Would you pay for DCS?

For development, and if yes, how much? Yes means donations or one-time payement.

I would. Up to 70€

I would. Say €50?

I voted no. The business model for DCS is best the way it is, since new players can try the free map + modules and then decide whether they like it enough to stick with it and invest money into other modules.

It works for Eagle Dynamics, and it's great for the community. Putting up just another arbitrary paywall would anger a chunk of the community who have already invested hunderds of dollars or euros into DCS, and would do nothing to speed up or improve the pace of development anyway.

We do already. I don't understand the point to this question?

You miss an option on the poll: "I already do"

I voted yes but the correct answer is it depends.

Pay for what ? Development of what ? We pay for the modules and the maps. They don't offer anything else or do they ? If they have a online platform similar to iracing but for aircombat I would pay monthly if I like it, in fact I do donate monthly to my favorite server already.

If they release fully upgraded modules similar to BS1 then BS2 let say for BS3, I would pay for that yes but it should be properly done, like real overhaul of the module, the same way you pay for a new fifa every year which is actually not new but upgraded old one.

I voted yes as well. But, like others above me, it greatly depends on what it is I'm paying for.

I'm a firm believer in paying for that which I use. So I donate monthly to groups that I'm a member of to support things like websites, and game servers. These things cost money to someone, and as a regular user of those services, I feel obligated to help keep things running with small monthly donations.

At present, Eagle Dynamics doesn't really offer anything other than maps and modules which we pay for already. However, if they were to create dedicated servers with dynamic missions in a multiplayer environment, ensuring a continuous war of sorts, then yes I'd be willing too pay a monthly fee of something between $10-15. I see it being no different than playing Blizzard's WoW, or other similar games, that provide the servers for which to play the game.

Now that that has been said, there's one other catch. If I was to pay a monthly subscription to play a game on a company's server for a game they are providing, I'd also expect that game to run flawlessly. At present, ED isn't meeting either of those expectations.

Voted No: Simulations have always been a harder sell and the model ED currently uses stands to draw more people in than if you had to pay up front.

You miss an option on the poll: "I already do"

+1

I would pay between $25 and $50 per module for significant, high quality updates to the core engine, e.g.:

- realistic weather engine with sky/cloud textures, effects like wake turbulence, dynamics models, realtime-update downloads - there were awesome payware add-ons for FS9/FSX back in the days.

- a capable AI-ATC engine for at least Towers and TRACONs, that is configurable to feature optional characteristics that can be applied to all DCS: World's maps and aerodromes: 1. US/NATO military / wartime style, 2. Russian/WP Block military / wartime style, 3. close to reallife civilian/military mix according to realworld use and region of aerodrome. Plus realistic western & eastern carrier ops and AWACS/GCI service.

- a dynamic campaign engine that is elaborate enough to convert F4/BMS fans to DCS, featuring the respective lessons learned of the last 25 years of milsim gaming, requiring also a significant unit AI upgrade across the board.

Just to give some examples, other topics might be an integrated radio/VOIP engine or the about to arrive dedicated server software.

Basically anything that I have been supporting financially already in the past, like paying for the LOtATC client software and donations for SRS and select public server hosts.

Other players might have other priorities and be willing to pay for terrain textures, 3D models, etc.

And others might not be willing to spend more on this game at all.

However ED does it, I would love to see major updates to the core engine in all aspects (Vulcan API, multi-threading, etc.) arrive faster.

And I offer the money I don't spend on other games as fuel for an increase in DCS software output and quality.

Sounds to me like you're talking about a Star Citizen-type "pledge" to fund development.

It would depend upon what ED were developing.

We do already. I don't understand the point to this question?

This!

We do already. I don't understand the point to this question?

We pay only modules, not the core sim.

+1

Same mind here.

I'm actually very angry with the very last open beta update, my DCS installation is refusing to run since then.

With best regards.

The way things stand, ED is forced to output new modules to make a living. And while that's something they are really good at, old modules do get neglected.

Software needs to be supported across its lifetime, and with more modules, there's an ever increasing amount of software that does need this support.

And while ED are addressing many of these issues, I would love to see a higher priority on the support of everything we already have.

So yes, I would pay for that, but this would come with a certain amount of expectations.

In the long run, though, it beats the alternative. I'm all for a variety of modules across all time spans, but if that means half the base game and half the older modules will all be broken at one time or another, what good does that do anyone?

Then again, many of us have funded software development, and support!, by paying full price, and if we got shut out of using these modules unless we start paying a monthly fee, I wouldn't be too happy, either. So I guess it would have to be either voluntary, or only apply to new modules, or such a monthly payment might then decrease the purchase cost for modules, without being mandatory for module owners. I'm sure there are ways this could be achieved to everyone's satisfaction. (Except for a very vocal minority, but that's always going to happen.)

I would pay between $25 and $50 per module for significant, high quality updates to the core engine, e.g.:

 

- realistic weather engine with sky/cloud textures, effects like wake turbulence, dynamics models, realtime-update downloads - there were awesome payware add-ons for FS9/FSX back in the days.

 

- a capable AI-ATC engine for at least Towers and TRACONs, that is configurable to feature optional characteristics that can be applied to all DCS: World's maps and aerodromes: 1. US/NATO military / wartime style, 2. Russian/WP Block military / wartime style, 3. close to reallife civilian/military mix according to realworld use and region of aerodrome. Plus realistic western & eastern carrier ops and AWACS/GCI service.

 

- a dynamic campaign engine that is elaborate enough to convert F4/BMS fans to DCS, featuring the respective lessons learned of the last 25 years of milsim gaming, requiring also a significant unit AI upgrade across the board.

 

Just to give some examples, other topics might be an integrated radio/VOIP engine or the about to arrive dedicated server software.

Basically anything that I have been supporting financially already in the past, like paying for the LOtATC client software and donations for SRS and select public server hosts.

 

Other players might have other priorities and be willing to pay for terrain textures, 3D models, etc.

And others might not be willing to spend more on this game at all.

 

However ED does it, I would love to see major updates to the core engine in all aspects (Vulcan API, multi-threading, etc.) arrive faster.

And I offer the money I don't spend on other games as fuel for an increase in DCS software output and quality.

The way things stand, ED is forced to output new modules to make a living. And while that's something they are really good at, old modules do get neglected.

 

Software needs to be supported across its lifetime, and with more modules, there's an ever increasing amount of software that does need this support.

 

And while ED are addressing many of these issues, I would love to see a higher priority on the support of everything we already have.

 

So yes, I would pay for that, but this would come with a certain amount of expectations.

 

In the long run, though, it beats the alternative. I'm all for a variety of modules across all time spans, but if that means half the base game and half the older modules will all be broken at one time or another, what good does that do anyone?

 

Then again, many of us have funded software development, and support!, by paying full price, and if we got shut out of using these modules unless we start paying a monthly fee, I wouldn't be too happy, either. So I guess it would have to be either voluntary, or only apply to new modules, or such a monthly payment might then decrease the purchase cost for modules, without being mandatory for module owners. I'm sure there are ways this could be achieved to everyone's satisfaction. (Except for a very vocal minority, but that's always going to happen.)

I would pay for this, there's nothing more that i can say but i have fear about some third parties developing a lot of modules and not caring of ther past ones. When f16 and f18c developement ends i would pay ED for develop the game itselfs (they already do), improving efficency.

I will sure pay for a "DLC" that improves the weather engine and dynamic with aircrafts and the VOIP radio, and more realistic ATC, AI, etc.

I rather pay for improvements in the game itself than a lot of modules. Because finally when you have a lots of modules you don't even fly all of them. Even in the sales i have a lot of doubts in buying new aircrafts.

If the spam of new modules keeps increasing (i'm nota talking about ED) we going to have a simulator of modules more than a Digital Combat Simulator.

a dynamic campaign engine that is elaborate enough to convert F4/BMS fans to DCS, featuring the respective lessons learned of the last 25 years of milsim gaming, requiring also a significant unit AI upgrade across the board.

Dat a whole lotta yup!

:thumbup:

I already have paid a lot. I own every module but 3. Why would I need to pay more?

I would gladly pay for a Dynamic Campaign, especially if it can be played in online multiplayer.

I prefer to help the development by purchasing almost every module, terrain and campaign that they've made :)

No, I like the current model of paying for content.

What I hate the most is when people start suggesting other ways to spend my money when ED haven't even suggested that they need it. Maybe you can afford to spend more money than is asked for, but not everyone appreciates your generosity with their money.

I voted yes.

Simply, either DCS is good enough already for you, or it isn't and you understand why.

I think for many people it's good enough.

The potential of it is unrealised though and it carries so much legacy code and design, it's held back by a relatively small team of devs.

For development, and if yes, how much? Yes means donations or one-time payement.

So you mean not paying for just aircraft?

Like if they sold engine features such as ground warfare / ground units, commander roles, extra maps, aircraft carriers or WW2 units and things like that, would we pay for them?

I'm not sure what the point of this 'poll' is.

I'm a "casual" sim fan, and I've easily dumped a few grand into this sim over the years, having all my computer equipment stolen time and time again :)

After all that money it would be nice if they'd fix the stuttering on hits, ejections and crashes, it seems to be coming along slowly, but *very* slowly.

Awesome game and all, it's better now than it ever was, but could still stand to be better, perhaps more optimized... Guys with insanely expensive rigs are still having stutters on various sim events. I suppose that's just how it goes.

Let's see how Vulkan API implementation goes in, say, another 5-10 years :)

AD

Truly an ill-thought-out proposition . I did not dignify it with a vote either .

Nope, not in a million years!....

DCS is such a complex sim that you need to offer it free to try and then make the DLC enticing enough to buy which it clearly is.

The flight sim community is small and VERY scrutinous so it's best to leave it the way it is. Free with 2 planes so you can see how it runs on your system and then let the end user go from there.