Some might think this is nuts, but for some of us....

[Gentoo87]

What say you about a monthly subscription option?

 

Throw us some coupons here and there, a newsletter, and maybe some free fly's or something. We can contribute to your payroll and keep development moving along or even create opportunity for other potentially less popular airframes to get developed.

It doesn't have to be nuts either; create a 5 dollar option, 10 dollar option and so on. Don't make it mandatory no pay to win. People want to just purchase airframes and that be it; great. 

I can't buy much more; not much more I care to own as of the moment. It would be a way for us to continue to help with development and secure the future of DCS.

I'd like to see more WWII development, which seemingly is a small aspect, and carries less interest. fell like this idea would help hire more people, and get more ideas rolled out.

 

[Rudel_chw]

45 minutes ago, Gentoo87 said:

What say you about a monthly subscription option?

 

Was already discussed:

 

 

and:

 

 

On my case, I prefer to purchase what I want once, rather than paying monthly forever.

 

Edited July 23, 2021 by Rudel_chw

[Munkwolf]

I think most, or at least the most vocal, are fervently opposed to such a thing.

 

I'm for it. Seems like it'd incentivize more core development and perhaps more attention paid to older and/or less popular modules vs solely relying on sales of new modules. Also seems more sustainable and stable long-term. What's better (for ED *and* the users), all revenue being dictated by the popularity of specific modules coming out every year? Or at least some percentage of that revenue being a more stable and recurring stream from people wanting to invest in the overall vision.. the World part of DCS World?

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm really excited about the Apache, Corsair, Mossie... really all the upcoming modules. What module would jump to the top of my list though, even if they were $100 or more? "DCS: AI Upgrade". My (completely speculative) read on it is core stuff like AI, etc, drop down the priority list because they aren't direct revenue generators. Putting more resources towards new modules will generate more direct revenue. Resources are eventually directed to those core things like AI when they get to a near-emergency point where something has to be done else it affects sales of those new modules that directly make money... which feels like where we're at to some degree. It's the way that's incentivized by the money.

 

Imo: $10 monthly subscription (for access to the shared services, not required to play purchased modules), end the frequent 50% sales, and halve the prices of modules (to account for the subscription, and the fact that customer base is already trained to pay 50% already by the frequency of the sales).

 

A racing simulator I've invested a lot of time and money into takes the subscription + selling cars and tracks approach, and has done quite well with it imo.

[G.J.S]

[Csgo GE oh yeah]

Developers might lose incentive to produce modules. 

[Rongor]

Honestly I have no idea why people feel entitled to suggest business models at all to a running franchise.

 

It's not that a company running and expanding successfully since how long (2 decades?) could reasonably suspected to be lacking smart heads. They will certainly have enough folks aboard to keep their economic health in control, assumably including access to a cabinets full of financial viability studies and periodic budget reports.

 

Then there come some dudes in the internet, offering them good ideas and advice. Really?

 

It happens quite frequently of course. This is not a DCS-specific phenomenon. I guess it's just the internet. Everybody and their grandma can vent their "brilliant ideas" to the waiting audience.

[Munkwolf]

12 minutes ago, Rongor said:

Honestly I have no idea why people feel entitled to suggest business models at all to a running franchise.

 

It's not that a company running and expanding successfully since how long (2 decades?) could reasonably suspected to be lacking smart heads. They will certainly have enough folks aboard to keep their economic health in control, assumably including access to a cabinets full of financial viability studies and periodic budget reports.

 

Then there come some dudes in the internet, offering them good ideas and advice. Really?

 

It happens quite frequently of course. This is not a DCS-specific phenomenon. I guess it's just the internet. Everybody and their grandma can vent their "brilliant ideas" to the waiting audience.

 

I definitely agree that it happens frequently and it's not dcs-specific. People expressing opinions. I don't understand how that is "entitled". At least in my job.. customers, internal stakeholders, team members, my bosses, etc, all voice the same kind of business model opinions to me every day. I don't understand why it bothers you.

Edited July 23, 2021 by Munkwolf

[Svsmokey]

Previously discussed ad infinitum . And like all such posts , completely oblivious . Then there is this :

On 1/26/2020 at 11:32 AM, BIGNEWY said:

Hi all

 

We have no plans to change the current pay model.

 

I think this thread is done now so I will be closing

 

Thank you for your support.

 

[Northstar98]

On 7/23/2021 at 9:09 PM, Gentoo87 said:

What say you about a monthly subscription option?

I say no way, absolutely out of the question, Jose.

If DCS goes subscription, I will do 2 things:

1. Be very annoyed
2. Leave DCS

Edited November 4, 2021 by Northstar98
formatting

[upyr1]

As states this has been discussed. The only way I could support a subscription would be if it is optional. Some of us have bought everything So I know I am not interested in buying a subscription. 

Just now, Northstar98 said:

 

I say no way, absolutely out of the question, jose.

 

If DCS goes subscription, I will do 2 things:

1. Be very annoyed
2. Leave DCS

What if it's optioinal? So you can buy the individual modules that you want and someone else could subscribe?

[Tippis]

This would most likely have the opposite of the intended effect: complacency and less incentive to actually make good modules that people want to buy.

It might cause a “better” motivation to listen to community wishes, but community wishes are often not a good thing to listen to, so… yeah… those quotation marks around “better” would be well-earned.

[Northstar98]

On 7/23/2021 at 10:46 PM, upyr1 said:

What if it's optioinal? So you can buy the individual modules that you want and someone else could subscribe?

Then what's the incentive to subscribe?

Perpetual licenses are always cheaper to the user given enough time, and a subscription is no guarantee that things will improve. There's already concern that modules people have already paid money for getting abandoned or left unfinished - there's no financial incentive to fix and finish them.

And in some cases it's not restricted to less popular modules, the F-5E-3's RWR has had a broken search mode for over 4 years, as well as having a tonne of missing functionality, the same can be said for the engine bug, this report is 6 months old, but is apparently a long standing bug (no idea when first reported though). Then there's other things like the simplistic RADAR modelling.

Somehow I doubt throwing more money at them would fix these issues.

Edited November 4, 2021 by Northstar98
formatting

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, Svsmokey said:

We have no plans to change the current pay model.

And yet, clear statements like this from ED apparently aren’t enough to end these pointless discussions.

[Tippis]

15 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

And yet, clear statements like this from ED apparently aren’t enough to end these pointless discussions.

Because “plans” are meaningless, as has been explained and proven to you many times over. The discussion isn't pointless just because you don't like the suggestion, and there is no reason for it to end. In fact, it's exactly because there are “no plans” that it keeps coming back: to try to change those plans.

 

What is pointless is posts like yours: ones that try to backseat-moderate and tell people that they cannot offer their opinion on a public forum; that fail to actually state an opinion of their own on the matter; and that only serve to chastise the people actually expressing an opinion and taking part of the discussion. You do have an opinion on the matter, right?

Edited July 23, 2021 by Tippis

[Rick50]

3 hours ago, Gentoo87 said:

What say you about a monthly subscription option?

It doesn't have to be nuts either; create a 5 dollar option, 10 dollar option and so on. Don't make it mandatory no pay to win. People want to just purchase airframes and that be it; great. 

 

 

Buuuuuuuttt... what if it's not enough dollars to keep things going? Remember, this is not "Nextflicks", where 50 million moms sign up, grandpa does too, and millions upon millions.  Love of aviation is not niche... but warplanes starts to become niche. Simulations of warplanes of any generation is a tighter niche. Hardcore realism of modern fighter combat... yea that's a tiny market compared to internet juggernaughts like... well the giant subscription based sites with huge volumes of content.

 

So what if it cost you $22 USD a month?  And then exchange rates go a little crazzeee, and now the monthly pricing spikes higher? If it's tough to afford the subscription, do you go without your favorite sim?  If you stuck with the current model, at least you'd still be able to play with the modules you did have, until you have more income or the exchange and monthly pricing gets reasonable again.

 

All I'm saying is, be careful what you wish for, you just might get it, and might not be happy with the actual result. The other thing is, a monthly subscription might not work for 3rd party developer teams... it would certainly complicate things for them a lot. Subscriptions aren't always cheaper in the long run. Sometimes they get expensive after not that much time. But that revenue model might not work well for simulation devs.

 

Basically, if a module looks pricey to you, then it's expensive to be sure. But over time, you can save,and then buy, maybe on a sale. 

 

Edit: 

Of timely note, is that despite having global household name recognition, it seems that "NEdfliks" may be in some trouble lately, with subscriber loss to the tune of nearly a million users cancelling. I wouldn't want ED to go out like that. And if they did fold, it'd be nice if they could let it be used for decades to come, enjoy what's already been created/paid for.

Edited July 23, 2021 by Rick50

[DaWu]

Not doing any subscriptions for games ever. Period 

[Rudel_chw]

Just now, DaWu said:

Not doing any subscriptions for games ever. Period 

 

I subscribed to Xbox gaming, for one month, in order to test drive the FS2020 ... so, subscriptions may be useful for that.

[DaWu]

1 minute ago, Rudel_chw said:

 

I subscribed to Xbox gaming, for one month, in order to test drive the FS2020 ... so, subscriptions may be useful for that.

gamepass is a different story as you get access to all games for very low price. Still wouldn’t do that personally. If I like a game I buy it. 
 

Sony with their psn+ can shove it. I use my ps5 SP only

[MAXsenna]

And here I was so sure that OP wants to throw free money at ED with some sort of Patreon plus program, because he has all the modules he needs, currently. But still wants to sponsor his fellow simmers to make sure ED's alright.
Did I read this so totally wrong and different from all you guys?


Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[upyr1]

6 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

 

Then what's the incentive to subscribe?

 

Perpetual licenses are always cheaper to the user given enough time, and a subscription is no guarantee that things will improve. There's already concern that modules people have already paid money for getting abandoned or left unfinished - there's no financial incentive to fix and finish them.

 

And in some cases it's not restricted to less popular modules, the F-5E-3's RWR has had a broken search mode for over 4 years, as well as having a tonne of missing functionality, the same can be said for the engine bug, this report is 6 months old, but is apparently a long standing bug (no idea when first reported though). Then there's other things like the simplistic RADAR modelling.

 

Somehow I doubt throwing more money at them would fix these issues.

I don't expect anyone to sign up for the subscription. I know I wouldn't

 

[IkarusC42B Pilot]

This is the stupidest idea i have ever got to read on this thread so far

[Mars Exulte]

Even ED said they didn't want or intend to do a subscription. If you want to support them, buy another module/campaign. If you have them all, donate to a friend. If you have no friends, donate to a rando on the forums. There, problem solved.

[Gentoo87]

16 hours ago, Rongor said:

Honestly I have no idea why people feel entitled to suggest business models at all to a running franchise.

 

It's not that a company running and expanding successfully since how long (2 decades?) could reasonably suspected to be lacking smart heads. They will certainly have enough folks aboard to keep their economic health in control, assumably including access to a cabinets full of financial viability studies and periodic budget reports.

 

Then there come some dudes in the internet, offering them good ideas and advice. Really?

 

It happens quite frequently of course. This is not a DCS-specific phenomenon. I guess it's just the internet. Everybody and their grandma can vent their "brilliant ideas" to the waiting audience.

Yes it seems a place like a forum where people come to discuss idea's It's quite strange when people come to them and do that very thing. Strange... I find it most intriguing people who jump into such conversations and bring a whole lot of nothing to the discussion the most egregious of mouth breathers. But eh mouth breathers are everywhere, and we all need to deal with them. Congrats on adding yourself to the lowest common denominator. 

[Gentoo87]

As mentioned above the subscription wouldn't be mandatory for anyone.

 

Customers can go about there day just buying modules.

From a personal standpoint I look at is as becoming an investor in DCS's future. I know at some point my contribution to the vision would help things get done, where budget and interest becomes less of a problem. Concerns about whether or not a module will turn a profit will be less of an issue. Especially as we are a very niche group. They can paint a complete picture of a timeline or battlespace, instead of hodge podging random generations of military aircraft pit against each other. 

If you wish, don't call it a subscription; it was just a convenient word we all understand in it's implied use. What about opening an avenue for investors to contribute. 

7 hours ago, IkarusC42B Pilot said:

This is the stupidest idea i have ever got to read on this thread so far

Explain your point of view?

[Gentoo87]

15 hours ago, Rick50 said:

 

 

Buuuuuuuttt... what if it's not enough dollars to keep things going? Remember, this is not "Nextflicks", where 50 million moms sign up, grandpa does too, and millions upon millions.  Love of aviation is not niche... but warplanes starts to become niche. Simulations of warplanes of any generation is a tighter niche. Hardcore realism of modern fighter combat... yea that's a tiny market compared to internet juggernaughts like... well the giant subscription based sites with huge volumes of content.

 

So what if it cost you $22 USD a month?  And then exchange rates go a little crazzeee, and now the monthly pricing spikes higher? If it's tough to afford the subscription, do you go without your favorite sim?  If you stuck with the current model, at least you'd still be able to play with the modules you did have, until you have more income or the exchange and monthly pricing gets reasonable again.

 

All I'm saying is, be careful what you wish for, you just might get it, and might not be happy with the actual result. The other thing is, a monthly subscription might not work for 3rd party developer teams... it would certainly complicate things for them a lot. Subscriptions aren't always cheaper in the long run. Sometimes they get expensive after not that much time. But that revenue model might not work well for simulation devs.

 

Basically, if a module looks pricey to you, then it's expensive to be sure. But over time, you can save,and then buy, maybe on a sale. 

 

Edit: 

Of timely note, is that despite having global household name recognition, it seems that "NEdfliks" may be in some trouble lately, with subscriber loss to the tune of nearly a million users cancelling. I wouldn't want ED to go out like that. And if they did fold, it'd be nice if they could let it be used for decades to come, enjoy what's already been created/paid for.

 

 
I see what your saying here, I guess I did a poor job in explaining my position. 

I'm not really asking for much in said subscription. I'm not asking for free planes, maybe free test drives. The purpose of the subscription would be for people who want to contribute to ED's bottom line with the intent of doing just that. 

Some of us have purchased every module ED has to offer. 

Some one had mentioned buying modules for people... I seldom like to do that type of thing for anyone unless I have a solid understanding that my time invested to make the money to buy said module would be well spent. 

If I buy some one a module for x amount of dollars and they use it once or twice it's not money well spent. 

Money contributed to developers/workshops budget, might be the difference between hiring one more person to tackle the large amount of work hours to complete a module. 

You know what I could say would be a good exchange for the monthly contribution. Send us a spending report on the crowd funded money, throw up polls on what you had most interest in your dollars going to next. Lets say we contributed an extra 10k they could spend. They could allocate that money towards bugs, or 8 towards bug fixes, and 2k towards fixing something else blah blah blah

 

Edited July 24, 2021 by Gentoo87