Wizard_03
-
Posts
1771 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Wizard_03
-
-
If its not realistic for the aircrafts time period, by all means keep them out of the sim. It’s unfortunate, but I’d rather have an accurate representation of the F-16 then a fantasy one. Thanks for the update!
-
I dont see how this addresses anything that I said.Not understanding how their own software works, nor communities, nor word of mouth, nor… well… economics — a rather important factor in sticking around.
You're still ignoring the fundamental implementation issue. It's not a matter of “buying based on other people's decisions” — it's a matter of their decisions making mine meaningless because of how this module is supposed to work. Nor is it a workable solution to make my decisions mandatory for them.
I can buy this module as much as I like — and I really would like to — but I would never be able to use it while actually flying any of the relevant aircraft in any meaningful way.
It also completely misses the point. This is also not difficult to understand.
Alright I’ve had enough my arguments rest, I have nothing more to say.
-
If you don't want to buy the module for single player, then don't.
If you don't want to buy the module for multiplayer, then don't.
If you don't have the module and want to play on a server that uses it, then buy the module.
If you don't have the module and you want to play on a server that uses it, then find a different server.
This is not difficult to understand.
In a year, most people who didn't want to buy it will probably have bought it, and the others will be happy in their own world.
This
-
So basicly you dont understand why people who have no interest in doing carrier ops have an issue with having to buy a carrier DLC in order to be able to play with their friends?
You dont understand why splitting a, in comparison, small community forcefully into more and more smaller people based on their willingness to spend money on things that they dont even use is bad?
I mean even EA doesnt paywall maps anymore due to large games like battlefield running into issues by paywall splitting the community.
The easy solution, and that solution was given 123423 times allready would be server licencing. But forcing someone to spend money on something he wont ever use just so he can participate is a very bad move and will most likely result in a comercial failure due to overall lack of interest.
But I mean, the obvious solution would be a battle royale mode :megalol:
Many of us have a huge interest in carrier ops. Including our friends that play online.
-
Don't care.
Other bottom line is that while I would like to have better ATC and maybe even some carrier action, I don't want my having it keeping me away from those who don't (or vice versa), and between the two, being able to play with others is vastly more important than carrier animations I won't even look at while fiddling with knobs. One involves actually playing the game, not just passively gazing at the scenery. One lets me talk more people into reckless expenditures and the other does not.
And really, there is no good reason why there should be a conflict between the two to begin with.
There's no “if” about it — it has already happened, and it is already hurting future sales and dividing the community before it the actual sales have even begun.
This outcome was obvious, predicable, and inevitable. The fact that the whole idea wasn't nixed from the get-go sends a rather worrying message as far as the corporate governance (and indeed future) of ED goes.
I don’t feel the same way. I don’t buy things based on other people’s decisions, if I want it and they don’t then; tough I don’t get to play with them anymore.
-
Also an idea, although that would probably require something more to be added to the base package to be a viable sales proposition for new players.
Like MAC? Bottom line for me is I want the new carrier comms whatever it takes to get them in the game.
-
So basically, they're mispriced then. Maybe ED should fix that problem.
Or they could not make it free to play and charge for the base game.
-
Then why would the 30% still buy the carrier when they see this coming?:music_whistling:
Because them and I want a more realistic sim.
Perhaps, but most likely not since they're well into the long tail on modules that have very little in the way of upkeep costs.No.
These modules have a huge “upkeep cost” they take years to release and sometimes even longer to complete
-
So make everything more expensive? That won’t work because people in this thread are already saying they can’t afford the carrier module.
-
Because I bought the hornet with the impression that buying the hornet would give me the full hornet experience.
Like I said whats next?
40$ DLC Air to air refueling?
20$ JTAC with propper comms?
Like where do you draw the line?
I consider something like communication a core gameplay feature for a simulation, nothing less.
What the alternative? ED creating some sort of subscription program where we all pay for everything all the time. The way they have it now, you have the freedom to chose what you’d like to support, by voting with your money.
-
Yes and due to the implementation of "everyone has to buy it", it wont happen, as not everyone will get it. Like I said, if you get out of the ED forums and check the multiplayer communities signs are its not going to happen since using it would divide the playerbase in an unfortunate way for said communities
Also with a dlc like that, whats next? A nice looking tanker with propper comms for 40 bucks?
Everyone does not have to buy it. But if you want the full hornet/tomcat experience why wouldn’t you? That’s what I don’t understand.
I get the feeling not everyone is interested in hyper realism all the time. But that’s why we have server menus. They are not taking anything away from what we have now. Those that won’t buy it for whatever reason don’t have too. They can still play online just not with the new carrier
-
What makes you think that there would be more active servers using this dlc than there are using the ww2 asset pack?
Because the hornet is most popular module in the game and carrier ops are a huge part of that experience.
-
Its nothing to do with being charged for work thats not the issue, What he does not understand is, You cant join join servers with this carrier module or WW2 assets packs thats all the problem is, ED need to find a way to solve that issue.
I’ll concede that, but making it free is not the answer either.
-
Thats wishfull thinking at best.
Looking at the reactions outside of this forum it looks like none of the bigger servers will implement the carrier, due to most of the mp community being understandably unwilling to pay for core features.
If you have a small community of 100 dudes, and 30% would buy the carrier, you would lose 70% of your group so yea your server wont have it :doh:
The 70 percent can still play the game on their own servers without the carrier
-
I am sure ED really appreciates your staunch defense for their money losing decisions.
How are they going to lose money by charging for their work?!?
-
because I wont use it. i'm using the things that i already chose to spend money on.
That’s fine, just don’t complain that you can’t join people’s servers who did buy it. I’m quite sure the group of people like yourself who don’t want it will create their own servers without it.
-
It’s not going to divide the community if we all buy it. You already spent 70 bucks on the hornet 60 for the PG map. Why would you do that and NOT buy the carrier?!? Lol
-
the whining is justified for once.
Really? Cause people said the exact same things when ED dared to charge for WW2 assets..
-
So have i paid 1000's every module but 2 And to find a new game because you cant afford it is just lame........................ Please no offence that is just not fair to others, To be honest animation deck crew will just dysnc anyway and do all kinds of strange stuff.Aaaaand this is the sort of elitism that has made me come to resent this community.
It’s not elitist, it’s a fact DCS expensive. Rightfully so
-
Now you're just not making any sense at all. Did you quote the wrong post?
No you said my argument is invalid I’m challenging you to present yours.
-
Non sequitur.
So how can they improve the game without money?
-
No hard feelings, but LOLNO. :lol:
So You don’t think ED deserves compensation for their work?
-
The problem is you start excluding people from servers that cant afford the module??????? THAT is not fair.
It is fair, I spent well over a thousand US dollars on DCS software and the necessary hardware set up. If you can’t afford it please find a new game, No hard feelings. But anyone who plays DCS seriously is going to buy the module and completely understand why they’ve got to pay for it. When MAC comes out, it will allow causal players an alternative.
-
Flight simming is not a cheap hobby...
Stop complaining about having to pay for EDs craftsmanship. This is not some massive Development company trying to suck money out of us, this a small group of enthusiasts building the best product possible in a tiny market. It’s going to cost money to keep them working for us. If you can’t afford it, find a new hobby. :)
[NOT REALISTIC] GBU-54,EGBU-12,GBU-39
in Wish List
Posted
Your right the hornet is much better! ;) who needs 9Gs I’ll get you with 6. Work smarter not harder.