DCS September Newsletter

[Dav IRL]

Credit card at the ready for all this lush new product range.

[Vespa]

Can't wait to get these new features

[112th_Rossi]

Ok just bought ever module I didn't have...

 

Sabre,

P51D,

Dora,

BF109 pre-order

Mi8

 

A mere $156 worth :D

[boquinauer]

Thanks for making up the cancelation of the Virtual Patriots L-39 project, ED.

 

That has been a very bad move. :mad:

[GeorgeLKMT]

I wonder how they're going to handle the release of C and ZA. I mean, they said they'll release C with ZA after, so is it going to be one price for two aircraft, or two separate modules? Because I can't imagine many people buying C, when they can buy basically the same aircraft only with weapon capabilities instead. We'll see.

[GGTharos]

Who says ED did such a thing? Do you know something others don't? Do you know how far along this project was out if it would not have been canceled anyway?

[boquinauer]

I think, that the statement that "Virtual Patriots" say in his webpage is self explanatory:

 

 

"Although the development progress was significant and our personal investment into the product over the past 28 months was very high, Eagle Dynamics' unexpected announcement for the imminent release of their own L-39 simulation under the DCS name has made our 3rd Party Licensed product redundant and additionally, unmarketable."

 

http://www.dcs-l39.com

Edited September 8, 2014 by boquinauer

[MTFDarkEagle]

Who says ED did such a thing?

ED did, by releasing this statement in their newsletter, KNOWING the Patriots were developing (what evidently turned out to be) the same aircraft. Don't you find that... odd at least?

[GGTharos]

It isn't telling you as much as you believe it is.

 

I think, that the statement that "Virtual Patriots" say in his webpage is self explanatory:

 

 

"Although the development progress was significant and our personal investment into the product over the past 28 months was very high, Eagle Dynamics' unexpected announcement for the imminent release of their own L-39 simulation under the DCS name has made our 3rd Party Licensed product redundant and additionally, unmarketable."

[boquinauer]

It's what all DCS costumers have read about it so far.

What I'm wondering is what potential new developers might be thinking about investing their time and money after this. :huh:

[WRAITH]

More Sad news on the Front regarding Sept News

 

Moved posts as per Silver-Dragons suggestion, I also hate off topic chat I do make efforts to stick to topic and believe my opinion on "Sept News" is better here.

 

 

update with ED September newsletter

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=2165343#post2165343

 

and L-39 Patriot team module cancellation.

 

http://www.dcs-l39.com/

 

Booo

I know we'll never get told the details, but it's a rubbish situation.

 

 

Yeah, I know what you mean Buzzles,

 

I was fearing this kind of news would drop in with so much promised.

 

Thats why I posted in this thread.......... http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2148972&postcount=181

 

To many "Air Crafts" many by which are not really needed if a better concept for DCS is panned out being a "AIR WAR COMBAT SIM" more like good oldie "Microprose Falcon 4.0" to be blatantly honest.

 

So I see more and more disappointments coming...........especially as DCS carries that little clause.......... "All Subject to Change"!

 

Time to rethink a better strategy and get a good "Air Combat Sim" complete thats my opinion!

 

There is no other Air Combat Sim in development or competing with DCS.

 

So Please DCS get the "Modern Air War Combat" concept part of it completed!

 

Please!

 

Cheers,

 

Edited September 8, 2014 by WRAITH

[WinterH]

Well since you decided move to your post, figured I'd need to move my reply as well Wraith :

 

Yeah, one aircraft is cancelled because another company out of the blue say they are releasing the very same aircraft, and this somehow reinforce your erroneous position of "meh all those aircraft are unnecessary, start doing what I want only!".

 

Way to jump on a perceived yet irrelevant opportunity man ;)

Edited September 8, 2014 by WinterH
fixing typo

[WRAITH]

Yeah, one aircraft is cancelled because another company out of the blue say they are releasing the very same aircraft, and this somehow reinforce your erroneous position of "meh all those aircraft are unnecessary, start doing what I want only!".

 

Way to jump on a perceived yet irrelevant opportunity man

 

 

Huh, whhhaaat,

 

You certainly dont understand the "Air Combat" community my friend suggest you use Google and respectfully get educated on what a majority wants, but are also giving up on ever seeing "Air Warfare Combat Sims" ever being developed, Sadly!

 

You do see not many people posting now days yeah! Sad!

 

But a caution- Dont make things personal its just a general view or outlook on things that are happening, Okay. I wont tolerate personal attacks!:(

 

Just dont take out your frustrations on people.:(

 

Also its not the end of the world bud, still hoping that DCS will come through with goodies after "Update 2.0.0 + Edge + NTR + F-18E"........hoping anyway!:thumbup:

 

The news reported is not good in news in general so people will respond, also taking note its not the first time people read this type of news info, Cancellations and Projects Dumped, okay!:cry:

 

Take care M8 not offended just saying.

 

Cheers,

 

:drunk:

Edited September 8, 2014 by WRAITH

[leafer]

It's what all DCS costumers have read about it so far.

What I'm wondering is what potential new developers might be thinking about investing their time and money after this. :huh:

 

You're peeved that ED announced a module that none of its official third parties are developing?

[WinterH]

...

 

Yeah, you still say "you don't understand 'Air Combat Community'", but problem with that is you assume your personal standing to be "will of the air combat community". I don't need to use any search service my friend, it is prety clear to me that people in combat flight sim community has somewhat differing desires, and your point of view isn't the landslide majority at all, and in time, they are all getting catered to anyway.

 

Yet, you use every (even false) opportunity to post "see, I am right, and everyone wants what I want too! stop doing everything else and do what I want for I am the spirit of the community". Let's say, completely arbitrarily, that 60, or even 70 percent of community align closer to your "grand scheme of things". Problem with that would be, according your apparent understanding of "democracy hell yeah!", the other 40 or 30 percent is automagically wrong, does not exist, and whatever other reasons developers may have for doing what they do, besides demand of other half, doesn't mean a thing in your eyes. Beacuse, majority right? :)

 

You accuse people and ED themselves of not understanding "the air combat sim", and assume that you understand everything, yet, display a lack of understanding instead.

 

Unlike what you try to portray in your post, I certainly have no frustrations here to take on other people dude... and while I find ED-Patriots L-39 situation displeasing and will personally boycott ED's module, I still commend ED for their vision of a full spanning, sandbox flight sim that does / will span across all eras of combat aviation inlcuding past and modern. I hardly am the one here going all the time "ED change your plans! your vision is wrong!" am I now? Who's venting frustration?

 

I don't engage in forum feuds, and I despise any form of personal attacks on forums on anyone, don't engage them myself. This not a personal attack, but I am sure people here are getting a bit tired seeing half a million posts from same user on many topics saying the same thing, whenever that user perceive an opportunity. What I am adressing here is not anyone's person, rather a practice of posting same thing all over the forums incessantly and often off topically.

 

Speaking of OT, whenever you feel your position in a discussion is threatened you say "stop OT chat people", while responses are perfectly on topic. Now I ask you, as I did in my previous post, how linking to your thread basically about "what the hell ED your vision is lacking, adopt mine! do only modern air combat!! and then whatever else since I'll be done", in a situation discussing two studios doing the same (funnily modern-ish) aircraft is on topic at all? This same situation could have been two houses announcing an F-15E (which happened anyway) as well would you still stand up and say "see, have a vision and do what I want"?

 

Reason for my post is just that, alright?

 

It is not a personal attack, but rather adressing a tendency of yours to post about your grand scheme of air combat simulation in any and every topic on forums, where it usually is off topic, as it is in this case. But since you tell you won't tolerate personal attacks, even though there is no attack to talk about, I suppose I better head for shelter to be on the safe side right :P ?

[WRAITH]

Yeah, you still say "you don't understand 'Air Combat Community'", but problem with that is you assume your personal standing to be "will of the air combat community".

 

 

Oh Boy :doh:,

 

First I will ask how often do you read the Forum, if its everyday then you would understand so many posts are......... repeats after......... repeats..........after repeats!

 

Also having spent much of my time in the Falcon community which sadly is dead, I have spoken with many in private message and in many Forums so i do have some idea and reasons in all fairness.

 

WE know what we all want getting it is a whole another story.

 

Anyway your response is becoming more personal and nasty not here for this, Okay! :(

 

The constant rebuttal, singling people out, twisting the replies and what not is pointless, when so many others post the same as I do that should be a given!:smilewink: :thumbup:

 

Posting in want, expressing new ideas, proposals and really goods ones I might add.

 

Anyway lets leave it at that!

 

Q?./ But how do we as a whole communicate what we want out of DCS or Air War Combat Sims? Ahhhggg, pffft..... LoL

 

Take care bud! :drunk:

 

Side note-

 

FORUMS :doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh: LoL

 

We just need more Combat Sims more to pick and choose to our liking! Sadly is the reason!

 

Take care all!

Edited September 8, 2014 by WRAITH

[FoReIgNeR]

But how do we as a whole communicate what we want out of DCS or Air War Combat Sims? Ahhhggg, pffft..... LoL

 

I would say in a constructive way (preferably with less emoticons) and respecting that not everyone is 100% aligned with your view =)

 

Back OT: it seems that 2014/1015 will be very exciting times for DCS and that a lot of peoples needs will be catered to. From WWII propheads to late 90's topguns, with new aircraft, theaters and core engine updates. Great way forward ED!

[Silver_Dragon]

will be the ED L-39 project a have a military / commercial project approved to release to entrainment sector or / and legal agreement with Aero company?

[NineLine]

will be the ED L-39 project a have a military / commercial project approved to release to entrainment sector or / and legal agreement with Aero company?

 

I doubt ED is going to comment on anything like that, I am sure they have all permissions required to produce the module, beyond that, you wont hear much else I imagine.

[Suchacz]

I doubt ED is going to comment on anything like that, I am sure they have all permissions required to produce the module, beyond that, you wont hear much else I imagine.

Why do you think? For example, BST made Huey an official Bell/Textron product...

 

Silver Dragon is askink a good and valid question, I'm interested too

[NineLine]

And I gave an answer, just based on what ED likes to share, I doubt they are going to come to this thread and comment on that, but logic says they will get all needed permission to produce the module.

[NRG-Vampire]

We also plan for this module (L-39) to include multiplayer front seat / back seat capability. We believe that this feature will add a new dimension of gameplay for this aircraft and several others like the UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, Hawk, and C-101

 

and TF-51D, MiG-21UB, F-15E, F-18D, Su-25UTG, Su-30, MiG-29UB, F-14A, Mirage-2000D, Tornado, Mi-24V etc... :bounce:

Edited September 8, 2014 by NRG-Vampire

[GeorgeLKMT]

but logic says they will get all needed permission to produce the module.

 

I agree with this. Considering how expensive the development of DCS modules is, I don't think they would risk their project getting shut down by original manufacturer just because they didn't secured permission beforehand. It can happen (and happened) to some small devs when they think they're small fish and nobody is going to bother. But ED is big, regular developer and not bunch of freelance amateurs or something.

[Suchacz]

...but logic says they will get all needed permission to produce the module.

No doubt about that. But if I undertand SD's question correctly, he was asking if Albatros module is made "only" with permission of the manufacturer, or with the cooperation of Aero. Imho there is no need to keeping this info in secrecy, info about a cooperation with Aero should be good for the marketing and should encrease the sale numbers :smilewink:

Edited September 8, 2014 by Suchacz

[Buzzles]

I suspect that when the L39 is closer to release and gets its own sub forum, or store page, we might get more information.

 

Until then, I very much doubt we'll get *any* news on it. Hell, it doesn't even have it's own announcement thread yet.

Edited September 8, 2014 by Buzzles
Speeeling