Dave Ferrell said:
"SFC3 did not have disappointing sales."
I stand corrected, and am sincerely glad that SFC3 did NOT have disappointing sales and that I was incorrect in making that statement. I do not have any privileged information in that regard and that statement was my impression just based on the general buzz of SFC3 relative to SFC and SFC2, and is HARDLY scientific.
I did not mean to offend.
But I cannot help but get the feel that even at this point, SFC2's following, despite its age, is currently comparable to SFC3's following, and that SFC3 support within the gaming community is decaying at a more rapid rate than SFC2 support. That, coupled with Activision's remarkable complaint to Viacom implies that Activision was disappointed with the sales of Star Trek software (Armada, Elite Force, SFC3, Bridge Commander, Armada 2, Elite Force 2, Away Team). Of those seven titles, 4 were games that did well enough that they either got a sequel or were a sequel themselves while under Activision, leaving 3 titles holding-the-bag so to speak: Bridge Commander, Away Team, and SFC3. Of the 3, clearly Away Team was the big loser, but just as clearly, Activision could not have been overwhelmed with sales of the other remaining titles either. Activision's apparent lack of support of Taldren in trying to get a patch going (and that's just hearsay I my part: I have no concrete info on it), furthers suspicion. But once again, it's all conjecture.
Also, it's just an educated guess here, but I would think the target sales for SFC3 would be significantly higher than for SFC2: bigger budget(?), more complete license, and more EXPENSIVE license agreement. But to the casual observer, at least at this point in time, SFC3's following seems to be comparable and not clearly larger than SFC. And, as I already said, I suspect SFC3's interest-decay to be much more rapid than SFC2's. But, obviously, I could be wrong.
Now don't get me wrong: as an SFC/Taldren fan, even an SFB-oriented one, for SFC3 to be considered within the industry as a success is A Very Good Thing. It dramatically increases the likelihood that SFC will eventually continue hand-in-hand with the Star Trek license even across a THIRD publisher (to continue across 2 publishers is impressive enough in this business, by the way). Personally, however, I hope that SFC2's long-term interest will serve as the catalyst for an SFC4 rather than SFC3's short-term(?) sales figures. Why? Because if the impetus for SFC4 is perceived as being due to SFC3's commercial success, it will likely migrate further from my beloved SFB mechanics in the hopes of broadening the market for the initial sales spike. Whereas if SFC2's slavish following is perceived as the impetus for SFC4, then I would expect SFC4 to be MORE SFBish in rules.
But once again, I did not mean to offend with my [mis]characterization of SFC3 sales as disappointing. Furthermore, I'm grateful for the SFC:OP support! Thanks, David Ferrell (and everyone else so involved)!
I DO think it would be an interesting question to ask everyone in this thread:
"If SFC4 ever materializes, will it be because of the success/persistence of SFC3 OR the success/persistence of SFC2[OP/EAW]? Just curious to hear what other people think.
Thanks!
-TF
P.S.: While trying to get an idea about the market demand for SFC3 by perusing ebay listings, I couldn't fight the temptation: I went ahead an just PURCHASED a copy of SFC3, because even though it leaves most of my beloved SFB rulebook bleeding and dying at the side of the road, it just LOOKS so darned cool! UI looks good, good price [now], and the beta patch available for download. Besides, I already have SFC, EAW, and OP. Might as well give 3 a shot. But damned if I'll get used to only 4 shields
!
Topic: If Trek Liscense is Split Up Again, What Happens to SFC Series? (Read 23849 times)