Kickstarter Physical Extras

[rubblebeam]

I had no interest in physical stuff and my selections in the backer page reflected that. It might be better to compile a list of people who have selected physical rewards and seeing if they'd be willing to substitute - hopefully most if not all can be convinced; small runs of specialized stuff is probably going to cost a small fortune...

This is what I'm afraid of. Imagine someone who gets access in a few days and finds this thread full of these kinds of posts. They're going to feel pressurized into giving up something that they want and have spent that extra bit of their money on. What's a poll going to achieve? "sorry the majority of folk have decided you're not going to get what you paid for"?

[upupandaway]

I had no interest in physical stuff and my selections in the backer page reflected that.

 

+1

[NineLine]

This is what I'm afraid of. Imagine someone who gets access in a few days and finds this thread full of these kinds of posts. They're going to feel pressurized into giving up something that they want and have spent that extra bit of their money on. What's a poll going to achieve? "sorry the majority of folk have decided you're not going to get what you paid for"?

 

That is not true...

[rubblebeam]

That is not true...

 

What's not true? Folk wont feel pressurized into giving up their rewards?

[NineLine]

That majority is going to rule in this... ED is going to do the best they can to make sure people are satisfied with the outcome.

[tough boy]

Actually I was really looking forward to the physical extras (got two in my pledge level). I'm a sucker for collectibles but especially I longed for the strategy guide, for the simple reason that I'm just getting into hi-fi sims and I'm crap at it and learning material seems to be all scattered through the internet so having a reference manual written by the experts would have been very cool and useful. I only care about manuals really.

Having said so, I will understand if it's not viable for ED to produce and ship them, and won't complain much. Would definitely like to have access to the content as soon as it is released as "modules" though, and not having to wait for the "single package" solution.

[NineLine]

The strategy guide is a tough one, I am not sure what RRG's plans were for that, or how they were gonna pull that one off.

[rubblebeam]

I think its a bad idea to have this topic when access still hasn't been resolved. That's all i'm saying

[NineLine]

I think its a bad idea to have this topic when access still hasn't been resolved. That's all i'm saying

 

 

Its a simple discussion to gauge peoples thoughts on the extras, its not going to decide anything. ED is picking up stuff promised by another company at great cost, there is nothing wrong with getting a feel for where peoples heads and hearts are one this... I appreciate your concern for those that dont have access yet, but nothing is going to be decided right away.

[Flying Penguin]

Whilst not a massive part of my thinking, the printed manuals/tactics guides I'd been keen to have, if costs aren't prohibitive. The manuals have to be written anyway so printing is the only additional cost, though I can see why the tactics guide would be problematic.

 

The t-shirts and posters, nah.....

[Bucic]

I'd like to know which extras are of highest cost to ED. I may take it under consideration and choose extras easier to dish out.

 

I'd also like to see a 'give up your extras - back the DCS core development' option (AI, damage model etc.).

 

In any case I don't think ED owes us any extras on th ebehalf of RRG. Or does it?

[NineLine]

I'd like to know which extras are of highest cost to ED. I may take it under consideration and choose extras easier to dish out.

 

I'd also like to see a 'give up your extras - back the DCS core development' option (AI, damage model etc.).

 

In any case I don't think ED owes us any extras on th ebehalf of RRG. Or does it?

 

I dont know the legal obligations if any, nor do I want to even try and comment on that. I work in a print shop so I am getting some prices to better gauge what costs might be, the strategy guide is the one that I am no clue on though... I wouldnt know where they would have to begin to put something like that together or what the costs to do so would be.

[Flagrum]

I dont know the legal obligations if any, nor do I want to even try and comment on that. I work in a print shop so I am getting some prices to better gauge what costs might be, the strategy guide is the one that I am no clue on though... I wouldnt know where they would have to begin to put something like that together or what the costs to do so would be.

That strategy guide would be the more interesting read of all the manuals/guides. But I can, too, see the problem here. Something comparable was never available from ED. Learning the machine is one thing, but learning how to use it properly a completely different beast. But, the reproduction costs all aside, just writing up something like that ... where to start, where to end? And in the end, it still is only just theory. One would still need to practice and put things into an actual context.

 

So, the money for such a guide is perhaps better invested in a high quality campaign and training missions - which were already part of the planned product, iirc? I'd say, better make sure the missions are well rounded - that would benefit the player probably better than a chunk of (virtual) paper.

[NineLine]

That strategy guide would be the more interesting read of all the manuals/guides. But I can, too, see the problem here. Something comparable was never available from ED. Learning the machine is one thing, but learning how to use it properly a completely different beast. But, the reproduction costs all aside, just writing up something like that ... where to start, where to end? And in the end, it still is only just theory. One would still need to practice and put things into an actual context.

 

So, the money for such a guide is perhaps better invested in a high quality campaign and training missions - which were already part of the planned product, iirc? I'd say, better make sure the missions are well rounded - that would benefit the player probably better than a chunk of (virtual) paper.

 

I would prefer Wags training missions to a strategy guide personally... I can crack open Shaw's book for tactics and such :)

[mjeh]

I ended up with a hundred-something pledge, first and foremost to see the funder succeed. Aside from all flyables, the rewards I really wanted (which dictated what tier I ended up paying for) was alpha access and to get the fw-190 as soon as possible.

 

To me most of the points of the so called matrix tier reward system seem kind of moot now that ED is releasing the individual flyables as DCS plugins anyway. I do hope to retain alpha access though, and I'm glad to see ED committed to honouring pledge promises.

 

As for printed manuals, I think they would be nice but I'd be quite happy with just the PDF. If physical rewards were to be taken out then I personally wouldn't shed any tears, but it would be nice if ED could make some sort of symbolic amend for it. Maybe a cool making-of video with a couple of guest appearances by the TFC warbirds? I ofcourse wouldn't mind this being available to non backers as well, so long as it is actually made :)

 

My 2 cents

[Paradox]

Eagle Dynamics have picked up this project at vast cost to themselves. I have a little bit of experience in the logistics of printing and shipping things like t-shirts and physical goods to a group of people located all around the planet. It's really expensive...

 

I appreciate that something has been promised and people want the things they paid for but I would rather that ED didn't have to pick up quite so much slack.

 

However I didn't choose a tier with physical rewards so my opinion should be worth less than someone that did since they would have more interest than me.

 

It's probably a tough situation really and I hope it can be resolved to everyone's satisfaction.

[Whiplash]

I'm not sure what kind of legal mess it would make if people don't get the physical reward they were basing their pledge on. I saw a link somewhere regarding the first kickstarter lawsuit and the last thing I think ED needs is to get tangled up with something similar. I have no idea where the line is drawn between partnership with Luther and ED. If ED is distant enough from Luther that they can legally remove themselves from the KS then that is probably for the best. Hopefully all that has to be shown to avoid any kind of lawsuit is evidence that an attempt was made to fulfill the contract with the backers. My gut feel is no matter what the majority decides, someone will put up a fight.

 

Something to throw around the office though Sith, might be to add an option to wave the physical content on the the DCS backer page. That could be a really quick way for ED to see where everyone stands anonymously. It would also highlight those who maybe don't know whats going on yet because obviously their options would not have anything selected. I also think you guys could try to come up with some kind of incentive to get people to wave the physical content. Would it be more cost effective to make a custom configuration or variation of some of the planes in trade for physical content? Hell, I know I would give up a reward tier or two for the P-51B variant. Or, the B-17 AI was never part of the original KS, could that be tide into an added incentive to wave the physical content. Or how about a custom backer skin? Not being a developer I have no experience to backup what I am suggesting so excuse me if I am way off base.

 

As far as a strategy manual, maybe see if we could organize a community one. Just an idea but ED could developed a format for people to submit their best strategies?? I'm not sure if that could work, but I'm just trying to brainstorm here. Also, does ED plan to create a manual for all of the planes to the same degree as the P-51 or FW-190? As long as PDF's exist of the manuals I don't think it should be hard to get people to wave those options.

[Whiplash]

Going along with what I just said about incentives, why not establish some kind of point system for the different tier levels that a backer could redeem for future content or other ED modules?

[Grim_Smiles]

Going along with what I just said about incentives, why not establish some kind of point system for the different tier levels that a backer could redeem for future content or other ED modules?

 

:thumbup:

"Must spread rep around before giving it to Whiplash again"

[Stonehouse]

My pledge was the flyables with beta access and DCS World FW190 beta access and I think a t-shirt for $92 including postage if I remember correctly and understood the "everything at the $50 level" thing.

My main concern is to get the aircraft and I'm fine with waiving the t-shirt (lol sorry for the pun). Putting a choice button/tick box into the DCS:WW2 Backer rewards page that was set up for us seems a good idea and a reasonably cheap way to get someone to agree to giving up the right to the physical extras and avoid future legal issues. My guess is the only people who would have a problem with not doing so would be those getting printed aircraft manuals as often they are regarded as collectors items.

 

<edit> I still would like beta access to DCS:WW2 modules if it was at all possible

Edited June 10, 2014 by Stonehouse
forgot beta access to DCSWW2

[Flagrum]

Going along with what I just said about incentives, why not establish some kind of point system for the different tier levels that a backer could redeem for future content or other ED modules?

+1

Excellent idea. Even the infrastructure is already there - either as cupon codes or perhaps by utilizing the bonus account system.

[Pizzicato]

I put in $150 and was really looking forward to the physical manuals. The recent turn of events, however, means that I'd be OK with dropping the physical rewards and just going with the game/aircraft.

[cichlidfan]

Going along with what I just said about incentives, why not establish some kind of point system for the different tier levels that a backer could redeem for future content or other ED modules?

 

The general idea is not bad but the problem lies in the 'future content' part. The best solution involves putting this whole thing to rest finally and completely, in a timely fashion. As it is, we have digital rewards that won't be available for as much as a year (not complaining about the timeline here). Having further credit points hanging over ED's head even beyond that time doesn't accomplish that, while still adding an additional bookkeeping task to the issue.

[NineLine]

The general idea is not bad but the problem lies in the 'future content' part. The best solution involves putting this whole thing to rest finally and completely, in a timely fashion. As it is, we have digital rewards that won't be available for as much as a year (not complaining about the timeline here). Having further credit points hanging over ED's head even beyond that time doesn't accomplish that, while still adding an additional bookkeeping task to the issue.

 

Perhaps it will come to some sort of coupon like the have done previously. I really dont konw at this point some of this stuff is going to be tough to do, and really wasnt well thought out IHMO, as for the legal obligations, I am not sure how much ED is legally responsible to do... and Wags said, they couldnt go into that. I am certainly biased in my own opinion, so its really what everyone wants and what ED can do... but they said they would honor the KS

[Flagrum]

The general idea is not bad but the problem lies in the 'future content' part. The best solution involves putting this whole thing to rest finally and completely, in a timely fashion. As it is, we have digital rewards that won't be available for as much as a year (not complaining about the timeline here). Having further credit points hanging over ED's head even beyond that time doesn't accomplish that, while still adding an additional bookkeeping task to the issue.

Concluding this mess asap would be ideal. But the idea could still be usefull in cases where - whatever solution might be found in the end - would still have rough edges.