PDA

View Full Version : Simulation Sales



ZappaTime
12-07-2005, 09:18 AM
Interesting article about sim sales (in the USA), including Pacific Fighters
http://www.bhmotorsports.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=34580

-HH-Quazi
12-07-2005, 09:40 AM
I didn't know Ubi Soft dissolved its partnership with Maddox Games. That is what the article says, but you can't tell it around here.

ZappaTime
12-07-2005, 09:46 AM
Wasn't the Lock-On team Russian? I thought it meant them rather than 1C:Maddox

sparty7200
12-07-2005, 09:53 AM
Is LOMAC done by Olegs team? how i read it, it's the LOMAC team that got the push!

3.JG51_BigBear
12-07-2005, 09:55 AM
No it is definitely a different development team. UBI dropped the LOMAC team and that's the reason that Flaming Cliffs is distributed by another company.

Taylortony
12-07-2005, 02:56 PM
The reason MS flight sim reigns supreme is simple....... it has an open architecture allowing every man and his dog to bring out add ons.
Go into any PC shop and you will see shelves full of extras for it, that keeps it at the top as you need the game to run them..then you have a plethoral of free add ons to download as well.. None of this Better advertising rubbish

The likes of PF have a narrower market due to the fixed structure of the game, and as such do not sell as much

neural_dream
12-07-2005, 03:25 PM
CFS owes its success to its publisher and its cousin (FS).

SlickStick
12-07-2005, 03:40 PM
Wow, only 41,100 PF copies sold in the US, yet we continue to get FREE stuff?!?!

There must have been a ton sold outside of the US then or by far, we have the most developer-supported flight sim in the world!!!!

(Oh wait, we do have the most developer-supported flight sim in the world.)

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Capt.LoneRanger
12-07-2005, 04:09 PM
That's a bit unfair, Taylortony.

The open structure may be one single reason for the success of the game, but it surely is not the main thing why the FS-series are such a success - infact, it rather is an effect of the success, as many 3rd-party crews try to make their profit with the success-sim.
IMHO reasons like
- ability to fly wherever you want (from the famous places around the world, to your home town)
- ability to fly aircraft, that you can see and fly with in RL
- realism and avionics ( it's easy to learn, but challenging to master)
- very large community
- excellent weather system

most people flying FS-series are not interested in prop-planes, most of them not even in flying war-planes. If it only was the open structure, CFS would have been at least sold in numbers to be included into the list... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

As the article says, LoMac was abandoned by UBI-soft. There were many mistakes made with this product, due to pressure and internal problems. And if that wasn't enough, most of them were denied by UBI and EagleDynamics way too long. It's a real pitty, nevertheless, as even with all it's bugs, LoMac was a promising sim. The latest mistake IMHO was the addon. An extremely well done and sophisticated flight modell, but it was not included in the demo as it was supposed to be and the modell was only applied to a single plane, though all Russian planes were updated, too. The US weren't, which practically eliminated all dogfight-servers with a single strike. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif

Chuck_Older
12-07-2005, 04:27 PM
If Ubi dropped 1C:Maddox Games, you can bet your last dollar this forum would come down in an instant

LStarosta
12-07-2005, 04:51 PM
Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
If Ubi dropped 1C:Maddox Games, you can bet your last dollar this forum would come down in an instant

We'd all move to the CFS3 forums.

redfeathers1948
12-07-2005, 04:57 PM
I'm not to much into the ins and outs of economical,corporate, who's who of the flight sm genre,to lazy to care probably, however I do remember that at the time I got into flight sims and computers at the same time back in '96 with a Gateway 196 with 16kb of ram I think. Windows 95 was the bomb and of all the flight sims out at that time the ONLY one designed for 95 and the ONLY one with excellant flight modeling was...yes Flanker 1.0. The beggining of my addiction. I never was an arcade kind of guy so nothing else interested me. Flight modeling..why have a HOTAS if you cant walk the edge of a stall to get some fun..anyway since that long ago time anything designed for my pleasure after The Wall came down has gotten my allegiance and respect..most everything else be darned. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

LEXX_Luthor
12-07-2005, 05:06 PM
Mee Too !!!!

I avoided flight sims like a plauge until I got started on Flaker 1.0 for DOS. I always hated the arcade super jets but Flaker was different from the usual super jets found in the sims so I gave it a shot and loved it. I didn't touch another of these things *all* with the same Hollywood TV planes until WW2 Eastern Front came out.

redfeathers1948::
yes Flanker 1.0. The beggining of my addiction. I never was an arcade kind of guy so nothing else interested me. Flight modeling..why have a HOTAS if you cant walk the edge of a stall to get some fun..anyway since that long ago time anything designed for my pleasure after The Wall came down has gotten my allegiance and respect..most everything else be darned. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

nickdanger3
12-07-2005, 05:33 PM
CFS3 didn't even sell 19,000 units ? That seems unbelievable.

I think a big part of Microsoft'd dominance of the market is the fact that their product is so firmly entrenched in the collective minds of computer users. It was the FIRST PC GAME that I ever saw back in the 1980's.

Capt.LoneRanger
12-07-2005, 05:43 PM
To be honest, despite of the high aims, LOMAC never was more than a remake of Flanker. I didn't like it, to be honest. It was too heavy scripted when flying to the edge, though it felt cool to fly it.
I'm still fan of the Falcon series. They are still sold in relatively good numbers and the game is 8 years old. I just wish they had the permission to alter the original exe, to implement a new graphics engine. ex-Microprose (now Hasbro/Atari) made a big mistake prohibiting that. The avionics, the campaign system and AI is still unparallel, but this is, what a modern flightsim should have.

neural_dream
12-07-2005, 05:45 PM
Have you missed the new Falcon 4?
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/falcon4alliedforce/review.html http://www.gamecaptain.de/galleries/2316/5.jpg

thefarb2
12-07-2005, 06:08 PM
GTR, 9000, the few the proud.

Waldo.Pepper
12-08-2005, 12:20 AM
I wonder how many sales were prevented by the rampant piracy that preceeded the releease of PF?

Capt.LoneRanger
12-08-2005, 01:15 AM
Of course not, neural_dream http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Infact Falcon4 was replaced by AF http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

But only part of the engine was updated (just clouds and textures) and it really looks a bit rusted. Not as bad as some some recently released sims, but you can see it's engine is outdated.

Bearcat99
12-08-2005, 06:18 AM
Keep in mind those figures are for Pacific Fighters.... Not the whole shebang.... I think the reason why MS does so well is because it is the original.... it has been around so long that there is a huge community already in place that is constantly being built upon. They have had what..... 10 years or so? Plus many simmers look at the shooting sims more as games.... mainly because they havent tried them.. or at least this one.. and what they want is a flying experience not neccessarily a combat flying one. Lastly..... you cant overestimate the ethnocentricity factor. I would be willing to wager that at least half of the regulars here initially passed on IL2 because they didnt see the familiar planesets... and it was only after trying the demo, the release of FB/AEP/PF or the ensuing buzz from all 3.. that they found out the quality of the sim.... and fell hook line and sinker.

nakamura_kenji
12-08-2005, 06:27 AM
would count operation flashpoint as soldier sim it sell million + ?

airdale1960
12-09-2005, 05:14 PM
When I tell people I play flight sims, they automatically think Microsoft. Most do not play any flight sim. When you throw in IL-2 Series, a Russian sim, Americans are clueless to what constitutes a great flight sim. Unless you are a hardcore simmer, the learning curve is too long for flight sims, especially the IL-2 series, most Americanishers do not have the patients to learn. They like their quick fix. Just a humble observation.

panther3485
12-09-2005, 11:32 PM
Hi there, airdale1960

Quote 1:
When I tell people I play flight sims, they automatically think Microsoft. Most do not play any flight sim.

I'm inclined to agree here. Microsoft FS series are long established and well known among the general public. They have also (mostly) been highly regarded and have a solid reputation in the popular mind. This, combined with the open architecture, a plethora of add-ons and the simple pleasure of flight without having to shoot or be shot at, hits the spot for many people. It is also a buzz being able to fly over one's own city or country as it looks today and recognize familiar landmarks. Then, of course, there's the 'serious' side of navigation, avionics, weather etc. A good blend for most punters here, I think.

But then, I'm not 'most punters' and for me, nothing beats the combat flight sim and the king of this sub-genre (IMHO) is the IL-2 series. I just have to recognize that my kind will probably always be a minority. (A perceptive, discerning and intelligent minority perhaps, but still a minority! Hem-hem! Cough, cough!)


Quote 2:
Americans are clueless to what constitutes a great flight sim. Unless you are a hardcore simmer, the learning curve is too long for flight sims, especially the IL-2 series, most Americanishers do not have the patients to learn. They like their quick fix.


C'mon mate! I think you are being very unfair to Americans here. I've known a good number of Americans and I see no evidence that they are any more 'clueless' (with the possible exception of Alicia Quiverbone - joke!!) or any less patient than most other Westerners. Surely the attributes you have mentioned apply to a sizeable percentage of people in most Western countries?

P.S. Alicia is probably a very intelligent young woman IRL.


Best regards,
panther3485

redfeathers1948
12-10-2005, 12:56 AM
most Americanishers do not have the patients to learn. They like their quick fix.

hmmmmmmm....I am not sure that 'most Americanishers'..ect ect is an accurate statement, being an American myself..but yeah we tend to be impatient at times..mostly depends on who or what we are dealing with..
honest humility usually gets the benifit of the doubt though..I'll take your humble opinion in stride airdale1960