AT-802U - Data Collection

[Frostiken]

Actually what concerned me the most is apparently some folks here would have loved it if it were serious.

 

Personally I'd be angry as hell.

 

Blind loyalty to a brand has never helped anything... If a random company that wasn't ED had made this it'd be the laughingstock of the sim world. If you truly cared about ED you'd be just as willing to tell them 'up yours' as not...

[EtherealN]

Actually what concerned me the most is apparently some folks here would have loved it if it were serious.

 

[...]

 

Blind loyalty to a brand has never helped anything...

 

Huh? Did I understand you right in that you are saying the only reason to like the idea of a DCS quality AT-802U simulator would be "blind loyalty"? How about actually liking the concept of (relatively) cheap COIN aircraft with modern sensors and weapons? The AT-802U actually has more modern avionics and weapons than the Shark, but liking the Shark doesn't raise any eyebrows. (Well, except for GG's.)

 

AND it has the mini-TALON standoff weapon. What's not to like?

 

(Aside from the lack of A2A capability and afterburners, but that's beside the point.)

[joey45]

Like someone said. It would be a good 2 seater test bed for DCS.

 

And yes I would buy it.

[Speed]

Actually what concerned me the most is apparently some folks here would have loved it if it were serious.

 

Personally I'd be angry as hell.

 

Blind loyalty to a brand has never helped anything... If a random company that wasn't ED had made this it'd be the laughingstock of the sim world. If you truly cared about ED you'd be just as willing to tell them 'up yours' as not...

 

You know, not everyone has the same tastes that you do, and it would help to remember that. There are even people out there at like Farming Simulator (WHAT THE @!#$?!?!). Sure I'd enjoy an F/A-18C and an F/A-18E even more than that, but lets see... I've bought flight sims, tank sims, sub sims, ship sims... and some people here have, I'm sure, bought even more than that. So sure, I'd buy DCS: AT-802U in a heartbeat. Especially considering it's a two-seater.

Edited July 2, 2011 by Speed

[EtherealN]

There are even people out there at like Farming Simulator (WHAT THE @!#$?!?!).

 

I almost bought that on Steam the other day, but I'll wait for the AT-802 DLC... :D

[Beagle One]

I would buy a AT-802U module over any other if just someone would do it right...im actually not interested in another A-10 , F15E, F-16 or another AH-64 Sim. I played those more than 10 Years ago for a long, long time...I Want something distinctive different. This modern Shturmovik looks appealing,.

[Frostiken]

You know, not everyone has the same tastes that you do, and it would help to remember that.

 

So therefore the concept of 'bad taste' doesn't exist?

 

Huh? Did I understand you right in that you are saying the only reason to like the idea of a DCS quality AT-802U simulator would be "blind loyalty"?

 

Are you saying that it's inconceivable that it could possibly be true? That brand loyalty has never sold software before? That that's pretty much the main reason COD is still spawning clone sequels? That nobody on this forum has said 'I'll buy whatever ED makes' before? That the niche market that games like the DCS series and ArmA appeal to aren't full of fiercely rabid fans who defend products from every scrap of criticism and seem to have a belief that the respective companies can do no harm? The colloquial term for someone like that is a 'fanboy', though if I'd used that earlier this place woudl implode.

 

This place has plenty of fanboys, and to disagree with this notion is absurd. I've been lurking around long enough to identify many of them. I've seen posts by people suggesting that others buy multiple copies of a game 'to support ED', as well as people saying that they'd buy any product ED would put out just to give them money to make the next game. Both of those are irrational behaviors and are, well, kind of disturbing.

 

Let me put it this way: This is a joke. You're supposed to be offended at the notion of it being real. Rather than do what you're expected to do, "everyone" celebrates, starts researching data, announces that they'll buy enough copies to craft into a human-shaped mannequin with which to have sex with... something is wrong. That 'something' isn't people simply having "different tastes", it's the scary reality that ED really could probably put out anything, put any pricetag on it, and the customers of this forum would buy it no matter what.

 

What makes that 'wrong' is that customers who aren't as lovingly attached to the DCS brand as you guys are would *not*. So to respond to your statement, Speed - yes, your opinion is wrong. ED has managed to somewhat revive the ailing flight sim genre and attract people who aren't as obsessed as one used to be expected to be, and assuming a lack of military contract, to try to push such a product out would alienate a huge amount of customers and undoubtedly cost them a serious amount of sales.

 

How about actually liking the concept of (relatively) cheap COIN aircraft with modern sensors and weapons? The AT-802U actually has more modern avionics and weapons than the Shark, but liking the Shark doesn't raise any eyebrows.

It's not a matter of it existing. It's a matter of ED only being able to put out one product at a time, and if my choice was to get this joke in two years and in FOUR years finally get an F-15 or, hell, even an F/A-18C, it's a non-issue. If this were able to be put out as some sort of pack or DLC (basically released in any format that didn't consume huge amounts of time better spent on other airframes), sure, whatever - worked for LOMAC... sort of.

 

Could this little toy be interesting? Certainly. Would it be worth the time and money? God no.

Edited July 2, 2011 by Frostiken

[EtherealN]

Are you saying that it's inconceivable that it could possibly be true?

That brand loyalty has never sold software before?

That that's pretty much the main reason COD is still spawning clone sequels?

That nobody on this forum has said 'I'll buy whatever ED makes' before?

 

I've not said anything about that. Yes there are people who would buy out of loyalty, and you know what? That's their prerogative. A lot of people bought DCS:BS not because they wanted to fly the Shark very much, but because they wanted to help ED keep the cashflow required to keep making that type of games.

 

However, if we look at what you posted you are actually not talking about that.

"Actually what concerned me the most is apparently some folks here would have loved it if it were serious."

 

...and then you go on about "blind loyalty". The apparent implication is that the only reason people might like the idea of a DCS:AT-802U would be "blind loyalty". That, sir, is completely rediculous. There are other reasons than stupidity, fanboyism, "blind loyalty" or whatever for having tastes other than yours.

 

The colloquial term for someone like that is a 'fanboy', though if I'd used that earlier this place woudl implode.

 

Again, if someone has to be a fanboy to like the idea of DCS:AT-802U, you need to really re-examine this community. People are not copies of each other, and some happily commit the atrocity of liking things that you don't - such as budget turboprop COIN aircraft. How would this be strange for you?

 

I've been propagandizing for that platform for at least a year now, it's a love at first sight. But you don't like it, so seeing people like it when it's presented like in this thread is something that you get worried by and start talking crap about fanboyism for? Sorry dude, you need to stow your attitude and learn to appreciate that people are different.

 

Let me put it this way: This is a joke. You're supposed to be offended at the notion of it being real. Rather than do what you're expected to do, "everyone" celebrates, starts researching data, announces that they'll buy enough copies to craft into a human-shaped mannequin with which to have sex with... something is wrong.

 

Err, dude, you need to read the thread. ;)

 

I did a quick count through the thread just now:

People expressly stating they'll buy: 1

People expressly stating they'll not buy: 1

People looking at the info: 2

People positive: 6

People negative: 8

Other unsorted: 7 (ED staff, Moderators, Testers, people with no apparent position.)

 

That's 25 people in total after a day, on a forum that will often have 50+ online at any one time (even if discounting guests) and a record of 702 at the same time (though that includes the russian section). Your analysis requires better data before it can even pretend to support your conclusion. But let's not kid ourselves here - you didn't gather any data. You saw something that you don't like, was shocked at the realization that there are people out there who actually like things that you don't like, and proceeded to draw the conclusion that fanboyism or "blind loyalty" is the explanation? Absurd. I wonder how you react when you meet people who like Lassie better than Flipper?

 

Sorry, sir, but your position is quite simply absurd. You've just had an experience of "humans being different" and you need to get accustomed to it.

 

That 'something' isn't people simply having "different tastes", it's the scary reality that ED really could probably put out anything, put any pricetag on it, and the customers of this forum would buy it no matter what.

 

Wow. I won't dignify that silliness with a response. You left reality a looooong time ago.

 

Speed - yes, your opinion is wrong. ED has managed to somewhat revive the ailing flight sim genre and attract people who aren't as obsessed as one used to be expected to be, and assuming a lack of military contract, to try to push such a product out would alienate a huge amount of customers and undoubtedly cost them a serious amount of sales.

 

Sooo many strange assumptions here, and you know what they say about assumptions...

 

1st: attracting people who aren't as obsessed, meaning the casual player, includes roughly 500 trillion MSFS users and civil aviation nuts - and quite a few of those have flown planes like the AT-802. We use a similar model. Bet you didn't think about that market? Or did you only think about the traditional Falcon target audience? Protip: ED isn't alive because they targeted stereotype markets.

 

2nd: that it would alienate customers... What? How? Why would someone who enjoys DCS:A-10C be "alienated" by the sale of something else? So maybe they wouldn't buy DCS:AT-802U, but so what? They can still fly DCS:A-10C, and they can still fly DCS:BS, and they'd still be able to purchase DCS:Fastmover whenever it comes. If they'd be alienated through not being given what they want every single time then they'd just have to grow up and enter the world of adults where you don't always get everything you want.

 

It's not a matter of it existing. It's a matter of ED only being able to put out one product at a time, and if my choice was to get this joke in two years and in FOUR years finally get an F-15 or, hell, even an F/A-18C, it's a non-issue.

 

It isn't up to you, and to a certain extent it's not up to ED either. They have a slew of aircraft they've done groundwork on (dig through the forums and you can find some stuff), but final implementation relies on a lot of things coming into place. What you personally would like is not the big variable, they make their decisions based on a huge amount of variables including marketability (again: and the potential market is bigger than just the Falcon crowd...), development time, complexity, synergies with the military side, ease of integration of new components into the existing codebase and so on and so forth.

 

Could this little toy be interesting? Certainly. Would it be worth the time and money? God no.

 

Says you. The person who also says that people are not allowed to have different taste in airplanes than you. Personally I think the only people here who are really capable of saying what could and couldn't work market-wise is the guys at TFC and ED, and I won't have a meltdown if I find people liking planes I don't like. I've grown accustomed to the fact that people are different, probably because I'm sort of quirky myself, so to me all y'all are just fruitcakes and loons. The whole lot of you. ;)

 

(EDIT: Except those of you who support the AT-802U. :D )

Edited July 2, 2011 by EtherealN

[joey45]

[EtherealN]

Now there is a picture that gets saved to my hard drive. :D

[genbrien]

A lot of people bought DCS:BS not because they wanted to fly the Shark very much, but because they wanted to help ED keep the cashflow required to keep making that type of games.

I bought it months after the A-10, flew it 2 times and said ''screw it, choppers are not for me'' :music_whistling::D

[VincentLaw]

People expressly stating they'll buy: 1

 

Make that 2! I will definitely buy DCS:Air Tractor. It looks really fun to fly.

 

This should appeal to everyone!

Many aircraft can launch Hellfire missiles and drop

laser guided bombs. But most jets and UAVs require

large paved runways, and attack helicopters require

hordes of maintainers.

 

The fight is out there, in the mountains and desert, far

away from pavement and policemen. That’s why the

802U is built to live and work out there with forward

operators, flying off dirt strips with minimal support.

 

Operating from unimproved airstrips and dirt roads,

the 802U can carry out forward arming and refueling

point missions to provide unparalleled direct support

and overwatch for ground troops. It can deliver fuel

and supplies to remote forces.

[Cali]

Ed wants to make money, remember that people and with this....they won't :lol:. Do you guys really think that someone will want to make a this aircraft? Well maybe after everything else has been made.

[genbrien]

it could be a paid download content, at the same time as the Nevada terrain.

[Krippz]

I'll pick it up regardless. I've spent close to $500.00 on FSX addons and $60.00 on ROF addons. I love sim-aviation; I want ED to continue to pump out modules. So if the AT-802U is in fact the next module; I will buy it.

[Beagle One]

Ed wants to make money, remember that people and with this....they won't :lol:. Do you guys really think that someone will want to make a this aircraft? Well maybe after everything else has been made.

When there is a market for this kind of aircraft, and there is, than there will also be a market for a DLC around it.

[Cali]

Good luck with this one guys you'll see it soon :music_whistling:.

[Speed]

Basically, I'll just buy any goddamn thing that I can load on my hard drive and is made by ED. If it costs more, that can only mean it's an even better product than normal!

 

:pilotfly:

[Speed]

When there is a market for this kind of aircraft, and there is, than there will also be a market for a DLC around it.

 

Excellent idea! You could start out with a DCS AT-802U module that costs $75, then, if you want bullets for your minigun- $2. Want a GBU-12? $5. Lightning pod? $10.

 

It would totally be a viable business model. No one could complain; ED would still end up getting much less money than they deserve for providing such a highly desired and anticipated aircraft!

[Jona33]

It does look kind of fun. Slightly ridiculous but still pretty funny. Personally I'd prefer it as an add on to Lock on rather than a DCS module but I could live with it. As long as we get dirt runways.

[BKLronin]

Well it just has character like the KA50, SU25T, DO-27, KA27, UH-1, F-4, Tiger, G21,Rafale, MU2. - Thers so much more than the average mercedes to show your balls. :P

 

AND it has some pretty much up to date weapon systems and two seats etc.

 

I could imagine that a lot of FSX and X-plane pilots could be attracted by it.

[digitaljjd]

I can't believe this has went 8 pages already. They are using an old Jedi mind trick to distract everyone. I wonder what they are really up to?

[kam]

This thread has been hilarious. :megalol::megalol::megalol:

[Frostiken]

<Words>

 

Yeah, and Jackson Pollock and Rebecca Black are the greatest artists in history.

 

In my opinion, everyone who thinks that, or actually wants this to be more than a DLC/expansion are a bunch of idiots.

 

Protip: ED isn't alive because they targeted stereotype markets.

 

So why is ED alive? Discounting the Flanker game (part of the mid-90s flight sim explosion, everyone had their hands in these), LOMAC was not a serious flight sim, it was really more along the lines of IL2, presenting simplified models of aircraft - it was quite a degree of fidelity higher than Over-G fighters for the Xbox, but not by much. Additionally, the response to DCS: Black Shark was somewhat subdued, whereas a 'romantic' plane like the A-10, a plane which lends itself popularly to imagination and hollywood-esque notions, has exploded in popularity and sales. I know firsthand half a dozen people who own or know of the game, whereas I don't know anyone who even knows what the KA-50 even is. Hell I don't even remember how I found out about the game, but it certainly wasn't because I read hype about it or heard it through the grapevine. I think I just stumbled across the box quietly sitting at the bottom of the games rack.

 

The market you seem to be arguing for are the people who are legitimately excited to fly a cargo plane from Hong Kong to LA in real time. So why did Microsoft fire the shit out of the only studio who was making those kinds of games? Was it because that market was making them money hand-over-fist? Or maybe because the return on their investment into FSX was slim to none, and they saw that the market for those kinds of sims has been slowly collapsing and was no longer worth their time?

 

If they'd be alienated through not being given what they want every single time then they'd just have to grow up and enter the world of adults where you don't always get everything you want.

First, this isn't the 'world of adults', this is the world of business. Second, stop being a patronizing asshat.

 

A good business strategy is not making a game that people aren't going to want to buy, using the money you won't make to then develop your NEXT game that people will want to buy... instead of just doing that in the first place. There's a good chance the next DCS module could be another F-16, and not because ED is going to do something new and unheard of that Falcon hasn't already done - it's because it's an insanely popular airframe and will move a lot of copies - not because it's an obscure gimmick they just felt like pouring tons of money in to.

Edited July 2, 2011 by Frostiken

[amalahama]

Oh shit, you are persuading me!!! ED, you will get my 120 bucks for sure!

 

Regards!