Flaming Cliffs without LockON

[jmod]

I don't want to keep Lock ON: Modern Air Combat installation CD for Flaming Cliffs 3!

 

Could it be possible to delete the LockON from the title so that you can distribute it without IP licensing limitation?

[EtherealN]

I don't know the details behind that, but my guess is that if it was that simple they'd probably already have done it.

[joey45]

Ubisoft still own the the name/Rights [ outside of RU and CIS countries ] but ED still own the game.

 

RDIT: I belive it's still a very sensitive subject.

 

But if there's a way to do it then ED has probably thought about it and tried it..

Edited November 20, 2011 by joey45

[HungaroJET]

My guess: you will able to purchase a full version FC3 or a cheaper "update" patch if you have FC2 installed. Just like BS-BS2.

I think LOMAC/FC1, "ubisoft" will not be a criteria.

Perhaps :smilewink:

[Viper101]

Well than don't get FC3 because that is how it will be set up, just like they did with FC2. Flaming Cliffs (series) is the expansion pack to Lock On and Ubisoft owns the rights to it. You can't just install expansion packs to a program if you don't have the full version already installed.

[jmod]

I don't believe FC series are just expansions to LockON, even with FC2, you can easily uninstall the LockON, and you have FC2 running perfectly!

[Viper101]

I don't believe FC series are just expansions to LockON, even with FC2, you can easily uninstall the LockON, and you have FC2 running perfectly!

 

Because when you installed FC2 it looked for the registry key of LockOn 1.0. FC2 (and soon FC3) are stand-alone installations that only let you install them if they see you own a copy of original LockOn or already have the registry key information in your registry.

[cichlidfan]

The point is, only ED knows what they can or cannot do, we don't. We will find out when ED is sure and sees fit to make an announcement regarding the specifics.

 

You are attempting to beat an unborn horse!:D

 

(not directed at anyone in particular)

[Elite]

The point is surely that ED must decouple FC3 from the original Lock-On CD however it can, as it is limiting the market considerably.

 

FC2 could have been a much bigger success as a standalone game. Can you imagine the number of potential players that would have seen the requirements for the original Lock-On, and be turned off by that? How easy is it to pick up Lock-On these days with diminishing retail space in stores for PC titles etc? And don't mention eBay - that's hardly the route for great sales of a new title.

 

I'm surprised FC3 hasn't been rebranded completely away from Lock-On and brought under the DCS moniker, which ED have no trouble with marketing. Particularly with the announced inter-operability of FC3 with A10C and BS.

 

Just my tuppence worth...

[Dudikoff]

I'm surprised FC3 hasn't been rebranded completely away from Lock-On and brought under the DCS moniker, which ED have no trouble with marketing. Particularly with the announced inter-operability of FC3 with A10C and BS.

 

I'm pretty sure the thought crossed their mind. It's most probably a legal issue as Ubisoft owns the Lock On IP the FC is a development of.

Edited November 21, 2011 by Dudikoff

[sobek]

I'm surprised FC3 hasn't been rebranded completely away from Lock-On and brought under the DCS moniker, which ED have no trouble with marketing. Particularly with the announced inter-operability of FC3 with A10C and BS.

 

My guess is that there are intricacies involved, you can't just rebrand it and be done with the old publisher.

[EtherealN]

The point is surely that ED must decouple FC3 from the original Lock-On CD however it can, as it is limiting the market considerably.

 

No, the point is that if it was as simple as this, I suspect they would already have done that. ;)

It's not like ED is founded to act as a fundraiser for Ubisoft. :P

 

FC2 could have been a much bigger success as a standalone game. Can you imagine the number of potential players that would have seen the requirements for the original Lock-On, and be turned off by that?

 

None of us have the data required to make a statement like that. You are only seeing one half of the equation: what about the people who start off with LockOn, liked that, and specifically go looking for an update and that is the reason they find FC?

 

Basically, neither of us has access to those numbers, so that was just speculation.

 

How easy is it to pick up Lock-On these days with diminishing retail space in stores for PC titles etc? And don't mention eBay - that's hardly the route for great sales of a new title.

 

Purchase it from ED and/or TFC over the internet.

Simple huh? ;)

 

Yes, I know it's not available as a digital download, but here you go:

http://lockon.co.uk/index.php?end_pos=1322&scr=shop

http://www.fighter-collection.com/pages/tfc/shop/index.php

 

No need for eBay. ;)

 

I'm surprised FC3 hasn't been rebranded completely away from Lock-On and brought under the DCS moniker, which ED have no trouble with marketing. Particularly with the announced inter-operability of FC3 with A10C and BS.

 

Just my tuppence worth...

 

DCS is not a "moniker", it's the series title. As for why - I would bet money it is because it would dilute the DCS brand. The idea is that when someone hears the name "DCS" their association will be "high-fidelity combat simulator", and the FC products don't do that. They're still nice products IMO, but giving the DCS name to FC would be a bit like making a version of the Fiat Punto under the Lamborghini brand...

[Elite]

I'm pretty sure the thought crossed their mind. It's most probably a legal issue as Ubisoft owns the Lock On IP the FC is a development of.

 

My guess is that there are intricacies involved, you can't just rebrand it and be done with the old publisher.

 

Thanks for the replies - I guess until we hear from the horse's mouth, we'll never know for sure what the reasoning is.

 

DCS is not a "moniker", it's the series title. As for why - I would bet money it is because it would dilute the DCS brand. The idea is that when someone hears the name "DCS" their association will be "high-fidelity combat simulator", and the FC products don't do that. They're still nice products IMO, but giving the DCS name to FC would be a bit like making a version of the Fiat Punto under the Lamborghini brand...

 

EtherealN - thank's for your reply, particularly the detailed breakdown of my original post.

 

You're correct in that we are really discussing supposition regarding sales etc, I still believe it is better to rebrand FCS3 as a new title!

 

Although I mentioned using "DCS" for the brand due to FCS3's planned connectivity with BS and A10C, I do accept your reasoning for not doing this. However I do still believe that FCS3 should be rebranded to "something else" because other possibilities come to the forefront if ED do this.

 

If we remove all technical constraints (needing LO CDs etc) due to licensing contraints (with Ubisoft etc), then suddenly we can start distributing via FC3 (or whatever it's called) via Steam and other platforms, and that should be a huge marketing lift for ED.

 

Purchase it from ED and/or TFC over the internet.

Simple huh? ;)

 

Yes, I know it's not available as a digital download, but here you go:

http://lockon.co.uk/index.php?end_pos=1322&scr=shop

http://www.fighter-collection.com/pages/tfc/shop/index.php

 

No need for eBay. ;)

 

This really is the point of my original post. Although acquiring LO is simple enough for the likes of you and I (although there's no need: I already have it and I suspect you do too ;)), it's never going to reach critical mass with those kind of constraints. And it'll never hit Steam either!

 

I want ED to find massive success so it can spend that money making more DCS titles (and quickly)!

 

Unfortunately I think the "Lock On" brand itself is actually aiming for the same crowd who these days in one and the same as the "dedicated sim crowd", who let's let's face it are going to be well aware of any ED release anyway (either directly or via the forums they hang out in).

 

So in my admittedly layman POV of this whole affair, there's kind of no need for the LO brand anyway!

 

I don't see how sticking with LO and the constraints it brings, outweighs the benefits of Steam distribution, etc.

 

Again though, the above is to be taken with a pinch of salt, as it literally is my tuppence worth, and not meant to rub anyone up the wrong way!

 

:thumbup:

[EtherealN]

Well, to be honest, I actually think you would be surprised at how popular the LO/FC products are in the "dedicated sim crowd". I think the main attraction it offers to that market is the fact that it does give you a lot of opportunities for dissimilar air combat and so on - something that is quite lacking still and will be until we get a couple more DCS products out.

 

And of course, it is a testament to it's popularity that ED actually goes ahead to make an FC3 in spite of the problems that might be involved legally and market-wise.

 

But in the end I suspect FC will simply die off - effectively being made redundant when there's sufficient DCS products out there.

 

And no worries about rubbing. :)