ED Please correct these bugs?

diveplane · May 7, 2006

Makes me wonder what the "ED Testers Team" tested ... and if you want us to adept i'll ask you to what? This "sim" is going downhill - just the same way
we saw it with F/A-18.

lmao

rlogue · May 7, 2006

I'm not jumping on the sim is dying bandwagon .. I play this game alot and I like it alot. There are some things I don't like and I've posted them above .. so don't read into my post's that i'm anti lomac. I am pro-gripe though .. everyone should post there gripes .. how else will they know what we are unhappy with ? I am anti - anybody who says we should not post our gripes.

May 7, 2006

Makes me wonder what the "ED Testers Team" tested ... and if you want us to adept i'll ask you to what? This "sim" is going downhill - just the same way
we saw it with F/A-18.

blind man walking...

Floyd · May 7, 2006

blind man walking...

Now tell us what you've tested - enlighten me ;)

S77th-GOYA · May 7, 2006

What's the WEP power-on stall speed of the P-38L in combat flaps configuration at normal combat gross weight?

Show me proof of that and I guarentee I'll buy BS. :)

I'm serious, Cali. Two copies!

Ice · May 7, 2006

There is nothing wrong with bringing up issues. Even I do that. But why should any software developer feel obliged to fix anything when it is demanded in the manner that some deliver. If it were me it would only make the chances of it being a dressed alot smaller.

GGTharos · May 7, 2006

Makes me wonder what the "ED Testers Team" tested ... and if you want us to adept i'll ask you to what? This "sim" is going downhill - just the same way we saw it with F/A-18.

We spent quite a chunk of time on correcting and catching crash and lock-up issues, we spend a -hideous- amount of time trying to improve the missile sensor model which backfired unfortunately, we spend a chunk of time poring through research materials to enhance the simulation, and so on and so forth.

The readme's come with each patch. Read them.

Just because you do not see what's going on behind the scenes, your pet peeve isn't fixed, and you think that either nothing was fixed or that those fixes were 'easy' or that the fixes YOU want are 'easy' doesn't mean it's so, and you're out of line backhandedly calling the testers lazy. We do this for free, we take time out of our lives for it. A lot of time. And it isn't necessarily fun either - a lotof stuff that was done was very repetitive with the intent of statistics gathering, or trying to reproduce bugs, etc.

Sorry to get harsh on you, but you really -are- out of line.

The sim isn't dying - it's evolving. No, it isn't evolving for free. I'm going to stick with it because I see a lot of potential from what I see being done in BS. Am I going to tell you what I'm testing?

No. I signed an NDA. Sorry. I would -love- to go on and on about the new 'pit technology and other enhancements that this will bring to the helo itself and eventually to the other flyables (and the rest of the sim, in fact - the flyables aren't the only thing that are getting attention).

I really don't mind if people post what their pet peeve is, but this ridiculous attitude that ED doesn't listen to players, and that they are lazy, as are their testers, needs to go away, NOW.

And one more thing: Most of us aren't really ED's customers. In fact, even though we buy the sim, the real customer is the publisher who has paid ahead of time to have a product made. That is -very simply- the reality of business, and nothing else - you won't see anyone but myself throw that at you, probably ... ED will certainly not use it as an excuse for not doing something you want, unless it has to do with direction - the contract dictates direction. That's my assumption anyway, from what I've seen of the business world.

And ED -still- does stuff for us, the end user, regardless. So get your stories and perceptions straight.

Post what bothers you, but leave out the insults and accusations - it helps no one. You want to know what's happening behind the scenes? Ask, and -maybe- someone will tell you. Most of the time you'll get the NDA line or no answer, but sometimes you'll get to hear something interesting.

PS: These thoughts are my own. I test for ED, I don't represent them.

May 7, 2006

People are always looking to fight over something small. Goya you know that modern jets are more complicated then older ones. Missiles to bullets and radar to eye balls. And what I meant by adapt was we have to adapt to changes even if they help or hurt certain jets/missiles. try to bait me all you want I wont fall for it :)

EvilBivol-1 · May 7, 2006

.

Shepski · May 7, 2006

Don't start bashing the testers because that will lead you down an unfortunate path.

GG said enough already and I echo his statements... read each and every point of every patch readme and then you will see what we have tested. Now add much more behind the scenes testing and evaluations that aren't mentioned and you will have an idea.

How much new content has Eagle added that wasn't initially planned in the patches? How much credit do they get for it?

As for bugs being fixed and features added to the Lock On series that aren't in the scope of Black Shark... I would love to see more work on the Flanker personally... some want more on the Eagle and Hog, some want more on the missiles, some want more on the naval aspect. Eagle cannot do it all when the new project is a helicopter simulation... you will have to just understand that and support them if you wish.

Shepski · May 7, 2006

I'm serious, Cali. Two copies!

I'm sure it's in a P-38 AFM that would be easy to get a hold of... if it isn't then it comes down to artistic license. :)

VMFA-Blaze · May 7, 2006

GG:

Your post here is dead on target, I for one have a small idea just what Ed is doing behind the scenes and I'm guite impressed. The team is totally dedicated to Eagle Dynamics are are doing an outstanding job here.

They're all working 18 hour days and are trying every possible way to get everything that were asking for.

Again this a small team of very young guys, so lets stop trying to get blood out of a stone.

All good things take time, (there's no easy way out) its all hard work.

Have some patients or else don't bother.

Blaze

EvilBivol-1 · May 7, 2006

Can't post... again...

SwingKid · May 7, 2006

I'm not trying to be objective. Whether or not I buy BS is purely subjective. And it was really in response to the claim that ED is in business for "our" pleasure.

Ok,

what would satisfy the requirements of proving that ED is in it for your pleasure, such that you would wish to eat your keyboard?

I don't suppose simply, oh, I don't know - making a good enough product for you to purchase it, would be enough? :)

-SK

EvilBivol-1 · May 7, 2006

GOYA,

"OUR" means our collective hobby of flight simming. Your contribution to it, as well as your voice in it, is no smaller or greater than the next guy's. I'm sorry that you can't see past your subjective desires in deciding what is, in your view, good decision-making for the company, which, in turn, would ensure your future enjoyment of their products.

My personal conclusion:

Having flown with the Virtual Blue Angels, spent countless hours in multiplayer coop and head to head missions, designed some of my own missions and subsequently flown them in both singleplayer and multiplayer, Lock On has provided me with 3 years of supreme entertainment and, in at least certain limited respects, some insight into that fantastic world of Cold War jet fighter combat. I would be ashamed to throw accusations at the Devs (or even the publishers for that matter, without whom we might not have had a Lock On in the first place), who, despite the community’s continual inability to understand or accept the realities of flight sim development, continue to find new ways to keep serving OUR need for more fun, more realism, and more flyable aircraft - all, mind you, practically mutually-exclusive goals. More power to them in whatever route they feel is best suited for it.

P.S. My flight time in LO is fairly evenly distributed between all of the flyables (except the vanilla Su-25). I would love to see any and all of them improved. But I understand that from a developer's point of view, it makes more sense to invest in your future, than in your past. IMHO, any accusations of 'failure to deliver', 'lack of support', 'not listening', are plainly untrue and are fueled by personal disappoinment rather than reality.

Cobra360 · May 7, 2006

There is one thing though. Some members, can't remember who off hand said that ED got hold of more info on the F-15 that has not made it's way into the game and at this stage looks like it never will. The A-10 is underpowered in how it's FM is modeled, this has been said and will also never be corrected.

Since ED is Russian based it looks as though all future improvements and addons will be Russian based, (not a bad thing IMO) but in their future plans it looks like the F-15 will no longer be apart of that. The A-10 may see another outing. But what we do have now is IMO the best sim of all the fighter types we have along with the best graphics and the AFM and advanced cockpit technology is all brand new in the simulation world.

The way I look at it is, ED have set a high standard for any new sim dev to try and match or surpass. ED are the only one currently to be able to do what they do for the fast jet sim community. If it wasn't for them, we'd all still be playing F4 and JF/A-18.

But as someone already said, every piece of software ever made has it's bugs. But what I'd like to see is, to fix all the existing stuff before adding new content and then having to fix that aswell.

I am currently on the fence about BS, in the end I may well end up getting it because IMO this is the only decent sim around till ED's next project and that will be a very long time away.:pilotfly:

EvilBivol-1 · May 7, 2006

To echo GG, even though I agreed earlier that Lock On is 'dead', I think "evolving" is a better name for it. AFAIK, Lock On's code may live on in one form or another for quite some time. But it will be gradually "phased out" as replacement code is developed. This process has already started with FC's AFM, expanded in Black Shark, and will continue growing thereafter.

Cobra360, for what we know, the F-15 is just as much a part or EDs future plans as any other aircraft, except the F-16 and (*maybe*) an advanced MiG-29, which have been mentioned numerous times as the more likely candidates for the next project.

"no promises".

hitman · May 7, 2006

Heres a question that would satisfy most of the guys here (and not a whole lot of the US wanting a/c) but if there is no more development for the F-15 and the A-10 flight models, why not simply remove them from game as flyables?

Rhen · May 7, 2006

because, despite the "nature" of these aircraft, there's still many of us that fly it, even in it's current state.:joystick:

Ironhand · May 7, 2006

Heres a question that would satisfy most of the guys here (and not a whole lot of the US wanting a/c) but if there is no more development for the F-15 and the A-10 flight models, why not simply remove them from game as flyables?

Because, at the end of the day, I enjoy them--well, the A-10 anyway. I'd rather have them with problems than not have them at all.

BTW, Aimmaverick, what's the problem you're seeing with the HUD vs HSI nav cues? In both the A-10 and the F-15, the HUD is pointing to the next waypoint while the HSI course window is indicating the required course from the waypoint behind you to the currently selected waypoint. So they are indicating two different things. Or is there another issue I'm not understanding?

And BTW #2, have you checked out Groove's link to the AIM-9 reticule? It's a bit hard to tell without the HUD frame or a clearly defined pitch scale but it certainly doesn't look as big as the one you reference in your 2nd screenshot (ammo depleted): A-10 AIM-9 HUD.avi. (Larger screen and in slow motion.)

Rich

chris2802 · May 7, 2006

Well I for one am extremely grateful to the developers and test team for all the hours put in to this game. It runs stable on my machine and its the closest I'll ever come to flying jets.

Besides, anyone who's lived with Microsoft software for years should have no problem with the amount/magnitude of the bugs on lock on. In comparison, its trouble free!

Chris

GGTharos · May 7, 2006

There is one thing though. Some members, can't remember who off hand said that ED got hold of more info on the F-15 that has not made it's way into the game and at this stage looks like it never will. The A-10 is underpowered in how it's FM is modeled, this has been said and will also never be corrected.

Since ED is Russian based it looks as though all future improvements and addons will be Russian based, (not a bad thing IMO) but in their future plans it looks like the F-15 will no longer be apart of that. The A-10 may see another outing. But what we do have now is IMO the best sim of all the fighter types we have along with the best graphics and the AFM and advanced cockpit technology is all brand new in the simulation world.

I'm going to have to pick on you here a little.

The F-15C -may- never be updated, that is certainly a possibility insofar as 'everything is possible' goes.

HOWEVER.

The Devs are loathe to touch anything using the 'old technology', meaning you're not seeing fixes to the F-15 NOT because ED is abandoning it, but because ED considers it a waste of resources to touch old code, where they can instead ressurect the F-15C with much better 'pit and systems tech a'la black -shark.

Do you hear that? FULLY CLICKABLE, 3D, 6DOF COCKPITS WITH SOME OF THE MOST ACCURATE SYSTEMS MODELLING YOU CAN FIND!

Was this clear enough? That is what BS is bringing to the table - BS is the prototype of what comes after LOMAC in terms of aircraft simulation.

They aren't touching the 15 NOW because it's much more efficiant to simply redo it on the whole using that technology LATER.

Same with the A-10.

From what I've read here on these PUBLIC forums, I would assume that those are ED's tentative desires and plans. They may or may not happen, but I would be betting on 'will' personally.

You guys need to stop the doomsaying, seriously. ED could have stopped doing -anything- a long time ago. Yet they still tweak missiles, radar performances, etc.

After BS we will see WAFM for all weapons. Probably an AFM A-10, and new pit for Su-25 and A-10.

I've said these things before. Do you people not read? Or do you just forget in the next ten minutes?

Again, while all this is technically 'pie in the sky', I understand that this is the desired course of action. It may change, but regardless, I think it shows that ED wants to move forward, and has every interest in updating existing planes if it can, but has no interest in fixing up old code when they've got something much better to work with.

S77th-GOYA · May 7, 2006

I'm sure it's in a P-38 AFM that would be easy to get a hold of...

OK, that mostly doesn't make sense but let me use this opportunity to let everyone know that if they know of any P-38 test data, I would really appreciate seeing it. The only place I know of is http://www.spitfireperformance.com and the data there isn't enough for my purposes.

And let me make this clear: I am NOT trying to tell ED how to run its business nor am I telling anyone else whether to support them. All I'm saying is that for some time now, ED has been focusing on things other than why I bought LOMAC and why I have enjoyed LOMAC for 2 years. This trend doesn't show any signs of stopping. There are people who would see buying BS even if they don't expect to use any of the new features simply as an investment in ED's future. I'm not one of them. I support companies that produce the things I like. And I don't expect my voice to be heard any farther than the cash register.

NO ONE has lambasted LOMAC because it's not perfect. The problem seems to be that support for the things that are important to some of us seems to have disappeared. I actually bought LOMAC on an impulse. I went to the store to buy Pacific Fighters and saw LOMAC with the Hog on the box and bought it instead. It was a hell of a good investment of $40 bucks. If that box had the Su-25T or Ka-50 on it, I never would have picked it up.

If ED produces a sim in the future with features that appeal to me I won't hesitate to buy it, knowing that there will be bugs and knowing that it will take them a lot of time to make patches and add-ons.

SwingKid · May 7, 2006

There is one thing though. Some members, can't remember who off hand said that ED got hold of more info on the F-15 that has not made it's way into the game and at this stage looks like it never will. The A-10 is underpowered in how it's FM is modeled, this has been said and will also never be corrected.

Since ED is Russian based it looks as though all future improvements and addons will be Russian based...

You must be referring to one of these messages.

http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?p=114643#post114643

http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?p=114758#post114758

http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?p=131653#post131653

http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?p=131673#post131673

http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?p=156540#post156540

http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?p=162870#post162870

http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?p=171741#post171741

http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?p=187031#post187031

This forum needs a FAQ.

Question #1: "Why is it a waste of time for ED developers to answer me?"

-SK

bflagg · May 7, 2006

I've said these things before. Do you people not read? Or do you just forget in the next ten minutes?

I think it's more of a case of not knowing...

for example in this thread.. there is to be work done onthe 120c in Blackshark.

I didn't know this... Is this a AFM fix?.. will the soviet counterpart also be fixed along with it.?

Many times threads will have the one post or two of relevant information on page 6. (after 2 pages.. my eyes kinda blur and I click somewheres else).

anyway...good nite to all

Sign In

ED Please correct these bugs?

Recommended Posts

diveplane

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

rlogue

Guest Cali

Floyd

S77th-GOYA

Ice

GGTharos

Guest Cali

EvilBivol-1

Shepski

Shepski

VMFA-Blaze

EvilBivol-1

SwingKid

EvilBivol-1

Cobra360

EvilBivol-1

hitman

Rhen

Ironhand

chris2802

GGTharos

S77th-GOYA

SwingKid

bflagg

Recently Browsing 0 members