About the release dates and the hype...

[Psicodreamics]

Whats the reason why ED usually tell us in the newsletter estimated release dates that we all know is not going to happen? I have a theory: they give us hype to maintain sales buying modules and campaigns. But the reality is... ED is playing with us??? Each newsletter full of promises and photos but the reality is after many years we have a 1.5.4 with play2 graphics, another copy of the sim (2.0.3) for playing nevada, and more than a year with the promise of 2.5 than of course is not as near as they seem to be in the newsletters. There have been more delays during last years, i remember the promise of 2.0 with caucasus and nevada in one exe. After a year of promises the reality was ED released the nevada map in a 2.0 exe out of caucasus. Then another promise of 2.5 with many improvements (BTW no news about new clouds and explosions since today for example) for 2016. Reading the newsletter it seems to be near but I suspect the reality is different. Please, ED, dont tell us tales. I dont have any problem If you need 3 years to do something. Tell us the truth and I go out to find another sim options. My time is gold too. And sure I will return when you release 2.5 or another map / module.

Edited October 30, 2016 by Psicodreamics

[Vitormouraa]

Wow.. I really don't think you should be saying that the ED is playing with us. It doesn't sound right...

[Psicodreamics]

Im a DCS fan but my patience has a limit. I tell what I think.

[Psicodreamics]

I know that my comments could not encouraged ED but I need to be critic with them too. I love DCS of course but I dont want they play with my time and hopes.

[RAZBAM_ELMO]

You've got to understand to that is it a Business so there's marketing and sales involved and end goal is to make profits clearly. Something like star citizens. Was a dream and a passion to create something for entertainment whereas dcs was born as a project for training and simulation that evolved into a group of people contributing to that factor with passion behind their own ideas to bring modules to customers. I get what you're saying but in general I can see why they would be "hyping" things up to boost sales and grow a business. It's straight up marketing a day as long as there is a functional and use able product at the end then yay us right?

 

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

[NineLine]

I would love for you to explain all these "promises" you are seeing in the newsletter, I would also like to see all these release dates that they are giving, because all I see is estimates based on the info they currently have available at the time.

 

As for the hype, well I am done with that word, the updates and previews ED gives are simply that, they are not trying to hype anything, all this hype stuff started at the user level. Its simply not the case, they know how excited we are about this stuff, as well they are excited to share it, its done for no other reason than that.

 

I am not going to pull apart every example in the OP, but let me point this out. The 2.0 with NTTR and Black Sea under the same version. Why was that delayed? Because the decided to redo and rebuild the old map closer to new standards, new trees, mesh, texture, ect, all free of charge but all a large amount of work. SO yes, that caused a huge delay, they gave no firm dates on 2.0 and then 2.5s release, they gave their best estimates at the time, and continue to do so. If they want to add content to make the old map even better then I am all in.

 

All I see is everyone wanting more info, and at this point I want them to give less because the knives come out if they say something that someone doesnt like (goes for third parties as well unfortunately), and all ideas of missed release dates and broken promises get thrown around.

 

The A-10C module took five years to develop, the F/A-18C is that and a lot more. The combining and redoing of the old sim into what 2.5 will be is no small task, while we are still playing in it. These arent excuses, these are just facts.

 

No deception, no games, no HYPE, just software development on one of if not the most complex combat flight sim out there.

 

I am going to leave this thread open for now, but dont make me regret it.

[Darkbrotherhood7]

Well, I wasn't really expecting the Hornet to come out this year, so I'm not upset about it. Regarding 2.5, I thought it would come out late this year, I was looking forward to a better HDR, light effects etc, but as it seems it was "delayed", I'm disappointed, angry? Yes, a bit. But complain will not help ED to release it this year. I perfectly understand ED, they always want to give us the best and soon as possible, if we have to wait more 6 months, so be it."perfection takes time." :)

 

But as we need to understand ED side, ED has to understand the community side, that's why I would like any clarification from ED.

 

Regards.

[StandingCow]

I will copy/paste what I said in the other thread here:

 

I think what Sith said shouldn't be ignored. When he said not to read too much into the quotes. While I don't think there was a mistranslation I think there may have been poor use of wording by Chizh. I am not worried about delays, they happen and are expected, I am a little disheartened about the lack of consistent information being given to two different language groups, look at the mess it has caused.

 

Q: As I understand, there will be no F/A-18 this year?

A: No. It's another year's worth of work at least.

Let's use the M-2000 as an example here, it was released about a year ago and work continues a year later. Since the last official word we got from ED was a hopeful 2016 early access hornet release, and no change in the last newsletter I am still thinking there is a good chance of an EA hornet release this year.

 

We can also look at hints dropped by sith earlier in regards to Wags being head down in documentation and all, it sounds like a crunch to get EA out to us.

 

So, I call this statement bad wording, EA officially as far as we know is still on track for 2016 with a full finished module due out a year +, no surprise there.

 

Q: And is the plan to release DCS 2.5 in 2016 still in force?

A: No. 2.5 will not be released this year. There will be a large update to Nevada and early access to Normandy.

This one is a little more surprising, last we heard most of the work was on 2.5, I am disappointed but I understand that delays happen. Better a delay than tons of bugs for what will be a huge release for ED.

 

Q: I remember at the end of last year there was a developer post saying that 2016 will be «the year of aircraft carriers». It's almost November. Did this conception change?

A: It did. Aircraft carriers are postponed for now.

Again, not surprising, I think this may have been before ED committed to totally redoing the black sea map, a lot of work has apparently gone into it and in turn delayed some stuff, carriers in this case.

[NineLine]

Carriers come with their own challenges and tasks, the level of realism they are swinging for that I have seen, I am not surprised they are taking some time. I dont want a bunch of pretty pixels floating in a sea of pixels that we crash into, I want to feel like I am there doing what they do... and mostly crashing into the deck, but you get what I mean.

[7rooper]

ED is brutally perfectionist and that's why they take so long developing. I never thought they were going to revamp the Black Sea map and upgrade NTTR as well.

It's like they give a step forward and come back two to improve something and and on top of that their staff seems to be too small for a project like this.

IMHO, they are wasting time upgrading the simplistic Flaming Cliffs aircrafts instead of focusing on more DCS level modules. If it is for the FC customer base there are many other ways to compensate them

Edited October 31, 2016 by 7rooper

[YorZor]

I really don't get that we have to be cheerful about the 'free' Caucasus update. It's their marketing piece for the whole platform. So unless they want to market a crappy map that you can buy extensions onto that might be better (from an outside pov) is as much in their interest as it is ours.

Stop the sugar coating.

 

As for the other delays, they were to be expected.

[NineLine]

I really don't get that we have to be cheerful about the 'free' Caucasus update. It's their marketing piece for the whole platform. So unless they want to market a crappy map that you can buy extensions onto that might be better (from an outside pov) is as much in their interest as it is ours.

Stop the sugar coating.

 

As for the other delays, they were to be expected.

 

Any other company would have been happy to charge you for all the work that was put into the FREE update. Heck many companies do less for yearly new releases and charge you 60+, so its not sugar coating, its helping people understand that you are not getting 2.0 now, you are getting 2.5 down the road with a lot more work done to it.

Edited October 31, 2016 by NineLine

[YorZor]

ED is the same as those companies.

It's not bad, it's not good. Just capitalism ;)

[NineLine]

ED is the same as those companies.

It's not bad, it's not good. Just capitalism ;)

 

So I will see if they can note on your account that you need to be charged $60+ for the new Black Sea map... or do you want the super-duper ultimate edition for $100?

[YorZor]

Well the map is not there yet. Maybe it'll get a flaming cliffs 'upgrade'.

[NineLine]

Well the map is not there yet. Maybe it'll get a flaming cliffs 'upgrade'.

 

You mean totally free? Yes... that is the plan, well except for you, the guy that was the super duper ultimate edition for $120. Its worth it, it comes with an autographed picture of me, suitable for framing or dart boards.

[GeorgeLKMT]

So I will see if they can note on your account that you need to be charged $60+ for the new Black Sea map... or do you want the super-duper ultimate edition for $100?

 

My account is getting charged everytime I purchase a module. DCS World is F2P with paid DLCs. You can't make up ridiculous comparisons to "other companies" (maybe give an example?) just so it can fit your narrative. There are plenty of F2P games out there, much bigger than DCS, and nobody is getting charged for core updates. That's the definition of free to play.

 

If you want to argue that "they could have released caucasus as paid DLC", then fair enough, but the original point still stands in that case. It's 2016 and they need the base package to be as appealing as possible. You can't do that with 10-year old map.

[The Black Swan]

You mean totally free? Yes... that is the plan, well except for you, the guy that was the super duper ultimate edition for $120. Its worth it, it comes with an autographed picture of me, suitable for framing or dart boards.

 

Dart boards!!!!! ROTF!!!!!!!!!! :lol:

 

Order now and get a bobble head wags! :D

Edited October 31, 2016 by The Black Swan

[NineLine]

My account is getting charged everytime I purchase a module. DCS World is F2P with paid DLCs. You can't make up ridiculous comparisons to "other companies" (maybe give an example?) just so it can fit your narrative. There are plenty of F2P games out there, much bigger than DCS, and nobody is getting charged for core updates. That's the definition of free to play.

 

If you want to argue that "they could have released caucasus as paid DLC", then fair enough, but the original point still stands in that case. It's 2016 and they need the base package to be as appealing as possible. You can't do that with 10-year old map.

 

Call of Duty, Battlefield... they all re-use art, repackage, the games come with the base game at 60+ and then you need to pay another 60+ for the season pass.

 

F2P games are small maps, arcade game play and the "free" is very loosely used. Those F2P have their own hooks for money. The point here is ED isnt a F2P model, so comparing them to F2P games is pretty tough, unless you want super missiles for some Golden DCS coins or earn XP to upgrade your armour in the 109K?

[GeorgeLKMT]

F2P means free to play. So no upfront cost for playing the game with additional content sold separately. That is DCS.

 

Digital Combat Simulator World (DCS World) is a free-to-play digital battlefield game...

[NineLine]

You can't do that with 10-year old map.

 

 

Actually, for a free map, the old map with new effects, lighting and such would have been fine as is, they decided they could do it better. And there is a ton of work going into it. ED isnt a big studio house, so anything they give up for free, I appreciate, and why I dont mind paying for campaign DLCs and the likes...

[NineLine]

F2P means free to play. So no upfront cost for playing the game with additional content sold separately. That is DCS.

 

Then the category is too broad because DCS is nothing like other F2P games with optional membership, grinding XP, and purchasable addons such as engines and guns, etc.

Edited October 31, 2016 by NineLine

[GeorgeLKMT]

Well I do appreciate the caucasus update as well, especially after they stated 15 times they not gonna do it, right. ;) And the definition simply describes the business model, can't see anything wrong in that.

[sniperwolfpk5]

2.5 is a big deal and I think every person is appreciating the efforts that the ED put on this upgrade. Yes we understand ED is a small company compare to other gaints. Currently people are a bit upset. It also shows how much people like the hornet and other stuff that were hyped. It is very said news that we have to wait for hornet, 2.5, carrier ops and no news regarding su-33 pfm.

[ebabil]

it's not good but .. this is the sim world. things don't go on like they do with multi million usd games.

 

they have very limited sources compare to them. budget also.

 

same for fsx side, for instance pmdg, they produce very best planes but it takes years. this is it.

 

if we didin't have dcs, we would have nothing. no other.

 

but it would be good if they communicate with community in a better way. i mean, for instanca, developer diaries, detailed news would be good.