Conure

Stick with it :) The sim is fantastic and has taken up thousands of mine - none of which are wasted given how much you learn about aviation in general :)

:megalol::megalol::megalol::megalol::megalol:

Is that how it looked in 2003? Then there has been even less progress than I remembered.........

You've stated a number of things ED has said it is going to do, and a few things which it has actually achieved. Let alone set deadlines! Since when did promises = content? Not often, with ED!

Mmm...I'm sure the majority of the community would prefer to see (let's be quite clear here) minor improvements in ME capability and the sound engine over new terrain and improvements in the general engine.

I doubt that you have any clue how they're doing financially (again, on the commercial side of things) other than the fact they're still solvent (unless they produce quarterly reports to internet forum moderators:lol:) - I would judge given the projections for projects that they would previously give (Nevada at release ring any bells?) and their utter inability to meet such projections and, additionally, requirements of modern technology, that they either can't afford man power, or can't effectively project manage. And yes you did say it at the beginning of the conversation, and all facts would point to the fact you're most likely still wrong! In fact I'd go so far as to have that using the data available, to presume ED are doing all-right would be the best you could derive from it. Unless of course you think a lack of material and slowly released minor upgrades (cockpit shadows in BS?) are the sign of a high powered, dedicated and effective commercial studio. I expect given how niche this title is, their military side is propping up the commercial side. Not producing effective deadlines, much less being able to work to deadlines is not good business practice. When effective competition comes out (and I sincerely hope it does), ED will have to start making and keeping promises to customers. I wonder if they're up to it?

Not really sure what you mean by this - I have seen multiple comments re stagnation. The same scenery for how long? In fact I'm not even sure...How long have we been using this map and texturing? I understand that it was expanded slightly, but ultimately how long have we been flying the same bit of Georgian coast?

I have done, the technology has been available for years yet still no support. Updates such as new terrain, multicore support, bringing the graphics into this century (like IL2, RoF, FSX + Addons granted, X-Plane 10), some form of dynamic campaign - all of these things would bring a plethora of new people to the simulator, but obviously since ED are doing SO well in their civilian enterprise, they don't even need more customers right? I have never ever seen you criticize ED, are they, in your opinion a company worthy of utter devotion with no room for critique? You see, that's all I'm doing. Perfectly legitimate critique. I think (with good knowledge of the workings of business and methodology behind increasing profit) that there are implementations that would drastically improve the size of the customer base. If you look to other forums there are many people who would love to move from F4 if there were some form of dynamic campaign, alternatively many would move from FSX if DCS had better visuals... If (I would argue, when) somebody comes along and takes note of this, ED will be in trouble on the civilian side. No doubt their military business is second to none. This idolising a company with very little experience in the civilian commercial sector is very dangerous, I hope the management at ED has more sense than some people here, yet given the general feel of the ED/TFC project, I don't hold out much hope.

Old, utterly relevant, and still not adequately addressed :thumbup:

ED is doing fine....And yet, don't have sufficient resources and man power to create updates in a timely fashion? Hmm..Nobody is asking for an engine rewrite every two years, perhaps just an update to something this side of 2005? :megalol: Are you serious when you say there is no stagnation, or was that a joke?:noexpression:

Happy? No, why should I be. Sad? No. Just aware of the fact that there are nobody out there good enough to step up and do what ED/TFC do/have done to date. We will see upon release of the Tacpac, Combat-Helo etc. My understanding is the VRS superbug is every bit as good as DCS minus combat. That will now change. Irrelevant if one has regard to the fidelity of ED's products to date. They continue to improve with every reiteration. There are no inferior or superior benchmarks: I know that the Airframes they provide are the best that they can be at that stage in the developmental process - they are not released as sub-par products. The engine is sub par to almost every modern software release in the last 5 years as it lacks full multicore support. I do not deal in 'what-ifs'. I deal in the here and now. Then I am glad you do not run a business of any kind, you wouldn't last long! Then what are you doing here? By posting here you have not chosen an alternative product: You have chosen to shop at the corner-shop. Conduct yourself accordingly. Whilst I understand that some people would equate criticism of a product with irrational hatred, as a paying and generally happy customer I have every right to be here. That is not to say that if a superior product were released I wouldn't jump ship until ED upped their development deadlines and quality control. Even if I did have to go through the mental anguish of knowing I was part responsible for ED redundancy on the commercial side of things. Ultimately, lack of criticism leads to stagnation. Stagnation is what we have here - surely you do not mean to argue that developing multicore support would have been a worse choice than FC3 and whatever the classic fighter is? There is growing interest in this genre, soon there will be direct competition to this software. This can only be a fantastic thing.

Are you happy about the fact that there is no competition? Do you think a lack of competition gives us a superior product? The reason a competitor has not arisen is, most likely, because there is more money to be a made in simpler yet more appealing products. That does not mean that competition will not appear. There are some very talented people (PMDG, TACPAC etc) and I really hope they get an engine worthy of their skills! I couldn't care for the livelihoods of ED employers if I chose an alternative product, any more than I would care for the livelihoods of a corner shop when I chose to shop at a supermarket. Utterly irrelevant.

It's not irrelevant at all, of course they are on track in a solo market where fans of the genre are effectively forced to purchase or opt out of the hobby. With no major competitors, doing things like releasing new scenery well over a year after expected and using a several outdated engine is fine. ED do some things well, customer care and meeting deadlines are not those things. If (when, more like, given the slow picking up the of genre over the last few years) a competitor arises, ED will find it extremely hard to keep its customers. At the moment they have the rare luxury of dominating the market. In any business, this rarely lasts if there is money to be made. I very much hope a competitor does come up with a release; the stagnation of this genre has led to people using the same scenery for however many years, and an ancient engine which runs on one or two cores! The fact that this is accepted (and indeed, defended) is very sad. In the 90s, the genre utilised the cutting edge of technology available...Now (as with FSX) people have to OC their computers significantly beyond factory requirements simply because the software is out of date. A Rise of Flight quality modern day engine would be fantastic, let's hope for our genres sake this is realised.

In a market with next to no competition, no doubt!

Cheers Effte - looks great, trial lesson booked!

Patience, its only a year and 3 months overdue!! :)

Hi everyone, I can't justify the costs of a PPL at the moment despite a number of lessons - but nevermind, I can continue in the near future :) Anyway, I was trawling youtube aviation vids and came across gliding which...Looks really fun. Does anybody do it? I've looked up prices and it seems way way cheaper than flying, as cheap as about £25.00 per hour, is that right?! Maybe I'm cynical because if that's true it could be a viable and affordable aviation hobby! Please let me know thoughts :)

It can be easier if you just download the torrent: http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/torrents/DCS_A-10C_EN.torrent Click that, it'll potentially also be faster.

Hey all, So wee have the Nevada terrain coming soon(ish) and was curious...How close is the Nevada terrain to the Middle East (I know I'm being a little generic) and roughly how large is it (the map I mean) - is it feasible to get the experience of flying in Afghanistan (I know, long missions, boring etc..But I'm the kind that enjoys transatlantic real time flights on fsx) - or is the scenery completely different? Cheers

The biggest challenge is the equipment I think - I've got a few smart friends who would play the game and eventually learn and enjoy the technical hunting aspect which the game offers - but would they enjoy it without a HOTAS/TrackIR/Rudder Pedals? Probably not much, and they sure wouldn't be willing to drop £200 for an X52 and TrackIR setup to enjoy these games properly!

Hey, Just read that my core i5 760 has turbo boost enabled with some applications - For example it may boost to 3.3ghz with a two core app. Would DCS A10/BS utilise this feature or, due to sound engine etc potentially being on a third core (or is it on second?) would it not boost?

I'll regret it but reluctantly buy.. :D Long time no speak - hope all is well!

He cheats - significantly!

I think most of the flight sim community would've been extremely happy with a re-release of FSX with full multicore support and code that was much more refined!

It's like Eve Online transversal for real :D