Jump to content

Do you want DCS to change to subscription based payment model


skywalker22

DCS changes to subscription based payment model  

167 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you like DCS change to subscription service instead of current one buying each model seperately?

    • YES (anual fixed payment and cheeper modules, terrains, campaigns,...)
      13
    • NO, leave it as it is, its just fine
      146
    • Not sure
      8

This poll is closed to new votes


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

Yes.

Theyre slow, but I doubt ED going subscription (which they themselves aren't interested in), is going to significantly speed it up.

You might have misunderstood my post. I don't support a subscription fee for DCS. I was pointing out that the issues someone was using as an argument to go to a subscription fee are already being worked on without it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

I did.

Did you read mine? Did you read others? Did you read where others have stated that it would have a meaningless impact given the money the proposed charge would bring in? Or the part where the subscription would have to be quite a bit more? Did you read where ED has stated they've no plans for this and they prefer their current model?

And the core hasn't changed since LOMAC? There sure is a lot of code left over that could definitely stand to be disposed of and assets that need be updated, but we're getting AI revamps. We've seen map updates, fixes, new systems, and quite a bit more.

That's a negativity bias if I've ever seen one. Some of the things are frustrating, there's no denying that. There's absolutely no denying that ED has some really bad priorities on what gets developed and what gets backburnered. You'll not hear me deny that. That'd be absolutely crazy. But, this is not an issue of resources but more an issue of priorities. By that token, what will more money going in really accomplish? Not much. It also sets a bad precedent, it tells the company they can squeeze more money out of consumers. Given that ED tries to appeal to a global market in which it has to address very disparate levels of disposable income across its customer base, it says to consumers in markets with tighter margins on their hobby cash that they demand a premium that could very well be seen as way too much.

A pro subscription is not a good idea. For anyone. 

Let's throw all of the nice new stuff on a new branch or as an option that non-subscribers can't use. Even ones like me who own most of the content which I was lead to believe pays for their development in addition to money coming in from their government contracts. So, the people forking over the cash can enjoy buggy, incomplete features. Features that could even break the game, for subscribers and non-subscribers alike since we all play on the beta branch anyways. And, that's more software management that have to do, more coding they have to do, more work they have to do, and all to get a few thousand more annually?

That won't really get you more coders to make a dent in what is desired to be done and this is all done at the risk of alienating the majority of the player base since the majority has made it quite clear how they feel on the subject.

All that's left is for this thread to get locked, tbh. Then wait 2 months for the next one and watch the literal same conclusion be arrived at. A conclusion that, honestly, doesn't really matter since ED's made it pretty clear their position.

 

At what point were you ever lead to believe that new content would pay for development. The not enough revenue idea was based on a number of 3,000 players. I have a hard time believing that is all there is when Growing Sidwinder has 200k+ subscribers. We don't agree that's fine nether of us really know the answer. I suspect DCS is on the verge of dying. Like in the next few years. You think everything is fine as is and will somehow get better this decade. I'm not talking about modules. I'm talking about the actual game staying relivent. We will see but so far every single thing with the core game is half baked and broken in some way. I really sincerely hope they get it together in some way. Because the last cash cow is behind them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I've always thought that a one off price, somewhere in the $50-$80 range, for a MAJOR version upgrade of the DCS core (V3.0, V4.0 etc, etc) every 3ish years, would provide the best compromise. Genuine improvements to the core sim would have to be developed to justify the cost, but finally resources allocated to the core would contribute significant  revenue, as apposed to the business model currently in use.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Callsign112 said:

You might have misunderstood my post. I don't support a subscription fee for DCS. I was pointing out that the issues someone was using as an argument to go to a subscription fee are already being worked on without it.

Don't worry, I read your previous posts.

I was just reiterating a point for anyone reading.

Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AV-8B N/A, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, WWII Assets, CA, NS430, Hawk.

Terrains I own: South Atlantic, Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas.

System:

GIGABYTE B650 AORUS ELITE AX, AMD Ryzen 5 7600, Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 32 GB, Western Digital Black SN850X 1 TB (DCS dedicated) & 2 TB NVMe SSDs, Corsair RM850X 850 W, NZXT H7 Flow, MSI G274CV.

Peripherals: VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Rick50 said:

 

Why is this thing still going?

ED isn't interested. Full stop. 

Move on.

 

The internet was created for the propagation of bad ideas. Let us not deny ourselves.

  • Like 1

Some of the planes, but all of the maps!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Il 15/4/2022 at 17:52, BIGNEWY ha scritto:

We have had this discussion many times here on the forum. We have no plans to move to a subscription payment model. What we have now works for us and our customers, with the free trials people can make informed choices before they buy. 

Thank you

I LOVE your mindset

  • Like 1

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

 

I7 8700K @ 4.9 ghz, SSD 850 evo, MSI Z370 Gaming Pro, GTX 1080Ti, F/A-18C in the garage, F-16C in the backyard, F-14B in the garden

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Slice313 said:

With Subscriptions the software would have to be bug free and feature d complete, aint paying a subscription for testing spaghetti on a single thread.

Well that is a good point. I think ED could do away with these type of threads and the negativity they bring by getting more on top of the long standing issues whether it be a particular module, or part of the games core. I think the sentiments of @FlankerKiller are unfortunately becoming too common amongst community members. My hope is not for a subscription service, its that ED finds the breathing room to get this issue worked out

@FlankerKiller: "We will see but so far every single thing with the core game is half baked and broken in some way. I really sincerely hope they get it together in some way."

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Callsign112 said:

Well that is a good point. I think ED could do away with these type of threads and the negativity they bring by getting more on top of the long standing issues whether it be a particular module, or part of the games core. I think the sentiments of @FlankerKiller are unfortunately becoming too common amongst community members. My hope is not for a subscription service, its that ED finds the breathing room to get this issue worked out

@FlankerKiller: "We will see but so far every single thing with the core game is half baked and broken in some way. I really sincerely hope they get it together in some way."

"I think the sentiments of @FlankerKiller are unfortunately becoming too common amongst community members."

At the end of the day, it is impossible to deny it. You might not notice it at the beginning, when you start sinking money into DCS... but sooner or later you realize... and it is already too late.

"Things" are just left half baked for some mysterious reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, norman99 said:

Personally, I've always thought that a one off price, somewhere in the $50-$80 range, for a MAJOR version upgrade of the DCS core (V3.0, V4.0 etc, etc) every 3ish years, would provide the best compromise. Genuine improvements to the core sim would have to be developed to justify the cost, but finally resources allocated to the core would contribute significant  revenue, as apposed to the business model currently in use.

I like that idea as well. But somethings got to change. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, FlankerKiller said:

At what point were you ever lead to believe that new content would pay for development. 

Then why would a singular injection of cash or even subscription make a dent in that case? 

Keep tilting at that windmill, though. 
 

  • Like 1

Reformers hate him! This one weird trick found by a bush pilot will make gunfighter obsessed old farts angry at your multi-role carrier deck line up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Slice313 said:

"I think the sentiments of @FlankerKiller are unfortunately becoming too common amongst community members."

At the end of the day, it is impossible to deny it. You might not notice it at the beginning, when you start sinking money into DCS... but sooner or later you realize... and it is already too late.

"Things" are just left half baked for some mysterious reason.

My brother in christ only 7% of people want it according to the poll, these sentiments are nothing but the mad ramblings of someone who doesn't like being told "no".

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, EnvyC said:

My brother in christ only 7% of people want it according to the poll, these sentiments are nothing but the mad ramblings of someone who doesn't like being told "no".

I'm not the OP, and I vehemently disagree with a monthly, or even annual pay to play subscription. But the current pay model priorities module development over core game development. Evidence, even though the Super Carrier proves the game can support an improved ATC system, and wingmen/ Ai landing behavior it still hasn't made it into the land based ATC. The Apache was released 15 months after announcement. Let give them another year and and it was developed in just over two years. About the same time the Super Carrier has been a thing. This is not a dig against Egale Dynamics. If they stop selling modules they die.  But this isn't 2009 ether. There is a fairly large player base, and alot of them want to see improvements tonthe base game. Cfrag had a decent Idea. Which basically put open Beata behind a paywall. If the proceeds went straight into the core game this might help alot. I would say no more then the cost of a module per year. For that you get to try out all the cool new stuff while it's being tested in Open Beata. The success of such a plan would be detrimend by how good the upgrades to the base game are. Most players play open Beata, and if ED could show something awesome in the first year that would probably draw alot more of the player base in the next year. 

Another option is to make DCS 3.0, MAC, Combat Simulator, whatever you want to call it a pay to play game. There are some issues there though. Like what Jet dose it come with? I would I would personally do the UH-1H, and the F-5. Make a decent campaign for them and let new players enjoy. Again this would have to have some pretty serious upgrades to get the player base on board. 

I personally prefer the latter, but the former could generate more revenue, and would incentiveise ED to keep updating the core game. Of cores they will always be limited by the amount of computing power available to the customer. This is a wishlist, and maybe ED will see an idea they like here. 

Of course they could just continue the glaciesally slow pace of improvement to the base game until someone somewhere decides that they can do better and dose. Or players decide they have all the modules that they want and dont stop buying new modules. Honestly I dont see how that isnt happing now. A new player could buy the F-16, A-10, and AH-64 and have littaraly every possible modern mission covered. market may be nich but it is profitable. 

I'm sorry but with players that own littaraly hundreds of dollars of modules, and thousands in hardware to play DCS, you can't convince me that the players wouldn't pay at least a onetime investment into brings the core game up the the exceptionally high standards of the aircraft modules that you in it. 

But hay these are just my mad ramblings. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, FlankerKiller said:

I'm not the OP, and I vehemently disagree with a monthly, or even annual pay to play subscription. But the current pay model priorities module development over core game development. Evidence, even though the Super Carrier proves the game can support an improved ATC system, and wingmen/ Ai landing behavior it still hasn't made it into the land based ATC. The Apache was released 15 months after announcement. Let give them another year and and it was developed in just over two years. About the same time the Super Carrier has been a thing. This is not a dig against Egale Dynamics. If they stop selling modules they die.  But this isn't 2009 ether. There is a fairly large player base, and alot of them want to see improvements tonthe base game. Cfrag had a decent Idea. Which basically put open Beata behind a paywall. If the proceeds went straight into the core game this might help alot. I would say no more then the cost of a module per year. For that you get to try out all the cool new stuff while it's being tested in Open Beata. The success of such a plan would be detrimend by how good the upgrades to the base game are. Most players play open Beata, and if ED could show something awesome in the first year that would probably draw alot more of the player base in the next year. 

Another option is to make DCS 3.0, MAC, Combat Simulator, whatever you want to call it a pay to play game. There are some issues there though. Like what Jet dose it come with? I would I would personally do the UH-1H, and the F-5. Make a decent campaign for them and let new players enjoy. Again this would have to have some pretty serious upgrades to get the player base on board. 

I personally prefer the latter, but the former could generate more revenue, and would incentiveise ED to keep updating the core game. Of cores they will always be limited by the amount of computing power available to the customer. This is a wishlist, and maybe ED will see an idea they like here. 

Of course they could just continue the glaciesally slow pace of improvement to the base game until someone somewhere decides that they can do better and dose. Or players decide they have all the modules that they want and dont stop buying new modules. Honestly I dont see how that isnt happing now. A new player could buy the F-16, A-10, and AH-64 and have littaraly every possible modern mission covered. market may be nich but it is profitable. 

I'm sorry but with players that own littaraly hundreds of dollars of modules, and thousands in hardware to play DCS, you can't convince me that the players wouldn't pay at least a onetime investment into brings the core game up the the exceptionally high standards of the aircraft modules that you in it. 

But hay these are just my mad ramblings. 

I think what's missing here is the complexity behind overhauling something the size of DCS World. The fact that other products/updates are being released while we wait for core improvements might be leaving some of us with the impression that ED doesn't care about improving core features and that progress on updating DCS World itself has stalled, even though work on the core has been ongoing all along.

I trust if ED needed to make a change in its business model that it would have enough insight to do that, but I don't think money issues are the reason for the long delays in core updates. I think it just takes that long. And I think part of what we are seeing here is the effect waiting without knowing has on people, especially when those people are paying customers. Don't believe me? I can think of at least one other popular WWII flight SIM that has been working on its Normandy campaign since November of 2019, and it still isn't finished. Obviously they benefit most by getting the product in customers hands, and the fact that they have been unable to do that until now tells me that it just takes that long.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, FlankerKiller said:

But the current pay model priorities module development over core game development.

How do you know what ED does with it’s revenue? Does it occur to you that they use the money from module sales to fund the core game development? Since DCSW is a free game that fact should be abundantly obvious.


Edited by SharpeXB

i9-13900K @ 6.2GHz oc | ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z790 HERO | 64GB DDR5 5600MHz | iCUE H150i Liquid CPU Cooler | 24GB GeForce RTX 4090 | Windows 11 Home | 2TB Samsung 980 PRO NVMe | Corsair RM1000x | LG 48GQ900-B 4K OLED Monitor | CH Fighterstick | Ch Pro Throttle | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/15/2022 at 11:49 AM, skywalker22 said:

Subscription model is a new emerging trend for the gaming industry. As a revolution, it quickly outpaced the traditional model of selling single copies of games. Immediately following Netflix as the successful video subscription service, gaming subscription can only be more promising. Changing business model to subscription based is to give ED and their partners oportunity for hopefully better income, which would eventualy lead them to work on numerous things that are still missing or are not properly designed in awesome game like DCS already is.

No thanks. I really don't want to "rent" my games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

How do you know what ED does with it’s revenue? Does it occur to you that they use the money from module sales to fund the core game development? Since DCSW is a free game that fact should be abundantly obvious.

 

Because I've been with this for a long time, and I've seen what they've done and what they haven't. It's pretty obvious where there priorities are. And of corse that makes total sense. But the modules have progressed to an awesome level, while the core game has lagged behind. There were some small improvements for 2.0. But it's still vary vary similar to LOMAC at its core. Yes lately there is progress but it's slow. Plus it's simple logic. The proceeds from the module have to cover the cost of the modules development. A process that is now four years in on the F-18, and three in on the F-16. That's alot of time so it can be inferred that it's been alot of work. That work cost money. And that's my point. We have seen frankly stunning progress on modules from Egale Dynamics, and third parties. It can be inferred that I'd because that is where the income lies. The base game is free. There is no income there, and interestingly not much progress ether. So maybe it is time to look into addressing that. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Since DCSW is a free game that fact should be abundantly obvious.

That is the entire point of the discussion. Some people think that's a bad idea and are mulling alternatives to refinancing development of the free base game.


Edited by cfrag
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

OK, this has gone on long enough, some of the comments here are absolute nonsense. 

We have no plans on moving to a subscription model, DCS is growing and continues to grow. 

Thanks

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 4

smallCATPILOT.PNG.04bbece1b27ff1b2c193b174ec410fc0.PNG

Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status

Windows 11, NVIDIA MSI RTX 3090, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 64GB DDR @3200, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, HP Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • NineLine changed the title to Do you want DCS to change to subscription based payment model
  • 1 year later...

Dear DCS Game Development Team,

I am writing to request the addition of a monthly subscription model to the DCS game. As a dedicated player of the game, I believe that this model would greatly benefit both the players and the development team.

Currently, the game offers a wide range of individual models and maps, which can be expensive for players who want to access all of them. By offering a monthly subscription, players would be able to access all the models and maps at a more affordable price point. This would allow players to enjoy a wider range of content and would encourage more players to join the game.

Additionally, a monthly subscription model would provide a more stable and predictable revenue stream for the development team. This would allow the team to invest more resources into improving the game and adding new features, which would ultimately benefit the players.

I understand that implementing a monthly subscription model would require some changes to the current pricing structure and business model of the game. However, I believe that the benefits of this model would outweigh any challenges.

Thank you for considering my request. I look forward to seeing the continued growth and success of the DCS game.

Sincerely,

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh no, not again...


Edited by Northstar98
  • Like 2

Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AV-8B N/A, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, WWII Assets, CA, NS430, Hawk.

Terrains I own: South Atlantic, Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas.

System:

GIGABYTE B650 AORUS ELITE AX, AMD Ryzen 5 7600, Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 32 GB, Western Digital Black SN850X 1 TB (DCS dedicated) & 2 TB NVMe SSDs, Corsair RM850X 850 W, NZXT H7 Flow, MSI G274CV.

Peripherals: VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...