Jump to content

Four Additional Flaming Cliffs Aircraft


Vampyre

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 365
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • ED Team
You're pissing off you're existing customers in favor of potentially pleasing new ones. Not only does this directly contradict one of the basic rules of buissnes (existing customers are always king) but more importantly you don't need to do this you can please both parties this just seems so self destructive...

 

Why is that, are you mad about the F-4, Hind, Hornet, Viper, and all the other full fidelity stuff coming out?

 

You only speak for you, you dont speak for the entire DCS World userbase.

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It cant always be about long time customers, but also about growing the userbase. for long time customers you have things coming out like the F/A-18C. Also there are many long time customers that enjoy FC level aircraft. SO we can only really speak for ourselves. ED has a lot of numbers that show where they should go and what they should offer.

 

#1 This is slightly off course but how about using resources to build out the support of multiplayer(I'll even PAY for a properly supported and built dedicated server client that sync's data to clients properly!), how do you grow a game this day in age without extensive multiplayer support?

 

#2 if there is a high fidelity module and an fc3 version of it, im not going to put the fc3 version of it on the DDCS network(they cause enough balance issue as is).

 

If you want to grow the player base drop this single player, 1-2 time play through campaign, way of thinking, this is not the future. (try DDCS, seriously, I have what you guys need, some more API support and BOOM, a online game that can do what falcon BMS does!, People will FLOCK to it in massive numbers!)

Developer of DDCS MP Engine, dynamicdcs.com

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=208608

Link to comment
Share on other sites

#1 This is slightly off course but how about using resources to build out the support of multiplayer(I'll even PAY for a properly supported and built dedicated server client that sync's data to clients properly!), how do you grow a game this day in age without extensive multiplayer support?

 

#2 if there is a high fidelity module and an fc3 version of it, im not going to put the fc3 version of it on the DDCS network(they cause enough balance issue as is).

 

If you want to grow the player base drop this single player, 1-2 time play through campaign, way of thinking, this is not the future. (try DDCS, seriously, I have what you guys need, some more API support and BOOM, a online game that can do what falcon BMS does!, People will FLOCK to it in massive numbers!)

 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++1

[100☭] holimoli #13, 100-й КИАП

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
#1 This is slightly off course but how about using resources to build out the support of multiplayer(I'll even PAY for a properly supported and built dedicated server client that sync's data to clients properly!), how do you grow a game this day in age without extensive multiplayer support?

 

#2 if there is a high fidelity module and an fc3 version of it, im not going to put the fc3 version of it on the DDCS network(they cause enough balance issue as is).

 

If you want to grow the player base drop this single player, 1-2 time play through campaign, way of thinking, this is not the future. (try DDCS, seriously, I have what you guys need, some more API support and BOOM, a online game that can do what falcon BMS does!, People will FLOCK to it in massive numbers!)

 

ED is looking at dedicated servers, its important to ED... BUT the single player side of ED is stronger that MP right now, and majority of the playerbase does single player. Doesnt mean ED doesnt want to grow MP, but done assume that is where ED is making all its sales right now.

 

If you run a server, you can add whatever aircraft you want, its a free world for the most part.

 

You guys are getting mad about something that was never promised to you. You are getting made about things you wished for, not that ED said you were getting.

 

This is the downside to being open and sharing more, sometimes the hype train mows you down.

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't help but agree with the majority that is disagreeing. No one would pay money for a dumbed down version of an already existing plane, and then pay even more for a full fidelity version of it. Like I don't see the point of this at all!?

 

Take aircraft that are more modern, planes who's full fidelity modules can't be made like 4th gen Russian or Chinese or maybe even European for that matter, and then make an FC4 out of that. It would make so much more sense that way

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

 

Planes: FC3, P-51, F-86, F-5E, Mirage 2000, F/A-18, F-14, F-16, Mig-19P :joystick:

 

ED pls gib A-4 and F-4 :cry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ED is looking at dedicated servers, its important to ED... BUT the single player side of ED is stronger that MP right now, and majority of the playerbase does single player. Doesnt mean ED doesnt want to grow MP, but done assume that is where ED is making all its sales right now.

 

If you run a server, you can add whatever aircraft you want, its a free world for the most part.

 

You guys are getting mad about something that was never promised to you. You are getting made about things you wished for, not that ED said you were getting.

 

This is the downside to being open and sharing more, sometimes the hype train mows you down.

 

how do you know that SP has a larger playerbase than MP?

[100☭] holimoli #13, 100-й КИАП

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont know for sure. I would expect ED/BST though.

 

A safe assumption. I would hope that ED would not place any expectation on third parties as some seem pretty taxed as is. This would be a most preferable approach.

 

So, that leaves us with candidates we can select from. The F/A-18C seems like a long time coming. I've always wondered why it was never in FC to begin with.

 

Outside of that, though? The Tiger is already near FC levels of simplicity. Are the WWII and Korean birds getting the treatment? How about the rotorcraft?

 

Again, I definitely appreciate the appeal of new FC content, but this seems like a dead end.

Reformers hate him! This one weird trick found by a bush pilot will make gunfighter obsessed old farts angry at your multi-role carrier deck line up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is that, are you mad about the F-4, Hind, Hornet, Viper, and all the other full fidelity stuff coming out?

 

You only speak for you, you dont speak for the entire DCS World userbase.

 

Nothing about those modules makes me unhappy, it's the concept that because we have these modules in development that we aren't allowed to be upset for any reason.

 

Do you see anyone in approval of this? I don't. It's clear that the overwhelming majority of people who are making their voice heard dislike this choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

how do you know that SP has a larger playerbase than MP?

 

https://strawpoll.com/d4339x9d

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=190854

To whom it may concern,

I am an idiot, unfortunately for the world, I have a internet connection and a fondness for beer....apologies for that.

Thank you for you patience.

 

 

Many people don't want the truth, they want constant reassurance that whatever misconception/fallacies they believe in are true..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean I would fly other aircraft more if they were easier to get into. I like the option of both. Sometimes time and 6 year old are my enemy :)
I know what you mean :)

 

I remember ED stating clearly that they would never develop FC level aircraft again.
It is now apparent that they are not developing new FC aircraft. Big difference between developing aerodynamics and FCS for FC3 F-15C and borrowing aerodynamics and FCS from already made F/A-18C to FC4 F/A-18...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ED is looking at dedicated servers, its important to ED... BUT the single player side of ED is stronger that MP right now, and majority of the playerbase does single player. Doesnt mean ED doesnt want to grow MP, but done assume that is where ED is making all its sales right now.

 

 

If ED is on the majority side, I must ask myself; What's the focus of DCS? the Money to development costs ratio of FC3 is a lot better than any other full fidelity module in DCS, but I am pretty sure if you ask the community which one would you like the most, the majority of the community would say Full fidelity, wouldn't they? That's my impression.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if ED wants to make it on existing aircrafts, why not give it a motive and a deviation? Why not make them based off the existing planes but maybe tandem seat versions?

 

Planes like the F-15D, F/A-18D, Mirage 2000D, Mig-29UB, maybe even an Su-30M2 or possibly even SM? Who else would be ok with this?

 

Like as Nineline said, FC4 would be based off of existing aircraft, and the customers don't want a dumbed down version of the exact plane they're flying, so why not a twin seat version of those existing planes?

 

I think this will also add to the expanded use of Multicrew in online gameplay, and also help implement the new Jester AI

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

 

Planes: FC3, P-51, F-86, F-5E, Mirage 2000, F/A-18, F-14, F-16, Mig-19P :joystick:

 

ED pls gib A-4 and F-4 :cry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is now apparent that they are not developing new FC aircraft. Big difference between developing aerodynamics and FCS for FC3 F-15C and borrowing aerodynamics and FCS from already made F/A-18C to FC4 F/A-18...

 

I was not talking about new aircraft.

 

Fact is they are developing FC level aircraft, even if they reduce development about half by copying flight model and systems to a downgraded module.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I think that's sort of a win win situation

 

I don't necessarily agree with your proposal, but it's better than getting an FC level F-5E.

Reformers hate him! This one weird trick found by a bush pilot will make gunfighter obsessed old farts angry at your multi-role carrier deck line up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't necessarily agree with your proposal, but it's better than getting an FC level F-5E.

 

Exactly, I too don't agree with an FC level F-5 or Mig-21. I think all 3rd gen planes at least should be full fidelity. It's understandable why 4th gen planes are hard to gather data and be turned into full fidelity planes. Hence I proposed the tandem seat version of 4th gen planes like that :)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

 

Planes: FC3, P-51, F-86, F-5E, Mirage 2000, F/A-18, F-14, F-16, Mig-19P :joystick:

 

ED pls gib A-4 and F-4 :cry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If only developers focused on the base product that would allow all the modules achieve their full potential. You know, fixing the multiplayer, optimizing the loading, etc.

 

Creating a good dedicated server.... the list just goes on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Polls are bunk, I can change that poll around in about 30 mins, with about 1000 vpn's etc, small script. the other thread post doesn't say much. (don't test me)

 

You probably don't have multiplayer numbers that you want because people don't want to deal with the amount of work it is to play multiplayer because it is not fleshed out enough yet.

 

This is 2018, Single player games aren't going to win and dare I say it, boring because your playing the same thing over and over.

 

(delete this if its too far offtopic, I just HATE the argument about single player, its crazy to focus on single player right now. Very short sighted)

Developer of DDCS MP Engine, dynamicdcs.com

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=208608

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...