C101

[NeilWillis]

And so the witch hunt begins...

 

Really guys, you're starting to sound unreasonable here. There was a communication 2 days ago, and given the upheaval caused due to DCS World undergoing such fundamental changes recently are you really surprised that Aviodev are taking longer than originally anticipated?

 

For a start, there is now a multiplayer aspect to the game that didn't exist when they started. Moving goalposts don't make for quick releases.

 

You bought a Beta install, while it was still under development, from first time developers. You really think it is reasonable to complain when things fall behind a schedule that was never even officially given a deadline?

 

I suggest we just get off their backs, before they follow the same path as other developers, and adopt a policy of partial non-disclosure because we're behaving like a lynch mob!

 

Do you need some pitchforks and torches, or shall we just act like adults?

[giei]

And so the witch hunt begins...

 

Really guys, you're starting to sound unreasonable here. There was a communication 2 days ago, and given the upheaval caused due to DCS World undergoing such fundamental changes recently are you really surprised that Aviodev are taking longer than originally anticipated?

 

For a start, there is now a multiplayer aspect to the game that didn't exist when they started. Moving goalposts don't make for quick releases.

 

You bought a Beta install, while it was still under development, from first time developers. You really think it is reasonable to complain when things fall behind a schedule that was never even officially given a deadline?

 

I suggest we just get off their backs, before they follow the same path as other developers, and adopt a policy of partial non-disclosure because we're behaving like a lynch mob!

 

Do you need some pitchforks and torches, or shall we just act like adults?

 

I've no problem to wait 3-6-12 months but stop calling it a beta.

It's a pre-alpha.

No systems and NO KEYBINDINGS can't be acceptable in a beta.

Beta = full functions with lots of bugs

[Johnny Dioxin]

Whilst I agree that it's acceptable things may stall the process a bit and things may take longer than planned, don't forget that we have actually paid for something here.

 

Big difference to stuff that hasn't been released or paid for.

 

So I do have sympathy for people getting worried about their investment and they have every right to air those worries.

 

At least I still have faith in Aviodev giving us what they promised when I bought it nearly a year ago - I can't say the same about all modules I have bought in "beta".

[NeilWillis]

I've no problem to wait 3-6-12 months but stop calling it a beta.

It's a pre-alpha.

No systems and NO KEYBINDINGS can't be acceptable in a beta.

Beta = full functions with lots of bugs

 

I'm sorry, but I call it a Beta, because that is the label applied to it by Aviodev. What the definitions you consider to represent a Beta are a moot point whether you like it or not.

 

The fact remains that this is their first outing, and clearly they have and are encountering issues. We either let them get on with it, or we start something that will result in what amounts to harassment.

 

Is it really that big a deal that you'd rather we destroy any chance of good relations between Aviodev and the forum just because you can't see the wood for the trees? It has already happened with other devs, and they took the natural course of action by cutting us out of the loop.

[No43]

Remembered the Mig21 development process? :-) ...and the result is beautiful!

Aviodev post updates from time to time...few weeks ago the beta manual arrived.

i cant see any big problem.

[FraserNZL]

I say close this thread before it turns into a shit storm

[Abburo]

Here are my positive thoughts to Aviodev. I bought this module too in order to support the team. And this is not worrying me at all. When will be ready with EFM i will take it to a spin. Until then there are a lot to use and learn in DCS.

 

And I am sure that sometime will be ready !!!

[Coxy_99]

Quick update DCS C-101:

 

We just wanted to let you know that the last couple of months has been complicated for the team, having a tight schedule in our day jobs. In any case, we remained focused on our main target to finish the CC version, and AFM for both modules. We have been receiving a lot of questions regarding the Steam release; it will be available as soon as the CC version is released. We are working hard to have it done soon. We would like to apologize for the inconvenience. Great things are yet to come!

 

06.03.2015

 

The word soon kills the update ;) You can see the frustration which must be understood from the paying customer.

[NeilWillis]

Frustration is of course absolutely natural. No one is more eager than me to get hold of the CC, and to fly both variants in EFM.

 

When one person here asks the question, we ought to just leave it there. I'm sure Aviodev are capable of reading a single post. I am also sure they realise they are under pressure and accept their corporate responsibilities, and what constitutes an Alpha and Beta release too.

 

We don't need to keep the mob mentality going in order to keep the module development moving, and we can take for granted that when there is news - either good or bad - we will be notified by them.

 

Put it another way - "How many DCS forum members does it take to change a module's development time?" - "One to get them message across, and 50 to form the lynch mob to make sure the devs don't get away with anything!" - except of course, nothing we can say or do here will make one jot of difference to development times, they are what they are.

[Coxy_99]

All im saying is just dont give impression that we would get it soon, That gets them all excited like puppies, Then comes along complications that push it further out than expected, Which gets the consumer annoyed :)

[NeilWillis]

Excited like puppies - I love that!

 

Agreed, but I have never seen anywhere that Aviodev have given a date for release, so how can they be disappointing people when there are delays? We make assumptions on time lines, but that isn't quite the same thing, and if our assumptions are not met, how is that Aviodev's responsibility?

 

Anyone who has been involved in DCS for any length of time will be fully aware of the inevitability of delays - NTTR being a very salient reminder of that, having been suggested when the A-10C was in Beta!

[Coxy_99]

Quick update DCS C-101:

 

We just wanted to let you know that the last couple of months has been complicated for the team, having a tight schedule in our day jobs. In any case, we remained focused on our main target to finish the CC version, and AFM for both modules. We have been receiving a lot of questions regarding the Steam release; it will be available as soon as the CC version is released. We are working hard to have it done soon. We would like to apologize for the inconvenience. Great things are yet to come!

 

06.03.2015

 

The word soon kills the update ;) You can see the frustration which must be understood from the paying customer.

 

 

 

Excited like puppies - I love that!

 

Agreed, but I have never seen anywhere that Aviodev have given a date for release, so how can they be disappointing people when there are delays? We make assumptions on time lines, but that isn't quite the same thing, and if our assumptions are not met, how is that Aviodev's responsibility?

 

Anyone who has been involved in DCS for any length of time will be fully aware of the inevitability of delays - NTTR being a very salient reminder of that, having been suggested when the A-10C was in Beta!

 

Your correct no given release date, But what do you consider soon? 2 weeks, 5 weeks, 1 year? Im just saying from a marketing purpose choose your words wisely, I would put something like,

 

 

We just wanted to let you know that the last couple of months has been complicated for the team, having a tight schedule in our day jobs. In any case, we remained focused on our main target to finish the CC version, and AFM for both modules. We have been receiving a lot of questions regarding the Steam release; it will be available as soon as the CC version is released. We would like to apologize for the inconvenience. Great things are yet to come!

 

Its the way i would of put that particular update personally. Plus others can have less patience than say you and I do.

Edited January 9, 2016 by Coxy_99

[NeilWillis]

They are deliberately vague for the very good reason that they cannot yet predict with any certainty when they will have the module sufficiently complete, and then there are also the possible delays involved when ED carry out their own testing of the package.

 

This is a situation that affects all developers, and so we only get clear release information when the module is in ED's hands prior to scheduling into the next ED update.

 

It is a huge pain in the butt, everyone knows that. But that is the nature of the beast. Bugs cannot be traced and fixed to a set timeline, and module development timetables just aren't an exact science - and that is before you factor in stuff like the developers day time jobs demanding all their time, illness, personnel issues and anything else that takes up time away from development work.

 

Finally, factor in the changes that ED make to the base code that have knock on effects to 3rd party modules, implementing the software anti-piracy tools etc.

 

So, it is absolutely impossible to predict when a module will be ready for release until it is very close.

[Johnny Dioxin]

Frustration is of course absolutely natural. No one is more eager than me to get hold of the CC, and to fly both variants in EFM.

 

When one person here asks the question, we ought to just leave it there. I'm sure Aviodev are capable of reading a single post. I am also sure they realise they are under pressure and accept their corporate responsibilities, and what constitutes an Alpha and Beta release too.

 

We don't need to keep the mob mentality going in order to keep the module development moving, and we can take for granted that when there is news - either good or bad - we will be notified by them.

 

Put it another way - "How many DCS forum members does it take to change a module's development time?" - "One to get them message across, and 50 to form the lynch mob to make sure the devs don't get away with anything!" - except of course, nothing we can say or do here will make one jot of difference to development times, they are what they are.

 

When we were invited to buy this module, we were told that the CC model was expected to be released by the end of March 2015 - it's a major reason why I bought it (was only about 2 months away) and I know that goes for many people.

 

Most of us have kept our peace and been patient, but please do not come on here acting like the elder statesman and telling people, almost a year later, that they have no right to expect anything.

 

You are going around threads for much belated projects that have already been sold on certain promises - and that's what they are, trying to tell everyone how they should behave. Please desist. You are not a forum moderator, nor do you speak for anyone else other than yourself.

[Pikey]

There's a proper question here about where the ball lies on repeating the same things because if it were praise then no one would mind, if it were feedback, generally there's repeated feedback and no iussue elsewhere on the forum either.

 

There is a value to repeat threads because it is about the voice of the customers and to suggest that no more than one customer can complain is a ludicrous statement, they can and should because this is what moves the market.

 

Censorship is a real thing and frustration is an iceberg on this one.

[Johnny Dioxin]

My post probably comes over a bit stronger than it is meant to be, but I just feel that it's far better to see people complaining because they want a product (that once again, has been paid for), which shows they still have interest in that product - rather than demanding a refund.

 

I also think there's a big difference between saying something like "come on, guys, let's give them a chance - they are doing their best" and lecturing them on why they shouldn't complain.

 

Complaining is the in thing these days - didn't you know?

 

Just do it nicely, please :)

[jjohnson241]

"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice..."

Gents, I vote (and complain) with my wallet. Suffice it to say that my wallet won't open for this vendor again, regardless of the poignant admissions past and future.

Very simple, pay for performance.

I frankly don't care if they deliver the CC, complete the EB and/or finish the AFM work. If "they're doing their best", it's not good enough to stay in this league, IMHO of course.

[Hook47]

"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice..."

Gents, I vote (and complain) with my wallet. Suffice it to say that my wallet won't open for this vendor again, regardless of the poignant admissions past and future.

Very simple, pay for performance.

I frankly don't care if they deliver the CC, complete the EB and/or finish the AFM work. If "they're doing their best", it's not good enough to stay in this league, IMHO of course.

 

A very fair valid statement, and one I think should be foreboding to Aviodev, especially if they intended on doing planes after the C101. That it why emphasize that they REALLY need to think about going the extra mile, as in way behond Razbam and other Devs who have solid communication in a attempt to manage the pretty serious PR problem that has been developing as a result of this module.

 

I buy every module for this sim because I eat it up, and love the sim, but I have to admit that even I am very concerned I won't be buying another product from this and one other dev until they product is/ever becomes 100 percent complete. Not easy for me to say but it is where I am at sadly.

 

If Aviodev hired me tomorrow as their PR guy (and I'm not speaking out of my depth here, I have some PR experience) the first thing I would do is launch live streams, weekly news letters with detailed development information, giveaways and community incentives, ask the dev streams or threads with highly active communication and try to repair the loss of faith in this situation by setting a very open and positive tone. What I certainly would not do is allow sparse and vague communication which often plagues a couple of the 3rd parties

Edited January 10, 2016 by Hook47

[zaelu]

"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice..."

Gents, I vote (and complain) with my wallet. Suffice it to say that my wallet won't open for this vendor again, regardless of the poignant admissions past and future.

Very simple, pay for performance.

I frankly don't care if they deliver the CC, complete the EB and/or finish the AFM work. If "they're doing their best", it's not good enough to stay in this league, IMHO of course.

 

+1

 

And I would like that "entry level" 3rd parties to start off with a plane (especially if is not at a good stage like Mig21Bis was when was launched) priced accordingly so people would not feel bad about their money one year after. I think nobody would complain for a 20 Euro plane like C101. But 60Euros (full price, the discounts don't count) is almost offending after one year and not much development.

 

 

I still remember when Peyvolt from AvioDev was starting a thread about C101 price scheme and boasting that they sell TWO planes so it's indeed a great deal at 60.

 

Imho, if they had set the price at 20 and 15 with discount (yes yes looks bad at first) and did some promo videos and not talk in spanish on facebook to make many people not bother to read they would have cashed more money than they did by selling 500 copies with the huge price. It's the reality, like it or not. If you talk in your native language that is not English your product looks small on the market and potential casual buyer will not even look not to say about buying.

 

Devs need to understand that many buyers are absolute casual... even players that are maniacs wih other modules are casual buyers for some modules... to support the devs... for OCD reasons that they can't sleep without their collection being complete... etc. This happens on Steam with many games. The hope that a dev would get only customers that will play hard their game/module and also they would pay premium even for a half quartered work is just and illusion. Yes it would be nice but is not going to be real.

 

Look at ED. They do very often sells so they would suck in more players that are on the fence and will never buy at full price (either because they are not interested or because of budget) and also to fend off piracy. ED's strategy is very good considering they are not delivering 10% of an aircraft... or if they do, they label it FC3 and offer it at 5 Euros with a lot of free updates.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

 

If Aviodev hired me tomorrow as their PR guy (and I'm not speaking out of my depth here, I have some PR experience) the first thing I would do is launch live streams, weekly news letters with detailed development information, giveaways and community incentives, ask the dev streams or threads with highly active communication and try to repair the loss of faith in this situation by setting a very open and positive tone. What I certainly would not do is allow sparse and vague communication which often plagues a couple of the 3rd parties

 

Therein is the issue: what do you stream? If no progress of any measure can be demonstrated, then why bother streaming.

 

IMO, ED should take a second glance at its standards.

[Coxy_99]

Therein is the issue: what do you stream? If no progress of any measure can be demonstrated, then why bother streaming.

 

IMO, ED should take a second glance at its standards.

 

Or help them.

[Hook47]

Therein is the issue: what do you stream? If no progress of any measure can be demonstrated, then why bother streaming.

 

IMO, ED should take a second glance at its standards.

 

Well I certainly hope that is not the case, maybe I give too much credit, but I guess that could be a possibility.

 

 

Or help them.

 

 

Yea... Maybe help them Virtual Patriots/L-39 style if we don't see something soon :/

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

Well I certainly hope that is not the case, maybe I give too much credit, but I guess that could be a possibility.

 

It's quite a huge possibility. It's neither positive nor negative, either; showing off lines of code to demonstrate progress in the flight model is largely unimpressive. "Look at all these lines of code, guys. See that? Yeah, that's the Sea Eagle, trust me!"

 

Art assets are what wow the most and once those are done? What else do you have? I can understand the desire to get more from developers in terms of community interaction, because there could definitely be a hell of a lot more, but there's a finite amount of information that they could provide.

 

If they go overboard with it, then they seem disingenuous. "WE GOT ALL THIS WORK DONE GUYS.."

 

Damned if you do, damned of you don't, really.

[rrohde]

Or help them.

 

Flight model development is a very specific skill, which is way beyond that of 3D modeling and texturing. The kicker for me - for any module - is the availability of an AFM/EFM/PFM (respectively). ED (and some 3rd party devs) have spoiled us tremendously in that regard, and I guess any 3rd party developer who sells a beta version of their product without EFM seems to feel the heat from the community. A DCS module without AFM/EFM/PFM these days it is just not very attractive. I haven't flown the Hawk and the C-101 in a long time, thus.

 

I wonder if ED will pick up the pieces if all else fails, especially in the EFM department, since programmers that are also proficient in flight modeling don't seem be easy to find - and keep around.

Edited January 10, 2016 by rrohde

[Coxy_99]

Atleast with veao we have seen EFM vids or work in progress and that it is being tested, What have we seen from Aviodev on any sort of flight model or testing, Its not a dig, But does ED have to say enough is enough? the C-101 is a nice looking aircraft and i also brought it A to support them and B i generally would like this with weapons. For now its just great for formation but thats about it.