rec.autos.simulators

"Formula Zero" and a proper "X-Car" rolled into one.  Fun, fun, fun.  I'll
allow the 2000hp engines, as long as they burn tons of fuel and grenade on
the second lap.

Stephen

The mass market are interested in (a) easy, trouble-free installation, (b)
easy, trouble free operation, (c) easy, trouble free driving experience and
(d) the ability to save a race in progress.

Take it from an ex-retailer, mate!

--
Regards,
Bruce Kennewell,
Canberra, Australia.
---------------------------

I get the impression, and please correct me if I'm coming at this from a
completely wrong tack, that the essence of your complaint is that the
software companies charge us for "new games" (my quotes) when, in fact,
these should be available as add-ons (I assume at little or no additional
expense) to an original game.

Is that correct?

--
Regards,
Bruce Kennewell,
Canberra, Australia.
---------------------------

- Michael

Maybe you're right, Bruce - but usually racing games only do really well
if they are either a big-name license such as F1 or NASCAR, or they are
arcarde-style games such as NFS.

If it was down to me it would be 1970's sportscars like the Porsche 917
and tracks like the Ring, Spa and Le Mans. Probably no-one else would buy
it though! (This newsgroup excepted:-)

That gives me an idea - maybe that would work if they could get the Steve
McQueen Le Mans movie licence and hook the game off that for a
sportscar series - he's never had a cooler image than now. Die-hards
could always change the names back to the correct ones.

- Michael

Well, he HAS had a "cooler" image, actually....when he was alive and doing
the likes of The Sand Pebbles, Bullit, The Great Escape, The Getaway (the
ONLY version!) etc.

Yep....he was certainly cool back then.
--
Regards,
Bruce Kennewell,
Canberra, Australia.
---------------------------

I know what you mean - but celebrities always gain popularity after
death. cf. James Dean, Marilyn Monroe etc.

The Ford motor company had his image used in a recent adverti***t here
in the UK driving a Ford Puma round San Francisco in scenes from Bullit.
Pretty seamless compositing job, but I bet SMcQ was spinning in his
grave:-)

- Michael

 Be as bemused as you want. Yes that is the core of my "complaint." It's a
charge really though. Small but subtle difference.

Who said anything about no charge?  A hell of a lot less than the original
game yes, say $10 for an add on.

How about the '57 season for GPL? Some new tracks, some new cars, and
tweaked physics. This would take Papy a matter of a few months compared to
the years it took to develop GPL in the first place. Done mostly by the
lower echelon of "programers." Maybe even in odd moments they arn't working
on N4. $10 would be a perfectly fair price.

I'd pay $10. I'd pay ANOTHER $10 for the  '55 season, and the '72 season,
and the '37 season. We havn't even gotten to the sporty cars yet.

Another $40 for the end user track and car editor.

Papy could do ok here, just on the installed base of GPL.

I certainly don't see how letting the end user have easy access to modifying
the game as they like could hurt them in the long run. In the specific case
of GPL it might actually generate sales!

I'm a physicist, programer, and businessman. I know what's involved in
writing a game of this nature. I also know what's involved in making a
profit off your work. I'm no pie in the sky  gimme gimme gimme little kid.

My charge still stands. It's valid. Played Doom lately? Is id doing ok? You
can download the source code for Quake and by a level editor from id. None
of this seems to have hurt their sales any. In face it is generally
aknowledged that this is the key factor that put, and kept them, on top of
the FPS field.

You are quite welcome sir.

--
Regards,
Bruce Kennewell,
Canberra, Australia.
---------------------------

You see, as a businessman, I have no axe to grind with those who market
"add-ons" as new packages because the mass market doesn't have the faintest
***y clue and will continue to buy....so long as the add-on is packaged
and promoted as either a major enhancement to the original or a significant
improvement to the original.  I know this from my entertainement-software
retailing experiences.

I also have no problems with this philosophy as it supports the case (put
forward by a book-selling acquaintance) that when an author writes a new
book yet includes the character and background from the previous book(s) the
new book(s) should be sold at a cheaper rate than the original because we
already know about the character and something of his/her background!  She
went on to use movies as another example...sequels should be cheaper to get
into than the original!! I suppose "prequels" (dreadful word!) should be
*more* expensive!

Cheers!
--
Regards,
Bruce Kennewell,
Canberra, Australia.
---------------------------

A carset dosn't.

Perhaps I'm an odd business man, and yes, I have extensive experience at the
retail trade and have even owned my own store, but... I've never believed
that getting the most pennies in the shortest possible period of time is the
best way to do business. I strive to build a relationship with my customers
based on mutually perceive value of the product and services rendered. I
like my customers to feel as if they were in charge of the transaction.

I have kept rabidly loyal customers for decades by this policy.

Again, in the software *** industry I would refer you to id.

If GPL, which has to be considered a "failed" product were suppurted the way
id supports its older games, and its customers, it could continue to be a
revenue source for relatively little time, effort, and expense. What's more
it would keep Papyrus as the flagship label of the sim community.

Did you know that every Porsche 959 was sold at a LOSS? Why did they do it?
Because it sold a lot of 911s. Plus they reaped the R&D benifits which they
recouped at a later time, they got a lot of press they couldn't have bought
for any amount of money for free, and they got to promote themselves as the
makers of the ultimate car.

There are a lot of ways that selling things for less, or even giving them
away, can result in overall greater profits for a company that knows how to
go about it.

In the history of computing all open architechtures have beaten out all
closed architectures in the marketplace. How many Apples have you bought
lately? Microsoft used to know a bit about this, now they have forgotten.
Microsoft became *** in the market when they were more open, and
now...well, time will tell. I know that if I could buy GPL for Linux I
wouldn't have a Windows box anymore.

One word, Betamax.

In the mass market $10 is a magic number. People will by 10 things for $10
before they will buy one thing for $50.

Two words, Proctor & Gamble. Now THOSE people know how to market. The
software industry could buy itself a clue here.

And, as always, if you don't do it, some new and hungry competitor will.
Sure Papy is generating maximum cash for their products NOW, but the West
Bros. are looming on the horizon. They are going where Papy could have been
a year ago. Papy left the door open for it. Now maybe they'll lose both
market share and market perception. If the English boys deliver I may never
buy another Papy product again and I think the folks at Papy are Gods. I'd
rather have bought from them, but I can't.

They left the door open for Noonan too. Why didn't they get my $20? Or $10
for a graphics upgrade to ICR2? Sure, the market's small here, but the
customer loyalty to be generated  isn't anything to***away. The software
industry is too young to fully understand the value of this. The very fact
that I could get a graphics upgrade to ICR2 would make me more likely to buy
N4. If N4 has an open architecture it will make me more likely to buy N5.

Of course, as I've mentioned, id seems to have a clue here. Too bad FPSs
bore the hell out of me.