Shibbyland

Yes, DCS has been around 16 years and yes, it's still a very cool bit of software. However, I reckon this is a defining moment for ED. There's been controversy but this ones big, probably the biggest. I'm not questioning the current state of the modules. Like many, I'm foreseeing these modules being unusable in future versions of DCS as was the case with the Hawk and I'm asking what ED has in place to prevent this type of thing occurring with the remaining 3rd party devs. It's a pretty reasonable question. In terms of the EULA, the most relevant thing I can see says ED can simply walk away from any of it's obligations under the section I quote below: "9.1 Eagle Dynamics SA may transfer, assign, charge, sub-contract or otherwise dispose of this Licence, or any of our rights or obligations arising under it, at any time during the term of this Licence." It's not much of an agreement when one of the parties can just walk away from it's obligations and, as I say, EULA doesn't mean a company can ignore it's legal obligations set out by the nation it's trading in. Really, it's all meaningless. I highly doubt an individual is going to put all this to the test, it simply isn't worth the effort so we can forget all that nonsense. It boils down to this. I, and I suspect many others have lost or are losing confidence in the product because of this situation. If you can be bothered to have a look at my profile, you will see the sharp decline in purchases. This is almost entirely due to the situation with RAZBAM. It's not that I care about RAZBAM as such, it's that there's a lot of third party content, it's expensive and it's not beyond the realms of possibility that some of the smaller 3rd party devs could fall over for any number of reasons. I want to know what protections customers have should products stop working. What's the policy, if any? If there isn't one, maybe there should be. If it's just a matter of "read the EULA, this is what you signed up for" then ok, I guess we'll see how that works out long term.

Appreciate the prompt reply Newy, not asking for a copy of the contracts you have with your business partners or third parties. I'm not asking for details of whatever is still going on with RAZBAM specifically. I'm asking for a description of the mechanism that protects customers from third party developers. I can't speak for other users but at least for the country I live in, my protections are provided by an Act of Parliament. In this case "if a purchased online service stops working, you have rights under the consumer guarantees act to seek a remedy, such as a repair, replacement, or refund". Rights under the act can't be negated by terms of service and if a company is trading here, they must comply with the law. Now I'm not suggesting I'd go chasing an overseas company using this act as I suspect it'd be pointless. What I am saying is I think it's fair for customers to expect compensation should the RAZBAM modules be unable to be brought along with the core of DCS as development continues.

I rarely read ToS start to end (I doubt many people do). I will occasionally read the privacy stuff and choose not to use a service because of it but that's quite rare. My attitude is a company can write whatever they want in the ToS but ultimately if you irritate your customers en masse then ToS or no, they won't be in business very long.

Looking to understand how third party modules are handled to protect the consumer. I wasn't playing DCS when the Hawk thing happened but I saw a bit of the aftermath and I thought something was put in place to prevent it recurring. But it's looking like the RAZBAM modules will end up being limited to old versions of DCS as the core is developed. I barely have space for a single install of DCS and associated content I've purchased let alone two versions. Eager to see how it pans out but in the meantime can somebody from ED answer this please: What prevents other 3rd party modules becoming unusable for whatever reason. Let's say one of the other developers had an issue where they couldn't continue their operation, would we end up in the same position as with the Hawk and now RAZBAM modules? The 3rd party stuff is some of the best available, particularly Heatblur but I don't have confidence DCS at the moment in order to continue making purchases. Need to see some commitment from ED as to how consumers are going to be protected. Even if ED is a victim (and I don't know what's gone on), ultimately the buck stops with them. I acknowledge it's an awkward position. Niche market which I'm sure we all want to see grow. If large numbers of people stop making purchases then our existing producers might pack it in and it'll be hard to attract more. That being said, I've spent a shameful amount on DCS and I can't keep pouring money in with such fragility hanging in the air.

I also have this bug. I've got performance issues with the F4u after latest update too. Very choppy particularly in flyby view. No issues with other modules, I've got a pretty decent system too.

Off topic but I operated an air transport aircraft not that long ago that used an EFB with Windows XP.

Yea I also thought the number of sales is getting excessive. At this point they may as well just make the sale price the actual price of their products and not have sales. It's a bit suss.

I wish I’d never spent so much on DCS. This has really highlighted the fragility of it and whilst it’s true lots of gaming works this way nowadays, with dcs it’s sort of an “all your eggs in one basket” situation. Many others have already said this but it wouldn’t be so bad if modules were reasonably cheap but they’re not. As we know, each module is the price of a full price game and it looks highly likely that in the not too distant future we’ll lose several of them with no compensation. Ive enjoyed my time playing DCS but probably not enough to warrant the expense.

I’ve just been talking to a guy I know who flies the Corsair and this is what he had to say: “The takeoff isn’t too bad as long as trims are set but we set take off power in two stages”. He went on to say it would expect it to be horrendous applying full power from stationary for take off. I also asked whether it felt weighty compared to other period fighters he’s flown. He said ”it’s light and balanced. A pleasure to fly. Easy in the air, a beast on the ground”. So just based on this one pilots input I think they’ve got the flight characteristics in game a bit back to front. In game I find the aircraft all over the show once airborne and really easy to take off and land. Sounds like it should be the other way round.

I've been playing around a little with curves. I'm using a TM16000m as that's the best I can get right now. Anyway I've reduced saturation Y on pitch to 60 and set curvature to 20. It's tolerable now but I still think the aircraft feels way too light. I did a trial of the Christen Eagle just to get a comparison to M3s other prop based module and it feels more authentic with exact same curves. The best word I could use to describe the Corsairs handling in this game is jagged and thats in all regards, the ground too. It's just so so pointy, like a go kart. I don't regret buying the module, it's seriously good looking and such a cool aeroplane but yea I go from the F4u to the P-47 and I find myself wishing the F4u had the same feel to it.

I agree, take off very easy, landing really easy too. Aircraft flies like a small aerobat. Fingers crossed it goes through some meaningful development.

Haven't flown a Corsair (but I know people who have so I could probably ask them). That being said, I've flown other aircraft from light to heavy and I find the flight model of the F4u in game unconvincing. Well done to Magnitude 3 for what they've achieved. The aircraft looks awesome, the carrier is great too and I'm stoked we've got at least some Pacific theatre content (fingers crossed with the potential for more) after years of waiting. But yea I really hope they work on the flight model. The aircraft has absolutely no feel of weight, it's super pitchy, it feels weird on the ground and I didn't notice any of the usual flight sim genre cues that warn of the stall. They could probably give the aircraft much greater feel by giving the player feedback through more sound. The Corsair is a big machine, it weighs more empty than some models of Spitfire fully loaded and yet in game it flies like a little aerobat. If you haven't already bought it, I'd recommend holding off and seeing how development progresses, it's just a bit arcadey at the moment.

I had to upgrade my mobo and therefore a heap of other stuff just so I could get windows 11 (and I still haven't gotten round to grabbing the upgrade). Old mobo (and it wasn't even that old) didn't meet security requirements. I just about spat out my tea when I saw how much prices had gone up on hardware when essentially everything was running just how I wanted it to. That being said I just blasted across the Syria map in the f-14 and got performance I've never had access to before.

I recently upgraded my CPU, mobo, RAM and cooling mostly because my old mobo couldn't support windows 10. I went with i7 14700k but still only have 32gb of RAM, albeit it's DDR5. The performance increase from my old i7 9700k is incredible. I'm not a VR player and I'd love to have 64gb RAM but I just ran out of money and as much as people say RAM is cheap, it's not where I live but I'll add a couple more sticks down the track when I've saved up. Holding off getting the cold war map until I get 64gb.

I've got water cooling but it's only a 240mm, Corsair nautilus. It's TDP is 250watts. Price was becoming an issue with this build and looking at my case, I think i'd be struggling to fit anything much bigger than 240 coolling. I'm not running DCS maxed out tho. Next move is to increase to 64gb RAM but where I live, RAM is actually pretty expensive so I wait. I was previously running an i7 9700k but that was only air cooled and I haven't increased my settings since the upgrade. I just wanted to be able to run the more intense maps at the same settings. I build my PC for DCS as thats the most intense thing I run, otherwise I'm playing games that require only half the performance. Cheers for all your input.

I've recently upgraded to an i7 14700k. I don't overclock so it's clock speed is 3.4gHz. This is below the recommended settings for many terrains in DCS and yet I'm able to run them reasonably well. I only play at 1080p but with textures high and pretty good shadows. How come I'm able to achieve this performance when my clock speed is so much lower than recommended. Should I be overclocking and how do I do this without damaging parts? I've got water cooling. Edit: The CPUs base clock speed is 3.4gHz but it's obviously capable of higher. Does it boost to a higher frequency automatically if demand is high? System specs: i7 14700k, z790 mobo, 32gb DDR5 RAM, GeForce 4070. DCS on standalone nvme with 500gb space free.

Just saw a video reckoning it needs 64GB of RAM to run well. Is this true? I'm running 32gb DDR4 with an RTX 4070 at 1080p and find Syria pretty good. Marianas I've always found not so great. Thoughts on this?

What internal work is being done? Is there a timeline for release? I've just scrolled back through all changelogs to January 2024 and unless I missed something, the mosquito only features twice (not including third party campaigns). Once for a fix to tailwheel and once for a fix to AI bombing after the player. That's not really meaningful development of the module. It's not all that different for modules like the supercarrier and the hind.

Cheers, what of the continued functioning as new versions of DCS core are released? I appreciate you guys have stated you'll continue to support the products but are you actually able to do that long term or are we likely to end up with modules that will only function in legacy versions of DCS into the future?

I see ED have stated the existing modules will continue to work. Is this achievable as new iterations of DCS are released or will we end up in a Hawk scenario where they'll work but only if you have an old version of DCS installed? Is ED giving any thought to extending store credit to other RAZBAM modules?

Deviating from the RAZBAM nature of this thread just for a moment. I hadn't heard of briefing room so thanks for mentioning it. Just looking at it now, it's looks awesome. If only it was built into the game.

Who here still has (and uses) the F-15e? One of the concerns that's come up a lot since this started is that RAZBAM modules will stop working. What's the current state of that module? I refunded as I didn't expect it to be completed and so an unfinished two crew aircraft is undesirable to me. That being said, I'm curious. If one never read this thread and had no idea about this issue would the F-15e be an acceptable module as it stands right now?

If I already own the full fidelity version of the aircraft featured in flaming cliffs 2024 AND I already own flaming cliffs, is there any benefit from having the upgrade? New campaigns or anything?

Unable to access F-15e store page on steam at the moment but other products appear unaffected. Any body else notice this? Does this have anything to do with this issue?

What work, if any, is still being done on this? It's been early access for a long time now and it's as if it's been forgotten. Still hanging out for some ability for the AI to operate the aircraft so player can act as navigator or at least for the player to direct an AI navigator to tune radios, navaids etc.