Business model behind this project?

What I am wondering is what the business model is behind this project.

As far as I understood it, the KS funds keep RRG alive while developing DCSWW2 until it is released in Sept. 2014. But what then? The game is f2p and no additional sellable content will then be ready, yet. At least not in a magnitude that would keep the whole team going, I would assume.

So, how shall this project work out in the mid and long term?

They have a bunch of products in the oven to be released soon yr-yr 1/2.

I'm puzzled by this too. Specially the post luthier made yesterday.

Did I get this right? If they meet the 100k goal and not more, everything made by rrg studios (Spitfire, Bf-109, P-47 and the new map) are going to be given for free to everybody, including those ashats that posted negative comments on the kickstarter comments?

What are they going to sell if they give everything for free? The whole ide behind kickstarter is to get enough money to get the ball rolling. Why not sell those m odels, to the people that didn't tke part in the kickstarter, to finance the developement of more models, like the fw190a5 and typhoon?

Why do we suport the developement of the game with the kickstarter, if those that didn't are going to get everything for free?

What are they going to sell if they give everything for free? The whole ide behind kickstarter is to get enough money to get the ball rolling.

They are going to sell the mustang and the dora. From what I gather, there will be separate "stores" for DCS and DCS:WW2, with some degree of cross-compatibility. If so, it makes sense for RRG to get a cut of ED's plane sales for DCS:WW2.

 

What are they going to sell if they give everything for free? The whole ide behind kickstarter is to get enough money to get the ball rolling. Why not sell those m odels, to the people that didn't tke part in the kickstarter, to finance the developement of more models, like the fw190a5 and typhoon?

Why do we suport the developement of the game with the kickstarter, if those that didn't are going to get everything for free?

I understood it like this, even if they don't hit their stretch goals other planes will still be made, they just won't be out on the release day (like they would be if they do hit stretch goals) but will come after some time. RRG will be selling those.

Also, I think that a free to play model is the best thing that happend to flight sims in a long while. It will surely help bring more people to this genre.

I'd say one aircraft should be more than enough to give away, for free, to those that didn't support the game developement.

Why give away all three new aircraft? It makes no sense. Even DCS gave away one old model only, the SU25.

They shoot themselves in the foot. There's no incentive to participate in the kickstarter.

I'd say one aircraft should be more than enough to give away, for free, to those that didn't support the game developement.

 

Why give away all three new aircraft? It makes no sense. Even DCS gave away one old model only, the SU25.

Three iconic combat planes from three different countries will attract more players than just one obscure trainer plane.

If this brings more attention to DCS series and flight sims in general, it's gonna be well worth it.

Three iconic combat planes from three different countries will attract more players than just one obscure trainer plane.

If this brings more attention to DCS series and flight sims in general, it's gonna be well worth it.

The problem is, as the things are promised now, they want to use us, who suported the game financially, pay for a full game for those that didn't. I'm not ok with that.

One plane is ok. All the planes and content made by them, with our financial help, given for free to those that didn't support the game is not ok with me.

My intention is to suport a game, not to be a sucker and pay for a full game for others.

A new map and a plane, fine. All the new content, nope.

This question puzzles me greatly also. I would be happy to pay for one aircraft in Kickstarter and pay more for every released later. These will be DCS quality and not IL-2 (honestly I'm much more interested in the BoS's front, aircraft, time period, game engine), which would translate to me as DCS: P-51 style pricing for the effort of developing such benchmark simulations.

I really want to support this project but I'm not even interested in any of the initial aircraft. The first interesting I see is the Me 262 for which I would pay some good bucks.

I'll probably kick in with 40 bucks and get the Me 262 eventually and support the developers.

Have to think about it until the next payday.

The problem is, as the things are promised now, they want to use us, who suported the game financially, pay for a full game for those that didn't. I'm not ok with that.

One plane is ok. All the planes and content made by them, with our financial help, given for free to those that didn't support the game is not ok with me.

 

My intention is to suport a game, not to be a sucker and pay for a full game for others.

A new map and a plane, fine. All the new content, nope.

I understand and partially agree with your point. We the backers are getting the short stick here. But we're doing out of our own accord, we're not being forced to do it. :)

And I'm gladly giving my 40$ away if that means that they will reach their goal and finish this product. And when the game will come out, those 40$ will mean nothing when I'll be able to play DCS level WW2 sim with my squad mates. Even if some of them didn't or couldn't support the kickstarter or buy the game, we'll still be able to play it together.

Now I am getting even more confused lol... why would RRG get any of the sales from ED created aircraft? Like I said before... just take my money and make the sim, I'll figure everything else out later :D

I think DCS WW2 is providing a much better sandbox to use the DCS P51, and FW190, which would stimulate far more sales of DCS aircraft. So why shouldn't they get a piece of the those aircraft sales. People are pledging now so that can receive these aircraft for no cost later. Either way we will be paying for those aircraft, with a cash/pledge now, or cash later. Paying now allows the development to hire more people to develop a more robust sim at next years release, rather than waiting to hire those people a year later if sales are robust enough. Its a win win situation for a relatively small investment from the community. There is no money out of our pockets if they don't reach the first goal. The upside is years of relatively cheap entertainment. :)

Giving away 3 high fidelity fighters doesnt seem like the right answer either, but its their decision to make...

I would be happy with an Hs-129B-2 as the only free flyable. A trainer aircraft I would have no use for as the actual combat aircraft are more useful in game and there is no real negative effects for smashing them into little bits inside a glorious smoking crater when you screw up anyway. The virtual squadron guys will want them but personally, I have no use for them. Moving the B-17 a little further down in the stretch goals seems like a good idea.

The problem is, as the things are promised now, they want to use us, who suported the game financially, pay for a full game for those that didn't. I'm not ok with that.

One plane is ok. All the planes and content made by them, with our financial help, given for free to those that didn't support the game is not ok with me.

 

My intention is to suport a game, not to be a sucker and pay for a full game for others.

A new map and a plane, fine. All the new content, nope.

They will not be receiving a full game. The free demo doesn't include the P51, FW190, and later aircraft and content. Very very few users will only fly the demo. Not to mention being part of the beta test team, which many of us covet. By far the majority of users will buy the P51, FW190, now or later so both groups will be paying around the same thing, except that pledgers depending on the level of the pledge, will pay a little less, or even more if they decide too put a substantial pledge down. I've put a substantial pledge because flight simming is hobby, that has provided me with years of entertainment value, at a ridiculously low price for the software.

By far the most important aspect of pledging is allowing the developer to plan ahead with some security, with some idea of the demand for their product, and hire more people to create more content sooner, than waiting a year from now to see if sales warrant further development, and hires.

They will not be receiving a full game. The free demo doesn't include the P51, FW190, and later aircraft and content. Very very few users will only fly the demo. Not to mention being part of the beta test team, which many of us covet. By far the majority of users will buy the P51, FW190, now or later so both groups will be paying around the same thing, except that pledgers depending on the level of the pledge, will pay a little less, or even more if they decide too put a substantial pledge down. I've put a substantial pledge because flight simming is hobby, that has provided me with years of entertainment value, at a ridiculously low price for the software.

 

By far the most important aspect of pledging is allowing the developer to plan ahead with some security, with some idea of the demand for their product, and hire more people to create more content sooner, than waiting a year from now to see if sales warrant further development, and hires.

Let me be more clear. As I see things now, we'll most likely get the 100k main goal, but nothing else.

I doubt we get to 375k with the kickstarter, so we can get the a5 and typhoon.

If so, they won't have anything to sell in order to generate revenue and developement money for aditional content.

the Dora and Pony are DCS planes. All rrg studio can get from those, is a small percentage, if they sell them. That won't be enough to pay the bills and programers to make more planes.

All they'll get is a bunch of happy free loaders (free new game with all new planes), and pissed supporters (paid for the game others got for free and have no hope for new content, because the game has nothing to generate income after the release).

If they get the 100k needed for the basic game and give all new content for free to those that didn't support the game, they will be back at square one in a year from now.

There's no bussines in their bussines plan.

Let me be more clear. As I see things now, we'll most likely get the 100k main goal, but nothing else.

I doubt we get to 375k with the kickstarter, so we can get the a5 and typhoon.

 

If so, they won't have anything to sell in order to generate revenue and developement money for aditional content.

the Dora and Pony are DCS planes. All rrg studio can get from those, is a small percentage, if they sell them. That won't be enough to pay the bills and programers to make more planes.

All they'll get is a bunch of happy free loaders (free new game with all new planes), and pissed supporters (paid for the game others got for free and have no hope for new content, because the game has nothing to generate income after the release).

 

If they get the 100k needed for the basic game and give all new content for free to those that didn't support the game, they will be back at square one in a year from now.

 

There's no bussines in their bussines plan.

I understand your angst, but they have enough investment monies now to create the free demo. If goals are reached kickstarter monies will allows them to start creating sellable content "now" that could be ready for sale shortly after the release of the free demo. The more kickstarter monies they receive the more sellable content they will be able to deliver.

According to Luthier RRG have some funding already, the Kickstarter funding will make things happen quicker, allow them to hire a few more people. If we miss the stretch goal (seems likely) then the stretch planes and content will most likely happen it'll just take longer and the number of planes we see will be dependent on DCS WW2 being a commercial success.

Of course we'll have to pay for the stretch goal planes rather than getting them for our $40.

That's how I see it anyway.

I understand your angst, but they have enough investment monies now to create the free demo. If goals are reached kickstarter monies will allows them to start creating sellable content "now" that could be ready for sale shortly after the release of the free demo. The more kickstarter monies they receive the more sellable content they will be able to deliver.

So, what is my $112 getting me, in the game, that someone that paid nothing will not get? I already have the Pony since beta, I'll get the Dora at release too anyway. So those two don't coun't.

Why not get the P47 and Bf109 pay for the 190a5 and Typhoon?

So you tell me that they have money for free stuf. Why ask me for suport then? Why no sell some of that free stuf.

I also fail to see what is giving 3 of the DCS Mustang level aircraft away getting them? One is more than enough to get people into the sim. IMHO it should be the Thunderbolt, as the Spit and 109 are more popular and more people will be inclined to pay for them.

If it was like, P-47 free, 20 dollars for Spit, and 30 for spit and 109, I bet we would have bigger chances to get to the first stretch goal.

Hell, ED is only giving the Su-25T which is not DCS level, and I feel that is just right.

But I do not feel bad for pledging 40 bucks, as I am sure I will be having lots of fun with those birds.

I would imagine they have a plan and reason behind it all. I imagine it was quite a few years in the original IL2 before return on investment was made etc. So I would wager a guess some of this funding is also coming from the team's own pockets.

But, if it does get off the ground, I wouldn't expect the pacific (or any other theater) they make to be free. I do agree that more money could have been had for different rewards etc, but I'm sure they have very good reason to charge what they do for the initial title. If this thing gets going, we could very well eventually have every WWII theater and a large majority of the WWII planes at DCS fidelity.

As far as QA with FM stuff, I'm sure that's one of the huge advantages with the Fighter Collection. I would wager a guess they will also be signing off on that aspect of the sim as well. I see this all as very good news for the future.

If this thing gets going, we could very well eventually have every WWII theater and a large majority of the WWII planes at DCS fidelity.

Just thinking about this puts a big smile on my face :D

So, what is my $112 getting me, in the game, that someone that paid nothing will not get? I already have the Pony since beta, I'll get the Dora at release too anyway. So those two don't coun't.

 

Why not get the P47 and Bf109 pay for the 190a5 and Typhoon?

 

So you tell me that they have money for free stuf. Why ask me for suport then? Why no sell some of that free stuf.

Of course the P51, and FW190 counts. Most people here don't already own the P51.

The list below shows what people will receive for the hundred dollar investment, it also shows what the free demo does not provide.

P51

FW190

Early access to the sims closed beta.

A hard copy of the games's air combat strategy, and tactics manual

A spiral-bound copies of complete aircraft manuals.

Plus the satisfaction of helping the developer hire more personal to create a decent product sooner with better possiblilities of creating further content/features/theaters later.

Personally, I'm not too concerned with the details, from experience I know that the years of entertainment value will far surpass any level I payed for that software, so I'll pledge as much as I can afford to pledge.

For the couple hundred dollars I invested in the origianl Il-2 there was ten years of highly entertaining combat flight simming.

I'll soon recoup far more than my investment in COD, especially with the free TF patches.

I'm sure my BOS and DCSWW2 investment will also be miniscule in comparison to the entertainment hours.

The cost of Combat flight sim software is quite frankly a joke compared to what it costs to create them, and the computer costs required to run them well.