Is the A-10C textures/cockpit/raindrops update still planned? - Page 3 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-28-2019, 09:35 AM   #21
nessuno0505
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Italy
Posts: 1,313
Default

I think ED should move to a subscription type of business for each module. This would be the only way to have a constant flow of money to provide updates and bug fixes in a reasonable time frame. It Is unacceptable to sell released modules full price in the state in which a-10c and ka-50 are now.
nessuno0505 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2019, 01:37 PM   #22
hansangb
Veteran
 
hansangb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: New York
Posts: 4,508
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nessuno0505 View Post
I think ED should move to a subscription type of business for each module. This would be the only way to have a constant flow of money to provide updates and bug fixes in a reasonable time frame. It Is unacceptable to sell released modules full price in the state in which a-10c and ka-50 are now.

Subscription isn't a bad idea. But your logic doesn't make any sense to me. If you buy a 10 year old car, do you expect it to have the same features as a 2019 model car?

And if your answer is "it's software so it's different" Then does MS Office from 2011 have the same features as modern Office?

And if your answer is "but they are adding new feature" We're right back to paying for the textures. Someone above said "no way, it's should be free" But I can just as easily argue that adding new shaders *is* a new feature.

But I do like yearly all you can eat SaaS license model. You could have different tier pricing. Interesting idea.
__________________
hsb
HW Spec in Spoiler
---
Spoiler:
i7-8700K Delid/OC'ed to 5.1GHz, EVGA Z370 MB, 32GB DDR4 3200MHz, EVGA 2080 Ti FTW3, NVMe+SSD, Win 10 x64 Pro, MFG, JetSeat, Warthog, TM MFDs, Komodo Huey set, CV1
hansangb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2019, 02:50 PM   #23
MasterZelgadis
Senior Member
 
MasterZelgadis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Ahaus, Germany
Posts: 1,003
Default

The moment they move to a subscription based pricing model will be the moment I will stop playing DCS...
__________________
"Sieh nur, wie majestätisch du durch die Luft segelst. Wie ein Adler. Ein fetter Adler."
http://www.space-view.net
MasterZelgadis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2019, 02:57 PM   #24
umkhunto
Member
 
umkhunto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Pretoria, South Africa
Posts: 234
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hansangb View Post
Subscription isn't a bad idea. But your logic doesn't make any sense to me. If you buy a 10 year old car, do you expect it to have the same features as a 2019 model car?

And if your answer is "it's software so it's different" Then does MS Office from 2011 have the same features as modern Office?

And if your answer is "but they are adding new feature" We're right back to paying for the textures. Someone above said "no way, it's should be free" But I can just as easily argue that adding new shaders *is* a new feature.

But I do like yearly all you can eat SaaS license model. You could have different tier pricing. Interesting idea.
They can recoup their costs somewhere else. Software is not like making a table. You do not need to make a profit, on every cent you spend, to be profitable. No raw materials are required, no warehousing is required. Just office space, and development costs. You develop 1 unit of a piece of software and resell that single unit infinitely. This differs from physical things, which you have make multiple units, to sell multiple units.

They will get their money's worth, since the A-10C and the Ka-50 are not off the shelf, are they? No, both are still available and people do still buy it. So ED is making money hand over fist on these 60USD modules, for development costs that have been recouped years ago, several times over. Thus, any work done by keeping the modules up to date with the engine is a drop in the bucket financially, compared to the full development of a module from scratch and will pay itself off with future purchases of said module.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hansangb View Post
But I do like yearly all you can eat SaaS license model. You could have different tier pricing. Interesting idea.

No. Horrible Idea.

You're right about one thing though; making software is not like making cars. It's completely different and you can't price software in the same way make cars, nor can you run a business in the same way to sell software.

Last edited by umkhunto; 05-28-2019 at 03:03 PM.
umkhunto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2019, 03:13 PM   #25
hansangb
Veteran
 
hansangb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: New York
Posts: 4,508
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by umkhunto View Post
They can recoup their costs somewhere else. Software is not like making a table. You do not need to make a profit, on every cent you spend, to be profitable. No raw materials are required, no warehousing is required. Just office space, and development costs. You develop 1 unit of a piece of software and resell that single unit infinitely. This differs from physical things, which you have make multiple units, to sell multiple units.

They will get their money's worth, since the A-10C and the Ka-50 are not off the shelf, are they? No, both are still available and people do still buy it. So ED is making money hand over fist on these 60USD modules, for development costs that have been recouped years ago, several times over. Thus, any work done by keeping the modules up to date with the engine is a drop in the bucket financially, compared to the full development of a module from scratch and will pay itself off with future purchases of said module.




No. Horrible Idea.

You're right about one thing though; making software is not like making cars. It's completely different and you can't price software in the same way make cars, nor can you run a business in the same way to sell software.

That's a common misconception: that software has no COGs so it's 100% profit after it's written. But DCS has no assets other than programmers. I mean they have PCs, offices, utility bills, but the *bulk* of their liabilities is in the programmers. Everything else is in the G&A column.

Someone has to maintain backward compatibility, someone has to keep up with patches, someone has to keep up with new shaders, someone has to keep up with making videos, someone has to link up with testers and collect feedback, someone to maintain this site, someone has to keep an eye on support tickets, someone has to keep track of Steam releases, someone has to draft contracts for 3rd party onboarding, someone has to market the product, and most importantly () someone has to improve the product for VR.

All those someone *IS* the raw material. There is no difference between lines of code, and sheets of wood, stack of metal, or buckets of concrete. They all cost money.
__________________
hsb
HW Spec in Spoiler
---
Spoiler:
i7-8700K Delid/OC'ed to 5.1GHz, EVGA Z370 MB, 32GB DDR4 3200MHz, EVGA 2080 Ti FTW3, NVMe+SSD, Win 10 x64 Pro, MFG, JetSeat, Warthog, TM MFDs, Komodo Huey set, CV1
hansangb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2019, 04:35 PM   #26
BuzzU
Senior Member
 
BuzzU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,288
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterZelgadis View Post
The moment they move to a subscription based pricing model will be the moment I will stop playing DCS...
Me too. I got caught in that trap with iRacing. Never again.
__________________
Buzz
BuzzU is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2019, 04:49 PM   #27
Hippo
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 449
Default

I think ED should charge for upgrades to aircraft AND to the base product. Their current model where they have to keep releasing new aircraft to keep the show on the road is, I suspect, unsustainable.

IMHO, the base DCSW product is not getting near enough the attention it should; I would prefer my money to go towards that, and would be happy to pay for it. Instead, all their income is coming from aircraft, many of which I simply have no interest in.

I think the model for Prepar3d has it about right (new version approx every two years, paid for, with many 3rd party developers charging a modest fee for upgrades as well). It's unreasonable to expect ED to keep updating everything for free for ever.
__________________
System spec: Intel i7 8700K (3.7 / 4.7 GHz), Asus Prime Z370-A, Zotac GTX 1080 Ti 11GB GDDR5x Blower (1480 / 1582 MHz), 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX Black (2x8GB) DDR4 PC4-25600 3200 MHz, Samsung 960 EVO 250 GB NVME M.2 SSD (system drive), Samsung 970 EVO 1 TB NVME M.2 SSD (games drive), AOC U3477PQU Monitor, Oculus Rift CV1, Saitek X52 Pro

Last edited by Hippo; 05-28-2019 at 04:55 PM.
Hippo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2019, 05:00 PM   #28
BuzzU
Senior Member
 
BuzzU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,288
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hippo View Post
I think ED should charge for upgrades to aircraft AND to the base product. Their current model where they have to keep releasing new aircraft to keep the show on the road is, I suspect, unsustainable.

IMHO, the base DCSW product is not getting near enough the attention it should; I would prefer my money to go towards that, and would be happy to pay for it. Instead, all their income is coming from aircraft, many of which I simply have no interest in.

I think the model for Prepar3d has it about right (new version approx every two years, paid for, with many 3rd party developers charging a modest fee for upgrades as well). It's unreasonable to expect ED to keep updating everything for free for ever.
$80 is a lot to pay for one plane. It should be for a finished plane. You want us to pay for all the updates until it's finished?
__________________
Buzz
BuzzU is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2019, 05:07 PM   #29
Hippo
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 449
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BuzzU View Post
$80 is a lot to pay for one plane. It should be for a finished plane. You want us to pay for all the updates until it's finished?
Considering the work and level of detail that goes into some of these aircraft (modern jets with detailed avionics and multiple weapons systems), $80 seems reasonable to me.

As to early access, that's another story entirely. I'm not a fan at all, but to be fair no-one is being forced to buy. I have decided that I will not buy EA ever again (well, maybe except for the F-16 ).

And, no, I was referring to updates to the completed aircraft when they need to be refreshed to bring them up to date after a few years - like they'll be doing with the Ka-50 and A-10.

It would be a bit cheeky (to put it mildly) for ED to charge for updates to the EA aircraft as they're brought to release, let's not go giving them ideas...
__________________
System spec: Intel i7 8700K (3.7 / 4.7 GHz), Asus Prime Z370-A, Zotac GTX 1080 Ti 11GB GDDR5x Blower (1480 / 1582 MHz), 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX Black (2x8GB) DDR4 PC4-25600 3200 MHz, Samsung 960 EVO 250 GB NVME M.2 SSD (system drive), Samsung 970 EVO 1 TB NVME M.2 SSD (games drive), AOC U3477PQU Monitor, Oculus Rift CV1, Saitek X52 Pro

Last edited by Hippo; 05-28-2019 at 05:15 PM.
Hippo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2019, 06:51 PM   #30
Redglyph
Senior Member
 
Redglyph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,530
Default

Quite a few companies are making a move towards subscription, to keep products up-to-date and evolving. However, in that case there's generally a whole team working on one product, which by its nature requires regular upgrading, and it's very stable all the time.

Another motive to have a subscription is a server maintenance and/or additional service (this addresses the iRacing comparison, for instance).

A very good example of subscription is development tools like Jetbrain's: languages are evolving, SDKs too, development paradigms are shifting continuously. Those are complex tools used for business, and companies can afford to pay them.

A bad example is MS Office: a word processor is a word processor, they can add new (unnecessary) features and fix bugs that shouldn't be there in the first place, there is no server, no real service to justify, hard to justify a subscription for that. Actually, I haven't checked whether this 365 idea was still in place or abandonned, I'm using something else now anyway.

In DCS there's a small team developing a lot of products, plus the base engine. In order to be eligible, a subscription service would require the products to be (a) stable and (b) updated often enough to justify this model. Or some (c) other form of service.

Neither of those apply, so it would be difficult to justify a subscription at this point. The base engine is evolving, yes, but that often breaks this or that module, and once a module is created, they don't often need upgrading. And it's for entertainment, not business, the audience is different.

Perhaps big upgrades of DCS world and subsequent upgrades of the modules would deserve a fee, as it sometimes happens in other sims, it's development that goes beyond what one would be expecting. But usually in that case it's not a subscription, it's a new product and people can choose not to opt in and still use the current product (see X-Plane, P3D, for example).
__________________
System specs: Win7 x64 | CPU: i7-4770K | RAM: 16 GB | GPU: GTX 980 Ti 6 GB | Thrustmaster HOTAS | MFG rudder pedals | SATA3 SSD | TrackIR
Redglyph is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:21 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.