Cessna 172

[SharpeXB]

1 minute ago, Northstar98 said:

Nearly 40% are in favour of it, that's not an insignificant percentage...

40% of DCS players are not going to buy a Cessna module. And any 3rd party Dev could make 10,000x the money selling a civ module to that other giant civy sim. Or probably not even then since there are already so many other 172 DLCs out there.  

[Tippis]

3 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

40% of DCS players are not going to buy a Cessna module.

So? If that's the argument against it, then all modules should be pulled from the store and development should cease on all future modules because none of them will reach such a moronic standard.

3 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

And any 3rd party Dev could make 10,000x the money selling a civ module to that other giant civy sim.

...and can then easily make even more money by also selling the module to the one giant combat sim. Everyone wins.

Anyway, we've discussed this before. You always come back to this wrong-headed notion that "no"-votes mean something, They don't. That's why your trollish whinging in wishlist threads is also meaningless: because it provides no valuable or useful information for anyone. The only thing that matters is how large a proportion of yes votes you get -- if it's large enough (and that doesn't have to be a very high absolute number), there's value to be had. The only time "no" votes matter is if the amount to 100%. All other times, they're worthless noise.

Edited January 17, 2022 by Tippis

[ricktoberfest]

I think people really don’t understand how different developing for DCS is from msfs. It’s not like you can just port over the code- it’s a completely different thing. Look at how many developers thought they could get into the game because they made a plane for fsx.

[Northstar98]

47 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

40% of DCS players are not going to buy a Cessna module.

Response to the poll, y'know, what you brought up?

And beyond that poll, how do you know?

47 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

And any 3rd party Dev could make 10,000x the money selling a civ module to that other giant civy sim. Or probably not even then since there are already so many other 172 DLCs out there.  

Okay, so if they're worried about being out-competed by another developer selling a 172 on another sim, I guess they could find their lucky break in a sim that doesn't have one?

Hmmmmmm

[SharpeXB]

33 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

And beyond that poll, how do you know?

Because the only GA module for this game, the CEII, is still incomplete in EA after nearly 5 years! If that’s not a bad indicator I don’t know what would be. Clearly that module didn’t sell enough to fund it’s development. So why would anyone else get in that market? 
 

I’ll say that again ALMOST FIVE YEARS! Are you freakin kidding?! That’s an eternity to develop a simple single engine biplane and one that’s arguably more interesting than a Cessna. 

[Northstar98]

7 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Because the only GA module for this game, the CEII, is still incomplete in EA after nearly 5 years! If that’s not a bad indicator I don’t know what would be. Clearly that module didn’t sell enough to fund it’s development. So why would anyone else get in that market?

And the Hornet is incomplete, in EA for nearly 4 years, and will likely still be for at least another.

Heck, its INS isn't even simulated.

Clearly that module didn't sell enough to fund its development.

[SharpeXB]

Just now, Northstar98 said:

And the Hornet is incomplete, in EA for nearly 4 years

Yeah the Hornet is the Hornet! It’s vastly more complex. Please tell us you understand the difference. The Hornet will get finished. The CEII probably never will be. It’s no doubt sold any copies it will ever sell by now. And anyone looking at it as an indicator of interest in that segment for DCS has living proof of failure. 

[Northstar98]

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

Yeah the Hornet is the Hornet! It’s vastly more complex. Please tell us you understand the difference.

The point wasn't complexity, it was sold enough to fund its development. And your metric for gauging that was time spent in development.

Magnitude 3 are also a smaller developer than ED, who are still working on the MiG-21bis, a module that will be celebrating its 8th birthday this year...

I would've thought that would've stuck as the talking point seeing as you brought it up less than half an hour ago.

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

The Hornet will get finished.

You sure about that? MSI (which is a pretty big deal) isn't even mentioned on the roadmap. They've already cut weapons (weapons it should actually have) from the roadmap too.

And if there's anything that is likely to not get finished it's modern complex aircraft.

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

The CEII probably never will be. It’s no doubt sold any copies it will ever sell by now. And anyone looking at it as an indicator of interest in that segment for DCS has living proof of failure. 

Anything else your crystal ball can tell us?

Edited January 17, 2022 by Northstar98
grammar

[SharpeXB]

13 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

Anything else your crystal ball can tell us?

I very much doubt anything like a Cessna will ever get made for DCS. 

[Callsign112]

2 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

How does a nearly 2:1 “no” vote lead to that conclusion?

If you read both of my posts together, plus the sentence that follows the one you quoted, you should be able to get pretty close to what my point was.

But I don't mind explaining myself in more detail here since I can't really blame you either because I used 60% as a sell rate in error while referring to the pole data. In reality, the data collected here, and the actual number of sales of any module have very little to do with each other.

The other side of this is that we don't actually have sales numbers from each module, so we are basically playing a guessing game.

But IMO, I would say that the Yak/CEII are probably not far behind a number of modules in terms of sales, and may even sell more than some.

Any guess what a module like the I16 sold to date? Or how about the L39/C101? I think all 3 of these modules are successful. The point is the I16 is not likely to be the top seller in WWII props, and I doubt the L39/C101 are holding the lead in sales over modules like the F18/14. But they don't have to in order to be a successful part of DCS World.

When the YouTuber Laobi did his Yak giveaway, he got over 600 people responding for a chance to win. That is a serious amount of interest, and internet surveys are known to generate only about a 1.5 to 2% response rate. But the question seems to boil down to the total number of people you think downloaded DCS World that would also potentially be interested in non-military aircraft?

I will go back to my original statement, the argument that an increased product inventory brings new/more customers is real.

 

[Beirut]

2 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

40% of DCS players are not going to buy a Cessna module. And any 3rd party Dev could make 10,000x the money selling a civ module to that other giant civy sim. Or probably not even then since there are already so many other 172 DLCs out there.  

 

Yeah but if you made it so that in this 172 you could kick out the cockpit window and push out an M-60 and fire while screaming bloody murder...

 

That would sell. 

[Callsign112]

Oh yeah I almost forgot, it's not a 2:1 response rate for no vs yes either.

[Mogster]

I’m not sure why just the suggestion of civvy modules gets some people frothing at the mouth…

No one’s suggesting that ED make a Cessna 172 or Robinson R44 instead of an F4 or Mig 29. There are very competent developers that make this stuff for other sims already though.

[Tippis]

1 minute ago, Mogster said:

I’m not sure why just the suggestion of civvy modules gets some people frothing at the mouth…

Because it would improve the game, widen the appeal ever so slightly, and add things they are not personally interested in.

These are clearly heinous crimes that must be trolled stopped at all costs.

58 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

I very much doubt anything like a Cessna will ever get made for DCS. 

Arguments from incredulity are fallacies for a reason.

What you believe is so amazingly irrelvant and off topic that it beggars belief. Oh, and do you remember what the mods have told you every time you get into this "gotta have the last word" mood of yours in wishlist threads...?

[SharpeXB]

21 minutes ago, Callsign112 said:

If you read both of my posts together, plus the sentence that follows the one you quoted, you should be able to get pretty close to what my point was.

I don’t think any 3rd party Dev would agree with your logic. 

[Callsign112]

I'm am not actually suggesting that they do, but good thing your not a a 3rd party Dev.

[SharpeXB]

11 minutes ago, Callsign112 said:

I'm am not actually suggesting that they do, but good thing your not a a 3rd party Dev.

If I was a Dev I sure wouldn’t make a non-combat aircraft for a combat sim. 

[Beirut]

16 minutes ago, Mogster said:

I’m not sure why just the suggestion of civvy modules gets some people frothing at the mouth…

No one’s suggesting that ED make a Cessna 172 or Robinson R44 instead of an F4 or Mig 29. There are very competent developers that make this stuff for other sims already though.

 

True enough, but there are some who prefer the DCS ecosystem - I apologize for using that word - to the other sims. The big civi sim has crashed and burned on my PC, I can't even uninstall the broken version so I can install it again. Not to mention they want my cell number before they will let me back into the sim I bought and paid for that doesn't even work! 

 

 ARRRRRGGGGHH!!!!

 

DCS works and just keeps working. And it's damn good. That's why I would consider any plane made for DCS and it's why DCS gets 100% of my flightsim money now. 

[Tippis]

32 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

I don’t think any 3rd party Dev would agree with your logic. 

And how is what you think in any way, shape, or form relevant to the topic at hand?

Third-party devs have already proven your belief wrong so we're once again at that stage of your wishlist trolling where you're starting to contradict known reality just to get the last word in.

15 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

If I was a Dev I sure wouldn’t make a non-combat aircraft for a combat sim. 

Good thing you're not a dev then since that would have deprived us of some of the more fun aircraft this game has to offer.

[Mogster]

23 minutes ago, Beirut said:

 

True enough, but there are some who prefer the DCS ecosystem - I apologize for using that word - to the other sims. The big civi sim has crashed and burned on my PC, I can't even uninstall the broken version so I can install it again. Not to mention they want my cell number before they will let me back into the sim I bought and paid for that doesn't even work! 

 

 ARRRRRGGGGHH!!!!

 

DCS works and just keeps working. And it's damn good. That's why I would consider any plane made for DCS and it's why DCS gets 100% of my flightsim money now. 

Agreed. I think you’ve missed my point, I’d rather fly in DCS.
 

I’m just not suggesting the current DCS developers make these aircraft but some of the better developers that make stuff for other sims.

[Beirut]

32 minutes ago, Mogster said:

Agreed. I think you’ve missed my point, I’d rather fly in DCS.
 

I’m just not suggesting the current DCS developers make these aircraft but some of the better developers that make stuff for other sims.

I'll give you...... 80% credit. I'm claiming 20% for the touch of ambiguity in your previous post.

 

I'm under a lot of strain here. Work with me.  

[MAXsenna]

13 hours ago, Mogster said:

I do think that part of the problem could be convincing Cessna to allow their civvy product to appear in what’s essentially a combat sim.

Why wouldn't they? We already have the Huey, so ED have a license from they already.

[Baaz]

On 3/4/2021 at 7:04 AM, Fri13 said:

 

 

 

Give me the ability to put smoke rockets on her, and I'd be happy to fly recon all day.

[Black_Dynamite]

On 1/17/2022 at 9:55 PM, Beirut said:

 

Yeah but if you made it so that in this 172 you could kick out the cockpit window and push out an M-60 and fire while screaming bloody murder...

 

That would sell. 

General aviation plane + jerry rigged mounted machine guns + dropping hand grenades from windows + Latin America map + drug lord and police vehicles pack + VR = profit

?

[Zius]

50 minutes ago, Black_Dynamite said:

General aviation plane + jerry rigged mounted machine guns + dropping hand grenades from windows + Latin America map + drug lord and police vehicles pack + VR = profit

?

Sounds good to me!

 

When it comes to GA, I have to be honest, the CE II is not the plane I fly the most, but I started her up the other day and was again impressed. What a joy it is to fly!

 

I do hope some developer sees the potential in making 172 for DCS as well!

Edited April 9, 2022 by Zius