Expert

hahah dude check my signature

É abbastanza calzante anche la mancanza di differenza di prezzo fra un modulo top e quella roba li.

What? F-15, really?

That's an hot question, and also very sad if true.

Certi bug o li eviti o disinstalli il modulo :lol: ... ma costa 70 euro! ed è incompleto e baggato. Ormai praticamente stanno tutti facendo cosi, solo che c'è chi si ostina a difendere le SH per le loro politiche spenna polli. A questo punto possiamo parlare di frode. Ma la gente ancora pensa al mig23 e all'f-15e... Sono commosso anche io :megalol: senza offesa per nessuno. Credo di essere il primo ad avere coniato il termine "buy to support" o buying to support, un abitudine al quanto sconveniente di questi tempi.

Apparently there are people who just don't want to understand the difference between those who buy and those who produce. They think they are part of the producers by buying EAs to support them and are happy to find bugs and report so they feel part of the process. I'm not telling you what to think about it because the cause of what we are experiencing with razbam depends on how these people have spent their money.

Finally someone who acts as a real buyer and not like who says to buy the EA to "support", "buy to support" do you understand what I mean? You should seriously think about suing for a refund. :lol:

Haven't they come to comment yet? incredible!

I couldn't have said it better than that :thumbup: It's all about the hype. Can you believe they claim to make the F15E? You are right. I'll tell you I have a more open mind. I would say to the devs: Are you unable to do a module at the level of a study level sim? okay, you state from the start that the module will have incomplete dynamics and avionics but at least it will be bug free. ah obviously the price will have to be much lower, and I don't think the devs like this part. The problem is that people keep buying EA to support by adopting the unhealthy "buy to support" habit. These same people get mad at you if you try to complain. For them it is right that we are just chickens to be plucked. Look the third part down here. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=284141

Ora mi spieghi dov'è la prospettiva in un bug presente da gennaio 2019 a gen 2020, che viene riportato in continuazione, che per andare dal punto A al punto B te lo ritrovi di fronte costringendoti ad utilizzare un altro modo di agire e cosi via.. è solo un esempio per dire che proprio c'è la mettiamo tutta a vedere le cose dalla prospettiva sbagliata. Io propongo un alternativa migliore ai developers. Se il sistema(per esempio un arma) è buggato, lo togli direttamente, se un sistema è verosimile ma incompleto, lo dichiari apertamente. Cosi facendo crei un prodotto non study ma comunque privo di bug e funzionale. Ehh ma ovviamente questo comporta scendere il prezzo, e mi sa che non va bene ai devs...

JAKAL non per fare polemica ma ecco il classico commento a protezione di tutto tranne che del proprio tempo(che non tornerà mai più indietro) e del proprio portafogli. Questo modo di parlare lo si trova un po da per tutto ma noi italiani a raggirare le cose siamo imbattibili. Riusciamo a fare passare un difetto come un pregio.... Dove sono finiti i vecchi tempi dove ti bastava un modulo incompleto ma funzionante da usare in una campagna dinamica che ti faceva sorvolare sulla grafica datata e robe varie, e dove per avere tutto questo non dovevi spendere un centesimo, al massimo una decina di euro per accedere...avete capito bene di cosa sto parlando. Invece oggi ci ritroviamo a spendere 80 euro a botta per moduli con estenuanti attese di essere completati pieni di bug nel mentre che ne escono altri l'uno sopra l'altro e cosi via quando poi non abbiamo neppure un valido ecosistema per usarli. Le cose stanno prendendo una piega che non mi piace. Altro che study level sim...

Certo che ne hanno avuto di tempo per incassare quei 70 euro... risolvi una cosa di qua una di li e aspetti che qualcuno si convinca che è sufficiente per acquistare il modulo. Ormai i changelog sono come la pubblicità, ti danno visibilità. Sembra quasi che un prodotto finito non attiri più, e intanto continuano a postare immagini di work in progress... se se aspetta e spera, c'è già da ridere, se si continua cosi dove andremo a finire. e già :music_whistling:

DLSS is the future. Not more competition with amd for now, bye bye.

It must be nice to spend 70 bucks and find yourself an unusable "product" in a hypothetical dynamic campaign. Could it be just a marketing strategy to sell to the unwary? Take a look here for the EA part https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=284141

Only on a DCS forum could the discussion take this turn. You rightly start talking about the historical/geographic/whatever realism where you should use the F-16 and end up talking about technical stuff and that could go on for eternity. Due to the 1.15 rule I prefer not to mention the name but have you ever tried the dynamic campaign of the other.... The only motivation for having another version is to fly it in a dynamic campaign that gives a touch of realism to the whole experience. There is no other sense for which ED should make that F-16 version. I really wonder how you play DCS, the more i read the forum the more it becomes difficult for me to understand what you find satisfaction in. To give you an example, it's as if for you the fun of football consisted in changing shirt and team (block 40 or 50 etc) rather than in the game itself (play the campaign=that is not a bunch of scripted mission but is a real moving world day by day like real life) In practice the 40-50 block are pretty much the same thing, no need unless you have a dynamic campaign and even then it would be marginal. I suggest people to take a look at that other....(rule 1.15 sorry) with the dynamic campaign .. and if you want maybe this thread. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=284141

Ma che immagine di profilo hai?!

I hope that by "very close" you mean that you have the data but cannot share it.

Ehhh devs need to pay yacht bills :music_whistling: Thx to people that say: i buy EA because i want support them :megalol:

Don't you think it's the devs' duty to make these changes? Current smoke looks like ps2 graphics.

And again .. another one that does not argue because deep down you know that the things i have written are true and cannot be evaded. But people these days just want to fight to claim that everything is an opinion and that one sentence is as good as another. This reminds me of a speech i made many years ago with a person regarding video games. This person was trying to excuse the developers for the flaws in the game and was saying, "Do you want this object to look better? the devs need more money, do you want that texture to be more defined? they needs more money" So I replied: Then i buy the game at 70 bucks at day one and that's "more" money. Moral of the story: Thinking about your wallet makes you understand the difference between what is a product and what is not. For example, the gaming PC that is assembled is not a product, a console instead is. The same is true for DCS and some modules, are like the pc, they do some parts very well but are incomplete in their entirety. It's a perennial beta, a work in progress, a continuous hype, a semi-product with free access that leads you to believe that by buying modules you will have more fun and so on.. but the reality is different, and in the end, after buying many modules (which are certainly not cheap, not to mention PCs and necessary peripherals) and having spent years of life, you realize that they do not run on a "product" And even if this could be fine for me, I don't like that some "elements" instead of complaining and trying to straighten things out for the better, they adopt the philosophy for them indisputable (just see the comments) of the "buying to support", which is a total and masochistic b... you know, i can write it. So, with all the respect to your opinions, try to think about it a bit and if it feels right to stick with your opinion then stay.

Ottima osservazione, evidentemente aveva troppi soldi da spendere.

As you want I can only respond you down with your own words since you're using your freedom of speech, and let me tell you, in an impractical way. Thanks for proving that I'm right. Sorry but I find it a confused thought, I don't understand; you feel part of the devs, you see the problems (ex F16 and F18 toghether with a lot of other modules ..) but you don't want to criticize them and you accept how things are handled (and you are happy to pay 5 years in advance to enrich the " home "and wasting years of life waiting for small constant improvements) and then tell me that since you are most (I don't think so) then I should silently accept? Here I disagree. You are obviously free to say what you want but if the sun is yellow and you tell me that you can say it is pink because it is just an opinion, this is not correct. You have to separate fanboy hype with passion. The typical signs of a fanboy are, the hype, the loyalty to the brand, the desire to support each product just because they "like it" regardless if it is valid or if the seller makes money on it (is legal but you know ..) These are facts, it is so everywhere. A flying enthusiast, on the other hand can certainly feel the hype and be excited, but after an analysis he gets tired of having paid for something that takes years to complete. The problem comes when the fanboysm takes over and starts saying the things i argued in my post. Bye

Thx for replying, I appreciate it, i would like to know your mature opinion, otherwise bye and have a great time, because for now you are only confirming my reasons. You know what? you are absolutely right, in fact I cannot answer you due to rule 1.3. Like you pointed we accept the rules and so we must fallow them. Thx for comment and goodbye. I'm sorry you're feeling this, i can only say goodbye to you because for now you are only confirming my reasons. As you see from your answer, you are confirming the things said in my post, it seems that you prefer the confrontation avoiding the subject of the question. If you do not want to argue it is your legitimate and respectable decision, I will not answer any questions evading the post, intentional or not. Let's not throw it too personal. Anyway thx for comment bye. I'm sorry you don't understand my intentions, please read carefully.

Thanks for responding Thx dude for fully confirming what i was saying. I'm sure they are delighted that most of the user hates their wallet and does not value the life time lost behind the incompleteness of a module as precious. Nonetheless, the best psychoanalysts are behind these market tactics. Here is the classic behavior I was talking about ... buying to support ... of course is your point of view. You are making unproductive speeches and covering up my words, you must understand that I am not against betas, against EAs etc ... The problem I have pointed out is another. I am against "ideas and words" of users who do not realize that everything has become a perennial EA that often comes out rather incomplete at the beginning (see f-16) and despite this they pretend that everyone agrees that this is the best way. They feel part of the devs, we are not, we are just buyers. As for the so-called insults, i realize they may seem so, i apologize for that, but how should i define a fanboy attitude if not as a child's attitude? I mean these are things that exist in all sectors, are we really getting to the point where we can't talk about them anymore? There is a lot of hypocrisy and narcissism behind these alleged post. The psychological part of a (all)community is important, in addition to the fact that free expression can only help. So censoring me and letting people reply to posts like in the link i post above leaves me with a clear insight into what this forum is becoming. Just my freedom of speech. Have a nice day.

This is the second time I am writing this message because the first one was deleted due to rule 1.2. This time I remove any reference that can be interpreted as offensive for some types of users, obviously this is a castration of freedom of speech since these users write falsehoods but are left to do as long as they protect the idea of buying to support. Premise: I know I know, the older ones among you might tell me that it has always been like this, but I see that lately the situation is getting worse. I will try to express myself in the least offensive way possible. Although I have recently joined, I have been reading the forum for years now. For some time now I have been noticing a certain bad behavior regarding various aspects of the sim from users. I find their "assertions" and "requests" to be counterproductive and above all wrong. It is as if they did not understand that the beauty of this sim lies in the scientific reproduction of the reality of flight in combat aircraft that true enthusiasts love. Let me give you some of the most famous claims i heard on the forum that if you let them go i'm afraid that will dirty the community of this beautiful simulator. The thing that bothers me is that someone should remind us all of the way things are. First thing I heard: 1) "I want my module to be competitive online" "It's not competitive enough online" "it's not competitive against..." "online is everything sp it doesn't matter ... etc .." (and they complain to the developers) My two cents: Let me explain what i think. First of all, you can't just expect that what you like is done, there are rules. A true flying enthusiast finds a way to become competitive by improving himself and just wants his modules to be as realistic as possible. If you are shot down immediately it's your fault so pls stop asking devs to improve your favorite module just becouse you want to win with what you've buy. Thx. Second thing I heard: 2) "the avionics is the most important part" "the systems are not complete, don't fix the FM do the systems first!" "Will my module have this weapon at the exit?" "you can't have the feeling of the real pilot so you can't need to have a precise FM .. etc ..." My two cents: It is clear that some people don't care much about flight, more than anything else they prefer just pressing buttons and raising and lowering the cockpit levers. Many time i read the most disparate excuses to discredit those who demand precision and realism from the FM by talking about things like the "feeling" of the pilot at the controls and then are the first who buys the hotas of the F16 with pressure sensor and two buttons useful only to the real pilot and not to simmers. I find this thing a little hypocritical if you allow me the expression. So if you enjoy clicking to sporadically set the avionics of your module can at least remebrer that DCS is a flight simulator? Flight, not avionics simulator. Thx. Third thing I heard: 3) (I heard it so many times that I was almost convinced) "ED need money so we must support it by buying modules in EA" "with EA they finance the module until it is completed" "if it were not for the EA would have nothing ... etc..." My two cents: My dear friends try to think about this: In your opinion, who has to build the module to be able to do it at the beginning has only half of the documentation or has it all ready? As we all know it is the second, so the EA is a way to skin chickens (sorry ED but I had to say it, you can't think everyone is blind or put their heads down.) Let me think about this other thing: Even if it were a question of money (and if it is, it is partially), how much is your time spent playing DCS worth over a 3-5 year lifetime? Wouldn't it be better to wait 1 max 2 years putting aside some money to pay for a 200 bucks form but that is complete as we have never seen? Personally my years of life are worth, i don't know yours but mine are. Fourth thing I heard: 4) (this is recent) "ED and the third parties have agreed not to make the FM too realistic otherwise they could use it to know the true performance of the jet" (just :doh: ) Again my two cents: The first time i found this assertion i asked myself just why?, and I'm still wondering why this nonsense . If something is classified, is still classified, but you really think "they" can't reverse engineer or spy on confidential information? pls stop writing certain things just to excuse issues with the most important part, the FM. Thx. I would have others but in order not to dwell too much, take a look here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=283763 This guy has only expressed his legitimate and shared opinion and look at how many come out with looking not to argue his speech at all in order to defend what? we will never know becouse the post has been closed, of course :glare: I don't mean to be rude but I consider this actions bad actions, and since we are still in a democratic regime with freedom of expression, I think i can express my point of view and expect responses and sensible interventions from those in charge that do not conceal the problems we are experiencing with a lack of clarity. In conclusion, I urge the community to grow up, and to focus on what we should really ask for. Don't look to the future, think of the present, don't follow the hype because even though ED is making its way, practically everything it does has already been on the market for years now, there's nothing to celebrate. We are not "bug testers/beta tester" we are buyers. Thank you.