Why not pay every month to play COD!

[5./JG27.Farber]

addman you seem to think that bucket loads of cash magic's up new content... It doesn't. Some one has to sit behind a computer and make it... Do you think they are sitting on tons of stuff and just not giving us it because they dont have enough cash?

[Osprey]

No Farber I think he is saying that they need cash in order to run and continue to make content.

One thing seriously overlooked here is the detail in the models today, not only graphically but behaviorally too. The point is they all take way more man hours to make and that means higher costs - but there aren't more people buying the game and relative spending power has actually dropped in the past 10 years. Everyone here wanting sequels and free patches with content is dreaming if they think they'll get the 200+ aircraft which the first series ended up with. You have to face up to the fact that you have to pay or development stops. The problem I have is that I see people complaining about how they spent £2000 on a supercomputer and somehow see it as 1C's job to deliver something worthy of it - so the failure of a £40 game is the tipping point for them - they think they have paid enough. If you join a golf club the membership fee and quality of course has no bearing on the cost of your golf clubs, bag, balls and shoes!

When you add it up £40 for a game is remarkably cheap for the hours of entertainment = you don't get that in any other hobby I know of. I think there needs to be more to secure the longevity of the series this time, DLC is the only thing I can think of right now which avoids the truly awful subscription. Just because 777 have lost sight of producing a testament to the Great War air fighting it doesn't mean that 1C have to.

If all else fails let the modders make it

[addman]

Originally Posted by Osprey

No Farber I think he is saying that they need cash in order to run and continue to make content.

One thing seriously overlooked here is the detail in the models today, not only graphically but behaviorally too. The point is they all take way more man hours to make and that means higher costs - but there aren't more people buying the game and relative spending power has actually dropped in the past 10 years. Everyone here wanting sequels and free patches with content is dreaming if they think they'll get the 200+ aircraft which the first series ended up with. You have to face up to the fact that you have to pay or development stops. The problem I have is that I see people complaining about how they spent £2000 on a supercomputer and somehow see it as 1C's job to deliver something worthy of it - so the failure of a £40 game is the tipping point for them - they think they have paid enough. If you join a golf club the membership fee and quality of course has no bearing on the cost of your golf clubs, bag, balls and shoes!

When you add it up £40 for a game is remarkably cheap for the hours of entertainment = you don't get that in any other hobby I know of. I think there needs to be more to secure the longevity of the series this time, DLC is the only thing I can think of right now which avoids the truly awful subscription. Just because 777 have lost sight of producing a testament to the Great War air fighting it doesn't mean that 1C have to.

If all else fails let the modders make it

This is EXACTLY what I'm saying, wish I could have put it like this myself, thank you Osprey. Forget freebies like the old IL-2 series, development costs have skyrocketed the last 5-6 years. We were spoiled with IL-2 and the freebies that came with it. As I said before, I wouldn't mind getting free content in patches but expecting it is just being naive/ignorant.

[ElAurens]

With the complexity of the 3D models in this series, I have serious doubts that the modders will have any more success in delivering quality aircraft in a more timely manner than the dev team can.

It's a lot more complicated than jamming a Heinkle cockpit in a B29 and calling it good.

Once again I point to the B-24 that Monguse and friends are developing for '46. It has taken two years to almost get this to the point where it will be up to a standard that can be used in the old sim.

[addman]

Originally Posted by ElAurens

With the complexity of the 3D models in this series, I have serious doubts that the modders will have any more success in delivering quality aircraft in a more timely manner than the dev team can.

It's a lot more complicated than jamming a Heinkle cockpit in a B29 and calling it good.

Once again I point to the B-24 that Monguse and friends are developing for '46. It has taken two years to almost get this to the point where it will be up to a standard that can be used in the old sim.

One may assume it would take considerably longer for third-party/modders to make a B-24 at CloD level of detail so I don't think they are the solution either. I guess more resources (programmers, 3D modelers etc.) for the development team would do the trick but more resources costs more money, now how about that DLC?

[ElAurens]

We already have DLCs, they are called expansions.

You know, like, "Forgotten Battles", "Pacific Fighters", "Battle for Moscow".

Sorry addman, but I cannot support the RoF business model in any way shape or form. If the development team goes this way, I'm out.

I'm bloody serious.

[addman]

Originally Posted by ElAurens

We already have DLCs, they are called expansions.

You know, like, "Forgotten Battles", "Pacific Fighters", "Battle for Moscow".

Sorry addman, but I cannot support the RoF business model in any way shape or form. If the development team goes this way, I'm out.

I'm bloody serious.

I wish that they would call it DLC then and charge for it as such. I respect your opinion mate. The RoF handles their DLC their way, maybe MG would have better judgment? I don't know, I just wish we had more content.

[5./JG27.Farber]

Originally Posted by addman

One may assume it would take considerably longer for third-party/modders to make a B-24 at CloD level of detail so I don't think they are the solution either. I guess more resources (programmers, 3D modelers etc.) for the development team would do the trick but more resources costs more money, now how about that DLC?

No thanks. Or a smaller team can take a little longer and for less money.

Who has decided 1c dont have the funds?

[addman]

Originally Posted by 5./JG27.Farber

No thanks. Or a smaller team can take a little longer and for less money.

Who has decided 1c dont have the funds?

Yes but longer time means more costs so it's +-0 anyway. Ehr...I don't have any insight in their financial standings so I wouldn't know. I'm just saying the game needs to be profitable, to be profitable it needs sales, to gain sales you need to sell something and I'm not sure an expansion pack/sequel every 1 or 2 years for a very niche game is enough to keep it going. Now I'm in speculation territory. I'm not in charge there anyway so I guess theres no need to worry for those who doesn't want DLC, right?

[ga_332]

Greate answer Gents verry interesting, could be fun to put up a vote box in here any one that could make one (I do not know how) lets keep it simpel and just say, (if better make a new post linked to this post)

1. Would pay for IL2 on a monthly bases, more then 10$ each month.

2. Would pay for IL2 on a monthly bases, less then 10$ each month.

3. No way, only pay for Main release and for Sequels or bigger updates.