New Pay Model / subscription discussion

[AdrianL]

This have been debated many times, and the answer was always no. 

No-one here knows what the DCS total sales numbers, retention figures, session play time, etc are so it is useless debating.

Best people to decide is ED.

All I know is that it will cause an absolute <profanity>-storm if they decide to go the subscription route.

Edited April 28, 2024 by AdrianL

[MAXsenna]

Bla bla bla. You're not on target. Sigh...

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

5 hours ago, JonathanRL said:

As a member of the community; I am strictly against any sort of subscription model that limits what I already have purchased. The very idea that I, who own almost every jet module would lose it all if I did not pay a subscription fee is ludicrous.

I can see a subscription being used in the same way as it is used in the gaming community today being applied to DCS but the option to pay a fixed sum should always be there and its addition cannot limit things already purchased. (i.e you can purchase FC2024 for a fixed sum or pay 5 bucks per months to EA Play; both options give you access to the game)

 

That would be the most obscene outcome and would effectively force many to toss DCS into the bin. I'm pretty sure ED doesn't want that and they know.

Given where DCS has gone in terms of monetization, a subscription model would either be a hard sell or just absolutely pointless. They can't limit access to what we've purchased, I'm sure a number of regulators across the world might take umbrage with that. My questions would be:

1. Are future releases going to be subscription only? If so, how does that add value to those of us, like you and I, who already own a substantial amount of content? To me, that just says "Well, sorry losers, the modules offered up on active subscriptions are now our priority since we're getting a drip feed of the purchase price??" Given the experience I've had, and many many others, with trying to convince ED that the Saber's ballistics are wrong, I would expect that frustration with everything else we have. So, I don't like that.

2. How profitable would a subscription be? Let's compare the existing FC3 price of $50 and your example of $5 a month ala EA play. That's $60 a year, so greater profit? Potentially higher margins for ED, right? But, you'll know right quick if you like FC3. So, what if I were drop a few months subscription to try it and I like it. But, DCS players are always eager to tell newbies to wait for sales. So, I've put 3 months into it, enjoy it, that's $15. It goes on sale for half off? I've spent $40, which represents a loss of $20. On the surface, it's actually not a horrible idea.

It could be used as a loss leader, a product sold at an unprofitable rate to grow customer loyalty and get them spending more. However, that could turn into an issue since ED might have to compensate by reducing discounts on other products or even discontinuing them. I think this is an untenable position given how many purchases happen during sales.

3. What happens to third parties? Can they opt out of the subscription model?

There's probably more that can be thought of and we can't get any solid proof since a business has the right to keep its figures confidential, but every smoke cloud we see from ED indicates that a more mainstream free to play model or an iRacing-esque subscription is just out of the question. I suppose if money is coming in, you just let it do so and don't try to squeeze blood from a stone.

After all, not everything can be answered by throwing more money at it.

[TimSell75]

vor 13 Minuten schrieb Vector1:

TimSell75,Go Away Too.

So everybody who disagrees with you should shut up and go away? Dream on! 

[TimSell75]

vor 54 Minuten schrieb Vector1:

TimSell75, That's is the only thing that you have got right in a while ,go away or maybe I should  translate it to Deutsch!

 

No need to, I speak multiple languages pretty fine. Nobody will go away just because you say so. Maybe apply for an admin job and try again.

[speed-of-heat]

This old chestnut again ...  FFS 

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

10 minutes ago, speed-of-heat said:

This old chestnut again ...  FFS 

Every gamer holds a degree in game design, economics, and business, don'cha know?

Clearly, a company that's been in business since the 1990s is doing something wrong in this regard and should listen.

I eagerly await DCS lootbox drops, premium currency that'll cut the weeks it takes to get out of a P-51 and into an F-86 into a matter of days, and the Everquest tie-in.

[Art-J]

7 hours ago, TimSell75 said:

The fact that somebody may have a different opinion than you, does not justify insults! Bad manners!

You're right about bad manners and too blunt response, but let's be honest - OPs theory is full of so many holes that he somewhat deserves the flak he receives. If some aspects of his opinin are just flawed, nobody's going to pat him on his back and give him "participation award" but shoot with reality check instead.

Moreover the subscription concept was already discussed ad nauseam in so many threads (which even included ED responses as well).... If OP decided it would be faster to redact and type his wall of text instead of just using search function then I can see how some might perceived him as not exactly the sharpest knive in the drawer.

[TimSell75]

vor einer Stunde schrieb Art-J:

You're right about bad manners and too blunt response, but let's be honest - OPs theory is full of so many holes that he somewhat deserves the flak he receives. If some aspects of his opinin are just flawed, nobody's going to pat him on his back and give him "participation award" but shoot with reality check instead.

Moreover the subscription concept was already discussed ad nauseam in so many threads (which even included ED responses as well).... If OP decided it would be faster to redact and type his wall of text instead of just using search function then I can see how some might perceived him as not exactly the sharpest knive in the drawer.

I never said I agree with the OP. But calling somebody idiot and telling him to go away, just because you don’t like his opinion, does not belong here. 

What he is right about, is that the current system is kind of flawed. It lives from people buying new modules every few months. To be honest, I can be proficient in 1-2 modules at a time, after a pause of a year or so I need to relearn them. So EDs System can simply not survive by people who just want to focus on 1-2 modules and be really good at them, they don’t finance the development of the base system. 

So either they get people putting 10+ modules in their virtual hangar or attract more and more new people joining the party by releasing new modules that share some of the revenue for the development of the base system.

Edited April 28, 2024 by TimSell75

[SMH]

It's like his 6th post. Not the best way to introduce yourself to the community. "Hey guize! I got an idea! Why don't we pay to fly?" 

[diego999]

2 hours ago, SMH said:

It's like his 6th post. Not the best way to introduce yourself to the community. "Hey guize! I got an idea! Why don't we pay to fly?" 

 

Two new accounts appeared on the same day writing a wall of text about ED going into subscription model. 

Something smells fishy.

 

[Qcumber]

47 minutes ago, diego999 said:

 

Two new accounts appeared on the same day writing a wall of text about ED going into subscription model. 

Something smells fishy.

 

Yes. I reported it as AI spam yesterday.

[Vee.A]

Here's Nick Grey's (the CEO of ED) answer to this question. I, for one, am thankful for it.

https://youtu.be/Fvkugzpzr-Q?si=0xzaCJ32c2Px7D-T&t=1570

 

[SharpeXB]

2 hours ago, Vee.A said:

Here's Nick Grey's (the CEO of ED) answer to this question. I, for one, am thankful for it.

https://youtu.be/Fvkugzpzr-Q?si=0xzaCJ32c2Px7D-T&t=1570

 

Good post. Yeah I don’t know why some people keep thinking a subscription model is appropriate for DCS. 

[Mammal]

an inappropriate solution to a problem that exists in the OP mind....

[Mammal]

Cute, call me a nitwit and call for ban for leaving an opinion the OP literally asked for. All this end of the world talk over a contract dispute. smh

[sirrah]

Perhaps I'm unaware of some kind of history about the OP, or maybe I'm just naïve, but I'm a bit surprised on the amount or toxicity in this thread (especially as I've never seen this kind of behaviour from some of the people that responded to this thread).

 

Admittedly, the whole "I got fat" part was weird and unnecessary, but it seems the guy is pretty green/new here, yet presumably posted his/her idea with good intentions (even though, like everyone here, I don't agree at all with this idea). I expect he has never seen any of the other discussions about this topic, or else I assume he wouldn't have gone through the trouble of posting this essay.

 

So, even though pretty much nobody wants a monthly subscription model for DCS, why is there so much hostility in all these reactions? Have I missed some sort of trolling history with this guy or something?

[Hiob]

Not gonna justifiy the tone of the conversation, but I can see why people are so frustrated with the proposal.

First, obviously an overwhelming majority thinks it is a very bad idea.

Second, this idea isn't new by any stretch of the imagination and has been brought up countless times. (...and has been shot down each and every time, including by ED). 

 

[sirrah]

9 minutes ago, Hiob said:

Not gonna justifiy the tone of the conversation, but I can see why people are so frustrated with the proposal.

First, obviously an overwhelming majority thinks it is a very bad idea.

Second, this idea isn't new by any stretch of the imagination and has been brought up countless times. (...and has been shot down each and every time, including by ED). 

 

Yes I know Hiob (and let me emphasize that I'm in the "no thank you" camp), but it was/is just the tone of some of the reactions that surprised me.

 

(I'll just leave it at me probably being naïve, when it comes to my expectations on the level of maturity on this forum)

[TimSell75]

vor 10 Stunden schrieb Vector1:

TimSell75 ,you would be my first ban , sorry ,the second , the nitwit that wrote this diatribe , would be first !

 

 

 

Well, glad for me that you will not be an Admin anywhere then.

P.S. wanting to ban somebody for simply posting his views in factual words and answering with an insult yourself is pretty much absurd.

Edited April 29, 2024 by TimSell75

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

11 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Good post. Yeah I don’t know why some people keep thinking a subscription model is appropriate for DCS. 

There's two extremes in the customer base.

There's one portion that thinks ED and co. will break into their homes and hold them at gunpoint before politely asking them to buy things.

The other, albeit much smaller, portion thinks DCS isn't monetized anywhere near enough and wants to dump loads and loads into micro transactions, because eliminating the open ended nature from DCS is a good idea.

[spacemishka]

hahaha... then i could  buy now all...and when then Ed change to subsciption model, what i sipposed to pay? I paid all already.

[slughead]

The irony of all this is that at anytime, should ED close up shop for whatever reason, none of our installs will work anymore without the license verification server. I’d be more concerned about that.

[Caveman655]

I am completely against having a subscription in DCS, but at the same time the constant early access model that ED uses is not a good one. The temptation will always be there for the next project to bring in that EA money without finishing the current project(looking at the super carrier). I personally don't see a easy answer to this and people smarter then me seem to be having the same issue. The only thing I can think of and even this would have flaws, is a 2nd income stream for ED, something like having a 2nd team create LOMAC 2 and put that game on a subscription model. We can all see how well War Thunder has done maybe ED can try to cut into that market share for the people looking for a simpler experience then what DCS provides? 

[SMH]

1 hour ago, slughead said:

The irony of all this is that at anytime, should ED close up shop for whatever reason, none of our installs will work anymore without the license verification server. I’d be more concerned about that.

You can put it into Offline mode but... yeah. (Not a big deal for me as I mostly fly multiplayer and obviously that can't work without their central servers either. Offline I mostly use for learning new aircraft and if there's no new aircraft then... meh!)