Hello everyone....
I have tried to keep my personal noise down on the AH BSS and contribute only when I think I can add some other perspective. Unfortunately the last time I posted here, someone from AGW felt obliged to drag it over there, surgically extract some message information out of context, added some personal remarks to pour gasoline on something that was intended as commentary for this community only. So, it would be appreciated if any lurkers who would like to participate in the discussion, would please add their comments to this thread to avoid revisionist views of history elsewhere. Thanks.
I have read with great interest weazel's thread "Stick a fork in me!" and also hangtime's "Range icons, do we need 'em?".
I have to say, I love you guys, but in my opinion the responses in those threads from most, simply miss the crux of the issue. Stand back, get outside the box and as Edward De Bono would say, think laterally to understand what Aces High is all about. It is first and foremost a business, the ONLY purpose of which is to create wealth for its shareholders as well as a generate a potential exit strategy for them. Having said that, then how is it possibly going to accomplish that task by eliminating icons and striving to create an arena environment that plays to only a very small market segment. A high realism historically accurate flight simulation is doable. I would suspect that of any team in this industry with the programming and research experience to accomplish this type of simulation, it would be the combination of Hitech and Pyro. However, I believe if they went down that road, HiTech Creations would slowly bleed (cash) to its fiscal death, either by not getting enough revenue into the company in early stages, or once at a critical mass, attrition through cancellations below what is needed to sustain the required infrastructure.
Ironically, that's exactly what's happening to iEN. They just published their updated (SEC form 10QSB) financials and I was actually incorrect and overly optimistic about their "cash burn" in a previous post. They started January 1st, 2000 with a little over $3 million in the bank. I calculated their burn at about $177,000 per month when in fact, as of March 31st, 2000, they only had $1,921,000 left on-hand. A real burn of over a million dollars in the first quarter (3 months), or almost $333,000 per month. Their on-line "Pay for Play Revenue" is down $44,000 over the comparable quarter for last year, which indicates that WB's players in general are using the game less. While all of this is happening, they continue to bicker amongst themselves and get into issues about realism on development forums that are never going to make iEN viable, as there are not enough hard core players to make a business out of it anyway. This especially applies to a flat rate model which is obviously in the cards for them down the road someplace. Perhaps their recent ACA changes are a sign of things to come.
Now you're saying, get to the point. Quite simply, you guys need to refocus your energy and start supplying HTC with objective, non emotional marketing feedback. Pretend you OWN Hitech's business, therefore, make suggestions on this BBS to accomplish one thing, that is a business model and definition of what the game environment in Aces High should look like, that maximizes revenue through new player sign-ups, as well as keeps current members from canceling their accounts. They are the ONLY things that HTC should be designing, programming and implementing from a business perspective if they intend on surviving the onslaught of on-line multiplayer environments such as WWII On-line. Imagine that you are at 4,000 members right now, but need 8,000 in 6-12 months, so how do you get to there from here?
Guess what? Those suggestions you make, in many cases will probably go against the grain of the avid high realism, historical arena, no icon type of guys like myself. So, how can we have it all? How can HTC appeal to all of the various demographics of potential players out there on the Internet to make a real business out of an on-line flight simulation like Aces High? Is it possible, or are companies like HTC simply rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic like iEN, as they sail towards the inevitable financial iceberg?
I believe there are at least three types of communities on here. The "quake birds", kill them all and let God sort them out bunch is one. Weazel loves them in their F4Uc's.
Next there's the absolute "newbie", who doesn't even understand how to start the engine and we all see a lot of those new guys continually logging onto the MA, driving joemud crazy with their naive ditching.
These poor guys get so frustrated about the current complexity, they probably never come back after a few sessions and most certainly, don't sign-up after two weeks. I spoke to one off-line the other day who was particularly frustrated. He came from something called AW III relaxed arena and wanted the same thing here. He said it was just too complicated for him and he probably wouldn't be back unless AH offered something similar and probably cheaper. I don't know anything about the environment he spoke of, except it sounded very arcade like. Finally, there's the hard core bunch like me, who say lets model the grain weights of individual ammunition types and use no icons. Can these groups coexist in one arena? Good question, I'd like to hear your feedback.
Before some of you run off and say let's do what iEN has done, such as setup an RR (Relaxed Realism), HA (Historical Arena) and an ACA (an arcade like air starts Air Combat Arena) to appeal to everyone's tastes, you have to ask yourself, has it worked for iEN? Look at their financial numbers, then tell me why it hasn't solved their problem of critical mass, plus with the exception of the ACA, they are still charging $1.99 per hour for all of the other arenas. By the way, iEN just modified the ACA to include squads and field captures, permit players to select the following aircraft, Fw 190A-8, Bf 109G-6, Spitfire IXe, P-51D, P-38L, B-25J, Ju52, Ju 88A-4, rotating terrain and the enabled ground starts, all for $9.95 per month. Obviously an attempt to further expand the less than hard core gamer crowd, as well as keep it interesting for their current ACA sign-ups so they don't cancel accounts because they're burnt out or bored with a lack of newness and change. Anyone think they might be just "robbing Peter to pay Paul" and not really gaining new sign-ups?
I realize that it's tough to view AH from any perspective other than what we personally want it to be, in order to meet our individual needs. Unfortunately, it must be a solid business first, designed to provide gaming entertainment on-line to the widest possible demographic of people, who are willing to pay $29.95 per month. If we don't seriously try to rationalize this traditional marketing dilemma of needing to appeal to the special interest groups, as well as the widest market base, we all could be looking for a different venue this time next year.
Regards,
Badger
[This message has been edited by Badger (edited 05-14-2000).]
