1C wants to make money? Surely the original P-51, B-17 and Fw-190 'financial' sense?

[Mysticpuma]

Although I have been watching the progress of CloD and news now of BoM, what became apparent from Luthiers replies was that they need to make money.

Seriously I do understand the requests for early war aircraft (hence 1940's era CloD) but as they said it's hardly set their finances alight! This of course isn't just about the era but also the buggy game engine.

So now 1C wants wants to make money and surely by releasing popular aircraft they can bolster their finances while also using that money to continue creating arenas of combat like BoM?

This isn't about dismissing the earlier aircraft and areas of combat but by selling/adding 'popular' aircraft surely this would make 'financial' sense?

I wonder though if they realize that these aircraft will be financially popular and that is a reason not to let an aircraft SDK out as whoever made a late war aircraft 'pack' would most likely make a financial 'killing'?

The only reason I see not to endorse the release of late-war 'popular' aircraft is something is one i can't work out!

Cheers, MP

[Winger]

Well, i for my part am paying around 10-20 bucks per plane in ROF and i surely would also do here. Maybe even more. Pay by plane would definately be a way to make money bigtime.

I would preorder all german planes.

Winger

[csThor]

Honestly: coherent well rounded packages for a certain operation are IMO the only sensible way. We had way too much of the watering can in 1946 and before, no need to repeat old mistakes.

[5./JG27.Farber]

That makes no sense. Once they release the 44/45 stuff who is gonna wanna come back to 41? Most servers in IL2 1946 fb + pick a mod, hosted mid to late war stuff, Usually 44. It makes the most sense to follow chronological order!

Releasing the aircraft SDK would be financial suicide.

Just wait, it will all come in time. ;)

[Feathered_IV]

Better to release aircraft chronologically. More exciting for each new release and each step in technology. Anyhow, Maddox games have not got the resources for an England to Germany map. Nor do we have the computers for it any time soon. The engine seems best suited to skirmishes between limited numbers of aircraft at medium altitude. I can't think of a game engine less suited to depicting the daylight bombing offensive.

[JG52Krupi]

Well, i for my part am paying around 10-20 bucks per plane in ROF and i surely would also do here. Maybe even more. Pay by plane would definately be a way to make money bigtime.

I would preorder all german planes.

Winger

As much as I dislike the ROF :-x system its a thousand times better than an MMO :evil:

As far what they release goes, I agree with csThor and Farber.

A lot of people enjoy the "crap" planes :D

[Catseye]

It would be interesting to see where most of their sales occur. Russia/Eastern Europe compared to Western Europe/North America.

Should it be that Eastern Europe have the largest edge here, it would seem that they are targeting that market with the next release for the best financial return.

[Chivas]

I seriously doubt they have the resources to build extra aircraft, especially at this critical time. I don't think they would even want to, as it could jeopardies sales of theaters that they will be building later. I could see them selling highly complex, and costly to build aircraft like four engine bombers, that were used in the theaters they have released. Like Feathered said, I don't think we will see a Western Front long range bombing campaign for years, until the game engine is improved, a huge map built, and new computers that could run it. I'd sure like to see it, but wonder how many in an already small genre would be willing to fly those very long mostly boring flights. I suppose some good fast forward to the action. :),

[slm]

Is there a list of planes that BoM is supposed to include? Just checked from Wiki that first Fw-190 models were taken to service during 1941, but were used in west. Any chance some early Fw-190 could be included in BoM?

[Chivas]

Is there a list of planes that BoM is supposed to include? Just checked from Wiki that first Fw-190 models were taken to service during 1941, but were used in west. Any chance some early Fw-190 could be included in BoM?

I believe BlackSix said the Fw-190 weren't used in the early campaigns they are currently building for the iniitial release of the Russain Front Sequel, presumed to be in the Moscow and/or Stalingrad area.

[slm]

Wiki says "The Fw 190 made its air combat debut on the Eastern Front in November/December 1942".
So Fw-190 would be a valid choice if BoM also includes battles in Stalingrad.

[ChrisDNT]

My money = no *%&*"ing bar in the 190!

[LoBiSoMeM]

That makes no sense. Once they release the 44/45 stuff who is gonna wanna come back to 41? Most servers in IL2 1946 fb + pick a mod, hosted mid to late war stuff, Usually 44. It makes the most sense to follow chronological order!

I will... ;)

[Chivas]

Wiki says "The Fw 190 made its air combat debut on the Eastern Front in November/December 1942".
So Fw-190 would be a valid choice if BoM also includes battles in Stalingrad.

We don't know for sure which areas of the Russian front were mapped, but again BlackSix said the FW190 wasn't used in the early campaigns they are currently modelling for the Sequel.

[slm]

Too bad. Because IMO Fw-190s, like P-51 models later, are those important planes that may get people to buy a sequel.

[KG26_Alpha]

P-51, B-17 and Fw-190

Cant think of anything more done to death and boring.







.

[addman]

P-51, B-17 and Fw-190

Cant think of anything more done to death and boring.







.

Couldn't agree more.

[slm]

P-51, B-17 and Fw-190
Cant think of anything more done to death and boring.
.

So if you could pick 2 planes from some era, which planes would get you to buy a game from 1c? If you think about the assumption of thread's title.

[Chivas]

Too bad. Because IMO Fw-190s, like P-51 models later, are those important planes that may get people to buy a sequel.

The 190 should be in later Sequel if the development survives and continues developing theaters.

[BGs_Ricky]

Wiki says "The Fw 190 made its air combat debut on the Eastern Front in November/December 1942".
So Fw-190 would be a valid choice if BoM also includes battles in Stalingrad.

It appeared first on the central and northern sectors, there were no FW-190 units in the battle of Stalingrad.

[slm]

I'm not quite sure how 1c defines their sequel contents. Is it some geographical area during certain months, a whole front (like east front in BoM case) during some time period or what?

If BoM is just a name, but it really means "east front from 6.1941 to 12.1942" then Fw-190 could be included.

[JG52Krupi]

Surely the Fw 190 will come in either the one after "BOM" or in a patch for "BOM"

Also look at the background...

http://www.warbirdphotographs.com/LCBW4/FW190-36.jpg

And for those that say the Fw190 has been done to death..... what are you smoking the 109 has been done to death ten times more than the 190 ever has!!!!

[slm]

This forum software needs a +1 button :)

[Mysticpuma]

That makes no sense. Once they release the 44/45 stuff who is gonna wanna come back to 41?

Releasing the aircraft SDK would be financial suicide.



So by reading the first part of your reply, you actually agree with the point I am making? 44/45 is the 'popular' stuff where lots of interest and finances could be made from? The only reason that 41 wouldn't be revisited by players is because....it's not as popular as 44/45?

This makes me think that there is a little snobbery going on here, whereby the popular aircraft must not be released as who will play with us if they do that? Surely the popular aircraft are where the finances and revenue could be driven forward by 1C to create 'less' popular Theatres?

Releasing the Aircraft SDK would be financial brilliance! Surely? 3rd Party developer's make add-ons (like the Aces Expansion for IL2(although that was Maddox of-course)) and release them. 1C take a percentage of the revenue. If a pack is popular 1C make money, if not, they don't make a loss in development time, someone else does? Surely the more popular and attractive the Software looks to buy into, the more people will come aboard? Maybe the 190 vs 51 servers would be more popular..but that's because more people want to play on them rather than being 'forced' (uses term loosely) to fly aircraft they really don't want to because it's better that 1C only pander to the elite than the masses?

Feathered IV:

"Better to release aircraft chronologically. More exciting for each new release and each step in technology"

I'm really not disagreeing with anyone regarding what should be done and in what order, I'm merely making the point that 1C need to make money because if they don't then nothing will be developed? If the FW-190, P-51 and B-17 (I would like a P-47 and 109 in the mix too of-course) were brought into the series earlier, then these ARE popular. These would raise lots of revenue. With that revenue, you can guarantee further era's and theatre's of combat?

Playing Devil's Advocate, lets say the Russian Theatre of BoM is another troubled child. Again little revenue is raised, development stalls, no money comes in...will there be future development?

By bringing in the popular aircraft earlier, the money would come in (granted there would be issues and bugs to fix!).

I just don't see the validity of the argument that the earlier more 'elite' less popular aircraft need to be developed, as why should the aircraft that lots of (due to them being popular?) players would grab a chance to fly be given priority?

It seems like a case of "don't give the masses what they want as no-one will play with our early more difficult aircraft!"?

I know realistically it will make no difference as they will have a roadmap laid out (I hope), but I just wondered why, when money is the main driving incentive, 'popular' aircraft are not at the forefront of the development?

Krupi;

"A lot of people enjoy the "crap" planes"

and in fairness, why shouldn't they. It just seems odd that popular aircraft that would raise much needed revenue would be kept back in the hope of pleasing the few rather than the many?

Catseye:

"It would be interesting to see where most of their sales occur. Russia/Eastern Europe compared to Western Europe/North America.

Should it be that Eastern Europe have the largest edge here, it would seem that they are targeting that market with the next release for the best financial return."

Agreed, although we wont have access to the figures, it would be really interesting to see what percentage of Russians bought CloD and what percentage of the rest of the world will by BoM. I expect it would be much higher for BoM as all the CloD users want to play a working flight-sim, so the figures would be really skewed I feel.

Chivas:

"I seriously doubt they have the resources to build extra aircraft, especially at this critical time."

The only reason it's a critical time is because they obviously need to raise revenue....and wouldn't that happen with 'popular' aircraft and Theatres of war?


slm:

"Too bad. Because IMO Fw-190s, like P-51 models later, are those important planes that may get people to buy a sequel."

I agree but it seems popular Theatres and Aircraft are not the way to raise funds?

Alpha:

"P-51, B-17 and Fw-190

Cant think of anything more done to death and boring."

Done to death because they know it makes money and sells units?

slm:

"So if you could pick 2 planes from some era, which planes would get you to buy a game from 1c? If you think about the assumption of thread's title."

That is a very fair question too. The aircraft I mentioned in the thread title were an example of aircraft that would possibly raise large amounts of finances for 1C. For clarity if you disagree, I would appreciate hearing what aircraft you would consider 'MANY' players would buy? Please note I have to make the assumption that the graphics Engine, FM/DM and all the rest are working ( ;) ) but how many units do you think the original CloD sold with all it's issues? So imagine how much revenue would be raised from 'popular' aircraft?

All I'm doing is asking the question of how 1C could raise funds quickly, as stated by Luthier, finances are the major driving factor now and they want to make money. Releasing a Lysander make look great...but would it make people rush to buy the sequel? (I used the Lysander as an example only of an aircraft that certainly played a part in WW2, but would it get the masses to invest or do we need the P-51/47/38/109/190 and other later aircraft so that 1C can drive their revenue stream forward and make sure development of the earlier theatres can take place?

I'm here for the long haul. There is no other Sim that I want to succeed as much as the CloD series, it's just that without a revenue stream....there may be no other Theatres at-all?

Cheers, MP

[KG26_Alpha]

The Mediterranean theatre complete with correct aircraft shipping ground units & maps would be the next step after BoM that makes sense.

Simply bunging 3 planes and a map at customers isn't going to do anything for the series.

IMHO






.

[Mysticpuma]

The Mediterranean theatre complete with correct aircraft shipping ground units & maps would be the next step after BoM that makes sense.

Simply bunging 3 planes and a map at customers isn't going to do anything for the series.

IMHO






.

Hi Alpha. That's a fair point. I was actually using those aircraft as a point of reference as 'popular' aircraft. In all honesty I know I would enjoy the MTO with P-40's and 109's/190's tangling in the air (or Spits/Hurri's vx Axis).

I'm not expecting 3 aircraft to be crow-barred into any environment, but if BoM is in the snowy wastes of Russia, the P-51's/190's and B-17's (or US Bombers) could represent "Operation Frantic" for example, so the environment can be 'tweaked' to match any era.

Alternately, FSX and RoF have a theatre of Operations and add aircraft into it so it's down to the Mission Builders to make believable environments for the aircraft to be in? Not the aircraft...it isn't their fault ;)

Cheers, MP

[KG26_Alpha]

Maps have always been used in a non historical manner to suit the needs of the mission builder and thier imagination.

Regardless of the aircraft types and time lines, some of the best missions I have created have been with historically mismatched aircraft.

Personally i was hoping for larger theatre maps for CooP missions but the current state of the CooP gui puts a grinding halt on my CloD mission building.

The limited theatre aircraft plane sets and maps don't spark the imagination much especially when you drop on top all the bomber bugs and other problems related to creating a believable environment.

I have made missions in FSX believe me its not funny.

As for RoF I had so many graphics glitches and FMB problems I left it alone after 3 weeks trying.

IL2 1946 had the quintessential CooP mode and GUI accompanied by a varied theatre of ops with released plane sets (Luthiers Pacific Fighters not included) IMHO, I voted for the Med along with Oleg :)
If the new series follows the doctrine the old series did it will naturally build into another behemoth of WW2 theatres and equipment as is IL2 1946.


Lets hope eh :)



.

[*Buzzsaw*]

Salute

As much as I would like to see an 8th Air Force Simulation, the current game engine has proved incapable of handling large numbers of aircraft successfully.

1000 plane raids? No chance with this game. If it can't manage 300 planes over London, how is it going to deal with 1000 over Berlin?

On the other hand, if the proper attention to logic had been followed, we would have seen a Mediterranean map using most of the existing planes, no need to build a whole new environment, Malta 1940/ first half of '41 could have been done easily, after all, it's mostly water.

[JG52Krupi]

The eastern front is the best place to go from every point of view IMHO.

The devs will get more as it will always sell more in russia.

We need a map that will allow a good rolling online campaign to be created and again the eastern front gives this as well. I know some here couldn't careless about the eastern front but personally I am happy to see Il2 go back to its original roots, I just hope we don't loose the best bits from COD when we do this.

[Chivas]

@Mysticpuma quote
"The only reason it's a critical time is because they obviously need to raise revenue....and wouldn't that happen with 'popular' aircraft and Theatres of war?"

Its a critical time.... because they have every crew member fixing the sim and adding content for the Sequel. They don't have the time or the personnel to start building aircraft for other theaters. Like I said I liked your idea, and expressed the same idea myself awhile ago, but only for very complex aircraft, like Lancasters, or B17's.

[csThor]

SLM

The first Fw 190 on the Eastern Front appeared with I./JG 51 at Lyuban in September 1942. Lyuban is, however, on the far side of the Eastern Front when seen from Stalingrad. It's a small town roughly 50km southeast of Leningrad. As such - if the sequel depicts the Battle of Stalingrad - no Fw 190 has a place there because none were present.

The closest (distance-wise) a Fw 190 ever got to Stalingrad was the posting of a Staffel of ground-attack Fw 190 A-5/U3 of Schlachtgeschwader 1 to Anapa on the Taman Peninsula in spring 1943 (long after the 6th Army had surrendered).

[slm]

SLM

The first Fw 190 on the Eastern Front appeared with I./JG 51 at Lyuban in September 1942. Lyuban is, however, on the far side of the Eastern Front when seen from Stalingrad. It's a small town roughly 50km southeast of Leningrad. As such - if the sequel depicts the Battle of Stalingrad - no Fw 190 has a place there because none were present.

The closest (distance-wise) a Fw 190 ever got to Stalingrad was the posting of a Staffel of ground-attack Fw 190 A-5/U3 of Schlachtgeschwader 1 to Anapa on the Taman Peninsula in spring 1943 (long after the 6th Army had surrendered).

Like I wrote earlier, I don't know how 1c decides the contents of their sequels. Is it just time period and whole front or some more limited area? If the whole front, then it would be ok to include fw-190. My info about when fw190 appeared in east was from fw190 wiki-pages.

[BlackSix]

We're not planning Western front or Mediterranean in the near future. We make Eastern front now only.

[BlackSix]

Like I wrote earlier, I don't know how 1c decides the contents of their sequels. Is it just time period and whole front or some more limited area? If the whole front, then it would be ok to include fw-190. My info about when fw190 appeared in east was from fw190 wiki-pages.

Some more limited area. We can't make the whole front.

[slm]

Thanks for the official info Black6! I do understand that making a map covering the whole east front would be too much.

Well, I hope we'll see Fw-190 rather sooner than later. It was used in so many places that it could be used in many kind of missions in the game: east, west, med. More planes of any kind is what this sim needs now that the biggest engine bugs have been fixed.

[5./JG27.Farber]

So by reading the first part of your reply, you actually agree with the point I am making? 44/45 is the 'popular' stuff where lots of interest and finances could be made from? The only reason that 41 wouldn't be revisited by players is because....it's not as popular as 44/45?

This makes me think that there is a little snobbery going on here, whereby the popular aircraft must not be released as who will play with us if they do that? Surely the popular aircraft are where the finances and revenue could be driven forward by 1C to create 'less' popular Theatres?

Releasing the Aircraft SDK would be financial brilliance! Surely? 3rd Party developer's make add-ons (like the Aces Expansion for IL2(although that was Maddox of-course)) and release them. 1C take a percentage of the revenue. If a pack is popular 1C make money, if not, they don't make a loss in development time, someone else does? Surely the more popular and attractive the Software looks to buy into, the more people will come aboard? Maybe the 190 vs 51 servers would be more popular..but that's because more people want to play on them rather than being 'forced' (uses term loosely) to fly aircraft they really don't want to because it's better that 1C only pander to the elite than the masses?



No I dont agree with you. Its silly. Its nice to have the eary war stuff. Im sorry you beloved P51 isnt in the game yet, just wait it will be. ;)

[Skoshi Tiger]

Its nice to have the eary war stuff.)
+1

[slm]

Every now and then I go and check what Team Daedalos has done to improve the officially abandoned IL2. Some of the new planes they've added have been exactly these early war planes like He-123 and P-36. I think their free effort has been magnifient.

[He111]

I'm not interested in beat-all-aircraft, i want historical scenarios and all the weird n wacky aircraft that actually took part.

anyway the IL2 will have flight characteristics of a 190 while the 190 will fly like a Bristol Bombay, so we're part way there! LOL! :grin: joking ..

.

[Bricks]

IL2 wasn't chronologically either. Besides it had several option for scenarios in the first place.

So I have to agree with MP: From the marketing point of view, a scenario of 1944 Western Front or even early Africa, to keep the beloved timeline would have been a much better advertisement. And more profitable. I must admit that the eastern front ist one reason I'm not interested in this sequel. And I guess I'm not alone.

[senseispcc]

.
Do not forget the 1C company is there to make money and this in the all world. So this said first IL2 Russian front then little by little all the fronts until the big problem with the USA and Grumman asking a lot of money for the copyright for their planes end the series. No with the COD a mitigated success so back to the initial triumph the Soviet against the Nazis first period June 1942 until June 1942 a lot of planes possible but not too much work to adapt the good thing from COD to the new game.
I like this period of war and wait for BOM with trepidation and curiosity.

[OB1]

Once DCS produce the FW190 and BF109 I don't think there would be any competition.

Even DCS' lack of terrain features which they are in the developing process to upgrade for combined arms. With their one WW2 aircraft and its sheer stupendously accurate and insane simulation quality and cockpit detail makes clod look like a toy and questions my beliefs on clod being a simulation.

DCS will steal the crowd. Eventually.

[Skoshi Tiger]

Once DCS produce the FW190 and BF109 I don't think there would be any competition.

Even DCS' lack of terrain features which they are in the developing process to upgrade for combined arms. With their one WW2 aircraft and its sheer stupendously accurate and insane simulation quality and cockpit detail makes clod look like a toy and questions my beliefs on clod being a simulation.

DCS will steal the crowd. Eventually.

DCS P51 is looking good for a beta product BUT the problem is that DCS hasn't finished its P51 yet and they have never said that they are going to create a contemporary opponent for thew P-51. They don't have an appropriate map or any appropriate ground objects.

Odds are that they will make a new plane to oppose or supliment the the A-10-C or branch off in some other Weird and wonderful direction like vietnam

When you think about it we don't have a player flyable equivalent to the Blackshark yet!

DCS World at the moment product is a group of unrelated study sims. It's all out of context. And look at the time it's taken them to get the Navada map off the ground. (Has it been released yet?)

[OB1]

DCS P51 is looking good for a beta product BUT the problem is that DCS hasn't finished its P51 yet and they have never said that they are going to create a contemporary opponent for thew P-51. They don't have an appropriate map or any appropriate ground objects.

Odds are that they will make a new plane to oppose or supliment the the A-10-C or branch off in some other Weird and wonderful direction like vietnam

When you think about it we don't have a player flyable equivalent to the Blackshark yet!

DCS World at the moment product is a group of unrelated study sims. It's all out of context. And look at the time it's taken them to get the Navada map off the ground. (Has it been released yet?)

DCS has the problem of classified information for modern aircraft that is why they are having a hard time producing aircraft to counter the KA-50

This is why they are now starting the new flying legends series. Old WW2 aircraft are now declassified and they are able to model them far quicker than modern aircraft.

They don't have an appropriate map or any appropriate ground objects.

Map is of little consequence, people want to fly.. people are already hosting server and dog fighting just with the one WW2 aircraft they have.

Odds are that they will make a new plane to oppose or supliment the the A-10-C or branch off in some other Weird and wonderful direction like vietnam

They have already announced that the flying legend series is separate and is being developed in parallel with their modern projects, resources devoted to modern aircraft have no bearing on the development of the flying legend series.

they have never said that they are going to create a contemporary opponent for thew P-51.

They will not announce/confirm nor deny anything... however I am privileged enough to have insight in their development direction.

[JG27_brook]

Thanks for the official info Black6! I do understand that making a map covering the whole east front would be too much.

Well, I hope we'll see Fw-190 rather sooner than later. It was used in so many places that it could be used in many kind of missions in the game: east, west, med. More planes of any kind is what this sim needs now that the biggest engine bugs have been fixed.

+1 I have cash now for a "FW190" and no interest in any crap planes!

[Skoshi Tiger]

DCS has the problem of classified information for modern aircraft that is why they are having a hard time producing aircraft to counter the KA-50

This is why they are now starting the new flying legends series. Old WW2 aircraft are now declassified and they are able to model them far quicker than modern aircraft.



That is sad, What they really need to get more interest in their [a-10- black shark part of the] sim is contemporary flyable adversaries and a more diverse flyable planeset.



Map is of little consequence, people want to fly.. people are already hosting server and dog fighting just with the one WW2 aircraft they have.


Just goes to show what a diverse range of people are into flight sims.

The biggest turnoff I have of DCS P-51 is the lack of context. To make it interesting for me I need contemporary maps, objects and adversaries.



They have already announced that the flying legend series is separate and is being developed in parallel with their modern projects, resources devoted to modern aircraft have no bearing on the development of the flying legend series.


Sad once again. At best it will just fragment or dilute their development efforts into the different areas. The worst that could happen is that loose their current expertise in developing for the modern aircraft.


They will not announce/confirm nor deny anything... however I am privileged enough to have insight in their development direction.
[/quote]

Pitty you can't talk about it more. A lot of us simmers are in it for the long run, not just for instant jollies. Knowing there is a future for any of the major sims is a good thing.

[OB1]

That is sad, What they really need to get more interest in their [a-10- black shark part of the] sim is contemporary flyable adversaries and a more diverse flyable planeset.

If you want more aircraft flaming cliffs 2 which is out now and compatible with DCS world and modules and flaming cliffs 3 to be released with more detail. Not to mention the many 3rd party project in development and is being quality controlled by eagle dynamics themselves. That gives you plenty of contemporary aircraft but not to the detail of the DCS series.


Just goes to show what a diverse range of people are into flight sims.

The biggest turnoff I have of DCS P-51 is the lack of context. To make it interesting for me I need contemporary maps, objects and adversaries

Your right just goes to show what a diverse range of people are into flight sims. The Flying legend series is very new.. Give it the same amount of time it took clod to get of the ground if at all you can actually believe that it is, the flying legends with a capable dev team will surpass clod.


Sad once again. At best it will just fragment or dilute their development efforts into the different areas. The worst that could happen is that loose their current expertise in developing for the modern aircraft.

Sorry you did not hear me the first time, ill clarify. they announced that this will not impede on their development efforts.

They have a big dev team, not like the 1 man we have at clod.

[slm]

Since when has CoD development been done by a one man?

[OB1]

Since when has CoD development been done by a one man?

Let me help you

Sarcasm: "is a sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter jibe or taunt, usually conveyed through irony or understatement. Most authorities distinguish sarcasm from irony, however, others argue that sarcasm may or often does involve irony or employs ambivalence."

Bias: "is an inclination to present or hold a partial perspective at the expense of (possibly equally valid) alternatives. Anything biased generally is one-sided, and therefore lacks a neutral point of view. Bias can come in many forms and is often considered to be synonymous with prejudice or bigotry."

It has been over a year now and the progress made makes it seems like there is only 1 man.

[slm]

It's not just about how many people your team has, but who they are and what those people do. It would be interesting to know how many of the developers were in the team when CoD was first released.

[DefiantMk1]

Honestly I think the problem with Clod doesn't stem from a technical standpoint, but rather a business model which isn't bringing in enough money and I have my serious doubts whether the Russian Front will make any difference.

I know there are a few vocal people who hate DLC, but look at the active development of two other titles, ie DCS series and Rise of Flight, both have come a long way and continue to grow, while Clod has stalled and patches seem to be slow in coming and rare.

As for the thread title, yes those planes do make much more sense to me for sure, and what about add-on aircraft? Expansion packs? Or just have a couple of free planes and then the rest DLC?

[OB1]

Honestly I think the problem with Clod doesn't stem from a technical standpoint, but rather a business model which isn't bringing in enough money and I have my serious doubts whether the Russian Front will make any difference.

I know there are a few vocal people who hate DLC, but look at the active development of two other titles, ie DCS series and Rise of Flight, both have come a long way and continue to grow, while Clod has stalled and patches seem to be slow in coming and rare.

You are right. Bean counters are the cause of many development fails in the gaming industry these days.. Except the bean counters in this case don't care much for the income over an extended time they just care about the insta cash they can make of us from the initial release and furthermore the bean counters in this case belong to Ubisoft.

Looking at both successful sim developers Eagle Dynamics and 777 studios have something in common with each other. They both develop and publish their own products. The unfortunate relationship 1c has with Ubisoft does not give them the flexibility they need.

Damage is done 1c was forced to release their unfinished game on Ubisofts terms. Now that Ubisoft has our money they couldn't care less about the future of cliffs of dover.

Ubisoft just hopes that we are dumb enough to buy the expansion, another unfinished project so they can fill their pockets even more.

People are not vocal about DLC's in general we just dont like the way Russian front is being forced out before they fix the actual game its supposed to complement, and forced out for the very reasons I have stated above.

[ATAG_Doc]

Listen to them. They have years of experience here. They run successful businesses of their own so you should take their advise. A man with a theory is never at the mercy of one with experience ya know. Just sayin ....

[ATAG_Doc]

I cannot wait for the next release either. If I could get an advanced purchase done today I would and so would many others. They should be ready to do exactly this before the end of this year. I cannot wait.

[Chivas]

You are right. Bean counters are the cause of many development fails in the gaming industry these days.. Except the bean counters in this case don't care much for the income over an extended time they just care about the insta cash they can make of us from the initial release and furthermore the bean counters in this case belong to Ubisoft.

Looking at both successful sim developers Eagle Dynamics and 777 studios have something in common with each other. They both develop and publish their own products. The unfortunate relationship 1c has with Ubisoft does not give them the flexibility they need.

Damage is done 1c was forced to release their unfinished game on Ubisofts terms. Now that Ubisoft has our money they couldn't care less about the future of cliffs of dover.

Ubisoft just hopes that we are dumb enough to buy the expansion, another unfinished project so they can fill their pockets even more.

People are not vocal about DLC's in general we just dont like the way Russian front is being forced out before they fix the actual game its supposed to complement, and forced out for the very reasons I have stated above.

I doubt Ubisoft is currently a major investor in the new series and has much say in the development. The IC group definitely does. Ubisoft has some rights to sales in the Western market and requested the development make changes to the epilepsy conditions of the sim before they could release it in the west, otherwise they would be have left themselves vulnerable to lawsuits.

Ubisoft may have made some money on the sales of COD, if their investment wasn't too large, but the IC groups investment was way to large for any hope of recouping their monies. IC has invested millions, even if COD were a success it probably wouldn't have recouped those costs. The only way they make any money is thru sales of a number of Sequels, and the first thing that has to happen is a successful first Sequel. Its highly doubtful the IC group is stupid enough to think that most people will blindly buy the Sequel, and will make every effort to finish and refine the game engine and features to make the Sequel a success.

[ATAG_Doc]

Obviously you're a high rolling hedge fund manager with all this inside knowledge. Oh great oracle...please tell us if we should buy or hold.

[OB1]

Its highly doubtful the IC group is stupid enough to think that most people will blindly buy the Sequel, and will make every effort to finish and refine the game engine and features to make the Sequel a success.

I hope the lack of information on the poor condition of the game at the time of release is not an indication of a pure profit driven attitude. Cliffs of Dover does atlest seem a passion driven project.

I do really hope they, as you said "make every effort to finish and refine the game engine and features to make the Sequel a success"

That said I also hope that costumers don't blindly go throwing their money at a sequel on faith or you do risk the common recurrence of developers in it for a quick buck, common to most other developers and publishers using status that was earned with previous success on similar products. But as you said 1c has put themselves in a position where they have to deliver or sink..

In general people should be more careful and reserved when purchasing to help cut down on the publishers taking advantage of hyped sales.

[Chivas]

I hope the lack of information on the poor condition of the game at the time of release is not an indication of a pure profit driven attitude. Cliffs of Dover does atlest seem a passion driven project.

I do really hope they, as you said "make every effort to finish and refine the game engine and features to make the Sequel a success"

That said I also hope that costumers don't blindly go throwing their money at a sequel on faith or you do risk the common recurrence of developers in it for a quick buck, common to most other developers and publishers using status that was earned with previous success on similar products. But as you said 1c has put themselves in a position where they have to deliver or sink..

In general people should be more careful and reserved when purchasing to help cut down on the publishers taking advantage of hyped sales.

I agree the publishers were less than truthful about the state of the sim at release. It was a catch 22 situation, if they advertised we were buying an unfinished, unplayable, sim, what do you think the sales would have been? As it stands, the sales were strong enough to indicate to the investors that continued funding of the development would give them a better chance for a return on their investment.

People blindly bought COD based on the work developers have done with the original series, that "won't" happen again. Certainly not enough to sustain the development. The developers/publishers know it and we know it, thats why they will "make every effort to finish and refine the game engine and features to make the Sequel a success".

Its also interesting that most people like myself bought the sim even after reading all the bad reviews from the East, with the thought the development has a history of staying the course with their projects. They've done just that over the last couple of years, but financing drives every effort, and that forcing them to concentrate on the Sequel. That said most of the work they are doing to make the Sequel a success, will make the Channel map a success.

Even if all the fixes and features I want, don't make the Sequels release, I will buy it, if reviews indicate that the development has done enough to survive and continue their work. Hopefully most will also feel the same way and sales will be strong enough for the series to survive, improve, and prosper.

[OB1]

I agree the publishers were less than truthful about the state of the sim at release. It was a catch 22 situation, if they advertised we were buying an unfinished, unplayable, sim, what do you think the sales would have been? As it stands, the sales were strong enough to indicate to the investors that continued funding of the development would give them a better chance for a return on their investment.

People blindly bought COD based on the work developers have done with the original series, that "won't" happen again. Certainly not enough to sustain the development. The developers/publishers know it and we know it, thats why they will "make every effort to finish and refine the game engine and features to make the Sequel a success".

Its also interesting that most people like myself bought the sim even after reading all the bad reviews from the East, with the thought the development has a history of staying the course with their projects. They've done just that over the last couple of years, but financing drives every effort, and that forcing them to concentrate on the Sequel. That said most of the work they are doing to make the Sequel a success, will make the Channel map a success.

Even if all the fixes and features I want, don't make the Sequels release, I will buy it, if reviews indicate that the development has done enough to survive and continue their work. Hopefully most will also feel the same way and sales will be strong enough for the series to survive, improve, and prosper.

Its finally good to see I can have an intelligent civil conversation with someone that understands the system and the situation this company and sim is in.

Nothing you have said I can dispute, in fact I agree completely. However maybe it is my experience that leaves me in my state of mind. I bought the collectors edition blindly, the money in its self is of no consequence but I feel my trust based on the status earned earlier on in the series has been used against me.

We cannot debate this issue any further because it now comes down to a matter of opinion and the taste that have been left in peoples mouths after these years of development. My opinion and beliefs in relation to the future of COD remain the same

I myself along with the group of people I fly with will not be purchasing the sequel. Once bitten twice shy. Once they have re-proven themselves I will commit myself and support them once more.

[CaptainDoggles]

It's just common sense. A lot of us bought CLOD early, when it wasn't even released in North America yet and technically still in Beta because we believed in Maddox Games' reputation for delivering a quality product.

Obviously in light of what happened it just wouldn't make sense to shell out another 60 bucks for the sequel without waiting for reviews.

It's too bad, because I feel like I'm one of the few guys in N.A. who much prefer the Eastern front to the Western front, especially through the later years of the war. I actually really really really want to get the sequel, but if reviews aren't positive I'll stand on principle and won't buy it.