Space Rangers 2 Expansion

Kobra · Post by **Kobra** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 5:59 pm

Coming in a couple weeks it looks like;

http://www.gamestop.com/product.asp?product%5Fid=646512

Svlad · Post by **Svlad** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 6:12 pm

That isn't an expansion, it's just the US release of the game we know and love.

That was truly mean of you - my heart leapt in joy at the idea.

Kadoth Nodens · Post by **Kadoth Nodens** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:47 pm

Looks like its on CD, which means my luddite ass can finally play!

McCrank · Post by **McCrank** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:41 pm

Damnit, no DVD? Guess ill have to buy the UK version, what a damn letdown...

Greggy_D · Post by **Greggy_D** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 10:49 pm

When are US publishers going to get a freaking clue and release on DVD only?

Kobra · Post by **Kobra** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 11:03 pm

Greggy_D wrote:When are US publishers going to get a freaking clue and release on DVD only?

Not to mention stop using the shitty cardboard boxes!

US Retailers blow ass, I can't wait until download delivery kicks the fucking shit out of these assholes like EBGames.

CeeKay · Post by **CeeKay** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 12:29 am

A little off topic, but it brings back memories to see 'Cinemaware' on the box

McCrank · Post by **McCrank** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 8:53 am

Now Im torn... I've heard rumors that the U.S. release will be updated with a newer patch, some extra content, and some fixed translations, do I buy the U.S. release which could be up to 5 CDs, or just go with the 1 DVD UK release...

Chraolic · Post by **Chraolic** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 9:22 am

It certainly won't be anywhere near 5 CD's, a full install only takes about 1.25 GB. I would guess two or three CD's, depending on whether Space Rangers 1 is included on a separate CD or not.

Roguetad · Post by **Roguetad** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 12:28 pm

On the Elemental Games forums, the developers mentioned that the US version would use the same 1.3 version as the UK release. The distinction between the two, so far, seems to be that an American translation team worked on the US version. There are quite a few translation errors, typos, and grammatical errors in the UK version I'm playing, but nothing game breaking or horrible. It seems that Cinemaware may not use Starforce, like the UK version, at least that's the rumor.

And I concur with the frustration of US publishers still insisting on using only the cd-rom format. I like the UK dvd cases too.

MT · Post by MT » Tue Feb 28, 2006 1:06 pm

When are US publishers going to get a freaking clue and release on DVD only?

When enough potential buyers get a clue and have DVD drives so that going DVD-only doesn't mean automatically excluding a sizeable chunk of the potential market. That's when.

Freezer-TPF- · Post by **Freezer-TPF-** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 1:22 pm

Roguetad wrote:It seems that Cinemaware may not use Starforce, like the UK version, at least that's the rumor.

That would be excellent news. The game sounds good but I passed on it due to Starforce. I bet others did, too.

JonathanStrange · Post by **JonathanStrange** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 2:29 pm

I didn't pass on it and I'm glad I didn't. It's been an incredible blast, I'll probably keep it on my HD for years. I look forward to any sequels too!

Papageno · Post by **Papageno** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 3:03 pm

Anyone know if there's a plan for some kind of translation-fix patch for the UK version?

And is there some game patch in the works for SR2 beyond the version that came on the DVD?

Sandpuppy · Post by **Sandpuppy** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 4:33 pm

When enough potential buyers get a clue and have DVD drives so that going DVD-only doesn't mean automatically excluding a sizeable chunk of the potential market. That's when.

Sometimes I think Rockstar is the only US developer that has upgraded their calendars past the 1999 edition.. San Andreas was DVD only. Then again, they did include a print manual - hardcover no less. That's definately old school.

As for the UK version of SR2, I kinda like the quirky English translation. It has an all-your-base-are-belong-to-us charm to it. OK, nothing quite on that scale.. and really, how many people in the US would even notice nowadays?

Roguetad · Post by **Roguetad** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 6:00 pm

Papageno wrote:Anyone know if there's a plan for some kind of translation-fix patch for the UK version?

And is there some game patch in the works for SR2 beyond the version that came on the DVD?

It's my understanding that Elemental Games, the development studio, closed their doors. Some of the developers still post on their forums. They said no official patch past the current UK 1.3 version. The Russian version has a 1.4 patch, but I believe that it wasn't a completely official patch.

MT · Post by MT » Tue Feb 28, 2006 6:55 pm

Sometimes I think Rockstar is the only US developer that has upgraded their calendars past the 1999 edition.. San Andreas was DVD only. Then again, they did include a print manual - hardcover no less. That's definately old school.

That may be the case, but it makes a poor comparison. San Andreas on PC was an aftermarket good; Rockstar had already crushed the console market with the PS2 version. The same can't be said for a niche PC release such as SR2.

Bandero · Post by **Bandero** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 10:23 pm

MT wrote:
Sometimes I think Rockstar is the only US developer that has upgraded their calendars past the 1999 edition.. San Andreas was DVD only. Then again, they did include a print manual - hardcover no less. That's definately old school.
That may be the case, but it makes a poor comparison. San Andreas on PC was an aftermarket good; Rockstar had already crushed the console market with the PS2 version. The same can't be said for a niche PC release such as SR2.

I'm curious - do you have any evidence indicating the the American PC game market does not have sufficient DVD drive penetration to make selling DVD versions of games economically viable? Since you are the one who claimed that by excluding CD-ROM only customers they are excluding a sizeable chunk of the potential market - where's the evidence?

I've had a DVD-ROM for like 4 years in my desktop, and I wasn't by any means an early adopter (my work laptop came standard with a DVD burner even!).

PS - I do sort of agree with you despite giving you a hard time - my thought is that pressing DVD's should be cheaper than pressing CDs, and the fact that American publishers are by and large not doing this would seem to indicate that they have some evidence that doing so would not be profitable for them despite the cost savings. Or they are just being stupid, one or the other!

KiloOhm · Post by **KiloOhm** » Wed Mar 01, 2006 8:25 am

MT wrote:
When are US publishers going to get a freaking clue and release on DVD only?
When enough potential buyers get a clue and have DVD drives so that going DVD-only doesn't mean automatically excluding a sizeable chunk of the potential market. That's when.

I would like to see your data on "sizeable chunk". Even my parents $400 Dell I bought them 2 years ago has a DVD drive. I can't imagine a PC that was bought in the last few years does not have a DVD drive.

MT · Post by MT » Wed Mar 01, 2006 8:56 am

I'm curious - do you have any evidence indicating the the American PC game market does not have sufficient DVD drive penetration to make selling DVD versions of games economically viable?

No, you misread what I said. I did not claim that selling the game in DVD format is not economically viable. What I said was selling the game in DVD format exclusively necessarily excludes all potential buyers with a CD-ROM drive and that is not economically smart, particularly for a niche developer who needs to maximize potential sales.

I would like to see your data on "sizeable chunk". Even my parents $400 Dell I bought them 2 years ago has a DVD drive. I can't imagine a PC that was bought in the last few years does not have a DVD drive.

This what is called a fallacy of composition, you assume what is true for one, is true for many or all. There is no doubt, as you note, that those with PCs bought in the last few years are likely to have DVD drives. But a large number of consumers have not bought PCs with DVD drives in them in the last few years. I haven't. I happen to have a DVD drive, but I'm not the typical user.

Anyway, the only sites I could find that discuss marketshare of DVD drives were fee-based and I'm not forking over $500 to win a forum debate. That said, I'll simply provide a simple example as to why excluding CD-ROM owners automatically is a dumb strategy for the developers.

Let's say that they might sell 100,000 units. $50 ($5,000,000)

And let's say, that the DVD:CD ratio is 9:1, or 90,000 to 10,000.

By going DVD only the company is precluding themselves from $500,000 in sales revenue. In other words they have to sell an additional 10,000 units to make up for that loss. On the other hand, they lose nothing by distributing the game in CD because CDs can be read by DVD drives. So now, they get both markets.

Perhaps some might not buy the game because it isn't in the desired format. But they're gonna be outliers.

KiloOhm · Post by **KiloOhm** » Wed Mar 01, 2006 9:54 am

MT wrote:
I would like to see your data on "sizeable chunk". Even my parents $400 Dell I bought them 2 years ago has a DVD drive. I can't imagine a PC that was bought in the last few years does not have a DVD drive.
This what is called a fallacy of composition, you assume what is true for one, is true for many or all. There is no doubt, as you note, that those with PCs bought in the last few years are likely to have DVD drives. But a large number of consumers have not bought PCs with DVD drives in them in the last few years. I haven't. I happen to have a DVD drive, but I'm not the typical user.

Anyway, the only sites I could find that discuss marketshare of DVD drives were fee-based and I'm not forking over $500 to win a forum debate. That said, I'll simply provide a simple example as to why excluding CD-ROM owners automatically is a dumb strategy for the developers.

Let's say that they might sell 100,000 units. $50 ($5,000,000)

And let's say, that the DVD:CD ratio is 9:1, or 90,000 to 10,000.

By going DVD only the company is precluding themselves from $500,000 in sales revenue. In other words they have to sell an additional 10,000 units to make up for that loss. On the other hand, they lose nothing by distributing the game in CD because CDs can be read by DVD drives. So now, they get both markets.

Perhaps some might not buy the game because it isn't in the desired format. But they're gonna be outliers.

I'm not basing my assumption on 1 purchase, I'm basing it on every system I've looked at online. The only systems I've seen anywhere near recently is the e-machines that the people who buy them I would imagine do not play games since they are so underpowered. I also never claimed my answer to be anything more than my opinion. Your statement made it seem like you had factual information.

I also will say that a person with a 4+ year old system is probably not looking to purchase modern games, or is at least is wiling to accept that their choice of games is severely limited (even with a DVD drive).

BTW - you're still pulling facts out of your a**, you're again making up numbers that you have no idea whetehr or not they are correct. You stated in your original post that a "sizeable chunk of the market" had CD drives only - I called BS on that (basically) and was asking you to prove it, nothing more.

Let's for the sake of argument say your information is somehow spot on, you're also contending that people who generally have PC's that are 3+ years old buy the same portion of games that people with <2 year old systems. Do you really think that makes sense? I'm sure there are some hardcore gamers out there that have older systems because they can't afford to upgrade but even they must also be buying less games but I don't think it's an "even" distribution like you seem to think.

MT · Post by MT » Wed Mar 01, 2006 1:24 pm

You're arguing just to be argumentative.

I'm not basing my assumption on 1 purchase, I'm basing it on every system I've looked at online.

Which is no more a counterargument because not everyone has bought a PC in the last day, week, year, three years, five years. Which is precisely the point I was making.

That PCs in the last few years have come with DVD standard is not in dispute. My point is that for many people, buying or even upgrading a PC on any sort of regular basis isn't an option let alone a practice.

I also will say that a person with a 4+ year old system is probably not looking to purchase modern games, or is at least is wiling to accept that their choice of games is severely limited (even with a DVD drive).

And you accuse me of pulling shit out of my ass. I can think of more than one person in these very forums that has done exactly what you claim they don't.

BTW - you're still pulling facts out of your a**, you're again making up numbers that you have no idea whetehr or not they are correct. You stated in your original post that a "sizeable chunk of the market" had CD drives only - I called BS on that (basically) and was asking you to prove it, nothing more.

I never claimed those numbers were accurate. What I said is - and you can go reread the original post if you don't believe me is three things: (1) that I wasn't going to pay $500 to $4000 to get the data so that you would be satisfied; (2) that the numbers were made up and done so in a manner simply to make the math easy and (3) that even with the numbers skewed way in favor of DVD ownership (the only way it could be more so is if it was 100% DVD ownership something I don't believe even you are contending), the dollar loss by not being able to sell to those who don't own DVD drives is not trivial.

You seem to be hung up on the word sizeable. My guess is because you're cognitively transposing sizeable with majority of even plurality. The reality is sizeable can still only be a very small minority for it to make a difference (see for example, elections). A 10% reduction in revenue is a sizeable amout for a small developer. Or if you need a more personal example tell your boss you want 10% less of your next paycheck.

The point is, I am not claiming that the percentage of CD drive owners is large. What I am claiming is that by de facto excluding them from purchasing the game the developers are eliminating a not-insignificant amout of potential revenue.

Let me try and be clearer.

According to this report 62% of American households owned computers in 2003 (the percentage is probably higher now but that only bolsters my argument). I don't feel like taking the time to do the math to calculate what the average number of people is per household, so for the sake of argument, we'll say four. The population of the U.S. is 295,734,134. Divide by 4 that makes 73,933,533 households. So far so good.

Let's say of those households 50% play games. That's 36,966,766 households. Of those let's say that another half are serious gamers: 18,483,383 households. And let's say 5% of those households do not own a cd-rom drive.

That is 924,169 households who are excluded by default from purchasing the game because the game is in DVD format only. Multiply that by $39.90 (the price listed by GoGamer) and that is $36,874,343 of potential revenue lost from the start.

Let's for the sake of argument say your information is somehow spot on, you're also contending that people who generally have PC's that are 3+ years old buy the same portion of games that people with <2 year old systems. Do you really think that makes sense? I'm sure there are some hardcore gamers out there that have older systems because they can't afford to upgrade but even they must also be buying less games but I don't think it's an "even" distribution like you seem to think.

Who knows? You're addressing a claim I'm not making. The claim I'm making is that when you're in business to make money, arbitrarily excluding potential buyers is moronic. Short of nobody owning CD-ROM drives, the specific numbers don't matter.

Now, as someone claimed, it may be that distributing via DVD media is cheaper and that offsets the potential lost revenue. I don't know that to be true, but if so, it obviously negates my point. But ceterus paribus, it makes no sense to publish in a medium that by default excludes potential buyers.

Anyway, I've written way more on this subject than I could possibly want to. It's simply good business to maximize the size of the market. Few if any DVD owners who want the game aren't going to buy it because it's in CD format. No CD owners can buy the game if they want to if it's only in DVD format. It's a simple as that.

Sandpuppy · Post by **Sandpuppy** » Wed Mar 01, 2006 2:55 pm

But ceterus paribus, it makes no sense to publish in a medium that by default excludes potential buyers.

It does if the means of providing that excluded medium are not cost effective. Point of diminishing returns and all that. It's the reason movie studios quit printing movies on VHS even though there is still a fairly sizeable portion of the population that still does not own a DVD player for their TVs. Now, the cost of pressing and shipping VHS compared to DVD is probably much greater than PC-CD vs PC-DVD, but there is a threshhold. One that the UK has apparently already crossed, as most of their PC games are printed on DVD nowadays.

I'd wager that the lack of DVD titles in the US PC games marketplace has less to do with accurate market representation, and more to do with outdated, lazy research or mandates handed down by the big retailers.

MT · Post by MT » Wed Mar 01, 2006 3:23 pm

Look up ceterus paribus and you'll see why your response makes no sense as a counter argument to the statement you quoted.

Kobra · Post by **Kobra** » Wed Mar 01, 2006 3:25 pm

There are people out there with only CD drives these days? Where? I haven't seen any...

Even shit $300 systems all come with DVD drivers - and have so for a few years. Can you even BUY a CD Drive anymore? I thought everything was DVD a couple years back and it was pretty much accepted as standard?

Personally, I think it is a silly and stupid move to NOT make games exclusively on DVD.

Papageno · Post by **Papageno** » Wed Mar 01, 2006 5:34 pm

While it may be true that there is some percentage of the "gaming" installed base out there whose PC does not have a DVD ROM drive, I would venture to say that a vanishingly small percentage of those machines could even come close to playing Space Rangers 2 (let alone something like FEAR or CoD2). Plus there's the extra (albeit small) expense of printing a minimum of 2 CDs vs one DVD.

knob · Post by **knob** » Wed Mar 01, 2006 6:04 pm

It's just so annoying that they bump up games graphically until you're forced to upgrade your video card and other such things, but they won't do it with a DVDs.

And it's not like DVD drives are expensive (Unless you try to buy one at Best Buy). I bought mine off of Newegg for about $40, and I'm sure you could find them cheaper these days.

Greggy_D · Post by **Greggy_D** » Wed Mar 01, 2006 9:53 pm

My God...this argument is as tired as the Floppy-CD transition. People WITHOUT DVD drives need to get with the program and drop 20 bucks on a drive. Hell, top of the line burners are under $40. Times and prices are definitely better now than back in '93-'94 when CD-ROM drives were $100-200.

Stop catering to the "weak" and now they ARE the minority (i.e. CD-ROM only customers). Publish only on DVD and force them to upgrade, if they haven't already. Europe obviously has no problem with this concept.

Greggy_D · Post by **Greggy_D** » Wed Mar 01, 2006 9:57 pm

MT wrote:
That PCs in the last few years have come with DVD standard is not in dispute. My point is that for many people, buying or even upgrading a PC on any sort of regular basis isn't an option let alone a practice.

Then FUCK THEM. They don't need to play ANY recently released game if upgrading is not an option. Don't penalize the rest of us because Jimbo Trailer Trash won't/can't spend 20 bucks to upgrade his drive.

Greggy_D · Post by **Greggy_D** » Wed Mar 01, 2006 10:02 pm

MT wrote:
The point is, I am not claiming that the percentage of CD drive owners is large. What I am claiming is that by de facto excluding them from purchasing the game the developers are eliminating a not-insignificant amout of potential revenue.

The claim I'm making is that when you're in business to make money, arbitrarily excluding potential buyers is moronic.

This is bullshit. If this were true, games would still be on floppy and Oblivion would be published on 5000 1.44MB Floppies.

You could also apply your "logic" to video cards. Do you have the same feelings about the person who bought a Dell last year with an onboard Intel Video shitset? They are "excluded" and "eliminating revenue" according to you but you don't see Bethesda bending over and accommodating these people.

Papageno · Post by **Papageno** » Wed Mar 01, 2006 10:10 pm

And it's not like he's going to be running FEAR or Pirates or even UT 2004 if his machine didn't come with a DVD-ROM built-in. I suppose for those people whose drives crapped out on them since they bought their machine and are left with a CD-ROM or CD burner only, that the CD releases are actually useful, but come on, if they've got the disposable income to buy a 20 dollar game like Freelancer or UT2k4, how do they not have it to fix a superbasic system component like a DVD drive? If money's that tight, buy one game title less and you're set. And if it's tighter still, you need to be spending it on rent and groceries, not PCs and games.