Beta period complaining

[SharpeXB]

I purchased the F-86F Saber on 7/27/2014. As of today 2/25/2016 this module is still listed as a "Beta". That's 19 months after the product was launched. I always feel encouraged to support this hobby and DCS in particular by funding many if not most all of the modules in their pre-order stage with the idea that this will help with its development. Apparently that is not how things are working out. Instead, it seems the early funding provides no incentive for the module to ever be finished. The time that the F-86 has gone unfinished is astonishing. Entire games are made in less time. Or the "Beta" moniker is used too exhaustively. I recognize all these products are continual works in progress. But "Beta" means unfinished.

I couldn't resist the MC-2000 and pre-ordered that as well. But it will probably be the last module I pre-order and I hope it's not in Beta for two years.

I don't want to seem negative and I want to help the development as much as I can but now it seems that the best way to help is to buy modules only when they're finished.

[Flagrum]

Which features are you missing in this beta, compared to the supposed release version? Or which remaining bug bother you?

 

What we have learned is, that in DCS "beta" does not really mean much. Sometimes it means "it needs some last bugs fixed", sometimes it means "yes, it can take off ... but that's basically it". And we see steady work on some while others seem to stay in whichever state the are for felt eternities.

 

From my (limited) experience with this aircraft, but also from what I gather around here, the Sabre is more one of the postive examples. I'd even say, the label "beta" is probably one of the few last things the devs need to take care of ... i.e. by removing it. :o)

[smnwrx]

I don't want to seem negative and I want to help the development as much as I can but now it seems that the best way to help is to buy modules only when they're finished.

 

You may be waiting a while. Most modules seem to get constant updates. It would be hard to say any of them are "done"

[Hook47]

The MiG 15 and F-86 are actually pretty solid, but I agree wth OP in that was is considered "beta" is a bit of a departure from the conventional sense. They have been extremely long. Heck I'm still waiting for some MI-8 gunners, and it came out before the Sabre!

 

If the label is the issue, I guess it would be better for the devs to just say the aircraft will be in active development for years after release up front, although that may impact sales for some.

[Zimmerdylan]

Man....this topic is so over discussed. It seems that every module that comes out gets hashed over the coals over and over and over and for no good reason.

So far as 90% of the people who own the F86 are concerned. This module is a solid addition to the DCS lineup. As it has been mentioned time and time again on these forums. Beta is only a word here. And indeed if you read your contract, it clearly states that these modules are in a constant state of development. So beta is a moot subject most of the time. There are modules that have been out much longer than the F86 that are still being developed, and changed. It is very much the nature of the beast.

Quite honestly, I was just wondering to myself if the F86 were still in beta due to the whining going on about the Hawk still being in beta. I just don't pay attention to these things because I learned early on that these planes will never stop being developed. And my conclusion is.......I could care less. Everyone who purchases DCS products should be well aware of how the development of these planes works. Complaining over 4 letters B-E-T-A in front of the title of a plane means very little if not nothing here. Especially when the plane in question has turned out to be one of the most popular, and widely used modules in DCS. It is one of my favorites and I see very little wrong with it. And the things that I do see are common to all DCS planes.

Wow.................Sorry for the rant, it's just that these threads are so pointless and prompt so many needless and destructive posts.

Edited February 26, 2016 by Zimmerdylan

[NeilWillis]

What features are you missing that you consider this posting to have been justified?

 

Or is it simply that you wanted to jump on the bandwagon and have a rant for no particular reason?

 

There is at present a 50/50 split between beta and final releases (10 of each), plus the game itself is in Alpha, Beta, and Full release versions.

 

If you are moaning simply over a label, then I am sorry, but there is absolutely no point even discussing it, because it is purely a matter for the developers internal decision making to resolve, and frankly I think a very minority public opinion means nothing in those terms.

 

If however you have been waiting for a particular feature/bug to be completed, then let's hear what it is you are so wound up about.

 

Otherwise, what exactly is the point of yet another negative, pointless, worthless rant?

[dufay]

What features are you missing that you consider this posting to have been justified?

ENG manual? Training missions? And these are only the very essential components of a flight simulator.

 

Stop barking on that guy. He's not the only who's disappointed. And as consumer who paid cash he and others have the rights to be unhappy.

Edited February 26, 2016 by dufay

[Jowen G. Bruère-Dawson]

Dufay : ENG manual ? You want an English manual ? Seriously check :

:C/DCS World/Mods/Aircraft/F-86/Doc... And there is the english manual... There is also another english manual on the internet (PDF file)

 

Yes its still in beta, but have you ever played other flight sims like FSX/P3D or X-Plane 10 ? A lot of add-ons for those sims have aircraft in final version, but there is not a lot of them which are at the same level of DCS's Sabre Beta version...

The F-86 is clearly near to the final version, and seriously, it's a great aircraft to fly, even in Beta, same thing for the MiG-15, Mi-8, Bf-109 and Fw-190.

 

Yes i agree we need missions and campaign for all of those planes (except Mi - 8, and even some units of their era, but in terms of the aircrafts themselves, those modules are really great don't you think ?

 

Don't really understand your complain

[dufay]

Dufay : ENG manual ? You want an English manual ? Seriously check :

:C/DCS World/Mods/Aircraft/F-86/Doc... And there is the english manual... There is also another english manual on the internet (PDF file)

So they finally started working on it after almost two years after releasing a product? That's a good news. For me, a good manual with all the required informations in a one place is a must for a flying sim. Without that I won't buy any other module in the future.

 

Yes, you can always say "we don't have this but we have that" but it's a matter of lowering your expectations just for the cause. But I see this as a modern trend - buying alphas, betas and then pretending to be happy about it.

 

I'm feeling I'm wasting my time now cause it's impossible to change people's way of thinking.

[Jowen G. Bruère-Dawson]

The manual was here since a while i'm wrong ?

 

I've my point of view. I'm really happy with DCS betas, when i think about Battlefield 4, The Witcher 3 and some other that you buy 59€, those games was supposed to be finished at their release date, but then nobody can play, because the game needs HUGE updates to be playable. The Witcher 3 was simply unplayable more than 10 minutes, after it crashed, need to wait for a patch to play quietly. I know it's not a good thing to compare DCS to other games, whatever they are, but still, DCS clearly claims that X product is in beta, and aircraft simulation is really hard to devellop (i think). So it needs time. And as i said, even with the mention ''Beta'', F-86 is great.

 

Seriously, you don't enjoy to fly with it ?

[dali]

I also have problem with naming convention. Once after release, it should be declared as V1.0 and there is no reason to continue updates. Otherwise every software product can be beta until the end. A handful of missions hardly suffice the amount of money one pays for the modules, regardless how much they supposedly cost to develop. And I'm not whining also, I'm very open and understanding and I love DCS.

[Rangi]

I don't care what it is called, for me the sabre is a well made module and I have fun flying it. If you have bugs, do a bug report and it will most probably be fixed.

[SharpeXB]

You may be waiting a while. Most modules seem to get constant updates. It would be hard to say any of them are "done"

Many of the modules are "done" to the extent that they're no longer Betas. I spend my time in DCS with those but I don't have the time to play Beta Tester.

 

If you are moaning simply over a label, then I am sorry, but there is absolutely no point even discussing it, because it is purely a matter for the developers internal decision making to resolve, and frankly I think a very minority public opinion means nothing in those terms.

The label is an important step. Removing the term "beta" means the product is mostly finished. I realize everything in the flight sim world is a constant work in progress. But removing that label is an important milestone. I'm not an aircraft expert or beta tester so I have no input to give in that regard, I've stopped installing beta modules as there are plenty of other DCS aircraft more worth my time.

I'm just a customer asking when the product I paid $49 for 19 months ago will be finished.

Edited February 26, 2016 by SharpeXB

[NeilWillis]

ENG manual? Training missions? And these are only the very essential components of a flight simulator.

 

Stop barking on that guy. He's not the only who's disappointed. And as consumer who paid cash he and others have the rights to be unhappy.

 

I'm not "barking" at anyone. You have the right to what you paid for, which was a Beta release. It came with no timetable, and it came with small print, which you obviously choose to ignore. As a bonus, when the final version is released, you'll be getting it as part of the bargain, but that isn't the same as paying for a final release and getting a beta, which appears to be the argument you are making.

 

However, and here is the rub... We have heard from so many people so many times about beta this and beta that, that the whole thing has been flogged to death, back to life, to death again, and for good measure, it has all been repeated ad nauseum!!!

 

If you have a desire to see the English manual, say so. If you wish to see the flange bracket actuator push-rod inhibitor modelled properly, say so. I don't have any qualms with people stating what they are missing, and asking for it. There is absolutely no doubting what you say in that a complete module requires a manual. Training missions though for such a simple aircraft to operate? Desirable maybe, but essential? Not really. Here is the rub though... You have a Beta release, and as such it is incomplete, and will remain in beta until such time as Belsimtek say otherwise - probably when it has a manual, and some training missions!

 

Blaming it all on the label beta is pointless, and always will be pointless. Modules are released incomplete, get used to it, and accept it, or just hold off buying until they are complete. That is all there is to say on that matter, and if you take the time to read what you are agreeing to, you will realise there is no point whining. I read these forums every day, all of them. I have heard it all before, and frankly there is no new argument, nothing new to add, and no point at all rehashing it. It will be taken out of Beta when the developers are satisfied with the content, and the content will be completed when they have the time and resources to dedicate to it. Right now, the Mi-8 is the main focus of their work.

 

If you took the time to actually read what I said, I simply asked HIM what HIS issues were. He didn't say so, and I'd say it was quite central to his complaint, wouldn't you agree? Another voice saying the same things about stuff remaining in Beta doesn't make the argument any more cogent or convincing, and I was curious as to what he was expecting that was so urgent that he had to bleat about it by resurrecting a flogged to death subject.

Edited February 26, 2016 by NeilWillis

[Buzzles]

The Sabre's just had a load of updates as well. I don't think there's much missing from the aircraft now.

 

As a module it's still missing a campaign + training missions (although 4 are done, as per the sticky), which is probably the only reason why it's still a beta.

 

It's a cracking module though, and well worth it. BST have done a good job on the airframe.

[NeilWillis]

Agreed Buzzles, it is getting there.

 

People should never underestimate the huge workload releasing a new module entails. There was a cost estimate of $100,000 dollars per module in DCS World awhile ago, and that should illustrate what developers are up against. If this workload is spread out over a couple of years, then the whole project is feasible. If we expect it to happen in 6 months, are we asking the impossible?

 

Experience shows that we have to be patient and just let the developers do their thing. Complaining will not help, but it will alienate the forum. We have seen that several times, and it won't do anything positive at all.

 

The modules are leagues ahead of anything else out there. The depth to which they are modelled is breathtaking. Don't expect miracles, that's all.

[NineLine]

To come out of Beta the module needs to be feature complete, we can see they are release things like training missions and such now, I am sure the goal is to get it to where it needs to be and get rid of the Beta tag.

[msalama]

So I'll just leave my opinion here, right? To wit, that the BST helos are still missing an elementary aspect of modelling (think thermophysics) or two - and yet, one of them has left beta ages ago already. OK, getting me coat now ;)

[Pikey]

I personally like when bandwagons are jumped on then someone jumps on the 'jumping on of the bandwagons'. About as useful as defining software betas or an argument over which missile is best or balancing PvP :)

Grabs coat and chases msalama oot tha door...

[Vincent90]

The manual was here since a while i'm wrong ?

I bought the F-86 and Mig-15 about a month ago, at that time the "english" F-86 manual consisted of an english table of contents, the rest of the manual was in russian.

 

I'm between parties here: The lack of a manual, training missions and campaign make this module worthy of criticism. That it is uncompleted after all these years is a legitimate complaint of a customer that pays top-dollar for these modules.

 

 

However, if we look at pure content: FC3 is a much more broken and unupdated mess than this, and that module, without the coming MiG-29 and Su-33 updates , is considered "finished" by ED. BST is at least honest and that should be commended.

 

So yeah, don't judge a book by its cover, but when pages of that book are still missing years later there should be some info or plan from BST to do something about it. The reason i'm not complaining is because I see BST is still actively working on all these modules, the planes themselves are top-notch (You guys really aced it, Belsimtek) and I bought it just a month ago, but something should definitely be done about it.

 

What really ruffles my feathers though, is that the ED store and Steam aren't upfront about which module is still WIP and which isn't. I wouldn't have bought the modules, if that information was given upfront and honestly. This lack of transparency about which modules are finished and which are still WIP is really bothering me, together with the lack of information about what content a module contains.

 

@NeilWillis: It's ok that you're fine with it, but every customer has the right to complain if something they buy doesn't meet their expectations.

 

I can understand that you're tired of the same arguments over and over again, given your seniority and activity on this forum, but the fact that the same arguments are repeating themselves means that something is structurally wrong. What the solution is, the devs should decide that for themselves.

[giei]

I own all modules and if the F86 is a beta than other modules should be considered like a sketches on a blackboard.

[Johnny Dioxin]

 

@NeilWillis: ...

 

given your seniority and activity on this forum...

 

 

That little gem made my day! :megalol:

[NineLine]

So I'll just leave my opinion here, right? To wit, that the BST helos are still missing an elementary aspect of modelling (think thermophysics) or two - and yet, one of them has left beta ages ago already. OK, getting me coat now ;)

 

Yet you would be hard pressed to find a better helo simulation.. let me help you put your coat on.

[SharpeXB]

To come out of Beta the module needs to be feature complete, we can see they are release things like training missions and such now, I am sure the goal is to get it to where it needs to be and get rid of the Beta tag.

I'm sure that's the goal as well. But once again 19 months! and that's not the time it required just to create the module. That's just moving it to a "feature complete" state. I don't personally think that's an acceptable pace of progress. Other developers have created entire games within that time frame. And so going forward I'll keep that in mind when purchasing future products.

[NineLine]

I'm sure that's the goal as well. But once again 19 months! and that's not the time it required just to create the module. That's just moving it to a "feature complete" state. I don't personally think that's an acceptable pace of progress. Other developers have created entire games within that time frame. And so going forward I'll keep that in mind when purchasing future products.

 

Not even I am going to argue the time frame (I love printing manuals so I get it)... they had some internal issues, so its a little easier for me to be forgiving as well. I get it, but on the other side of the coin its a pretty solid module no mater what tag is on it...