Jump to content
StG77_Roo5ter

A Reasonable Plan to Expand the Player Base

Recommended Posts

Man's desire to fly has been around for ever, same is true of competition..

 

But, those desires can be filled by less realistic games that don't require you to know let alone understand the history behind it..

 

For example, plenty of games out there with flying carpets and or space ships shooting at alien cat pilots

I think the flying is more important than the history in the short run. And the flying in BOS is good. This game/sim is FUN. The flying will lead to the history in the long run. It is a different path than us old timers. We did it the other way around due to our proximity to the events.

Edited by HerrMurf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the flying is more important than the history in the short run.

Bingo..

 

Now combined that with the 'short' attention span ala sound byte world we live in..

 

And it is no surprise that x-genns op for the low learning curve flying games over the high learning curve and history lessons! ;)

 

This game/sim is FUN. The flying will lead to the history in the long run. It is a different path than us old timers. We did it the other way around due to our proximity to the events.

Agreed

 

x-gen has the cart before the horse! ;)

 

I just don't know if the history will come

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am still convinced that a decent well structured SP campaign with a proper career mode would encourage more people to play. As much as I enjoy this game, the SP experience is sorely lacking. Maybe if we had an absorbing and interesting SP element that could be the stepping stone to MP numbers?  

I agree, particularly with the current flight sim crowd. However, the next generation is an almost exlusively online crowd. All of the six and seven year olds at my home rink play Minecraft with or against each other online - and they sit across the table from each other for hours. The complexity is there, the competition is there, the creativity and patience as well.

 

That is the future crowd Loft and company are seeking inroads with along with the current 20 somethings. It led to the folly of the unlocks but I don't think the dev's hope for future sim pilots is misplaced. We need to get a younger crowd on board or the genre will die. I think a user made SP campaign will fill the ranks again but it will only cover the next five or ten years of flight simming. Without drawing a new generation in  this wonderful hobby is dying on the vine.

 

Bingo..

 

Now combined that with the 'short' attention span ala sound byte world we live in..

 

And it is no surprise that x-genns op for the low learning curve flying games over the high learning curve and history lessons! ;)

 

Agreed

 

x-gen has the cart before the horse! ;)

 

I just don't know if the history will come

 

Only way to know for sure is to get em flying.  I think you are misunderstanding the current generations sense of self entitlement with attention span. I see the self entitlement at every turn. On the other hand, I see huge swaths of kids playing Minecraft for hours on end and learning from each other as well as from YouTube. The attention span is there. We need to tap into it.

 

Now how do we do that? What is your counter proposal to the OP?

Edited by HerrMurf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

History will come at least here in in Europe because its easy for us to tell the kids : you see "that" place it's where "this" happened.

 

My son who's 12 knows perfectly that the village where he's at school was a shelter for kids of of his age during WW2

 

And for now he likes the game but find it a bit difficult...

Edited by UF_Luny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But we gotta try, right? Just throwing up your hands and saying young people suck isn't gonna get it done either.

+10

"I do not believe in a fate that will fall upon us no matter what we do.  I do believe in a fate that will fall upon us if we do nothing." 

 

- some guy someone my age (29) shouldn't know about

Agreed 100%

 

I think the flight sim devs figured it out the hard way..

 

And that is due to realistic flight sims typically have a steep learning curve.. and the younger x-gen generation is not all that into realistic anything IMHO..

 

Any gaming is an escape (read fantasy) for the user..

 

For the older crowd, escaping to pretend you were a WWII fighter pilot was in and of itself an escape..

 

But, for the x-gen crowd, where most don't know about WWII let alone who won it..

 

Pretending to be a WWII fighter pilot is NOT an escape for them..

 

Pretending to be a DJ spinning tunes in SimCity is or pretending to be a thug basket ball or baseball player or pretending to be some sort of wana-be gangster driving fast cars and slapping hos around is an escape for them..

 

So, sadly I don't see the flight sim ranks getting bigger with time, I see them getting smaller with time..

 

Except for some of the World of Tanks and or World of Warplanes type of un-realistic gaming, where the learning curve is low and no one even will notice if the P-51 has German markings on it! ;)

 

Bring in a First Person Shooter (infantry) aspect to this game, combine it with an actual armor sim (that you would pay for each module or tank), and bring all that, wadded up together, onto our maps in a real time battlefield of sim quality.  Each aircraft, each tank, can be purchased in packs or by themselves.  The infantry aspect of the game will be the free part, plus a starter vehicle for each category.  Basically, bring Call of Duty into a real, quality, combined arms sim.

 

While the "Ball-in-Cup" (seriously, LMFAO) crowd gets their instant gratification by the infantry part, those who dare take to the armor or skies will be whittled down to only the truly dedicated, and that will increase the numbers.  While many will try and be fun kills for us, people who wouldn't normally be exposed to this sort of sim would be.  If done the way Sony did Planetside and Planetside 2, it could be really profitable.  Factions in those games make real armies with infantry, mechanized infantry, tank companies, and air support rolling blitzkrieg style across these gigantic maps conquering territory.  The more territory you have, the more resources your faction gets, the more vehicles you are allowed to have on your side.  So it can be quite frustrating and quite fun.

 

There are so many small particulars and specifics that would need to be worked out, but as a base plan for a free to play game with the potential to make massive amounts of profit...I think that could work.  It would be a massive undertaking, but if someone were to produce this in a World War Two setting, then... $$$ 

 

Just my two cents though, and feel free to disagree.

 

\\//

Edited by [JG2]volc0m

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bring in a First Person Shooter (infantry) aspect to this game, combine it with an actual armor sim (that you would pay for each module or tank), and bring all that, wadded up together, onto our maps in a real time battlefield of sim quality.  Each aircraft, each tank, can be purchased in packs or by themselves.  The infantry aspect of the game will be the free part, plus a starter vehicle for each category.  Basically, bring Call of Duty into a real, quality, combined arms sim.

It's already been done, and is struggling to stay in business.. it's called Aces High

 

Granted, it is pay to play, but, it is cheap, if a kid was 'insterested' in it, Im sure he could whine and stomp his feet and fall down rolling around like so many kids do today in public to get his parents to 'buy' it for him.. Where as had a kid done that when I was a kid, all he would have got was his pants pulled down in public and a belt across his A! ;)

Edited by ACEOFACES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only way to know for sure is to get em flying.

Yup, but time machines have not been invented yet! ;)

 

I think you are misunderstanding the current generations sense of self entitlement with attention span. I see the self entitlement at every turn.

Disagree

 

On the other hand, I see huge swaths of kids playing Minecraft for hours on end and learning from each other as well as from YouTube. The attention span is there. We need to tap into it.

I think your confusing attention span with the ability to do mindless things for hours on end! ;)

 

To fully apricate a WWII flight sim, IMHO you have to know there was a war called WWII..

 

Pretending to be a wizard where you cast spells and there is no real wrong answer is alot easier to do they pick up a history book

 

Now how do we do that? What is your counter proposal to the OP?

I wish I knew..

 

Because understanding history is necessary for life in general, not just games!

 

Hence the old saying of know it or your doomed to repeate it..

 

And what with the news these days.. I fear the world is repeating allot of 'things' and most don't even realize it..

 

But, that is another topic for another forum, just wanted to highlight the need to know your history

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's already been done, and is struggling to stay in business.. it's called Aces High

 

Granted, it is pay to play, but, it is cheap, if a kid was 'insterested' in it, Im sure he could whine and stomp his feet and fall down rolling around like so many kids do today in public to get his parents to 'buy' it for him.. Where as had a kid done that when I was a kid, all he would have got was his pants pulled down in public and a belt across his A! ;)

Yes, and so did WW2OL and its struggling too now. The point is it isn't that easy for a kid to stomp his feet and get a recurring monthly fee for those games. But warthunder? World of tanks? Free to play and thriving. And that is the difference I was proposing, a free to play game.

 

In reality I say for this games immediate future, make it free with one aircraft per side.

 

But in a perfect world and the distant future, make it a character based game. Choose a side, and grow your character. Just look at Star Citizen or Elite: Dangerous, those games are basically first person sims revolve around flying in space. And if you think BoS has a steep learning curve, add another dimension.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there!

 

I'm some of that potential expanded player base you're talking about, so I thought I'd just share my experience with you.

 

 

I've been supporting the project since it was first announced on the Rise of Flight forums (hello RoF friends reading this!), and I keep coming back from time to time to fly a quick mission, but really, I suck so bad.

 

I find it much, much, much more difficult to fly BoS compared to RoF. Heck, compared to the old IL-2 "1946" (which I flew for many years before RoF), it doesn't even feel like I'm flying planes on the same planet.

 

 

Maybe my problem is that I've picked the Lagg-3 and decided that I should get reasonably comfortable with it before attempting MP. But like Indy says in Last Crusade: Fly, yes. Land, no.

 

Most of the time, on the ground I'm bouncing around and making pirouettes, whether it's taxiing, landing, heck sometimes even taking off. I've also spent a bit of time in the La-5, but found it equally hard to get started with. The smoothest experience I've had so far was in the Pe-2, but I don't dare go online with that thing. Maybe I should try it anyway?

 

I'd give the German planes a go, but I'm reading here that there's no real shortage of players flying those, so I'm less inclined to invest a lot of time in them. I'm more of an Entente (WWI) / Allies (WWII) pilot anyway.

 
Anyhow, I have BoM pre-ordered now, and I'm really excited to return to the I-16, the plane I learned to fly with in the old IL-2 Sturmovik.

 

 

Any tips for someone like me who's simply ashamed of himself for struggling so hard, in spite of having quite some experience with previous sims?

Edited by Hellbender

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, and so did WW2OL and its struggling too now. The point is it isn't that easy for a kid to stomp his feet and get a recurring monthly fee for those games. But warthunder? World of tanks? Free to play and thriving. And that is the difference I was proposing, a free to play game.

Hard to say why one fails vs another..

  • could be warthunder is thriving because it free to plays some aspects..
  • could be warthunder is thriving because it is a dumbed down WWII game and great graphics..
  • could be aces high is NOT thriving because it has a steep learning curve..
  • could be aces high is NOT thriving because it has crap graphics..

Hard to say, but, I agree, you need a free something to get the kids in the door..

 

But you need the eye candy and simple flight models to keep the kids playing, and warthunder has those two things..

 

I am pretty sure Aces High and WW2OL has free entry level stuff to play.. Or at least first month or something like that is free..

 

If that is true, than free is not the reason why a game thrives.. IMHO.

Edited by ACEOFACES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's extremely apparent that the cheap Russian model that is similar to what the OP suggested is wildly more successful...just look at the multiplayer server list. Any Russian server is chocked full of people during primetime and even still after primetime. That's not the case for US servers...we've been lucky to reach 40 people on a weekend, most likely due to the initial cost of the game.

 

The interest for flight games is definitely out there. War Thunder, as many people detest it, is extremely popular boasting a nightly player cap of approximately 60k and over 100k on weekends...partly due to the initial price (free with microtransactions) and partly due to the ease of use with mouse-aim (which can be overcome with short exposure to BoS). There's no doubt in my mind that an identical model to Russia's cheap $12 version of BoS being available in other countries would skyrocket this series into popularity...but you can't expect that change to be made so early in the game's release, especially after so many people just purchased it for $100. That'd be yet another slap in the face of the community.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am still convinced that a decent well structured SP campaign with a proper career mode would encourage more people to play. As much as I enjoy this game, the SP experience is sorely lacking. Maybe if we had an absorbing and interesting SP element that could be the stepping stone to MP numbers?  

 

I Agree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...especially after so many people just purchased it for $100. That'd be yet another slap in the face of the community.

I purchased the game for $100 so I'm begging to be slapped I guess. 

 

Out of all the flight sims out there at this very moment, the only real competition is DCS.  I don't count War Thunder a sim, but there are a lot of people who play it in lieu of one, and those are people we can get.  DCS has a good plan with the free map and starter plane, however their kickstarter program for DCS: Europe 1944 fell face flat and the entire community who spent their money and got screwed are just out there hanging.  And with no map of a theater, no vehicles or weapons from the era, and just in general no immersion, they aren't really competition for WW2.

 

CLoD, 1946, Aces High, WW2OL, and just name your flight sim... all of them are old and obsolete.  DCS with edge might be competitive, but it would just put it on even footing with BOS... and then only in certain areas.  This game has more potential then any I have seen.  It could be relavent for years or longer if milked right.  Constantly add content both free and paid and people will stay. 

 

\\//

 

Dev's:  If you build it, they will come. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's extremely apparent that the cheap Russian model that is similar to what the OP suggested is wildly more successful...just look at the multiplayer server list. Any Russian server is chocked full of people during primetime and even still after primetime. That's not the case for US servers...we've been lucky to reach 40 people on a weekend, most likely due to the initial cost of the game.

 

The interest for flight games is definitely out there. War Thunder, as many people detest it, is extremely popular boasting a nightly player cap of approximately 60k and over 100k on weekends...partly due to the initial price (free with microtransactions) and partly due to the ease of use with mouse-aim (which can be overcome with short exposure to BoS). There's no doubt in my mind that an identical model to Russia's cheap $12 version of BoS being available in other countries would skyrocket this series into popularity...but you can't expect that change to be made so early in the game's release, especially after so many people just purchased it for $100. That'd be yet another slap in the face of the community.

 

the slap has already happened along with a back hand  and  a boot to the tackle...making BOM the same as the $12 Russian version would be a good idea however there are other things that must also be fixed.

 

1. traditional style CO-OP

2. being able to host with out having to use Dserver.

3. A game browser very similar in function to Hyperlobby

4. a ME that has a very similar feel to the original IL2 but at the same time retaining its higher functions for people who want to utilize it to it's fullest extent (along with DOC's)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's extremely apparent that the cheap Russian model that is similar to what the OP suggested is wildly more successful...just look at the multiplayer server list. Any Russian server is chocked full of people during primetime and even still after primetime. That's not the case for US servers...we've been lucky to reach 40 people on a weekend, most likely due to the initial cost of the game.

 

The interest for flight games is definitely out there. War Thunder, as many people detest it, is extremely popular boasting a nightly player cap of approximately 60k and over 100k on weekends...partly due to the initial price (free with microtransactions) and partly due to the ease of use with mouse-aim (which can be overcome with short exposure to BoS). There's no doubt in my mind that an identical model to Russia's cheap $12 version of BoS being available in other countries would skyrocket this series into popularity...but you can't expect that change to be made so early in the game's release, especially after so many people just purchased it for $100. That'd be yet another slap in the face of the community.

I think the Russian version of the game and WT prove this proposal has merit. How much could only be proven by trying it. Not trying it proves nothing and if it fails the cost to the developers, either in design cycles or actual cash, would be very low. High upside, low downside. Those are the kind of bets I'm willing to take.

 

Honestly, I'd take a little reality slap if it meant I'd get 60 to 100 thousand more players to play with or against. My pride can take it. If they offered this solution tomorrow I'd still buy the whole of BOM (just waiting on the next paycheck) and happily watch others sample the two aircraft for cheap.

 

As to two bits for AoA:

 

Minecraft is surprisingly engrossing to a wide fan base and is extremely creative, immersive and social. There are multiple game modes and it is hardly mindless. It's why I let my kid play it for hours even though I have no personal interest in it. Think of it as online Legos with a twist.

 

And you still haven't offered anything constructive on how to build numbers in BOS or combat flight sims in general.

Edited by HerrMurf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the slap has already happened along with a back hand  and  a boot to the tackle...making BOM the same as the $12 Russian version would be a good idea however there are other things that must also be fixed.

 

1. traditional style CO-OP

2. being able to host with out having to use Dserver.

3. A game browser very similar in function to Hyperlobby

4. a ME that has a very similar feel to the original IL2 but at the same time retaining its higher functions for people who want to utilize it to it's fullest extent (along with DOC's)

Co-op is available in decent form in BoS, it's just that no one is using a medium to communicate with random public players to get those games started...nor is anyone creating any worthwhile co-op missions. A healthy co-op environment is extremely possible in BoS' current configuration. I've gone over this in another thread in detail. A game browser/HyperLobby function has already been created by a part of the community (though its announcement was moved to rarely visited subforums by forum mods, singlehandedly destroying any possibility for the game to enrich itself...crazy that mods have that kind of indirect power, eh?)

 

If you're looking for an exact clone of the features of IL2, you're looking for the wrong thing. There are many ways to do certain things. IL2:1946 is not IL2:BoS, and things in the past are not done in the future. Just because you're familiar with one old thing does not mean it is not as effective as a new thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

P's and Q's.

 

So typical.  :cool:

 

Wha??  No sure what you mean?  Does it's SP campaign not kick ass?  I mean, if a good SP campaign is the key to getting more people to play BoS, that also must be true of other flight sims, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea of having 1 or 2 planes (definitely lagg, maybe Stuka or g2) as a free to try option with 1 or 2 offline missions and restricted access to multiplayer.

 

Also, if the target is new, younger customers, than it is safe to assume they will have very limited knowledge of flying any aircraft at the sim level, let alone trying to take 1000hp AC into combat. I think a great benefit to attract these customers is to have some sort of offline "flight school" and "combat flight school". Flight school could be a series of intro missions covering the basics of taxi, takeoff, level flight, trim, etc. Combat flight school could cover the gunsight, basic maneuvers (roll, loop, etc.), situational awareness...

 

Without a proper manual and without decent beginner missions or school/tutorial I think this game is exceedingly difficult for a new player with little to no knowledge of flight or simming to break into.

Edited by Porkman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the slap has already happened along with a back hand  and  a boot to the tackle...making BOM the same as the $12 Russian version would be a good idea however there are other things that must also be fixed.

 

1. traditional style CO-OP

2. being able to host with out having to use Dserver.

3. A game browser very similar in function to Hyperlobby

4. a ME that has a very similar feel to the original IL2 but at the same time retaining its higher functions for people who want to utilize it to it's fullest extent (along with DOC's)

 

Agree on all counts.

 

An easier to approach ME and being able to host without a dedicated server would bring back all of my BlitzPig/Pilot's Pub friends, so if it works for them it would work for a lot of others.

 

I don't know why this is so hard to grasp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a lot of people forget that IL-2 in its heyday was flown by the vast majority in a similar way to warthunder, by that I mean in wonder woman view and with scant regard for history, I think it is a telling fact that WT has practically dropped any form of simulation aspect as it has become more successful

 

Cheers dakpilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Russian version of the game and WT prove this proposal has merit. How much could only be proven by trying it. Not trying it proves nothing and if it fails the cost to the developers either in design cycles or actual cash would be very low. High upside, low downside. Those are the kind of bets I'm willing to take.

 

Honestly, I'd take a little reality slap if it meant I'd get 60 to 100 thousand more players. My pride can take it. If they offered this solution tomorrow I'd still buy the whole of BOM (just waiting on the next paycheck) and happily watch others sample the two aircraft for cheap.

Agreed. It's not about the money and retro-pricing for me, but we both know people would have a miscarriage on the forums if BoS was released for $12 tomorrow. The devs probably somewhat know that, and also know that they can also rely on the current flow of sales with the current versions at $100/$50 for probably the rest of FY2015...not in the name of greed, that's just having business sense. There's probably more math and numbers involved than the simple "just try it" approach that most companies aren't willing to make.

 

I hope I'm wrong though...I'd love to see a cheap version of the game sooner than later. It'd give me more motivation to keep making the MP missions I find myself constantly in front of my computer for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am still convinced that a decent well structured SP campaign with a proper career mode would encourage more people to play. As much as I enjoy this game, the SP experience is sorely lacking. Maybe if we had an absorbing and interesting SP element that could be the stepping stone to MP numbers?

I know. It is so freaking obvious. I don't know why this fact eludes the developers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't necessarilly want a cheap version of the full game. But a two plane set as a stepping stone with the cost recoverable when purchasing a full version of BOS or BOM seems quite reasonable. I'd be surprised if BOS doesn't come down in price in the next twelve to fifteen months anyway. You could buy the two plane set now, wait and get BOS for some reduced price and move your invested twenty bucks over at that time with you two aircraft in hand. Or limit the two to BOM full price only if you don't want it to affect your bottom line - still winning. You'd still get BOS at the (likely) reduced price with two aircraft in hand. STILL WINNING.


I like the idea of having 1 or 2 planes (definitely lagg, maybe Stuka or g2) as a free to try option with 1 or 2 offline missions and restricted access to multiplayer.

Also, if the target is new, younger customers, than it is safe to assume they will have very limited knowledge of flying any aircraft at the sim level, let alone trying to take 1000hp AC into combat. I think a great benefit to attract these customers is to have some sort of offline "flight school" and "combat flight school". Flight school could be a series of intro missions covering the basics of taxi, takeoff, level flight, trim, etc. Combat flight school could cover the gunsight, basic maneuvers (roll, loop, etc.), situational awareness...

Without a proper manual and without decent beginner missions or school/tutorial I think this game is exceedingly difficult for a new player with little to no knowledge of flight or simming to break into.

Everything past your first line is being worked on currently by members of the community. Though the flight schools will likely be online affairs if and when they launch. If they haven't by the end of June, I may jump in and design one of my own. I'm a little overscheduled to take on a full time hobby until then.

Edited by HerrMurf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wha??  No sure what you mean?  Does it's SP campaign not kick ass?  I mean, if a good SP campaign is the key to getting more people to play BoS, that also must be true of other flight sims, right?

 

:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know. It is so freaking obvious. I don't know why this fact eludes the developers.

 

Possibly because their data shows that it isn't true?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before that I'd suggest allowing video settings to be changed so a mass amount of people aren't barred off form playing.

 

and to avoid derailing the conversation. I do like the idea, i just think some quality of life changes should be added before opening up the floodgates.

Edited by simplyjames

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of all the flight sims out there at this very moment, the only real competition is DCS.  I don't count War Thunder a sim, but there are a lot of people who play it in lieu of one, and those are people we can get.  DCS has a good plan with the free map and starter plane, however their kickstarter program for DCS: Europe 1944 fell face flat and the entire community who spent their money and got screwed are just out there hanging.  And with no map of a theater, no vehicles or weapons from the era, and just in general no immersion, they aren't really competition for WW2.

 

I also have heavily invested in DCS, however I don't currently play it because I can't stand the georgian map. There is a difference between flying in DCS and flying in BOS - I prefer BOS as is because I can jump into any a/c and fly it without having to re do a full type rating...that way I can concentrate more on whats happening outside the a/c than inside. I like to keep it that way. If you think the servers in BOS are empty, have a look at the DCS ones as well. May not be exactly the same but DCS suffers from the same problems that BOS does player-wise. A lot of that is the steep learning curve...which you don't have with WoA or WoT or whatever.

 

If you want to keep and grow your player base, you need to ensure your product is a quality one. Look at IL2....it lasted for what 10 years? It kept things simple. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly because their data shows that it isn't true?

If there is data showing that "Groundhog Day" is a formula for success, I'd like to see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the data shows that absolutely no one plays the campaign. why spend lots of money on something no one is going to use?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the data shows that absolutely no one plays the campaign. why spend lots of money on something no one is going to use?

There is a reason no one is playing the campaign.  If the campaign had some tweaks and more historical story to it rather here kill/bomb this people WOULD be playing it.  

As obvious as this may be I'm not surprised you came in with yet another blatantly negative narrow-sighted comment that did nothing to further the discussion.

 

The campaign needs help and if it eventually had some help and maybe used a couple engaging missions as a free demo it would help the player base.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way to let people try the game for FREE is to let people play as a gunner and ever AA gunner for free. Anything else you have to buy the game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the data shows that absolutely no one plays the campaign. why spend lots of money on something no one is going to use?

Just because nobody wants to drink muddy water, it's no reason not to make wine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way to let people try the game for FREE is to let people play as a gunner and ever AA gunner for free. Anything else you have to buy the game.

 

I wish it was this simple but I feel like my Stuka would never have a tail because of jerks- on the other hand I think we might have some middle ground on this idea.

 

What if every three months an account would accrue an invite for a gunner only copy of the game for free? Max accrual of two at a any one time unsent.

 

This would allow the community to do some self control of the floodgates and provide a way for me to enslave my wife. I know a lot of people who would gun for me who don't necessarily play flight Sims. This could really help add new people to the flight Sim community and if someone just likes gunning well the rest of us can have a better experience too.

 

One addition that would be nice is 6DOF gunners seats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am still convinced that a decent well structured SP campaign with a proper career mode would encourage more people to play. As much as I enjoy this game, the SP experience is sorely lacking. Maybe if we had an absorbing and interesting SP element that could be the stepping stone to MP numbers?  

 

I disagree.. that would attract those who know what that entails but as far as drawing in new folks.. I don't think so.

 

It's extremely apparent that the cheap Russian model that is similar to what the OP suggested is wildly more successful...just look at the multiplayer server list. Any Russian server is chocked full of people during primetime and even still after primetime. That's not the case for US servers...we've been lucky to reach 40 people on a weekend, most likely due to the initial cost of the game.

 

The interest for flight games is definitely out there. War Thunder, as many people detest it, is extremely popular boasting a nightly player cap of approximately 60k and over 100k on weekends...partly due to the initial price (free with microtransactions) and partly due to the ease of use with mouse-aim (which can be overcome with short exposure to BoS). There's no doubt in my mind that an identical model to Russia's cheap $12 version of BoS being available in other countries would skyrocket this series into popularity...but you can't expect that change to be made so early in the game's release, especially after so many people just purchased it for $100. That'd be yet another slap in the face of the community.

 

I agree with much of this.. I think that perhaps just before BoM is released they ought to offer up a F2P version with the Lagg and the F-4 on the Lapino map. I don't recall how long it took for RoF to offer up a F2P version.. but I think it was something like maybe two years after 777 got hold of it.. I think that in may ways WT and IL22 will wind up complimenting each other... and it is in IL22s best interest to let WT do WT.. and for this sim to do what it does and move toward hardcore while retaining it's less than hard core functionality so that folks will have somewhere to go.

 

It seems to me that there is a good possibility that IL22, DCS and CoD will be that triumvirate of WWII sims that fans of the genre will have to choose from .. I don't see another player coming to the genre with any kind of smash.. but that is a varied enough base to satisfy a wide range of simmers.. I deleted WT from my drive... Hadn't touched it in well over two years.. but I still fire up CoD on occasion.. and DCS.. and this of course..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Co-op is available in decent form in BoS, it's just that no one is using a medium to communicate with random public players to get those games started...nor is anyone creating any worthwhile co-op missions. A healthy co-op environment is extremely possible in BoS' current configuration. I've gone over this in another thread in detail. A game browser/HyperLobby function has already been created by a part of the community (though its announcement was moved to rarely visited subforums by forum mods, singlehandedly destroying any possibility for the game to enrich itself...crazy that mods have that kind of indirect power, eh?)

 

If you're looking for an exact clone of the features of IL2, you're looking for the wrong thing. There are many ways to do certain things. IL2:1946 is not IL2:BoS, and things in the past are not done in the future. Just because you're familiar with one old thing does not mean it is not as effective as a new thing.

 

I am not looking for a "clone" but when you call your product the "continuation of the il2 series" there needs to be familiarity  for the sake of a fluid transfer to the new product, we should be able to open the ME and feel at home while at the same time scratching our heads over all the new features just like it was with CLOD, of course the biggest nightmare of all for CLOD was there was no documentation on all the features of the ME but none the less the community went right to work providing user based how-to's in word and video.

Do I think that 777 should have rewritten their ME to function like the old IL2? no, of course not that would be a waste of time but on the other hand they should have released the beta ME 6 months prior to game  release to the rest of the founders that they had given to the "chosen"...so we could start getting familiar with the unfamiliar and helping each other out like we have done since the beginning. Just imagine the content  that could have been created buy the time of official release....

I see the community has come through again with "HyperLobby function" as you call it but that really is not the community's job to be adding core features that should already exist on top of the fact they just announced presales of BOM is ...well...questionable to put it nicely and as you noted why are they hiding it? thought it only add to the game...

 

 

I also have heavily invested in DCS, however I don't currently play it because I can't stand the georgian map. There is a difference between flying in DCS and flying in BOS - I prefer BOS as is because I can jump into any a/c and fly it without having to re do a full type rating...that way I can concentrate more on whats happening outside the a/c than inside. I like to keep it that way. If you think the servers in BOS are empty, have a look at the DCS ones as well. May not be exactly the same but DCS suffers from the same problems that BOS does player-wise. A lot of that is the steep learning curve...which you don't have with WoA or WoT or whatever.

 

If you want to keep and grow your player base, you need to ensure your product is a quality one. Look at IL2....it lasted for what 10 years? It kept things simple. 

 

keep it simple? that was the beauty of the original IL2, you could start in silly mode and end up in series mode it had scalability to please almost everyone. :) and that is something that need not change.

 

I think a lot of people forget that IL-2 in its heyday was flown by the vast majority in a similar way to warthunder, by that I mean in wonder woman view and with scant regard for history, I think it is a telling fact that WT has practically dropped any form of simulation aspect as it has become more successful

 

Cheers dakpilot

 

Do you think WT will have the same life expectancy as IL2  1946 with out the ability to scale up the difficulty level? or will they just  tire of their stressed aluminum tie fighters after a while...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because nobody wants to drink muddy water, it's no reason not to make wine.

 

I'm not talking about this campaign, I'm talking about the RoF campaign.  A campaign that people are now raving about.  No one plays it.  

 

And the campaign that you want would put them out of business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A downloadable demo with 1 or 2 SP missions on a small summer and winter map ...bingo

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

That is precisely how Oleg Maddox did it

Share this post


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...