Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
S!fkaIaC

What is the value of a decent Simulation Engine??

What is the value of a real MilSimfor you  

278 members have voted

  1. 1. What is the value of a real MilSimfor you

    • 30-50â?¬ one time
      57
    • 50-100â?¬ one time
      68
    • 100-150â?¬ one time
      44
    • 30-50â?¬ every year including all fixes and expansions
      37
    • 50-100â?¬ every year including all fixes and expansions
      33
    • 100-150â?¬ every year including all fixes and expansions
      19
    • More then 150â?¬, even every year
      25


Recommended Posts

Prices for 3D engines have dropped alot over the last years. Current engines with Newton physics implemented (wich would imo be a real choice for BIS aswell as the result of the implemented inhouse physics engine is not satisfying) are around 2000 Euro up to 10.000 euros or more. I´ve switched to Unity 2.5 lately which is significantly cheaper while offering a real drag/drop solution to build simulations/games. There´s quite some obstacles with other engines to get models into the engines, texturing is sometimes hard, baking lightmaps on the fly is unsupported in alot of engines and getting imported animations to run on and control is sometimes a real pain in the ass. Wit Unity it´s easy as imported fbx-files are fully mapped, textured and animations can be split on the fly in Unity.

The biggest benefit of Arma 2´s engine is it´s weak point aswell: It´s a grown engine.

Some of the features implemented over years base on somewhat outdated code and the flexibility of the engine itself regarding physics, import, animation support and the needed control of animations is not up-to-date. Native C or Javascript support is also missing.

Overall I´d say BIS would be better of sometimes to license existing engine components that are tested, working and more flexible than the solutions developed by BIS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More advanced physics equals less resourcess for AI, graphics etc. It's a massive scale game and you can't make it top of the scale in every aspect. The physics are somewhat outdated but they do work. It would have been cool to be able to turn a hut piece by piece into rubble with a .50 cal but that would be at the cost of much more important things. BIS has taken the approach to crate as many things as possible in house. It might not always be the wisest decision but I respect that. In the end it's your decision whether you wanna buy the game or not.

I don't think I'd be willing to pay more than for normal games. I'm quite sure that is the common view on this. Developing a special expensive high end version would probably not appeal any larger numbers of players. I doubt, even though trying to be optimistic that BIS be able to sell more than 100.000 copies even if the price was just €100. Anyone with a sense of math realizes that it would be far more logical to aim for the million marker with a game costing a third of that. If they do manage to create a bug free version with top physics etc then why price it so high that only a minority would buy it?

So how much I would pay for it? Well, I've bought OFP:CWC twice, OFP:R, OFP:GOTY, ArmA, ArmA:QG and ArmA2. I'm not sure how much that is but I would guess a bit over €200. On otherhand that's spanning over 8 years which makes it about €25 a year. So well, perhaps that's what I would be willing to pay a year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The experience tells us that the majority of "good" games is around 50 € one time. Most of them are bugged and not maintained.

So I assume that is NOT what we want.

Hence, if we want to have a decent, high quality engine and real large evolution steps in terms of functionality it is obvious that either a.) BIS must sell the same game to much more peps and/or b.) BIS must take more cash per licence.

Another license model, NOT SAYING BIS SHOULD, just to illustrate the posiibilities:

Ordinary buy-play-dump-license

If some kids only want to use a title like ArmA 2 for peng-peng just sell them a one time copy for 30€ with patch-support for 1-2 years and WITHOUT anything else then the 2d mission editor.

The next level might be an advanced gamer license with an annual fee of 50- 150€, this annual fee includes:

- game and patches for one year

- the right to register and use a BIS owned bugtracker

- patches for 1 year

- 2D editor

- 3D editor

- other tools to create content

- a BRILLIANT documentation that is constantly maintained and missing descriptions are treated as a bug in the bug tracker

Highest level would be the ArmA - Freak - License, this one with the highest annual price contains:

- game and patches for one year

- access to a special modding support (via phone too)

- all modding tools

- guaranteed time to answer for trouble tickets/documentation questions/feature requests

Don´t jump on the price and the content I suggested, that has to be tuned by BIS, I just want to illustrate that it would make sense to make a suitable packet for each customer segment.

I do not have a solution for the fact that the guys doing the most work - the modders - would have to pay the biggest price. Maybe the lowest "single buy" license should be crippled in a way that only BIS standard addons can be used. As soon as one want to play custom content, it requires the advanced gamer license.

In the end we need a cash beam that enables BIS to make every 4-6 years a more or less new engine WHILE maintaining the current products.

Edited by S!fkaIaC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not like the most of modularity and paying of extra to any single extra content. I want single pact that is enormous enough to include them "all-in-one" . This single unit though is extremily flexible then and let users dedice what options enabled to install. I would readily to pay single time as much is there content, whit full physics and such the community dream game I would pay 500£ but whit current A2 game 100£.

Perhaps it doesnt work lik this way in real world, but there should be options to be able directly pay to BIS extra money to help them develop next installment and every penny is directed only to support that.

Any extra cash of retail game out of unit should be considered. BIS should foremost try to sell it out from they own internet p2p service, without any other parties involved. Why cant they distribute themselves without typical publisher who usually take the mayority of profit. If they sell A2 25u BIS get 5u profit of product total money, 50u > 15u, 100u > 40u, 200u > 120u so they get increased rate from single unit when the price go up the weight of product remains same so the cost of production, retail and transportation wont go proportationally whit price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I want single pact that is enormous enough to include them "all-in-one" . This single unit though is extremily flexible then and let users dedice what options enabled to install.

Means your package is the ArmA Freak License.

I try to make you understanding that an "all-you-can-eat" meal for 5 bugs MUST taste cheap. Look were in other parts this flat-rate hype lead to:

Internet flat rate: best effort, 0900 support lines (1,xx euro per minute)

cheap flat cellular rates: crappy networks, often out of coverage

cheap mobile phones for 1 euro includes in tariff: they do not survive 2 years

High quality products and low prices do not go together.

To rise the quality of ArmA BIS must show the willingness and the ability and they need more cash.

For the cash I would say that 100 Euro + is achievable from what I can see in my tiny stats here.

To avoid that BIS would loose the low price segment customer base I suggest to sell a stripped down version. Most others here in the forum would buy at least the "advanced gamer license" anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What's wrong with the physics?

:confused:

Take the USMC dirtbike and try to ride up a hill on it, you lose momentum halfway up it is funny in a sad way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The experience tells us that the majority of "good" games is around 50 € one time. Most of them are bugged and not maintained.

So I assume that is NOT what we want.

Hence, if we want to have a decent, high quality engine and real large evolution steps in terms of functionality it is obvious that either a.) BIS must sell the same game to much more peps and/or b.) BIS must take more cash per licence.

Another license model, NOT SAYING BIS SHOULD, just to illustrate the posiibilities:

Ordinary buy-play-dump-license

If some kids only want to use a title like ArmA 2 for peng-peng just sell them a one time copy for 30€ with patch-support for 1-2 years and WITHOUT anything else then the 2d mission editor.

The next level might be an advanced gamer license with an annual fee of 50- 150€, this annual fee includes:

- game and patches for one year

- the right to register and use a BIS owned bugtracker

- patches for 1 year

- 2D editor

- 3D editor

- other tools to create content

- a BRILLIANT documentation that is constantly maintained and missing descriptions are treated as a bug in the bug tracker

Highest level would be the ArmA - Freak - License, this one with the highest annual price contains:

- game and patches for one year

- access to a special modding support (via phone too)

- all modding tools

- guaranteed time to answer for trouble tickets/documentation questions/feature requests

Don´t jump on the price and the content I suggested, that has to be tuned by BIS, I just want to illustrate that it would make sense to make a suitable packet for each customer segment.

I do not have a solution for the fact that the guys doing the most work - the modders - would have to pay the biggest price. Maybe the lowest "single buy" license should be crippled in a way that only BIS standard addons can be used. As soon as one want to play custom content, it requires the advanced gamer license.

In the end we need a cash beam that enables BIS to make every 4-6 years a more or less new engine WHILE maintaining the current products.

I hope BIS will just laugh about this idea. They develop and make money with games, not with licences. Think about where that would lead.

The modders, who have to purchase the ArmA-Freak-license, have to pay much money and invest theyr freetime to develop mods and give they for free away? Or will we then have to mess with payware like MS: FlightSimulator?

Then a player who maybe want to buy those payware addons have also to buy an advanced gamer license to be able to play it, so they have to pay more for the game AND to buy the addons?

You know what i mean? Then the question wouldn't be anymore "What is the value of a decent Simulation Engine?", but "Who want to make money with a decent Simulation engine?".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hope BIS will just laugh about this idea. They develop and make money with games, not with licences. Think about where that would lead.

The modders, who have to purchase the ArmA-Freak-license, have to pay much money and invest theyr freetime to develop mods and give they for free away? Or will we then have to mess with payware like MS: FlightSimulator?

Then a player who maybe want to buy those payware addons have also to buy an advanced gamer license to be able to play it, so they have to pay more for the game AND to buy the addons?

You know what i mean? Then the question wouldn't be anymore "What is the value of a decent Simulation Engine?", but "Who want to make money with a decent Simulation engine?".

I guess you gonna buy some braincells, read my posts again, review my arguments and try to argue against.

I do not have a solution for the fact that the guys doing the most work - the modders - would have to pay the biggest price. Maybe the lowest "single buy" license should be crippled in a way that only BIS standard addons can be used. As soon as one want to play custom content, it requires the advanced gamer license.

Maybe you overlooked that I commit that for some issues in my suggestion I do not have a good solution.

Don´t jump on the price and the content I suggested, that has to be tuned by BIS, I just want to illustrate that it would make sense to make a suitable packet for each customer segment.

And that part was totally blanked out by your non-existing IQ.

For you I would suggest an all-you-can-eat-dödel-license.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I guess you gonna buy some braincells, read my posts again, review my arguments and try to argue against..

I am against this whole idea as well.

This would mean competition with the mod community, which for this game series is really the life of it.

If you want a different core engine for it then get some funding and hire some developers and do it yourself.

I am not saying that I don't want to see or think there needs to be changes in ArmAs core but I understand the business of software development. They already have an ambitious project out there in this game and it takes a lot to build the systems that go into it.

Give it time. I know, 10 years almost, but still, they are a relatively small

team of developers and their resources are limited.

Opening a license model for most people will not work, most will ignore the hassle and it will drive piracy of the game up substantially, especially at the prices you are suggesting. You will get the hardcore people who are willing to pay for it, but the bread and butter group wont touch it, especially if there is issues of interoperability between it and higher subscriptions.

Also, they already give away those things you are thinking they should charge for right now for free... Why would anyone want to start paying for something that they can get for free? The mod community already delivers extremely talented results and I see no benefit from adding a premium to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am against this whole idea as well.

This would mean competition with the mod community, which for this game series is really the life of it.

If you want a different core engine for it then get some funding and hire some developers and do it yourself.

Where comes this communist attitude from? Everything for free - no care where it comes from? Big in spending - short in earning?

The community modders would work as before, but guys like you would pull the short end - nada with buying a cheap copy for 30 Euro and getting community content for free which is sometimes a 100 Euro and more worth when sold in masses.

The difference between the suggested "advanced user license" and the "ArmA Freak license" is basically the support. Rest is as today. And the modder can choose! nobody is forcing someone.

Maybe you did not understand - the engine would be the SAME, but the TOOLS and the SUPPORT would differ between the USER LICENSE.

And it is just MY SUGGESTION. But one thing is for sure: BIS is NOT ABLE to bring their initial dreams up to an acceptable quality, they show us meanwhile since 8 years that they CAN NOT. My HOPE is that MORE MONEY would ENABLE BIS to RISE the QUALITY + MAINTAINING the released products + developing NEW FUNCTIONALITY in PARALLEL.

If one price - one package does the job -> me happy.

But this thread is rather about the PRICE vs VALUE. So please state how much you would PAY for ArmA 2 as it is today but without bugs and better documentation.

Edited by S!fkaIaC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I guess you gonna buy some braincells, read my posts again, review my arguments and try to argue against.

Maybe you overlooked that I commit that for some issues in my suggestion I do not have a good solution.

And that part was totally blanked out by your non-existing IQ.

For you I would suggest an all-you-can-eat-dödel-license.

Nice reply, thank you :). But like you see i'm not the only one that doesn't agree with your sugestions.

You say something about communist attitude while sugest a clearly capitalist one? And then insuinate that BIS is not able to bring "theyr dreams" up? :confused:

Maybe my copys of OFP, ArmA and ArmAII are not equal to yours, but i think they are as good as it get for a game and that BIS has achieved theyr dreams of a MilSim for everyone.

But keep insulting everyone that don't share your opinion, it's the right way to show how plausible it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nice reply, thank you :). But like you see i'm not the only one that doesn't agree with your sugestions.

You say something about communist attitude while sugest a clearly capitalist one? And then insuinate that BIS is not able to bring "theyr dreams" up? :confused:

Maybe my copys of OFP, ArmA and ArmAII are not equal to yours, but i think they are as good as it get for a game and that BIS has achieved theyr dreams of a MilSim for everyone.

But keep insulting everyone that don't share your opinion, it's the right way to show how plausible it is.

You got me wrong, that's why I suggested to buy some.

I hope BIS will just laugh about this idea. They develop and make money with games, not with licences. Think about where that would lead.

Also really nice. Maybe you are confused by the word "license". Game license = the right to play ArmA + the right to develope addons based on the engine capabilities BUT currently BIS owns the work of the community :eek:

Anyway, you seem to be happy with the game as it is, you obviously do not need a higher quality so everything is fine.

But I still want to seek a possibility to enable BIS (if they want) to deliver something better.

The modders, who have to purchase the ArmA-Freak-license, have to pay much money and invest theyr freetime to develop mods and give they for free away? Or will we then have to mess with payware like MS: FlightSimulator?

Then a player who maybe want to buy those payware addons have also to buy an advanced gamer license to be able to play it, so they have to pay more for the game AND to buy the addons?

I try to be precise:

The "advanced gamer license" would be basically ArmA 2 like you know it know. The "Freak License" would be something additional, maybe a complete modding team could share such a license. Dunno, but it would be a win/win even for BIS if excellent modding teams could rise their speed and quality thanks to much better doku and support.

But all that has a PRICE that has to be PAID.

To cripple the low end license in a way that it can not utilize custom made addons was just a mind how to avoid that the best modders paying expensive support + doing all the work. Forcing those who want to play addons to a more expensive license would lower the price for the "Freak license" which is fair. The low - end license would act as a "entrance drug".

See it like that: the free-of-charge ArmA 2 demo is good enough to sell it as own game (well if it would have less bugs).

I would love if all that would work with one common all - included license, but it will not. 8 years of buggy BIS games is the evidence

Maybe my copys of OFP, ArmA and ArmAII are not equal to yours, but i think they are as good as it get for a game and that BIS has achieved theyr dreams of a MilSim for everyone.

They can live their dream as long as it is in line with mine. :cool: Else they should stop taking money.

Edited by S!fkaIaC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As llauma says the product you imagined does already exist! Its called VBS and the Australian army uses it to train their troops, you too CAN buy this product AND it has a price! (undoubtedly set by BIS ;)).

Isnt it great when dreams come true ;)

Geezer

Not only does AUS use it but many many many other countries and military branches. At my office alone we have handfuls of keys for various uses, network, developer, for support of hundreds of clients.

As stated, VBS2 covers the simulation aspect with real time editing and extreme detailed documentation. That is what we pay for in the contracting world. A $49.99 commercial video game is not going to have those extensive features because to put it simply, you get what you pay for. Contracts make requests for specific features and they pay to have them implimented and developed/designed.

There's many other companies out there that develope content for VBS2 but nothing is for free. A 1 time payment of $49.99 is not going to cover extensive content designs off of community requests for a life time.

That's just the way it is.

But all that has a PRICE that has to be PAID.

Couldn't have said it more plain and simple. Developments and content designing takes lots of time and effort, people do not work for free. Content we have created is paid for and it's not cheap. Imagine a base line of paying someone for their work and they work at $24 an hour, if it takes the developer 16-48 hours to create something or even longer then you are approaching triple digit numbers or higher, and that's only saying that 1 developer is doing the work by themself... which is rarely the case, then you double the cost.

I wouldn't sit here and create maps for free, it's all about money and I'm all about getting paid for my time. Just the way it is.

Edited by Vandrel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't sit here and create maps for free, it's all about money and I'm all about getting paid for my time. Just the way it is.

Who cares about VBS? This is about ArmA. VBS is targeted at a different market.

Lets see the maps you make and if anyone here is willing to pay for it. There are already dozens of dedicated community members who will do it for free, for the good of the community.

You guys are trying to put a price on something that is already given away for free. How many times has that worked out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No you missed the point entirely,

VBS1/2 is targeted at entities for SIMULATION purposes.

ArmA/2 is targeted at public commodities for ENTERTAINMENT sales.

The 2 are vary different in terms of marketing, sales and profit as well as content development.

And to comment on your request to see "my maps" I am sorry but as stated I am a contractor, you will see my location is a U.S. military base therefore all content I create at work is property of the U.S. Government and is not for distribution to the public for public use.

Furthermore, to rehiterate my point, BIA has simulation features inside their simulation titled VBS2. If anyone is looking for a accurate simulation they can pay out for the VBS2 side of the house... that is what it's there for. Gamers here have a tendancy to ask and ask and ask with the "gimmie" sydrome. There is lots of content and features that will not see the public side of ArmA/2 mostly because it's specifically for VBS and was funded for such use.

Edited by Vandrel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No you missed the point entirely,

VBS1/2 is targeted at entities for SIMULATION purposes.

ArmA/2 is targeted at public commodities for ENTERTAINMENT sales.

The 2 are vary different in terms of marketing, sales and profit as well as content development.

And to comment on your request to see "my maps" I am sorry but as stated I am a contractor, you will see my location is a U.S. military base therefore all content I create at work is property of the U.S. Government and is not for distribution to the public for public use.

Furthermore, to rehiterate my point, BIA has simulation features inside their simulation titled VBS2. If anyone is looking for a accurate simulation they can pay out for the VBS2 side of the house... that is what it's there for. Gamers here have a tendancy to ask and ask and ask with the "gimmie" sydrome. There is lots of content and features that will not see the public side of ArmA/2 mostly because it's specifically for VBS and was funded for such use.

Doesn't mean you can't do something in your free time, you know for the communities sake.

Your original comment was backing up comments made by the thread starter about pricing ArmA. My comment was in response to that.

Also, as a tax payer I would kindly ask you to NOT post here while you are on the job... That is if you are on the job. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I pay taxes too :D I'm not a government employee, just contracted here hehe.

True, I could create things on my free time at home but that's the catch. Certain programs were made available exclusively for VBS2, Landbuild, Visitor4, etc. which are dependant upon HASP keys and not intended for personal computers, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No you missed the point entirely,

VBS1/2 is targeted at entities for SIMULATION purposes.

ArmA/2 is targeted at public commodities for ENTERTAINMENT sales.

The 2 are vary different in terms of marketing, sales and profit as well as content development.

And to comment on your request to see "my maps" I am sorry but as stated I am a contractor, you will see my location is a U.S. military base therefore all content I create at work is property of the U.S. Government and is not for distribution to the public for public use.

Furthermore, to rehiterate my point, BIA has simulation features inside their simulation titled VBS2. If anyone is looking for a accurate simulation they can pay out for the VBS2 side of the house... that is what it's there for. Gamers here have a tendancy to ask and ask and ask with the "gimmie" sydrome. There is lots of content and features that will not see the public side of ArmA/2 mostly because it's specifically for VBS and was funded for such use.

Right, that is BIS/BIA view to the market. I try to elaborate if there is a market between for a product that is somehow ArmA/VBS.

VBS1 was sold for 1200 USD / single user license if I remember correctly. But for a VERY SMALL customer base. Releasing same product public would at least lead to half of the price IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bug free, and everything working as listed on the box?

I'd pay a 100 bucks or more for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, but obviously BIS has problems with your theory. BTW, it is also mine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted € 50-€ 100 once.

BIS should have sold ArmA 2 without the single player campaign, because it is too difficult to complete for most players.

Only if you are an OFP veteran, you could complete the SP campaign and enjoyed it a lot(as I did). Bugs bypassed.

To me ArmA 2 product (FIXED, bug free) should include (price € 60):

- written in capital letter that is a SIMULATION and not mass market videogame

- n.10 scenario single player, well tested, approx 1,5 hours each scenario (infantry, tank, helicopter, high command). This could lead to about 10-15 hours of SP of good quality.

- SP printed manual

- Editor with printed manual (Mr Murray for example)

- multiplayer missions

- a "voucher" to download the SP campaign, when it will be ready. Extra cost: € 10.

ArmA 2 is more a "software/simulator", such as"Photoshop", "Bryce" (for the graphics market). And they are sold for higher prices.

The slogan could be: "create your own dream missions", "the war in your hand". It could be a possible marketing solution, in all honesty.

Edited by eirulan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would pay more than 150 per year, if everything works fine, with good performance and in a way I always dreamed about... anyway, this is almost impossible... but would be amazing... I would not play any other game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A true "Military" simulator would have to encompass so many different things it would cost far, far more than any of the prices you have specified. A real military sim is designed to help save lives in the event of a combat engagement in the real world. Not to keep a civilian entertained in the evening or at weekends. You have to include peacekeeping, humanitarian operations, VIP protection, etc.. In a real world military environment it's rarely as simple as "Enemy in *THIS* uniform is located in *THESE* locations. Take your team and capture the objectives". The amount of technology and licences needed to put said technology in the simulation would cost so much money that they couldn't afford to charge anything under thousands of dollars. I think Arma II is about as in depth as it is realistically possible to achieve in a military simulation for entertainment purposes. You are asking for something unrealistic. Plus a REAL simulation would be boring, lots of waiting around playing cards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×