i would buy( full price of the fínished game) a copy of the alpha/beta version, to support the development process.

The poll results are very encouraging. All the ‘yes’ answers show support for the direction in which I see flight sim development go anyway. But I have three remarks:

- Why are so few (relatively to the other questions) people interested in an online newsletter (which I take it is free)? Does this have anything to do with the attractiveness of a newsletter or with methodological aspects of the questionnaire (people who answer the poll are so involved in the forums they don’t need the newsletter)?
- The people in this thread are bound to be relatively positive. Why not put the poll out to all SimHQ members once the daily news starts again?
- You talk about sims in general. But could the answers WWI sims not be different (less positive) than for, for example, WEWII sims which, I think, are much more popular?

I don’t want to be discouraging; I answered all questions with ‘yes’ and hope (and would pray if I were a believer) that so many people do that investors lay waiting in their sleeping bags at Aspect’s doors tomorrow morning. But we have to bee cautious. All the same, there is hope again for KoE and what more could we ask for at the moment?

I wanted to add...I knew that Eddie was working as contract modeller for KoE long before any of this story about the puplisher going AWOL became puplic. (Hope that is not any breach of NDA, he never let me in on any infos or screenshots or something).

Would have to be a mighty well-planned fraud to have people, months before the final pull, give out false information.

Nah, Eddie is legit (as John noted he's now working on some PF Models) and by that extension when he choses to associate himself with KoE they are totally legit themself. Not a doupt about that.

And even if I wouldn't know Eddie...it still would be a little too big a setup to create a game website, build screenshots, run this for half a year, then construct a story about a puplisher going AWOL, instead supporting another WW1 Sim on the X-Box, and finally trying to get people to send money...

Nah...fraud can be waaaaay simpler than that.

About the newsletter question. Guod had some real limitations imposed on him by the software when it came time to write the questions for the poll. He didn't have a chance to better explain what was meant. I think most people understood from having read all the other posts during the past week that we were asking about a newsletter that was published on a website and that you had to pay a subscription fee to be able to see and read. The money raised would be used to help cover the expense of finishing KOE.

Here's how it would work.

Let's imagine that you've decided to help support the finishing of KOE. You send Aspect Simulations $15 for a 6 month subscription to the newsletter via PayPal. You get sent in return a password that allows you to connect to a secure website that has the newsletter on it. In this newsletter you'll find news about the development of KOE and see screenshots and videos of the game in action that are exclusive to the website. When KOE becomes available for sale, you'll get a $20 or $30 discount for having been a subscriber to the newsletter. When we need beta testers, only subscribers will know about it and their applications will be given favor over non-subscribers. We may have a thousand subscribers and only need one hundred testers, so a subscription isn't a guaruntee that you'll get to be a beta tester, but you'll have a much better chance to be one than the regular player.

The placing of this poll on the KOE forum instead of a general discussion forum was done at the request of SimHQ.

The thought of investors waiting at the door is an interesting one. They'd have to bring along some strong insect repellant as the mosquitos around here have a very real threat of carrying the West Nile Virus. They'd have to worry about getting overrun by tumbleweed and rabbits and the occassional praire dog as well. Fields of buffalo aren't too far away either.

........and a lot more profitable and painless that what Xeidos2 has been revealing to us here so far I'm sure!

Let's move on beyond this issue, there's things to do, people to see, and issues to be resolved..............with all due caution and determination acknowledged.

Well I certainly don't want to go to Colorado now!!!

I'll take my updates in a newsletter form........thank you very much.

Well I answered yes to all the poll questions except the "buying the product in stages" one!
I'm willing to pay for the game over the Internet and I'm also willing to give money in advance (newsletter and other contributions) and I'm also a 100% supporter of future Addons which I think it's an excelent idea to keep a game profitable!

But regarding the "buying the product in stages" option my answer is clear NO!! I will NOT buy a game (or other kind of product) in stages! When I buy a game I want it to be at least completed and have a minimal standard of quality (which an uncompleted game will not have for sure)!
I had enough of many recent games (specially sims) which have lot of bugs and were really uncompleted when they got out.

But I do support at 100% all other options and with them I think there's no need to release an uncompleted game!

I guess it depends on what "stages" means. If it is:

Stage 1: lots of bugs
Stage 2: fewer bugs
Stage 3: a lot less bugs
Stage 4: very few bugs
FINAL: hardly any bugs

Then I am against it. But, if it means:

Stage 1: Single player with 4-5 planes per side.
Stage 2: Single player with 10+ planes per side.
Stage 3: Multiplayer on company server (free)
Stage 4: Multiplayer on user servers and company mega servers (fee)

You get the idea. If "staging" means thoroughly tested and operational but with limited features then I'm OK with that.

Pen, you have made a very good point.

I believe that this game is real, and not a con job but even with our support there is no guarantee that it will see the light of day. I have seen some games that looked very good but never made it to the light of day. Confirmed Kill, Target for Tonight are two that come to mind.

This is something that everyone that gets involved, financially or not,needs to keep in mind before committing to this, or any other game of its type. Many great ideas never get to the final stage and this may happen. I don't want anyone to get upset if KOE still fails. I suspect that it will take a lot of effort from a lot of people to get this thing off the ground and that it may come to fruition unless there is a major backer. I am still willing to help, whatever way I can but I also realize that like some investments, they don't pan out. It is a risk.

What would be nice is for people to see some kind of 'working' copy of the game. Not everyone, maybe some reliable people in the gaming press or those without a major interest in the game. Kess would be a goo one to look at the early early builds to verify that yes, there is a game engine and yes that it is in good shape. In addition I am sure there is someone at SimHQ, Check 6, and other mags that would be willing to look at it and verify that it is 'on the track' to completion. I am not suggesting myself, whomever the group here thinks would be an impartial staff member to look at the game would be the best bet.

Personally I think that would be the best way for the public to view this project.

Just remember that it still may not come to be, even with positive press covering it may still fail.

No rose covered glasses here.

Also a good point but expect bugs. I can't remember a game that didn't have some major ones in it so I expect it here. As long as it doesn't crash and the planes fly reasonably well I am willing to wait for fixes.

Absolutely!

The modular concept, discussed here (no pushed here) on this forum for over a year now, was seen as a key to getting the most bug-free, in-depth, iron-out coding, high-fidelity AC, terrain, campaign, online networking.............you get the idea!

The formula for success has always been there, and it's time to embrace it!

Maybe necessity dictates this now, but like others have maintained, and how Stickshaker (and now Chevelle) have denoted, for highest quality high-fidelity simulation nowadays, you need to focus (this was at the heart of my "squadron(s) campaign idea)!

You prioritize the essentials, and take on the building in segments, by adding on layers...........but the original build has to have this modular concept in mind from the beginning for easiest implementation (which makes the facillation of adding additional content later easier in the long-run).

My own examples of successful staged releases:

1. WFP: Started with about 60 planes, is now at 100. Added things over time, developed software to automate processes, graduallya dded stuff and I'm still at it.

2. My real job: Was hired three years ago to work on software that leaked memory like a sieve, performed like a pig, and had about 40% of the funtionality of the flagship java product. After V4 it didn't leak anymore. After V5 its performance had improved by almost 2000%. After V6 its performance had increased by 3000%. All along its feature list was catching up to the flagship program.

Staged releases are ABSOLUTELY THE CORRECT WAY TO DEVELOP LONG LIVED SOFTWARE!!! The thing is that most games are not intended to be long lived, so they are coded like ****e for a quick bang.

...so there's profit?!$ $

If a newlestter doesn't make me pay more and just changes 'when' I'm paying then I change my vote (as that was the only one I voted 'no' on). Of course, there does need to be a gurantee of eventual release before any actual transactions are made.

I don't fear a sim ever being released, even in alpha stages, I'm a total believer that there is a flying KoE. My fear is that we get a WWIIOnline version of WWI flight sim. In that I mean, a piece of flying crap, to put it lightly. Sorry if anyone loves WWIIOnline, but to me it looks like a cartoon both in animations and features.

Personally, I'd rather pay $150 to see an updated version of Longbow 2, or send the money Flexman's way to get AH64 Apache out the door, but I guess you won't find helos in WWI so more power to you guys if you can pull it off with a decent sim.

There's alot of people evidently willing to blindly throw money at a project that may never get finished. There's absolutely no way i'd ever prepay for anything that i wasn't absolutely positive of getting and that i didn't know exactly what i was getting for my money. In other words there's no way i'd prepay unless:

1) I was guaranteed it was going to be released
2) I was guaranteed what features were going to be in
3) Guaranteed a release date

Without those conditions i may as well throw my money away as it'd serve the same purpose. I personaly don't think a situation like this would work as the people that prepayed would consider themselves investors and rightly so, and would expect to be involved directly in the process and again rightly so and have constant updates and progress reports. This situation would be more of a headache for the developer than it'd likely be worth. Let alone the potential for lawsuits when the finished product either doesn't come or doesn't meet certain standards. I personally think that this should just be allowed to die a graceful death and that be that.

And that was Swampthng folks, lets have a big round of applause for the thng!

We'll take that as a "No" vote...........LOL!!!

Pssst... Hey fellas, a little tiny thing called a DEMO would inspire some of the non-believers. Heck even an alpha technology demo would be enuff. If ya can't even make something available like that at this point in it's development, I'd say the investors are gonna have to wait quite some time to get there hands on a product finished enoughed to even be released. It may involve many more headaches than you asked for. No matter how nice and supportive people may seem now, give them another year without at least some kind of release and you'll find out who your friends are.

Some valid points raised there. I must admit the idea of KOE being resurrected by the very people who are most interested in it, is a good one. I for one would rather it didn't "die a graceful death" but I would also need to know that after subscribing to a newsletter or funding the project any other way, that I was eventually going to have a flyable WW1 flightsim on my hard drive. A year down the track and a couple of newsletters later I would be upset, to say the least, if the comment "sorry we have to turn the lights out" came up.

My major concern is ironically also the best part of this idea, namely letting us, the simmers, fund this project. Despite the couple of hundred people who have voted on this poll, is that really enough to fund the completion of KOE or would the subscription start running into three figures?. Has this idea (and this poll)been circulated to other sim sites?. I guess this is all semantics right now and there would be many details to iron out before any money changed hands.

I agree with Tom Cofield when he says that we would need an idea of exactly how far forward the development of KOE has come so far. A selected release of the sim would at least give us an idea of whether KOE was actually worth investing in. As for guaranteed release dates and features, no sim would ever have been released if those stipulations were present!.

*edited for dyslexic spelling ability*

Terrible Two:

Amen brother. I would really like to see an updated Apache sim as well. World War One in my opinion, and my opinion only just doesn't trip my particular trigger. So say NO for me.

As for pricing, here is a neat trick. Read on if you need a refresher in Econ 101. I am jumping the rails at this point and goint OT. Read at your own risk.

Let the market decide. It's worked for about Six Thousand years or so of recorded history. It's imperfect, but it's better than anything else out there.

People's grasp on economics, and civics seems to be pretty weak these days. Here in the States during an election cycle especially, it gets down right insane. No logic, no basis in reality, just a beauty contest, punctuated with anti-logic. You can figure out who is full of poo for your self. That is so far OT even I won't go there.

All I know is the guy that says he is going to make the world some kind of utopia, and all he needs to do it, is the major part of my income, uses the same "logic", as the guys in this forum that want to "save" flight sims by charging $ 150 - $300 US a pop.

Life doesnt work that way friend. You charge all you can till somebody else makes a better product, at a reduced cost. Repeat as necessary. It's basic economics. Why shouldn't basic econ apply to flight sims as well as any other product ?

The Russians couldn't ignore that reality, and went broke. The Chinese tried it too, and now they use the market as a weapon to persue their agenda (very smart, forward thinking people the chinese) Didn't work for Castro either because he floats his workers paradise on drug money. North Korea is starving. They ignored market forces and now their people are in a world of hurt. However they did manage to con lots of weapons money, and even heating oil out of some stupid US politcians who threw money at them in exchange for a bogus promise not to develop weps of mass destruction. the funding stopped only when Japan had a multi-stage missile splash off their east coast as a result. Most of the countries in Africa who are really hurting are doing so because they stifled their market forces in favor of a centrally controlled economy. Look at South Africa. Mugabe is absolutely nuts ! S. Africa is hurting now, when it use to be the economic giant of the contenent.
Check for yourself. Market forces can not be denied.

My bet is the developers get this. They tried to say so, but nobody listened. They want to gauge interest to see if further expenditure of capital is warranted. I don't get why so many folks don't understand that.

You may now return to a hopefully more enlightened discussion of the issue.

I think the idea of a subsciption newsletter is a bad one. This whole endevour can only succeed if the community as a whole gets behind it. This may mean paying for a product that may come in stages. Information is vital to keeping the community behind the project. Limiting it to only those that have paid for it risks loosing the support of the larger community, something that this project cannot afford.