Pay-As-You-Go? (discussion of why it's not a great idea)

ATTENTION ALL: This topic has changed so much, it’s not even funny. There’s obviously more downsides to having pay-as-you-go, so we’re switching this topic to only downsides. (And if you’d like, you can also name some ways to improve this system.

The question now is: What are some reasons FDS will not put pay-as-you-go into IF?

Feel free to read everything I have below for a couple of the positives to a system like this.
But enough of the positives, what are all the negatives?
I’ll update the “ALL EDITS” list as we get more negatives!

So my last post got shut down. As far as I know, it was because I put it in Features, but I should have put it in General instead. (EDIT: please do not close this post, I was allowed to create this discussion!
I’m just looking to get a discussion going about reasons this idea may or may not work.
If I’m doing something wrong by putting this in General now, feel free to close this topic immediately! Can you just DM me to tell me what I’m doing wrong? I’d like to learn for future reference. Thank you!

And before leaving a comment or question, be sure to read the current suggestions in the “ALL EDITS” section below!

Now, for my post:

Okay, I know that this probably won’t happen in Infinite Flight for a number of reasons. However, I thought it might be nice just to throw this idea out there. (I hope this isn’t a duplicate.)
Feel free everyone to share your ideas on this approach. I don’t necessarily intend for IF to implement this, but I thought it might be nice to discuss the pros and cons of a system like this.

Often times I find myself never flying to regions like Antartica or central Russia. Should I still get charged for these areas that I never fly to?
What if you were automatically charged every time you flew through a “region”? These regions might be similar in size to those of pre-global. The prices for different regions might vary depending on their popularity. (For example, KLAX might be slightly more expensive than an airport in Greenland.)
It might change how much it charges depending on how long you fly in the region.
The system will not charge for any time the aircraft is stationary on the ground.

So what do you all think? Is there anything I should add/change? Feel free to discuss ways to improve this system and ways in which this system will/won’t work.

And btw, if I liked your comment/question, there’s a good chance you’ll see it below:

August 15, 2018 With the current prices of Global being pretty high for some, maybe this plan might seem more inviting for those people? More people buying = more revenue?

August 15, 2018 The App Store doesn’t support this type of billing at the moment.
August 15, 2018 Pilots misusing the system, cheating and taking advantage of bugs.
August 15, 2018 Potential lost revenue from this system? Could cancel out the benefit of having new buyers?
August 15, 2018 Overall just very complicated, not super efficient*
August 15 Route planning complications…
August 15 For many people, it’s cheap enough already right now.
August 15 People wanting to do ATC???

Ways to improve this system:
August 15, 2018 Improve efficiency and allow more sampling, see @cblaydes7 's post.

August 15, 2018 Maybe just add this option instead of replacing others? That way pilots can choose whichever option will be cheaper.
August 15, 2018 Another option is to replace having no subscription at all with a system like this.
August 15, 2018 My original idea was to bill by time, it doesn’t matter how many times they enter the region.
August 15 Too much risk of lost revenue

Thanks, and happy flying!

Previous discussion responses (from the closed topic):

Uh oh… now the other one got reopened
Let’s just stick with this one

EDIT: Ok, the other post is unlisted now, we’re good.

My thoughts

Positive: People don’t pay for regions they fly to.

Negative: Pilots that fly very frequently might end up paying more than what they pay right now.



FDS has a billing model and simplified it recently. I don’t see this happening.

  • Too complicated of a billing method.
  • Pricing isn’t feasible on mobile app stores.
  • Opens up billing errors “I forgot my flight was running and I passed through all these regions, I demand a refund”
  • Potentially reduce revenue.

Basically I see this as a “I am paying too much I want to pay less” type of deal.

For example, would you ask spotify to charge “by song”?


@Chris_S I totally agree with everything you’re saying, you have some very good points there.

However, one way to think of this system is through Apple Music.
If you have the premium Apple Music subscription (Pro subscription for IF), then you always have access to all of the songs, and you can download any of them.
However, if you don’t pay for the premium subscription (this system), then you have to buy the specific songs/albums you want to listen to and/or download.

I think it’s kinda the same idea as that, except in IF context. You only pay for the regions you fly in.

1 Like

It’s more expensive if you buy all of the songs you want to listen to though. For example, I enjoy over 100 different songs. Each of them costs around $3. If I were to buy all of them it would be $300. Whereas a subscription is (I think $9…?), it would be less expensive.

Say every region was listed at $1. If each of them was the same size as the regions were before, a long haul would easily cost more than $10, which is the price of a monthly subscription. Like @Chris_S said, it’s too complicated of a billing method.


I like your thinking, I put in the negatives section that it might become too complicated.
However, that’s why we might also leave the current Pro subscription as an option for buyers. That way they can choose which plan best suits them.
(Oh and btw, $1 would be way too much :D I was thinking closer to 10-30 cents)

I have a couple questions:

Would one get charged every time they flew there? Ie: if someone flew in said region twice in same flight, would they get charged twice?

How would it work? Would you get charged a certain amount for a certain amount of time flying in that region?

What if I had to leave I the middle of the flight? Would I still get charged for my flight?

All in all, I, personally, don’t see this being very efficient, especially for frequent flyers in the sim so they would get charged more than needed.

I agree to what everyone has said before, this is just my take on it.

Good Day,

1 Like

The idea I had was to charge people by time. How much they are charged depends on how much time they spend in each region, regardless of how many times they enter/exit the region. I think if you left in the middle of the flight, it’s kinda on you. It’s like half-eating a meal. You already payed for it, but if you only eat half and throw away the rest, it’s not really the restaurant’s fault and you won’t get a refund for that.

Sure. I hear what you’re saying.

But, people leave flights in the sim all the time. I like your example with the restaraunt, but with the sim, sometimes you have to do other things than the sim, and since, for example, you’re doing a short haul flight and you have to leave, you’re still paying for that flight, therefore, it’s inefficient.

It’s also too complicated just like diamond and Chris said.

Good Day,


So I guess there are two approaches people take on leaving mid-flight:

  1. “Since I didn’t finish the flight, I really shouldn’t get charged.”
  2. “If they flew, then they used the simulator and should get charged for using it.”
1 Like

If the cost is too low, then IF will lose revenue. If they lose revenue, the updates they produce will not be quality. If that happens then users will quit. If users quit, then IF goes out of buisness forever. Therefore, if the cost is reduced, IF goes out of buisness forever.


Everyone, don’t forget:
The purpose of this topic is NOT a feature request. I 100% DON’T expect FDS to even think about implementing this.
The purpose is to discuss all of the positives and negatives if IF started using a system like this.

1 Like

I think the cost will be slightly higher than what it is for a Pro subscription. It’s just divided up.
That way it suits people who don’t fly enough to pay $60 a year. They aren’t using the servers anyway, so should they pay? That’s the concept behind this topic.

With this… All I see are people finding the glitches in the system… I dont see it happening


If you don’t expect them to think about implementing this then what would be the purpose of this topic?

Although you don’t want them to go and implement it right away you obviously think this system would have more benefits than drawbacks otherwise you wouldn’t mention it.

I’m throwing out positives because no one else is.
You can check the positives and negatives in the main topic. I’ve listed more negatives than positives.

Well, I think that me and most people agree that there are a lot more negatives than positives.
And, you do have to realize, Global costs a lot of money to create and maintain. They have to pay for the servers to stream the data from, and the image and topographical data. Remember, FDS is a business, they have to make money and pay for the operational costs of the sim.
This would hurt both FDS and the user, in my opinion. So… what would be the point then?


I have thanks. I’ve read through every post and you seem to think this is a beneficial idea.

Unfortunately, I really don’t think it is and nobody else seems to.