Man Battlestations Forum
General => General Discussion => Topic started by: Ruckdog on February 06, 2017, 10:22:35 pm
-
This month, our question revolves around the question of new releases. How often does a company need to release something new for a game? How long can a company go between releases before the player base starts to lose interest and move on? For the purposes of this poll, a new release could be any kind of new content, such as new models, a new supplement, new editions, and the like. Thanks for voting!
-
Depends somewhat on the game. If there's a dozen-plus factions, you need something for each faction or direct allies every year. For a system overall, anything less than Quarterly, and you're leaving money on the table, and player interest in the dust.
Even just a resculpt will do.
How long now since the last significant thing for Firestorm or Planetfall?
-
Agreed with Dale about tending to each faction at least once a year--whether that's new models, updated stats, etc. For an entire game system that contains multiple factions (DW and Firestorm Armada, for example), I think something needs to come out at least once per quarter--which, with those two games, one release per faction per year would satisfy that requirement if they didn't drop it all at once.
I don't have many complaints about Spartan Games, but one thing I think they could do to help themselves is reduce the number of simultaneous new releases. We've discussed ad nauseum their release schedule and how they tend to hop from system to system; I wouldn't mind seeing a steady trickle all year of 1-2 releases per month, instead of them dropping a whole bunch of new models at once and then not touching that game for 10-12 months.
On the other hand, they may just be trying to be fair to all the players: i.e., new battleships are developed for the Core 7 factions, and they release all at once (or very nearly all at once) so that all the core faction players can run new battleships at roughly the same time. Otherwise, you might get the FSA battleship in January and the Russian battleship in July, with one per month in between. Great if you're the FSA player, but half a year goes by if you're the Russian player before you get your new ship!
-
They want to drop all faction new models at the same time for why you say. But what they could do but don't is drop just the BBs one month, the Cruisers the next month, the Bomber in the 3rd. Unless somehow those are all in a single Box set without that option.
By my own internal timer, Spartan has under 140 days right now to show some serious Firestorm and Planetfall love and confidence.
Oh, and as of last night, no one's responding to my multiple Vanguard emails over past 3 weeks requesting support for the Genghis Events. (Even with Neil cc'd in this week). I'll trying hitting up Josh Linde (now Spartan-Linde) on the forums tonight - he seems to be handling things if needed.
-
I agree with Greg and Dale. A multi faction system needs at least one release or update for all factions once a year. However to keep things fresh they should really be releasing something every quarter.
For a smaller game with only two factions or a smaller company they could get away with releases every 6 months, but again, they need to have at least something once a year for everybody.
-
Just out of curiosity, for a game like FSA do you think that all the factions need something new over the course of a year? Or is it OK for just the core factions to get updates? DW is the same way, though not quite as bad!
They want to drop all faction new models at the same time for why you say. But what they could do but don't is drop just the BBs one month, the Cruisers the next month, the Bomber in the 3rd. Unless somehow those are all in a single Box set without that option.
I think this is more the result of Spartan trying to simplify logistics more than anything. I think a good middle ground option would be what Greg mentioned, to stagger faction releases; do KoB and PE one month, FSA and EotBS the next, etc. As long as all the stuff in a new wave are out within 3 months are so, I think it would be fine. It would still be better than, say, 40k, where factions that aren't some flavor of Space Marine can go multiple years without new releases!
-
I'm of the opinion that with a system of "core" factions and "minor" factions it is important to update everything. For instance with Dystopian Wars I'm now at a point where I will never own all the models for the French because there is just too much. Half of it would never see the table. If they only updated the core factions in a given year i would not purchase anything for an entire year, thus they are leaving money on the table. When you have as many factions as Spartan Games for both their main systems you can't survive by just updating the core factions. There are too many people that only use one or more of the minor factions. Having core and minor factions is a hindrance in this way.
If a system has 4, 6, or even 10 major factions only then they will be easily able to update everything in a year with models, rules, books, or something. Everything has the same value or importance in this way.
-
I agree with quarterly but where a smallish company such as Spartan with very limited staff (as with I suspect many of our borderline cottage industries are) run product multiple lines, it seems as if their ability to focus broadly is limited. Dystopian Wars seems to be a sharp focus at the moment and I suspect Firestorm is ripe for attention as well but I would guess there will be a cost to Planetfall and likely Legions will remain a semi-orphan.
I suspect so much of Halo is third party that they should be fairly consistent.
-
I'm of the opinion that with a system of "core" factions and "minor" factions it is important to update everything. For instance with Dystopian Wars I'm now at a point where I will never own all the models for the French because there is just too much. Half of it would never see the table. If they only updated the core factions in a given year i would not purchase anything for an entire year, thus they are leaving money on the table. When you have as many factions as Spartan Games for both their main systems you can't survive by just updating the core factions. There are too many people that only use one or more of the minor factions. Having core and minor factions is a hindrance in this way.
If a system has 4, 6, or even 10 major factions only then they will be easily able to update everything in a year with models, rules, books, or something. Everything has the same value or importance in this way.
That's a good point, though I'm still not sure that every single faction needs new stuff each year. I'd prefer to see each major faction get some kind of new release at least each year, plus a subset of the minor factions getting updates. Part of this is that I like the concept of having minor factions that are competitive as a "pure" build at smaller point levels, but which don't have the tools to perform as a pure faction in larger games. That just feels "right" to me thematically, though I recognize others feel differently. For example, I seepeople (probably Aussies ;D) expressing a desire to see the DW Australians expanded to the point that that have a "full" fleet, including unique carriers, dreadnoughts, air units, etc.
-
The "small company" argument is often used as the excuse for why systems get neglected for nigh on whole years at a time.
Problem there, from a business perspective (not the Entitled gamer syndrome) is you are leaving money on the table. Its clear from this discussion and others that we'd all by buying more, if there was more shiny to buy.
But the product is not being made. If they continue to think small, they'll stay small.
-
I've never seen the point in having new models released all the time, it means you never get a chance to settle into your fleet/army. Fluff and campaign material are a different thing though, and I'd be happy if things like that came out monthly. My perspective is probably skewed by a lack of time and money though.
-
Charbe, that's a good point. Monthly releases also make the Unpainted Pile larger and larger.
Dale, we should trademark the "Entitled Gamer Syndrome".
-
I actually know a few smallish game companies that deliberately want to stay small. They are essentially hobbyists for whom the business expresses a passion and is not a sole source of income. For them, the attention a line gets is strictly a function of their (and possibly some like minded friends) spare time and the expected return is more about covering costs than growing the business.
I see others such as Hawk (and to a lesser extent Spartan) where there is a true profit and growth motive but as with a great deal of entrepreneurs, the desire for growth clashes with the desire for margin and control. New releases require constant reinvestment and that can quickly become a cash flow challenge that may limit just how much new and shiny you can afford to pay for up front. Even more common is the almost compulsive need for control where a centralized decision maker has a terrible time trusting staff with their "baby". This is certainly apocryphal but Hawk allegedly runs very tightly through the Founder still and with Spartan, while Neil has staffed up to some extent, an awful lot still runs through him. Centralized decision making across multiple products, factions and story lines will slow releases.
Outside of a few big players, this is mostly a hobby supported by what can only be described as cottage industries where the personality quirks of the creators can significantly impact how things happen and often that is driven by factors way beyond basic business logic. I tend to stock up on ranges/products I like in excess of immediate need because I've seen so many lines/ranges etc. vanish in a puff of personal issues on the part of the entrepreneur or simply poor business choices.
Note: I consider Mongoose (the land of 1,000 abandoned product lines) an extreme example of here today, we're not doing that tomorrow. (as in release, release, coming soon, oh we quit).
-
I've seen so many lines/ranges etc. vanish in a puff of personal issues on the part of the entrepreneur or simply poor business choices.
While they technically still exist, this is a prime description of Crocodile Games. A tragedy I constantly mourn.
Note: I consider Mongoose (the land of 1,000 abandoned product lines) an extreme example of here today, we're not doing that tomorrow. (as in release, release, coming soon, oh we quit).
The other tragedy case. May they burn forever in the Special Hell for screwing up not just one cool idea, but ruining games for:
-- Judge Dredd
-- Babylon 5
-- Starship Troopers
-- Starfleet Battles (with the CTA fleet-scale rules)
-
Dale, we should trademark the "Entitled Gamer Syndrome".
My favorite example lately of EGS involves how Privateer Press is now doing MONTHLY Errata and Updates. Anyone in IT can appreciate how sinking maintenance costs is a tough choice (i.e. supporting past sales and products over future). PP is now constantly revising imbalances, and issuing not just a description, but PDF cards and PDF Designer Notes so you know exactly WHY stuff is changing. And of course the automatic War Room app updates.
Possibly the best example of Game Maintenance out there right now, actually.
Still, there's always a chorus of, "Well then, PP should refund me for the physical cards I bought 6 months ago because they're useless now." EGS at it's pettiest, when 3 of your 180 reference cards need a PDF printed overlay, but you want a full refund.
Even more egregious are the guys who find a Spam-skewed force (or read about it), run out and buy 10 Griffons or whatever, and then demand refunds when the previously broken skew gets nerfed back to normal balance. As if their particular exploit should remain forever enshrined as a temple to their laziness. EGS at its stupidest.
As I think about it, Spartan could go a HUGE way back on track if they'd resume those fairly regular PDF updates again. We haven't had a significant FSA or P-Fall update in what feels like aeons.
-
Even more egregious are the guys who find a Spam-skewed force (or read about it), run out and buy 10 Griffons or whatever, and then demand refunds when the previously broken skew gets nerfed back to normal balance.
I almost sprayed the keyboard reading that ;)
The howls of nerfed power gamers are one of the funnier gaming tropes I encounter.
-
I think you make a good point about rules updates Dale!
Often we think that the most important thing for a company to update is the models. We always want new models. Just as important are consistent rules updates. I take that into account when looking for quarterly updates.
-
As I think about it, Spartan could go a HUGE way back on track if they'd resume those fairly regular PDF updates again. We haven't had a significant FSA or P-Fall update in what feels like aeons.
I think the last FSA update was back in the fall timeframe, IIRC, so we are definitely due for another!
I think you make a good point about rules updates Dale!
Often we think that the most important thing for a company to update is the models. We always want new models. Just as important are consistent rules updates. I take that into account when looking for quarterly updates.
Quarterly seems about right for rules updates and FAQs, even if they are small balance tweaks. For games with a smaller "sample size" for player feedback like Spartan, I don't think you could do it much more frequently than that. PP and GW have the benefit of a much larger player base and a consequently much larger tournament scene.
-
Rule updates and balancing every month or two would be brilliant, especially if you could happen on a set date, 5th for example, each time. That way it would be easier for regular and organised play groups.
-
especially if you could happen on a set date,
This.
One major pain for Tourney organizers is always the errata/update that drops a few days before your event, and then half want to use it while the other half of players hadn't even heard about it.
A set date would make it very easy to plan around that scenario.
-
So going with Spartan, in case they're listening, they could do quarterly reviews for each of they're games, with each IP spaced a month apart for convenience. Set the release for the 15th of each month, which should avoid any major holidays in the english speaking world and give Ruckdog and Landlubber a chance to review them between podcasts.
-
So going with Spartan, in case they're listening, they could do quarterly reviews for each of they're games, with each IP spaced a month apart for convenience. Set the release for the 15th of each month, which should avoid any major holidays in the english speaking world and give Ruckdog and Landlubber a chance to review them between podcasts.
Thanks for thinking of us! ;)
Seriously though, I like the idea of having a release schedule that is that regular. It would certainly put Spartan on a different level from its competition if they were able to pull off something like that. It seems like logistical issues (production delays, shipping delays, etc) are the bane of just about every gaming company out there.
-
i like my new stuff to be well spaced , it gives people time to bed in the newer stuff into the way they play before anything comes along, also i think you can end up losing players who don't get to game often and find them selves behind in the game
-
Choose quartly as think gives enough time to work on things and time to save. As much as monthly is nice, sometimes cant get it at the time and maybe for somegames putting out too much, too soon.
Honestly notsure really.