USA_Recon

Glad to be a part of this - hope it turns out fantastic - certainly worth it. I know I threw in some extra $$$ at the end to hope to get past that $150k mark - (although not sure Me262 was my first pick, but heck, I'm not complaining!!!)

I increased my pledge - thanks

thanks for the information guys, I'm holding on and hoping for the best after hearing this. in the end, we don't support these efforts and commit to it, the genre will die

I see rumors and speculation around non-ED members in the forum. I see Wags post on 'EDGE' - which was vague. We've seen EDGE in videos. I haven't seen any indication that EDGE will contain a dedicated server. I haven't seen anything that says multiplayer will have any emphasis. Actually I see more that shows it's more on the back burner ? I see more conversation on new planes and new maps, and SDK, but nothing on multiplayer. And in this case, by the time it has this doesn't sound like initial launch. So much of me wonders if it's best to wait to see what is delivered and if it has multiplayer, then buy into it. To me, this time period right now is the 'marketing' piece. This is where Luthier (and Oleg, who I haven't seen anything from him besides his fireside chat in a video) and his team need to sell us. This could mean things like 'ok, we will start a second kickstarter to cover adding multiplayer dedicated server support' - that would be something. But I don't see anything right now that makes me think next fall it will be available. Actually, I'm always surprised I don't hear more, I think I read these forums and comment more than the people creating this software do :)

On the DCS WW2 - some comments were made that EDGE would include a dedicated server. I'm with some other here - I'm not too interested in buying into all this if there isn't going to be a decent multiplayer setup. I see rumors, I see comments about 'EDGE' - as far as I know that is the map creation 'world' aspects - I don't see much from Wags or any other person in charge here that really says there will be a dedicated server and any effort in multiplayer. Any official word ?

I *want* to believe, truly. I like ED, I like Maddox. $150k in one year isn't much money to support all the things needed with a development team for a year. I think they will need more funding as they go. Then maybe so. SiTHSpawn - honestly, I don't know much about DCS World right now. Some of AKA flies it that are into the jets. I bought the p51 recently. You have a good point, my biggest concern would be no dedicated server (and game finder). Is DCS World the right place to ask about this ?

A step further, I actually was excited thinking of building on this engine, but this engine is not the one that would be good to build off of. Ironically, the current best WW2 engine available is CloD Team Fusion. What a clusterF* we have here.

hearing this gives me no hope for DCS WW2 - seems it's just not a priority - and for me, as OP stated, I would spend most my time wanting to fly online - and even further, online with large numbers flying campaigns. Flying against AI has no to little appeal to me whatsoever

This forum - why so obscure I don't understand why this important DCS WWII: Europe 1944 is tucked down under it's current location. It's no wonder people don't know much about it and your not getting funds. This forum should be listed directly under 'English' section of the overall forum ???

Yes, I understand that now - when it was first worded though, I had though they were adding it to the first release to help reach the $100 k mark. It's completely undoable to reach that amount of money, if anything, this has proven what an eye opener it is that these flight sims can only get $150k - that is crazy bad. That said, I think these stretch goals are just out of reach, personally, I think just having new kickstarters for each new aircraft would be more reasonable. ie. Luthier should start a B17 kickstarter to fund it - come up with a reasonable amount to do it instead of bundling everything together.

That is what I thought - as originally I had pledged $40 - then the whole 'we are going to make the B-17 flyable' discussion came around, so I up'd my pledge to $85 because I really wanted to see this happen. But I don't think this is true now ?

I lowered mine :( All the changes have lost some interest for me. And I have much concern over the status of a dedicated server (as in there isn't one). I'm mostly an online player and not hearing much about the single player campaigns so I feel I'm way over paying at this point. No flyable bombers, etc... (although I admit, flying it might be so complex that I won't find it enjoyable lol). I also am not very interested in paying for others to get a free game, I missed that part somewhere. Hard to ask for funds when you going to let people put a $1 down to get the game. I thought this project needed backing - if so, then why the free game aspect ? Edit: to add, I must admit, all the changes give me impression that there is a lack of knowing what the team is doing. A bazillion options, confusing options at that, always changing, I don't quite honestly know why - when you make your pledge goals why would you start changing it all with 4 days left ?

First off, the game shouldn't be free. The money earned pays the developers and provides funds to continue building more aircraft, etc... This is a no brainer. I'm not pledging the money I did so that free loaders could have a great free WW2 game. I pledged the money because I wanted to see this become a reality. For instance, the p51 and upcoming 190 should be purchased. I picked up the p51 for $19, same goes for the 190. The base game should cost at least $40. Secondly, additional 'stretch goals' should be new kickstarter programs. RR Studio's need to show they can now deliver. I pledged knowing I'd get a (1) map and (2) p47, 109, spitfire. I thought at one point we'd have a flyable b17, but I see that wasn't true. That is ok though, because at this point, after this 'base game' is created and sold (it needs to be sold for at least $40 pledge right???) then more content can be created and funded by additional kickstarter programs. The reason this is good, is kickstarter funding for content will continue to let the community decide what is next... ie. if you need another $100k to do a B17, start a funding project, if you meet that goal you'll know it's going to be created. It's important for many reasons that RR studio first prove it can deliver on it's promises, as there is a trust factor here. I'm expecting this team to deliver WW2 game with a Normandy map and 3 planes. When this is done and proven, as I said, it will make funding for more content easy. For a game with a small base, this should keep things moving. In summary, charge for the base, at least $40. No free loaders. Use additional kickstarter projects to fund addon WW2 aircraft/features. My 2 cents :)

graphics look old and outdated - reminds me of IL2:1946

The issues isn't with a formation of bombers :) The issue has to do with LOD's (vs. just when you see a dot) of fighters. They literally have such a white background of the sky (it's like a white out in CloD), when the plane turns it disappears even with fully zoomed in view. Team Fusion will be fixing this in the next upcoming patch. I am hoping to get a good answer from him on this subject as it's one that makes or breaks a good game.

Seems that this game has some issues with 'dots' thereby making it very difficult to see and track and aircraft, even when very close. Maybe it has to do with it being first and foremost a 'jet sim engine' where you have radar and locking on targets, etc... and guns only being with a clear shot - but for WW2, I think there will need to be much improvement in LOD. What concerns me as well, is the LOD issue in CloD comes from this same development group ? And much work has gone into fixing it. I hope this is addressed with DCS WW2 or I know for one I'll be very disappointed. Having a great 'EDGE' terrain is all great, but if you can't see aircraft well, it will be a frustrating experience...

maybe just me, but it seems like the flames in this game - and how there are always flames when you, ie. shoot a wing off, seems very off. CoD damage is much more realistic at least visually

Well done - very clear - thanks!

this might help: http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5717

This is all initial release, it's not too far fetched to imaging more new aircraft being made, new maps, etc... if all goes well. The potential here is unlimited imo, we just need to get the first goals met!

Part of the update is they are extending the map - so that is good news

Count me in - updated my pledge Love the new options , to show - I updated my original $40 pledge/reward to $100 !!! Bring it on WW2 DCS! As I said, when I heard about B-17, I would double my pledge for it !

Not sure what more people need, there is DCS P51 to go try, if you like that and want more with a map included, then pledge :) This isn't being built from ground up right - so we have a working model. (This is actually closer to understanding what we get than BoS using a RoF WW1 engine)

now now!!! - I welcome the challenge - I'm still voting for it - as without it, it will be a air quake scenario of just dogfighting and jabo missions :)

wow, what a selection... this won't be easy. I do have concerns about B17 lately, as I really want this, but I don't know if I will like it as with DCS this could be complex to use it won't be usable. There is a point it has to be usable without a bazillion switches and super complexity - it's honestly why I don't fly DCS jets :)