Jump to content
LeeHarvey

A more robust QMB?

Recommended Posts

Hi there you princes of flight sim design. I was just wondering if there was going to be an expansion of the Quick Mission Builder's capabilities in the future. It would be nice to have more than 16 planes in the air, and more choices to customize those aircraft, like the QMB from 1946.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not listed among the improvements being worked on for BoBp, but its possible there will be some tweaks. I don't think at this juncture we're looking at a big overhaul.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, LeeHarvey said:

Hi there you princes of flight sim design. I was just wondering if there was going to be an expansion of the Quick Mission Builder's capabilities in the future. It would be nice to have more than 16 planes in the air, and more choices to customize those aircraft, like the QMB from 1946.

 

Yeah, I'm hoping for a more extensive range and possibilities of air to ground missions in QMB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eventually we want to expand the QMB. No resources to do that right now.

 

Jason

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 6
  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Thanks for the response Jason, and the glimmer of hope for a more comprehensive QMB. As for resources, are we speaking of $$$ or just time? I can understand everyone in your studio being occupied with BoBP right now. If the problem is monetary, well, not to sound critical, but the game itself is already quite expensive, especially if one purchases all the installments in the Great Battles series at $49.99 each, or $79.99 for the premium versions. Unless the player base is incredibly small, I wouldn't think funding should be an issue, but then again what do I know about such matters.

Edited by LeeHarvey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, LeeHarvey said:

 then again what do I know about such matters.

 

Nothing - no disrespect.

The devs are not sitting over there going "we have all these programmers and money - what can we ignore just for kicks?"

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, LeeHarvey said:

Thanks for the response Jason, and the glimmer of hope for a more comprehensive QMB. As for resources, are we speaking of $$$ or just time? I can understand everyone in your studio being occupied with BoBP right now. If the problem is monetary, well, not to sound critical, but the game itself is already quite expensive, especially if one purchases all the installments in the Great Battles series at $49.99 each, or $79.99 for the premium versions. Unless the player base is incredibly small, I wouldn't think funding should be an issue, but then again what do I know about such matters.

The player base is small, the type of programming is specialized and labour-intensive, and getting the talent they need at a price they can afford  is, I imagine, very, very difficult. You can't just pull a guy off programming Call of Duty and throw him to the wolves of flight modeling and dogfighting AI. Such a small studio needs to keep their overhead low as well to keep the lights on. 

 

Most "AAA" games go for this price or more, and have loads of paid DLC, and those companies sell millions of copies (and sometimes still fail to break even - game development is very expensive). Given that incredible sales come by with a lot of frequency (BOS and BOM half off just recently I think), I would say the pricing is extremely competitive...

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

 

Nothing - no disrespect.

The devs are not sitting over there going "we have all these programmers and money - what can we ignore just for kicks?"

 

 

 I didn't just assume they were ignoring things for fun, or at all for that matter. I realize they are a small company and incredibly busy doing the excellent work they do. I was simply seeking clarification on what "Resources" Jason was referring to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, =621=Samikatz said:

Time and people, I would imagine

 

Time/staff/money

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking forward to a beefy QMB to bring the SP experience of this excellent sim alive.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, LeeHarvey said:

 

 I didn't just assume they were ignoring things for fun, or at all for that matter. I realize they are a small company and incredibly busy doing the excellent work they do. I was simply seeking clarification on what "Resources" Jason was referring to.

Not that many people buy ww2 flight simulators. The market just isn't big enough to throw a 60 dollar price tag and include all the stuff that's available. Prices are similar to other flight sims, games like P3d have addons that run 100+ US dollars for just one plane. I think the prices for these planes are pretty fair. Just takes time to collect them all if your budget isn't large. My point being if the market was larger prices could be lower, but it's not so what we get is due to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in my point of view the prices are not fair , it should be increased a little bit  , more planes especially good and strong ones should be as collector planes ,

e.g: ME262 I wonder why it's not a collector plane ? ,

 

the price of one plane in DCS is equal to the price of a whole il-2 battle pack .

 

some may say that DCS planes are full fidelity , I agree , But have you played DCS in VR !! it's very bad unlike il-2 .

 

for me I won't pay a penny  for a full fidelity game that has very bad graphics

but i'll pay for a game that has an acceptable degree of reality with good graphics .   

 

this is my opinion . i'm not telling the developer or the producer what they should do , in the end they know better

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, =RS=BlackRaven said:

in my point of view the prices are not fair , it should be increased a little bit  , more planes especially good and strong ones should be as collector planes ,

e.g: ME262 I wonder why it's not a collector plane ? ,

 

the price of one plane in DCS is equal to the price of a whole il-2 battle pack .

 

some may say that DCS planes are full fidelity , I agree , But have you played DCS in VR !! it's very bad unlike il-2 .

 

for me I won't pay a penny  for a full fidelity game that has very bad graphics

but i'll pay for a game that has an acceptable degree of reality with good graphics .   

 

this is my opinion . i'm not telling the developer or the producer what they should do , in the end they know better

I think for multiplayer, they want people to not get the idea it is 'pay to win' with high performance planes only available as premium. The collector planes are usually more unique, or slightly out of time or place.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, RedKestrel said:

I think for multiplayer, they want people to not get the idea it is 'pay to win' with high performance planes only available as premium. The collector planes are usually more unique, or slightly out of time or place.

i agree to some extent , but the dev and producer need to be payed , most games have higher prices for packs that contain better content 

and it's not always pay to win ,E.g. if me and you paid for D-9 and faced each other the one with more skills will win , . 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×