Jump to content

What about Russian jets?


wizav

Recommended Posts

Chizh mentioned on the russian side that he didnt believe there was a viable market for russian aircraft. Aside from the probable classification issues.

 

Edit: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=103691&page=20

 

Page 20 and onwards. Use chrome translator.

 

Thank for the read. I found it highly interesting to read. Brushed up on my russian as well.

 

Comparing the interest in Russian/Soviet DCS aircraft with hobby modules.... kinda seems out of place.

 

Hmm, saying that there is no interest in soviet aircraft and then saying that they will sell, but not as good as western aircraft seem like completely different arguments (which kinda go against each other)

 

How much is considered a "good" amount of sold copies ? What are they based on ?

 

If they are based on the Ka-50, I would argue that the Kamov is really specific aircraft, with its quirks, which are not for everyone. The correct aircraft should be picked.

 

I do support the argument that, there isn't really a product which can represent statistically the need of such an aircraft.

 

I do also understand, as Chizh mentioned, that ED is a business at the end of the day, and they want to make the most out of their work.

 

A lot of the kids grow up watching movies with western aircraft and want to fly them understandable, but a lot of these people represent the casual community who I dare say have no idea what they are doing when it comes to the simulation of these aircraft and how to use them to their maximum, thus and the high number of SP users who just mess about. Yes, they are in high numbers, but how much of them stick around ?

 

The hardcore simmers are the one who stay loyal with time.

 

I believe the right model of a MiG-29 or a Su-27 for example can really spark an interest.

 

If I was to pick again between the Huey or the Mi-8, I would pick the Mi-8, but it is too late now. Should have done my performance research on time. It really came down to the fact that I mainly fly Blue as there are (almost) no Red full modules.

 

Hah, there was also this fun comment, that with the Persian Gulf map, we will stop making wars based on political and regional views (East/West)

 

There will be no FC3 modules, only full DCS (the same) modules on both sides

 

The reason for the war will be a dispute between the grandma's of Hassan bil'Hatbom the Second and Abdul Al'Ruhani the Third.

 

One of them will stack with Hornets and Harriers and the other one with KUB, BUK and S-300 SAM sites :lol:

'Shadow'

 

Everybody gotta be offended and take it personally now-a-days

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^

 

 

then maybe a 3rd party could do it

 

I got the impression lots of people were happy abut the Mig21. Not just Russian fanboys.

 

I myself would lean towards westen aircraft more but still had fun with a aircraft like the Mig21. ( even thouh i almost never took it out initially because I hated getting my asss handed to me at a time when there were nothing but 4th gen aircraft)

 

 

Hell even some 3rd aprty devs didnt choose icons, they went for planes that wouldnt appeal to To a wide audeince and generally appeal to a very aquired taste. Think Viggern here. Unique charactestics, interesting to fly but not very versatile. ( cant mix different A/G muntions, and mostly focused around anti shipping) and was only for people with a very specfic taste. Heatblur did it anyways.

 

I really do think Something like the Mig29 would have broader appeal thatn a Viggen, and still be an iconic, and vastly exported plane (well not mig21 icon but still) of a plane to make sales. So even if ED isnt interested maybe then a 3rd party could call dibs on it.


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think it's a commercial thing.

 

simmers all around the world.. Americans for example would love to buy Mig-29 or any other 4th gen. Russian Military Interceptor, Attack, multirole or whatever aircraft.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm British and i have bought more Russian modules than i have western.

 

mi-8, ka-50, l-39 and mig 21.

v's

huey, gazelle and a10c.

 

so Russian modules make financial sense to me..

 

in fact the mi24 is my next purchase :)

My Rig: AM5 7950X, 32GB DDR5 6000, M2 SSD, EVGA 1080 Superclocked, Warthog Throttle and Stick, MFG Crosswinds, Oculus Rift.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps because ED is based in Russia and the government has forbidden the creation of recent aircrafts...

 

That's the rumor...

 

But there are two questions:

 

1) Is that rumor even true?

 

2) What are the exact conditions of this ban?

 

If you consider the Mi-24 and the MiG-29A of the same level of technology, I don't see the problem. The Ka-50 is arguably much more advanced and "secret" than the MiG-29A, or the Su-27A. So the present situation is not logical at all.

 

As for the commercial aspect, I'd buy a full fidelity MiG-29A or Su-27A in a heartbeat, for any reasonable price (say Hornet level). Personally I don't care that much which version of the MiG-29 or Su-27 we could get (as long is it's not FBW. :pilotfly:)

Modules: Bf 109, C-101, CE-II, F-5, Gazelle, Huey, Ka-50, Mi-8, MiG-15, MiG-19, MiG-21, Albatros, Viggen, Mirage 2000, Hornet, Yak-52, FC3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then exclude the Su-27, because is FBW.

My bad... It doesn't feel like FBW though for some reason... :music_whistling:

 

I'd still buy the Su-27A even if it's FBW. :lol:

Modules: Bf 109, C-101, CE-II, F-5, Gazelle, Huey, Ka-50, Mi-8, MiG-15, MiG-19, MiG-21, Albatros, Viggen, Mirage 2000, Hornet, Yak-52, FC3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the rumor...

 

But there are two questions:

 

1) Is that rumor even true?

 

2) What are the exact conditions of this ban?

 

If you consider the Mi-24 and the MiG-29A of the same level of technology, I don't see the problem. The Ka-50 is arguably much more advanced and "secret" than the MiG-29A, or the Su-27A. So the present situation is not logical at all.

 

As for the commercial aspect, I'd buy a full fidelity MiG-29A or Su-27A in a heartbeat, for any reasonable price (say Hornet level). Personally I don't care that much which version of the MiG-29 or Su-27 we could get (as long is it's not FBW. :pilotfly:)

 

It's not that simple. AFAIK there is no clear ban like that. It's more like that there are a lot of rules, laws and regulations that make it difficult to develop a modern russian aircraft for DCS without violating them. It starts with simple copyright licenses that need to be obtained from the actual aircraft manufacturer and goes all the way to laws about treason in regard to classified aircraft systems.

Wags commented on that once during a live stream (I think it was a Normandy stream), where he answered user questions. He said something like that it is difficult, especially as ED is based in Russia which is why they must be extra cautious about these things.

Lack of will by ED to make a modern russian aircraft is definatily not the problem.

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's more like that there are a lot of rules, laws and regulations that make it difficult to develop a modern russian aircraft for DCS without violating them. It starts with simple copyright licenses that need to be obtained from the actual aircraft manufacturer and goes all the way to laws about treason in regard to classified aircraft systems.

 

That is actually what I'm looking for. But it is still vague.

 

Copyright license for the manufacturer is clear, Mikoyan and/or Sukhoi have to approve. Otherwise you can't use the name, but you could use something close, like MaG-229 or Sa-72.

 

The other part about classified systems is something which would be good to have clarified in detail, so that we know what we might expect. As I said above, with the MiG-29A/G, I can't see the problem.

Modules: Bf 109, C-101, CE-II, F-5, Gazelle, Huey, Ka-50, Mi-8, MiG-15, MiG-19, MiG-21, Albatros, Viggen, Mirage 2000, Hornet, Yak-52, FC3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is actually what I'm looking for. But it is still vague.

 

Copyright license for the manufacturer is clear, Mikoyan and/or Sukhoi have to approve. Otherwise you can't use the name, but you could use something close, like MaG-229 or Sa-72.

 

The other part about classified systems is something which would be good to have clarified in detail, so that we know what we might expect. As I said above, with the MiG-29A/G, I can't see the problem.

 

Yes, it would be nice to know more about that, but these things are internal things that we don't get to know. All we have is that Wags said during a livestream that this is a delicate matter.

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, Russia is not really a country you want to be messing with in terms of loopholes in laws etc. Especially when it comes to MoD stuff they get really nervous.

 

Next to that its very simple, if ED say this is the deal, then thats the deal. No need to try and change that by whatever means.

''Greed is a bottomless pit which exhausts the person in an endless effort to satisfy the need without ever reaching satisfaction.''

Erich Fromm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, Russia is not really a country you want to be messing with in terms of loopholes in laws etc. Especially when it comes to MoD stuff they get really nervous.

 

Next to that its very simple, if ED say this is the deal, then thats the deal. No need to try and change that by whatever means.

 

well ED just needs to confirm that so we don't have to ask about Russian planes.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Copyright license for the manufacturer is clear, Mikoyan and/or Sukhoi have to approve. Otherwise you can't use the name, but you could use something close, like MaG-229 or Sa-72.

 

Isn't this what happened with Razbam and the Mirage 2000?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think classification/documentation is less of a problem than rights/licenses. Beeing allowed to recreate an aircraft at study sim level is more of a problem. Even the MiG-29 in use by other countries is still a product of Mikoyan.

 

How are the FC3 aircraft licensed then? :music_whistling:

:matrix: :joystick: ....... BOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMM ....... :megalol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How are the FC3 aircraft licensed then? :music_whistling:

 

Probably not at all since they don't really simulate anything in a realistic manner.

ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero, i7-6700K, Noctua NH-D14 Cooler, Crucial 32GB DDR4 2133, Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 256GB, Samsung EVO 250GB & 500GB SSD, 2TB Caviar Black, Zotac GTX 1080 AMP! Extreme 8GB, Corsair HX1000i, Phillips BDM4065UC 40" 4k monitor, VX2258 TouchScreen, TIR 5 w/ProClip, TM Warthog, VKB Gladiator Pro, Saitek X56, et. al., MFG Crosswind Pedals #1199, VolairSim Pit, Rift CV1 :thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sadly the marketing question makes the most sense here. I can well believe that the US audience is the catalyst for which modules are chosen. It also leads to a MP vs SP mentality and question. Until the major purchasers of aircraft want to buy a Russian/Eastern full fidelity module (because full fidelity is the only one on the cards) and until Multiplayer human vs Human develops more mainstream popularity from a marketing perspective, these "redfor" module choices are relegated to the backburner.

 

No one said MP or Red planes were not vehemently popular in their respective camps, just that when measured up against people wanting to see their "beloved" favourite, the US airframes are going to give ED more money. It's a business. Chizh is saying that the Russian audience is hitting 10% of sales.

 

Is it ANY WONDER that Hormuz, F-5, F-4E, F-14 are all Iranian opfor planes? Are they trying to satisfy BOTH markets? The middle line? I think so. I think there is a concerted effort by ED to get the best of both worlds by lining up an oddly opfor but Western popular plane set in development. You will see Mirages and A-4's and such that have been predominately West but appear in conflicts.

 

I feel as sad as any others not to see a Mig-23 or Mig-29 done to a full level. I've even met a few American's who would love to fly them, but let's be real, this module choice is torn and messed up completely due to demand. Expect F-16C, expect mass popularity choices for the meantime.

___________________________________________________________________________

SIMPLE SCENERY SAVING * SIMPLE GROUP SAVING * SIMPLE STATIC SAVING *

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sadly the marketing question makes the most sense here. I can well believe that the US audience is the catalyst for which modules are chosen. It also leads to a MP vs SP mentality and question. Until the major purchasers of aircraft want to buy a Russian/Eastern full fidelity module (because full fidelity is the only one on the cards) and until Multiplayer human vs Human develops more mainstream popularity from a marketing perspective, these "redfor" module choices are relegated to the backburner.

 

I don't have the sales number for each module obviously (let alone the profit), but I did make a list of forum popularity (ranked by total no. of posts). I didn't take the devs main forum into consideration, but for devs with only one module, one can imagine many of those posts are actually about the module, just in the wrong forum. So the actual posts regarding a module may be more. I also only counted the English forums.

 

Module / Threads / Posts

 

DCS: A-10C Warthog 15,891 186,080

DCS: Ka-50 Black Shark 10,261 127,391

DCS: Flaming Cliffs 3 3,353 48,623

Mirage 2000 2,945 47,710

MiG-21Bis 2,637 35,621

DCS: P-51D Mustang 2,075 31,267

DCS: UH-1H Huey 2,328 26,330

DCS: AJS37 Viggen 1,340 18,603

DCS: Hawk 869 16,728

AV-8B N/A 1,112 14,802

DCS: Mi-8MTV2 Magnificent Eight 1,254 14,134

DCS: Bf 109 K-4 Kurfürst 695 13,742

DCS: F-14A & B 391 13,479

SA-342M Gazelle 839 13,125

DCS: F-5E Tiger II 931 11,273

DCS: Spitfire L.F. Mk. IX 617 11,147

DCS: Fw 190 D-9 Dora 562 10,541

DCS: F/A-18C Hornet 221 9,826

DCS: F-86F Sabre 999 9,658

C-101 Aviojet 282 5,312

DCS: L-39 Albatros 626 4,806

DCS: MiG-15bis 362 2,963

BO-105 PAH1A1 40 1,836

Curtiss P-40F 28 1,548

DCS: Yak-52 6 104

 

What I see is that the older modules A-10C and Ka-50 are by far the most popular. Besides those, the Mirage 2000 and the MiG-21 are popular, followed by the Mustang and the Huey. So I can't see that American modules are significantly more popular than Soviet modules.

 

What does suprise me is the lack of popularity of the F-5E and the huge popularity of the F-14, even before it's released. Also the DCS version of the Viggen seems very popular compared to it's real world counterpart, which is probably the least produced aircraft in this list.

 

My two favourites, the MiG-15 and the Albatros also seem to be vastly underrated. :(

 

Of course, forum popularity does not equate sales figures or profitability.

Modules: Bf 109, C-101, CE-II, F-5, Gazelle, Huey, Ka-50, Mi-8, MiG-15, MiG-19, MiG-21, Albatros, Viggen, Mirage 2000, Hornet, Yak-52, FC3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Zius

Older modules are obviously going to have more posts... because they're older. That's not how you do a test sample.

 

If you wanted to get an idea of relative activity, you'd measure number of posts over a period of a time, say the last 90 days, preferably modules that are already released or available for sale.

 

This would show you an idea of ACTUAL activity levels per module, at least per forum section. That has nothing to do with popularity persay, but it does show forum activity.

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always been curious about how it was recreated without a licensing agreement? Did the manufacturer assist them in developing it without letting them actually call it "Mirage 2000" or was it just done with pieced together information? Not that it bothers me, but it would be cool to know.

 

AFAIK, Razbam have a licence or an agreement of sorts with Dassault. They certainly had communications as they had to change the name from the original DCS:Mirage 2000 to DCS:M2000, with a public request to the DCS community to only call it by the latter. Can't find the post now so it might have been deleted.


Edited by Buzzles
Spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like Chizh is applying his own preferences to the market :D .

 

I read the last 10 or 15 pages of that Russian thread, and 'Preferences' seems to be putting it a bit harshly - it definitely seems to be that Chizh believes that current sales to date indicate there's a lot more money to be made selling Western Aircraft than Russian & so that's where they'll focus their energies.

 

E.D. have definitely hinted that 'secrecy' was a factor in their not producing more up to date Red ASM modules, but the fact that he says (paraphrasing) 'we're not saying we won't do a modern red module, they're just not at the top of the list' to me implies that they could if they thought it a financially sound choice, but don't see it that way at the moment (so 'secrecy' laws not perhaps not the primary concern. As someone else pointed out, the Ka-50 is both 'Modern' and has ASM).

 

There were several comments to the effect of 'How can you say Red modules don't sell as well as Blue, when you don't have any Red?" which were countered with comments by Chizh to the effect that they can see which modules sell well - presumably across all 3rd party modules as well - & Blue makes more money than Red despite the amount of noise made by Red fans on the forum.

 

Trouble with that is people that are not that 'into' simulation and want a SP SIM for 'casual' play, want something 'modern' and 'iconic' that they've heard about, and preferably something they think 'kicks ass' & will let them rampage across the skies.

 

Essentially they want the planes that come up if you google "are Russian planes better than Western Planes"

From a Western point of view, for ASM modules you have on the Blue side some of the most iconic aircraft ever built, may of which are either still relatively 'modern', or are part of popular culture.

 

Again from a Western point of view, hardly any of the ASM aircraft that have been modeled would appear on the list if you were to ask someone on the street who was interested in aviation to spontaneously name some Russian aircraft they'd like to fly (K-50, L-39 & Yak-52 ? Great modules, but not well known at all among the general public in the West).

 

As a 'Westerner' the current module list looks like someone complied a wish-list from English speakers of Blue aircraft they'd like to fly & started building from the top, then compiled a similar list of Red aircraft from English speakers, cut the top five names off the list, then started building every fifth aircraft from what was left.

 

From experience I know for most Westerners the only planes they're likely to know are the Su-27 & the MiG-29 (Maybe the MiG-31). If they're old enough they'll know the Mig-21, but think of it as fodder for the Israeli air force not a vehicle to turn them into aces. WRT ground pounders - They might have seen and heard of an Su-25 from Afghanistan and modern conflicts like Georgia & Syria.

 

So of course the Blue modules sell quicker than the Red.

 

I'm not saying that an Su-27SM or a MiG-29S would sell better in the West than a teen series US fighter, but I seriously believe that they would sell more copies than a Mirage 2000 or a Harrier.

 

It might be that 3 modules - Su-27SM, MiG-29S & Su-25SM would be enough to saturate the market in the West for Red aircraft, but those 3 would make money, and they would make MP world more interesting.

 

My understanding is that to date, the SP market drives DCS sales. The way the world is going, at some point E.D. will have to turn that around - even if only in a marketing sense. For that to happen there have to be interesting conflicts, which implies there has to be 2 opposing forces. USA in Red vs USA in Blue doesn't provide that.

 

It's not that simple. AFAIK there is no clear ban like that. It's more like that there are a lot of rules, laws and regulations that make it difficult to develop a modern russian aircraft for DCS without violating them. It starts with simple copyright licenses that need to be obtained from the actual aircraft manufacturer and goes all the way to laws about treason in regard to classified aircraft systems.

Wags commented on that once during a live stream (I think it was a Normandy stream), where he answered user questions. He said something like that it is difficult, especially as ED is based in Russia which is why they must be extra cautious about these things.

Lack of will by ED to make a modern russian aircraft is definatily not the problem.

 

True, but the Ka-50 implies that there are paths through that minefield.

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it hard to believe that russian aircraft wouldn't sell well. Obviously, not as well as american aircraft, but still. BTW, didn't ED grow up selling Flanker 1.0, Flanker 2.0, etc?

 

Maybe ED is going for the bigger sales now - american teen series, you just can't beat that - and then when everyone has been eating, breathing and drinking those aircraft for a while, that need for something different will make a market for a MiG-29 even more attractive than it is now. More big juicy sales. I have actually no idea about any of this commercial stuff, but this would make sense to me. Unfortunately.


Edited by PeaceSells

My DCS modding videos:

 

Modules I own so far:

Black Shark 2, FC3, UH-1H, M-2000C, A-10C, MiG-21, Gazelle, Nevada map

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trouble with that is people that are not that 'into' simulation and want a SP SIM for 'casual' play, want something 'modern' and 'iconic' that they've heard about, and preferably something they think 'kicks ass' & will let them rampage across the skies.
I'm not sure at all if that represents the general DCS player. That sounds more like World of Warplanes etc. Except for "modern".

 

I would have thought that if ED's goal would have been maximising sales, it may have been better to stick with FC3 but add more theaters and a dynamic campaign.

 

Then you'd end up with Falcon 3.0 Gold +++. This is still one of my all-time favourites, so that would not have been bad. Also, if there would have been no DCS, we might not have known what we were missing. ;)

 

As a 'Westerner' the current module list looks like someone complied a wish-list from English speakers of Blue aircraft they'd like to fly & started building from the top, then compiled a similar list of Red aircraft from English speakers, cut the top five names off the list, then started building every fifth aircraft from what was left.

Also this I disagree on. Actually I think that for Blue, the only top of the wishlist aircraft is maybe the A-10 (although I wouldn't call it "top of the wishlist myself as it is a rather limited aircraft and not as sexy as a fighter). The F-18, F-14 are coming up, but the F-15 and F-16 are still missing, let alone the F-22 and F-35. The latter two for obvious reasons, and I can also see the reasons why the F-15 and F-16 are still missing, but still.

 

Also popular European aircraft are still missing (Rafale, Eurofighter, Gripen, Mirage F1, Mirage III, Tornado).

 

I'm not saying that an Su-27SM or a MiG-29S would sell better in the West than a teen series US fighter, but I seriously believe that they would sell more copies than a Mirage 2000 or a Harrier.
This I fully agree on.

 

But we are getting off-topic here. ;)

Modules: Bf 109, C-101, CE-II, F-5, Gazelle, Huey, Ka-50, Mi-8, MiG-15, MiG-19, MiG-21, Albatros, Viggen, Mirage 2000, Hornet, Yak-52, FC3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read the last 10 or 15 pages of that Russian thread, and 'Preferences' seems to be putting it a bit harshly - it definitely seems to be that Chizh believes that current sales to date indicate there's a lot more money to be made selling Western Aircraft than Russian & so that's where they'll focus their energies.

 

Well it was a joke(hence the laughing face). But I have been reading hundreds of posts by Chizh on the Russian forum and he does seem to have a strong preference for "Western"(US mainly) equipment and equally low regard for just about anything Russian - it might just be a "knee-jerk" reaction to bombastic and unrealistic claims made by Russian manufacturers reflected by forum posters, but when I read that he doesn't believe there is a market for Russian aircraft in the West, I cannot help to think; "quelle surprise" :D

 

I don't see how "sales to date" could indicate/support that claim - you would first have to make a module for a modern/semi-modern Russian fighter aircraft in order to get an indication on its popularity based on sales figures :) . I have no idea about what ED's sales figures are, but IIRC they said themselves at one point, that the FCx line was still the best selling product. It may be, as some claim, that its just down to a shallow learning curve, but I suspect that it may equally be down to having a collection of sleek, powerful fighters of both Russian and US origin in the same package.

 

E.D. have definitely hinted that 'secrecy' was a factor in their not producing more up to date Red ASM modules,

 

Secrecy is definitely a factor for a lot of modern Russian aircraft, but you cannot just throw anything Russian into that basket - it very much depends on the particular aircraft type and variant.

 

..but the fact that he says (paraphrasing) 'we're not saying we won't do a modern red module, they're just not at the top of the list' to me implies that they could if they thought it a financially sound choice, but don't see it that way at the moment (so 'secrecy' laws not perhaps not the primary concern. As someone else pointed out, the Ka-50 is both 'Modern' and has ASM).

 

Well I don't know - I think you are generalising a little too much. Some "modern"(there is an elastic in that term) aircraft might not be "on the top of their list" because they don't currently have the necessary data on them(for ASM mainly), while other might not be due to commercial considerations.

 

There were several comments to the effect of 'How can you say Red modules don't sell as well as Blue, when you don't have any Red?" which were countered with comments by Chizh to the effect that they can see which modules sell well - presumably across all 3rd party modules as well - & Blue makes more money than Red despite the amount of noise made by Red fans on the forum.

 

Well not a lot to base that on is there?

 

Trouble with that is people that are not that 'into' simulation and want a SP SIM for 'casual' play, want something 'modern' and 'iconic' that they've heard about, and preferably something they think 'kicks ass' & will let them rampage across the skies. Essentially they want the planes that come up if you google "are Russian planes better than Western Planes"

 

..and this is just a Russian thing? - I mean there are no "Western players" who want an F-16C or an F/A-18C because they are "modern", "iconic" and "kicks ass and will let them rampage across the skies"?! :D

 

From a Western point of view, for ASM modules you have on the Blue side some of the most iconic aircraft ever built, may of which are either still relatively 'modern', or are part of popular culture.

 

Again from a Western point of view, hardly any of the ASM aircraft that have been modeled would appear on the list if you were to ask someone on the street who was interested in aviation to spontaneously name some Russian aircraft they'd like to fly (K-50, L-39 & Yak-52 ? Great modules, but not well known at all among the general public in the West).

 

As a 'Westerner' the current module list looks like someone complied a wish-list from English speakers of Blue aircraft they'd like to fly & started building from the top, then compiled a similar list of Red aircraft from English speakers, cut the top five names off the list, then started building every fifth aircraft from what was left.

 

From experience I know for most Westerners the only planes they're likely to know are the Su-27 & the MiG-29 (Maybe the MiG-31). If they're old enough they'll know the Mig-21, but think of it as fodder for the Israeli air force not a vehicle to turn them into aces. WRT ground pounders - They might have seen and heard of an Su-25 from Afghanistan and modern conflicts like Georgia & Syria.

 

So of course the Blue modules sell quicker than the Red.

 

My point exactly :) .

 

I'm not saying that an Su-27SM or a MiG-29S would sell better in the West than a teen series US fighter, but I seriously believe that they would sell more copies than a Mirage 2000 or a Harrier.

 

Yes so do I - even the baseline Su-27 and MiG-29 brought up to DCS level.

 

It might be that 3 modules - Su-27SM, MiG-29S & Su-25SM would be enough to saturate the market in the West for Red aircraft

 

Seriously? - Su-35, Su-30MKx, MiG-29SMT or MiG-29K....no? :)

 

My understanding is that to date, the SP market drives DCS sales.

 

AFAIK it always did.....and by a very large margin.

 

The way the world is going, at some point E.D. will have to turn that around - even if only in a marketing sense. For that to happen there have to be interesting conflicts, which implies there has to be 2 opposing forces. USA in Red vs USA in Blue doesn't provide that.

 

Agree completely.

JJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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