Opinion on new modules alphas, betas etc..

[PeaceSells]

I own the A10C, Huey, FC3 and the Nevada map. I regard them as high quality, they are worth every penny I spent on them and I wouldn't say they are broken in any way.

 

But DCS has a few known important problems that remain there for many years, despite being every now and then brought up by users (model visibility, AI and mouse lags are just the ones that come to my head right now). They aren't too many, but they are there for years and in both v1.5 and v2.1. Important problem means it should be priority no. 1 and fixed before releasing new content, that's just basics and there's no way around it.

 

At the same time, ED is a company and has to do it the way it works out better commercially too. Why does it work out commercially to release many new content before fixing basic stuff? Because you guys always buy them. You guys complain, open threads, whine, throw hissy fits, but when a new colorful module is released you jump on it like kids in a candy store.

 

I have my eye on some modules like the Ka-50, the Sabre, the Gazelle and obviously the F-18. I want this F-18 DCS level study sim real bad. But will I buy them? Much probably, but first I will wait till they improve some of the basic stuff. We all know they are more than skilled enough to improve those things mentioned, "new tech" and "WiP" are obviously no explanation, every game is "new tech" and "WiP", new technology is in every software all the time. Priorities are priorities. They just don't do it now because they're prioritizing new content. And they only prioritize new content because you prioritize new content.

 

I spent like 500-600$ on dcs already owning both alpha maps.

 

...

 

From now on I am not paying full price for alphas or obsolete stuff and will buy new content only finished or on a big sale.

 

This is why I stay with it and keep buying almost everything.

 

To buy the modules in my signature I spent 550$ total.

 

(in my case, I spent about 500€ also, between aircrafts, terrains, etc)

 

looking at my previous orders from DCS store: 480.75 USD

 

I'm at $1214.… still waiting to actually play the modules in a decent state.

 

I've only used KA-50 so far.

 

Quite honestly, I am also at the point where I won't be making any more purchases in this title, other than Belsimtek's Mi-24 and F-4, because these are two things I just can't resist.

 

I've long stood by the sim, but enough's enough, and until stability arrives my days of supporting the devs are over, and those of "only buy what I'm extremeley interested in" has begun.

 

Damn. $685.40 on my first account.

 

...

 

And I tend to buy every DLC, Maps (except MiGs - maybe it's cultural, but just not interested) to support ED.

 

 

Sorry, I have to say you guys don't really sound much bothered by the issues.

 

I'll repeat what others have said before and state that I would much rather pay for an update that fixes basic problems of DCS than pay for new content. I will gladly pay, and I will keep paying for new modules until I have probably all of them, but I will only do this as long as I feel the basic issues are being at least improved.

 

So... how many of you will buy the F-18 as soon as it's on pre-purchase?

[Gryzor]

Meanwhile ED do not solve bugs like model vibility, A-10TGP IR, AI, and performance impact in FPS... which it is worse in each update, i will not buy anymore. That´s over. (F-18 included).

 

Like I said, some modules in alpha state would not last forever in time (2 years for merge nevada....come on...and meanwhile, devoloping full WW2 product leaving other things unfinissed), If I buy early Access products thats do not means I have to wait many years to have a full product I paid with my money.

 

Solving bugs must be a obligation to customers who support and pays money, not a priority.

[WinterH]

At least for me, your deduction of "not really bothered" is hundred percent wrong. As for your final question, I may not even get it at all, let alone during the prepurchase.

 

I would maybe consider paying for fixes of core sim issues, but I don't see such happening it would be a huge ruckus, and what would happen for people who won't pay, their sim advertised as free to play won't function anymore? Or it will not get updated? Can't really see either scenario fly well by people.

 

I for one, will just wait until the sim is in a better state, if that ever happens. Meanwhile, I will get Phantom and Hind as I've wanted high fidelity sims of these things for like two decades now.

 

There are many more upcoming modules I am interested in, but like I've said, I just don't see myself getting anything I am less than extremely interested in.

[Rudel_chw]

... So... how many of you will buy the F-18 as soon as it's on pre-purchase?

 

 

I will buy it on pre-purchase only if it is with a discount ...

 

 

for example, I wanted really badly the F-5 (because it was a plane used on my country's air force), it came out on November 2016 ... I didnt purchase it at that moment since it was $60, but did ended purchasing it on December 23th ... when it was on sale with 30% discount :)

 

 

 

In short, I'm willing to put up with early access bugs, but only if it cames with a reduced price.

 

 

Cheers

[hansangb]

Sorry, I have to say you guys don't really sound much bothered by the issues.

 

I'll repeat what others have said before and state that I would much rather pay for an update that fixes basic problems of DCS than pay for new content. I will gladly pay, and I will keep paying for new modules until I have probably all of them, but I will only do this as long as I feel the basic issues are being at least improved.

 

So... how many of you will buy the F-18 as soon as it's on pre-purchase?

 

 

I'm not bothered in the least. I'll pre-purchase it because I'm sure there will be a discount. For me, it's worth every $ I've spent on it.

 

Let alone, Joysticks, Rift, MPCNC, numerous Bodnar, DSD, and other HIDs.

 

And I can't wait to try the F18 on a carrier op. I remember when I landed my F19 Stealth Fighter on a carrier. I was over the top happy about it. We've come a long way and I don't mind the few wrinkles here and there. I get why some are upset about it and I respect it. But I don't mind it.

[PeaceSells]

I would maybe consider paying for fixes of core sim issues, but I don't see such happening it would be a huge ruckus, and what would happen for people who won't pay, their sim advertised as free to play won't function anymore? Or it will not get updated? Can't really see either scenario fly well by people.

 

The scenario already flies well, it already happens... when a new module is launched, old features get updated/corrected to accommodate the new module. Bound to the launch of the F-18 there will be carrier improvements and also Su-33 improvements. It also happens in other games, see the release of the Marksmen DLC or Arma jets (urgh!) for Arma 3. Each came accompanied by many improvements for players who didn't buy these DLC too, like the ability to rest your gun on surfaces (Marksmen), sensors overhaul (Jets), among others. Those were free core game updates for for everyone. (For the record, I don't fly Arma planes).

 

There's no reason why a paid new module wouldn't bring improvements for the game as a whole.

[remi]

If ED charged $1/month for a subscription to DCS updates from 2.5 onward, this would generate a lot of revenue for the ED team so they could hire additional development staff, and actually work out the bugs and deficiencies.

 

Doubt people would be supportive of such a move, even for such a low subscription fee.

[PeaceSells]

Interesting, I was thinking something similar some days ago. It was about other games (1st person shooters, another passion of mine), that have big problems with cheaters/hackers. I was thinking how many people would accept paying a monthly subscription so the developers keep the anti-hacking software updated, because currently they are 99% useless. I guess most people wouldn't, but I'm sure many would.

 

It's funny, because most people already pay for skins (CS:GO, for example) or DLCs (BF4 and DCS, for example) continuously, but would complain about paying for something actually useful to them.

[David OC]

If ED charged $1/month for a subscription to DCS updates from 2.5 onward, this would generate a lot of revenue for the ED team so they could hire additional development staff, and actually work out the bugs and deficiencies.

 

Doubt people would be supportive of such a move, even for such a low subscription fee.

 

No need to pay ED for more core development, it's not about throwing more cash and resources at these very hard problems, it's more the level of tech each element needs to get to, in the world of DCS / TBS

 

It's a very unique niche ED is in here, not all coders would be interested or be able to do what ED's team do, plus for the money on offer, I think you would really need to love it and love physics:smartass: a lot. Easier to build goat sims and get paid the same perhaps? less stressful to most likely.

 

I'm a bit bias and really want ED and TFC to succeeded in both the markets their in, and do whatever they need to do in this unique small niche, such as picking up other contract to subsidize there income, if that's what needs to happen to survive.

 

 

Their getting close to having a very good foundation once all these new elements they are working on all come back together, perhaps even expand the team more for the modern consumer side when things are settle down some, just like the ww2 team.

 

Remember a point about the WW2. Part of the original RRG Studios has integrate into ED team and actually has the "active" team of WW2

 

Interview: Matt Wagner On Black Shark

 

RPS: Would ED rather work on sims for the military or the public? I get the feeling defence departments pay more and complain less.

"Matt: We want to work on both! The developments are very much complementary. We have a development engine, which for want of a better term we call TFCSE (The Fighter Collection Simulation Engine). This engine is under continuous development and enhancement. Therefore the military gains an advantage of using technology that is state of the art, and the public get an entertainment title that has improved fidelity from our military experience (obviously limited to those are areas that are not classified!). We therefore can amortise our development costs across two markets, to the benefit of all. Military contracts are not a license to print money, as often they are required to be done on a “cost plus” basis, and I can assure you that they are very demanding as the simulation has to be perfect so as not to introduce “negative training”. In addition, gaining/winning military contracts is highly unpredictable, whereas for entertainment titles, we can plan a business over several years."

 

 

This above helps gives you the bigger picture of the ED / TFC business model, to be able to survive in this small niche and stay in business and to keep moving forward, not many (any) developers left in this niche we enjoy so much.

 

 

.

[dvas]

I really dont understand the complaints. The team always improove their products and to tell the truth, the game was unplayble in my machine and now is! Every year the game becomes better and better. You wont get a finalized product because they keep improoving it. Maybe the terms alpha, beta and final are obsolete!

 

Note: Im not a member of Eagle Dynamics, im a customer like all ofyou and i live in Greece.

[metzger]

I really dont understand the complaints. The team always improove their products and to tell the truth, the game was unplayble in my machine and now is! Every year the game becomes better and better. You wont get a finalized product because they keep improoving it. Maybe the terms alpha, beta and final are obsolete!

 

Note: Im not a member of Eagle Dynamics, im a customer like all ofyou and i live in Greece.

 

Go fly as a wingman to AI lead in a low level flight with helicopters and tell me how it is improved last 5 years. - Missions 3,5,6(didnt go further due to frustration) from huey UN campaign are completely ruined, and yes I can do pretty good formation flying with huey in MP.

 

Compare Caucasus map to the one 5 years ago and tell me what was improved, the ground is still hotter than a running tank so you barely see anything in a10 tgp and not only.

 

Go check the updates in the change logs, you see mostly fixes for a bugs introduced by the previous updates. I had to pause gaming for a couple of months due relocation and now I am back and all I see in the release notes for the new updates are fixed bugs which were not broken before I paused so in the mean time they manage to brake and fix them :)

While the major issues are still here not touched.

 

I understand they are a small team and lack of resources etc no problems with that and I do support them completely. But I don"t like the strategy of releasing many new modules and maps while the core needs major fixes, it makes every new release broken at some degree as you need to use it in a broken enviroment.

Not to mention most if not all except a10 modules completely lack any proper quality SP campaigns and playground so if you are not a ME guru and have tons of free time to build yourself, you can practice with it learn it and leave it to collect dust.

 

 

Ofcourse it is their business and they can develop it however they want. We as a customers need to give them feedback so based on that they can make future decisions.

 

EDIT:

 

Forgot to mention - yes they released the new lightning engine for 2.1, the only time I tried it, everything was too bright and overexposed. But I cant use it due to performance issues in VR with it, especially in normandy so I am stuck to the old one.

Edited August 24, 2017 by metzger
1.1

[33-DFTC]

At the same time, ED is a company and has to do it the way it works out better commercially too. Why does it work out commercially to release many new content before fixing basic stuff? Because you guys always buy them. You guys complain, open threads, whine, throw hissy fits, but when a new colorful module is released you jump on it like kids in a candy store.

 

Truth.

[remi]

Go fly as a wingman to AI lead in a low level flight with helicopters and tell me how it is improved last 5 years. - Missions 3,5,6(didnt go further due to frustration) from huey UN campaign are completely ruined, and yes I can do pretty good formation flying with huey in MP.

 

Compare Caucasus map to the one 5 years ago and tell me what was improved, the ground is still hotter than a running tank so you barely see anything in a10 tgp and not only.

 

Go check the updates in the change logs, you see mostly fixes for a bugs introduced by the previous updates. I had to pause gaming for a couple of months due relocation and now I am back and all I see in the release notes for the new updates are fixed bugs which were not broken before I paused so in the mean time they manage to brake and fix them :)

While the major issues are still here not touched.

 

I understand they are a small team and lack of resources etc no problems with that and I do support them completely. But I don"t like the strategy of releasing many new modules and maps while the core needs major fixes, it makes every new release broken at some degree as you need to use it in a broken enviroment.

Not to mention most if not all except a10 modules completely lack any proper quality SP campaigns and playground so if you are not a ME guru and have tons of free time to build yourself, you can practice with it learn it and leave it to collect dust.

 

 

Ofcourse it is their business and they can develop it however they want. We as a customers need to give them feedback so based on that they can make future decisions.

 

EDIT:

 

Forgot to mention - yes they released the new lightning engine for 2.1, the only time I tried it, everything was too bright and overexposed. But I cant use it due to performance issues in VR with it, especially in normandy so I am stuck to the old one.

 

 

This is the problem with not making people pay for the core engine.

 

The development is focused on money-making endeavors, which is primarily modules, which is why are getting mostly new modules and not new engine features.

 

If engine enhancements were paid for, and required a monthly subscription to keep getting updates and access to new modules, then the engine itself would be a money-making endeavor.

 

Having a steady stream of monthly revenue would allow the hiring of additional programmers solely for engine development.

[Rudel_chw]

This is the problem with not making people pay for the core engine.

 

 

The sim market is already quite small ... DCS doesnt even show on the top 100 most played games of Steam ..

 

 

do you really believe that asking for a monthly subscription would not result in an immediate drop in the amount of people willing to use DCS?

[hansangb]

I would have thought most DCS users would be non-steam, no? Considering most everything comes out as standalone first? I'd be willing to pay a few bucks a month.

 

But the sad truth is that unless DCS makes a console version, it'll never reach mainstream.

[Rudel_chw]

I would have thought most DCS users would be non-steam, no?

 

 

well, most people on this Forum dont use Steam .. but that hardly means that they are the majority of the market; its a common mistake to project one's preferences and likes to the whole of the market.

 

 

I dont have any statistics on ED's side, but on Steam you can see this overview:

 

 

http://steamspy.com/app/223750

 

 

Unfortunately, those statistics dont tell how many DLC's have been sold ... but it gives at least an estimate of the market size.

[Weta43]

At the same time, ED is a company and has to do it the way it works out better commercially too. Why does it work out commercially to release many new content before fixing basic stuff?...

 

They do fix stuff* - compare what you have now to what was there when FC1 was released.

Why does it make commercial sense that they continue to sell modules before they fix ALL the bugs in the core ?

For E.D. it seems to me to make sense because - given that to maintain a single MP community the core platform is free, any improvements are also provided for free - If they don't sell modules, how do you suggest they pay their staff's wages ?

 

* (make a list of all the fixes in the change-logs over the last 3 years, then say they don't fix things)

[Weta43]

LOL

Bottom of the page.

"Steam Spy is still in beta, so expect major bugs.

 

well, most people on this Forum dont use Steam .. but that hardly means that they are the majority of the market; its a common mistake to project one's preferences and likes to the whole of the market.

 

 

I dont have any statistics on ED's side, but on Steam you can see this overview:

 

 

http://steamspy.com/app/223750

 

 

Unfortunately, those statistics dont tell how many DLC's have been sold ... but it gives at least an estimate of the market size.

[cichlidfan]

* (make a list of all the fixes in the change-logs over the last 3 years, then say they don't fix things)

 

While this is quite true, the newly created bugs that seem to come with the fixes to other things does make it difficult to maintain the appearance of a positive trend.

[metzger]

They do fix stuff* - compare what you have now to what was there when FC1 was released.

Why does it make commercial sense that they continue to sell modules before they fix ALL the bugs in the core ?

For E.D. it seems to me to make sense because - given that to maintain a single MP community the core platform is free, any improvements are also provided for free - If they don't sell modules, how do you suggest they pay their staff's wages ?

 

* (make a list of all the fixes in the change-logs over the last 3 years, then say they don't fix things)

And what is fixed in the last 3 years ? They release something which brakes 2 more things then they release a new update to fix those things but breaks something else and yes you can say they fix something in every update :) in the end we have the same number if not more bugs but if you look back the release notes there are a lot of fixes.

 

I am curious how the release notes would look like if they were specifying not only what they fix but what they break as well.

 

Anyway DCS is the best we have so I guess we have to continue support them and hope one day we will have what we are waiting for and it will be neat :)

 

Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

[Majinbot]

Maybe after the F-18 and all the money they will receive with that module, they can relax and start fixing all the issues..

[hansangb]

BTW @metzger, was in Prague this past week. Beautiful city.

[metzger]

BTW @metzger, was in Prague this past week. Beautiful city.

Indeed, a vit overcrowded tho.. :)

 

Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

[hansangb]

Indeed, a vit overcrowded tho.. :)

 

Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

 

 

LOL I contributed to the crowd situation!

 

They had the IPILOT there, but when I found out it was P3D (albeit with replica cockpit) I passed on it. My VR/P3D or DCS seemed better! :D

[metzger]

LOL I contributed to the crowd situation!

 

They had the IPILOT there, but when I found out it was P3D (albeit with replica cockpit) I passed on it. My VR/P3D or DCS seemed better! :D

Ye I heard there is one, never tried it but considering :)

 

Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk