Jump to content

Virtual Patriots L-39

Tango
 Share

Recommended Posts

Lizzard

Lizzard

Posted
Posted

this is really an unfortunate Situation..and right, we don`t know much, but it seems like ED and VP never talked to each other..this communication between ED and 3rd party devs should really be worked on..

My Specs:

I don`t care..it is a Computer..a black one..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 222
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Flagrum

Flagrum

Posted
Posted

I can understand the decision of VPJT to cancel their product on a personal, emotional level but from a business perspective I have difficulties.

 

A cancelled product is a 100% loss. If they would still finish it, it might not turn into a "100% win" anymore, but anything that reduces the loss is better than nothing. Of course this might heavily depend on how much work would be still to be put into it. But I am sure, that not all of the potential L-39 buyers would migrate over to EDs version - I am sure, a VPJT L-39 would still get quite some sales - and if it is just for sympathy with the team and their situation.

 

So I just hope, VPJTs decision is not overly hasty and that it is not just driven by emotion ... good luck, VPJT!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lizzard

Lizzard

Posted
Posted

As harsh as it sounds I think ED are right to just do what they feel is best to develop their product. They shouldn't restrict creation just because a 3rd party has 'reserved' a jet.

 

Developing a module for DCS takes loads of time, heart and money..and of course you are right ED is the Boss in the Ring..but things like this could really make some 3rd party devs think twice whether to develop a module or not. And come on..any new module is beneficial..not just for the devs and the community..even ED has benefits..new modules..new customers..new crowd for other (ED) modules..etc..as I said..I guess this was all one big communication error..lessons will be learned..hopefully

My Specs:

I don`t care..it is a Computer..a black one..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SilentEagle

SilentEagle

Posted
Posted
I can understand the decision of VPJT to cancel their product on a personal, emotional level but from a business perspective I have difficulties.

 

A cancelled product is a 100% loss. If they would still finish it, it might not turn into a "100% win" anymore, but anything that reduces the loss is better than nothing. Of course this might heavily depend on how much work would be still to be put into it. But I am sure, that not all of the potential L-39 buyers would migrate over to EDs version - I am sure, a VPJT L-39 would still get quite some sales - and if it is just for sympathy with the team and their situation.

 

So I just hope, VPJTs decision is not overly hasty and that it is not just driven by emotion ... good luck, VPJT!

 

The decision was made because of the time and financial investment still required on our part to finish the module. The custom code base Tango and I have amassed is not lost and will certainly serve as the basis for future endeavors outside of the DCS engine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Boss86005

Boss86005

Posted
Posted

"From a consumer perspective we have seen a few 3rd party projects announced then disintegrate in various ways over the last couple years.

Some aircraft development ceased, another aircraft almost stopped due to internal conflict amongst the team members.

Also some online aerobatic teams have developed their own flyable mods which they then refuse to share with the community. (I have no problem with this but I still wish I could fly them).

 

As harsh as it sounds I think ED are right to just do what they feel is best to develop their product. They shouldn't restrict creation just because a 3rd party has 'reserved' a jet.

 

Who knows how long the 3rd party will take to release their project, if ever."

 

+1. Ever heard the saying, "Ya snooze, Ya Lose". If someone is going to commit to making an aircraft for DCS World they had better get it done in a timely matter or someone else will.

"We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the day and night to visit violence on those who would do us harm".

---------------------------------------------------------

Intel i-9 9900k @ 5.0 Ghz, EVGA 2080tiFTW3 11Gb, Corsair H115 PRO water cooler, Gigabyte AorusMaster motherboard, EVGA Super Nova 1000 watt G+ powersupply, G.SKILL 64Gb ram @3800 MHz, HP EX 920 M.2 PCIe 3TB,Windows 10Pro x64

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tango

Tango

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
I posted this in the newsletter thread last week, but have posted it here as it's how I feel about this event:

 

"From a consumer perspective we have seen a few 3rd party projects announced then disintegrate in various ways over the last couple years.

Some aircraft development ceased, another aircraft almost stopped due to internal conflict amongst the team members.

Also some online aerobatic teams have developed their own flyable mods which they then refuse to share with the community. (I have no problem with this but I still wish I could fly them).

 

As harsh as it sounds I think ED are right to just do what they feel is best to develop their product. They shouldn't restrict creation just because a 3rd party has 'reserved' a jet.

Who knows how long the 3rd party will take to release their project, if ever."

 

The dramatic cancellation statement at the Patriots website has confirmed my above thoughts.

I am sure that the Patriots will keep working on their L-39 and continue to use it in their aerobatic routines. Not sure why they don't wish to share it with the community.

With respect, that is wholly incorrect.

 

Being mindful of NDA, we were blissfully unaware that ED were creating their own L-39 until very recently. We were bitterly disappointed when we were told by ED of their plans.

 

This was an extremely tough decision for us to take, but we feel we have no other choice other than to halt development before incurring any further costs.

 

Best regards,

Tango.


Edited by Tango
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tango

Tango

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
Ever heard the saying, "Ya snooze, Ya Lose". If someone is going to commit to making an aircraft for DCS World they had better get it done in a timely matter or someone else will.

 

I challenge anyone here to do what we did in less time, with the given resources.

 

Just an FYI - the mods are watching this thread like a hawk.

 

Best regards,

Tango.


Edited by Tango
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Boss86005

Boss86005

Posted
Posted

It's reality in the business world, like it or not. Was not trying to put down your work and no need to challenge anyone.

"We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the day and night to visit violence on those who would do us harm".

---------------------------------------------------------

Intel i-9 9900k @ 5.0 Ghz, EVGA 2080tiFTW3 11Gb, Corsair H115 PRO water cooler, Gigabyte AorusMaster motherboard, EVGA Super Nova 1000 watt G+ powersupply, G.SKILL 64Gb ram @3800 MHz, HP EX 920 M.2 PCIe 3TB,Windows 10Pro x64

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tango

Tango

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
It's reality in the business world, like it or not. Was not trying to put down your work and no need to challenge anyone.

No problem - your post suggested that we decided to "just not work on it anymore", which couldn't be further from the truth.

 

Regarding the mod comment - there is zero tolerance on speculation as to why we have made this decision. We appreciate there are things we can not share with you to shed light on our decision, but rest assured we have not made this announcement without very good reason.

 

Let me say this - we would never abandon a project after expending so much time, effort and cost, unless there was no other option. Development costs money.

 

Best regards,

Tango.


Edited by Tango
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Python

Python

Posted
Posted
outside of the DCS engine.

 

I feel for you, I really do. They certainly should have told you they had the same aircraft in production and I have no idea why they didn't (we don't get to know much around here unless VEAO are involved) But giving up completely on DCS would be unfortunate for us all. I realise you must feel disheartened, even betrayed but there is a big market here, plenty of us would invest in future products from you and DCS is likely to grow and grow. Rather than cutting all ties, it might be better to step back for a while and decide on that later once emotions have settled. The more third party developers we have around, the better. While we don't know much at all, It does seem clear there needs to be a more open relationship, or just a better understanding between ED and third party developers to prevent anything like this happening again. I hope you do well in whatever you choose to do... and I sincerely hope DCS will be involved in your plans at some point.

[sIGPIC]sigpic67951_1.gif[/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasiuss

Anastasiuss

Posted
Posted

But if you work together with 3rd party developer. Which should be a part of the DCS world, then ED should also give them a few securities (maybe a timeslot for a beta status or so). Otherwise, nevertheless, no developer invests in future more resources in the platform. Or have I overlooked something? :helpsmilie:

 

[edit] im typing to slow ^^

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

360th TFW Falconeers

last video ->

 

ASUS P6X58D Premium, Intel Core i7 920, 6GB DDR3, SAPPHIRE TOXIC HD 5850, Win7 64 Bit. X52, Track IR 4, Momo Racing.

ArmA1+2+3, DCS: World, K-50, A-10C, CA, P-51D, UH-1H, Mi-8FC1+2+3, FalconAF, FC1+FC2, IL2'46, rFactor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tango

Tango

Posted
  • Author
Posted
They were told when ED decided to proceed with theirs, it wasnt some sneaky deal where they were building this behind the teams back...

 

Wow. NDA prevents me replying to this! All I will say is: inaccurate.

 

Best regards,

Tango.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
simis

simis

Posted
Posted
They were told when ED decided to proceed with theirs, it wasnt some sneaky deal where they were building this behind the teams back...

 

They found out about it a week ago like everyone else, cockpit renders were shown in the newsletter, thats not much heads up. Seems like they've been working on it for some time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cichlidfan

cichlidfan

Posted
Posted

Fwiw, after reading a bit, I think I will pass on ED's L-39.

ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero, i7-6700K, Noctua NH-D14 Cooler, Crucial 32GB DDR4 2133, Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 256GB, Samsung EVO 250GB & 500GB SSD, 2TB Caviar Black, Zotac GTX 1080 AMP! Extreme 8GB, Corsair HX1000i, Phillips BDM4065UC 40" 4k monitor, VX2258 TouchScreen, TIR 5 w/ProClip, TM Warthog, VKB Gladiator Pro, Saitek X56, et. al., MFG Crosswind Pedals #1199, VolairSim Pit, Rift CV1 :thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...