Think Papy is trying to say something....
Papyrus releases NR2003 patch day before Thunder 2004
A poster noted Papyrus's NR2003 patch arrived the day before EA's NASCAR Thunder 2004. Posters debated whether Sierra cared about a product it no longer developed, with others arguing the patch helped keep NR2003 selling. Pete said Papyrus had lost money on NR2002 and NR2003 because EA kept raising the NASCAR licence fees, which was why there would be no NR2004.
Automated summary.
"senojm23" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> Think Papy is trying to say something....
>
>
Thunder? You're kidding, right? I doubt Papyrus is concerned about that
game.
NR2003 is the better game (or will be the better game) by far, IMO.
Alanb
You never know!!
"Alan Bernardo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:w4t9b.469235$uu5.81245@sccrnsc04...
Quoted text (15 lines)
> > "senojm23" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Think Papy is trying to say something.... > > > > > > Thunder? You're kidding, right? I doubt Papyrus is concerned about that > game. > > NR2003 is the better game (or will be the better game) by far, IMO. > > Alanb > >"senojm23" wrote...
> Think Papy is trying to say something....
Other than they're confident they can officially release the patch, you
mean?
Jan. ;-)
=---
Any developer is "concerned" about similar products from other companies.
If he wasn't then he shouldn't be in business.
Bruce.
"Alan Bernardo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:w4t9b.469235$uu5.81245@sccrnsc04...
>
> Thunder? You're kidding, right? I doubt Papyrus is concerned about that
> game.
>
Why would he care very much if at all if he isnt producing the product
anymore? Heartfelt sentimental reasons? i doubt it. If they were worried
about marketshare or something They probably blew that when they said "Last
of the series" as they moved onto Kiddie boxes <G>
"Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
that
> > game.
> >
>
>
Quoted text (9 lines)
> Any developer is "concerned" about similar products from other companies. > If he wasn't then he shouldn't be in business. > > Bruce. > > "Alan Bernardo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:w4t9b.469235$uu5.81245@sccrnsc04... > > > > Thunder? You're kidding, right? I doubt Papyrus is concerned aboutBecause it's still for sale and competing on the same shelf for consumer
dollars. Papy can still sell thousands of copies of 2003 if it's considered
the best Nascar sim "ever" so they have an incentive to keep it at the top
of the market.
--
Joe M.
"Plowboy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> Why would he care very much if at all if he isnt producing the product
> anymore? Heartfelt sentimental reasons? i doubt it. If they were
worried
> about marketshare or something They probably blew that when they said
"Last
> of the series" as they moved onto Kiddie boxes <G>
> "Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
> news:[email hidden]...
> > Any developer is "concerned" about similar products from other
companies.
> > If he wasn't then he shouldn't be in business.
> >
> > Bruce.
> >
> > "Alan Bernardo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
> > news:w4t9b.469235$uu5.81245@sccrnsc04...
> > >
> > > Thunder? You're kidding, right? I doubt Papyrus is concerned about
> that
> > > game.
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Joe took the words right out of my mouth!
It's still a saleable product and still earns money *for Sierra* and as long
as that capability exists then the fact that it might be their last such
product is immaterial.
Get the idea now? :)
Bruce.
The read me was dated over 2 weeks ago, make up your own mind on the reasoning for the delay.
--
Steve
"To put it in gentleman's terms -
if you've been out for a night and you're looking for a young lady and you pull one,
some weeks they're good looking and some weeks they're not the best.
Our performance today would have been not the best looking bird but at least we got her in the
taxi."
Ian Holloway describing a recent win.
"senojm23" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
> Think Papy is trying to say something....
>
>
"senojm23" said:
> Think Papy is trying to say something....
Such as...
"Hey! We released this game 7 months ago - now here's the patch... Go
download our patch and install it into the product you *bought* from us 7
*months ago* - and that we've *allready* earned money on. Don't go and buy
that new game cause that really dont mean a damn thing for our business!"
??
--
ed_
I think Sierra/Papyrus is betting on PWF and patches to sell more copies of
the game. Even though it's free upgrades I bet it's a lot cheaper than
paying NASCAR their licensing fees.
N ascar
A lways
S hould
C are
A bout
R evenue
"Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:3f66ab74$[email hidden]...
> Joe took the words right out of my mouth!
> It's still a saleable product and still earns money *for Sierra* and aslong
Quoted text (8 lines)
> as that capability exists then the fact that it might be their last such > product is immaterial. > > Get the idea now? :) > > Bruce. > >"Bruce Kennewell" wrote...
> Joe took the words right out of my mouth!
> It's still a saleable product... <snip>
Just out of curiosity, shouldn't that be a "sellable" product as in "to sell
computer games"?
Jan.
=---
On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 19:16:09 -0500, "senojm23" <[email hidden]>
wrote:
>Think Papy is trying to say something....
By releasing a patch for a product they're not really making money on
anymore for a series that has been discontinued?
Jason
First "Bruce Kennewell" wrote...
>
>> Joe took the words right out of my mouth!
>> It's still a saleable product... <snip>
Then "Jan Verschueren" wrote:
>
>Just out of curiosity, shouldn't that be a "sellable" product as in "to sell
>computer games"?
>
I thought so too Jan. But since Bruce used the term, I now know I was
wrong. It MUST be "saleable". I've never seen Mr Kennewell say
anything that was incorrect.
<BG>
In article <HlG9b.22826$[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...
> > Joe took the words right out of my mouth!
> > It's still a saleable product... <snip>
>
> Just out of curiosity, shouldn't that be a "sellable" product as in "to sell
> computer games"?
Possibly local dialect, saleable product is perfectly valid to
describe a product suitable for sale. At least 'round my parts.
Cheers,
Rod.
>"Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote
> Any developer is "concerned" about similar products from other companies.
> If he wasn't then he shouldn't be in business.
Well, they aren't similar ;)
(I know, I know, just semantics)
--
-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard>
-- http://ymenard.cjb.net/
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
"Ed Solheim" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:3f670a44$[email hidden]...
buy
> that new game cause that really dont mean a damn thing for our business!"
> ??
>
>
You're right, no new buyers are available. Everyone that will ever buy
Nascar 2003 has already bought it. Since there's no future version of a
Papy Nascar sim all prospective buyers simply pass it on the shelf. ;)
--
Joe M.
Quoted text (8 lines)
> "senojm23" said: > > Think Papy is trying to say something.... > > Such as... > > "Hey! We released this game 7 months ago - now here's the patch... Go > download our patch and install it into the product you *bought* from us 7 > *months ago* - and that we've *allready* earned money on. Don't go and"jason moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
I guess economies of scale escapes this group. :) They'll make
incrementally more "profit" per unit on every unit sold until it's no longer
on the shelves. They've long since covered costs and now it's all gravy.
Why would they not maintain their market leadership with a patch to ensure
it remains the Nascar product of choice?
--
Joe M.
Quoted text (8 lines)
> On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 19:16:09 -0500, "senojm23" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >Think Papy is trying to say something.... > > By releasing a patch for a product they're not really making money on > anymore for a series that has been discontinued? > Last I heard Papy had losses on N2002 and N2003. Thats
why there isn't a N2004. The fees being paid out in rights
were just too large. EA has kept upping the ante they were willing
to pay until they broke the bank at Sierra. They couldn't beat them
with their product so they did it with the cheque book. :-(
Pete
"Joe M." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
>>
> I guess economies of scale escapes this group. :) They'll make
> incrementally more "profit" per unit on every unit sold until it's nolonger
Quoted text (9 lines)
> on the shelves. They've long since covered costs and now it's all gravy. > > Why would they not maintain their market leadership with a patch to ensure > it remains the Nascar product of choice? > > -- > Joe M. > >You mean they beat them with their marketing. EA upped the ante because
they are infinitely better marketers than the Papy/Sierra combination and
actually know how to generate enormous revenue and profit from their
franchises. They simply feed the masses and count the beans. They also
don't "waste" resources on small "passion projects" like other gaming houses
of the past.
This falls right in line with our microwave oven, fake boob culture that
rewards bullshit no talent reality TV, glorified spin-master CEO's who take
credit for pure market inertia (latest example: Grasso of NYSE), and the
general lack of QUALITY that epitomizes the 2000's and the foreseeable
future. I'm not bitter, just stating the facts. ;)
BTW, we might be lucky given that ISI is behind NT2004 and EA is
surprisingly moving towards more realism (just look at NHL 2004 - huge
changes this year based on the demo). So while the days of pure simulation
may be over, we're not stuck with crap arcade.
--
Joe M.
"Pete" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:VyO9b.1792$[email hidden]...
> Last I heard Papy had losses on N2002 and N2003. Thats
> why there isn't a N2004. The fees being paid out in rights
> were just too large. EA has kept upping the ante they were willing
> to pay until they broke the bank at Sierra. They couldn't beat them
> with their product so they did it with the cheque book. :-(
>
> Pete
>
> "Joe M." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
> news:[email hidden]...
> >>
> > I guess economies of scale escapes this group. :) They'll make
> > incrementally more "profit" per unit on every unit sold until it's no
> longer
> > on the shelves. They've long since covered costs and now it's all
gravy.
> >
> > Why would they not maintain their market leadership with a patch to
ensure
> > it remains the Nascar product of choice?
> >
> > --
> > Joe M.
> >
> >
>
>
Yes you are absolutely correct. The sad part of the whole thing was
that Papyrus was in bed with EA at one time but jumped ship and went
with Sierra without giving EA a chance to match or better the offer.(Or
so I was told.)
It would be interesting to imagine what might have been if they had gone
with EA instead.
Another interesting aside is about a certain software house in Vancouver
that EA bought out years ago.(I can't remember the name from those days
but my company(brokerage firm) did the initial underwriting in the late
70's).
We ended up getting stuck with the stock in the house account because
the
market took a big dump after we went public with it. We sat on 46% of the
outstanding shares if I recall. And unloaded them a few years later. They
might have made a few bucks on them but nothing like what they were worth
once EA took them over. But hindsight is wonderful.
Hopefully ISI will update their engine!
I just quickly tried the demo of NHL2004 and couldn't get the feel for
it.
Perhaps the full version will have some more tuning options. I have every
version of it so I suppose I will get this one as well. :-)
Pete
"Joe M." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> You mean they beat them with their marketing. EA upped the ante because
> they are infinitely better marketers than the Papy/Sierra combination and
> actually know how to generate enormous revenue and profit from their
> franchises. They simply feed the masses and count the beans. They also
> don't "waste" resources on small "passion projects" like other gaminghouses
> of the past.
>
> This falls right in line with our microwave oven, fake boob culture that
> rewards bullshit no talent reality TV, glorified spin-master CEO's whotake
simulation
> may be over, we're not stuck with crap arcade.
>
> --
> Joe M.
