Will DCS Black Shark 3 be required to continue using the KA-50 in DCS

Its easy for one to say that they don’t mind spending money for continued development. But this can get expensive enough that some will say “too rich for my blood.” I have well over $1k invested in ED products since Flanker 1. That’s a thousand bucks spent over 25 years. Not bad I guess. I am a well-paid guy with a huge love for the genre. But what happens when Razbam and others follow ED’s lead? Let’s say the Harrier II (2) comes out in 4 years. Fair enough. I love it. I will likely pay for it. But are there enough out there like me to sustain the revenue model? If paid updates are really how this is going to work, it would be simpler to go with a subscription model and divide revenue based on which models and sceneries are used most. This would encourage more reliable releases and regular updating.

3 Likes

It’s that word again!!!
Can’t argue, you are right - and I have brought up the idea before.
If you had to pay $50-100 a year (let’s call this a bad case scenario for the moment) - would you have spent more or less by now?

Plus that gets rid of the whole two-branches of a product issues, etc.

3 Likes

Far, far less over the years for me.

I don’t think we’ll be locked out of the old Ka-50 and A-10C. Atleast not in the near future. It would not be exactly fair to people who would buy these modules today for $50 and $60, respectively. What I think that ED really ment was that the old versions will be pulled from the store and you can only buy the newer versions.

I think (and hope) it will be something like this indeed. Perhaps the current variant of the A-10C gets renamed to A-10C Suite 3 and there will be a new airplane option for the suite 4/5/6/7/8 (whichever we’re getting). Idem for the Ka-50. This would be similar to how we can currently choose our spitfire/mustang/SA342 variant. That way we could also still fly the lesser advanced version without all the new whizz-bang if that is appropriate for the mission.

I’ve heard ideas about a subscription model before but I am angsty about it from both a consumer and business perspective. As a consumer I always feel pressured to get my money’s worth out of a subscription. Right now I can spend time on other things in my life or other sims and games, knowing that my planes are waiting for me in my hangar for when I find the time to fly them again. From a business side of things, who gets to decide who gets what portion of the cut? How much should the F-14 guys make and how much should the I-16 team get? Right now the rules are simple. Sell more cookies = make more dough. Also, would it then not be more sensible to enlist as few 3rd parties as possible as not to having to share the wealth? There’s also a lot promised for 2020, and a lot I am looking forward to. Besides the discussed updates to the warthog and blackshark we’ll be getting the Thunderbolt, a new world war 2 map (it was mentioned in The P-47 bit.), hopefully the mosquito, a Hind, the Kiowa and the Mudhen ( I personally really hope for that MiG-23 as well). I think it would be to much to be hoping to get all that for a $50 or a $100 subscription while including even more updates to the core sim, which seems to be one of the primary reasons people want a subscription model.

5 Likes

And keep updating two iterations of the A-10C and BS modules…? ED would be better off just giving the updated versions to old owners. Or will they stop updating the old versions? What happens when a DCS core update breaks the old module?

It will be interesting to see how they solve this.

1 Like

1k or even 2k might seem a copious amount of money, but then you also have to think about the timespan. I mean, Flanker 1 was in 1995, that’s 25 years ago. You probably spent most money on DCS, so let’s make it less schewed by taking 1k over the timespan of 2008 until now. That’s 12 years, so that amounts to ~100 dollars per year. Not to say that that’s nothing, but the platform has seen some significant improvements since then.

Let’s look at the next 10 years.

Do you think you are as likely to purchase as many aircraft as you have during the last 10 years? For me, that’s a definitive no, i might even go so far as to say that save from the Tomcat and the wee WWII radial there’s not likely going be anything coming out that i would buy without a significant discount. I don’t see myself buying as many aircraft as i have in the past, as i barely have time to stay current in one or two right now. On the other hand, i don’t expect the platform to drag me along indefinitely without some contribution. Something’s gotta give, and i think this voluntary paid enhancement to existing modules could strike a good balance.

4 Likes

I think that it’s not that much of an issue. Having two versions does not automatically mean you have twice the work of maintenance, if it’s just minor details then it is actually more the contrary. It depends a lot on what is different and how much it differs. Two versions of A-10C will definitely not double the amount of A-10C related code.

2 Likes

No, but compared to just giving old owners the new version? Wouldn’t that be easier? And would they lose that much money, considering that many old owners wouldn’t pay to upgrade anyway?
I don’t know…

But the question is how may we expect this to be handled in the future?
If we look at DLC and other flightsims we often see that add-on makers include updates for the current version only. Any updates is a bonus. Or they guarantee updates for the current flightsim iteration (FSX, XP11). And then there are variants of these…

As you say, ”something’s gotta give”. If we must buy all our modules again in DCS 3, will we do it? Like you, I don’t stay current in all my modules either. There’s no way I could.
But everytime there’s a new module out there I’m like a kid in a candy store (my wife would say I’m just being me) and run screaming for my wallet. I guess I buy them because;

  • I’m a collector
  • I love aircraft
  • I also love flightsims
  • I want to support the developers

But for how long will it continue like this?

I’m actually pretty sure it will be a commercial success amongst those pilots who intend to keep flying her throughout the next decade. Giving the update away as a freebie would certainly not be very helpful to keep the lights on at ED’s office. I hope that both the new and old suite/bort remain available in DCS, and that they will run on the same code. That way, new features will only be available to paying customers while keeping maintenance to a minimum.

4 Likes

I think you are making this something that it isn’t. Nobody is saying you have to rebuy all your aircraft (well actually that remains to be seen, wrt my original question). We’ll have to see what this all amounts to financially with discounts for existing users, etc.

I can offer you a different perspective, though. I don’t want to buy stuff i don’t use. I don’t want ED to think i want aircraft that i don’t really care about. I also don’t want to buy the same aircraft three times without ED committing to supporting it further. For me, having the option to buy an uprated aircraft and getting prolonged support from ED would be a godsend, while it doesn’t take away anything from you. The same can’t be said for what you propose.

No, nor am I. :slight_smile:
I’m just speculating what the future will bring.

Sure. You can of course just buy the new version.
I thought that was a given option :wink:

And this is also my preferred solution.

Who…? :wink:

Actually, @sobek, I think we’re talking past eachother.
I’m just discussing the options as, AFAIK, ED doesn’t have a clear policy on these matters. Which is evident by the confusion on the current affairs.

2 Likes

With new LED lights, who knows…? :wink:

All I’m saying is that there will be a cost associated with updating two versions. And, in the long run I guess ED would be happy to get rid of the older versions and just keep updating the new one. Somewhere there’s a cost/benefit intersection that says something about the amount of re-buyers needed for ED to actually benefit from having two versions.

2 Likes

I kinda expect them to at some point do the “Hawk maneuver” and just tell everyone who doesn’t want to buy the upgrade to go and install version 2.5.xx

In the main branch you will have to either switch to Hog/Shark version 3.0 or stop flying it.

I don’t see them maintaining an old version and a new version of the module because even if you dont change anything then they have to be recompiled for every new DCSW core version and they will break and require maintenance.

Edit:
And they might be nice and give the update to everyone for free who has bought the module less than 3 or 6 months ago.

4 Likes

I would love them to include the BS1 theme as it is the shnizz :heart_eyes:

3 Likes

The pitfall for ED is that there might be a disincentive for customers to buy new modules should 3rd parties also begin to offer paid updates. There are buyers—and I believe that a sizable percentage of the English-speaking ones are right here—who buy everything. Some do so at least in part to support ED. Those customers may not mind an update bill for each module every few years. For the others though, a quick session with a calculator will show that if this is the future, you are better off buying only what you really want. (Always the case anyway.)

Having said all that. I don’t think I care, certainly noy for the 2 modules mentioned. Ninety precent of my DCS enjoyment came from those two models. As for non-ED offerings, so long as the “update bill” clock doesn’t start until “early access” ends we have potentially decades before worrying about a favorite module going breasts-up in front of a paywall.

6 Likes

image

5 Likes

DCS: A-10C v2 is paying for their installation costs. :rofl:

This is certainly well intentioned - I just imagine there will be protests over the cutoff date, and even some “If you just bought in and it’s free, why not me a loyal customer of X years?”. :man_shrugging:

This is all why I asked about a pre-pre-order - the sooner ED has my money, the sooner it’s not my problem anymore! :grin:

2 Likes

As I read through this I kept saying To myself, “Myself, I think the issue devolves down to the fact that DCS World itself is being constantly developed (and is free), which means that there is a constant need for compatibility testing for all the modules.”

If DCS World was a static version, the whole point would be moot. ED would simply release an A-10C v2 and BS 3…maybe give owners of the previous versions a discount. The old versions would work like always.

But, alas, that is not the world we live in. The ED developers probably have an idea or feeling of what changes to DCW World May break some functions and it would be nice if they work with those thoughts in mind. However, there will likely come a day when, in order to get some function we all all clamoring for, something gets broken on an older–no longer developed/maintained–module.

IMHO, they key is transparency. If we all are told the “facts of DCS-World life” in no uncertain terms, well enough ahead of implementation, then we can make informed decisions. :thinking:

Oh who am I kidding. I just wait for the sales and buy all that I can. :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

2 Likes

I dont own every DCS module and I dont even plan to buy them all. I just pick what I like.
From this perspective it is ok for me to buy module upgrades. Because that way I can invest some money without buying what I dont really want to fly.

5 Likes

Wha…what…what did he say? :open_mouth:

© 2020 Mudspike.com | Articles Website | Forums Rules & FAQ