Jump to content

Would you pay for a monthly DCS subscription?


GunSlingerAUS

Recommended Posts

The current pay model is much better. Pay once and be done. I see no need for nor benefit from a subscription. On ED's side, module sales, in addition to campaign sales, already provide a stream of income. We don't even know why ED does things the way it does so speculating on a lack of funding doesn't really hold any weight.

Awaiting: DCS F-15C

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would pay on a monthly basis only if the updating / release process turns MUCH MUCH MUCH faster....

Mainboard: ASUS Maximus X Hero Intel Z 370

CPU: Intel Core i7-8086K @ 4.0 GHz

Memory: 32GB Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR4-3000

Graphics Card: ASUS NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 10GB

Monitor ASUS PA 329 32" @ 4K

1 SSD Samsung 860 PRO 256 GB

1 SSD Samsung 860 PRO 4 TB

Windows 10 - 64 V. 2004

CH Pro combatstick, throttle and pedals

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also do not agree with subscription at all, this would devide DCS community to people who would commit to subscription and others would end support ED completely (including me). I think this would lead to loss of custumers and other potencial customers like me would be discouraged.

 

I have about 23 modules + terrains from ED aside from few campaigns and i am very much looking forward to buying even more (Mi-24, Mig-23, F4U, F-4 ...).

So if such thing like subscription model would happen i would buy no more, end for me, NO!

 

I am also not playing DCS every day, sometimes not even few months. The pricing that is suggested in original post 20 euros would not be justified for me to invest in DCS monthly, i would definitely spend it on something different.

But one time payment example 50 euros for one module that i can play from now on anytime without worriyng about subscription is much better.

 

Current ED`s model of pricing is the reason why i even started with this sim. Before I was thinking of buying X-Plane but the fact that you basically have to buy the same game every major update X-Plane 9 to X-Plane 10 to 11 and also DLC aircraft may not be supported is to me unacceptable but I see subscription model as even worse, NO! for me.

 

Please do not even suggest this again.


Edited by Matis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Simply No.

 

I wanna pay once and own it.

Gigabyte Aorus X570S Master - Ryzen 5900X - Gskill 64GB 3200/CL14@3600/CL14 - Asus 1080ti EK-waterblock - 4x Samsung 980Pro 1TB - 1x Samsung 870 Evo 1TB - 1x SanDisc 120GB SSD - Heatkiller IV - MoRa3-360LT@9x120mm Noctua F12 - Corsair AXi-1200 - TiR5-Pro - Warthog Hotas - Saitek Combat Pedals - Asus PG278Q 27" QHD Gsync 144Hz - Corsair K70 RGB Pro - Win11 Pro/Linux - Phanteks Evolv-X 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think subscription would be a loser.

 

Most of the modules are quite learning intensive, hours upon days upon weeks of learning. That's a big ask of middle aged fathers in the critical time of their careers.

 

With the current biz model, if a leisure-limited adult really wants to dive into the Hornet or Viper, and it will take him quite a long time, that's ok, just the one time price, maybe he gets it on the sales. If it takes him 3 weeks months, that's ok. If it takes him 3 years, that's ok too.

 

Ok now let's take the same scenario... but it's all subscription. He's now paying for 25 modules, but only using the one. And the longer it takes him to get finished on the Viper, the more likely he'll just throw in the towel and just quit simulations altogether. This is a MUCH bigger problem than most realise. Over the last year I've been buying HOTAS and other peripherals on local trading boards (Kijiji in Alberta), and I've gotten some amazing deals. Every single time, I would ask, why they were selling because, in their words "I just don't have time to do this".

 

 

Note that if it's subscription, you can also say goodbye to any sales... because now you'd be all about constant revenue stream... can't interrupt that!

 

Also, if subscription, say if you were frustrated by a module's lack of updates, your ability to vote with your wallet goes from "ok, I'll put off buying more, until they fix XYZ" to "do I really want to stop the full subscription and not fly DCS at all anymore?"

 

The other thing is, ED is a business. They have managers, a CEO, lawyers, advisors, they probably hire game consultants from time to time. They have a much better idea of what is best for ED, than we'll ever have. If they decide to keep it as is, they have their reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rent seeking is like the holy grail for any business. However it encourages laziness, since a regular income stream actually reduces the incentive to come up with new concepts and ideas. Look at cable and phone companies and how they fail to expand or even update their infrastructure until they absolutely have to. Imagine how long it would take your landlord to fix the broken toilet if the contract/law didn't oblige him to do it within a certain time period. Once you're in rent Nirvana, the only reason to leave is when subs start dropping. But when that happens it's usually too late to save the business since you've burned all your customers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting to hear so many people against it. Yet I think it's inevitable if you look at every other entertainment industry. Not to mention hardcore sims. They either have pitifully low player counts like xplane, or they grow from 20,000 subs to 100,000 subs in six years like iRacing did. I think anybody who pays attention to games and entertainment as businesses can see that the paid live service model isn't the future. It's already here.

Intel 11900K/NVIDIA RTX 3090/32GB DDR4 3666/Z590 Asus Maximus motherboard/2TB Samsung EVO Pro/55" LG C9 120Hz @ 4K/Windows 10/Jotunheim Schiit external headphone amp/Virpil HOTAS + MFG Crosswind pedals

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to take just your PROs and explain why I'm a NOT GONNA HAPPEN.

 

 

 

• A constant, reliable income for ED, which will allow them to spend more time developing the core game rather than new modules. This is arguably the biggest benefit. I could spend pages talking about how this could help ED, but I think it's pretty obvious.

 

You are making the ASSUMPTION that ED has the staffing levels on hand to magically do this when a subscription is started. We have already been told by NL and BN plus countless others that they have teams that work on different things. It's not the entire ED team working on the Viper and nothing else. So BOOM, busted that one.

 

 

• This reliable income would allow for a true live service, with constant servers run by the company. This would not stop communities from also running their own servers – perhaps the best of these could be supported by free hosting by ED. Hell, we could even have forum software developed after 2012.

 

I fail to understand how this point is helpful in any way. We already see bi-weekly if not weekly updates to the core of DCS, plus whatever 3rd Party has tested and ready to go for that patch. On that last part, yes let's charge a subscription fee and then give away free space on those servers to Blue Flag, 104th, or F99th (just examples, as those are heavily played servers). Why do that when they run their servers quite well and your ping rate would be insane if everyone had to go through Russia to play online. This argument just doesn't hold water. Now dynamic online campaigns are a different beast.

 

• ED becomes more accountable to the players. With a monthly subscription model, if the game is not in a good shape, players will cancel their subscriptions.

 

Yes because Blizzard (WoW) and Bethesda (Fallout 76, ESO) have followed this path and it has all been hunky dory. NOT. I think the current model makes ED more accountable than a sub would. True they get there money upfront, but if that model doesn't have steady upgrades and improvements, good luck selling your next one. Remember F-18 owners going nuts about the 16 release when so much wasn't fixed or done on the 18.

 

• ED is less likely to go out of business if the current pay-for-module method doesn't prove to be sustainable (personally, I don't think it is)

 

Simple hyperbole on this bullet. because you have ZERO data to back up this claim, their is no reason to discuss it further.

 

• The ability to focus on new features other than modules, such as a much-improved VR experience, a new graphics engine, better AI, etc. All of those myriad tasks that we want to see completed could start getting done, but which currently come second to modules.

 

Again they have stated that other teams are working on these features. A lot of the modules are 3rd Party, meaning ED just has to give it a good test, make sure it doesn't break the game, and allow it to patch into Open Beta. 3rd Party takes care of their own modules, not ED.

 

• The ability to start coming up with really outside-of-the-box ideas, such as an online dynamic campaign that can host squadrons, incorporate logistics and player hierarchies, mirroring the way Eve Online works with its corporations.

 

Nothing really to argue here as those would be great improvements and great features. Only thing I will add is most of the milsim squadrons already do this kind of stuff (logistics, player hierarchies) and Co-Op between groups is pretty easy. I don't think ED should have to get involved in any of that stuff (minus Dynamic campaign of course)

 

 

• Again borrowing from Eve Online, ED could host real world events each year, such as an annual DCS-con, where module makers, developers, modders, skinners and players could all get together to talk, drink and shoot each other down from the sky in a blaze of glory... sorry, I'm getting a little carried away by the possibilities that an annual subscription fee could bring.

 

This is another that I don't really buy. We have multiple outlets for this kind of interaction. Grim Reapers meeting up at RIAT 2019, for example. Remember this is a worldwide community and a rather niche one at that.

 

Look at the end of the day, their are always arguments for or against different things. One thing I think you might want to stop doing is trying to relate DCS to other games. WoW, Fallout, ESO, or EVE Online all have dynamic structure and economies within them, which is something DCS doesn't do or even need. DCS is horrifyingly simple, purchase an aircraft, now spend months or years fully learning how to employ it on the battlefield. It's one of the reasons they don't want you talking about other games or other game companies (I'm waiting for BN or NL to bust me for mentioning the ones I did). I'm a gamer, I play a lot of different games on console and PC, and DCS is like none of them, it is it's own wonderful, nightmare fuel that I keep coming back to because I enjoy the challenge. I don't see how a subscription improves DCS, for those of us that enjoy the study sim. So again, NO SUBSCRIPTION.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Guardian, thank you for really putting some thought into your post. It's really refreshing to know that there are people with a different perspective to me that do think about this topic seriously, rather than just throw their hands up in the air and scream no. All of your points are totally valid, and I can see why the existing model works if they are true.

 

My biggest concern though is the sustainability of ED, and as a direct result, DCS. You are absolutely correct in saying I have no visibility about the financial health of the company, but I do see a few red flags here and there. Things like the totally rushed F-16,and relatively high price of the supercarrier feelike ED is having to lean on these releases to make money. I'm fine with paying for these, but not when they release in the state of the F-16.

 

ED has also talked a lot about improvements to the core engine, and have mentioned a huge variety of awesome things on the way, like new clouds, a dynamic campaign, and porting to Vulkan. Problem is, I've been hearing these promises for several years, yet we still have a sim where my AI wingman can't even remember not to burn through a his fuel. Not sure how long you've been following DSC, but I've been playing since LOMAC, so I'm well aware of ED's intentions to improve the game. But I feel like they simply don't have the resources to deliver on them. A subscription model would go a long way to solving that, and we'd all end up with an even better sim for the cost of a couple of Big Mac meals. Sounds like a no-brainer to me, as I believe ED would use these new funds appropriately. I really do believe that they're super passionate about this game, and wouldn't simply sit back and bathe in cash rather than reinvest it into the game.


Edited by GunSlingerAUS

Intel 11900K/NVIDIA RTX 3090/32GB DDR4 3666/Z590 Asus Maximus motherboard/2TB Samsung EVO Pro/55" LG C9 120Hz @ 4K/Windows 10/Jotunheim Schiit external headphone amp/Virpil HOTAS + MFG Crosswind pedals

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's what happens when beating tired horses. It has nothing to do with ''taking it seriously'', it's got to do with satisfying your urge for debate, on a topic that 99% of folks here recognise is a dead end and that ED themselves said they weren't interested in.

 

 

ED employs 200 some odd people across a half dozen or more little teams. I'm sure at least one of them is an accountant capable of basic math and access to the company coffers. If numbers go negative too long, I'm sure he'd say something to the bosses. They don't need the unwashed public telling them how to run their business or waxing poetic about ''how ever shall they keep the doors open without my stellar business acumen?!''

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's what happens when beating tired horses. It has nothing to do with ''taking it seriously'', it's got to do with satisfying your urge for debate, on a topic that 99% of folks here recognise is a dead end and that ED themselves said they weren't interested in.

 

 

ED employs 200 some odd people across a half dozen or more little teams. I'm sure at least one of them is an accountant capable of basic math and access to the company coffers. If numbers go negative too long, I'm sure he'd say something to the bosses. They don't need the unwashed public telling them how to run their business or waxing poetic about ''how ever shall they keep the doors open without my stellar business acumen?!''

 

As mentioned previously, the search feature did not return any results when I looked for "subscription". So they have 200 staff now eh? Weird, a month ago one of the owners said 125. .I'm not trying to tell them how to run their business, but I would like them to know that many of us have enough spare income to afford a tiny $20 per month to keep DCS alive if it comes to that. Also,us grown ups like to chat about things that matter to us. It's a shame that some people have to be rude when they don't agree with something.

Intel 11900K/NVIDIA RTX 3090/32GB DDR4 3666/Z590 Asus Maximus motherboard/2TB Samsung EVO Pro/55" LG C9 120Hz @ 4K/Windows 10/Jotunheim Schiit external headphone amp/Virpil HOTAS + MFG Crosswind pedals

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No It is would be a bad idea. Subscriptions always incur higher costs to the consumer . besides I am already invested purchasing the module I own . This has been brought up before and I wish this topic would just cease because most people don't want it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I would pay for core updates. My price target would be $10 a month or $99 annually. They deserve the incentive to keep people working on the core. I think people are a little confused about this proposal. There are many ways to do it, some more sensible than others. IMO they should just charge for the core updates. You get some sticky stable version for free. You get the P-51 and Frogfoot and Caucuses free, and you still pay for other modules. All those are still flyable on the latest version of the core you subscribed to. When your subscription ends, your core updates end.

 

I don't think they could ever get away with suddenly giving all their planes and maps away for $20 a month. People paid a lot of money for their modules and they want to keep them even if the subscription runs out. Paying for planes individually makes sense. Not paying for core updates makes no sense to me. We see the results of that. Lots of bugs in the core nobody bothers to fix because there's no incentive.

 

So yes I'd pay because I don't know how they thrive without some recurring revenue. All this talk about money grabbing is insane. Software companies need cash flow guys. Programmers aren't cheap.

Oculus Rift S / Aorus GTX 1080TI / Intel i7 7700k @4.2 GHz

/ 32GB DDR4 RAM @2400 MHz / TB250-BTC Biostar Motherboard / Thrustmaster HOTAS Warthog PC / Thrustmaster TFRP Pedals / Windows 10 / Western Digital 500GB SSD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally agree

Oculus Rift S / Aorus GTX 1080TI / Intel i7 7700k @4.2 GHz

/ 32GB DDR4 RAM @2400 MHz / TB250-BTC Biostar Motherboard / Thrustmaster HOTAS Warthog PC / Thrustmaster TFRP Pedals / Windows 10 / Western Digital 500GB SSD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Totally agree again. ED is probably running on fumes, hand to mouth, based on sales of the latest pre-release thing. A well managed campaign server would be a great subscription incentive as well. I don't see why they would want to spend good development resources on the dynamic campaign when they can probably get a couple gaming junkies to manage a big server like that for a pittance and potentially bring in a load of revenue.

Oculus Rift S / Aorus GTX 1080TI / Intel i7 7700k @4.2 GHz

/ 32GB DDR4 RAM @2400 MHz / TB250-BTC Biostar Motherboard / Thrustmaster HOTAS Warthog PC / Thrustmaster TFRP Pedals / Windows 10 / Western Digital 500GB SSD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

125? Ok, I misremembered and we can go with that. It's morevthan a handful, regardless and I'm sure at least one is an accountant. Also, you didn't look very hard, cause there's been a half dozen in the last month or two I remember offhand.

 

 

@Kenny

That's ridiculous. The community ALREADY more or less has running campaigns. Why would anyone possibly pay a MONTHLY SUBSCRIPTION for a multiplayer server instead of one that's free? The only way this notion works is if they shut down community servers altogether to force it.

 

 

People pull the most ridiculous notions out of thin air and act like it's a golden ticket nobody thought of before. Damn glad ED don't listen to these folks, they'd have been shuttered ten years ago @@ People bitch about paying for asset packs, and your idea is sell them monthly fees for a glorified mission generator? Yeah, THAT'S gonna go over great.

 

 

I hope Electronic Arts isn't watching. They love that sort of thing


Edited by zhukov032186

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm against the idea mostly because steady subscription income removes incentive to work on a better product. Sure, some examples of companies that make a good use of such a business model exist and were mentioned in this thread, but so were the companies which got lazy instead, because with money coming anyway, they lost motivation. So it depends on management and people rather than model itself. There's no guarantee that ED would fall into the first category - it's only an optimistic assumption, equally valid to pesimistic concerns of those who perceive ED as a chaotic producer with no clear development picture in mind.

 

I also don't see comparisons with iRacing valid. First, it's a racing sim (a genre which is multitude times more popular than flight sims), second - it's been designed as a MP-only, subscription based product from the get go. Flight sims are a niche in comparison, combat flight sims are niche within a niche, study combat flight sims are a niche within a niche within a niche, and MP community of flight sims is a niche within a niche within a niche within a niche :D. Simply put - apples and oranges.

i7 9700K @ stock speed, single GTX1070, 32 gigs of RAM, TH Warthog, MFG Crosswind, Win10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

attachment.php?attachmentid=225677&stc=1&d=1579835791

 

This subject has had many threads created for it, and no, I'm not gonna search and count them all :no: . The above image is from one such thread/poll I found fairly quickly.

Wags, at sometime, made a short passing comment on the subject sometime back, stating as it was not in the interest of Eagle Dynamics for such, and no, I'm not gonna search for that post either :no:. However, you can.

 

If your really seriously interested in the financial viability of Eagle Dynamics and it's associated organization "The Fighter Collection" there are a few things YOU can do right now, and in the years to come.

 

  1. You could purchase at least one Eagle Dynamics product every month or two. At the date of this post there are a total of 72 (yes that's SEVENTY TWO) Eagle Dynamics products available for purchase today. If you purchase one DCS product a month, it would take you six years to purchase the DCS products available as of the date of this post!
  2. or, if you are really, really totally serious about the viability of Eagle Dynamics you could purchase all available 72 products, at full price, which would only cost you US$2,158.34 as of the date of this post. In addition you will have the opportunity to purchase system upgrades for the Blackshark and A-10C soon at full price, plus even more upcoming modules, maps and campaigns as they go full price after the per-purchase sale opportunities.
  3. You could purchase duplicates of DCS product you already have and gift it to someone who may show an interest in DCS, however, has not purchased a dcs product yet, or gift it to someone who is a DCS fan whom cannot afford to purchase it at the moment, or just gift it to family or friends.
  4. You could join the Friends of the Fighter Collection for £15.00 / year, or get a family subscription for £25.00 / year.
  5. You could purchase gift items from the Fighter Collection Shop (books, clothing, badges, caps).

However, if your wanting to access $2,158.34 (plus much more monetary value coming in the next couple of years, likely be more than doubled that) of Eagle Dynamics products for only one or two hundred dollars a year, you seriously are not having the best interest of of the Eagle Dynamics / Fighter Collection as your motive.

 

Just call it for what it is, if someone wants total access to $2K to $4K of software products for about a 90% - 80% discount, it's for the selfish best interest of themselves, and has nothing to do with the caring of the viability of the ED/FC group.

 

On a different note, it would not surprise me, and I personally kinda expect for MAC to be a subscription based service, namely, as all the aircraft, systems wise, will be the same, or mostly similar to each other, differing FM and wrappers, but the same basic or simplified aircraft, systems wise, and as such marketed to a differing customer base, than a "study simulation". Me personally, not my interest at all, however, I personally expect MAC to be a successful product.

 

I already own every module, map and campaign available for DCS. I only fly a couple. I often buy copies for friends. I look at the hours I spend compared to other hobbies,around 30 per month, and it's a fricking cheap spend. I can understand if you only play 5 hours a month that a sub seems expensive, but up that to ten and $20 is a bargain. If you think $20 is toouch, you must underappreciate the manhours it takes to make this kind of game, or you're stuck in the past when subscriptions only related to your monthly guns n ammo mag.

 

 

I find it really hard to believe you guys think ED is adequately resourced... when they haven't even released the template for the F-16. Wake up and smell the coffee before it gets poured down the sink.


Edited by GunSlingerAUS

Intel 11900K/NVIDIA RTX 3090/32GB DDR4 3666/Z590 Asus Maximus motherboard/2TB Samsung EVO Pro/55" LG C9 120Hz @ 4K/Windows 10/Jotunheim Schiit external headphone amp/Virpil HOTAS + MFG Crosswind pedals

Link to comment
Share on other sites

oh, i got an idea:

 

simple as that : F18D !

 

seriously, ED throw in a kind of jester AI, change some values here and there and give a 3d model for the plane.

99.9% commonality with F18c .

complete F18c and F18d and sell D variant to full price, so we have 2 >>complete<< modules.

then they make F18e and F18f with simple or "average" systems complexity , afterall many planes module are simple systems and noone is crying about it (su27, su33, F15, A10a, su25t, ecc).

and again commonality from F18c is really, really high , lets say 90% .

sell F18e and F18f at full-discounted price and you have 4 complete modules, offering 4 different planes, with in fact a huge commonality for ED that means 1 work 4 times the results.

 

PROS:

we dont have to pay montly fees or re-buy already owned modules

we can choose if / what to buy

all this 4 modules would be completed, so an high quality experience for users.

already owned modules stay as they are and no need to pay again.

3 new modules would bring more fresh air to DCS

ED gets 4 times (supposing all buy) the revenue of F18

ED gets a image improvement delivering complete modules.

ED will get all this with a 0.1% work on F18d and a 10% work on F18e and F18f

 

CONS:

honestly i dont see any cons… seems a win-win situation.

 

customers get new modules and completed F18c, and choose if and what to buy.

are not forced at all, just get "more" options.

ED gets more revenue in a legit way, and with a very little work.

 

yeah yeah, you can get this idea for free ED, i dont apply any charge, LOL !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm against the idea mostly because steady subscription income removes incentive to work on a better product. Sure, some examples of companies that make a good use of such a business model exist and were mentioned in this thread, but so were the companies which got lazy instead, because with money coming anyway, they lost motivation. So it depends on management and people rather than model itself. There's no guarantee that ED would fall into the first category - it's only an optimistic assumption, equally valid to pesimistic concerns of those who perceive ED as a chaotic producer with no clear development picture in mind.

 

How do you stay inspired as an employee? Does your employer give you year's salary upfront, and you promise to deliver (kinda like sellinf early release modules today). Or do you get paid on a monthly basis? Which method proves to work best at delivering maximum benefit for both employer and employee?

  • Like 1

Intel 11900K/NVIDIA RTX 3090/32GB DDR4 3666/Z590 Asus Maximus motherboard/2TB Samsung EVO Pro/55" LG C9 120Hz @ 4K/Windows 10/Jotunheim Schiit external headphone amp/Virpil HOTAS + MFG Crosswind pedals

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...