Question regarding price

[leaddernoir]

Hi all,

Was thinking of picking this up recently but if I remember correctly this game used to be around 20-25 dollar mark. It is now retailing for 37. Is this a mistake or has this game appreciated in value since last year?

Cheers.

[clandini5]

I checked the Ageod shop at http://www.ageod.co.uk/en, as a citizen of the U.S. the prices listed there was 29.99 for the download edition and 39.99 for the boxed edition + free download.

[Taillebois]

Yes, sadly under new ownership there seems to be a "stuff the wargamer" approach. I've got pretty much all the AGEOD games, including WW1 (two copies actually) . Only weirdos buy these games, so hit them for thirty bucks a go. I would like to buy Espana, but it is basically one scenario.

Calvinus almost killed himself making this WW1 game finally work. I admire his perseverence and honour towards those who paid for the early buggy release.

Look around, play the demo (is there a demo?). Maybe there are alternative routes.

More people, especially children, should be given a copy of this WW1 game. It is the hundred year anniversary of 1914 , yet I have still to find anybody of whatever age (I'm 59) who even knows that the Schlieffen Plan wasn't the only option.

[Taciturn Scot]

Was thinking of picking this up recently but if I remember correctly this game used to be around 20-25 dollar mark. It is now retailing for 37. Is this a mistake or has this game appreciated in value since last year?

Well, why not? It's probably the best WW1 game on the market so I don't see a reason for it to depreciate in price. If there is another WW1 game that does such a good job of simulating this conflict, I'd like to hear about it as I've always been fascinated by WW1. Probably something to do with its static front lines on the West Front. It's only $25 so it's money well spent. The same as a trip in to watch a 3D movie and a bucket of popcorn.

[Shri]

Yes, sadly under new ownership there seems to be a "stuff the wargamer" approach. I've got pretty much all the AGEOD games, including WW1 (two copies actually) . Only weirdos buy these games, so hit them for thirty bucks a go. I would like to buy Espana, but it is basically one scenario.

Calvinus almost killed himself making this WW1 game finally work. I admire his perseverence and honour towards those who paid for the early buggy release.

Look around, play the demo (is there a demo?). Maybe there are alternative routes.

More people, especially children, should be given a copy of this WW1 game. It is the hundred year anniversary of 1914 , yet I have still to find anybody of whatever age (I'm 59) who even knows that the Schlieffen Plan wasn't the only option.

Modern revised history coming out of the UK has a more sane and balanced view regarding the GREAT WAR and blames all the powers equally with special emphasis on Servia, Russia, AH Empire and less on the historically bashed up GERMAN Empire.
Also lot of new authors like- Terrance Zuber have discounted the SCHLIEFFEN PLAN and instead gone on to strongly state with proof though not yet completely conclusive that the main GERMAN war plan was-
To attack with a strong right flank to outflank the french and not necessarily to capture paris, they wanted a decisve battle on their terms within french territory/belgian territory rather than CANNAE itself as the GERMAN generals realised that they were not strong enough.
It was this weakness rather than supposed German strength that made the canny and winsome (stating winsome in the manner of the English winning almost all the wars they fought in the millenia) English side with the Russians and French.

[Shri]

On another note-
War was to come in Europe either in 914 or 1915 or 1920, it was a question of when ever since the early 1900's and not why?
Edward Grey's dilli-dalli ness and wishy-washy diplomacy meant that 1914 the war started but there was every chance if that was not, then in 1915 or 1920 there would have been war.

Russia rather than Germany was the most Militaristic state in Europe and since 1820's there was troubles, revolts and attempted uprisings in Russian Empire in almost every decade and in some decades twice or more, to ease the mind out of internal troubles the TSARS repeatedly invaded the sick man- OTTOMAN empire throughout the 19th century on a regular basis, when they had milked this cow dry they turned east and got a bloody nose in Manchuria courtesy the DIE HARD JAPANESE and then they turned south-west to the old past time of the Tsars- Balkans. Rest is History, Italo-Ottoman, 1st Balkan and 2nd Balkan wars had crippled the Ottomans and made the Balkan situation extremely fluid with Austria also a non-decisive power due to fear of getting stabbed in the back by Italy.

[Taillebois]

Sadly most people in Britain don't even know Italy was in WW1. They also couldn't tell you where the Balkans are.

Caporetto? Oh is that a new coffee?

[Random]

Modern revised history coming out of the UK has a more sane and balanced view regarding the GREAT WAR and blames all the powers equally with special emphasis on Servia, Russia, AH Empire and less on the historically bashed up GERMAN Empire.

I'm actually inclined to disagree with this, not the revisions themselves but rather the idea that the historical narratives coming out of the UK are, on the whole particularly well balanced.

A case in point is Max Hasting's recent account of the origins of the Great War - Catastrophe: Europe Goes to War 1914 a book I found to be verbose, quite biased and vastly inferior to Margaret MacMillan's The War That Ended Peace: The Road to 1914, or Christopher Clark's The Sleepwalkers: How Europe Went to War in 1914 and even Donald Kagan's Europe's Last Summer in most respects.

In general, British historians still seem wedded to the Churchill/Terraine/Pitt/Taylor/Tuchman narrative that vilifies Germany, demonizes the Kaiser and where the British Empire innocently entered the European war for reasons of the purist altruism. This certainly remains a popular point of view in the UK.

A century on and we're nowhere near to closing the book on The Great war.

And as much as I generally hate game-pricing threads, WW1G was included in the Matrix/Slitherine Christmas sale so complaining about the cost a couple of days after the sale ended seems a bit disingenuous.

-C

[paulk205]

I'm actually inclined to disagree with this, not the revisions themselves but rather the idea that the historical narratives coming out of the UK are, on the whole particularly well balanced.

A case in point is Max Hasting's recent account of the origins of the Great War - Catastrophe: Europe Goes to War 1914 a book I found to be verbose, quite biased and vastly inferior to Margaret MacMillan's The War That Ended Peace: The Road to 1914, or Christopher Clark's The Sleepwalkers: How Europe Went to War in 1914 and even Donald Kagan's Europe's Last Summer in most respects.

In general, British historians still seem wedded to the Churchill/Terraine/Pitt/Taylor/Tuchman narrative that vilifies Germany, demonizes the Kaiser and where the British Empire innocently entered the European war for reasons of the purist altruism. This certainly remains a popular point of view in the UK.

A century on and we're nowhere near to closing the book on The Great war.

And as much as I generally hate game-pricing threads, WW1G was included in the Matrix/Slitherine Christmas sale so complaining about the cost a couple of days after the sale ended seems a bit disingenuous.

-C

Spot on on both books. Hastings is the worst sort of revisionist, just repeating his convictions over and over as the truth with no evidence. Say what you will about Niall Ferguson (and I have lots of bad things to say about him as an academic and as a public personality), but the Pity of War was both eloquently argued and supported by reams of evidence. Hastings' work also suffers from not properly using Russian and French material, possibly due to a language barrier. It's mostly the British viewpoint, which was a tiny bit of the picture in 1914. The very shallow treatment of the French experience is particularly odd. The latter accusation could even be made about Norman Stone's classic (and brilliant) the Eastern Front, which is 80% Russia's experience and very little on the Austrian or German side. I don't mind the absence of the German viewpoint so much, since it is well handled elsewhere, but the shallow approach on the Habsburg side in English (I don't read German, sadly) is a longstanding grievance of mine. Hastings is even worse, as he dismisses Austria as a frivolous and irrelevant player in a backhand manner and goes into very little detail beyond the usual gossip about Conrad's personality etc etc.

McMillan's book is not as remarkable as the Peacemakers (which I found excellent), but it is thorough and well argued.

[leaddernoir]

Thanks for the info gents,

And as much as I generally hate game-pricing threads, WW1G was included in the Matrix/Slitherine Christmas sale so complaining about the cost a couple of days after the sale ended seems a bit disingenuous.

-C

Just for the record (and not trying to start a flame war here) I was not complaining about the price. I was asking whether the game has increased in price (which it seems it has under the Matrix acquisition) as its highly unusual for games to appreciate in value and I was unsure whether this was an error or not.

Cheers

[Random]

Just for the record (and not trying to start a flame war here) I was not complaining about the price. I was asking whether the game has increased in price (which it seems it has under the Matrix acquisition) as its highly unusual for games to appreciate in value and I was unsure whether this was an error or not. Cheers

Apologies if I offended. The vast majority of pricing threads seem to be intended to be deliberately combustible but it would appear that this was not the case here.

It's a great game if frustrating and occasionally flawed, WW1G covers more of the Great War in more depth than any rival that I know of but of course the value of anything rests with the buyer and not the seller. Once again I am very sorry if I misinterpreted your motives for starting the thread.

-C

[leaddernoir]

Apologies if I offended. The vast majority of pricing threads seem to be intended to be deliberately combustible but it would appear that this was not the case here.

It's a great game if frustrating and occasionally flawed, WW1G covers more of the Great War in more depth than any rival that I know of but of course the value of anything rests with the buyer and not the seller. Once again I am very sorry if I misinterpreted your motives for starting the thread.

-C

Not a problem Random, I also apologise if my comments came off abruptly (as that was not my intention). It's very difficult to convey tone when writing online and I was just trying to restate my position. Anyway, now that I know that the pricing is indeed not a mistake, I will certainly pick this game up. Having heard the positive comments about WWIG (not just here but over at the Matrix forums) it really does seem to be the most in depth and intuitive game on the period.

Cheers

[Bruit Bleu]

Was thinking of picking this up recently but if I remember correctly this game used to be around 20-25 dollar mark. It is now retailing for 37. Is this a mistake or has this game appreciated in value since last year?

Hi, Mr Matrix heard you and dropped the prices of a few old games 2 days ago, and WW1 Gold went to 30 $ instead of 40 : http://www.matrixgames.com/news/1333/Permanent.price.reductions
Cheers !

it really does seem to be the most in depth and intuitive game on the period.

The best in depth, alright. But intuitive, I wouldn't say that.
You should try the demo, if not already.