Jump to content

Discussion about DCS:WW2 goes here.


Recommended Posts

The kickstarter itself is already bringing back bad memories. Changing goals midway through the kickstarter, misjudging their target audience, and premature demos using the previous engine that won't be the release engine and planes already created on the current engine. That's, wow, that's exactly like the CoD talk up,  and development, summed up in less than 30 days.

Changing goals midway really created a peak in Pledges per Day.($8,565)

dailypledges.png

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The kickstarter itself is already bringing back bad memories. Changing goals midway through the kickstarter, misjudging their target audience, and premature demos using the previous engine that won't be the release engine and planes already created on the current engine. That's, wow, that's exactly like the CoD talk up,  and development, summed up in less than 30 days.

 

 

Im feeling the same thing, they had a whole campaign ready, but have scrapped it and started again... come on....really?... in the middle of the KS?

 

Im filing that under "epilepsy filter"

 

Lets see what Monday brings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it only me that senses the irony of BOS being lauded as the second coming of IL2 while everything that the actual creators of the original try to do is kicked in the face?

No mate. It isn't only you. In a couple of years, we'll be able to look back and make an assessment.

 

(@ Furbs - 'Tree, Falstaff and Furbs....ya know?' - Yes mate, but please don't start before it's even had a chance to begin).

Edited by Dutch
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

People who ask for super-polished presentations and a professional demeanor as well as Hollywood-quality preview movies churned out every three days just don't have a realistic view of hi-fidelity flight sim development. Did you notice that even Microsoft, with all their billions, pulled the plug on "Flight"? Do you think flight sims rake in the dough like GTA V? - Come on!

 

The nutjobs making hi-fidelity flight sims are nerds with a love of flight and simming who are trying to get projuects up and running with shoestring budgets. They have no guarantee of anything like a good income or financial stability. Their main reward is to give wings to all the dreamers who want to be WWII aces in the virtual world.

 

Pls don't expect super-polished efforts from them... Give them a bit of slack and understanding, and try not to hold them to standards that are just unrealistic.  

 

I cant see why we shouldn't, everything that has been done by BOS's development team has been polished and professional to a pretty high level.

 

This KS has been planned for months, everything SHOULD have been polished and well thought out and ready to go, not changed, rearranged and scrapped halfway through.

The product lead should not be video editing late into the night on his own in a scramble to get something out that should of been ready BEFORE the KS got going, leaving Luthier to over see the forums and be there to answer questions and keep the updates coming at the right time.

 

Its daja vu all over again.

Edited by =BKHZ=Furbs
Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant see why we shouldn't, everything that has been done by BOS's development team has been polished and professional to a pretty high level.

Is it the same budget?Is it the same approach?Had they both had a bad reputation after a greedy publisher forced them to release an unfinished product with no regards to the consequences? I think not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant see why we shouldn't, everything that has been done by BOS's development team has been polished and professional to a pretty high level.

1CGS have the 1C financial clout behind them just as Maddox games used to do. RRG games look as though they're trying to work out of someone's front room, hence the kickstarter. Get some perspective mate, please. Fancy videos and marketing spiel don't make a good product.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1CGS have the 1C financial clout behind them just as Maddox games used to do. RRG games look as though they're trying to work out of someone's front room, hence the kickstarter. Get some perspective mate, please. Fancy videos and marketing spiel don't make a good product.

 

So dont RRG have DCS and ED backing them?

Ease up on each other, and on Luthier. Keep all posts constructive, and avoid points scoring comments.

 

 

Sorry, your right...its late and im tired, delete my posts if im over stepping the mark.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So dont RRG have DCS and ED backing them?

They have their support. I very much doubt that DCS and ED have the financial clout that 1C have. DCS and ED are themselves pretty small compared to 1C from what I can gather. But we can speculate all we like. Maybe the whole kickstarter thing is simply to judge the level of public support for RRG and Messrs. Maddox and Shevchenko after the debacle of the Cliffs of Dover release, and the lack of support it got from certain quarters, mentioning no names.

 

Maybe there are investors in the wings waiting to pump money into the project as long as it reaches it's kickstarter goal. Maybe I'm talking complete rubbish and all Mr Shevchenko will get is what is pumped into the kickstarter. But maybe given the history, those blokes deserve all the support they can get, including yours, Tree's and whoever the other bloke was. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The kickstarter itself is already bringing back bad memories. Changing goals midway through the kickstarter, misjudging their target audience, and premature demos using the previous engine that won't be the release engine and planes already created on the current engine. That's, wow, that's exactly like the CoD talk up,  and development, summed up in less than 30 days.

I just read the latest update. I am truly agog that the campaign for a process heavy flight simulation was to be aimed purely at the uninitiated. Surely that can't be true.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1CGS have the 1C financial clout behind them just as Maddox games used to do.

Perhaps it comes down to motivation of the developers more than budget. Maddox Games did very little to promote their product or educate the community with the same backing.

From where do you get the word "purely"? Its DCS we are talking about guys.

Ah sorry! This bit:

 

"we've had a whole campaign written out and put together. As the kickstarter got started we realized it was all wrong, since we were doing something for people new to flight sims, expecting an influx of people who have never flown a plane in their life"

"Now that we've realized that this project can only succeed if we work with the dedicated flight sim fans"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps it comes down to motivation of the developers more than budget. Maddox Games did very little to promote their product or educate the community with the same backing.

And maybe they spent their money on more important things than marketing.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Something" :) Its DCS we are talking about, once again.If you still want to believe that he teamed up with Eagle Dynamics to make a Warthunder competitor then be my guest.

 

Back on topic, after Mysticpuma's video  there has been a good increase in backers.

Edited by royraiden
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don't introduce facts to interrupt a good lynchin.  ;)

 

Since you bring up facts. My entire post is accurate, that's exactly how CloD went from it's announcement to it's release.

 

Additionally, a single spike which was followed by several days more of half the backing than the previous days - that doesn't say much for his changing goals (again) half way through.

Edited by FuriousMeow
Link to post
Share on other sites

If the KS campaign succeeds, and DCS:WW2 gets released, I at least hope they will improve the Net Code and the optimization. DCS is terribad in multiplayer right now (warping, bad performance).

Also, the B-17 at 375 000$ but the Me.410 at 1 000 000$ ? Duh.. I don't understand people sometimes.  :mellow:

Edited by Corsair
Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it the same budget?Is it the same approach?Had they both had a bad reputation after a greedy publisher forced them to release an unfinished product with no regards to the consequences? I think not.

 

What, so 1C should have kept funding the development of CLoD for umpteen more weeks / months / years until the development team finally got it right? What was it, a 7-year development time for CLoD as it was? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since you bring up facts. My entire post is accurate, that's exactly how CloD went from it's announcement to it's release.

 

Additionally, a single spike which was followed by several days more of half the backing than the previous days - that doesn't say much for his changing goals (again) half way through.

CloD didn't start from a kickstarter.

And that's NOT a single spike. With the Update #2 announced that day, Backers per day was increased from the day before's 52 to 70(34.62% UP), and the Pledges per day was increased from $3,903 to $8,565(119.45%). These mean the change increased both the number of backers and their average pledges.

dailybackers.png

dailypledges.png

 

 

Stretch Goals and Rewards Updated
Update #2 · Sep 13, 2013 · 13 comments
Edited by =CHN=Crash
Link to post
Share on other sites

Since you bring up facts. My entire post is accurate, that's exactly how CloD went from it's announcement to it's release.

 

Additionally, a single spike which was followed by several days more of half the backing than the previous days - that doesn't say much for his changing goals (again) half way through.

Its quite simple really, the development read our posts, and could see what people would prefer.  Now do they change course, and have people say they don't know what they're doing,  or stay the course and have the same people say they aren't listening to the community.   There only solution is to listen to the community, use the logical input, ignore those that that see everything in a negative light, and deliver a good product,

Link to post
Share on other sites

CloD didn't start from a kickstarter.

And that's NOT a single spike. With the Update #2 announced that day, Backers per day was increased from the day before's 52 to 70(34.62% UP), and the Pledges per day was increased from $3,903 to $8,565(119.45%). These mean the change increased both the number of backers and their average pledges.

dailybackers.png

dailypledges.png

 

Those values are clearly declining in monetary numbers. One DAY it increased briefly, then slumped back down to half each day as opposed to the days prior to the goals change. The goals update was the 12th, not the 13th.

 

In any event, yes - the KS mirrors CloD's development.

 

This is exactly how CloD went:

 

Changing <engines> midway through the <development>, misjudging their target audience, and premature demos using the previous engine that won't be the release engine and planes already created on the current engine.

 

Odd, how only two words had to be changed to make it slightly different from how this KS has gone.

Edited by FuriousMeow
Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it only me that senses the irony of BOS being lauded as the second coming of IL2 while everything that the actual creators of the original try to do is kicked in the face?

  

 

Kicked in the face ...isn't that a little .. dramatic?

 

1CGS have the 1C financial clout behind them just as Maddox games used to do. RRG games look as though they're trying to work out of someone's front room, hence the kickstarter. Get some perspective mate, please. Fancy videos and marketing spiel don't make a good product.

Are you sure about that? I don't think that is quite right.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1CGS have the 1C financial clout behind them just as Maddox games used to do. RRG games look as though they're trying to work out of someone's front room, hence the kickstarter. Get some perspective mate, please. Fancy videos and marketing spiel don't make a good product.

Amen to the "Fancy videos" bit. You might have heard of these guys, they have an excellent video team;

Edited by [JG2]Creepermoss
Link to post
Share on other sites

Those values are clearly declining in monetary numbers. One DAY it increased briefly, then slumped back down to half each day as opposed to the days prior to the goals change. The goals update was the 12th, not the 13th.

 

In any event, yes - the KS mirrors CloD's development.

 

This is exactly how CloD went:

 

Changing <engines> midway through the <development>, misjudging their target audience, and premature demos using the previous engine that won't be the release engine and planes already created on the current engine.

 

Odd, how only two words had to be changed to make it slightly different from how this KS has gone.

12th? 

Stretch Goals and Rewards Updated
Update #2 · Sep 13, 2013 · 13 comments

And I think these updates are good. But, anyway, it's your freedom to believe those updates are bad. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant see why we shouldn't, everything that has been done by BOS's development team has been polished and professional to a pretty high level.

 

 

Can someone remind me of the vast 777 portfolio of games produced from scratch? sure they have done a wonderful job since inheriting a ready made game engine, a bit like TF are doing for CoD.

granted it seems they are doing good work bringing ROF 2.0 WWII to life.

 

I think Luthier has misread the market because he has seen how much interest BOS has created from the War Thunder end of the market, but when you enter from the DCS end of the scale then that is really not your target audience, still can't blame a guy for trying.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone remind me of the vast 777 portfolio of games produced from scratch? sure they have done a wonderful job since inheriting a ready made game engine, a bit like TF are doing for COD.

777 Studios took over ownership from Neoqb, however the development team has been the same throughout.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not in the slightest sadly.

Well, it's the BoS board, and as with every other board/product, there are fanbois who will neither tolerate critics nor allow praise for anything else. While they usually are noisy, their voice shouldn't be mistaken for the voice of the entire community. That said, I guess a little scepticism is justified, or at least justifyable.

 

Up to now, after a good two weeks, there are about one and a half thousand backers. Prerelease of BoS is running for a lot longer than the DCS kickstarter, with a lot more info available, and maybe two or three times as many copies were sold. It appears that this is pretty much the support you can expect from a niche market, sad but true.

Edited by JtD
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

My problem to the DCS graphics are i am loosing view in P51 on an oponent at a distance of 300m+, what makes dogfighting for me useless of course. A proper working mp is a must be in todays time ,which is not atm.

Another issue is that the project presentation is again far off looking professional.

I dont know about the internas of Clodo and what happened.However the disaster got a personal projection on the lead dev, so i am not sure if it was smart to use the same one for community contacts and advertisement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

777 Studios took over ownership from Neoqb, however the development team has been the same throughout.

 

ROF pre 777 is hardly a shining example of getting things right, the pedestal has to come down a few feet.

 

Well, it's the BoS board, and as with every other board/product, there are fanbois who will neither tolerate critics nor allow praise for anything else. While they usually are noisy, their voice shouldn't be mistaken for the voice of the entire community. That said, I guess a little scepticism is justified, or at least justifyable.

 

Up to now, after a good two weeks, there are about one and a half thousand backers. Prerelease of BoS is running for a lot longer than the DCS kickstarter, with a lot more info available, and maybe two or three times as many copies were sold. It appears that this is pretty much the support you can expect from a niche market, sad but true.

 

True, at least the kickstarter is only a few hundred short of that figure in backers after just 2 weeks, but it never ceases to amaze me how members of such a niche market feel spoiled enough not to be relatively grateful for anybody trying to bring something to the table despite perceived management skills, just give support and let it mature.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ROF pre 777 is hardly a shining example of getting things right, the pedestal has to come down a few feet.

 

 

True, at least the kickstarter is only a few hundred short of that figure in backers after just 2 weeks, but it never ceases to amaze me how members of such a niche market feel spoiled enough not to be relatively grateful for anybody trying to bring something to the table despite perceived management skills, just give support and let it mature.

 

Anyway, I'll just leave this here, I'm off to go flying in a Stearman, see you in a few hours.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it's the BoS board, and as with every other board/product, there are fanbois who will neither tolerate critics nor allow praise for anything else. While they usually are noisy, their voice shouldn't be mistaken for the voice of the entire community. That said, I guess a little scepticism is justified, or at least justifyable.

 

Up to now, after a good two weeks, there are about one and a half thousand backers. Prerelease of BoS is running for a lot longer than the DCS kickstarter, with a lot more info available, and maybe two or three times as many copies were sold. It appears that this is pretty much the support you can expect from a niche market, sad but true.

Yes, I think all of us including backers have some scepticism.

 

Exactly my thoughts. Both dev parties need to react to this situation and long before the release.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Heres the thing...

 

If everyone who will support DCS:1944 regardless of anyones perceived ideas of brilliance or uselessness has already done so that leaves who to support it further?...

 

I have been waiting for more tangable information before sticking down the money (I already support DCS since pre-Blackshark and have most of the modules) and I am sure there are many like me....but how many?....the same number again?....

 

Then that leaves the "haters" and the "hard done by" who will not support another thing these guys are linked to no matter how good it is.

 

So, my point is....how much more support is there post KS for this product?....is there an avalanche about to happen?, or is it double whats there.....that aint enough to bring this to any stretch goal in the distance!

Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Nielsen 2008 study:

The PC title IL-2 Sturmovik 1946 had the highest average minutes per week for a given player, but only had 6,978 unique players. World of Warcraft come in at a close second with 744 minutes of average play per week per player and a staggering 1,201,848 male players in the U.S.

5 years old study, but I guess the main idea is still valid. The "hard core" of the flight sim community is tiny, compared to popular gaming titles. In 2008, we were at 0.6% of what the then most popular game was. You can only be commercially successful if you make a product good enough to attract occasional players, but occasional players don't fund kickstarters. They come in after the thing has been published, and praised by international media.

Edited by JtD
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

War Thunder is where the money is.Make of that what you will.

A couple of stats from wiki. No, I struggle to believe it as well, but there you go.Anyone willing to attempt a hi fidelity DCs type sim in this market had my respect.

 

'July 25, 2013 - War Thunder reaches 3 million players.'

 

'The average size of maps in the game currently range from approximately 65 km x 65 km to 100 km x 100 km to 200 km x 200 km'

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...