Would you be willing to pay for additional contend?

[NedLynch]

Originally Posted by Bryan21cag

Here is why I would say no to this one. Although I do own ROF and have paid a bit into there system to get most but not all of their planes, I would very much not like to see IL2 games loose their Open Source type of approach. All of the Modded Content for IL2 46 really kept the sim interesting and even today keeps it at a fun for hours level that CLOD has not yet achieved in my opinion. Someone already said it on page one of this thread and I would have to agree, that with everyone everywhere able to generate skins, campaigns, graphics, and sound mods for the game it really does make the the replay value of the sim soar.

Waiting for single airplanes to be added or new skins or modes to be added and then paying for them each individually would probably go over just as well as waiting for the current updates have Plus it would leave large gaps of time where the sim would be unchanged and people would be off trying other things and forget about the sim entirely. LOL I log on to mission4today just about every other day and its like Christmas every time when there are new campaigns or mods to check out which is almost every time I log on Any way I would much rather get new XPACS for the sim and pay for those just like we did with all the early IL2 series. And while we wait for the next one to come out all those epic Modders and campaign creators out there will keep the new content flowing freely which is part of what makes these sims so incredible.

Cheers

I do agree wholeheartely. When I posted the question it didn't even cross my mind to cut out modders and the community in creating additional content.

The openness of the game must be preserved of course, that is one of the hallmarks of the IL2 series.
I missed formulating that in my original post. I was really aming along the lines of RoF, i.e. planes and field mods, maybe a skin pack and mind you, nobody puts a gun to your head and tells you you have to buy it, I only purchased planes from RoF,not all, and no field mods so far.
Exansion packs from 1C have always been at a charge (pacific fighters). I really meant little things, as stated, to give 1C some kind of cash flow.

And like I said, the sim should have been released in a better state, but then again IL2 original seems to have been in a pretty pathetic state upon release as well, according to community statements.
The concern, real or just perceived, I am having right now is that the dev team still is made up of human beings who have bills to pay, and if those guys do not get paychecks anymore, well then the sim is really lost and that would certainly be a shame.

To all who take a tougher stand, and there seem to be quite a lot, understandably, it is not as if we have a plethora of WWII sims available, IL2 1946 is of course still there but with CEM, airplane and damage modeling and the arguably nice graphics in CoD this one is more than worth being developed over the coming years.

I guess my point is, money is the fuel that makes every business engine run and microtransactions would just be one source the dev team could tap to keep going in the long run.

Btw., I am not sure what it is, but I do consider my comp a rather mid level system and the game runs fine for me, I so far never had a ctd and in the "test" mission I run to see how high I can turn on graphic settings (30 planes, clouds and shadows on, model high, textures original, ssao on, everything else to medium, vsync on in nvidia cp @ 1600x900, AA in game to 1x, looks better than 2x, strange I know) I do not drop under 25 fps. The mission is from the quick missions, the british attack on a german airfield.

[von Pilsner]

Microtransactions = no, that would kill this game for me.
New theater w/ maps, aircraft, campaigns, etc... = sure, after this game is working better and all the original issues (or at least most of them) are worked out.

Originally Posted by NedLynch

I guess my point is, money is the fuel that makes every business engine run and microtransactions would just be one source the dev team could tap to keep going in the long run.

Had they originally sold the game as a micro transaction game that would be fine, I would not have paid $49.99 for it under those circumstances, however...

[NLS61]

At this stage i dont need addons i like to be able to play the game.
launcher.exe problems all the time.

[Seeker]

To those who say "but what alternative is there?":

There's at least two WWII flight games i the pipeline, so game developers know there's a WWII interest (though the games may not be sim enough for this crowd).

And I wonder how many program designers don't bother with the full sim aproach as they think IL-2 has the stranglehold on the sim market?

Maybe the best thing for WWII simming would be for this title to die the death it deserves and encourage other developers to fill the hole.

[furbs]

Not a snowballs chance in hell will i buy anything from MG again until COD is in a fit state to be called a working sim.

Further more, if MG even offered me downloadable content for a price i would be insulted beyond belief.

[Feathered_IV]

No.

I bought clod on preorder, before the first reviews were out and on trust from the developers, based on their promises and claims.

As it stands now, it turned out to be a waste of money. I'm not especially upset about that however, as I consider my purchase to be a "thank you" for the years of enjoyment I got from Il-2.

Based on MG's current performance, quality of leadership and standard of community involvement, I do NOT intend to provide them with further handouts for old times sake.

I do not believe Maddox Games will profit sufficiently from this debacle to make good on what we have now. Therefore I would much rather support the emerging 777 studios and see some return on my investment.

[Bryan21cag]

Originally Posted by NedLynch

I do agree whole heartily. When I posted the question it didn't even cross my mind to cut out modders and the community in creating additional content.

I am not 100% sure on this but I don't think you can have both. If you are putting out single planes and single campaigns for people to buy then you really do not want open access for modders to create the same thing that you are trying to sell. If you were a Mod God you would just wait and see what the items were make them your self and drop them for free on to the mod sites, so my guess is if they went this way they would also have to change the code around to prevent this. That is why it scares me a little if they do entertain this idea at some point.

Cheers

[esmiol]

for me the system of ROF to pay each plane is just horrible !

i will pay for extra content like i do for il2 forgotten battle or pacific fighter, etc... in one word addons!

i don't want to pay for each plane...or each visor or for each boulon of my plane like it is coming in ROF.


then my repsonse is NO!

[Icebear]

Great poll ! Developers will definitely draw conclusions if only 25% of the last people interested in their game are "surely" willing to pay for any additional contend. It's too bad. On the one hand it's too good to throw away, on the other hand I'm also not willing to spend another single cent at this stage.

IMO a useless if not destructive poll.

[Blackdog_kt]

Originally Posted by Bryan21cag

I am not 100% sure on this but I don't think you can have both. If you are putting out single planes and single campaigns for people to buy then you really do not want open access for modders to create the same thing that you are trying to sell. If you were a Mod God you would just wait and see what the items were make them your self and drop them for free on to the mod sites, so my guess is if they went this way they would also have to change the code around to prevent this. That is why it scares me a little if they do entertain this idea at some point.

Cheers

According to one of their past interviews they didn't want to go with a RoF-style business model, but stick to the way it was done in IL2 with complete expansion packs.

Now it's true that many things have changed due to publisher pressure, but i think we have clear indications this is not one of them:

a) We got the 109E-1 for free and the E-4 is probably next (new aircraft mentioned in the last development update as being part of the patch).

b) In one of the development updates they mentioned the release of an SDK as being the next step after the bug fixing is done, which would enable the community to mod new aircraft and maps into the sim. The limitation is the map size so they can still sell expansions with large maps down the road.

c) The sim is very moddable even in its current state for people who have some programming knowledge: it's possible to insert custom campaigns with their own menu entries, create new overlay windows from scratch, etc.

So i think they are not going down that road and i'm glad for it.

Originally Posted by Tree_UK

Another lovely long post Blackdog, and yes we have heard it all before, and it's good to see you towing the party line, but you see it really doesn't matter what you or I think, everyone who reads these forums as read every argument and point of view and it doesn't matter how rational you appear to be, because the bottom line is that the majority of people here feel they have been 'ripped off' and furthermore the general feeling is at this current time Luthier is not doing enough (communication wise) to show that he gives a rat's ass about it. Yes he's payed lip service to it with the 'Community manager' that seems to have gotton lost in the Dynamic weather so he knows its important to us, we should be patient I hear you cry, but thats not what we want, we want to be kept informed, and 'the customer is always right'.
You can dress it up all you want, but that's the general mood. The only person who can change this, is not a moderator with a stubborn sense of duty but Luthier himself. If he carries on to ignore 'his' valued customers then he and his business will suffer and deservedly so for the lack of respect that he has shown on these boards by not keeping us (the paying customer) informed. Simples!

I'm not trying to convince you. I'm just saying i disagree and you're not worth the time convincing, so i just post to maintain my opposing viewpoint's time under the spotlights to prevent the forum giving off the false aura of everybody agreeing with your viewpoint. It's a devil's advocate kind of thing.

Oh and don't bring up the moderating status in this, if i wanted to silence you guys i could have done so on the first day and saved myself the time of answering you, it's just a couple of clicks worth of time.

I just don't believe in forcing my opinion across and that's why you are still posting here.

If you can't appreciate this it's none of my concern, but don't expect me to accept the kind of treatment i refuse to dish out, you're going to get called out on it. Nothing personal, just calling them as i see them