Quote:
Originally Posted by RickRuski
(Post 489427)
........Maybe 1C should have as suggested, tried 777s business model from the start, but with the initial release based on the Battle of Britain it would be difficult to add more planes and keep it historically within the time frame.
|
WRT your above thoughts, here were mine in a similar vein which I had posted on our ATAG forum -- with the emphasis on "20/20 hindsight", of course:
With 20/20 hindsight (of course) I wish MG could've started off a LOT simpler with CoD following a similar release model to their successful IL2 Sturmovik release. Instead of immediately branching off in all directions, they could've focussed on fewer planes and ground objects, a smaller map -- but getting it all RIGHT the first time. Example:
1) Battle of France: Hurricane MK1 (2-speed), 109E1, Blenheims, Ju87's, 110's. MAP: NW France, Low Countries. Sunny weather only. Cost: $50
2) Dunkirk Evacuation: add: Spitfire MK1 (2-speed), Beaufighters, 109E3, 110's, Ju88's. MAP: East Coast airfields. No added weather Cost: $50
3) Channel War: add: Spitfire 1a, Hurricane MK 1 Rotol, 109E4, He111. MAP: no addition. Weather: Heavy cumulous, overcast. Cost: $50
4) RAF airfields: add: flyable Wellingtons, Dornier17's MAP: add Sector 11 SE England less London. Weather: rain, thunder, lightning. Cost: $50
5) London Blitz: add: Spitfire 2a's, Me262's (anyone reading this far?) Map: London, Sector 12, Weather: fog_peasoup_version. Cost: $50
Of course, above is an oversimplification and we can certainly argue plane types, ground object inclusion, radar, FMB, etc etc. But you get the gist. MG/1C could've milked us by five times over AND WE WOULD HAVE PAID -- IF -- they focussed on the important stuff and got it right the first time.
This is a genre that sells thousands, not 100K's, of copies. They needed a steady inflow of cash to keep CoD on course. They failed on that IMHO.
