outlawal2

All these internet "experts" You guys truly have no idea what you are talking about and all you care about is "You want (Fill in whatever module) and I want it now"... The reality of the world is quite different, and luckily for those folks actually DOING something in this world, it is good that there are patent laws and copyright laws etc.. Just becasue you, in your infinite wisdom, thinks it is "Silly" does not make that statement the truth.. Threads like these really slams home just how selfish and ignorant a large portion of the world really is.. Pretty sad really..

I hope that was a joke.. Right or wrong is not determined by whether or not you can be prosecuted... It is either right or wrong.. PERIOD... I for one would not want to do business with a company that tried to circumvent copyright laws for their own profit and the parent company be-damned.. There are too many unscrupulous companies out there now.. I prefer above board top-notch companies like VEAO where guys like ELLS and PMAN hold very high standards and won't venture into a project without all of the contracts and hand shakes in place.. I can guarantee you that if I was aware of such shenanigans by a 3rd party dev I would not buy anything they produced no matter the quality of the module..

NICE I 2nd that! :thumbup:

LOL.. Yeah so I guess the 5,000+ apps in use at my company (One of the largest health care companies in the US with more than 120,000 employees) Apparently all of our apps were written incorrectly and we are just doing it wrong.. Once again, whatever

So the fact that THIS IS WHAT I DO EVERY DAY OF MY LIFE and that installing and supporting applications is what I do.. I guess I have no idea what I am talking about right? Apparently the multitude of reboots that are requested on a daily basis while I am installing applications must be a figment of my imagination? Whatever, I will leave this to all of you "experts"

I believe what you are saying, and maybe this is a DCS World aberration, I am just saying that across the board as far as Windows applications goes, this is standard procedure... You have no idea how much time I sit and wait on PC's that are rebooting due to app installs on a daily basis.. And CATSEYE, that is correct as you are UPDATING, not clean installing..

Nearly all apps do it... (and yes I do know what I am talking about as supporting desktops / servers / applications is what I do..) Reboots have been dramatically reduced in recent versions of Windows, but scratch installs almost always ask to reboot.. It is part of the application cleanup process after installation..

I guess I don't really get the question. NEarly every windows application in existence asks you to reboot when you install the app... Sooo??? (If you had done an update I could understand the question, but you already said was a scratch install so I am not getting your question..)

The info provided by the folks in this thread is GOOD INFO.. You making the "Fanboy" statement rather than reading good informed information shows YOU as spreading Fan-Boy-ISMs... :doh:

Nope not stirring the pot.. A statement was made... It is not truthful and I am pointing out what the situation really is.. If anyone wishes to not be called out on something then don't say it in the first place... And you sir... Should leave it alone...

So the reality of the situation is: VEAO attempted to do the right thing and work with the current copyright holder, making sure to be as transparent and legal as they could. When faced with the large royalty fee requested by said copyright holder, they decided that the project could not be completed in a manner that allowed them to EAT... And have since ceased work on the module... THAT... Is a far cry from... "Veao couldn't get the job done, so now I am going to have to figure out a way to do it myself." :doh:

Any response to these licensing questions?

Did you bind your fire button to the weapon release?

Well JazAero we are all waiting to see your completion of this module, considering that VEAO weren't able to complete it... How exactly do you intend to get the signoffs required if Veao could not?

Thanks for the clarification PMAN... (I didn't lose my mind after all!) :megalol:

Ahh that may be the case.. I thought Veao was talking about it, but maybe they hadn't identified it outright and I made a mistake.. Sorry..

Make sure that you don't have a light source on behind you... I had a lot of issues early on and figured out that the light in the other room was messing up the TIR. If I close the door to the room I have ZERO issues.. (You say only F-86 does this so this suggestion may not help at all because if this is the issue it should showup in all modules but thought I would mention it anyway.)

As stated I thought it was on Veao's future roadmap and then removed but I may be wrong...

Copyright deals must be made with the parent company so I can guarantee that this is a factor... Devs have also commented that due to the multiple cockpits that ED has not yet provided code for, is also an issue.. Personally, I think the multi cockpit issue will be resolved as many modules are planned that require it, the copyright issue will probably be wht sticking point... As for a company wanting or not wanting to allow a module to be created, keep in mind that these companies are in the business of building planes and have ZERO interest in what you or I want on our computers... They are not in the business of entertainment software and many are notorious for completely blowing off any and all offers.. As for you talking to Boeing (or anyone else) If I was as serious as you are about this possibility I would ping up one of the devs directly and talk to them about the issues they perceive and whether they think you could be of assistance.. I believe it was VEAO that had the Phantom on their list a while back and then removed it.. (I believe it was them) Ping up ELLS or PMAN...

Because they still own the rights to the name, namesake, likeness etc. for the plane and they can decide what can and cannot be done using it.. Everyone seems to have issue with this, but I can guarantee you that if you personally came up with an airplane (Or anything else for that matter) and spent years of time and stacks of cash, you would defend that copyright as well.. Also, copyright law being how it is, you are REQUIRED to defend your copyright becasue if you don't, after a certain amount of uncontested time goes by you FORFEIT those rights.. That is why you see so many large companies squashing any kind of infringements at all.. And while I love these modules as well as the next guy I can guarantee you that if I had a product such as the Phantom, I would not stand idly by and let a software company make money on my hard work, money etc. At least not without some kind of royalty put in place.. Now how much that would be I don't know, but no one should expect to ride someone else's train for free...

As always, YES it should be an option because nukes do exist in the wild... Then let the mission builders and server owners decide whether they want to use them in their missions and they can choose to restrict their use and "ass-hattery" with mission design.. As for the Air Quake crowd, natural selection will balance things out.. If too may folks are jerks with it, no one will play those missions / servers and eventually mission builders will do a better job of creating suitable missions that utilize the nukes on a limited and more appropriate basis..

Now that is a posting we can all relate to! Very few on this forum would NOT like to see a HIND parked in our hangars, just don't underestimate the complexity involved with making a module up to the level of fidelity that we all hope for... There is a REASON that there are only a handful of developers prepared to tackle a full on DCS module... The few devs we have so far have been excellent and have provided kick-ass modules but it has not been an easy road for any of them... This stuff is complicated! I am with ya in wanting certain modules to be made, but let's give them the time they need to complete them successfully.. ...as well as the respect they deserve for wading thru the complexities and providing excellent simulations for us to thrash... My hat is off to ED, Belsimtek, Leatherneck and VEAO for the work they have provided and continue to provide. And I am waiting to add to this short list hopefully soon.. :thumbup:

My opinion is go with the GTX 970 or 980 now. No idea how DCS World 2 and EDGE is going to perform but you can be certain that a GTX 970/980 will work well and you don't need to mess with the SLI hassles.. (And find a way to save up for the TIR as it is INDESPENSABLE!) Still I would go in that order.. GTX970 or 980 and then TIR... EDIT: After reading Cichlidfan's response I am editing this one to reflect checking out the GTX 970 and 980 prices..

Careful with the "Shovel and Donkey" statements.. Some of those folks kicked BOTH Russia's ass as well as the US so they aren't harmless by any means.. What they lack in equipment and skill they make up for in tenacity and fervor... (And I KNOW that politics gets in the way of EVERYTHING and we aren't going to go there) but be very careful to never underestimate your enemy... Besides, if I had the choice of an AIM120 on the hard-point and nothing I am ALWAYS going to pick the self preservation mode and mount the AIM120...

A lot of factors go into a missile hit and remember that seldom does the missile actually physically hit the plane, it has a proximity fuse that goes off if it gets close enough... the warhead is also like a Claymore mine and explodes showering fragments and the fragments is what kills the plane.. Kind of like a great big shotgun blast..