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

[OB1]

Originally Posted by slm

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

[Chivas]

Originally Posted by OB1

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.

[OB1]

Originally Posted by Chivas

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]

Originally Posted by OB1

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.