Propose new business model for Eagle Dynamics DCS

I see the problem with the ED business model, they need to adjust it!

Maybe as a pre-release version it should be very cheap, and if you want bug fixes you pay a bit more. In that way there is incentive to continue development by the developer, the user gets a cheap but albeit frustrating version (which the dev lets users know the limitations prior to purchase) allow user to pay for more functionality, BUT that functionality should be well tested not a buggy pre-release. Prices of additional functionality should be a fraction of original purchase.

This could be win-win if they got the pricing right.

Give ED problem with releasing buggy software frustrates and angers many users.....be up front about it, let users pay for the bug fixes........I wouldnt mind, IF the price was appropriate, and saved me wasting untold hours.

This way users could upgrade when they had reached a point beyond which they could stand or only modules they wanted, put the burden of play-ability on the user providing he was willing to spend a little more.

The Grim Reapers interview with Simon on future dev, precipitated this in my mind.

As various optional modules (type of missile for example) gets completed, the missile module could be added to the base plane at an elevated cost, creating a stepped pricing model for the plane depending what options were selected.

Users could request module fixes or new additions, so ED could prioritize their efforts.

If ED were up front about what they were offering simmers realizing the problems with the existing model would accept it. They might not like it, but thats where the pricing is critical to success.

Its unrealistic to expect ED to do enormous amounts of work for no additional money, just as it is unrealistic to expect users to wait years for some functionality or bug fix. This is an attempt to create a win win situation.

Okay, nice idea. My next car should have 3 tires and 2 from 4 cylinders. After a while i buy the upgrade for the 4th tire and now for the speedometer because it's the first opportunity for me to drive the thing. No problem, it was cheap and i can wait. I can only drive by day because the lights are not available at this time.

What is it? StarTrek Generations? The Tractorbeam will be installed next Weeek?

Sorry, but Early Access would be better than your business model.

Rainer

Okay, nice idea. My next car should have 3 tires and 2 from 4 cylinders. After a while i buy the upgrade for the 4th tire and now for the speedometer because it's the first opportunity for me to drive the thing. No problem, it was cheap and i can wait. I can only drive by day because the lights are not available at this time.

What is it? StarTrek Generations? The Tractorbeam will be installed next Weeek?

 

 

 

Sorry, but Early Access would be better than your business model.

 

 

Rainer

Thank you for your thoughts, I see you joined 06-15-2020, but interesting to see noobie thots.

I joined the Forum at this time. This is no indicator for my knowledge. I'm a little older and thsi is not my first Rodeo or better Flight Sim. I miss the good old times with my Amiga 2000 and DI F-16 Combat Pilot. Nice dynamic missions. I hope there will be a AH-64 in the future of DCS. Janes AH-64D Longbow was fun. It's a pity that my trusty old Thrustmaster FLCS don't work anymore but the Warthog is a nice replacement.

People can easily choose not to buy EA at all, solving most the problem. As for paying a "really cheap price" for the half baked alpha version, and then "paying more" for the future bug fixes... Sorry, that's the most ridiculous thing I've read here in two weeks (the average frequency of "I know how to run the company" threads)

You'd literally end up with multiple "versions" of the same aircraft in the code base, each requiring their own support line. That or the "original" half baked version flatout stops working a couple weeks after purchase as it diverges from the code base.

Dear Sir from Dontgiveacrapistan, why is your hostile response not surprizing!?

I expect smart people could find a way around your issue if they gave it some thought.

If they cared!

Business model:

No free DCS core. Free updates along the year and paid yearly upgrades that includes new major features.

Early Access that has a comprehensive and transparent roadmap and that is not subject to change after pre-release: Words are kept and the roadmap is realistically achievable within it's announced development period; the roadmap that is realistic and transparent, meaning that for example, during pre-release, when the roadmap is announced, that such a module will have it's development interrupted for XX months in order to focus on another module, so as to make sure that the costumer is aware before pouring money in.

An early access roadmap that has its development properly planned with the main goal of providing positive training throughout its development cycle. This means that features, when implemented, are done in an organized manner and follows a plan that focus on providing the user a progressive learning experience of each new system that is introduced as a whole, and not in bits of random broken pieces every once in a while.

A development forum that is free from censorship and revionism, but that is based on moral-ethical values of fairness, equality, respect, tolerance and humility to, for example, accept criticism, even if that means, for example accepting to have DCS being openly compared and discussed against that other 'not to be named' simulator or any competitor.

And World Peace for all

And World Peace for all

For you too.

I understand that people are trying to help, and offering some creative solutions. Nothing wrong in that. Just understand though, that the actual situation is likely a lot more complex, a lot more variables, a lot of pitfalls and negatives you'd never even considered, that would go into the actual decision... Just pointing it out, so that people don't get too upset if their "new shiny" idea is not adopted. And if they do like one of your ideas and adopt it, then awesome, you'll have benefited the company and the community!

I think most people here want DCS to be successful.

Constructive criticism is good it can lead to innovation which can benefit all.

I agree with most of what stormridersp has already said, we all want the same thing.

In the present state there are many disgruntled, DCS customers unhappy with the status quo. I believe DCS business model is to blame. DCS is very good but has great potential to be better.

Just want people to reflect and have an open mind.

This could be win-win if they got the pricing right.

 

Give ED problem with releasing buggy software frustrates and angers many users.....be up front about it, let users pay for the bug fixes........I wouldnt mind, IF the price was appropriate, and saved me wasting untold hours.

This way users could upgrade when they had reached a point beyond which they could stand or only modules they wanted, put the burden of play-ability on the user providing he was willing to spend a little more.

 

ED also builds these sims and systems for commercial app's. That's what pays for the majority of ALL the upgrades here. If it was only for us simmers...ED would be better off building goat simulators and making a lot more money and it would be 1000s times easier to build. They must love what they do right.

It's also not just about bug fixes if you want ED to push forward to use the latest technologies, hardware and software.

Some ED's code is also a zillion years old too and needs redoing etc.

The GOAL posts keep moving and bugs keep moving along for the ride too.

It is what it is and ED is still in business........ I do hope it can stabilize a little at some point once vulkan is implemented and tweaked some.

In short we have no plans to change our business model.

Thank you

Thanks BigN for your response, I presume that is the companies attitude and not your personal feeling as community manager!

Most companies dont post that they are considering a business model change, but that aside, if the company is quite happy with this business model that speaks for itself.

Kind regards

Lala

Ps Your use of the word we, answers my question. :-)

Oops just noticed, thread down stars by 33%

Oops just noticed, thread down stars by 33%

when its a bad enough idea that you have to solicit sycophancy, i see

 

In short we have no plans to change our business model.

 

Thank you

excellent response to the armchair CEOs.

this should be an automated response whenever the inevitable business-advice-no one-asked-for/ subscription model/ end EA threads pop up like weeds

thank you

the inevitable business-advice-no one-asked-for/ subscription model/ end EA threads pop up like weeds

 

thank you

If business-advice is a pop-up weed as you suggest, doesnt that suggest that many see a problem.

There are paleontologists that would cry if they saw this. This horse isn't just dead; it's fossilized.

If business-advice is a pop-up weed as you suggest, doesnt that suggest that many see a problem.

It means the internet is full of would be experts that think they know better than everybody else. Choose topic : same result

If business-advice is a pop-up weed as you suggest, doesnt that suggest that many see a problem.

People may perceive a problem, but unless they're part of certain portions of ED, they don't have the big picture. There's plenty of information we're not privy to. They're only operating of suppositions and assumptions, and may most certainly be projecting issues where there are in fact none.

I certainly don't see a problem with the status quo, and it would seem ED doesn't either.

So here we go again. Pay up front for bug fixes. Microsoft had us all do that already multiple times in the past and we literally ended up in having an eternal pre-alpha early access with forced updates that wreck our systems everytime they happen including long standing issues as old as over a decade still not being fixed, especially with the file manager that's known as Explorer. No thanks. What's next? Subscription model for the core to base the whole thing on and premium price tags for getting support? Oh, wait, I forgot the copy protection dongle that wouldn't work on like half of the systems without issues...

Pay extra for functionality?

No thanks.

Pay extra for functionality?

 

No thanks.

Depending on your point of view, that's exactly what additional aircraft modules, terrain, and supercarrier are... anything beyond the base free download is additional functionality, technically speaking