ED Forums

ED Forums (https://forums.eagle.ru/index.php)
-   Western Europe 1944-1945 (https://forums.eagle.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=340)
-   -   The Battle of the Stretch Goal (https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=114788)

Cnuke 09-30-2013 07:40 AM

Thank you for your consideration.

It's about love and passion that needs to be transferred in the sim. Take time to do additional planes and with it's quality, it will be easy to sell those planes. For continuational work.

MACADEMIC 09-30-2013 07:41 AM

Luthier,

My feeling is that the decision reaches way further than just achieving or not achieving the Me262 stretchgoal. But of course only you and your investors can know how deep your pockets are and if you really can afford to forgo all future revenues from the Spit, the Kurf├╝rst and the Jug.

I don't think you should, from my limited viewpoint.

MAC

Sharpe 09-30-2013 07:41 AM

and PayPal?

Bucic 09-30-2013 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by luthier1 (Post 1890172)

Anyway, I'll sleep on the changes to the overall KS, and either hit Publish in the morning, or not. In the end, we have already reached our goal. Is a flyable Me.262 worth making yet another drastic change in the project?

Oh yes it is ;) What would possibly make you think it's not? You don't brake any pledging conditions for those who has backed already. 'Bad press'? Those making you a 'bad press' were doing it anyway.

Also, mark my words :) , these 3 free flyables are going to drag you down long after you publish the game. TDCS aircrafts ate enough to cover months and months of gaming for many people and you won't get a dime from them. So it's not only about 262.

JackDant 09-30-2013 08:03 AM

I have been holding off on pledging, and at this point I'm unlikely to. So take what I say with a grain of salt.

Threatening those of us who haven't pledged with taking away the free planes will not get you to the stretch goal. If anything, it strengthens my doubts: you cannot run a simple kickstarter without flailing all over the place, how can I expect you to run an actual project?

In exchange, you will cripple your end product by having not just one plane, but only one side freely available. As a platform, DCS:WW2 will need multiplayer to become popular, like all F2P games do. How will that work if every new player flies for the Allies?

You set up the kickstarter with an unrealistic set of goals, then made constant and confusing changes even you can't understand now. Your promotional material consists mainly of guys talking in a language 90% of your customer base can't understand, and screens and videos of other games.

Now that it hasn't worked, you are threatening to take your toys and go home unless we throw money at you. Nothing of this inspires any confidence.

Bucic 09-30-2013 08:14 AM

@JackDant
How is that threatening? Too many free aircraft was a mistake. This would be merely a correction.

You have a point with the free A/C for one side only and MP though.

SlipBall 09-30-2013 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JackDant (Post 1890195)
I have been holding off on pledging, and at this point I'm unlikely to. So take what I say with a grain of salt.

Threatening those of us who haven't pledged with taking away the free planes will not get you to the stretch goal. If anything, it strengthens my doubts: you cannot run a simple kickstarter without flailing all over the place, how can I expect you to run an actual project?

In exchange, you will cripple your end product by having not just one plane, but only one side freely available. As a platform, DCS:WW2 will need multiplayer to become popular, like all F2P games do. How will that work if every new player flies for the Allies?

You set up the kickstarter with an unrealistic set of goals, then made constant and confusing changes even you can't understand now. Your promotional material consists mainly of guys talking in a language 90% of your customer base can't understand, and screens and videos of other games.

Now that it hasn't worked, you are threatening to take your toys and go home unless we throw money at you. Nothing of this inspires any confidence.


Well the game will go forward, so your decision is most certainly a big mistake. That is of course if you decide one day that you want to finally get into it, it may be expensive.

JackDant 09-30-2013 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bucic (Post 1890203)
@JackDant
How is that threatening? Too many free aircraft was a mistake. This would be merely a correction.

One free aircraft for each country made perfect sense and is not a "mistake" until you take the limited budget into account. Even then, fixing that "mistake" reeks of desperation and strong-armed tactics and is exactly the opposite message to the one doubtful pledgers need.

adonys 09-30-2013 08:38 AM

no, it wasn't a mistake.

it was the best decision for the future which could be taken considering the sale model they've decided for: a free base game + payments for any other present/future modules.

in order to attract customers, the base module of the game must contain the engine and something flyable for them to test it. the three free aircrafts were one for each major side in the european conflict: germans + british + american, increasing the chances to attract customers via the free base model.

now, probably they could have went for only two airplanes, one for axis and the other for allies, and a spitfire would have been the normal decision for the allies side, as an iconic plane (the other P51 one being already present into DCSW). and that would have left the massive american customers base without an american carrot to drag them in, hence the P47 choice as a 3rd base module free airplane.

including them for free wasn't a bad decision at all, specially considering the long term effect.

removing them and leaving only one has two major problems:
a) as the remaining included airplane will definitely be an allied one (and most probably american), the free players will only join the allied side, creating a huge imbalance in the game.
b) the willingness to remove two from the three base modules free planes shows a bad willingness to ditch long term benefits and actually accept long term base problems in exchange for short term funding, which is at least concerning for me..

TimeKilla 09-30-2013 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by luthier1 (Post 1890172)
and I'm definitely not saying it enough. Continuing to ask you for more and more money is just plain wrong.

Anyway, I'll sleep on the changes to the overall KS, and either hit Publish in the morning, or not. In the end, we have already reached our goal. Is a flyable Me.262 worth making yet another drastic change in the project?

Am no so sure but its your call.

Changing to one free aircraft is a good idea tho!

Linx 09-30-2013 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adonys (Post 1890229)
no, it wasn't a mistake.

it was the best decision for the future which could be taken considering the sale model they've decided for: a free base game + payments for any other present/future modules.

in order to attract customers, the base module of the game must contain the engine and something flyable for them to test it. the three free aircrafts were one for each major side in the european conflict: germans + british + american, increasing the chances to attract customers via the free base model.

now, probably they could have went for only two airplanes, one for axis and the other for allies, and a spitfire would have been the normal decision for the allies side, as an iconic plane (the other P51 one being already present into DCSW). and that would have left the massive american customers base without an american carrot to drag them in, hence the P47 choice as a 3rd base module free airplane.

including them for free wasn't a bad decision at all, specially considering the long term effect.

removing them and leaving only one has two major problems:
a) as the remaining included airplane will definitely be an allied one (and most probably american), the free players will only join the allied side, creating a huge imbalance in the game.
b) the willingness to remove two from the three base modules free planes shows a bad willingness to ditch long term benefits and actually accept long term base problems in exchange for short term funding, which is at least concerning for me..

+1

This will get RRG a lot of bad reputation, which is especially bad since they have a very capable competition, that has already showed a lot more so far. Plus the whole CloD fiasco...
Well, it's their choice to make in the end and as long as my $40 pledge still gets me all the planes on the release...

ami7b5 09-30-2013 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grifo (Post 1889983)
...

One more thought: I Think that focusing about casual gamers is just a waste of time.. They will yet have something arcadish with Battle of Stalingrad and War Thunder!
And don't waste time producing new videos... I know your work is very early stage and you have very little to show us... I don't need nothing to be more confident, just a good project and your Name!

In any case don't let any aircraft for free;)

Best of Luck!

How do you mean this?

Bucic 09-30-2013 08:58 AM

Yeah, the long-term effect being nobody buys anything. And please stop with the '3, one for each country'. Neither WW2 was about 3 countries nor it is a minimum for creating a scenario with opposing forces. 2 is enough and even 1 could be used with an Aggressor skin. If DCS fidelity doesn't convince someone, nothing will.

hegykc 09-30-2013 09:01 AM

Making only 1 airplane free is great! Giving 3 away for 1$ defeats the purpose of hitting the stretch goal entirely.
It doesn't say 3 free planes in the 1$ description of the pledge?

Just change the entire campaign description/goal to 1 free plane. And 40$ gets you 3. The vote here is something like 99% in favor of that.

Bad press?? From whom? The ones that were not planing on paying ever, getting the free planes and dissecting them apart giving more bad press? I can already imagine them with the alpha access. They'll kill you even before you start selling. And for free. This way at least you'll get something from them.

You have nothing to loose here, the only question is how much you will gain.

I would also limit the free airplane to something like no click able cockpit, no 6dof or something like that. Like the Su-25.

Kuky 09-30-2013 09:03 AM

Giving out all aircraft for free IS A MISTAKE. Saying that it isn't (and you haven't pledged) puts you into "want everything for free" category and you shouldn't be commenting on this because that is equivalent to wanting others to pay for you... If you want something.. EARN IT

Bucic 09-30-2013 09:09 AM

The last acceptable solution leaning towards those non-contributing would be to transfer those free flyableas to at least $10 pledge. It can't be that even those lobbing *it at the Kickstarter project get the same as backers. An extreme but true case.

hegykc 09-30-2013 09:10 AM

Pay for all planes. Think about it.

You can bet your ass there will be 10.000 people worldwide buying WWII modules that have WWII environment and ground units to go with.

That's 400.000$ you're giving away with a DCS level module. That money could pay for a B-17, a bigger map, better core features development. And we're in a niche market, if it goes away for free it will never get back.

EDIT: post intended for the "free plane poll", but what the heck...

Boris 09-30-2013 09:15 AM

+1 on one free aircraft only.

The whole reason to have free aircraft at all is as a demo of what the sim can do.

Any more is just overkill and money out the window. Creating aircraft to DCS level of detail takes time and effort, and people will be more than happy to pay good money for extra aircraft.

Even two free aircraft would be too much. If people had a german and an allied aircraft at their disposal, this is months and months of fun without having to spend a dollar.

Not to mention that many people already own the P-51 and all they really need is a theatre to fly in.

I think coming from an IL-2 mindset makes it hard to believe people might be satisfied with only a few aircraft?

SlipBall 09-30-2013 09:15 AM

The whole concept of this WWll with high fidelity, just blows me away. I'm so looking forward to the beta.

Linx 09-30-2013 09:21 AM

Ok, just want to confirm one thing.
Those of us that already pledged $40 are still getting P-47, Spifire, Bf-109, Fw-190 and Mustang?

hakjar 09-30-2013 09:24 AM

As far as I understand it yes, those already pledged gets everything as earlier stated.

JackDant 09-30-2013 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kuky (Post 1890256)
Giving out all aircraft for free IS A MISTAKE. Saying that it isn't (and you haven't pledged) puts you into "want everything for free" category and you shouldn't be commenting on this because that is equivalent to wanting others to pay for you... If you want something.. EARN IT

Oh noes, I want to play a "free to play" game for free! The horror!

The F2P model works by offering a substantial free base game, and premium content at a price. You hook people with the free content and then they spend money. Those "freeloaders" also provide content, in this case people to play with and shoot down, and they are essential to the experience for those who pay.

If Luthier wants to drop the F2P model, let him do it. Then it's just another DCS module. But a F2P game with only one playable side cannot work.

PS. Funny that in a topic about how to get more pledges, people who haven't pledged are told to shut up.
PPS. Oh, and also massively negrepped :D

adonys 09-30-2013 09:28 AM

the DCS WWII is not a F2P model, but rather a free game + paid DLC's. same as RoF has become, for example.

I'm not sure that a 40$/50$ pledge grants the DCS WWII P51-D and FW190-D9 though..

hegykc 09-30-2013 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JackDant (Post 1890280)
Oh noes, I want to play a "free to play" game for free! The horror!

The F2P model works by offering a substantial free base game, and premium content at a price.
If Luthier wants to drop the F2P model, let him do it. Then it's just another DCS module. But a F2P game with only one playable side cannot work.

Spitfire, 109 and P-47 is the premium stuff.

F2P with only one playable side is working perfectly for DCS world for quite some time now.

JackDant 09-30-2013 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hegykc (Post 1890285)
Spitfire, 109 and P-47 is the premium stuff.

And where is the "substantial free base game"?

Quote:

F2P with only one playable side is working perfectly for DCS world for quite some time now.
Not really. You can fly Su-25T's for the blue coalition, as Georgia. Now imagine the reaction of the forums if the normal scenario for DCS:WW2 had German P-47s instead of 109's.

hegykc 09-30-2013 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JackDant (Post 1890292)
And where is the "substantial free base game"?

Nowhere. It was a promise made in the earliest stages of development, on a prediction that there would be thousands of pledgers and supporters. There's not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JackDant (Post 1890292)
Not really. You can fly Su-25T's for the blue coalition, as Georgia. Now imagine the reaction of the forums if the normal scenario for DCS:WW2 had German P-47s instead of 109's.

The goal is to have a free option to explore the game with some limitation. Not have a full WWII scenario that would keep you busy for years to come.

Bucic 09-30-2013 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JackDant (Post 1890280)

PS. Funny that in a topic about how to get more pledges, people who haven't pledged are told to shut up.
PPS. Oh, and also massively negrepped :D

I think you don't realize what value a DCS fidelity plane is. Su-25 is NOT of such fidelity BTW. 'Only' its damage model and flight model.


And negative repping is a bit too much, IMO. Let's leave such measures to complete bollocks and forum rule offenders.

Boris 09-30-2013 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JackDant (Post 1890292)
And where is the "substantial free base game"?


Not really. You can fly Su-25T's for the blue coalition, as Georgia. Now imagine the reaction of the forums if the normal scenario for DCS:WW2 had German P-47s instead of 109's.

Nowhere does it say the demo aircraft needs to be balanced for both sides. This would even motivate people to buy another aircraft.

sylkhan 09-30-2013 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hegykc (Post 1890312)
Nowhere. It was a promise made in the earliest stages of development, ..

A promise IS a promise

sylkhan 09-30-2013 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bucic (Post 1890327)
I think you don't realize what value a DCS fidelity plane is. Su-25 is NOT of such fidelity BTW. 'Only' its damage model and flight model.

Why LUTHIERS didn't realize this, before his KS


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:09 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.