Everyone's Best Interests

[[TWB]80hd]

The standard operating procedure for games has been (in the past) to wipe any accrued progress made prior to release AT release (or at certain intervals along the way).

This is done for several reasons, but the main reasons are:

 

1.  As balance changes and achievement criteria change, it is generally unfair to allow those who obtained tangible and useful power via earlier easier means (either through bugs, unfinished features, or simply too easy difficulty settings) to play in the same realm as those who must grind or otherwise achieve those same objects/powers under more difficult conditions. 

 

2.  In the case of closed beta tests, it would be unfair to allow those who were fortunate enough to "make the cut" or be acquainted with someone who gave them access to said closed beta to retain items earned to use against those on opening day, etc.

 

 

Neither of these apply to BoS, however, because:

 

1.  EVERYONE must grind offline.  You will enter Multi-Player with whatever you have unlocked, it is 100% dependent upon you, the player.

 

2.  EVERYONE has had the exact same opportunity to pre-order the game for the last year+.  If you are an avid and active simmer, you've known about BoS for quite some time now.  There is no secret club you had to be in to gain early access.

 

The only logical reason to wipe our progress (as far as I can discern, and I AM after all a legend in my own mind) would be if 777 determines that the rate of exp gain/unlocks is too fast, and/or the method of obtaining said exp/unlocks is too simple (i.e., missions too easy, exploits discovered and then closed, etc)... in that case, the argument could be made that in order to protect the integrity of the game, the rate of exp gain must be reduced and/or the exploits used to advance too easily must be closed.  After doing that, it becomes clear that you must also reset everyone who benefited from the aforementioned discrepancies in the game's integrity.

 

 

That being said, my plea is thus:

 

Devs, community managers, etc:  Some of us are HOT on this game right now.  We are REALLY enjoying it... we are creating a community, growing our squads (August 2013 TWB had *2* pre-orders... we now have 10 members with the game installed, I am sure many other squads have similar stories to tell).  I have been advertising this game on other game forums (diplomatically, for me at least) and have tried to help with pushing the Metacritic reviews (it went from 6.6 to 8.6 after I began my guerrilla marketing campaign *bows*).  Because I WANT this game to succeed.  WE want this game to succeed.  

 

The problem is this:  We, as a community, were making progress.  Growing the base by adding players was one aspect simply based on word of mouth, but servers like Syndicate and Eagle's Nest wereinstrumental in this by creating meaningful missions as simple dogfighting had become stale.  The videos we've used to entice our friends were based off of gameplay on those two servers.   Things were going GREAT.

 

Then last week happened.  You locked all the unlocks.  No one could take off, and no one knew why.  Even after the word was passed to "Reset to Mission Defaults" went out, missions were still broken... why?  Because of something as simple as HE-111s Mission Defaults included things that needed to be unlocked (20mm cannons).  Why?  Because mission planners realized that players would much rather fly supply missions if their chance of success was as high as possible.  So, the server admins scrambled to re-do all of these missions.  Then Friday night happened... now, I for one was very much impressed by the campaign.  I think it's an absolutely amazing way for new players to cut their teeth before they jump in against this community of seasoned veterans.  But I am in the minority for two reasons:  I am just now (in the past two weeks or so) really getting into BoS, and secondly, I'm not that good.  This stuff is exciting for me because I haven't already shot down 500+ real players over the last year of testing.  I'm not already able to surgically remove the wing of an opponent in a vertical rolling scissors.  As far as the current community of early access goes, I am in the minority.

 

First you de-funded AND de-authorized the Sea Eagles over some comments made while emotions were riding high that night.  I get it.  You were WELL within your rights to do so, but at what cost?  You IMMEDIATELY destroyed the mainstay U.S. server.  You forced the entire player base onto Syndicate's server, which is now over capacity.  We could always count on at least one of those two servers to be up and operational.  If we're being dead honest, the majority of the player base was lashing out at you for one reason or another, and you took it out on who you could.  Again, totally within your rights, but also absolutely shooting yourselves in the foot.

 

On top of that, we are now in this "unlock limbo"... I'm your best case scenario as far as early access players go... I've paid my money, AND I enjoy the campaign... however, I am not going to do it twice.  If you can't assure me that my progress is an investment in the future, I will simply wait until that assurance exists before I invest any more time into unlocks.  I can't speak for the design/architecture of the game... I'm no developer, and I am certainly not aware of all the things that the BoS dev team is aware of, but I know for a fact that assuring early-access players that work they put in right now (and trust me, for some of these veterans, performing these single player missions is indeed WORK) is safe and permanent would re-ignite the player base.

 

Secondly, regardless of whatever was said from the =SE= camp regarding the state of the game last Friday night, revoking their dserver privileges right now is counter-productive.  Isn't de-funding sufficient?  You have a team that has proven their willingness to voluntarily put in the elbow grease required to make a successful server happen.  We NEED at least two good servers with missions.  Right now the burden of the entire player base is squarely on Syndicate's shoulders.  You can fix this right now.  

 

Lastly, we need to ALL work together to make this release as strong as possible.  The dev team has put in some insane hours and produced the most beautiful sim yet made.  I get a literal chill when I have my canopy open and my engine is warming up... I am lost in a world long since passed, an immersion so complete that every time I take off I think about the pilots that were not doing this out of choice, but out of duty and necessity.  The player base has persevered through it as well... and we ALL know what a fickle, prima donna bunch sim pilots are!  We're going to bitch about everything from how bright the sun is to what speed the slats come out.

 

Bottom line is this:  It is in ALL our best interests that this game succeeds, and a smashingly successful launch is the very best way to kick that off.

 

This means that we need all of the players to suck it up and stop being little Goldilocks this porridge-is-too-cold bitches about things like unlocks.  

 

This means that we need definitive word from the devs regarding said unlocks... because the fastest way to get people to stop bitching is to assure them that they simply need to shut up and fly, right now, to get those things permanently unlocked.

 

This means that we need EVERYONE to throw some positive reviews out there and encourage their joystick-owning friends to take the plunge.  It doesn't matter what little beef you have with the flight model or the unlocks or the sounds or whatever your personal porridge-temperature requirements may be... if there aren't people to fly with/against, this game is going to be a failure.

 

Finally, this means that we need our rock solid U.S. served back, and the only way that is going to happen is if we can all kiss and make up, put this shit behind us, and let the Sea Eagles host a dserver again, right now.  When people in the Western Hemisphere log in for the first time, click multiplayer, and all they see is a bunch of servers with 1 player, and the Syndicate with 55/55 players and 150 ping, I give you my complete sober assurance that it will be a disaster.

 

Sorry for the book, the coffee was extra strong this morning.

 

[Dakpilot]

News from Zak on progress wiping

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/11248-are-unlocks-now-permanent/?p=172878

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Edited October 6, 2014 by Dakpilot

[FZG_Merlin]

+1

[Afwastus]

I'm all for banding together and singing Kumbaya, as well as making the game better, but the developers need to meet us half-way. 

Edited October 6, 2014 by Afwastus

[Dakpilot]

Regardless of what happened at Eagles nest (best left to only the people involved)  I am surprised not to have seen a single comment about the gesture of 777 funding the server for the community in the first place...maybe I am just old fashioned

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[-NW-ChiefRedCloud]

 

The standard operating procedure for games has been (in the past) to wipe any accrued progress made prior to release AT release (or at certain intervals along the way).

This is done for several reasons, but the main reasons are:

 

1.  As balance changes and achievement criteria change, it is generally unfair to allow those who obtained tangible and useful power via earlier easier means (either through bugs, unfinished features, or simply too easy difficulty settings) to play in the same realm as those who must grind or otherwise achieve those same objects/powers under more difficult conditions. 

 

2.  In the case of closed beta tests, it would be unfair to allow those who were fortunate enough to "make the cut" or be acquainted with someone who gave them access to said closed beta to retain items earned to use against those on opening day, etc.

 

 

Neither of these apply to BoS, however, because:

 

1.  EVERYONE must grind offline.  You will enter Multi-Player with whatever you have unlocked, it is 100% dependent upon you, the player.

 

2.  EVERYONE has had the exact same opportunity to pre-order the game for the last year+.  If you are an avid and active simmer, you've known about BoS for quite some time now.  There is no secret club you had to be in to gain early access.

 

The only logical reason to wipe our progress (as far as I can discern, and I AM after all a legend in my own mind) would be if 777 determines that the rate of exp gain/unlocks is too fast, and/or the method of obtaining said exp/unlocks is too simple (i.e., missions too easy, exploits discovered and then closed, etc)... in that case, the argument could be made that in order to protect the integrity of the game, the rate of exp gain must be reduced and/or the exploits used to advance too easily must be closed.  After doing that, it becomes clear that you must also reset everyone who benefited from the aforementioned discrepancies in the game's integrity.

 

 

That being said, my plea is thus:

 

Devs, community managers, etc:  Some of us are HOT on this game right now.  We are REALLY enjoying it... we are creating a community, growing our squads (August 2013 TWB had *2* pre-orders... we now have 10 members with the game installed, I am sure many other squads have similar stories to tell).  I have been advertising this game on other game forums (diplomatically, for me at least) and have tried to help with pushing the Metacritic reviews (it went from 6.6 to 8.6 after I began my guerrilla marketing campaign *bows*).  Because I WANT this game to succeed.  WE want this game to succeed.  

 

The problem is this:  We, as a community, were making progress.  Growing the base by adding players was one aspect simply based on word of mouth, but servers like Syndicate and Eagle's Nest wereinstrumental in this by creating meaningful missions as simple dogfighting had become stale.  The videos we've used to entice our friends were based off of gameplay on those two servers.   Things were going GREAT.

 

Then last week happened.  You locked all the unlocks.  No one could take off, and no one knew why.  Even after the word was passed to "Reset to Mission Defaults" went out, missions were still broken... why?  Because of something as simple as HE-111s Mission Defaults included things that needed to be unlocked (20mm cannons).  Why?  Because mission planners realized that players would much rather fly supply missions if their chance of success was as high as possible.  So, the server admins scrambled to re-do all of these missions.  Then Friday night happened... now, I for one was very much impressed by the campaign.  I think it's an absolutely amazing way for new players to cut their teeth before they jump in against this community of seasoned veterans.  But I am in the minority for two reasons:  I am just now (in the past two weeks or so) really getting into BoS, and secondly, I'm not that good.  This stuff is exciting for me because I haven't already shot down 500+ real players over the last year of testing.  I'm not already able to surgically remove the wing of an opponent in a vertical rolling scissors.  As far as the current community of early access goes, I am in the minority.

 

First you de-funded AND de-authorized the Sea Eagles over some comments made while emotions were riding high that night.  I get it.  You were WELL within your rights to do so, but at what cost?  You IMMEDIATELY destroyed the mainstay U.S. server.  You forced the entire player base onto Syndicate's server, which is now over capacity.  We could always count on at least one of those two servers to be up and operational.  If we're being dead honest, the majority of the player base was lashing out at you for one reason or another, and you took it out on who you could.  Again, totally within your rights, but also absolutely shooting yourselves in the foot.

 

On top of that, we are now in this "unlock limbo"... I'm your best case scenario as far as early access players go... I've paid my money, AND I enjoy the campaign... however, I am not going to do it twice.  If you can't assure me that my progress is an investment in the future, I will simply wait until that assurance exists before I invest any more time into unlocks.  I can't speak for the design/architecture of the game... I'm no developer, and I am certainly not aware of all the things that the BoS dev team is aware of, but I know for a fact that assuring early-access players that work they put in right now (and trust me, for some of these veterans, performing these single player missions is indeed WORK) is safe and permanent would re-ignite the player base.

 

Secondly, regardless of whatever was said from the =SE= camp regarding the state of the game last Friday night, revoking their dserver privileges right now is counter-productive.  Isn't de-funding sufficient?  You have a team that has proven their willingness to voluntarily put in the elbow grease required to make a successful server happen.  We NEED at least two good servers with missions.  Right now the burden of the entire player base is squarely on Syndicate's shoulders.  You can fix this right now.  

 

Lastly, we need to ALL work together to make this release as strong as possible.  The dev team has put in some insane hours and produced the most beautiful sim yet made.  I get a literal chill when I have my canopy open and my engine is warming up... I am lost in a world long since passed, an immersion so complete that every time I take off I think about the pilots that were not doing this out of choice, but out of duty and necessity.  The player base has persevered through it as well... and we ALL know what a fickle, prima donna bunch sim pilots are!  We're going to bitch about everything from how bright the sun is to what speed the slats come out.

 

Bottom line is this:  It is in ALL our best interests that this game succeeds, and a smashingly successful launch is the very best way to kick that off.

 

This means that we need all of the players to suck it up and stop being little Goldilocks this porridge-is-too-cold bitches about things like unlocks.  

 

This means that we need definitive word from the devs regarding said unlocks... because the fastest way to get people to stop bitching is to assure them that they simply need to shut up and fly, right now, to get those things permanently unlocked.

 

This means that we need EVERYONE to throw some positive reviews out there and encourage their joystick-owning friends to take the plunge.  It doesn't matter what little beef you have with the flight model or the unlocks or the sounds or whatever your personal porridge-temperature requirements may be... if there aren't people to fly with/against, this game is going to be a failure.

 

Finally, this means that we need our rock solid U.S. served back, and the only way that is going to happen is if we can all kiss and make up, put this shit behind us, and let the Sea Eagles host a dserver again, right now.  When people in the Western Hemisphere log in for the first time, click multiplayer, and all they see is a bunch of servers with 1 player, and the Syndicate with 55/55 players and 150 ping, I give you my complete sober assurance that it will be a disaster.

 

Sorry for the book, the coffee was extra strong this morning.

 

 

 

+100. Well said ....

 

 

 

Regardless of what happened at Eagles nest (best left to only the people involved)  I am surprised not to have seen a single comment about the gesture of 777 funding the server for the community in the first place...maybe I am just old fashioned

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

Agreed but don't recall the funding being a topic on the forums as I read them. Any links?

 

Chief

Edited October 6, 2014 by -NW-ChiefRedCloud

[BraveSirRobin]

Regardless of what happened at Eagles nest (best left to only the people involved)  I am surprised not to have seen a single comment about the gesture of 777 funding the server for the community in the first place...maybe I am just old fashioned

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

It was a great idea, right up until the moment they shut it down.  

[Yakmaster]

Regardless of what happened at Eagles nest (best left to only the people involved)  I am surprised not to have seen a single comment about the gesture of 777 funding the server for the community in the first place...maybe I am just old fashioned

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

thats the one way to look at it,

i see devs use enthusiastic group of players to make missions for free for devs and take care of their server, as devs didn't have time to make proper missions for MP od dint think its important, and as bonus dont tell anything wrong about the game or ... 

[heinkill]

@OP, great post, true passion will hopefully get through

 

I've decided to leave the game largely alone until we hear definitively whether unlocks will be erased for launch version.

 

Just went through this with DayZ when a development reset wiped out a character of mine which had survived in zombieland for 4 gruelling months (real time). I could handle them 'dying' at the hands of a horde of zeds, but wiped out by a goatmothering patch? That was (sniff) brutal.

 

Don't want to waste all those hours unlocking my 109G mods now, only to have them wiped again in a month's time. The argument of launching with a level playing field is silly, it would be irrelevant within a week of launch.

 

+1 to #dontwipetheunlocks.

 

H

[Sokol1]

"The only logical reason to wipe our progress..."

 

There's other reason, if the unlocks are not wiped on release, in the first days/weeks/? after release the founders go to MP with "OP" planes and "Uber "weapons, but the new buyers no,  and go complaint in forums that is unfair... blablabla. Maybe a indication that tie SP unlock to MP dont make much sense... 

[Dakpilot]

Uber weapons..?

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[SYN_Bandy]

As my good friend SYN_Adam discussed, and as posted elsewhere (didn't see this thread before) unlocks come from free-2-play games where they need to keep players grinding in order to sell them a premium account (to grind faster) and to sell online advertising space.  We have paid for BoS, there is no purpose in having us grind at all. 

 

Grinding will not attract more people to BoS who are going to pay for the game anyways, in fact it is already doing the opposite to those waiting to see how it will develop.

 

If they want an immersive purposeful campaign perhaps they should look at RoF career, where you gain rank based on performance, move up and take command, manage pilots in your flight.  Right now it is pretty sterile, not even names for AI pilots you fly with. 

 

SYN_Requim's review on these BoS grinding 'missions' in the other thread is about as objective as it gets, post 21 here: http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/11273-single-player-campaign-thread-without-talking-about-unlocks/

 

Developers please take a moment to read the more informative reviews.

Edited October 6, 2014 by SYN_Bandy

[SCG_Neun]

I hope the Dev's are listening to the comments and haven't insulated themselves in the "bunker" there at design headquarters.  You can get "tunnel vision" and focus so much on a set game plan and only in hindsight shake your heads and say.....why didn't we listen.  Maybe your marketing strategy is "spot on", and we are the fools for having our doubts....or maybe we just are reacting in haste and not giving the game it's full time to evolve prior to release.  Not sure on that one.  One thing I am sure of is that all of us here from day one have wanted this game to succeed.  But I feel the impetus is moving forward,and for all intents and purposes, changing course right now for you guys...might not even be possible.  I think that's what concerns me the most....

[=SqSq=Sulaco]

+100 

The Eagles Nest is what I used to get eight of my friends from my ARMA unit to make the plunge into BoS. That may not sound like much but $480 is $480, I'm sure I'm not the only one who used promises of amazing online PvP co-op to move copies. C'mon dev's, be the bigger men here and get that server back up.

[[TWB]80hd]

Bring back the Eagle's Nest!

 

 

[216th_Peterla]

^{Very well exposed [TWB]80hd.}

[Afwastus]

As my good friend SYN_Adam discussed, and as posted elsewhere (didn't see this thread before) unlocks come from free-2-play games where they need to keep players grinding in order to sell them a premium account (to grind faster) and to sell online advertising space.  We have paid for BoS, there is no purpose in having us grind at all. 

 

Grinding will not attract more people to BoS who are going to pay for the game anyways, in fact it is already doing the opposite to those waiting to see how it will develop.

 

If they want an immersive purposeful campaign perhaps they should look at RoF career, where you gain rank based on performance, move up and take command, manage pilots in your flight.  Right now it is pretty sterile, not even names for AI pilots you fly with. 

 

SYN_Requim's review on these BoS grinding 'missions' in the other thread is about as objective as it gets, post 21 here: http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/11273-single-player-campaign-thread-without-talking-about-unlocks/

 

Developers please take a moment to read the more informative reviews.

+1

 

This and Adam's posts are right on the money.

 

Also, the North American community needs the Eagle's Nest back. At the very cusp of launch, it does nothing for the game to kill off one of only two historical, objective based servers. I love the SYN server, but I also want to see a server available in the US with good ping and it's something that potential customers are going to be looking for as well.

Edited October 6, 2014 by Afwastus

[dburne]

It amazes me that they did not expand on and enhance what they already had in ROF, for the following:

Career Mode

Graphics Settings

Controller Settings

 

Yes, the career mode in ROF is considered beta, and could use some work, however I certainly like how it is better compared to what we currently have offered in BOS.

[ducs]

The following was a post was from Pizzicato over at the SimHQ forums and while I hope he doesn't get upset with me for x-posting what he said, I think it was extremely insightful and hit the nail on the head. It's very much worth reading.

 

Also, please no one yell at me! I'm the Ctrl+V'er=)

 

Without further adieu...

___________________________________________________________________________

 

"I want to start by pointing out that the intent of this post is not to be inflammatory or disrespectful, but to try to articulate my current feelings about the direction of BoS and the (perceived) steps that have brought us to this point.

Just to provide a little context, I'm a Design Director at EA. I've been working as a designer in the games industry for over 16 years during which time I've worked on the Battlefield, Max Payne and Prototype franchises, so I like to think I have at least some reasonable understanding of game design, creative vision and product positioning.

With this in mind, I find the current state and direction of BoS extremely frustrating and schizophrenic.

The first issue that I perceive is the disconnect between the fidelity of aircraft modelling, the accuracy of the map and the structure and presentation of the SP campaign:

• When it comes to the aircraft, there's a huge emphasis on authenticity - prop pitch, mixture control, radiators, trim and all of the rest are modeled with great levels of realism. This speaks to a desire the satisfy the hardcore flight sim fans.
• When it comes to the map, there's been a huge emphasis on historical accuracy and recreating the battlefield as it was in late 1942. Once again, this speaks to the serious, historically invested player.
• When it comes to the campaign, however, the experience deviates massively from any attempt to immerse the player in the reality of that time - settling, instead, for extremely simplistic action/RPG tropes.

The end result is that it feels as though the SP campaign was designed and implemented by some third party with no understanding of what the rest of the team was looking to accomplish. The best analogy I can come up with is that it's like one half of the team building Gran Turismo cars while the other half of the team builds Mario Kart tracks for them to race on. Both approaches are entirely valid, but they can't live together cohesively in the same space. Creative vision demands that you pick one or the other and drive (no pun intended) in a clear direction.

In this regard, it seems to me that 777 don't have a clear picture of what they want the game to be and which audience they want to serve. As a result, the game ends up falling horribly between stools.

This lack of coherent creative vision also manifests itself in the bizarre requirement that MP players play through the SP campaign in order to unlock MP features. From a design perspective, there is literally zero reason to go this route outside of an arbitrary and ill-conceived determination that "We built this content, so you're damn well going to play it".

I've seen this kind of thing before at several studios and it's just really poor game design. Being a good game designer is about making the choices that deliver the best possible experience to the player - not willfully forcing your own preferences onto them.

This leads me to my final point - respect for the customer.

I think it's a reasonable assumption that the people that were willing to shell out nearly $100 for early access were the serious flight sim fans - the ones that were courted and catered to from the outset by the high-fidelity controls and accurate environment. Over the past year, everything about the various releases and communication through developer updates has suggested a reasonably simulation-centric approach. All of a sudden - mere weeks before release - it feels as though there's been a sudden "Surprise! It's a game!" unveiling of the final experience.

This, understandably, seems to have caused a great outpouring of frustration from the audience that bought into the promise of the project right from the outset. Rightly or wrongly, it feels like a bait-and-switch at the expense of the core audience. I've heard the developers explain it away as "Well, the audience has changed and no one wants to role-play real war anymore", but if that's the case, why bother with realistic aircraft and theatres? Why not just go full Ace Combat?

From my perspective, the game has gone horribly off the rails in its closing months, and it's a product of a complete lack of coherent creative vision. I'll be fascinated to see if 777 decide to do any course correcting as a result of the current negative feedback, but I'm not holding my breath.

Frankly, it's a crying shame, though. There are the seeds of real greatness in BoS, but it's currently a massive, soulless disappointment. So close and yet so very, very far..."

 

 

 

Edit1: I disagree with Pizzicato's final assessment whole-heartedly and I love this game so far, but did not want to be accused of editing a quote.

Edit2: Also 80, You sir get a +1, excellently worded and my feelings exactly.

Edited October 6, 2014 by [TWB]ducs

[=SqSq=Sulaco]

Thanks for posting that well written, informative and entirely on point post, well worth the read. +1 ^

[Afwastus]

RIP autopilot for campaign and x16 time compression.

 

x2 compression is now full speed. 

 

The developers giveth and the developers taketh away.

Edited October 6, 2014 by Afwastus

[SYN_Per]

As my good friend SYN_Adam discussed, and as posted elsewhere (didn't see this thread before) unlocks come from free-2-play games where they need to keep players grinding in order to sell them a premium account (to grind faster) and to sell online advertising space. We have paid for BoS, there is no purpose in having us grind at all.

 

Grinding will not attract more people to BoS who are going to pay for the game anyways, in fact it is already doing the opposite to those waiting to see how it will develop.

 

If they want an immersive purposeful campaign perhaps they should look at RoF career, where you gain rank based on performance, move up and take command, manage pilots in your flight. Right now it is pretty sterile, not even names for AI pilots you fly with.

 

SYN_Requim's review on these BoS grinding 'missions' in the other thread is about as objective as it gets, post 21 here: http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/11273-single-player-campaign-thread-without-talking-about-unlocks/

 

Developers please take a moment to read the more informative reviews.

Absolutely agree Bandy!

[[TWB]Pand]

+1

[MarcoRossolini]

Absolutely agree.

[RedGuard]

 

"The only logical reason to wipe our progress..."

 

There's other reason, if the unlocks are not wiped on release, in the first days/weeks/? after release the founders go to MP with "OP" planes and "Uber "weapons, but the new buyers no,  and go complaint in forums that is unfair... blablabla. Maybe a indication that tie SP unlock to MP dont make much sense... 

 

If the devs follow this logic, whenever a new pilot purchases BoS, we should then expect a total wipe 

 

Red

[AbortedMan]

If the devs follow this logic, whenever a new pilot purchases BoS, we should then expect a total wipe 

 

Red

Lolz to you, good sir. You have won yourself 1 Internets today for this comment.

[Static]

In 1981 President Ronald Reagan orders Solar Panels on the White house removed. Lol! Doh!

[Jaws2002]

At this point the developer/publisher is trying as hard as possible to make my gaming experience miserable.

 

Why is it in my best interest to see them succeed and prosper?

Edited October 7, 2014 by Jaws2002

[GhostLine06]

It seems like there has been a trend for games that were originally designed to be "full purchase/stand alone" type items to suddenly shift to the Free To Play model if they don't do well upon their release.

 

I almost wonder if devs have an F2P backup plan if BoS does not sell as well as hoped for upon initial release. It would make sense for such a niche genre game that has had so much hard work poured into it to have such a plan. Especially when additional content could be slowly released over time (such as new high fidelity planes, maps, theaters of war, etc..) instead of being released in one big shot as an expansion pack or sequel or something.

 

F2P games or games with micro-transactions are becoming more and more a standard model in the gaming industry and in a way those models make good sense from a business stand point as they can provide a steady stream of income for a company to stay relevant and expand on what is an already firm foundation. Designing a game from the ground up with the option of having it go F2P at anytime is a smart move and probably why BoS has unlocks included while the ability to use 16x and autopilot to speed up the grind have been removed. It would explain why EA player's unlocks would have to be reset at the official release, so that there is a level playing field for everyone at least at start. Come to think of it, it would also explain why unlocks can only be preformed in single player, since the MP environment contains too many variables in which a player or players might be able to cheat the system in order to advance faster, clan servers dedicated to boosting for example.

 

I remember 15 years ago when I worked IT support for a small sales force, I was told that it is always better to sell software as a service versus selling software as a complete product. The influx of F2P and micro-transactions in games seems to suggest that the gaming industry has also come to that realization, especially now (as opposed to 15 years ago) since high-speed internet has become pretty much standard for regular people and is no longer something that just big companies can afford.

 

But who knows... maybe these unlocks, and grinds, and resets make sense in a "full product" game in a way that I am just not aware of (or maybe the devs are just intelligently hedging their bets).

[Adamfp3]

It seems like there has been a trend for games that were originally designed to be "full purchase/stand alone" type items to suddenly shift to the Free To Play model if they don't do well upon their release.

 

I almost wonder if devs have an F2P backup plan if BoS does not sell as well as hoped for upon initial release. It would make sense for such a niche genre game that has had so much hard work poured into it to have such a plan. Especially when additional content could be slowly released over time (such as new high fidelity planes, maps, theaters of war, etc..) instead of being released in one big shot as an expansion pack or sequel or something.

 

F2P games or games with micro-transactions are becoming more and more a standard model in the gaming industry and in a way those models make good sense from a business stand point as they can provide a steady stream of income for a company to stay relevant and expand on what is an already firm foundation. Designing a game from the ground up with the option of having it go F2P at anytime is a smart move and probably why BoS has unlocks included while the ability to use 16x and autopilot to speed up the grind have been removed. It would explain why EA player's unlocks would have to be reset at the official release, so that there is a level playing field for everyone at least at start. Come to think of it, it would also explain why unlocks can only be preformed in single player, since the MP environment contains too many variables in which a player or players might be able to cheat the system in order to advance faster, clan servers dedicated to boosting for example.

 

I remember 15 years ago when I worked IT support for a small sales force, I was told that it is always better to sell software as a service versus selling software as a complete product. The influx of F2P and micro-transactions in games seems to suggest that the gaming industry has also come to that realization, especially now (as opposed to 15 years ago) since high-speed internet has become pretty much standard for regular people and is no longer something that just big companies can afford.

 

But who knows... maybe these unlocks, and grinds, and resets make sense in a "full product" game in a way that I am just not aware of (or maybe the devs are just intelligently hedging their bets).

If it does become f2p what will those of us that paid for it get as compensation?

I dont think they could change to f2p now.

[Trinkof]

+1 

Fully agreed with OP, we need to make this game live alltogether 

 

[GhostLine06]

If it does become f2p what will those of us that paid for it get as compensation?

I dont think they could change to f2p now.

 

We will have all of the planes. If it goes F2P (or more likely micro-transaction based) I imagine the new players would only be allowed one or maybe 2 planes. Sort of like how RoF is F2P.

[CIA_Yankee_]

I remember 15 years ago when I worked IT support for a small sales force, I was told that it is always better to sell software as a service versus selling software as a complete product. The influx of F2P and micro-transactions in games seems to suggest that the gaming industry has also come to that realization, especially now (as opposed to 15 years ago) since high-speed internet has become pretty much standard for regular people and is no longer something that just big companies can afford.

 

But who knows... maybe these unlocks, and grinds, and resets make sense in a "full product" game in a way that I am just not aware of (or maybe the devs are just intelligently hedging their bets).

 

Oh, there's no "seems to suggest"... micro-transanctions and F2P is the most successful business model for gaming right now, and with good reason. Some see this as a bad thing, but I do not. It allows players who have more money than time to help finance games for those with more time than money. It balances out and the end result is a larger game population (there are pitfalls, like pay 2 win, of course, but that doesn't seem to be the case here).

 

Even if they were to apply that model to BoS (pay for additional airplanes, pay for faster unlocks, whatever), it's not like our current money would be wasted. Likely F2P would have fewer planes, slower unlocks, and of course we get early access.

 

That said, I agree with the sentiment in this thread. We need to help the game become a success. The devs aren't our enemies, even if they make choices we may not like. Ultimately the goal is to end up with an excellent new sim, and _everyone_ wants that to happen.

[=SqSq=Sulaco]

With an entry fee of $54.99 and $94.99 skewing the gameplay to promote microtransactions would be a disgusting move at this point.

 

Don't get me wrong, I want to support the devs but there's a limit.

[GhostLine06]

In general I have no problem with an F2P/micro-transaction model for this game, especially if it brings us more content down the road, I just wanted to point out why "unlocks" might be in the game.

[[TWB]80hd]

Honestly, I just want to see multiplayer missions and a lot of players online all the time.

[Br00ns]

In general I have no problem with an F2P/micro-transaction model for this game, especially if it brings us more content down the road, I just wanted to point out why "unlocks" might be in the game.

 

I don't have a problem with a RoF/DCS-ish model either, with the HUGE caveat that it has to be fair, transparent and not outrageously pricey. The core of the RoF model is perfect, for me - you get the entirety of the game's playable content and two fun, useful aircraft for free. (Hell, you could even charge maybe $10 or $15 and get away with it, as far as I'm concerned.) Want a Dr.I to satisfy that Red Baron impulse? All yours, $6.25, or even less if it's on sale. Sure, the latest new planes cost a little more, as do the big ones, but what the hell, right?

 

Where this starts running into trouble is when some for-pay products have other for-pay dependencies - some planes really need the sights in their particular field pack upgrades to be effective, so you're charged an additional $1-2 for the privilege. It's not the end of the world, but it feels deceptive on some levels. I'm OK with them selling the St. Mihiel campaign (it's like an expansion pack, right?), but it's problematic, for me, to sell the map you need to play it separately, for an extra $17. And we're rapidly heading into mobile-game money suction territory with custom sidearms and different colored scarves. I mean, come on.

 

DCS is a lot simpler, even if it's also a lot more expensive - every big upgrade pack, whether it's a single fully modeled aircraft or a ground-forces add-on, is essentially its own product, and is priced accordingly. Frequent sales aside, modules are released at maybe $40 or $50, and become cheaper over time. No scarves, no missiles missing unless you buy the add-on pack, no map to buy separately from the campaign, which you also had to pay for. 

 

For BOS, however, the point is largely moot - everybody here has paid either $50 or $90 already, on the understanding that we're getting either the full game or the full game minus the FW-190 and La-5. If they came out tomorrow and offered a more in-depth campaign for an extra $20, I'd feel cheated. (I might buy it anyway, but I sure as hell wouldn't be happy about it.)

 

In a way, this whole process is a pretty good cautionary tale for sim fans pestering developers to release stuff on time - if you REALLY want them to commit to a release date, you're going to get whatever they've gotten done by then, even if it's not much like the product they wanted to create or the one you wanted to buy. I'd be happy for them to delay the release if it meant a campaign more like the one they outlined earlier in the process, but I've already got the game. And more to the point, they've already got my money. What incentive do they have to cater to me?

 

So by that logic, heck; maybe it WOULD be a good thing if they microtransacted us a real campaign sometime in the future. It might be the only way we get one. A comparatively large proportion of BoS' target market already owns the game via pre-order, so I question whether the official release date is going to be that big a deal.

 

P.S., in regard to "let's all band together and make BoS' release great" - I appreciate the positive sentiments, but honestly, grow up. Like I said, we've already paid our money for the game, so the idea that we can vote with our feet in any kind of meaningful sense is ridiculous. Should we be less than honest about the fact that BoS still isn't looking quite like the game we paid for, in the hopes of getting more people to buy it, for some reason? 

 

Please don't misunderstand - I think, in terms of looks and core gameplay, that BoS is far and away the best WW2 flight sim I've ever had the pleasure of playing, and I genuinely hope it's wildly successful. But it's also still very, very rough around the edges, and it's asinine to expect that a few true-believer pre-order customers are going to do anything to help it appeal to new buyers. Carping and pissy behavior on the forums aren't what will keep a larger audience away - the fact that the game is fantastically difficult, lacks effective training, and doesn't have a universally compelling single-player component will do that all by itself.

[[TWB]80hd]

 

P.S., in regard to "let's all band together and make BoS' release great" - I appreciate the positive sentiments, but honestly, grow up. Like I said, we've already paid our money for the game, so the idea that we can vote with our feet in any kind of meaningful sense is ridiculous. Should we be less than honest about the fact that BoS still isn't looking quite like the game we paid for, in the hopes of getting more people to buy it, for some reason? 

 

Please don't misunderstand - I think, in terms of looks and core gameplay, that BoS is far and away the best WW2 flight sim I've ever had the pleasure of playing, and I genuinely hope it's wildly successful. But it's also still very, very rough around the edges, and it's asinine to expect that a few true-believer pre-order customers are going to do anything to help it appeal to new buyers. Carping and pissy behavior on the forums aren't what will keep a larger audience away - the fact that the game is fantastically difficult, lacks effective training, and doesn't have a universally compelling single-player component will do that all by itself.

 

This is certainly one way to look at it.

 

In a game that is THIS niche, the sentiments of the community will unequivocally make or break it in the long run.  It may not massively affect sales at release, but it will be the absolute final word in whether or not this game has any multi-player presence a month or two after release.