MiG21bisFishbedL

Thanks for the explanation.

IIRC, there's no intention to add it, mostly because it didn't seem to be very good at its job in combat. At least, against Stingers or more modern IR guided missiles. It might've been better against Redeyes and Blowpipes Strela-2s.

Gotta pay for it, some how. And, since it's updating the module to a more modern standard, it keeps it relevant to new comers. Tenbux ain't so bad. Given how the F-5 almost always ends up as someone's first ride in DCS, I like that. Plus, I got miles. Free for me!

I'll grant you that. Some is justified, some is certainly not.

Well, it isn't a new thing.

My god, this goes deep.

Yes, it's a conspiracy, we need to connect all the dots.

10 bucks is a pretty fair price. But, I do wonder if additional capabilities were ever considered? Getting Limas or even another pair of AIM-9s would change the game for the F-5. That alone might engender sufficient good will that they sell more. And at 10 bucks a pop, that'll really be nice.

Key Features of the Remastered DCS: F-5E: Remastered external model based on the latest graphics technologies to create a highly accurate and realistic model. New external animations have also been added. Remastered cockpit with greatly improved resolution, glass surfaces, and attention to detail. Addition of a 1st person view pilot in the cockpit view. New afterburner effects. (coming soon) New vortices effect based on the aircraft’s angle of attack. (coming soon) Numerous bug fixes and tunings such as damage modelling, sensors, and avionics.

I was just wanting F-5E issues addressed. But, 10bux for a revamped set of art and those fixes? Yeah, I can swing that. Easily.

No doubt, but it is what it is. I'm pretty happy that the F-5 isn't just getting love, but a lot of it.

The bug reporting sections indicate otherwise.

Hyperbole is a poor replacement for insight, indeed. Yeah, Fishbed needs work, but find me any FM in DCS that is devoid of inaccuracies. At some point, you have to accept that DCS is a video game and that is that. And besides that, there's not THAT much wrong with the Fishbed. Just long standing issues at low speed and avionics that need addressing. At this point, passive aggressive posts replete with plenty of '...'s and what not aren't exactly going to speed up Mag3's development. We wait, it's all we can do.

Wait until you feel how basic the grass feels. Yeah, DCS is very lacking in that kind of feedback, even with FFB. But, honestly, what sim isn't?

It really doesn't matter if you agree or disagree, adding in amateur code into the game can and does raise issues. I've had a number of issues arise because of mods. Everything from crashing to sound errors that effected the entire software. It's why the devs and support always suggest you empty your mod folders whenever you have issues with DCS. That video by reflected is good testimony as to why. ED needs all the help it can get to address issues, really. I love the A-4E-C, I love the OH-6, but they could still see an update that introduces issues. They are a double edged sword and that's just how it is.

Widowmaker was applied by popular media. While the Germans saw it lawn darting, the Spanish didn't lose a single airframe during its service with them. The Japanese only lost 3. It's really a reflection on how important in type training really is.

That'll be fun to do over Kola.

Please do point out where I denied that ED is, indeed, fixing things and improving DCS overall. Anywhere. No, really, go ahead. Please. Because, clearly, ED is improving DCS and that cannot be denied. This thread is just testament that they could be doing better and ideas how.

That's the contention; what they think is most important. They will let bugs languish in the code for over a decade before addressing them. They'll allow modules to grow out of date, not address known issues within them, and still want $50 for that. We do see core updates, that's great. More of that. But it's really not that much to ask that they address bugs confirmed from when Millennials were *still* in school. Especially ones that objectively harm the simulation's quality. Be flippant all you like and reply with "so riot" etc. but this isn't BOO ED SUX, this is as if Fred Fleet actually HAD binoculars in the crow's nest the night that RMS Titanic struck an iceberg, saw said iceberg, and told Captain Smith about it only to have Captain Smith reply "lmao we'll do something about it trust me bro" before promptly striking the iceberg just as they had before. These are consumers trying to tell ED to course correct before it actually does manifest poorly.

To be honest, the deck crew is kind of an essential issue. As is the weather effect. We gotta give 'em this one.

The fog and the deck crew features are looking pretty good and are certainly welcome. That F-104, though. That's the real winner.

Resources can be re-allocated else where. And we've BEEN reporting those bugs. For years. And, yet, we're here.

Honestly, it looks great. There's absolutely no denying it and I cannot wait to kick up dirt with my Hind. It'll be a lot of fun. I'm probably going to sink a lot of hours into those. But, again, we could have happily waited for that for some REAL basic fixes and such, like.. oh I don't know: And one of those is for the Mossie. Where's my incentive to buy these when such glaring issues remain unaddressed? And they want us to buy the Hellcat when that drops? I'd love to, but if they aren't willing to address these issues, then I find myself waiting for sales or major improvements, whenever those happen. They've not been forthcoming.

Well, we understand that other things are fun, too. And that they may be worth our disposable income.

Yeah, this isn't a question of what I want to see resolved first but rather resolved period. Again, F-86's guns. 10. Years. To. Address. And I have seen nothing, absolutely nothing, to indicate that ED's project managers even see that as a glaring failure. If that's going to be the response? Whew! I'm guessing ED first party modules are a wait and see for me, from now on. Frankly, the insistence that they have the best view of the bigger picture is questionable at best. More and more it seems they can't see the forest through the trees. AND, when the F-86's guns did get addressed? It was right as FC2024 was made available. Let's be real, that does not inspire confidence in consumers when the only reason something receives a minor but important fix is so that it can be repackaged and sold again. What is galling and what we're seeing refusal to do is "Oh, well, I guess we were wrong. We need to review our priorities!" And do just that. I've been in software dev, this isn't the most difficult thing to do. We're not doing this because we want outrage clicks farmed on Youtube because something something Razbam, we want to see DCS be good. We want to part with our money with confidence, especially in these trying times. We want to be able to impulse buy from ED like we used to without then stopping ourselves and going "Oh wait, is ED even gonna support this adequately?"