mue

Does this really means, that ED allows each 3rd party developer to define their own meaning of "Early access", "Released" and "Finished"? That would effectively mean there is no QA from ED's side on 3rd party modules. Strange!

No, it doesn't matter if the feature is missing because of bugs or if the feature is still being developed. The feature is missing, period. Is this the new ED quality policy: A feature can be labeled as completed even though it's actually missing. The 3rd party developer only have to promise "it's still being developed"?

Originally Posted by NineLine That person spoke out of line, and is wrong. I already addressed this with Ron. Thanks. The most we control is removing the EA text from our website, but that is done with RAZBAMs request. Does this mean, if a 3rd party developer request to change the status from EA to "finished product" then ED just do it without any QA checks?

I wonder, why ED don't put the Early Access label back on the Harrier until the missing items are delivered or implemented? Is there no QA for 3rd party modules?

That's what I actually wanted to illustrate: you can't believe ED's PR statements.

Wags in Nov. 2017: Source: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=196539

Oops, I really forgot about Windows 8/8.1. Anyway, Vulkan support before January 2023 confirmend. :D

So, ED plans to release the Vulkan based DCS version before the end of support for Windows 7? :smilewink:

Does ED know which 3rd party modules use airframe-element based method and which do not? Maybe this info can be posted here?

AFAIU with the external flight model the whole flight model computation must be done by the 3rd party (i.e. no framework). I assume there is only a interface definition (API) that provides/defines the interaction DCS World <-> Module. So the question is, what 3rd party modules really react to the wake turbulence velocity field provided by the DCS World engine? I'm curious.

I don't know either. Why do you ask? I didn't made such statement. I'm curious, how many users actually know about the offline mode? And if in offline mode multiplayer is not possible. What happens if one plays in multiplayer and then there is an ISP outtage for more than 3 days. Of course multiplayer is not possible then, thats ok. But after 3 days he can't also play SP anymore. I repeat my opinion about this DRM scheme: it's user hostile!

IMHO the statement at the shop page is misleading because "requires internet activation" does not mean "requires frequent internet access"

"...we had users ... w/ systems that barely met minimum requirements..." therefore we had to change minimum requirements ?:huh:

Is this an official ED statement? ... Strange!

I really wish more users would think and act what way. Then maybe the DCS mess with unfinished modules will end someday.

It's about needing regularly internet connection to regularly ask ED if I'm still allowed to play the module I bought. And that it's in my and other users opinion a regression from the old drm system. As a side note: The new drm system is still not mention in the e-shop page of the AV-8B. It still says: "requires internet activation." No mention of requiring regularly internet connection (instead of one-time connection for activation).

No, the statement was: "Even Starforce requires a phone home from time to time." https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3306838&postcount=110 And now you confirmed that Starforce only attempt to phone home, and if the attempt wasn't successful, I still can run the game. Therefore for starforce to phone home is not a requirement to run the game. In contrast to the new drm.

You defended the new drm by claiming that Starforce does the same (need to phone home regularly). And now as it seems your claim is wrong it suddenly doesn't matter? :huh:

Can anyone of said users confirm that?

Maybe StarForce checks the keys only when a module is activated. At least (according to my test) SF didn't lock the module if it can't reach the server (e.g. no internet connection).

That was said by a moderator here to defend the new drm system. But we still wait for confirmation from official ED staff. My test and experiences from other users rather show it's not the case. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=196899

+1 Especially since this argument (eg. "Even Starforce requires a phone home from time to time.") was used to defend the new in my eyes very problematic drm schema. Since I haven't played DCS for over 1,5 years (according to the modified date of my dcs.log = April 2016) I made the following test: I disconnected from the internet and started DCS. I was able to use all my bought modules without problems. So it seems that StarForce in DCS doesn't use the "periodic license confirmation" (phoning home from time to time). But to be sure I also want confirmation or negation from ED about that.

Can anyone confirm that StarForce in DCS uses "Periodic license confirmation"? And what is the confirmation intervall?

Really? How, if I keep my computer disconnected from the internet after activation of the software?

Maybe most users didn't see the danger of this drm schema: With it, ED has full control of the software. They can easily revoke your license to use the software in the future. And there is nothing you can do about it (besides taking legal steps).