MACADEMIC

Luthier, My feeling is that the decision reaches way further than just achieving or not achieving the Me262 stretchgoal. But of course only you and your investors can know how deep your pockets are and if you really can afford to forgo all future revenues from the Spit, the Kurfürst and the Jug. I don't think you should, from my limited viewpoint. MAC

Voted for 'Pay for all planes', but would have voted for free trainer airplane and pay for all others if that was included as an option in the poll :) MAC

Of course it's a nice thought that $30 invested early would give you a total of 5 DCS level warbirds plus a free game. However in my opinion belongs to the category 'If something sounds too good to be true, it most likely isn't'. $6 per DCS level airplane is way too little money for the value. I'd rather fund something that can be financially viable and has a chance to exist than an utopic dream. Even if I have to pay more to get those planes later on. MAC

Here's the list of things that can be changed and that can't from the KS 'Creator FAQs': "Can a project be edited after launching? Yes, you can edit the following content after launching: — Project description
 — Video and image
 — Rewards (add new ones or edit those not yet backed) 
— Your profile 
— Project FAQs The only things that cannot be edited after launch are: — The funding goal 
— The project deadline 
— Your Kickstarter name 
— Rewards that have already been selected by a backer" The goal stated on DCS WWII: Europe 1944 is: "The initial kickstarter goal is needed to fund a longer more extensive beta testing period for the game, giving all its components extra polish, and to make the game landscape more alive by creating a larger variety of ground objects and vehicles, and spending more time to hand-craft various historical areas such as accurate recreations of more coastline villages, important bridges, unique airfields, and more." So while the free flyable aircraft to be included with the game as a free download is part of the project description, this description can be changed while leaving the original funding goal (above) intact (it's a tightrope act, I know, but if it's technically possible it's probably better than a cancellation, see below). If such a change is based on an honest and openly publicised assessment of the situation, it is my opinion that most people will upheld their funding and the original funding goal will still be met. Others would be entirely free to withdraw their pledge. The important thing here is to make such a change while the KS campaign is ongoing. Once it's finished and pledges are collected, the creator could make himself liable for refund and/or legal action if it turns out that he is unable to complete the project and deliver on the reward promises. From the FAQ's: "If I am unable to complete my project as promised, what should I do? If you realize that you will be unable to follow through on your project before funding has ended, you are expected to cancel it. If your project is successfully funded, you are required to fulfill all rewards or refund any backer whose reward you do not or cannot fulfill. A failure to do so could result in damage to your reputation or even legal action by your backers. To avoid problems, don't over-promise when creating your project. If issues arise, communicate immediately, openly, and honestly with your backers." MAC

From the rewards descriptions: It says nowhere that you are entitled to three flyable aircraft for free. You can't change the rewards as soon as there are takers, but you can change the project goals (see Kickstarter guidelines). Hence, as long as there is at least one flyable aircraft that will be delivered for free, the quoted rewards would be satisfied by delivering the Mustang and/or the Dora. MAC

Ilya, I've already suggested a change of project goals a while ago. I'm happy you're considering this now. In my opinion, reading the KS guidelines, you can do this. You can't however change the promised rewards, effectively they could change as well however once the project goals have changed. This is so because of the way they are formulated. My suggestion: - use the kickstarter funds to create the base game - create one or two trainer aircraft (a Tiger Moth and/or a Bücker Jungmann) - release the game and trainer aircraft for free - in the game, create a training infrastructure that allows newcomers to find experienced instructors to help them fly hi-fi trainer planes - award backers of above $20 or above $30 with digital copies of the P-51 and/or FW190 only - thus game will intially be populated by trainers, P-51s and FW190s - release the three other aircraft some time after game release as commercial products at DCS level pricing The way I see it, if you come out with a very honest assessment now, that this is the way to make this project happen, and that it otherwise has become unfeasible to pursue the original goals, you will still have this community behind you and you will still meet the original funding goal. The aim now has to be to make this project sustainable long term and not to aim for stretch goals. MAC

From the Kickstarter guidelines it seems entirely possible to change the goals of a project during a campaign. You can't change the rewards once you have some pledges for them, but reversing on the promise to deliver a free game and airplanes could be entirely changed. I think it would be a not only smart, but vital move for the project. MAC

No. That would be limited to the P-51D5, the FW190-D9 and any other aircraft that is developed by reaching the KS stretchgoals. Anything beyond that or not financed by reaching stretchgoals is not promised to be made available for free to pledgers of $40 and above. MAC

No, not quite, I think DCS has been around much longer than the free DCS World plus one flyable free aircraft. They added that later. MAC

Hi HJM, - a paid flyable is one that you don't get for free with the base game (so it's the P51-D5, the FW190-D9 and any other plane that is developed by reaching stretch goals) - ALL paid flyables then are the P51-D5, the FW190-D9 and any other plane that is developed by reaching stretch goals MAC

I'm sorry but you are mistaken, since you're talking about DCS World and not DCS WWII. It is promised to be released with three free aircraft, the Spitfire MkIX, the Bf109-K4 and the P-47. You don't have to pledge anything to get those. With a $20 pledge you can additionally select either the DCS P-51D or the FW190-D9 as a digital copy to use in DCS WWII, with $30 you get both. $40 gets you both plus any aircraft that will be made by making stretch goals (which looks unlikely now). So if you previously bought the DCS P-51D and the FW190-D9 (to fly them in DCS World) a pledge will give you nothing you wouldn't get anyway, or be able to use in DCS WWII anyway, except for the backer's badge and Beta access. Notwithstanding some of the material gifts some other backing amounts grant you. Quote from the original KS page: MAC

Do you mean that DCS World is for free and comes with a flyable Su 25? That is a good idea in my opinion, keeping in mind that the Su 25 doesn't have a clickable cockpit and is not of the same quality as the A 10, P-51 or others which you have to buy to enjoy. But DCS WWII promises to give away not only the game but also 3 (!) of the most desirable aircraft in DCS quality for free, to everyone. What that leaves them to sell I do not know. MAC

Mogster, let's not confuse this kickstarter's success for market potential. It's one thing to put your money up for a promise and another to buy a game that's ready and available. If a good game is produced it will find a good market. Question is only what revenues can be made with this venture since it's all promised to be free. MAC

In my opinion it would be up to Ilya to explain what he would do with extra funds beyond the intitial $100.000,- should the first stretch goal not be reached. It's a legitmate question. MAC

Here I'd caution about the focal range of the projectors. Quite a range there to the various canopy surfaces, especially with turning the head and panning sideways. I don't think it could provide a focused image in that setup :( MAC

From the geneb's first post: That's right, but not to forget you won't be able to reach out to turn knobs, flick switches etc. in a setup like this, without your hands getting in the way of the projectors ;) MAC

I think I found the answer in the tested.com report posted above by hegykc: MAC

2nd paragraph here MAC

Hi geneb, This is very interesting! I'm not sure however I completely get the principle. I understand you're wearing shutter glasses, and there are two micro projectors seated above each glassframe projecting onto a retro reflective surface, the light reflecting straight back to your eyes, information reaching each sequentially. There's a tracking system to determine where in the scene you're looking at. But what's the camera doing? ? MAC

Luthier, Please allow me to comment on your above statement. It seems to me that your kickstarter campaign and business model (as far as we have learned about it) suffer from similar (unrealistic) outlooks, which endanger the entire project down the line. While the kickstarter will most likely be successful in reaching its primary goal of $100.000, I fear that your promise of making the game including three DCS level aircraft available free to everyone in about a years time will financially shipwreck this project. Here's why. You mentioned that your intention is to kick the game into life 'with a bang' and provide you with a userbase large enough to sell additional content. But similar to the kickstarter, where you came to see that the overwhelming majority of people who pledge are already flight sim fans, not newcomers, you will find that this will also be the very users and customers you have once you release the game, map and the three airplanes, at least initially. Only that you have nothing left to sell to your core audience, hence no revenues. Your core market of about 2000 flight sim enthusiasts doesn't have the expectation that a game has to be free, nor a map, nor DCS level airplanes. It's our hobby, we constantly invest in computers, monitors, flight sticks and software. It's normal. But to apply a F2P model (in the scope you have projected) to a high fidelity simulation environment is akin to financial suicide. F2P works well in easy action arcade environments, but for this you only need something that looks good and plays easy, certainly nothing as realistic and hard to master as DCS level airplanes. For those you need time, effort and dedication, as with any real airplane. It is commendable that you attempt to bring more people to flight simulations, but please do it in a sustainable way. Use the support that is obvious from the core community to build something lasting, not something that will run out of money and fail. My suggestion is that you change what you can, which is the goals of the project (reward promises you can't change now). Use the kickstarter funds to create a Northern France and Southern England map, make one or two DCS level trainer aircraft (e.g. a Tiger Moth and/or a Bücker Jungmann) and release together as free for everyone. This is enough to provide newcomers with a taste of a realistic flying experience within the time period and will wet their appetite for more. To at the same time stay true to the rewards promises, provide all backers above the $30 pledge level with digital copies of the DCS Mustang and the Dora to be used in WWII. Sometime after initial release, you can by and by introduce more airplanes, maps, campaigns as commercial products. I know it would not be easy to go back on your inital goals and announcements, but I am positive that this community will much prefer an adjustment to realistic goals now while you can than experience your failure to deliver down the line due to excessive initial goals. I know what I'd rather back. Thank you for your consideration. MAC

Certainly not my intention at all. On the contrary, completely agree that presently the graphics are the Achilles' heel of DCS. Also, I haven't been too impressed with this aspect in the WIP pictures of EDGE, but I'm still giving it the benefit of doubt that this is nowhere finished and I'm hoping that there's much more and better to come. On the other hand, for me it's hard to conceive how big parts of the community are reacting with 'Ohh', 'Amazing', 'Gorgeous' and the like to these early shots. This may send the wrong signals to devs, as can happen in closed systems. MAC

What makes you so sure...? We're talking about the new IG? I noticed you've been campaigning for graphical changes in DCS for a long time, I agree if we're talking the present engine, but do we know enough about EDGE yet? Anyway, the technology for photorealistic flying environments would certainly be here. Example below. MAC

Nice details, but colors and especially sky looks really flat. Hopefully this is not the engine but a matter of artistic direction! MAC

Great video MP! Ilya should have enlisted you from the start! MAC

Good to see these graphs, and thank you for your kind words Yo-Yo. It is incredibly interesting and rewarding to work with you. :book: MAC