Official Fulqrum Publishing forum - New IL2 Sturmovik Title!!!

Official Fulqrum Publishing forum (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/index.php)

- IL-2 Sturmovik (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/forumdisplay.php?f=98)

- - New IL2 Sturmovik Title!!! (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/showthread.php?t=36430)

I understand the DLC scene, but it's the only way these producers and small flight sim companies are going to make it. Look at Micro-Soft twice they gave it a go, and twice they lost.

If it isn't a big title like (FPS) have become, then they should charge for the nickel and dime code and time to make a map, a plane, a car, a train... if it takes up time and money and resources sure charge, charge, charge.. It's the only way this 100k people game is going to survive..
I'm not saying charge full on game title cost for DLC, look at Train Simulator 3, 10.00 dollars here and there, yes ROF 20.00 for a map a little much,
Yes that's what the sales are showing only 250k plus, people bought flight sims in 2012.

compare that to COD=Black ops2....... over three million...

Quote:

Originally Posted by GF_Mastiff (Post 492296)

You're not wrong. But it doesn't invalidate concerns over how this will play out with the community and how it will affect how online is done in the community. It'll be a very different dynamic than IL-2 1946.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GF_Mastiff (Post 492296)

There's a number of things I believe you are overlooking.

Comparing our flight sims to CODBO2, BF3, Skyrim, etc for the purposes of budget and sales is way off. Look at the budgets that go into developing those games at the huge, HUGE dev houses, the money that goes into publishing, and even moreso advertising and support, etc etc. You can't watch ESPN these days without seeing ads for AAA game titles all over the place, and those ads aren't cheap, and represent only a fraction of their overall budget. In this day and age, if one uses the right tools, channels, and methods, advertising can be done on a relatively equal scale at a fraction of the cost.

Next, look at all the games picking up help from places like Kickstarter, or *shudder* Green Light on Steam. Minecraft is probably the original success story, and look at how many copies they've sold throughout the years at 5, 10, 20$. One of the best $5 games I ever bought.

Also consider how it's possible to reach a greater number of people by making the game's realism scalable. 1946 already did a great job of that, lots of options for what one can turn on and off. Hell make an "arcade" mode for casual gamers that just want to shoot up things, and give each plane an "arcade" and "realistic" set of characteristics. Casuals whining about balance? Fine, modify the arcade settings. Wrap a layer on top of the "real" game so that the casuals will buy and enjoy it, and we can still have our honest abe, true flight SIM.

Lots of ideas. Good ideas plus the right work can yield far more benefit that the effort it takes to do so. Dozens if not hundreds of small indie games over the past year or two are living proof.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whacker (Post 492279)

It's not only Rise of Flight, look at FSX and it's predecessors.

The whole nickle and dime, "extra plane costs $50+", or maps and whatnaught are going to drive this genre even further into the dust. The reason I love and still fly IL2 1946 (though not at all the last few months) is precisely because it is modable, has almost a hundred or so planes (through mods), maps, etc. It's not the prettiest gal on the block and it's aged reasonably well but a bit rough around the edges, but I wouldn't trade it at all for any of that closed market, closed environment, DRM-crippled BS. And don't even THINK about subscription based models.

Here's an idea. Instead of charging for content, charge for FUNCTIONALITY. Start with a good solid base, and go from there. Multi-crew planes a lot more work in code? Great, start with single user aircraft and then sell that in an expansion once it's worked out and stable. Don't try and charge me $10 for a map and 3 new flyable planes. Maybe add ground vehicles in a later expansion. Helicopters? Sure. Hopping around in planes? Sure. Just don't try and nickle and dime for functionality either. I never did mind paying $20 for full on expansions to games back in the day, because most of the time you were basically paying for a big enough amount of content that it was worth it. Above all else, make it MODABLE. Release the specs for how to make planes, maps, hell make it modular so people can make their own "add-ons" without having to open up the code base which can lead to cheating issues.

To anyone defending the nickle and dime mindset, that smacks of the recording industry's broken attitude toward it's own market. The world changes and they refused to adapt, and paid the price. The groups that rolled with the changes and times were the ones that made it through with flying colors. Nickle and dime isn't the new it, or is it the right way. Uncomfortable truths, just like the fact that piracy helps gaming and sales far more than it hurts it (unless it's a AAA title), and modding brings in far more of an audience than it costs to implement.
:-)

That is kind of problematic.. After experiencing the RoF model I think it is a pretty good one. The old model has failed and I cannot help but wonder sometimes if IL2 had a similar model given all the content we got for free would MG still be around. Out of all the planeds available to me in IL2 I only fly less than 10 types on a regular basis.. We sometimes forget that the bottom line for all this is the folks who make these sims need to see a profit or else they will stop coming.. and if changing the way it s done can increase the possibility of me being able to still find a new flight sim a decade from now so be it.. When I think of how it would be if say.. IL2 was it.. if say the genre folded due to lack of pofitability and all we had was IL2 to mod from here on out.. afdter a while how would that be? Not very good IMO. The when you consider piracy.. and other facts of the business..

Quote:

Originally Posted by IceFire (Post 492298)

I think it will be fine.. One thing I like about the RoF model is when a new AC comes out you get it... so you can still make missions with it you just can't fly it without buying the cockpit. Those RoF sales are nice too.. they bring the prices down a bit.. I just hope that they get the marketing better.. and tat they put a shopping cart in the store.. Wtht eh last sale they said it would last till 12/30 .. but what they didn't say was 12/30 Russian time.. so when I got home expecting to capitalize on the sale I had missed it.. Little things like that are annoying but not show stoppers..

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bearcat (Post 492354)

I think it will be fine.. One thing I like about the RoF model is when a new AC comes out you get it... so you can still make missions with it you just can't fly it without buying the cockpit.

True, this is not really an issue and does not fragment the community. However the new Channel Map does fragment the community. it's too expensive to be commonly owned and so full-ish online servers playing the old map are suddenly empty when the mission switches over to the new Channel map. They need to solve that or the new map will not be used online much, thus decreasing its value, thus dimishing sales of the new map. A vicious circle rather than the virtuous circle they've got going for upgrading already owned and purchasing new aircraft.

Ah yes, the hated steam. The sole reason I didn't buy Clod.

if anyone missed...

here interesting post about soviet fighters in 42-43 from one of authors of this book (i'm not advise or PR, just, apparently, it's new info from archives)...

old sources have really have many little errors, understatements etc (for example, if i'm not mistaken, "yak-9 1942" began to fight only in kuban'43), so, if this is really more realistic picture of technical equipment of VVS in battle of stalingrad, it's answer, i think, why USSR could not win till 43...

experienced luftwaffe on bf 109f-4 and g-2, maybe, best german fighters according to complex characteristics, etc, against all these yaks/laggs'41-42, and, mainly, first series of la-5 with gargrot and 5 fuel tanks, low? level of command until the mid-end'43, some problems with quality (of planes, engines, weapons) etc...

it's really hard situation...

As said before 777 business model is to sell only to the rich......charge for the base sim and then charge for every plane, map, ....and who knows what else...
ROF is a very expensive sim......well done but there should be much more for the price you pay.....
IL2 1946 with all it's free updates, an incredible number of aircraft, 3rd party mods...and still excellent graphics for a 12 year old sim....
This is the masterpiece of flight sims......
I doubt if I will be able to afford Battle of Stalingrad......unless this lottery ticket pays off....

You get what you pay for. Quality costs.

IL2 mods is a unique situation where people do the mods/updates for free. Definetly not the norm.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CWMV (Post 496103)

You get what you pay for. Quality costs.

IL2 mods is a unique situation where people do the mods/updates for free. Definetly not the norm.

Agreed. And, IL-2 mods are only quasi-legal. The fact that 1C has decided not to pursue prosecution of the modders does not mean that what they do is done legally. No one should expect there to ever be a situation similar to the current state of IL-2 1946 ever again.