Dear ED! No love for KA-50? - Page 3 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-05-2018, 02:16 PM   #21
Yurgon
Campaign Testers
 
Yurgon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 6,590
Default

ED once planned to deliver an overhaul of the Ka-50 for free.

Seeing as that plan failed, and they turned it into a paid upgrade and received quite a bit of blow-back for it, I'm sure they're not going to make any promises unless they're quite sure.

AFAIK, the problems with the lamps/lights have been acknowledged as a bug and will be fixed (hopefully soon).

IMO, most of the Ka-50's cockpit interior is below today's standards as set by newer modules. I'd certainly applaud ED if they upgraded it for free, but I'd definitely be willing to pay a reasonable price for BS3, too.
__________________
Yurgon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 02:27 PM   #22
MilesD
Member
 
MilesD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Wallingford, CT
Posts: 150
Default

Msalma, I could see your point if DCS followed a traditional game format. Why work on Call of Duty 17 when everybody is buying Call of Duty 18. Airframes in DCS are not only task specific, but persistent. How old a module is does not really have anything to do its viability in the game. When a new airframe is introduced there will obviously be a sales spike from the current DCS customer base. However, for someone late to the DCS game like myself, I am looking at what airframes interest me, when it was released has nothing to do with my decision. The DCS business model gives completed modules very long legs in sales. My first purchase just a few years ago was Blackshark 2, followed by A10C, then flaming Cliffs. 20 modules later I am part of the growing DCS customer base, buying the latest modules only because I don’t have them. My point is the old modules were new to me, and they are new to every other customer who is new to DCS. People who are just getting into DCS and purchase Blackshark as there first module may be disappointed and judge DCS unfairly and not become part of their loyal customer base. Expanding a customer base is the only way a company can survive. So DCS has three choices. 1) Reduce the price of the older modules as they have done for the flaming cliffs, so customers know they are getting a budget model. 2) Upgrade the current module for free and continue to sell at full price. 3) Upgrade the current module, charge for the upgrade, and continue to sell the upgraded model for full price. I think they have to pick one, and it would be in their best business interest to do so. DCS is like a Crack Dealer, they offer a taste for free, get you hooked, next thing you know you are hovering over your keyboard pressing F5, or buying modules that aren’t even out yet. Of course, it exercises your mind instead of destroying it, and is about the cheapest thing out there for personal entertainment.
Just my thoughts.

Last edited by MilesD; 02-05-2018 at 03:23 PM.
MilesD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 02:29 PM   #23
Shadow KT
Senior Member
 
Shadow KT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Sofia, Bulgaria
Posts: 1,289
Default

Huh, guess we should pay for patches as well, if we follow your logic.

I am certain that if ED asks a higher profile texture mod creator in the community and give him the resources he will do it for free
__________________
'Shadow'

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

Last edited by Shadow KT; 02-05-2018 at 04:57 PM.
Shadow KT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 02:29 PM   #24
Esac_mirmidon
Veteran
 
Esac_mirmidon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Ferrol, Spain
Posts: 5,641
Send a message via MSN to Esac_mirmidon
Default

Well said
__________________
" You must think in russian.."


Windows 7 64 bits Home Premium-Intel 2500K OC 4.6 - GTX 1060 EXOC KFA2 - 16 Gigas RAM 1.600 - 1920x1080

Hotas Rhino X-55 - MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals - Track IR 4
Esac_mirmidon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 02:38 PM   #25
StrongHarm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: USA, EST
Posts: 2,040
Default

We should give credit where credit is due. If DCS wasn't a labor of love for ED, it wouldn't exist at all right now. They haven't always made profit in equal measure to effort. I would venture to say that they still aren't. They're playing the long game. Wags has discussed many times in the past that you don't develop Sims to make max revenue. Candy Crush didn't require a team of artists, mathematicians, and subject matter experts... but I would bet that it's made more money. What they've done for the sim community is a significant breakthrough, and it was done at much personal sacrifice. These are people who see a value which is beyond a "bottom line". I would have to agree with the other folks in this post when they say ED will take care of the KA-50 textures.. it's just a matter of time and resources.
__________________
User Missions I've Created
StrongHarm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 02:46 PM   #26
Quadg
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 428
Default

they do give love to the ka 50.. it wasn't so long ago that there was no engine EGT limits..

they got added as a complete surprise to bring it into line with the MI-8.

about a year ago or so?
__________________
My Rig: i7 4930k 4.5Ghz, 16GB DDR3 2400, 2x SSD, EVGA 1080 Superclocked, Warthog Throttle and Stick, MFG Crosswinds, Oculus Rift.
Quadg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 03:01 PM   #27
Yurgon
Campaign Testers
 
Yurgon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 6,590
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadg View Post
they do give love to the ka 50.. it wasn't so long ago that there was no engine EGT limits..

they got added as a complete surprise to bring it into line with the MI-8.

about a year ago or so?
Sure you're not referring to the UH-1H, and only about a couple months ago?

I'm fairly certain I've killed, fried and frozen my engines in the Ka-50 long before the DCS UH-1H ever saw the light of day.
__________________
Yurgon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 03:09 PM   #28
kontiuka
ED Translator
 
kontiuka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 3,399
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yurgon View Post
Sure you're not referring to the UH-1H, and only about a couple months ago?
I was wondering the same thing.
kontiuka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 03:16 PM   #29
metzger
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Czech Republic
Posts: 561
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MilesD View Post
Msalma, I could see your point if DCS followed a traditional game format. Why work on Call of Duty 17 when everybody is buying Call of Duty 18. Airframes in DCS are not only task specific, but persistent. How old a module is does not really have anything to do its viability in the game. When a new airframe is introduced there will obviously be a sales spike from the current DCS customer base. However, for someone late to the DCS game like myself, I am looking at what airframes interest me, when it was released has nothing to do with my decision. The DCS business model gives completed modules very long legs in sales. My first purchase just a few years ago was Blackshark 2, followed by A10C, then flaming Cliffs. 20 modules later I am part of the growing DCS customer base, buying the latest modules only because I don’t have them. My point is the old modules were new to me, and they are new to every other customer who is new DCS. People who are just getting into DCS and purchase Blackshark as there first module may be disappointed and judge DCS unfairly and not become part of their loyal customer base. Expanding a customer base is the only way a company can survive. So DCS has three choices. 1) Reduce the price of the older modules like flaming cliffs, so customers know they are getting a budget model. 2) Upgrade the current module for free and continue to sell at full price. 3) Upgrade the current module, charge for the upgrade, and continue to sell the upgraded model for full price. I think they have to pick one, and it would be in their best business interest to do so. DCS is like a Crack Dealer, they offer a taste for free, get you hooked, next thing you know you are hovering over your keyboard pressing F5, or buying modules that aren’t even out yet. Of course, it exercises your mind instead of destroying it, and is about the cheapest thing out there for personal entertainment.
Just my thoughts.
+1 well said.

Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk
metzger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 03:17 PM   #30
MilesD
Member
 
MilesD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Wallingford, CT
Posts: 150
Default

StrongHarm, I don’t even know if you could call it “the long game”. How did that meeting for their business model go … “Let’s find a software revenue stream with a small market share, low price point, difficult to research and code, heavily dependent on the latest hardware, discriminating and demanding customer base, I got it, let’s make a digital combat simulator.” Yea, I would agree that many of contributors are there because of there passion for it, and we do get the benefit of their passion. The crack dealer comment was in jest, true ,but in jest. And your candy crush comment is right on. But my wife does get upset about how when she knocks out a block of candy that the acceleration of gravity is not properly modeled and the falling candy reaches terminal velocity instantaneously.

Last edited by MilesD; 02-05-2018 at 03:20 PM.
MilesD 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 11:21 AM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.