rec.autos.simulators

1) To get the information - it is only necessary to check the sales figures
for different genres.  It is compliled and available from gamespot, among
others.  If you really want the best information - buy stock and read your
quarterly reports - if you request it, the depth of information they can
provide you with includes revenues vs expectations versus title - region -
and packaging.  Since revenues for racing "games" over the last two  to
three years is considerably higher than racing "sims," saying that the
demand for games is greater than the overall demand for sims is an easy
call.  It is not that GPL hasn't made a profit, simply that it didn't meet
minimum projected profit - which is often more damaging in the business
world than abject failure.

2) I agree that the era and type of racing reduced sales on their own.
However, this was expected and taken into account when projections were
made.  The expectation of revenues from GPL was much lower than for a NASCAR
or even a CART title.  The problem is that GPL has not met even these
reduced expectations - and had a high return rate for Papyrus titles (ask
Sierra about the return rate - the only higher was the FBPro 99  fiasco as a
percentage of original sales).  Which leads us to:

3) I never said anything about being forced to run in junior mode.  Why do I
think arcade mode should be the default? Simple - it helps to prevent
returns by those people looking for an arcade racer and unwilling to take
the time and effort to toggle on switches.  Ideally it would be controlled
by an on/off toggle available when the player first puts in their name.  I
think that the default setting should be easy enough that ANY computer racer
can complete a circuit around the track on their first attempt.  Difficulty
can then be added in layers.  Please realize - most of us on this newsgroup
would never race with this setting, but there are many out there who bought
GPL, and promptly took it back after crashing several times on their first
attempt to race - never completing a full lap.  This phenomena is what led
to my "virtually inaccessible" comment.

I know many of us treat computer racing as very serious business, and would
like to see as many as realistic as possible sims available for our perusal.
If you get nothing else from what I say, please understand that we as the
*** simmers must be willing to argue for features we will personally
never use to keep the games playable by less *** gamers, or we are
destroying the chance for future, more realistic sims.

Michael...

Comments by Chris and Griffin:

1) Most information out of Sierra available to the general public - even
their PR - mentions that GPL has not been considered a real success.  See
even their very recent press releases.  They are openly stating such as
justification for altering the specifications of this years NASCAR titles.
That GPL has not met financial expectations is pretty much general
knowledge.

2) As far as returns - it can be as simple as asking local software stores
how many were returned within the first two weeks of release, and how many
times some copies were repackaged before they didn't come back.  In most
states, software stores are required to keep such records (legal and piracy
issues).  At one local store here (JAX,FL), a single box was repackaged and
resold FIVE times before finding a permanent home.  Since repackaged sales
are typically not reported to the publisher, the return rate may be much
higher in local stores than even Sierra's numbers.  If the sim would have
been more usable by the purchasers - that could have been six sales
(original plus five return sales) rather than one.  You also have to realize
that salespeople usually stop recommending titles that have more than one or
two returns in most locations - which further cuts sales.

3) Ask for information from investor relations if you are a stockholder -
you can get pretty much any information you want if you have enough stock.
Some of their reports are VERY detailed (down to how many boxes are in which
warehouse, how long they have been sitting there, if they have been there
before, how long they are expected to stay, etc.).  The best information for
revenues, projections, and returns is in the monthly accounting office
report.

Sierra has a past history of killing entire lines of development when one
title didn't meet their expectations. (The Laura Bow mysteries for example -
and that series lead developer was one of the founders of the company, who
until that point got her way in everything.  Like GPL, Laura Bow II was a
success - most companies would have thought it a great success - but it
didn't meet expectations and LBIII was stopped dead in its tracks as a
result).  The reports on and changes to upcoming titles (as reported here
and at E3) leads me to believe that Sierra accounting and marketing have
been putting considerable pressure on Papyrus concerning their 1999
releases.

Michael

--
Best regards,
Bruce.
======
The Stunned Mullet........seriously satirical stuff!
http://www.racesimcentral.net/
===============================================

If the supplier doesn't wish to go down the road of producing a marginal
product, then that's his/her/their decision, but don't blame the poor
consumer for asking.  Jeeeezuz!

--
Best regards,
Bruce.
======
The Stunned Mullet........seriously satirical stuff!
http://www.racesimcentral.net/
===============================================

Again....the call is with the supplier and if they did some decent market
research once in a while instead of simply listening to their own marketing
hype then they *may* just get the picture, eh?

--
Best regards,
Bruce.
======
The Stunned Mullet........seriously satirical stuff!
http://welcome.to/the_stunned_mullet
===============================================

If the software developers/publishers don't take it upon themselves to
discover what the bulk of the marketplace wants then they should not be in
this business or any other business associated with selling.
This practise is called MARKET RESEARCH.  Most successful enterprises who
produce something for mass sale use it.

We as the "***" simmers should argue for what *WE* would like.  We are
not here to (a) act as the advocates for those with less lofty desires nor
(b) act as non-paid employees of the company whom we are petitioning.
--
Best regards,
Bruce.
======
The Stunned Mullet........seriously satirical stuff!
http://www.racesimcentral.net/
===============================================

Interesting information and perspectives that you offer in your posts. The
accessibility issue is one of the things that GPaL attempts to
address...i.e. scaleable AI in terms of both speed and diversity, novice
trainers that the novice racer can easily use in single race mode, etc.etc.

My view is that the average gamer buys a racing sim to race, not to train. I
think it's unfortunate that when that average gamer tries to do what he
wants to do most and clicks on Single Race mode, he's automatically handed a
F1 car, without even an option for F2 or F3. Sure, if his machismo will
allow it (and I think many times it won't), he has the driving aids, and if
he selects Novice (an acknowledgment that you don't have the "right stuff"
to many) or Intermediate, the AI is scaled back further, but he still
fundamentally has the F1 car to wrestle. And then, assuming he's swallowed
his pride and been patient enough to race in Novice, he's forced to go to a
more advanced level before he can enjoy longer races.

To further frustrate the novice racer, the NPT system virtually insures that
he'll never win or even finish near the front. Sure NPT has it's benefits in
that it insures that the racer will always have some AI competition, but my
bet is that the overwhelming majority of new GPL racers would prefer, after
a few hours of effort, to be contending for the podium rather than avoiding
Surtees in mid-pack of a progressively faster AI field. So GPaL addresses
that situation with it's flexible AI controls.

My feeling: With more flexible gameplay options, and a little more creative,
aggressive marketing, I think GPL could have been and still can be a much
greater commercial success. I continue to be intrigued by the idea of
bundling the movie "Grand Prix" with GPL that someone else purposed here
earlier. I think it would add tremendously to its shelf appeal! Ever seen a
two-cassette movie offered with a video game? And wouldn't it add an element
of intrigue to the younger prospective buyer who otherwise takes a look at
the packaging says, "What!?! 1967? That's when my dad was a kid! Yuck!" And
the movie would certainly add to the appeal and the romance of the game once
the customer got it home.

I don't pretend to understand the economics of the movie biz, but come on,
how much incremental income is MGM, or whoever currently owns the rights,
generating off of "Grand Prix"? It seems to me that you might be able to
pull off a bundle deal without too much incremental expense if you also
threw in some additional collateral...like some coupons for
rentals/purchases at your neighborhood Blockbuster. Can you imagine if at
your local Blockbuster there was a kiosk full of these Grand Prix/GPL
bundles and overhead there was one of those powerful Blockbuster monitors
playing a well-produced, voice-over video that jumped back and forth between
clips from the movies with rugged Jim Garner sawing at the wheel in Monaco,
clips from the game, and clips of guys racing against each other from all
corners of the globe via the Internet? Beats the heck out of languishing on
the shelf amongst all the NASCAR and arcade titles! I think they could sell
truckloads on the basis of curiosity alone! And if GPL was sufficiently
accessible, those curiosity buyers might actually become GPL ***s, like
us!

Jack Rambo

www.RaceLive.com/GPaL

Like all companies mass marketing, Sierra does market research.  The problem
from the sim players point of view is that market research delivers
information in statistical format - and is most useful in determining the
lowest common denominator (LCD) of the market - where sales will likely be
highest.  This is especially true in the land of sequels (i.e. the US
market).  Much more than market research, however, most companies use the
success of previous products to estimate the success of current ideas.

It would have been better to say that we the sim players that want more
realism must realize that we are not the LCD of the racing market.  If we
wish to see realism remain an issue, particularily for Sierra/Papyrus
products in the wake of GPL, then we must convince them that products, by
providing various options, can meet the demands of both the average (LCD)
racer and the more *** sim driver - thereby selling to both markets.
Since the "average" racer is much more common, we will have to accept that
installation defaults will need to cater to that racer, otherwise viability
of the title is risked.  If we are unable to do this, financial dictates
will push to remove increased realism from racing software, and in the end
will leave us only with "games" not "sims" as they have higher potential
sales.

Eventually the market would rebound - probably by some small upstart similar
to the original Papyrus - but we would lose the expertise of those groups
who have developed their art of sim design in the interim.

Michael

Wait a minute!  Hold on a second!  Things are getting just a little out
of hand here.  I am sorry, but Moses has not come down from the mountain
yet.  We do NOT know that any of the above is a true fact.  

1)  I highly doubt that 100% realism is part of what kept the sim from
market expectations....
   a)  Does anyone outside of Papy/Sierra know what their market
       expectations where?
   b)  Sierra did a piss-poor marketing job in GPL.  Almost $0.00 in
       fact.  Sierra doesn't seem to hot to market any of Papyrus's
       products well.
2)  We have no way of knowing what the "suits" are saying or doing.
Everything posted here in r.a.s. and other forums is 100% pure
speculation.  But if we say it enough times, I am sure it will become
true.  Who says that the physics engine in GPL is be tossed out with the
bath water by the suits?

3)  It is NOT clear that the majority of users playing driving
simulations are more interested in "games" rather than "sims".
   a)  I will concede that the majority of users playing driving games
       are more insterested in "games" rather then "sims".
   b)  For many there just isn't the apppeal in a 1967 Grand Prix
       simulation.  Many users need the "I see it on TV" and I can do
       it on my computer crutch to be jived on a racing simulation.
       Why else do you think the developers spend so much money on
       licensing?
   c)  The hardware requirements for GPL are almost state of the art
       and many folks just can't justify upgrading for a simple
       past-time.

<snip>

% For GPL, papyrus listened to the *** simmers, perhaps too much, and the
% game IS virtually inaccessible to many racing enthusiasts.  I don't see any
% changes on the horizon to salvage this title in terms of market saturation.
% While a wonderful sim, GPL should also serve as an example to all of us of
% how too much of a good thing, without options making it accessible to the
% average racer, hurts our desires for more realism in the long run...

Nope, for GPL, Papyrus listened to their "hearts" and "souls".  And they
listened well and should be applauded for their results.  GPL is a
labor of love and dedication to what Papyrus Design Group has always
been since the birth of Indianapolis 500 the Simulation.  People are
getting confused between the "profession" and "avocation".  Papyrus's
profession is to produce products that will sell well in the
entertainment industry.  Their avocation (or calling) is to produce
computer based racing simulations for the home computer.  In order for
PDG to keep their avocation alive, they must keep their profession
alive.  That's all that is happening...  That is why the NASCAR99
dress-up, and now the enhanced NASCAR2000 (which if people had read
between the lines many months ago we were being told about from posts
here in r.a.s. by Papy employees).  

GPL was a work of art that was forced on the market before it could be
completed.  The starving artist needed to stay alive in order to
continue creating.  Have no fear, Papyrus will never stoop as low as to
produce a NASCAR Revolution game to stay alive.  But it has no qualms
with taking an early art project and making variations on the theme
available to keep food on the table.  

Patience grasshopper....

--
**************************** Michael E. Carver *************************
     Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./.  [-  < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

  about 2 months after buying GPL I also bought "Grand Prix".  Packaging
them together would be a great idea...they're made for each other.  
I'd also suggest that your GPaL should be in that bundle too :)

My enjoyment of GPL went through the roof after I discovered an AI Tweak
package on the web...

Dennis

If the product met the minimum projected profit but didn't sell as
well as expected it presumably sold at a higher ASP then predicted?

Fully agree with this, and have argued this for a long time. The
simulation realism must be married with sales (and hence profits),
with an acceptance of whatever that entails.

Cheers!
John

What would I have done in November '98 when I worked 95 hours overtime in the
month and one race of GPL a day kept me sane? ;-D

Jason.

They are however, narrow-banded.

Z.

Please remove NOSPAM from my email address when replying.

Z.

Please remove NOSPAM from my email address when replying.

--Tel