Black Shark 3?

Any other software house develops and sells its products differently: 10 years ago your PC ran windows vista. You have had to pay to upgrade to windows 10. 10 years ago maybe you could play the witcher, today you have to pay if you want to play the witcher 3, and maybe you use your old copy of the witcher to level the desk's legs. DCS Ka-50 black shark is still alive and healthy after 10 years. We have had DCS world, and the ka-50 has been brought into it (paying), all the other updates have been for free. Today it is the oldest module we have. Maybe a tiny update with some textures could be enough - and you'd have it for free as all the other updates you had in 9 years, after BS2 - but maybe a more extensive work has to be done to bring it the same technology level as the f/a-18. If they ask a small fee to do this, after 10 years, I can't call this a robbery, above all if the only alternative is to keep it as it is, and it works... for now, but you risk the same destiny of the hawk (i.e. you'll have to play it in DCS legacy versions in the future). I believe in ED's dream to offer a detailed and complete war theater simulation and to do so you cannot leave anything behind, but neither you can think to bring all up to date for free.

Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

Lol, The Witcher and The Witcher 3 are two COMPLETELY DIFFERENT games. A cockpit upgrade is NOWHERE NEAR a completely new game. It's basically a BUG FIX with a shift to a new graphics engine.

People are always asking how they can help DCS financially. I think a payed upgrade to modules is a great idea.

Agree!

ED ARE obligated to update and fix what they broke by upgrading other elements of the sim FOR FREE.

What exactly makes you think that? Is apple obligated to give you a new iPhone when a new iOS breaks your old one? Will MS give you a new office version if your office 2003 does not run on win10? You are free to install 1.5 where everything still works more or less. NOONE forces anybody to use the latest OB release. And NOONE ever promised lifetime free support for the Ka-50 or any other module for that matter. This is the price of progress. Stuff breaks and has to be redone. And that requires resources and has to be paid for. It´s simple as that. Rather than making such selfish claims towards a niche company like ED, you should encourage them by showing that you are willing to pay for what they put their work in. I would gladly pay the full price of BS2 to have a Ka-50 with up to date visual standards and bug fixes and nothing more. And let´s be honest, its not the modules that are draining our vallets. Its the HOTAS and PC Hardware that cost hunderds or thousands of dollars. 50$ for a module you will have hours and hours of fun with is really nothing compared to the cost of even an average PC.

Its pretty simple really...If I didn't already own Blackshark...and I bought it tomorrow...it would be broken yes? ergo they would have to fix as advertised via the manual.

Its pretty simple really...If I didn't already own Blackshark...and I bought it tomorrow...it would be broken yes? ergo they would have to fix as advertised via the manual.

May be ED should fix the light bug and leave the rest as it is for who is not willing to pay.

For the other people, release a completely overhauled BS3 for sale. In addition to graphics may be some better simulation of INS and electrical systems and some other currently not simulated systems might justify the cost for a new module, but I would be happy with a graphical only update as well.

Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

I don't think the people who just bought this BROKEN module for FULL PRICE are going to be very agreeable having to BUY IT AGAIN.

NO WAY am I going to pay for just bug fixes and a graphical update to match the new engine which should have been done anyway. We already pay more than enough for each module ( the price of a AAA game ).

I do not understand the hysteria in here. ED has already made a free update for the MiG-29. So why shouldn't they make a free update for the Ka-50, too?

I am sorry to hear that some people had to buy the Ka-50 again to play it in DCS, but that was a different thing.

the price of a AAA game

Don't you consider dcs: ka-50 a AAA game? It Is much better than a lot of so called AAA games that are only eye candies with the same boring repetitive gameplay, in which you have to explore a huge map back and forth just to find a piece of armor and you end up using fast travel to ease the boredom and come quickly to the end. After which you probably never play a second time. In dcs: ka-50 you have a complete manual to study, a lot of systems and procedures to learn, training missions to make practice, a few single missions and a campaign, a powerful mission editor, and a virtually forever lasting game in which you still learn something new after years of play. And the software house still supports and updates it after 10 years. IMHO dcs: ka-50 Is given at the price they ask for.

Take fifa for example.

Every year they release "new" Fifa for full price around $70-$80. It mostly feels the same with minor tweaks, graphics from year to year is very slightly improved, they update licenses and stuff, pretty much the same graphics and gameplay engines with minor tweaks, doesn't feel at all as completely new game more like a small updates.

Now if you take fifa for 10 years from fifa 2009 to fifa 2019, there is already a bit bigger difference but you have paid approx. $800 to play pretty much the same fifa for 10 years. For the shark you paid $50-$60, and when a major update is asked to be payed(it can be taken as a complete new BS3 following BS2, the same way fifa19 follows fifa18) you start to complain ?!

And have in mind that until a few months back, BS2 was sold for $39 when not on sale, which means many people payed $40 bucks for 10 years of support and gameplay.

Sorry but I think most of you doesn't deserve DCS to exist.

Take fifa for example.

 

Every year they release "new" Fifa for full price around $70-$80. It mostly feels the same with minor tweaks, graphics from year to year is very slightly improved, they update licenses and stuff, pretty much the same graphics and gameplay engines with minor tweaks, doesn't feel at all as completely new game more like a small updates.

 

Now if you take fifa for 10 years from fifa 2009 to fifa 2019, there is already a bit bigger difference but you have paid approx. $800 to play pretty much the same fifa for 10 years. For the shark you paid $50-$60, and when a major update is asked to be payed(it can be taken as a complete new BS3 following BS2, the same way fifa19 follows fifa18) you start to complain ?!

 

And have in mind that until a few months back, BS2 was sold for $39 when not on sale, which means many people payed $40 bucks for 10 years of support and gameplay.

Sorry but I think most of you doesn't deserve DCS to exist.

Totally agree with Metzger!

Take fifa for example.

 

Every year they release "new" Fifa for full price around $70-$80. It mostly feels the same with minor tweaks, graphics from year to year is very slightly improved, they update licenses and stuff, pretty much the same graphics and gameplay engines with minor tweaks, doesn't feel at all as completely new game more like a small updates.

 

Now if you take fifa for 10 years from fifa 2009 to fifa 2019, there is already a bit bigger difference but you have paid approx. $800 to play pretty much the same fifa for 10 years. For the shark you paid $50-$60, and when a major update is asked to be payed(it can be taken as a complete new BS3 following BS2, the same way fifa19 follows fifa18) you start to complain ?!

 

And have in mind that until a few months back, BS2 was sold for $39 when not on sale, which means many people payed $40 bucks for 10 years of support and gameplay.

Sorry but I think most of you doesn't deserve DCS to exist.

I respectfully disagree. This is a false analogy. You're underplaying the amount of new content and development that goes into every new FIFA game. Also, FIFA 2009 is no longer a supported product that is actively on sale.

The Black Shark has been on sale since it's release and is still on sale as a current and available DCS module. We're essentially talking about a bug fix here, not new content. Current cockpit textures don't work well in the new engine, so that the use of certain cockpit systems is undermined (eg. autopilot channel lighting). As a currently supported module, I would also consider an update to bring it up to 2019 visual standards a bug fix.

Now IF the Black Shark were to be given new content (skins, campaigns), new features (Igla, night capability) etc., then I paid upgrade would be justified.

I respectfully disagree. This is a false analogy. You're underplaying the amount of new content and development that goes into every new FIFA game. Also, FIFA 2009 is no longer a supported product that is actively on sale.

 

The Black Shark has been on sale since it's release and is still on sale as a current and available DCS module. We're essentially talking about a bug fix here, not new content. Current cockpit textures don't work well in the new engine, so that the use of certain cockpit systems is undermined (eg. autopilot channel lighting). As a currently supported module, I would also consider an update to bring it up to 2019 visual standards a bug fix.

 

Now IF the Black Shark were to be given new content (skins, campaigns), new features (Igla, night capability) etc., then I paid upgrade would be justified.

Of course it is not the same analogy but it is close enough.

Fifa 18 is actively for sale for the same price until the next one is released. BS2 will not be for sale once BS3 is released, the difference is that you have significantly longer life time for the shark in compared to the fifa. You have to also consider the difference in the niche market as a helicopter within a combat flight sim and a Fifa soccer game - more potential sales will decrease the price. So fifa is much more overpriced in this regard, especially knowing that you will pay 70 bucks and after 1 year it will be obsolete, MP servers will be empty and you will have to pay another 70 for the new one, while BS2 you could actively use for 10 years. Now you can still have the same option as fifa - Buy the new BS3 with new graphics to use in DCS 2.5 and above, or keep using the old version 1.5 without paying more but with empty servers etc.

EDIT:

I do have most of the fifa's and they feel very much the same with minor changes, If I underline the amount of work required for those changes, I can say the same that you underline the amount of work required for the complete 3d model and textures update.

We are not speaking about jsut fixing the buttons lights, this is easy - download the devrim cockpit, I am sure ED can fix that for free, we talk about complete renovation of the cockpit 3d mesh.

When talking about what the update should be, night capabilities etc is pointless to speak as this would be different frame and they stated 1000 times they wont do different frame. What can be added is some new missions,skins, better INS simulation and similar stuff. They can only do a graphical update and charge a bit less then a full module or any similar approach.

I am sure ED will make the correct decision, we are about to see what soon enough.

We're essentially talking about a bug fix here, not new content. Current cockpit textures don't work well in the new engine

The new engine IS new content. But you've had it for free in the "core" DCS world.

Every year they release "new" Fifa for full price around $70-$80. It mostly feels the same with minor tweaks, graphics from year to year is very slightly improved, they update licenses and stuff, pretty much the same graphics and gameplay engines with minor tweaks, doesn't feel at all as completely new game more like a small updates.

... and you don't find this rather ridiculous, from a customers perspective?

... and you don't find this rather ridiculous, from a customers perspective?

And what do you think will happen with DCS if everyone thinks that paying for a nich simulator is ridiculous and it should be maintained for free ? If there is no business case for ED to do it, what do you think will happen ?

Someone will do it just to satisfy people who thinks everything should be given to them for free because 8 years ago they paid for a module ? Do you work for free ?

Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

If it was so ridiculous, would it be successful for already 25 years ? Obviously customers are ok with that.

And what do you think will happen with DCS if everyone thinks that paying for a nich simulator is ridiculous and it should be maintained for free ? If there is no business case for ED to do it, what do you think will happen ?

Someone will do it just to satisfy people who thinks everything should be given to them for free because 8 years ago they paid for a module ? Do you work for free ?

 

Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

Don't know why you are persisting with this discussion. Nineline confirmed in this very thread that the updates to the Ka-50 will handled exactly like the warbirds' were, at no additional charge.

Nobody in this thread wants stuff for free, nor have they gotten anything for free. Most people in this thread has paid twice for the Ka-50, the exact same module, with nothing new. So it is understandable that people do not want to pay for the same thing a third time, hence the pitchforks and torches came out. Customers are NOT okay with it.

I'm not sure if you work in the software industry, but in case you don't, it functions vastly different from any other industry. Regardless of whether you're a multi billion dollar publishing studio, or an independent developer and publisher. Making customers pay several times for the same product is NOT how money is made in the software industry. That's how you close shop. You make money in software, with new products, not trying to sell the same thing more than once to the same customer. (Which is what BS2 was, exactly. There was nothing new in BS2.)

Every single one of your analogies falls flat on it's face and is borderline strawmanning. You are comparing paying for Windows Vista and Windows 10, as being the same thing as what we have here, when it isn't the same thing. That comparison is apples and oranges. BS is a current supported piece of software that people have paid for. There is nothing free about that. A fitting analogy would be:

You've purchased Windows 10. Microsoft then maintains the software via updates and service packs. The updates and service packs do not come at an additional charge. This is exactly what the graphic update and fixes to the Ka-50 and A-10C is. Nothing new is being introduced. It's software that must be maintained.

There is nothing "free" about maintaining the software, and ED bringing the Ka-50 and A-10C up to the standard of 2.5 modules, isn't work they are doing for free. This is work that is budgeted for and is included in their overhead, which is covered by the regular sales of existing modules and new modules. ED is getting paid.

If it was so ridiculous, would it be successful for already 25 years ? Obviously customers are ok with that.

And what do you think will happen with DCS if everyone thinks that paying for a nich simulator is ridiculous and it should be maintained for free ? If there is no business case for ED to do it, what do you think will happen ?

Someone will do it just to satisfy people who thinks everything should be given to them for free because 8 years ago they paid for a module ? Do you work for free ?

 

Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

That BS2 was a paid upgrade was/is ok in my eyes - we DID get a huge amount of new content with it, namely flying within one (DCS) world.

I would also not have argued against it, if DCS 2 were a paid upgrade, as the new graphics engine and all the added potential (that we are now, closing in on 2.5.5 - and beyond) equals to a huge amount of new content.

But EDs business model is different: the base game is free and it was their decision to not ask for money here. But I fail to see the reasoning to pay for bug fixes and graphics adjustment (caused by changes in the base game), that other modules are getting for free.

If ED chooses a different business model - however that might look like - where paying for substancial updates is fair(!), then I would not mind...

That BS2 was a paid upgrade was/is ok in my eyes - we DID get a huge amount of new content with it, namely flying within one (DCS) world.

I wonder what was this huge amount of content? IIRC, when BS1 came out, it was advertised as being the first modules in the series which would integrate together. Then, when Warthog came out as part of the now common DCS World, they had to adjust some things in the BS to fit the changes in the common base made in between, which they decided to charge for, even though (again) the original BS was announced as a module which will be integrated with any future modules.

Yeah, the DCSW development dragged on for years and the amount of compatibility changes required to BS was probably quite significant, but speaking strictly from the BS owner's perspective, the only obvious new BS specific content (ignoring the changes made to the common base and BS AI improvements) was a new campaign and the majority of the new base features were already paid for with the Warthog in a way. But, you were OK with paying for that.

Now, besides releasing the Hornet, they also keep adding stuff to the base game (not to mention the reworked free map and all the FC3 aircraft improvements they gave away for free), but this time it's not OK to charge for all these parallel developments somehow?

It's just that such a view feels a bit inconsistent from my perspective, but then again I didn't like paying for mostly compatibility changes back then which I felt weren't supposed to have been necessary given that the module was sold with that feature in mind.

But, regarding BS3, I'm not proposing that they should charge money for just fixing whatever the issue is with cockpit textures. I'm not sure how much work in fixing it is required, but if it's in any way significant, perhaps it's even a waste of time given that they do seem to plan to make a new cockpit and a new 3D model (among a few other system updates supposedly). And that's certainly worth charging some money for, won't you think?

I wonder what was this huge amount of content? IIRC, when BS1 came out, it was advertised as being the first modules in the series which would integrate together. Then, when Warthog came out as part of the now common DCS World, they had to adjust some things in the BS to fit the changes in the common base made in between, which they decided to charge for, even though (again) the original BS was announced as a module which will be integrated with any future modules.

I remember it differently. BS1 was a stand-alone game and you could only fly with other Blacksharks online.

I don't remember, if DCS:W came first and then the Warthog, or if both "evolved" together? But anyways, the Blackshark then was ported to DCS:W in the form of BS2.

I remember it differently. BS1 was a stand-alone game and you could only fly with other Blacksharks online.

 

I don't remember, if DCS:W came first and then the Warthog, or if both "evolved" together? But anyways, the Blackshark then was ported to DCS:W in the form of BS2.

Yes, BS1 was standalone initially, but AFAIK (can't really find those old announcement articles now) it was advertised as a first in a series of modules which would be integrated together. Then DCSW came together with the Warthog, but instead of the expected integration of BS1 with the Warthog, there was a payware upgrade to BS2.

I have BS1, Upgrade and BS2 (I don't like DVDs..). IIRC A-10C and Ka-50 could fly with BS1, I think the upgrade was needed once FC2 and DCS Wold were released in order to make the whole lot compatible together. I may be wrong, it was a decade ago.

That being said, I bought BS1 on the day one and it's still the only module I fly regularly. BS doens't sport Kamov's logo anymore since the Upgrade; so I guess ED can take a bit more freedom about what they do with it. Therefore I'm happy to pay for a BS3 if it contains different versions of the Shark as well (I don't really care about textures and lighting, it's still usable) such as the Ka-50N or Ka-50Sh.

Unfortunately the Ka-50 is the only attack helicopter in DCS and both Mi-24P and AH-1whatever will be completely outclassed by it, pilot workload aside (it's still good to have 2 pilots, just to share radio comms and management and SA) hence an updated Shark would be great.

I think if there would ever be a paid-for upgrade for the Black Shark, it would depend on the price and content.

 

If it's just a external & internal model update, I would be prepared to pay a small amount for it.

Like 10~15 dollar or something I would be prepared to spend on it, in a heartbeat.

Purely based on the fact that the original development of the Ka-50 has been so many years ago, and I've had so much enjoyment out of it over the years.

 

If there would be some extra development, i.e. expanded avionics, more weapons, that sort of stuff, I'd be prepared to spend more.

Surely you joke?

Bringing the entire fleet up to current standards is something ED will do as standard, they do this simply because it makes sense to bridge such an enormous gap in the old and new graphics engine.

They also do it because they have pride in what they built, this is very evident over the years and the work they put into old modules to keep everything tip top and Bristol fashion.

They also do it because the KA-50 is the ONLY High tech attack chopper in DCS and even then she is not equipped to defend her self in an European high threat environment....... which is a shameful state to find ones self!

As you state at the end of your rant, a major avionics change is required for cash. Defence is where this nasty aggressive weapon needs upgrading!

The only real true value of your weapon and how to use and protect it is to know when it is time to withdraw it, a $13,000,000 machine is an asset you protect and you spend another 2,000,000 dollars protecting it....easy!

Is she really to throw away because a radar guided AA missile launcher locked and engaged you and you knew nothing about it until the baby Jesus explained it all to you whilst standing on a fluffy cloud?

We pay for defence only!

if this is not possible then fine...

No defence no cash!

Lol, well said Rogue, well said. We need FLIR, RWR, and at least Igla's. Six pylons like the Ka-52 carries. Missile Warning System I'm not a huge fan of since it goes off like crazy when flying over the small surface to surface missile launches coming off of tanks and APC's.

With all the variants of the Ka-50 built, there must be some advanced ones that encompassed this.

That being said, I bought BS1 on the day one and it's still the only module I fly regularly. BS doens't sport Kamov's logo anymore since the Upgrade; so I guess ED can take a bit more freedom about what they do with it. Therefore I'm happy to pay for a BS3 if it contains different versions of the Shark as well (I don't really care about textures and lighting, it's still usable) such as the Ka-50N or Ka-50Sh.

 

Unfortunately the Ka-50 is the only attack helicopter in DCS and both Mi-24P and AH-1whatever will be completely outclassed by it, pilot workload aside (it's still good to have 2 pilots, just to share radio comms and management and SA) hence an updated Shark would be great.

Agreed. I'd pay for an updated KA or variant thereof. I really prefer single-pilot aircraft, and as far as I know there aren't any other single-seat attack helicopters.