Erdem

I'm really excited for this. The tanksim genre has been mostly dead for the last decade, with SB Pro milking the sales to the extreme during that time unopposed, with little to no innovation for an outrageous price. There were occasional WW2 tank sims from Russian developers, but they barely released with questionable quality and quickly vanished after absymal sales. An Abrams tanksim would make them lots of sales if they can get it right. They will need to work on detailed terrain rendering and probably a whole new system of crew and ground AI. If they could get it right, I would buy it in a heartbeat though.

Way to escalate a simple question thread, did this really have to be 4 pages long? Great job. No matter how knowledgeable and "right" you are, a little moderation in your attitude and wording goes a long way . . . especially for a moderator.

. . . and this is why you be extra careful when backing projects early. Once they have your money, they have no obligation to deliver you their promises. The features they promised suddenly becomes homework, since they're already compensated. If they don't care about their reputation that is, which is clearly the case with Beczyl.

This is why I haven't bought BS2. It really is just a DCS World compatibility update, like the A-10 got over it's course, but ED decided they can milk their users some more by charging 20$ for it. This is when they lost my good faith and now we see how it gets worse with them essentially repackaging Flaming Cliffs planes as "DLC"s.

I hope he gets the message.

Why does ED allow stuff like these having the"DCS" title? When I see "DCS: X" I want it to be a thoroughly researched and modelled aircraft, not something modelled with a lot of assumptions. Heck, you don't have aerodynamic data, avionics data or system data. The "look at all the documents we got!" images on the Kickstarter page are just laughable. So, my question is; why the F-35? The developer of this mod can do a DCS: F-4 which plenty of data is available even in basic aerodynamic textbooks . . . It will still sell lots, maybe even more because of how iconic this plane is. But I think the devs is just trying to go the easy way, and do a "DCS" plane without all that tedious modelling. If you can legitimately say "we just approximated that stuff" then your work becomes suddenly a lot easier.

I appreciate ED's acceptance of the initial complaints on FC3 and improving those points. I was very critical at first because there wasn't much content in it, but it becomes more tempting by each update. Please keep this attitude going and listen to your community. If you go down the "We know what's best for them" path, it'll be very damaging for you.

Oh someone got paid by Boeing it seems.

I think we need a good "DCS Quality" Russian and Western fighters ASAP. Only then there will be a competitive online scene, and consequently popularity explosion. Flaming Cliffs just doesn't cut it.

We all know how Origin is terrible when compared to Steam, but more choices for customers equals more sales for them. I just hope they won't go Origin exclusive and release their games on Steam as well . . .

I'm sick of "investing in the future" since 2003. I will value ED products on their own merits from now on and FC3 is just isn't a sequel worthy of it's 40$ tag over FC2.

It seems like a glitch and not the intended behaviour to me.

Yet, ED with it's resources as a company, time(10 years from LOMAC) and lots of people buying their products "in their goodwill"(not always on product's merits) still cannot bother to change the 3D model of Su-27 in LOMAC's supposedly THIRD sequel. On one side, we have this F-15C with 6DOF cockpit with it's whistles and bells, and on the other we have pre-2002 crude Su-27(I'm mentioning it because it's one of the flyables, I don't dare go into unflyables). I think the time spent on F-15's cockpit could have spawned a few external aircraft models. Heck, even users of this forum made great aircraft models(Su-27, A-10, F-15) in the free time. Only explanation is that ED is working on DCS F-15C, and transferred the completed 6DOF cockpit to FC3 to beef it's already weak feature set, they're very good at making us pay for the same stuff multiple times.

Simple answer, and you said it yourself: ED is not Activision. ED lives on the trust it has built up in it's small community, and their games sell because of the word of mouth this community produces not because of it's billion dollar marketing engine. Their advange is that they are developing products that are not available anywhere else. They basically have no competitors and so far they kept their standarts pretty high while pricing their products modestly. They're pretty much the only developers I buy anthing they make, without any thought, just to keep them going. Now, about FC3. The jump from FC1 to FC2 was a pretty huge one just because even "DCS compatibility" was such an immense update over the good ol' 2003 LOMAC structure. BS2 which was basically a patch bringing it up to DCS A-10C standart raised my eyebrows(Do we have to pay for compatibility of older products every time a new module releases? BS 3-4-5 anyone?) and now this, FC3. I understand ED treats FC and "compatibility upgrades" like BS2 as their cash cows for their hard hitter DCS modules. Even though they try to legitimize the price by naming them as full sequels, I fail to see the "full sequel" content in them. What would you expect from a FC sequel? A new aircraft maybe, or a new map? Updated FM that feels less scripted? People suggest "read the first page again", only "notable" features catching my eyes are "advanced missile dynamics" and "updated HUD and cockpit systems", the rest is DCS stuff we already have. While they sound nice I'd like to ask what are the improvements exactly? What exactly are the missile improvements, which cockpit systems got improved and how much? "Improvements" is a subjective term. Do we get to see the specifics before we shell out 40$? Or shall we put the trust to use again? Honestly, if the improvements are substantial, it can justify the purchase alone. But I'm not sure of that because of the lack of communication during development. Judging by the demographics of the people here, 40$ is not a problem for most at all. ED Products are their hobby, they'll buy them no matter what. But with these moves, ED is turning off a small portion every time. Community is the currency they have, Activision can get away with it because they can make up for it in other areas, but ED really has to think twice about this "updates" IMO.

So, why the special treatment for F-15? To me, it makes no sense to release FC3 with only one plane getting the goodies, the inconsistency is disturbing. The rest is DCS stuff cooked for FC, which I already have with A-10, BS. So far I have bought every single title ED has put out to help them, but seriously I'm starting to feel "milked". 40$ is a steep price just for DCS World compatibility.

Turkish Stars 20th year promo video:

Why even take the T then? Just use the regular frog. The whole point of Su-25T seems to me is to take out armor with Vikhr's. If you're going to load it up with dumb bombs and rockets . . . that seems counter productive.

Oh well, if you're going to cut "500 billion" from your defence budget then get ready for much worse I'd say. This decision is based on pure costs, not on "Which platform is better". There are things both A-10 and F-35 do better but definitely not to the extend that one replaces other.

So another round of 15$ patches are incoming for A-10 and Ka-50?

T-129 during gun firing tests;

Incredible, ED you're my favourite developer ever! :D

If it's selling well or not, I'm completely supporting ED with every sim/module they make. I already made three of my friend buy it and I'm always looking for more recruits :D

Not a screenshot but I don't it deserves it's own thread, yet. A movie I made from a training fight in about 2 hours.

Alright, fingers crossed then :)

ED has come a great way by implementing a server browser and account login so that we don't need to use programs like Hyperlobby to find servers anymore. Though, I believe lack of a chat room or a "lobby" is really hurting the multiplayer community. A chat room encourages people to socialise and makes it easier to find people to fly with. People who are not flying could also "hang out" in the chat room helping people out. ED can even think of introducing a "friends list" in the future. I also don't think a simple chat room will put much stress on ED master server. What do you guys/ED think about this? :joystick: