Jump to content

SkateZilla

ED Beta Testers
  • Posts

    21627
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    20

Everything posted by SkateZilla

  1. Prolly should chill with assumptions about other users living arrangements, and the use of specific adjectives. We don't need any drama to derail the thread and get it locked.
  2. https://forum.dcs.world/topic/94816-guide-info-dcs-updater-usage-version-numbers-module-ids/?do=findComment&comment=2621546
  3. If I told you how many contract disputes I see weekly with my employer (*not ED / flight sim related), you'd lose your mind. Contractual issues are part of doing business with 3rd parties, there's no such thing as a Business w/ 3rd Parties that does not have contractual disputes for one reason or another. RB publicizing their dispute, was their decision, the terms, at least to the public, are speculation. The motive behind going public is also speculation, so there's no need to comment on the motive or timing, or why. It's Public now, and the outcome hasn't changed because it's public, if anything the only thing being public has done, is stir the pot, and make it harder for both sides to come to an agreement.. To quote Xena. "Two war lords cannot make a peace treaty if their troops are fighting and killing each other in the camp outside of their tent."
  4. Considering how public the issue has become, at this point Disclaimer is pretty much a slap in the face, and not needed. Pretty much anyone that's involved enough in DCS to hit buy on any DCS Module, knows the rumors, ramblings and future assumptions already. It's beating a dead horse at this point constantly asking for a disclaimer, most of those asking for said disclaimer have already purchased the module, so what does a disclaimer do for you? absolutely nothing. There are better ways to spend your time other than eating/selling the fruit of the poisonous tree, speculating, and spreading rumors.
  5. From experience, corporate contract disputes often go months before even going to legal mediation, and often months after.. It's disappointing when people assume it's a simple "OK cool, handshake, signed check, resume work." between 2 people.
  6. Only the prototypes and LRIP1 Units would be accurate, as things changed after LRIP1.
  7. I'd have to confirm, I was told it was a type of ray tracing / active reflection rendering, a cube map does make more sense given the excessive amount of post processing shaders running already. Even then, if it's not actual ray tracing, you'd likely not see anything definitive until Vulkan.
  8. Secondary Lighting On, Global Cockpit Illumination On?
  9. iirc F-16 and F-18C for starters, but it should be on all of them.
  10. AFAIK, Only in the cockpit.
  11. the new Canopy reflections are raytraced.
  12. Different engine, different engine management system, slightly different flight model.
  13. The Wingtips tank mod is self contained, you only need to at the store lines.
  14. ST Binaries are being depreciated, as MT matures and more items are coded for MT.
  15. Thank you guys for the responses.
  16. Apologies, let me rephrase. The Announcement has no effect on the module's current state (Future State, yes, current state no.) Which is why I'm asking, why users that purchased and was flying the module with no problem a month ago, are now saying they can't fly the module due to the dispute. The Module didn't magically have a stroke just because it wasn't actively being developed during the patch cycle. That's all I'm asking, I'm fully aware of the status of bugs, and what halted development / support means for future state and issues. However, that is not the case for right now, and the current DCS Build. As for "Radio Silent" Rumors, they are just that, rumors. And I Doubt anyone would be communicating w/ former employees, the contract with between ED<>RB, not ED and RBs employees directly.
  17. Why is everyone acting like the F-15E is gone? It's still functioning the same as it was prior to the disagreement being public, it's not like it was removed or disabled. Even if there was no disagreement, there's no guarantee there would be updates with every patch, especially new features and/or major fixes..
  18. That type of response really isn't warranted. no one should be telling anyone not to come to the forums.
  19. I don't even think I have skype anymore, as I transitioned to Microsoft Teams for all my communications for work related things, Why would I need to check my Skype sir? I have not been a moderator for years, so i wouldn't be able to assist with account issues.
  20. If it ever came down to that, the Aircraft would not simply be removed quietly, ED would make an announcement the same way they did with the Hawk T.1A. Even then, the Aircraft would remain in the CoreMods for AI regardless.
  21. More like, not to cross post and try to throw a log on the fire for something else.
  22. That literally doesn't mean anything.
  23. Just because RB have stated they halted work, does not mean the module will be discontinued, I don't know where anyone got that conclusion from, changes made after the VEAO departure protect modules from any form of rapid discontinued support.
  24. Negotiations are ongoing, until otherwise stated, that's the current status. I would encourage users to not read into the angry rant posts on social media, regardless of who they came from (Current or Former RB employees). As for disclosing in a Newsletter, No Business actively discloses internal affairs in a product newsletter to customers. Once ED and RB come to an agreement, regardless of the direction, ED will likely then make an announcement regarding status / future support.
×
×
  • Create New...