v1.2 Market Research Poll - Ka-50 or no?

[SwingKid]

ED is a small software developer with limited resources. When making new products, they must choose which features to develop, and which not to develop.

 

The development of a new flyable aircraft like the Ka-50 requires the majority of ED programming resources and prevents the possibility to use those resources to develop other parts of the sim. The purpose of this poll is to gauge whether people consider the development of a new flyable aircraft to be the most efficient and profitable use of those resources, or if they believe that ED could find an even better way to apply their skills.

 

Notes:

 

(1) I don't represent ED, this poll is only for my personal research. Don't worry, there are no plans that I know of at present, to change any of the content already announced for v1.2. This is only for my own curiosity.

 

(2) If you choose (A), you cannot substitute a different flyable aircraft. It's the Ka-50, or no new flyable.

 

(3) If you choose (B), you don't get to control what the alternative improvements will be. It is a choice between the Ka-50, or no new flyable - which does not necessarily imply your most desired alternative feature. You trust ED to decide where other to spend the resources.

 

Curious,

 

-SK

 

addentum from Dmut: SK, I've add a poll, if you don't mind :)

[SwingKid]

Dmut:

 

Yeah, what happened? Should not the two options be different?

 

-SK

[Dmut]

sorry, now fighting with forum scripts, give me 2 minutes :)

 

edit: ok, looks like it ready to go... it was a glitch with scripts, it seems they don't like a long choice-text in poll.

[ZoomBoy27]

I voted for B, Other improvements, because at least 1 of them would be a major improvement. A dynamic campaign or a dedicated server with base-to-base air wars or a large quantity of contents(campaigns+AI improvements.)

A major feature is required for a expansion pack or a large accumulation of content+improvements. Otherwise it's merely a patch.

 

I do have another choice - wait until I see that actual features ED does add and then decide if I want to pay or Not.

 

Canadian joke: With a question that complex, the PQ has a job for you.

[SwingKid]

Candian joke: With a question that complex, the PQ has a job for you.

 

:lol:

 

I think all our simultaneous editing has deleted the votes, try again.

 

-SK

[Guest ThomasDWeiss]

Add please a third alternative

 

I would pay for a 1.2 regardless of any new flyables - so long as it is an improvement.

 

But it will have the Havok , so ... let's hope they improve Lock On AI and eye candy.

[SwingKid]

Add please a third alternative

 

I would pay for a 1.2 regardless of any new flyables - so long as it is an improvement.

 

But it will have the Havok , so ... let's hope they improve Lock On AI and eye candy.

 

I think that every time we edit the poll, the votes are erased.

 

Perhaps the poll is phrased poorly. Look at it this way: ED has a finitie amount of resources to invest in Lock On. Would you prefer that they spend it on adding the Ka-50, or on something other than a new flyable?

 

Then choose whichever option is closer to your preference. Don't worry about the "I would not buy" phrase, it is not an official poll.

 

-SK

[Dutch60]

I would pay 60 Euros or more for v1.3 if it had and flyable F/A-18 and F-16 :roll: :idea:

[355th_Thomp]

I would pay 60 Euros or more for v1.3 if it had and flyable F/A-18 and F-16 :roll: :idea:

 

x2

 

 

-Thomp

[KILSEK]

Re: v1.2 Market Research Poll - Ka-50 or no?

 

Hi all.

 

EDITED:

 

Notes:

 

(3) If you choose (B), you don't get to control what the alternative improvements will be. It is a choice between the Ka-50, or no new flyable - which does not necessarily imply your most desired alternative feature. You trust ED to decide where other to spend the resources.

 

I voted for (B). I am not interested in the Ka-50. I would rather have ED focus on other areas of LOMAC.

 

IMHO I.E.

Mission Editor, A.I., Non-flyables and other vehicles/weapons systems, and some other areas that could be "touched-up".

 

Eventually the Ka-50 would be welcome, but right now there are other things to do/add. ***cough***F/A-18***cough*** :lol: :cry: -KILSEK

[britgliderpilot]

Re: v1.2 Market Research Poll - Ka-50 or no?

 

I think the Lomac world would be enhanced more with a flyable helicopter than it could be by improvements to the existing engine.

 

 

Knowing the scope of what can be done to the existing engine within the reality of an addon . . . . . the Ka50 just sounds like a better bet to me.

 

 

However - purely hypothetically - if ED could implement AFM for all aircraft, a dedicated server, and improved enough AI and mission editor, I would be perfectly happy without the Ka50 . . . . I just don't think it's a reasonable expectation at the moment. I'll wait for the next sim.

 

(edit - but I'm afraid I can't vote either way - mostly because I'd buy v1.2 anyway :wink: )

[Gel214th]

Why's the choice just the KA50?

 

What about wanting another Add-On Aircraft...but not the KA 50? I'm actually leaning toward something multirole like the F18. A2G and A2A...plus carrier ops. Or maybe the Rafale...something russian but modern? :-)

 

Or not caring for another aircraft if existing aircraft featured some sort of upgraded avionics or flight models etc.

 

I think the questions were poorly phrased and won't really be representative of people's opinions as many of these posts show.

[SwingKid]

Why's the choice just the KA50.

 

Neither the F/A-18 nor any other aircraft besides Ka-50 carries Su-25T sensors, weapons and avionics.

 

-SK

[MBot]

I would be happyer if the available resources for 1.2 would be spent elsewhere than on the Ka-50.

 

Lock On already features many flyable planes that have to be operated in a semi realistic way. The game lacks key features that have to accompany a flyable plane to represent it realisticaly, like mission planing, proper tactics and procedures for the AI using that plane, communication/interaction with your envoirment etc.

Per example the MiG-29 is flown in Lock On like a western fighter with western air war doctrine. But the soviet doctrine is fundamentally different with the fighter bound tightly to GCI. But LOMAC fails to represent this. Lock On stops after modeling the aircraft as a machine and leaves modeling proper operations aside. This is true, more or less, for all of Lock On's flyables.

 

With the inclusion of a flyable helicopter, Lock On will include yet another field of operations, while the other fields are only halfe done. Helicopter combat is a very complex subject itselfe and I don't expect 1.2 to do it justice, just like 1.0 didn't do the CAS or GCI envoirment justice. Will the AI helos use proper helo tactics, will there be communication with ground forces, will terrestrial warfare be upgraded to greater detail ? It would have to be, because a flyable combat helo is more suited in a ground warfare simulation than in a air combat simulation. Making a helo simulation isn't just a matter of adding a flyable helo to Lock On. I would absolutly love to see a proper Ka-50 simulation, but I fear that 1.2 will only be a Ka-50 in a jetsim.

 

Therefore I would prefere, if the resources would rather be spent on enhancing the envoirment of the current flyables, rather than adding yet another unfinished one. But I know I am repeating myselfe :)

[42nd_eemee]

AFAIK Lock On 1.2 would be the second ever sim, which has (will have) human controlled planes AND chopper(s) (I'm an optimist:)) However nowadays no one can survive without multiplayer capability (hint: dedicated server).

IMHO the first feature gives something unique to the product. I don't know about any sims on the market, or even in development which features both flyable a/c and helos. A good, and only a good dedicated server ensures, that the sim would be played for years after the release.

 

With other words we definitely need a helo and a major upgrade, namely a good dedicated server.

[spearsd]

Precisely my feelings on the matter ;-)

 

Add please a third alternative

 

I would pay for a 1.2 regardless of any new flyables - so long as it is an improvement.

 

But it will have the Havok , so ... let's hope they improve Lock On AI and eye candy.

[bflagg]

Need more choices to be more effective in your poll.

 

--

How about providing FM to all aircraft and not just the SU-25.

correct their Radars, and missle parameters and adding a

dynamic campaign BEFORE putzing around with a add-on.

--

 

I think it's a bad strategic mistake - business wise - to ingnore these issues.

[Bug11]

I didn't get the point of the poll at first.. i couldn't see why anyone on earth would choose to buy a patch without a new helicopter than one that didn't have one :) So i'll assume the original poster was talking about dev effort focus.

 

I would prefer that the functionality that is present is improved upon. Improve the AI so that it more intelligent than artificial, streamline the mission editor so that those with a creative streak are going to be able to create what this community needs - missions - without pulling their hair out. Improve the interface, add some multiplayer functionality and tweak what there is (eg, ditch the recover feature and replace it with spawning at airbases ala il2).

 

The Falcon community effort went the road of adding new aircraft and features without focusing on those things that weren't working right first and for many those issues are the killers. For LOMAC to have a long life it has to be rock solid in what it has rather than adding additional things while leaving other stuff unpolished or not working right.

 

I'll be buying the FC addon not because i am interested in the Su-25T at all, but because there's lots of bug fixes that will improve what is already there.

[SwingKid]

I didn't get the point of the poll at first.. i couldn't see why anyone on earth would choose to buy a patch without a new helicopter than one that didn't have one :) So i'll assume the original poster was talking about dev effort focus.

 

Good point, correct. :)

 

Original post edited with introductory blurb.

 

-SK

[Trident]

Re: v1.2 Market Research Poll - Ka-50 or no?

 

However - purely hypothetically - if ED could implement AFM for all aircraft,...

 

You're taking the words out of my mouth! IMHO improving what's already there to a consistent, high standard would do wonders for my longterm enjoyment of LOMAC. The AFM and avionics enhancements for existing aircraft would top my list in that respect. There are several areas in the sim where disparities in fidelity between certain entities/features are evident - this starts with the graphics (3D models and performance) and now ends much more significantly with the AFM and the new damage model. Removing these inconsistencies would improve immersion a great deal.

 

Giving LOMAC a thorough polishing would enable ED to concentrate on developing real gameplay enhancements such as a new campaign system, a new theatre or new multirole aircraft (or any combination of these) in future projects. No more dealing with the legacies of projects as old as Flanker2 and loosing some small but great features in the process! In other words, ED could create the best possible foundation for their next big sim, a well-rounded and stable basis to build on.

 

That said, I do realize that hardcore fans like us cannot expect casual gamers to spend 35$ on an add-on that, superficially, offers little in the way of 'tangible' innovations, such as a new player aircraft. I also like the Ka-50 very much and would in all honesty have preferred it to the Su-25T for v1.1. In the end I guess that ED, having hard sales data at their disposal, are much better suited to judge the economic implications of such a desicion.

[KILSEK]

Hi all.

 

There is something I want to clarify. I would be more interested with the resources directed towards working on other areas of LOMAC than creating a flyable Ka-50.

 

:oops: I know better than that. Bringing up the F/A-18. Sorry. :oops:

 

-KILSEK

[169th_Moose]

I vote for A all the way. No sence of having 1.2 without no additionnal add-ons. Better have a flyable ka-50 to satisfy the hunger for helicopter virtual pilots then having the same bread all over again.

[olaleier]

It all depends on the features present instead of a new flyable...that being said, I am a complete fanboy and will buy anything ED releases. It costs about 1/2 the money I spend on a night out, so I recoup my expenses four times the first weekend I have it. :mrgreen:

[169th_Cobra]

as much as i would love to have a flyable chopper in lomac i am a perfectionist and feel they should get the parts they have started finished off properly before making more problems. (ie AFM for all flyables.)

 

i love this game but there are some glaring ommisions that really need to be addressed.

 

the two areas i feel this most about are:

 

dedicated server and netcode.

 

navigation, both ground stations and airborne hardware.

[VVanks]

I think they should focus on bringing more "planes" into the game rather than choppers.

 

They also need to upgrade all the planes with the new flight model. (The chopper is an entirely new flight model, months of developing time gone there)