done differently. The POP part could actually have been left out. Too late now but in the future that is an appealing thought. POP could be handle as any other input (money, raw material)

 

[unmerged(5098)]

I don't have time to rewad through this whole thread, but I think Victoria: EuTS, while it does have issues that badly need to be adressed, is a finished and excellent game.

 

[Theodotus1]

Exactly my thoughts when I thought about all the Vic bashing that’s going on why. The POP part could actually have been left out. Too late now but in the future that is an appealing thought. POP could be handle as any other input (money, raw material)

War -- Age of Imperialism has less detail and more gameplay, and its sales went cardboard, to borrow a recording industry term.

 

[unmerged(16875)]

This demonstrates a fundamental lack of business awareness. If your product is released first in America, and your future sales are affected by the response in America, then you'd best care a whole lot about what people think in America.

It's not like the game was released all over Europe first, and then came to America.

(Besides, the gold strike is only an example of something that about 60 seconds of internet research will reveal. What's damning is the lack of understanding of fundamental business principles.)

The real point is that Paradox had best invest in some in-depth market research before changing course with its business. Changing course without such research is like trying to drive a car blindfolded. And it doesn't sound like anything other than emotion is at the wheel right now.

Beyond that, I have no intention of damning the product. Victoria is magnificant, despite some omissons.

Counterpoint: I'm American and don't give a rat's ... about the Colorado gold rush.

 

[unmerged(15243)]

Counterpoint: I'm American and don't give a rat's ... about the Colorado gold rush.

concur

 

[Theodotus1]

Counterpoint: I'm American and don't give a rat's ... about the Colorado gold rush.

And if the core market of the product wasn't composed of people who would notice the omission it wouldn't matter. But that's not the case with Victoria.

Additionally, if you play USA in the game, I'd think you'd care about missing gold strikes. Because there are more than just Colorado that are missing.

The point is not so much that these errors exist, but that apparently no one thought they would be a problem for anyone.

(And as I've said before, the gold rushes are just an example. It's things like the lack of Guadalupe Hidalgo that I perceive to be a fundamental aliention factor for the game's initial audience.)

 

[TheDarkside]

Counterpoint: I'm American and don't give a rat's ... about the Colorado gold rush.

Me neither, but I don't play the game to learn more about a country's history, I play the game to start in a simulated moment of time with some random country, and then develop it into a world power in a campaign so unhistorical it would look like I'm playing a 'Civilization' title

 

[unmerged(16875)]

And if the core market of the product wasn't composed of people who would notice the omission it wouldn't matter. But that's not the case with Victoria.

Additionally, if you play USA in the game, I'd think you'd care about missing gold strikes. Because there are more than just Colorado that are missing.

You're outnumbered 3:1 so far.

I would trade away a thousand missed gold rushes in order to keep a game where I can tweak factory inputs.

EDIT to update the vote count.

 

[Theodotus1]

You're outnumbered 3:1 so far.

I would trade away a thousand missed gold rushes in order to keep a game where I can tweak factory inputs.

EDIT to update the vote count.

Lies, damn lies, and statistics. : )

My question then is, why have any gold strikes in the game at all? Why do something, if only to be incomplete about it? This is the problem, not individual omissons.

 

[TheDarkside]

And if the core market of the product wasn't composed of people who would notice the omission it wouldn't matter. But that's not the case with Victoria.

With all due respect, that is a suppostion which cannot be proven. Alternatively, I'd wager this product is composed of more people who do not care for this omission. That is my suppostion.

 

[Theodotus1]

With all due respect, that is a suppostion which cannot be proven. Alternatively, I'd wager this product is composed of more people who do not care for this omission. That is my suppostion.

OK, I'll withdraw the gold rush example. How many people feel that leaving out Guadalupe Hidalgo was not a problem? How many Americans feel that leaving out Guadalupe Hidalgo was a problem?

 

[Marcelo]

I too hope Johan and Paradox will think about it and balance Victoria's disappointment with earlier successes. I have all of their games (except Victoria, that I will still buy as soon as a friend travels abroad - my trip to London on 3/1 was cancelled) and always relied that patches will come to fix balance issues. A complex and good game isn't easy to make.

For example, I still visit EU2 and HOI forums from time to time to download things, and by the way there are very few games that I play a 2nd time, let alone a 20th time. This has to have some value for god's sake!!

So cheer up!

 

[unmerged(16875)]

OK, I'll withdraw the gold rush example. How many people feel that leaving out Guadalupe Hidalgo was not a problem? How many Americans feel that leaving out Guadalupe Hidalgo was a problem?

Errr...so, how about that weather?

Hidalgo would have been nice. But I can make that happen by whupping Mexico so bad it becomes a satellite...pretty much like the US did in real life. So that's not a huge deal.

The bigger problem is that we're never again going to see a game that concerns itself with the level of detail in EU2 and Vic. Paradox's next release will be Civ 4 on an EU2 engine. And THAT, my friends, is worth mourning.

 

[TheDarkside]

OK, I'll withdraw the gold rush example. How many people feel that leaving out Guadalupe Hidalgo was not a problem? How many Americans feel that leaving out Guadalupe Hidalgo was a problem?

Oh you're gonna hate me

It really dosen't bother me at all, and yes, I'm an American- born & raised.

One reason events (or omissions of events) do not bother me is they are fairly easy to include yourself, or have a modder include. It's certain game mechanics like POP merging that bother me, because there's nothing I can do about it.

 

[TheDarkside]

The bigger problem is that we're never again going to see a game that concerns itself with the level of detail in EU2 and Vic. Paradox's next release will be Civ 4 on an EU2 engine. And THAT, my friends, is worth mourning.

Let's not be too hasty now, little hobbit. I too immediately considered that horrible scenario when I read Johan's post, but Derek has a nice, optimistic interpretation of that statement, in that certain micromanagement features such as POPs will be abstracted, which I guess can deal with (although I do enjoy that elvel of detail). Just don't take away my Steel factories, coal mines, railroads etc...

 

[Theodotus1]

Oh you're gonna hate me

It really dosen't bother me at all, and yes, I'm an American- born & raised.

One reason events (or omissions of events) do not bother me is they are fairly easy to include yourself, or have a modder include. It's certain game mechanics like POP merging that bother me, because there's nothing I can do about it.

The moddability of the game is one of it's most magnificant aspects. As is the whole POP system, which can be used to simulate public opinion in outstanding ways.

 

[Theodotus1]

As an attorney I can tell when I'm beaten by the audience, so I'll go back among my own kind in VIP. : )

I would say that my fellow American debaters here have helped demonstrate the preferred level of complexity for Americans.

One final thought, hopefully more positive, that I previously overlooked:

My considered opinion as a professional advisor of businesses is that Paradox should consider changing publishers and distributors before changing anything else. They are apparently not at all well-served by the ones they have now. They need to find entities that share their vision, or they will not ever succeed because whatever they publish will not get market push.

Paradox produces products that no one else comes close to, and has a level of support that no one even approaches. They do almost everything right, as far as I can tell by looking in from outside. If there's a crises of confidence now, it should be used as a spur for reflective action, not as a reason to feel there's been failure. I believe the worst mistake Paradox could make would be to change their focus from what it is. Because I do beleive there is a far larger market for their product, especially outside America, that is obviously not being tapped at all. Even if they change their course, nothing will succeed unless problems with publishing, marketing and distribution are eliminated first. Only then should Paradox start to reconsider other parts of its business plan.

You can make the best product in the world, and if it's not marketed correctly you'll still go broke.