Do you want DCS to change to subscription based payment model

[Beirut]

15 minutes ago, FlankerKiller said:

I don't disagree with you. Better is also better. No amount of new content can improve the core of the game those new maps.and new planes run on. Just look at how much more fun it is to dogfight the Ai today then it was six or eight months ago. How much better  could it be to do it in fully dynamic weather. Or to have to cracks an IADS that has multiple EW, C2 nodes, and SAMs with no fore zones that will use some intelligent tactics to bring you down. Or to hunt tanks that actually seek cover, or retreat. Or have a realistic, think non combat flight simulator, ATC to bring you home. None of that is going to be easy. And it's going to eventually need full muti core optimization. None of this stuff is cheap. And ED if they will admit it or not could use a significant shot of income to get it done. 

 

I can't really disagree with that. I would love to see more fancy new aspects to the core game

 

I was just saying that Rudel was right in that new modules bring in new money. And some of those dollars do end up in the core game itself. Such as bringing us the new clouds. They were not only free, but far and away the best addition to DCS I've seen.

[cfrag]

1 hour ago, FlankerKiller said:

So the modules are there. But the core game still very much resembles LOMAC. We, especially the single players, need a better war environment to fly these awesome modules in.

Not really. We, especially the single players, but also the MP crowd, WANT a better environment - we don't need it, and we have purchased already. As far as ED sees it right now, DCS is good enough to sell more modules (I'm the proof for that, I got the Apache a few months back in pre-order, as most of you, despite also owning the Hawk). "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" is business sense as much as common - and DCS is only broke to those people who have spent above-average amount of time in DCS (and of course that includes me). It's not what we want to hear, but it's the sad truth. Base improvements will only happen when absolutely necessary (usually when a competitor pushes the market) 

 

1 hour ago, FlankerKiller said:

Right, but how do they finance that?

Obviously the classic way: get a loan, or go public. With all you'll have to put in a re-finance plan (even if you went crowd-funding). I wager that with a new flashy module or map that is much easier than a vague 'Improved AI, Better Damage Model, Dynamic Weather, Integrated Campaign Mode and a Fully Multi-Threaded Graphics Engine'. In the eyes of those who are giving money, those points have no measurable return on investment (how can additional DCS units given out for free generate additional income?). Financially, that route is closed off. It's unfortunately a bit of a corner that ED have painted themselves into here; now they'll likely have to scrounge funds from funded projects (new models) to cross-finance up-keep/improvement of the base. An unenviable position, but very common.

1 hour ago, FlankerKiller said:

Personally I would announce another game.

*Cough* Yeah! How about we call it "Modern Air Combat" or a cool acronym? *Cough*

Yeah, I'm not happy with the way DCS is right now. And then I remember that it could be worse: we could have no DCS. And then I start DCS, don my VR, grin, and tell the chief to start air to my Tiger.

 

Edited April 15, 2022 by cfrag

[FlankerKiller]

9 minutes ago, cfrag said:

Not really. We, especially the single players, but also the MP crowd, WANT a better environment - we don't need it, and we have purchased already. As far as ED sees it right now, DCS is good enough to sell more modules (I'm the proof for that, I got the Apache a few months back in pre-order, as most of you, despite also owning the Hawk). "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" is business sense as much as common - and DCS is only broke to those people who have spent above-average amount of time in DCS (and of course that includes me). It's not what we want to hear, but it's the sad truth. Base improvements will only happen when absolutely necessary (usually when a competitor pushes the market) 

 

Obviously the classic way: get a loan, or go public. With all you'll have to put in a re-finance plan (even if you went crowd-funding). I wager that with a new flashy module or map that is much easier than a vague 'Improved AI, Better Damage Model, Dynamic Weather, Integrated Campaign Mode and a Fully Multi-Threaded Graphics Engine'. In the eyes of those who are giving money, those points have no measurable return on investment (how can additional DCS units given out for free generate additional income?). Financially, that route is closed off. It's unfortunately a bit of a corner that ED have painted themselves into here; now they'll likely have to scrounge funds from funded projects (new models) to cross-finance up-keep/improvement of the base. An unenviable position, but very common.

*Cough* Yeah! How about we call it "Modern Air Combat" or a cool acronym? *Cough*

Yeah, I'm not happy with the way DCS is right now. And then I remember that it could be worse: we could have no DCS. And then I start DCS, don my VR, grin, and tell the chief to start air to my Tiger.

 

 

Yeah sure, but will you buy the next module? The Apache brought something new. A modern attack helicopter with night fighting capability, and an Ai for the single player. Plus it's iconic. Would you buy the Cobra? I had hopes for MAC. But then they announced that it would be separate from DCS and more like a flaming cliffs. Sorry but I'm not going from full fidelity to FC4. I don't care how awesome the environment is. Plus I haven't heard a peep about MAC since 2020. DCS can't survive by bringing in new players alone. They have to keep the been here too long crowd playing. Plus reviews are a thing. Anyone looking to dump sixty to eighty dollars on a module can read a review about the game. And they just might pass if they don't like what they read. Yes we have paid. And for the most part we have taken delivery of what we paid for. But we didn't pay for core upgrades. DCS in more or less it's current form released in 2009. There was a burst  of improvements around the time of 2.0 and clearly they are working towards a 3.0. Personally I would love to see something like MAC. A new game as long as it could run the current modules. I again would gladly pay to upgrade. But the fact is the core as it stands isn't good enough. And the block buster modules are already out, or snatched up by third party's. What will keep up playing and by extent buying is improvements to the game itself. 

[Mr_Blastman]

Subscriptions are awful.  No way.

 

[cfrag]

48 minutes ago, FlankerKiller said:

Yeah sure, but will you buy the next module?

Yes. Like every other module.

48 minutes ago, FlankerKiller said:

The Apache brought something new.

Not nearly enough to justify a purchase. Iconic? I got the Hornet, I got the Huey. AI coop? I got the Tomcat and Hind. Night Attack? I got the Harrier. No, I‘m just nuts for combat flight swimming, and DCS is still the best game in town. And if something better comes along, I‘d be gone in a second until DCS re-gains the crown. That‘s how this market works.

48 minutes ago, FlankerKiller said:

Would you buy the Cobra?

HELL yes! A Huey with real weapons! 

48 minutes ago, FlankerKiller said:

They have to keep the been here too long crowd playing.

Why? We don‘t really count.

48 minutes ago, FlankerKiller said:

Plus reviews are a thing. Anyone looking to dump sixty to eighty dollars on a module can read a review about the game.

Yes. But most reviews are written by neophytes, and the long-timers are usually honest enough to differentiate in their review between the module they review, and the game-engine inherent flaws. Plus, don‘t you also also laugh at reviews from self-important jerks who give a thumbs down to a game that they have over 2000 hours on the clock? That ship has sailed for most of us

48 minutes ago, FlankerKiller said:

I again would gladly pay to upgrade.

And that is where I fanatically join you. I paid for my A-10 C II upgrade. Let‘s have a DCS PRO paid upgrade. The rest can fly their modules on DCS standard until the c(r)ows come home, and the PRO people get the good stuff. I‘ll even pay for a season pass (ugly, ugly, ugly) if that funds the base game improvements. I stand for the motto ‚good service costs good money‘ and my wallet will back me up (as long as it‘s the best game in town)

Edited April 15, 2022 by cfrag

[cfrag]

54 minutes ago, cfrag said:

Let‘s have a DCS PRO paid upgrade.

So let‘s talk about this. This isn‘t so much a subscription, as much as a „priority pass“ (which is a subscription, but subscribers are stupid, and I don‘t mind  ) 

• You pay a certain price (say 50 USD) a year to participate, there is NO automatic renewal
• Participants to the program always see what they get for their money (i.e. the features ALREADY EXIST in the priority version) before they commit
• Participation is for exactly one year and then returns to standard
• priority items are things that improve the base game: Vulcan, better AI, better damage, dynamic weather, you name it
• After a certain time (one year max), all priority features are folded into the free standard version. So the standard version always lags the pro version by some time, but always receives all improvements given some time

This forces ED to provide incentives to pay real money for real advantages, and those who pay fund development for real improvements. These become available for everyone free after a certain max time.

There are many questions to be resolved before this can be anywhere near a production item, but at least it resolves the problem of funding (this people can invest in).

Cheers,

-ch

Edited April 15, 2022 by cfrag

[Rick50]

 

Ok, subscription is unpopular.  But people are concerned about the profitabiliity of ED. They want to contribute in some way.  Then how about  buying some high-profit low-effort merchandise?

 

https://merch.digitalcombatsimulator.com/

 

No one's becoming a millionaire with merch, but it's an area that's almost like donating directly to the company, and you get a shirt or hoodie to wear for the next airshow!

Hmm... looks like they'll need an Apache hoodie and tshirt for sale! And Hind...

(by "low effort" meaning designing their merch isn't being done by the people making modules so those and DCS World aren't affected)

Edited April 15, 2022 by Rick50

[MAXsenna]

28 minutes ago, Rick50 said:

 

Ok, subscription is unpopular.  But people are concerned about the profitabiliity of ED. They want to contribute in some way.  Then how about  buying some high-profit low-effort merchandise?

 

https://merch.digitalcombatsimulator.com/

 

No one's becoming a millionaire with merch, but it's an area that's almost like donating directly to the company, and you get a shirt or hoodie to wear for the next airshow!

Hmm... looks like they'll need an Apache hoodie and tshirt for sale! And Hind...

(by "low effort" meaning designing their merch isn't being done by the people making modules so those and DCS World aren't affected)

 

Oh, I will when they make something I like. 

Currently none, sorry ED.  

[Rick50]

Well, let's help them out!!  What would you like to see and buy?

 

 

[MAXsenna]

Well, let's help them out!!  What would you like to see and buy?
 
 

Oh, sure!
Main problem. I don't like the graphics/art on it. That's just me. I know. Not very constructive.
Ask Iron Maiden/Derek Riggs for kind permission to have an ED version of the "Aces High" cover. Sure Bruce will go along. He might even be into DCS (maybe even Nicko) unless he's only flying that new shiny sim.

I will never ever wear a hoodie.
But give me some mugs, and a bomber jacket would be cool. Ties, and tie clips or what is called. Cuff links. Suspenders. Haha Christmas sweaters.
Can't believe they didn't jump on the "mask wagon" though.

As for @cfrag 's idea. Well, I had the exact same thought a couple of years back when I had gotten back into DCS. Not sure if I did post anything about it, but I think I did. You worded it much better though
Myself, I'm a stupid subscriber and would gladly pay a hundred a year to be six months ahead. But it ain't gonna happen, because it will devide the multiplayer community.

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[Rick50]

31 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

Ask Iron Maiden/Derek Riggs for kind permission to have an ED version of the "Aces High" cover.  

But give me some mugs, and a bomber jacket would be cool. Ties, and tie clips or what is called. Cuff links. Suspenders. Haha Christmas sweaters.
 

Aces High, ok now you  have my attention!!  Maybe even add one of those electronic sound doodads from fancy birthday cards that has the song on it!

 

[MAXsenna]

Just now, Rick50 said:

Aces High, ok now you  have my attention!!  Maybe even add one of those electronic sound doodads from fancy birthday cards that has the song on it!

 

Awesome idea!!!! 

[Rick50]

 

Bruce recently visited Alberta and got to fly a Buffalo Air DC-3 from Edmonton to Calgary!  Mikey and his dad came for the flight!

Buffalo has a maintenance/overhaul and build hangars located in Red Deer, which is halfway between the two cities. I only got to see Iron Maiden once, in the 1980s for the Somewhere in Time tour, my first metal concert, awesome!!

[MAXsenna]

 
Bruce recently visited Alberta and got to fly a Buffalo Air DC-3 from Edmonton to Calgary!  Mikey and his dad came for the flight!
Buffalo has a maintenance/overhaul and build hangars located in Red Deer, which is halfway between the two cities. I only got to see Iron Maiden once, in the 1980s for the Somewhere in Time tour, my first metal concert, awesome!!

Too young for Somewhere in Time. But 7th Son through Brave New World I did get to see.

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[despinoza]

Maybe offer both. subscription with all modules enabled and the current mode.

[Beirut]

1 hour ago, Rick50 said:

Well, let's help them out!!  What would you like to see and buy?

 

 

Coffee cup. Shot glass. 

 

Hell I'd pay for a custom skin. Mix and match colours, patterns, and logos from a chart, punch in your selection, pay your $1.99 or whatever, and you get your very own personalized downloadable skin. I'd buy a few of those.

[Rick50]

19 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

Too young for Somewhere in Time. But 7th Son through Brave New World I did get to see.

 

I "kinda" was too young for Somewhere in Time as well, but I had the cash, I knew the concert was on, had time off, and debated for probably half an hour, decided not to go... 5 minutes later I got on the bus to go to the show! bought scalper ticket at a very reasonable price (basically normal price of the time, he was worried having not sold the ticket when the concert started opening act!), and had a great time!  

 

As for the other revenue ideas, I'm liking them! Well, don't expect me to buy a Christmas sweater though...

[MAXsenna]

3 minutes ago, Rick50 said:

As for the other revenue ideas, I'm liking them! Well, don't expect me to buy a Christmas sweater though...

Will be my first!  

[Callsign112]

definitely not interested in a subscription.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

We've had this discussions a few times, OP.

1. ED has stated that they aren't hard-up for funds.
2. How does a subscription benefit me, someone who owns most modules? There's little value to be had there for me.

The amount of money reaped from subscriptions would prove to be minor when weighed against the response from the customer base. Even if it were met with ambivalence, the time and resources spent setting up the methods and infrastructure to do this would be better spent on addressing the core issues we lament, ironically.

This ship sailed almost 10 years ago. There's no feasible way of walking that back and not angering customers. 

I love me some DCS World, but it's just a video game. I have no real loyalty to it. It has to compete for my time with other video games and other hobbies.

[Rick50]

12 hours ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

2. How does a subscription benefit me, someone who owns most modules? There's little value to be had there for me.

 

This is probably the BIGGEST reason why subscription is a bad idea. Subscription only makes sense for people just starting out, because while it's inexpensive upfront, it's expensive over time. But lots of people have ALREADY spent a LOT in many DCS modules... subscription basically stabs them in the back by  effectively making them pay twice for all the modules. 

 

MS tried subscription in flight sims, twice now. The first failed SOOOOOOOOOOO  hard that few even remembered that project even existed!!!!  An  entire sim... that few ever even knew about... and forgotten a year later by those who DID know of it. They wanted to monetize the whole thing. Basically, they wanted Simmarket and Aerosoft to go away, MS could do all those products and sell it in-house. All the addon planes, alll the custom terrains.  The base was a few light sport planes,  and Hawaii. It looked good to the eye. It took them  a year to make one or two payware addons, simple sport planes, no complexity. Customers had already moved on. The product died at launch, in effect, and never recovered.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Flight

 

And the second time, now, is of questionable popularity, most people who are into this new flight simulation pay full price. The subscription is more to try and get Xbox arcade players to "try a flight game for a change, see if you like it". 

 

Edited April 16, 2022 by Rick50

[Exorcet]

46 minutes ago, Rick50 said:

 

This is probably the BIGGEST reason why subscription is a bad idea. Subscription only makes sense for people just starting out

 

I'd argue that a subscription doesn't even make sense for new buyers. It's inexpensive up front, but not over time. I avoid subscriptions for this very reason. The subscription only makes sense if you don't actually like the product and plan to quit it soon. If that's the case you get in and out before your spending goes out of control, but then why even buy in the first place?

 

Then of course there is the other problem with subscriptions. It's been mentioned before in the other threads but I'm not sure if it has in this one. We can't estimate what it's going to cost. Whenever it's brought up many people assume the subscription payment will be some tiny amount. How do they know how much ED needs? Just because you don't pay in full doesn't mean that the subscription won't be double digit per month pricing.

[Ramstein]

Lease with option to buy even better. If someone pulled the rug out from under us and changed the current business model. I feel that us older people do not like changes. IMHO. Even though it is software I actually feel like I own the aircraft. Any other way would feel like I am renting it and buying extra accident insurance and they check for dents at return. btw, who thought of this new thing? too much stuff to worry about in life already without have one more issue...

[FlankerKiller]

12 hours ago, cfrag said:

So let‘s talk about this. This isn‘t so much a subscription, as much as a „priority pass“ (which is a subscription, but subscribers are stupid, and I don‘t mind  ) 

• You pay a certain price (say 50 USD) a year to participate, there is NO automatic renewal
• Participants to the program always see what they get for their money (i.e. the features ALREADY EXIST in the priority version) before they commit
• Participation is for exactly one year and then returns to standard
• priority items are things that improve the base game: Vulcan, better AI, better damage, dynamic weather, you name it
• After a certain time (one year max), all priority features are folded into the free standard version. So the standard version always lags the pro version by some time, but always receives all improvements given some time

This forces ED to provide incentives to pay real money for real advantages, and those who pay fund development for real improvements. These become available for everyone free after a certain max time.

There are many questions to be resolved before this can be anywhere near a production item, but at least it resolves the problem of funding (this people can invest in).

Cheers,

-ch

 

Now you see that is an actual solution. Nobody losses there modules if they don't pay. The game is still free to try. Mony gets pumped in that is specifically for the improvement of the game itself. Best of all ED would actually be incentiveised to continually develop the game itself. I suspect most players would actually pay for the advanced features. Like most play open Beata now. Egale Dynamics, you really should look at this. 

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

No, it really isn't. In fact, that's a horrible solution. There's already complaints that maps divide the community, adding a yearly paywall that would place already paying customers behind it and declare them as 'secondary' to people who pay a yearly 50 bucks is going to drive away a lot of customers, me included.

Because, again, as an owner of most modules, where do I actually get more value out of this additional expenditure?  Instead of the $80 or so I spend yearly on modules, it's now going to be $130 to access features which had been freely accessible to everyone prior? This reads as nickel and diming the consumer. I now have to spend more money to access  the things I've already paid for. 

I really, really don't get where this idea that throwing more money at a problem is going to magically solve it. It isn't. ED has stated that they aren't tight on cash. If you really, really feel like throwing more money at ED, they got merch and you can always buy modules for friends. 

They'd be farther ahead ceasing DCS as a free product at that point, they might as well charge a $30 for the base simulator.

Quick math:
According to the DCS website, there's over 3,100 people playing DCS right now. It's not the whole base obviously and this figure will fluctuate as the day progresses, but let's assume it's the chunk of the player base that'd buy this pro subscription. At $50 a pop, that's $155,000 in revenue before you start divvying that up into profits taken by the company, into pay toward workers, support costs, etc.

That's nothing. That's peanuts. After it's all said and done, that might not even be enough to get another programmer. No, you're not going to dump all that money into hiring another programmer, there's a lot of overhead to address as well. It's also key to remember that this is a generous assumption of how many would get pro. I anticipate few would. No matter where you outsource this work too, no matter which poor populace you exploit, you're not going to get a substantial enough hiring boom that it would make a difference in the rate we get core updates.

On top of that, it could actually harm income from modules as players upset with the pro subscription divide stop buying them. This would then hurt the third party developers the most. I'm not sure I'd like to give a financial middle finger to Heatblur right about now. Suddenly, module sales drop and are replaced by subscriptions, subscriptions that cost less than a module, they have a smaller take over all, and now those core issues are even slower to be fixed.

Revenue streams have to be thought out. They have to give the consumer some perceived value. Otherwise they don't just fail, they can risk damaging rapport with the customer base.

ED has stated no subscriptions and for a good reason; they understand they have a niche market and they understand how fragile it can be. They have a pretty appreciable grasp on how much stress their customer base will take before they stop playing, as they've been to that threshold before.

Edited April 16, 2022 by MiG21bisFishbedL