Hybrid Purchase\Subscription Model

[CptTrips]

I think his idea is interesting and worth considering.   

Of course that only works with constant, reliably cadence of innovation and new development.  The model only works as long as you keep producing new content.



I like that it is a hybrid model, so you can do it which ever way you prefer.

I head the Combat Pilot mention looking at a similar type model.

[hazmatt]

The hybrid model seems to make the most sense. I think more options are better in any situation.

I bought a WT premium subscription and it was the biggest waste of money ever. I didn't notice any difference. I did buy a couple premium planes on sale that helped speed up my research by a bunch but now I'm to the point where my research has outpaced my skill and crew skill levels. I've noticed that crew skills really start to become a factor in the jets.

[Animl-AW]

This immature child complained about me posting on DCS. 'more unsupported planes".

You all think he's your buddy,... you're just a shoe in the door to whip everyone the bird and post all dcs on AH boards.

Oh I forgot, he's from TX, it's ok

[AKIron]

Interesting proposal. Would cost them little to try it I think. Easy to shut down if not profitable enough.

[Spikes]

To me it seems like it would be a money loser - but has potential I guess. I agree that if it doesn't work you just end it. I prefer subscription models in games where I can play but don't lose progress if I cx the sub for a while. World of Tanks or Warships is a good example of this - I might play it for a month or two but not touch it for six. Something like this would fall into that category inherently since there isn't any progress to lose.

I assume if it was announced there would be a large influx of people more willing to try DCS. What price do they set for a monthly sub? You're getting thousands in aircraft for what is essentially a rental policy. Surely it would have to be higher than $15/mo which is the standard among most sub-based games. With that said I think for a non-DCS vet nobody doing the subscription is getting their money's worth anyway, as each plane is very in-depth and takes a lot longer to learn.

Also, does ED pay the aircraft developers up front, or are the developers getting payments/royalties from sales each time a module is purchased? Just wondering if the devs lose out on sub-based model.

[CptTrips]

Also, does ED pay the aircraft developers up front, or are the developers getting payments/royalties from sales each time a module is purchased? Just wondering if the devs lose out on sub-based model.

Not sure on a lot of that.  It would need some careful consideration for sure. 

Pretty certain devs probably get paid on something like a quarterly basis a portion of the sales of their modules sold through the ED store.  Either way they have to pay their license royalty but they could sell through their own store-front or pay ED a slice to sell through theirs.

I image a sub would include all ED products and any mod devs that wished to revenue share and participate.  A mod dev wouldn't have to participate.   Their modules could be for sale only if they choose.  OR maybe it just covers ED products.

The beauty of a hybrid model is it can be mixed and matched in different combinations. 

[AKIron]

I don't know but I assumed 3rd party devs were paid per sale. Would be interesting to see how they would handle a "rental". If they pay 3rd party devs for subscriber time spent in their aircraft what's to prevent someone from unscrupulously logging in and running up the hours on autopilot in a 3rd party plane?

Could still be done I suppose. Make it more expensive to subscribe and spend all your time in one plane than the dev would be compensated for.

[CptTrips]

I don't know but I assumed 3rd party devs were paid per sale. Would be interesting to see how they would handle a "rental". If they pay 3rd party devs for subscriber time spent in their aircraft what's to prevent someone from unscrupulously logging in and running up the hours on autopilot in a 3rd party plane?

Yeah interesting.

Maybe it only covers ED products and FC3-4 etc. 

I guess vendors could run their own...

or they could set up an add-on thing like your cable does if you add-on HBO.  So you have your cable bill or cable bill + HBO surcharge.  That surcharge (minus store fee) gets paid to the module devs.  The module vendors could decide if their charge was per plane or for all their modules.

So it might be billed like:

DCS World Premium
vs
DCS World Premium + Heartblur Anthology

[AKIron]

Yeah, that makes sense. Obviously there is some investment in setting that up. Seems the first step would be a survey. Probably no quicker way to start an insurrection though. 

[CptTrips]

Yeah, that makes sense. Obviously there is some investment in setting that up. Seems the first step would be a survey. Probably no quicker way to start an insurrection though. 

Well, one of the nice features is no one gets screwed.

If DCS were to implement this tomorrow, Iron would simply be listed as an owner of all his current modules just like he is now.  As new stuff comes out, he can go rental to access the new stuff and he still owns his purchased modules.  Or he can ignore subscription mode and just purchase the new content the way he always has and prefers. 

I'm not recommending this for AH necessarily, but if a company like AH were to implement this, no one is forced to go out and buy anything to keep playing.  They simply start out as subscribers as they are already and can stay that way if that's how they choose.  Someone not really sold they want to hook into a sub on this old a game can simply buy the PTO, ETO, or East Front expansion pack for a fixed cost.

But no one is forced to do it either way is the key point.

[DmonSlyr]

Im not a fan of subscriptions. They limit player base, they keep younger kids out. You may like that, but it doesn't build up next gen players. Everything just nickle and dime you every single month and you never actually "pay it off". This is a rental approach and it's just endless cash being thrown out month after month. Like for AH, I love the game. But, all those $15 add up to like 2k over time and I still wouldn't be able to play next month if I didn't want to pay.

The best model IMO, is to be able to buy the game for a one time payment of $60. Then you own the game and can play whenever, and the company gets more cash up front for payroll and operations. I don't mind how DCS where you have to purchase a plane, because each module is like a game in itself, and the fact that you can play it whenever for how ever long after you purchase the modules once is what I really like. Having to pay another subscription on top of the 10 I already have is going to prevent me from enjoying more modules down the line. IMO, just trying to convince you to throw money into the wind for ever... AH is the only game I'll sacrifice a monthly sub for. Just because its my favorite pastime, but in all regards I hate subscriptions and I feel its been a major problem why AH never got as big, and then had a declining base over time when more competition came out. The subscription is a block to prevent players from trying the game again after a few month and it limits players. Like, I wouldn't go pay a $15 subscription just to log into chiverly one time to play it and see if i still like it. Its not a winning strategy to me.

[Eagler]

It's all about the monthly payment today isn't it..who pays cash for anything..especially our younger citizens..

Sleezy car dealer: "what can you afford monthly?"..

Need lower interest rates so things cost more but monthly payment is lower/affordable...

Not sure why the younger generation have an issue with subscription as it seems their entire financial system is based off it today..

Eagler