Like it or not, I think the days when 50 USD buys a working almost bug free sim with features like CloD had planned, with many accuratly modelled flyable planes and even more AI planes, with off- and online play are over. This money buys you a module like DCS:A-10C, a single flyable plane.

I can accept the way ROF works: pay for new flyable planes or campaigns or maps. I could even live with a monthly subscription, if the content was continuously expanded for that money.

I am afraid a combination of F2P MMO with subscription (premium) possibility is the only way games make money in todays crisis economy. The choice is simple if investors/publishers decide to support the sequel it will be a sort of F2P+subscription MMO. If they decide not to support it, it will be canceled.

After a long break I reinstalled WoT after a major patch 2 months ago and spent about $150 already because it is fun sometimes.

In 2-3 years all decent game developers, programmers and modelers will work for MMOs because they can pay more and others will be out of the market.

MMO is a great model especially for adult gamers who work and value their time: e.g. you can play only once per week, buy a premium account on per day basis, buy premium equipment to make more cash, etc. In WoT it works very well.

Of cause pay-to-win projects are very frustrating and are not popular. Payments must be restricted to time-saving features only but not give advantage on a battlefield.

MMOs are targeted at younger audience. If we do not play it, it will not be a great loss to the market potential. Traditional sim community is already small and becoming smaller every year as it is ageing. If publishers can not attract 16-20 y.o youngsters in one way or another the sim genre is dead anyway (e.g. look at RoF problems).

If MMOs is the only way for the sim genre to survive I am supporting it.

This is all simulation you can get for one time $30+ payment today http://damageincthegame.com/

http://youtu.be/PRYOJmGo8dg

Subscription based model is such a horrible and outdated idea. There is a reason why every new subscription based MMO keeps failing (most recent example is BioWare's Star Wars: The Old Republic).

IMO, the only viable option for such a niche market game is a free-to-play content-based model. You pay for what you want when you want. Both DCS and RoF are already on this train.

The ROF system works just fine.
 

:-P+1
The ROF system works just fine.
Buy what you want when you want.
I avoid online play in most games,unless TRULY co op.
So Clod with a mission structure like 1946 is just fine.

What about offline players, like me? Will we pay?

I require an adequate AI, will it be fixed or dropped ?

I like the current model, pay-for-patch-with-new-planes :grin:

.

Nope. I have less than no desire to play online.

Difficult for such a game like a sim, because sims usually lives long with scenarious from users. There are so much scenarios and stories to tell, that a model like wot isn't applicable to do things like that. The whole freedom of a typical sim will suffer from this. what about offline flyer and their needed contents? Will they pay?

Also clear is, that such difficult and accurate games with such a small comunity is hard to produce for 50 bucks per user. battlefield could do, even with just 1000 players playing it! Why? Because it is just copy paste with new graphical content. noone takes care of differencies or accurate differencies in weapon impact, flight curves... They just accept eveything as it is as they do not know better and the game just needs to provide motivation and fun! Thats it, but costs are low and they earned a lot with bf3 and the addons, which are now also 100-120 bucks. They earned a lot and do not know, where to put all the money.

Same with wot: casual game, easy and sime fun for casuals and alsi a bit funny for fans of tanks. No accurate data needed, just balancing. I drive it as well and already spent about 300 bucks, although my first intention was just to buy premium to achieve the tanks faster.But now I spent money for 2 years premium, + 1 tank and several times using gold to get out the free xp on some tanks. Never thought I would go that far, but I am just average in the core players. Some of them already paid 100-3000 bucks for this game with nothing special, just casual gaming.

It is difficult, but u can see: I would spent also many bucks into a game which I like. But sims are another world and I do not know, if this would help. Perhaps such games, where u need some own imagination to fill it with life, is dieing out. Hope not. I am still dreaming for a fully simulated, graphically gorgeous worldwar 2 online with clustered servers, a big front and every aspect u dream of. Worldwar 2 online in good would be my death :) Big sim mmorpg with millions of people! just dreaming... :)

To be honest, I don't see what the big hubbub is.

In my mind it's a question of value vs cost. If the product is well made, fun, engaging and has a level of simulation I find acceptable, I'll buy it/subscribe to it as long as I'm having fun.

If it doesn't measure up to what I'm looking for, or if it costs TOO much, I'll leave it alone and not pick it up.

The thought of that it's the way it's sold/made available that will define if I buy it or not is, to be, utterly silly.

Personally I think this is the best way to go for both the user and the maker.. But I think the makers really like the idea of monthly check.. Only time will tell

these treads of late makes me think in the bottom of the ehart everybody is a troll