Jump to content

DCS: A Way to out of Endless Early Access


omskTransmash
 Share

Recommended Posts

I feel like a lot of the claims that you make in your argument are illogical. ED is working on the Stable Branch by working on the Open Beta, the two go hand and hand, it's not that difficult to understand. If you're looking for news on the Stable Branch but don't see anything, look at the latest news and reports for the Open Beta, and with some deductive reasoning, you should be able to get an idea of the status for Stable.

 

stable and beta branch can working together "Only if they stop adding new, buggy things in the working beta" because obviously it will make more problems than fixed bugs.

Any sane developer, if facing a competition, will somewhere stop add things to beta version and finalize, then release. New things added up to the que (or special research branch) and then to the next openbeta. You guys already know this because you use a lot of stable/beta/alpha software in your life.

 

But right now they are keep adding new modules (naturally with a log of bugs) to openbeta. Stable cannot be stabilized because of SC must be launched in OB.

Why? simple: Money.

 

Without competition, ED has no reason to fix bugs, keep adding new things to the openbeta and make revenue. This is where your "the big brains of ED executives working". They all know this, but as business, they are maximizing their profit by using the monopoly position. (albeit not very efficiently.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is also an endless discussion. You don't have to buy EA, I don't want to wait years to get my hands on dream planes while getting older. If there hadn't been EA sales, I would have to wait until 2022 to play with hornet and God knows until when for viper

 

Im not sure you are actually happy with waiting until 2022, but the rest of us are fearing that would might be 2030 (why is explained in detail), and want to make it at least 2021 by doing something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm gonna add my dos centavos here and say I have no problem with the state things are in, and would have no problem with the current status quo being in place indefinitely.

Endless early access? Frankly I don't care. I see it as the module being in a continual state of evolution.

Do I need or want every system running as on the real life counterparts? Noap. Give me "good enough", and I'll be happy as more features continue to evolve. I know there's people in the MP arms race who can't wait to have the latest and greatest, but personally it wouldn't hurt my feelings if MP ceased to function. I'd still enjoy DCS just as much.

I'm not going to armchair-CEO. I'm sure if ED needed an additional revenue stream, it would be in place. I'm not convinced than an influx of cash equals a faster development cycle, and even if it did........so what?

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] DCS: The most expensive free game you'll ever play

 

 

 

Modules: All of them

System:

 

I9-9900k, ROG Maximus , 32gb ram, RTX2070 Founder's Edition, t16000,hotas, pedals & cougar MFD, HP Reverb 1.2, HTC VIVE

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look at the facts, and not how some random community members feel about ED business model, ED is doing just fine.

Otherwise they wouldn't be wasting resources on upgrading the A-10C pit or a brand new map, for free.

 

The fact that you don't understand DCS development pace or ED business model should tell you just that. That you don't understand.

And instead of assuming since you don't understand, they must be wrong, maybe, just maybe, you should try to have a better understanding of the matter.

 

Also, if '95 is your year of birth, it means ED has been in the flightsim business for longer than you've been alive...


Edited by Eight Ball
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's be fair. :smilewink:

 

Most companies pay a lot of money for the fact that outsiders who have no idea about the product point out mostly obvious things. And it also seems to be his planned career path.

Company blindness is not an all too rare fenomehn.

 

He certainly paid attention during his studies and his description of the situation from his point of view and that of others is certainly quite accurate.

 

However, in his approach to finding a solution - and it is not intended to be anything else - he has committed serious crimes. The greatest of all, everything is based on assumptions, he has no reliable figures whatsoever, not even a clue on which business management basis (Numbers like cost and customer basis) ED works. But honestly, none of us do.

 

As a 3dt Party Mission Designer, I can only say that to deliver such a special and small target group serving such an undisputedly brilliant product is much harder than you think.

 

In fact, he confirms ED in her actions. Because obviously they draw the right conclusions from the knowledge of the numbers.

 

His intentions are also enthusiastic but honorable and if it were that simple it would be to the benefit of all.

 

Guilty in the sense of the indictment - Have done similar things in another context only recently.

And I have to admit he did a much better job in his presentation. :cry:

And I have a little more insight into the numbers, of course. :book: :doh::doh:

 

It's up to everyone to decide whether it was particularly courageous or particularly stupid to express such thoughts here in the forum. But he does not deserve to laugh at him for that.


Edited by CHPL

Always happy landings ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a long term DCS player going back to the early days of Lock on. ED cater for a market that is considered ‘niche’ these days. They make a simulation that I could have only dreamed of as a child when I sat at my Amiga playing B17 Flying Fortress and the like.

 

My thoughts are that ED deserve all the support they can get from customers like myself and I will pay for a module even if I only have a remote interest in it. For example, I bought the viper just to support them but now I have it, I fly it and will continue to do so.

 

People are too quick to bash the ED business model. If it wasn’t for them where would we be? Nothing compares to DCS in terms of realism, graphics and immersion and they should be applauded for the good work they do. Yes there are constant bugs, but in a sim this complex that evolves on a weekly basis at times, it’s only natural.

 

Keep up the good work ED. You are my second most expensive hobby haha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a long term DCS player going back to the early days of Lock on. ED cater for a market that is considered ‘niche’ these days. They make a simulation that I could have only dreamed of as a child when I sat at my Amiga playing B17 Flying Fortress and the like.

 

My thoughts are that ED deserve all the support they can get from customers like myself and I will pay for a module even if I only have a remote interest in it. For example, I bought the viper just to support them but now I have it, I fly it and will continue to do so.

 

People are too quick to bash the ED business model. If it wasn’t for them where would we be? Nothing compares to DCS in terms of realism, graphics and immersion and they should be applauded for the good work they do. Yes there are constant bugs, but in a sim this complex that evolves on a weekly basis at times, it’s only natural.

 

Keep up the good work ED. You are my second most expensive hobby haha

 

 

+1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a cunning plan for a new pay model!-

 

-ED, make a go-fund-me so rich people can throw money at you with no expectation of anything in return

-You now have more money, and the users who want to give you insane volumes of money can do that without trying to suggest ways for the rest of us to give you insane volumes of money

 

2 birds with 14 lbs!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a long term DCS player going back to the early days of Lock on. ED cater for a market that is considered ‘niche’ these days. They make a simulation that I could have only dreamed of as a child when I sat at my Amiga playing B17 Flying Fortress and the like.

 

My thoughts are that ED deserve all the support they can get from customers like myself and I will pay for a module even if I only have a remote interest in it. For example, I bought the viper just to support them but now I have it, I fly it and will continue to do so.

 

People are too quick to bash the ED business model. If it wasn’t for them where would we be? Nothing compares to DCS in terms of realism, graphics and immersion and they should be applauded for the good work they do. Yes there are constant bugs, but in a sim this complex that evolves on a weekly basis at times, it’s only natural.

 

Keep up the good work ED. You are my second most expensive hobby haha

+1

 

Oh and I think the op is a plant to make us realise just how lucky we are! :)

Intel i5 8600K 4.8GHz · Palit RTX 2080 Ti Gaming Pro · TUF Z370 Pro · HP Reverb Pro · 500Gb M.2 NVMe · 1Tb SSD · 32Gb G-Skill 3200MHz DDR4 · Windows 10 · Thrustmaster TPR Pedals · Thrustmaster Warthog . JetSeat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

2 birds with 14 lbs!

 

i-see-what-you-did-there-gif-14.gif

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] DCS: The most expensive free game you'll ever play

 

 

 

Modules: All of them

System:

 

I9-9900k, ROG Maximus , 32gb ram, RTX2070 Founder's Edition, t16000,hotas, pedals & cougar MFD, HP Reverb 1.2, HTC VIVE

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look at the facts, and not how some random community members feel about ED business model, ED is doing just fine.

Otherwise they wouldn't be wasting resources on upgrading the A-10C pit or a brand new map, for free.

 

I am not pretending I know all, I suggested an alternative BM from my limited knowledge.

It's fine you think it's fine, but that doesn't mean it can't get better. Many business changes, updates their BM continuously. Why ED should not change to a better BM because "you" are fine with it?

 

That said, giving something for for free time to time may be fine for you, but that doesnt mean it's doing well or 30 years old BM is good enough.

 

My suggestion can be wrong but it could not be more wrong because ED is doing fine because you said so.

 

The fact that you don't understand DCS development pace or ED business model should tell you just that. That you don't understand.

And instead of assuming since you don't understand, they must be wrong, maybe, just maybe, you should try to have a better understanding of the matter.

 

Again, it is not about anyone's wrong, or stating I know everything. As stated, it's at best a wild thought experiment or just an alternative suggestion.

If you felt it like someone should not suggest something if the one knows not enough, that, I understand.

 

Also, if '95 is your year of birth, it means ED has been in the flightsim business for longer than you've been alive...

 

If you could not resist demise a personality from it's mere alias, maybe you should not join a discussion. 95 is not the year of my birth, 95 is around the year a bought my 5th PC.


Edited by zakk95
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's be fair. :smilewink:

 

Most companies pay a lot of money for the fact that outsiders who have no idea about the product point out mostly obvious things. And it also seems to be his planned career path.

Company blindness is not an all too rare fenomehn.

 

He certainly paid attention during his studies and his description of the situation from his point of view and that of others is certainly quite accurate.

 

However, in his approach to finding a solution - and it is not intended to be anything else - he has committed serious crimes. The greatest of all, everything is based on assumptions, he has no reliable figures whatsoever, not even a clue on which business management basis (Numbers like cost and customer basis) ED works. But honestly, none of us do.

 

As a 3dt Party Mission Designer, I can only say that to deliver such a special and small target group serving such an undisputedly brilliant product is much harder than you think.

 

In fact, he confirms ED in her actions. Because obviously they draw the right conclusions from the knowledge of the numbers.

 

His intentions are also enthusiastic but honorable and if it were that simple it would be to the benefit of all.

 

Guilty in the sense of the indictment - Have done similar things in another context only recently.

And I have to admit he did a much better job in his presentation. :cry:

And I have a little more insight into the numbers, of course. :book: :doh::doh:

 

It's up to everyone to decide whether it was particularly courageous or particularly stupid to express such thoughts here in the forum. But he does not deserve to laugh at him for that.

 

Thank you for the understanding. I knew from the first place that without the (internal) numbers I could not possibly suggest a right number. I admit it maybe was an overreach.

 

Anyway, If this niche market is not that diversified (understandable because this is a very small market), maybe getting to high for the premium segment is unrealistic.

 

But I still think ED should adopt multi-tier pricing for even with a smaller gap. I small incentives are better than no incentives, and no need to "not" to discriminate the customers since many other business do it..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1

 

Oh and I think the op is a plant to make us realise just how lucky we are! :)

 

Maybe you are being sarcastic but here I am totally agree with you. We are very lucky :)

Just how many niche business went out of business while ED stood firm for the last 30 years and provided us dream aircraft and combat simulations?

 

Don't get me wrong I love them very much, and my though BM experiment is centered on how can ED make more money. (and not to go out of business soon :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this whole thread could be attributed to your lack of understanding of just how complex and work intensive it is to develop a new module. I highly recommend hearing this interview with Nick Grey From ED entirely but many of your core misunderstandings could be cleared up at 15:52 min on ward.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this whole thread could be attributed to your lack of understanding of just how complex and work intensive it is to develop a new module. I highly recommend hearing this interview with Nick Grey From ED entirely but many of your core misunderstandings could be cleared up at 15:52 min on ward.

 

 

 

Thank you for the link. Although I already watched it. I also read Nick Grey's article here,

 

While I dont understand why some comments are about "understand more of ED",

My post is actually about some possible solutions of Nick Grey mentioned:

 

from the above hoggit article,

 

The solution: ED needs to develop another source of income using DCS. The belief they can build a better product through early access with input from the community is actually hurting their overall product more. This one is a bit difficult because I’m sure if ED identified another source of money using DCS, they’d be doing it already. I think a lot of people are correctly tuned into the idea that ED is hurting for money right now. One thing I think is reasonable that wouldn’t cost much in development is actual content. DCS is a sandbox, and requires players to rely on themselves for content. Some single and multiplayer campaigns and missions from ED could be a quick way to snag a few extra dollars, provided they are simple enough to work without fear of the next update completely breaking them. I would even pay money for some new voices in game. Doesn’t have to be professional voice actors. Just grab an employee and record some voice lines for an hour. Hell, I'd even volunteer my own voice for free.

 

What I suggested is multi-tier pricing can be what Nick Grey has suggested as "another source of income". Nick Grey's own voice acted, story driven content also can be great (which i will definitely buy it) , but multi-tier pricing can also be a life saver, because it can be coupled with monetary incentives.

 

 

Eagle Dynamics’ project management and PR

The solution: Cut out the middlemen. Let your teams communicate with each other because it feels like they don’t. I don’t know how you guys are passing information around, but I strongly get the impression it’s mass email chains and walking over to the other person’s desk. Get Slack, make some channels and start talking to each other. Start telling each other what you need from them to complete your tasks, and let them tell you what they need from you for their tasks. The more cohesive you are, the less you’ll have issue statement retractions and backtracks.

 

My idea of enforcing the "rules" regarding in and out of early access, to set the proper incentives is what I think the next form of "ED's Project Management". Better communications would be great, but monetary incentives and rules can also be important.

The solution: Assume everyone has something of value to add. Be tactful in your disagreements and we will all have much better exchanges and might actually even be able to solve some problems in doing so. That’s the easiest one. Quite literally, just be friendly to each other, even when you think the other guy has no clue what they are talking about. Again, I’m guilty of getting heated here. It’s conscious effort change, but probably the easiest one to make, mechanically speaking.

 

I am practically saying that ED should make more money and suggested a way to do it, not bashing ED. At first I was worried about the community taking me as an ED spy/agent, but it turned out very differently :) Very interesting phenomenon.. (Maybe simply because the people dont read? Dont know..)

 

Anyway, I hope others can see that my post is actually an effort to help what Nick Grey has in his mind, as I have quoted above.


Edited by zakk95
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway, I hope others can see that my post is actually an effort to help what Nick Grey has in his mind, as I have quoted above.

 

my take was that it all seemed very much a solution in search of a problem,but to each their own

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] DCS: The most expensive free game you'll ever play

 

 

 

Modules: All of them

System:

 

I9-9900k, ROG Maximus , 32gb ram, RTX2070 Founder's Edition, t16000,hotas, pedals & cougar MFD, HP Reverb 1.2, HTC VIVE

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for the link. Although I already watched it. I also read Nick Grey's article here,

(...)

What I suggested is multi-tier pricing can be what Nick Grey has suggested as "another source of income". Nick Grey's own voice acted, story driven content also can be great (which i will definitely buy it) , but multi-tier pricing can also be a life saver, because it can be coupled with monetary incentives.

(...)

Anyway, I hope others can see that my post is actually an effort to help what Nick Grey has in his mind, as I have quoted above.

 

Nick Grey never said those things. Rasmorak did.

 

Concerning my previous post, it wasn't a personal attack. It was a general observation about these kind of threads which keeps popping up lately.

 

The tongue in cheek comment about your year of birth wasn't an insult. There's nothing wrong with being born in 95. I was just highlighting the fact that ED has been in business long enough to know what they are doing.

And with The Fighter Collection they have more than enough experience and expertise to pick a business model suiting their needs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again my 2 cents :

 

I'm here (with DCS), because a given aircraft in which I spend money... is mine.

Otherwise, if obligated to pay regularly only to periodicaly access a given product... forget about it.

 

Either the aircraft is mine or it isn't at all.

HANGAR

JETS  FlamingCliffs 3 | MiG-21 bis | Mirage 2000C | F-14 A/B | F-16C | F/A-18C

HELIS :  Mi-8 MTV2

 

... only recently using the full benefits of Windows 10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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