A.I only porting

[HagarTheHorrible]

No expectation of anything, just idle musings on my part.

 

Would it not be possible to fill out the 1918 stable somewhat , for gameplay purposes (PWCG) by porting over some RoF aircraft ?  If the aircraft brought over from RoF were A,I only then I imagine most, if not nearly all, of the work required to include aircraft in FC isn’t required ?   Models would be lower poly but then is that important when not sitting in them ?  No redone cockpits, skins could be left to the talented artists in the community, What else would be required ?  Once again, if Jason were to put a price on what this work might cost and the FC community met that threshold ?

[AndyJWest]

I very much doubt that Jason would want to discuss development costs publicly. And since he has repeatedly said that he isn't interested in crowdfunding, what exactly is the point in bringing it up yet again?

 

I think it would be a lot better for the future of FC if the 'community' stopped trying to tell the developers how to do their job,  and instead concentrated on doing the one thing which is most likely to result in future expansion - encouraging people to buy the existing product. Halfbaked proposals to add more content aren't going to do that. All they do is make it seem that the existing content isn't worth having.

[HagarTheHorrible]

You’re right, I was wrong to bring it down to just the finance.  Forget I mentioned the funding aspect, just concentrate on whether there is much work involved in porting 5 or 6 A.I only models, from RoF to FC ?   Didn’t they do an internal case study with the DR1 ?

Edited February 7, 2020 by HagarTheHorrible

[AndyJWest]

Things we know for sure:

 

(a) The developers have limited resources (developers and funding).

(b) Porting RoF aircraft to FC as AI would take some of those resources.

 

Things we can probably assume:

(d) Using resources to port RoF aircraft would require approval from investors.

(e) If such spare resources are available, they could be used to develop paid content instead.

 

Speculative conclusion:

(f) Since investors generally seek the best return on investment (while taking into account risks), they are more likely to approve a proposal to create more paid WW2 content (which is presumably profitable, otherwise they'd have stopped investing in it by now), than to take a chance on added free content for FC actually increasing sales enough to justify it.

 

Clearly, my conclusion is speculative, since I don't have any of the necessary details (costs, sales figures etc.) to reach a conclusion. And even with those details, there are no certainties involved. If I was an investor, I'd take a great deal of convincing that giving away something for free was going to give a better RoI than selling stuff, though. And nothing posted on this forum by people not in possession of the necessary details would be likely to convince me of anything much, If I was such an investor. No matter how many times they come up with variations on the same 'give stuff away and make a profit' themes. You can sometimes make a profit that way, but counting on doing so based on wishful thinking and/or the sunk cost fallacy isn't generally advisable.

 

Stop trying to tell the developers what you think they are doing wrong. You aren't in a position to know.

 

Edited February 7, 2020 by AndyJWest

[J2_Trupobaw]

FMs would still have to be ported, tgere are few corners that can be cut there. They would be able to cut out cockpit / controls porting.

[US63_SpadLivesMatter]

Let's not start the trend of AI "If we keep giving them money they might make it flyable...someday" aircraft in FC too.

 

Devs, if you make more WW1 content for me to fly.  I'll buy it.  But you have to make it first.

 

And why are we still using WW2 flak?

Edited February 7, 2020 by J28w-Broccoli

[LukeFF]

3 hours ago, J28w-Broccoli said:

And why are we still using WW2 flak?

 

? There's WWI flak in the game already.

[Enceladus828]

5 hours ago, J28w-Broccoli said:

And why are we still using WW2 flak?

 

1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

 

? There's WWI flak in the game already.

We're using WW2 barges on a WW1 map.

[LukeFF]

9 hours ago, AndyJWest said:

Stop trying to tell the developers what you think they are doing wrong. You aren't in a position to know.

 

Amen. These sorts of topics, where people like to give their unsolicited business advice to the developers, are always an amusing read. 

 

They know what they're doing people.  You don't make it this long in business by randomly bumbling your way to success.

[ST_Catchov]

 

On 2/7/2020 at 9:06 AM, AndyJWest said:

 

Stop trying to tell the developers what you think they are doing wrong. You aren't in a position to know.

 

 

On 2/7/2020 at 7:00 PM, LukeFF said:

 

Amen. These sorts of topics, where people like to give their unsolicited business advice to the developers, are always an amusing read. 

 

 

[edited] A little condescending don't you think.

 

Hey, let's just wait and see if Jason's proposal to add a free campaign to FC, if approved, shifts more units? I hope it is and I hope it does.

Edited February 9, 2020 by SYN_Haashashin
Language

[LukeFF]

On 2/8/2020 at 1:16 AM, catchov said:

[edited] A little condescending don't you think.

 

No, not at all. These people obviously know what they are doing, so quite frankly they don't need people coming in here trying to tell them how to run their business. Do you really think they haven't already contemplated all of these ideas already? 

[Eisenfaustus]

14 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

No, not at all. These people obviously know what they are doing, so quite frankly they don't need people coming in here trying to tell them how to run their business. Do you really think they haven't already contemplated all of these ideas already? 

So this forum should not be used to discuss ideas?

 

Maybe this idea is not profitable or OP seriously underestimates the amount of work needed to do this and maybe most players would not like this...

 

But why shouldn't it be discussed?

 

OP isn't ordering the devs to do something - he is just asking a question. 

 

For the record: I like the idea and it would make me buy FC. And no - I'm not buying in the hope of it some day maybe reaching a state in which I would want to play it. 

[HagarTheHorrible]

On 2/7/2020 at 7:00 PM, LukeFF said:

 

Amen. These sorts of topics, where people like to give their unsolicited business advice to the developers, are always an amusing read. 

 

They know what they're doing people.  You don't make it this long in business by randomly bumbling your way to success.

 

 

I could say “Nutz”, I could say “Balls”, but I won’t, instead I’ll say “binoculars”.

 

“ we added a long-requested feature - binoculars for the tank commanders”

 

Will this feature increase the sales of TC, maybe, will it improve gameplay, probably.  The developers have spent time, energy and resources to improve gameplay, AT THE REQUEST OF PLAYERS, will it improve their bank balance, probably not, but never the less they could see, looking further ahead (binoculars come in handy for that sort of thing) that it was a feature worth implementing to improve gameplay, AT THE REQUEST OF PLAYERS.

 

Possibly, because of fewer options, players who buy into products like BoX, are invested in the franchise, and many of us have followed Neoqb/777/Great battles since early inception, and before that, as you well know, with the Maddox games.   Importantly, and what the developers and players both realise is, that to keep the game fresh and to stop it from going stale over the years, even decades, of development, is to have a constant drip feed of news and improvements.  If any part of this adventure is allowed to fester then, sooner or later, it will wither and die, even if, for lack of anything better, a hardcore, a rump of die-hard fans will continue to fly in circles doing the same thing over and over again, as much from habit as from a genuine love of what’s on offer.

 

So we come to FC and “my idle musings” on developing the future of FC, and not, as you imagine “unsolicited business advice”.  As I mentioned earlier, we are invested in the game, because the conversation between ourselves and the developers is, mostly, one way, we can but make requests, such as binoculars.  Some request are dreams, pure flights of fancy, utterly unrealistic, either because they just wouldn’t work from a gameplay perspective or because, and most probably because of the resources available and making sound business decisions.  That said ideas, requests, that maybe once seemed “pie in the sky” might over the months, or years, become more feasible, ESPECIALLY, if the player base considers it worthwhile and popular, such as binoculars.  As Jason has said before, to paraphrase, “there are better and easier ways to make money than flightsims”,  but the developers continue, despite the occasional grief, to plug away, because of a shared love of, and common interest in, combat flight sims.  Not all decisions are based purely on financial return.  We, on the customers side of the fence have to be realistic in our expectations though, but we can support the developers, and indeed do, by pre-ordering and financially supporting development  (yes it can be double edged, as DCS is only too aware)   We, here in FC land, would love to see our little bit of the BoX world continue to flourish and grow, sales, or lack of sales of FC (we, none of us, are privy to that information) may preclude further expansions, and developing new, or porting over, content from RoF may not, with the most popular content already having been done, be money well spent.  That is not to say that ‘nothing is possible’, we can for our part try to be as proactive and supportive as possible and if that means gauging support through qualified preordering for additional content then so be it.  if on the other hand we need to scale back our ambitions, for one of potentially any number of reasons, then so be it, we can try a different tactic,  a different flank.  If additional player aircraft are prohibitively expensive to convert to FC  then a compromise, for gameplay, might be bringing over A.I aircraft only, it might be far from perfect, but it might give mission makers and Patrick Wilson more content with which to work to add variety to the FC experience.  While adding binoculars might add to game play in TC they probably won’t add to sales, however adding additional content, even if only A.I, to FC will definitely add to game play but probably also sales.   The models, from RoF, may not be up to snuff for player piloted aircraft, there may even be other aspects that would fall short of expectations, if the ported over content was player controlled, but, and a compromise of expectation might be needed, that might be far less important for A.I only gameplay elements (we already accept this compromise for ground elements).  The long argued reason for not including a wider variety of content to RoF/ BoX is that whether player or A.I controlled, the aircraft require the same level of flight modelling and thus work, the addition of player elements is less significant (if the 3D model is already up to snuff).  The work on FM’s for additional FC aircraft has already been done, less possible tweaking to bring it up to FC standards, the possible biggest reason for not adding additional A.I content, to increase variety  and gameplay variability, is null and void.  Is it perfect no, might it bring additional sales, maybe, will it keep the FC hooligans quite, probably not, will it preclude the sale of those same aircraft, should it be deemed pertinent to fully develop them if FC became more popular because of good game play, no.

 

Do I know what I’m on about, NO, but I, along with many others,  wish to see FC flourish, if that requires compromise or thinking outside the box then so be it.  Binoculars prove that the developers listen to and consider player requests so I won’t apologise for constantly wanting to see FC, and other titles in this series, improve and move forward.  If floating ideas in a popularity contest is what is required then so be it.  Yes, the developers have probably already considered lots of options but that isn’t to say the fan base has and if a feature or request is sensible (and who knows what that might be) or popular then maybe the developers will act on it. 

 

So there, and nutz to you LukeFF  !!!!!!!!  

Edited February 9, 2020 by HagarTheHorrible