bfr
-
Posts
630 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by bfr
-
It'd obviously be the version that is easiest to get accurate data on.
-
Whilst there isn't any reason that DCS on Windows 10 would just stop working, its difficult to see why they'd be too bothered about continuing to support a platform once it is itself unsupported if something did come out of left field.
-
The 23 was supposedly happening, but under Razbam so now its not happening. The Mig 25 I suspect would be a tough pick given its very niche and I doubt it'd sell or sit within the game particularly well. Su-17 might've been a good call for someone to do now we have CWG.
-
I don't think they've yet committed to doing any on the Iranian side of the border but I agree that it'd be a massive missed opportunity if at least some don't ever happen. They had however committed to adding some Kuwaiti bases.
-
The Iraq map is a lot like this in the south where the buildings are yet to be done but the roadways and so on are clearly already there waiting.
-
If i'm not mistaken wasn't what ended up as the current Harrier module originally meant to be a Sea Harrier FRS1 but bizarrely too much was still deemed to be classified (mostly the radar) and they then pivoted to the USMC variant?
-
Ideally you'd hope some of the previous team could be roped in with anyone taking it on, for the sake of continuity and getting any fresh developers up to speed if nothing else. Like you say though, its not an instant no-brainer if anyone does fancy considering trying to take it on. And that is before you get to figuring out what the IP is worth in monetary terms for Razbam to pass it over (further muddied if they in turn still owe the devs money).
-
As HB would you want to take on that support and future development burden when a decent chunk of potential sales have already happened? Even if they got given the intellectual property for free its still not a small undertaking and would require an awful lot of due diligence (state of things currently, how much in the way of future features is already mapped out, how many more units they might expect to reasonably sell to cover costs).
-
Iraq is already at 111GB (v 154GB for Kola) but a lot less 'done' i.e. there is basically half of the map with no buildings on it yet. So i'd be surprised if it doesn't end up about the same footprint in time.
-
Its very much there (including 'death strip', access roads etc). If you're looking for an easy reference point to pick it up then fly to the Bundestag/Brandenburg Gate (which sit either side of it). Or fly east from Tempelhof and you'll hit it a little bit short of the river.
-
Its already on the list for Phase 3.
-
Sources like that can be used as a starting point certainly, but there is still a massive amount of work to then get to a finished and polished product.
-
Really impressed. Did an Apache joyride around Berlin first up, then a blast over the same in the Hornet. I then jumped in the Hornet again and did a north-south run along the Inner German border from the Baltic before turning east to land at Berlin. Never once did it feel like it was struggling.
-
Iraq is as big now as phase 1 of Germany is (110GB) and similarly a WIP. Kola is also about the same storage footprint.
-
I had the same, seemed to recognise i'd bought the map at about the 3rd attempt.
-
Indeed. Haven't seen anything resembling a confirmation or denial. They've probably been burnt too many times to commit to anything by now!
-
I initially assumed (for no reason at all) it might not be in this one. There are still a couple of weeks left in the month and I sort of expected they'd at least be taking orders slightly ahead of it actually going live.
-
Looking at my installation folder now: Iraq - 111GB (and that has a long way left to go still) Kola - 154GB Falklands - 114GB So a final tally of 200-odd and 100-odd for phase 1 given the densely populated areas doesn't seem all that surprising to me. And I thought the installer already didn't pull down the entire map again per update? I would've expected to have noticed if that were the case with the last two in the above list.
-
And your evidence to back this claim up is what exactly?
-
They did make a statement at the beginning when RB first decided to drag a legal dispute out into the sunlight of a court of public customer opinion. Not that the RB statements particularly aimed at laying out all the facts (good or bad) but rather just tried to pull emotional strings.
-
I know its a crazy concept but perhaps there is a entirely sound reason why ED began withholding those payments.
-
Meanwhile in the real world then most people at least understand ED using what leverage they had available whilst they believe they've been wronged against.
-
What would be the point of that? Assuming RB is a fairly hand to mouth organisation (and handing over anything owed would mostly then disappear on paying contractors etc) then you could later win those damages but there be little or nothing from which to actually realise them.
-
Not really. It just shows that intelligent people with highly marketable skills unsurprisingly have a relatively low tolerance to working for free.
-
Consider that if early access releases weren't a thing then some of the modules we have/had might not ever have existed. The EA model allows for money to come in to fund ongoing development. Without it you've got to find all the funds upfront to develop a feature-complete product, which significantly raises the bar of entry (and bear in mind a lot of modules take years to just reach initial EA standard).
