FUBAR Posted November 11, 2004 Posted November 11, 2004 Why didn't ED take this opportunity to call the game SU-25 Flaming Cliffs, make it back-wards compatible with Lock-On then they could have found a distributer in the West without breaching their current agreement with UBI, I know it would have been a sneaky way of getting around it, but I'm sure it would have worked :D
britgliderpilot Posted November 11, 2004 Posted November 11, 2004 Re: ED and Distribution . . . . . . they could have found a distributer in the West . . . Personally, I'm not too optimistic that they could have done. Shrug. In any case, with shelf space coming at a premium and interest in flight sims decreasing, not too many shops would be likely to stock it . . . . look at the number that actually stocked Lomac. Selling it directly would seem to be a more cost-effective method of distribution . . . . . http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v121/britgliderpilot/BS2Britgliderpilot-1.jpg
Dark_Sceptre Posted November 11, 2004 Posted November 11, 2004 I think that direct to customer is the best option for a product aimed at existing flight simmers. You keep all the profits to yourself, and stay in full control of the product distribution. The downside is that no new gamers will stumble across the product, unless perhaps by ads on webpages. Realistically though, I suspect that few people ever bought Lock On because they saw it on a shelf.. though I'd love to be wrong about that one :)
BIOLOG Posted November 11, 2004 Posted November 11, 2004 UBI is not stupid. They would have notised the same game engine... And caused lots of problems... The bird of Hermes is my name eating my wings to make me tame.
britgliderpilot Posted November 11, 2004 Posted November 11, 2004 UBI is not stupid. They would have notised the same game engine... And caused lots of problems... . . . . Yeah . . . but Ubi doesn't technically own the game engine - that's a TFC right. If I've understood this correctly, what Ubi own is the right to distribute Lock On:Modern Air Combat . . . . and any immediate derivatives thereof. It might be that v1.1 changes enough of the engine to be counted as a different game . . . . or it might not. It's a fine point. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v121/britgliderpilot/BS2Britgliderpilot-1.jpg
olaleier Posted November 11, 2004 Posted November 11, 2004 I think that direct to customer is the best option for a product aimed at existing flight simmers. You keep all the profits to yourself, and stay in full control of the product distribution. The downside is that no new gamers will stumble across the product, unless perhaps by ads on webpages. Realistically though, I suspect that few people ever bought Lock On because they saw it on a shelf.. though I'd love to be wrong about that one :) Agree, I love the idea that every single ruble I pay goes straight to ED. It would be interesting to see any prediction if the increased revenue matches the lost impulse sales coming from a nice box on a shelf....but I sure hope ED makes enough from 1.1 to stay in business and keep feeding me their aerial delights. :D
Recommended Posts