Paying money??? (rant)

[Red Dragon-DK]

I'm sure a few will jump overboard in horror as I come in for landing :D:D

[Goa]

It is completely optional, you do not have to have it, you will still have access to the Stennis.

 

However if you want the features that go with the super carrier module you will need to pay for it.

 

Some of the planned features

 

Early Access Features

New Nimitz-class aircraft carrier model:

Highly detailed polygon model.

High-resolution textures that include realistic weathering and markings

Animated arresting wires and blast shields

Animated radar antennas

Animated aircraft elevators

Catapult bubble between catapults 1 and 2

Steam from catapults

Risers (guard rails) around aircraft elevators when lowered

Long-range line-up lights

IFLOLS

Animated “rabbit lights” along landing area centerline

Deck lighting

Functional air defence weapon systems:

Sea Sparrow

CWIS

Sea RAM

Option for Nimitz-class aircraft carriers of the Roosevelt sub-class:

CVN-71 Theodore Roosevelt

CVN-72 Abraham Lincoln

CVN-73 George Washington

Deck parking allowing up to 14 aircraft to be spawned on deck. We will review the possibility of increasing this number to 18 in the coming months.

Carrier radio communications for Case I, Case II, and Case III.

Static deck vehicles (AS32A-31A Flight Deck Tractor, AS32A-32A Hangar Deck Tractor, AS32A-36 Aircraft crash and salvage crane, P-25 Fire Fighting Vehicle) that can be placed by mission designers.

Static deck crew that can be placed by mission designers.

Animated deck crew for bow and waist catapults launches.

 

Thanks

 

 

IN VR IT HAS TO BE AWESOME!!!:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

[Rabb]

Free Will. You can choose not to buy said module, while I am quiet happy to use my choice by paying for said module...

 

 

 

See you are creating a situation to rant about where none exists...

 

 

Quote above is purely illustrational. Opinion below is not a direct response to it.

 

 

 

Although I do not agree with original "rant", I have to point at a problem most people ready to buy a "supercarrier" fail to grasp.

 

 

If "supercarrier" module is to function the same way as WWII asset pack, it will make all servers inaccessible to people who choose not to buy it. It is not hard to imagine that all maps (except Nevada, obviously) on every popular server will feature "supercarrier" as soon as it released.

 

 

I would personally prefer different approach, one that does not effectively force people enjoying online play to buy non-critical modules.

[104th_Maverick]

If "supercarrier" module is to function the same way as WWII asset pack, it will make all servers inaccessible to people who choose not to buy it.

 

 

This has already been discussed at length, the carrier module is not going to work like the WW2 pack. Even if you do not own the super carrier you will still be able to join servers that have it active.

[Rabb]

;4156665']This has already been discussed at length' date=' the carrier module is [b']not [/b]going to work like the WW2 pack. Even if you do not own the super carrier you will still be able to join servers that have it active.

 

 

Thank you for your clarification, Maverick. Haven't visited forums for quite a some time. After so many years, that is definitely a new approach from ED. Welcomed.

[Grodlund]

I'll pay nothing for this, and happily pay the double for the Kuznetsov.

As they say. I call your 50 bucks and raise with 50 more :D

 

Very happy for you guys though. The work we've seen so far really looks amazing!

[Steve Gee]

I'll pay nothing for this, and happily pay the double for the Kuznetsov….

 

Hoping the Kuznetsov doesn't get pushed back again. They've had a new model of it in the works for a couple of years it seems, and even showed it in a video or two.

 

I'm thinking the Burke we seen in the trailer got pushed ahead of it to finish the DCS: Supercarrier package. :/

[Schmidtfire]

We need Kuznetsov :)

[Extranajero]

I'm sure a few will jump overboard in horror as I come in for landing :D:D

 

They'll have my Jester to keep them company while they are bobbing about waiting for a boat to pick them up...Jester doesn't really trust my flying for some reason :D

[SGT Coyle]

Looking forward to this Module in the new year.

[lobo]

Yeah! just nercro'd this thread from last year!

 

if ya dont want it dont buy it. imo.

[Infiltrator]

So we are paying money for a carrier? This really sounds silly. Why should I pay money for a large carrier when I can use the Kuznetsov or the Stennis? I just don't see the point. Supposedly there will be some relaxing room, but this is digital combat simulator, not digital meeting simulator. This is also not digital navigating to a carrier simulator. I'm sure some people will pay for this, but a good amount of people wont pay 50 bucks for some carrier. It would be nice just to have it as an AI model, not as a paid module, so that way everyone can utilize this, but time will tell.

 

That's like asking "why are smackheads paying their dealers for crack" :lol: Seriously though, personally I'm an immersion freak and the more detailed, realistic and immersive some thing is in DCS the better and all the worth while paying for. When the supercarrier is released I along with many others won't be able to get our wallets out quick enough! I have no issue with paying for modules etc. in DCS because the enjoyment DCS brings me is just unmatched by any other sim/game. The experience, immersion and learning curve is just incredible! Looking at the supercarrier's trailer, one can only imagine how much painstaking work the devs have put into the project.

[Thor_H]

Does anyone know if there are any plans to remodel or upgrade the Kuznetzov?

[Jester986]

Does anyone know if there are any plans to remodel or upgrade the Kuznetzov?

 

There was, and there have been a few screens of it. But we haven't heard anything about it for some time now. Best guess is its been backburnered and they'll get around to it sometime. With only 1 Russian FC3 plane to fly off it though it's understandable that its priority dropped.

[Steve Gee]

Does anyone know if there are any plans to remodel or upgrade the Kuznetzov?

 

Reports have gone from it'll be right after Supercarrier to after the Arleigh Burke and back again a few times. They ARE remodeling it, just might not be as soon as people want.

 

I'm betting we'll see it this year.

[DmanGIV]

Will they model the ocean going tug that escorts it because it always breaks down???

[Jksmith0902]

ummmm,,,,,I'll be your friend for a free kick ass carrier module lol. I just hope they have at least 1 female voice for carrier operations.

[Jksmith0902]

I just dont get the negativity surrounding the carrier or early access. Im to impatient to wait for the full bug free releases of any kind. DCS is no where near the only game that does early access either. I for one want as much immersion as possible. They could just sit on their respective ass's and not update or upgrade anything. After all we already have carriers, and pretty damn good looking ones at that. But as they develop new technology which costs money for R&D we get the opportunity for more enhanced immersion. I'll gladly pay for it, I just hope we get some female voices to guide us in. Dont get me wrong, moving forward after this initial carrier release any new modules that can make use of said technology should include it. Oh and did I mention they just gave us a free cockpit upgrade for the A-10 and a much needed upgraded Normandy map. Which is much better. only complaint I have about DCS is the actual People animations suck, especially for 2020. But we dont fly People. Cheers everyone from this Yank to everyone else in the world,,,Happy New Year.

Edited January 3, 2020 by Jksmith0902

[Wizard_03]

There’s not, just a few people that don’t know how the world works. I myself cannot wait for the carrier and the possibilities it will bring, we’re about to have a modern comprehensive naval aviation simulator. The first in history, Its very exciting.

[Uxi]

Of all the things to complain about, this is one of the least. This is very cool if you want it. If you don't, you don't have to get it. Seems pretty easy. I'll get it to support the game and it will be way better for running carrier ops in the F-14 and F-18. Those with the F-14 will probably get most of the coolness from the Forrestal Heatblur is working on, though not expecting nearly as many of the features.

[lxsapper]

Talk about missing the point and beating on a dead horse. For several pages of this tread I've hardly seen anyone complaining on the Super Carrier beeing sold as those who did where kwickly silenced out. Yet people one after the other who think otherwise still feel compeled to come and say how utterly wrong they were.

 

Well as someone who somewhat seats in the middle, I feel compeled to chime in as well.

I think the Op's and some of the other's point is not so much about the carrier beeing paid. But more about what else will be paid from now on.

Lets not forget that it was ED's decision to move to a model where they provide the base engine free of charge and make their profit on the sale of playable modules. And lets not also forget that they profit a margin of third party developers sales without having to spend on those modules development.

I don't blame people who think they should suport ED in any way they should, even though I think in a way they are contributing to practices that harm us all as consumers. But each should use their money as they best see fit. That's the nature of capitalism.

But myself I don't see myself obligated to suport ED. Instead I see it in ED's best interest to make something I'll want to buy. And that is absolutely the nature of capitalism. I do own many of their modules, so I think they have been more than reasonably sucessfull at that. But I will not throw my money just to suport them, I don't patron anyone, but I'll be a costumer to anyone who makes something I want. That is how I chose to use my money.

 

With all of that out of the way, I see it as a reasonable thing that the Carrier is beeing sold with the list of features it has. Wether or not I'll buy it, very much depends on pricing at this point. Don't get me wrong it's looking great and very appealing to me. But all things have a price, ED will put a value on their work and I will put a value on my money, if the two are reasonably close to one another I'm sure I'll get it, if not at launch, then at some point in the future.

 

But I do not think all feartures in the carrier should belong in the carrier module. I think Advanced carrier comms should belong to the default DCS engine. The same engine ED decided to develop free to play, and make their profit on the playable modules alone. Which in my humble opinion the Super-Carrier isn't, the playable part I mean, It adds gameplay, but it isn't playable. But still like I said I agree that ED sells all those extra features. But comms, IMO should not be extras, and in fact we all know that ATC in this engine needs a major overhawl, carrier and otherwise.

 

And this I think is the major point of the people who raised their concerns. What exactly is ED going to try to charge for next? Land based ATC? Weather? What then is the Free part of the engine anymore?

 

I would absolutely have suported their decision to sell the carrier and make advanced carrier ATC avaiable to everyone (on the other carriers) regardless of having the super-carrier or not. Since they didn't, all I can say is... I'm kind of ok with it.

 

I have no idea if they are struglling financialy or not. I hope not, as I very much enjoy DCS and hope it remains a thing for a long time. But I will only chose to suport it in the terms I mentioned earlier, by paying for what has reasonable value to me.

But I don't belive they are, specially in the light of all the recent anoucements of all the projects. I belive DCS is alive and well and I am certanly glad for it. There's defenitely more than one thing on the newsletter today that has me wanting to open up my wallet when the time comes.

Now having said that, and I have nothing against ED's profit margins incressing, in fact I hope they do. I don't think it's ok for them to seek that increase by going back on what they said would be their model for DCS: free engine, paid Playable modules. Assuming of course business is going well.

I would be very disapointed if indeed next we were paying for weather, atc, etc.

 

But maybe there will come the day DCS is struggling and maybe the business model has to be revised. If that comes to be, then I think some good comunication with it's costumers should be in order for ED.

 

But on the current model what is understood is that there is a Free part, that is obviously suported by the paid part plus profit from partners sales. I don't think things that are easely understood that should be in the free part should now routinely be made paid.

 

This I belive is what people had a problem with, not that the Super-Carrier with all the extras is beeing paid.

[Wizard_03]

Talk about missing the point and beating on a dead horse. For several pages of this tread I've hardly seen anyone complaining on the Super Carrier beeing sold as those who did where kwickly silenced out. Yet people one after the other who think otherwise still feel compeled to come and say how utterly wrong they were.

 

Well as someone who somewhat seats in the middle, I feel compeled to chime in as well.

I think the Op's and some of the other's point is not so much about the carrier beeing paid. But more about what else will be paid from now on.

Lets not forget that it was ED's decision to move to a model where they provide the base engine free of charge and make their profit on the sale of playable modules. And lets not also forget that they profit a margin of third party developers sales without having to spend on those modules development.

I don't blame people who think they should suport ED in any way they should, even though I think in a way they are contributing to practices that harm us all as consumers. But each should use their money as they best see fit. That's the nature of capitalism.

But myself I don't see myself obligated to suport ED. Instead I see it in ED's best interest to make something I'll want to buy. And that is absolutely the nature of capitalism. I do own many of their modules, so I think they have been more than reasonably sucessfull at that. But I will not throw my money just to suport them, I don't patron anyone, but I'll be a costumer to anyone who makes something I want. That is how I chose to use my money.

 

With all of that out of the way, I see it as a reasonable thing that the Carrier is beeing sold with the list of features it has. Wether or not I'll buy it, very much depends on pricing at this point. Don't get me wrong it's looking great and very appealing to me. But all things have a price, ED will put a value on their work and I will put a value on my money, if the two are reasonably close to one another I'm sure I'll get it, if not at launch, then at some point in the future.

 

But I do not think all feartures in the carrier should belong in the carrier module. I think Advanced carrier comms should belong to the default DCS engine. The same engine ED decided to develop free to play, and make their profit on the playable modules alone. Which in my humble opinion the Super-Carrier isn't, the playable part I mean, It adds gameplay, but it isn't playable. But still like I said I agree that ED sells all those extra features. But comms, IMO should not be extras, and in fact we all know that ATC in this engine needs a major overhawl, carrier and otherwise.

 

And this I think is the major point of the people who raised their concerns. What exactly is ED going to try to charge for next? Land based ATC? Weather? What then is the Free part of the engine anymore?

 

I would absolutely have suported their decision to sell the carrier and make advanced carrier ATC avaiable to everyone (on the other carriers) regardless of having the super-carrier or not. Since they didn't, all I can say is... I'm kind of ok with it.

 

I have no idea if they are struglling financialy or not. I hope not, as I very much enjoy DCS and hope it remains a thing for a long time. But I will only chose to suport it in the terms I mentioned earlier, by paying for what has reasonable value to me.

But I don't belive they are, specially in the light of all the recent anoucements of all the projects. I belive DCS is alive and well and I am certanly glad for it. There's defenitely more than one thing on the newsletter today that has me wanting to open up my wallet when the time comes.

Now having said that, and I have nothing against ED's profit margins incressing, in fact I hope they do. I don't think it's ok for them to seek that increase by going back on what they said would be their model for DCS: free engine, paid Playable modules. Assuming of course business is going well.

I would be very disapointed if indeed next we were paying for weather, atc, etc.

 

But maybe there will come the day DCS is struggling and maybe the business model has to be revised. If that comes to be, then I think some good comunication with it's costumers should be in order for ED.

 

But on the current model what is understood is that there is a Free part, that is obviously suported by the paid part plus profit from partners sales. I don't think things that are easely understood that should be in the free part should now routinely be made paid.

 

This I belive is what people had a problem with, not that the Super-Carrier with all the extras is beeing paid.

 

But that’s the thing it costs money and resources for them to overhaul things, how can you expect them to make improvements to the sim without compensation. There’s nothing wrong with the current comms they just are not high fidelity. The high fidelity comms for the carrier required the most work, according to ED themselves, more so then just retexturing the carrier. so how else can we compensate them?

 

It’s the exact same arguments for the WW2 asset pack people expect ED to add NEW content to the game for free. It’s ludicrous. What else are they going to charge for? safe bet, is everything they can, cause they are a business and they have to keep the lights on, and want to make money. There’s nothing unfair or dishonest about that.

 

Nowhere does it say that core improvements to the game will be free going forward. Why anyone would think that is beyond me. I would happily pay them to improve the weather, ATC. They pump good work Any improvement on what we have now, deserves compensation. They aren’t bug fixing they are adding content. Now when a module shows up full of bugs and incomplete that’s when I hold off. I do not reward sub quality work with my business.

[RaisedByWolves]

Talk about missing the point and beating on a dead horse. For several pages of this tread I've hardly seen anyone complaining on the Super Carrier beeing sold as those who did where kwickly silenced out. Yet people one after the other who think otherwise still feel compeled to come and say how utterly wrong they were.

 

Well as someone who somewhat seats in the middle, I feel compeled to chime in as well.

I think the Op's and some of the other's point is not so much about the carrier beeing paid. But more about what else will be paid from now on.

Lets not forget that it was ED's decision to move to a model where they provide the base engine free of charge and make their profit on the sale of playable modules. And lets not also forget that they profit a margin of third party developers sales without having to spend on those modules development.

I don't blame people who think they should suport ED in any way they should, even though I think in a way they are contributing to practices that harm us all as consumers. But each should use their money as they best see fit. That's the nature of capitalism.

But myself I don't see myself obligated to suport ED. Instead I see it in ED's best interest to make something I'll want to buy. And that is absolutely the nature of capitalism. I do own many of their modules, so I think they have been more than reasonably sucessfull at that. But I will not throw my money just to suport them, I don't patron anyone, but I'll be a costumer to anyone who makes something I want. That is how I chose to use my money.

 

With all of that out of the way, I see it as a reasonable thing that the Carrier is beeing sold with the list of features it has. Wether or not I'll buy it, very much depends on pricing at this point. Don't get me wrong it's looking great and very appealing to me. But all things have a price, ED will put a value on their work and I will put a value on my money, if the two are reasonably close to one another I'm sure I'll get it, if not at launch, then at some point in the future.

 

But I do not think all feartures in the carrier should belong in the carrier module. I think Advanced carrier comms should belong to the default DCS engine. The same engine ED decided to develop free to play, and make their profit on the playable modules alone. Which in my humble opinion the Super-Carrier isn't, the playable part I mean, It adds gameplay, but it isn't playable. But still like I said I agree that ED sells all those extra features. But comms, IMO should not be extras, and in fact we all know that ATC in this engine needs a major overhawl, carrier and otherwise.

 

And this I think is the major point of the people who raised their concerns. What exactly is ED going to try to charge for next? Land based ATC? Weather? What then is the Free part of the engine anymore?

 

I would absolutely have suported their decision to sell the carrier and make advanced carrier ATC avaiable to everyone (on the other carriers) regardless of having the super-carrier or not. Since they didn't, all I can say is... I'm kind of ok with it.

 

I have no idea if they are struglling financialy or not. I hope not, as I very much enjoy DCS and hope it remains a thing for a long time. But I will only chose to suport it in the terms I mentioned earlier, by paying for what has reasonable value to me.

But I don't belive they are, specially in the light of all the recent anoucements of all the projects. I belive DCS is alive and well and I am certanly glad for it. There's defenitely more than one thing on the newsletter today that has me wanting to open up my wallet when the time comes.

Now having said that, and I have nothing against ED's profit margins incressing, in fact I hope they do. I don't think it's ok for them to seek that increase by going back on what they said would be their model for DCS: free engine, paid Playable modules. Assuming of course business is going well.

I would be very disapointed if indeed next we were paying for weather, atc, etc.

 

But maybe there will come the day DCS is struggling and maybe the business model has to be revised. If that comes to be, then I think some good comunication with it's costumers should be in order for ED.

 

But on the current model what is understood is that there is a Free part, that is obviously suported by the paid part plus profit from partners sales. I don't think things that are easely understood that should be in the free part should now routinely be made paid.

 

This I belive is what people had a problem with, not that the Super-Carrier with all the extras is beeing paid.

 

 

TLDNR

[lxsapper]

What else are they going to charge for?

 

The Flyable Modules?

 

Oh and the sale of third party modules, wich I have no idea on the percentage. But I'm sure all parties conseider fair.

ED makes the engine for said planes to be viable and fun to fly. Makes a proifit on all planes sales. Third parties have to front of the costs of developing their own planes and share a percentage with ED but do not have to develop the engine for those planes to operate.

 

how can you expect them to make improvements to the sim without compensation

 

I Think you don't undertand The Idea of F2P. A Model ED from their own free wheel decided would be viable to keep the lights on, feed their families and make a profit. And I belive they are doing wonderfully (as well they should) but again, I'm not their book keeper. I could be wrong on that.

 

But if that's the case they should let us know. And maybe not do free updates that are welcome but superfulous for Sim as a whole. Such as Updates to the cockpit art of aircraft. The fact they to those updates reinforces my idea they are doing well, as I certainly hope they do for a long time.

 

I do not expect them to be without compensation. They were the ones that elected that the compensation for all of the work they do would come from the sale of modules, theirs and third party. So I absolutely expect the core engine to recive updates and new features. Because that is absolutely what they said they would do and I agreed by purchassing a healthy amount of modules. Or un-healthy from a certain perspective and that I don't have time to ever learn and fly them all and still I'm likely to buy more.

 

 

 

Now disagree with me all you like. But you threw this questions out there as if they weren't well adressed in the first place. I belive they were. But here I am taking the bait again and explaining my self over and over.

 

That was more than my two cents, that was like a whole two dollars worth. So I'll keep the rest for myself. Happy flying all.

[Flamin_Squirrel]

I would absolutely have suported their decision to sell the carrier and make advanced carrier ATC avaiable to everyone (on the other carriers) regardless of having the super-carrier or not. Since they didn't, all I can say is... I'm kind of ok with it.

 

I've not seen anywhere where ED have said no ATC improvements from the new carrier will transfer to the existing. Your post is a long rant based on speculation and a misunderstanding of how things are now, let alone that "everything is subject to change".