Appeal for calm in the DCS F-16 community

[RaceFuel85]

Folks..

 

I get we're all super excited, and we all have features we want, are disappointed if we don't get, they're delayed, they're changed...

 

But can we just please stop the perpetual outrage cycle that has been building in this group for the last week? It's exhausting for us as a community and I'm sure for the devs and ED folks who have to deal with this.

[CaptJodan]

Oh how I wish it were.

 

I always hoped that ED wouldn't come out with a pre-order or even announce when they were thinking of release until like a month or so before release, given the community's propensity to run a hype train right off the track and into the 9th circle of Hell. At least then it would be shorter.

[BuzzU]

It could be avoided if they release when a product is finished and tested. Then we know what we're buying.

[Glowing_Amraam]

It could be avoided if they release when a product is finished and tested. Then we know what we're buying.

 

Product is still months away from release (Early access at that) so by then you will know what you are buying and what you are getting. :thumbup:

[CaptJodan]

It could be avoided if they release when a product is finished and tested. Then we know what we're buying.

 

That's cute. Then you'd have people complaining about the lack of any new content, the "when are we going to get the Hornet, M2000, Harrier, F-14 (there was plenty of complaints on that as it is), etc. The list is endless on modules that have not reached a completed state that would not be out to play now. And I get that that's fine with you. But that's probably not fine for others, and they would complain and vent and rant as much as those who hate EA.

 

So really, simply changing things to the way you want would not change the tone of the community. And it's not like it was hidden knowledge before it was even announced that it was going to be an EA product, and it would be subject to change.

[BuzzU]

Product is still months away from release (Early access at that) so by then you will know what you are buying and what you are getting. :thumbup:

 

We won't know how a plane is going to turn out until it's completely done. Some of the team has left the Hornet to work on the Viper. Doesn't that slow down the Hornet from being finished?

 

Why not put the whole team on one plane until it's finished? Then move to the next plane. That's how most every other sim/game do it.

 

I've been involved with car racing sims. Nobody would buy a new track or car that wasn't finished. Yes, it might need some hot fixes after it's released but the items have all features when released. Would you buy a car or track that wasn't finished? Here's the new car. Be careful driving it. It has no brakes.

[BuzzU]

That's cute. Then you'd have people complaining about the lack of any new content, the "when are we going to get the Hornet, M2000, Harrier, F-14 (there was plenty of complaints on that as it is), etc. The list is endless on modules that have not reached a completed state that would not be out to play now. And I get that that's fine with you. But that's probably not fine for others, and they would complain and vent and rant as much as those who hate EA.

 

So really, simply changing things to the way you want would not change the tone of the community. And it's not like it was hidden knowledge before it was even announced that it was going to be an EA product, and it would be subject to change.

 

 

Whiners will always whine. I waited patiently for the Hornet to be finished. I even left for awhile hoping when I came back it would be done. Not even close. I like DCS. I just don't agree with how they do some things.

[razo+r]

They won't finish a plane before commencing another one because that would mean a long period of time without a lot of money coming in.

[Revelation]

They won't finish a plane before commencing another one because that would mean a long period of time without a lot of money coming in.

 

Not just that, you would have team members that would be sitting around twiddling their thumbs with nothing to do since the work needing to get done is outside of their expertise.

[BuzzU]

Not just that, you would have team members that would be sitting around twiddling their thumbs with nothing to do since the work needing to get done is outside of their expertise.

 

Are you saying the team members that left the Hornet for the Viper had nothing to do on the Hornet? If that's true i'll gladly shut up and admit i'm wrong.

[Hentai Paisen]

I’ll calm down when we get the LAU-88 racks for double and triple AGM-65 loadouts, which block 50s were approved to use and DID use for decades.

 

Why did ED decide to be so anally specific on the loadout for the viper but is including everything from IOC to 2007 for the Hornet?

[Sn8ke_iis]

Just some speculation here, but a lot of the outrage I'm seeing on Hoggit or on these forums is really from a very small group of hardcore emotionally invested people. Maybe too much "gamer" influence? Age? I also don't know if they have any safeguards against sock puppet accounts like mac address. I see a lot of commonalities in some of the long winded manifestos and rants uploaded under different user names. I think people are upvoting their own manifestos and downvote mobbing people who disagree with them to try and amplify the weight of their opinion.

 

These forums can be wonderful sources of information, but a lot of the younger guys don't remember flight simulation essentially dying in the 90's as a viable genre for major developers. They want a game with all the quality of life features as an Assassin's Creed or GTA on an Indy developer budget. Several people were even advocating review bombs on Steam.

 

I know I'm not the only guy around here who likes to make models. ED's approach to module development makes perfect sense to guys who buy expensive aftermarket resin detail sets to correct inaccuracies on their models or buy a specific paint to match Luftwaffe colors.

[CaptJodan]

Whiners will always whine. I waited patiently for the Hornet to be finished. I even left for awhile hoping when I came back it would be done. Not even close. I like DCS. I just don't agree with how they do some things.

 

And I think it's fine if you don't like the way they do things. But saying the community outrage will be solved if they just did things the way you wanted to, and dismiss everyone who might disagree with that as "whiners" isn't going to solve the underlying vitriol problem.

 

I like EA. I like the trickle of features from the Hornet, as it allows me to understand and "master" (in so much as I am capable, which is not that much) a system before moving on to the next. The Hornet is a VERY complicated aircraft, and with some of the latest features coming out, I've been very happy to say "Well, I know how to start up, taxi, use the basic functions, having done it for 6 months. That means I can focus on this new content."

 

Would I like progress to be faster? Sure I would. Be great if it was feature complete already, but it takes the time it takes. I'm just glad I can fly it and see the upgrades as they come out, rather than still being without a Hornet. It needs to be completed sometime in the near future, but progress is clearly being made.

 

I don't know if the Hornet progress is drastically slowed because of the F-16. Only ED can answer that, though it's clear they are working on features of the F-16 already completed for the Hornet (exterior and interior modeling, systems we already have working for the Hornet (except maybe bugs), etc), so they may be different people. Phase 1 stuff seems mostly, if not completely is stuff we already see in the Hornet. Since you've been in development, you probably are aware of the fact that sometimes more people doesn't mean better progress, depending on the project.

[Sn8ke_iis]

Wasn't the presale supposed to start today? Or did they push it back?

[CaptJodan]

I’ll calm down when we get the LAU-88 racks for double and triple AGM-65 loadouts, which block 50s were approved to use and DID use for decades.

 

Why did ED decide to be so anally specific on the loadout for the viper but is including everything from IOC to 2007 for the Hornet?

 

I don't know enough about the history of the Viper and the different variants to know the full story behind those. I'd sure like to have them myself. If it's as realistic as the A-10's use of triple racks, I hope the community can convince them to put them in like they did on that module (that people argue isn't realistic, but we have it anyway).

 

Either way, it can still be approached calmly. :)

[CaptJodan]

Wasn't the presale supposed to start today? Or did they push it back?

 

It was a typo on the Friday newsletter. Was supposed to say May 24, not 22.

[BuzzU]

And I think it's fine if you don't like the way they do things. But saying the community outrage will be solved if they just did things the way you wanted to, and dismiss everyone who might disagree with that as "whiners" isn't going to solve the underlying vitriol problem.

 

I like EA. I like the trickle of features from the Hornet, as it allows me to understand and "master" (in so much as I am capable, which is not that much) a system before moving on to the next. The Hornet is a VERY complicated aircraft, and with some of the latest features coming out, I've been very happy to say "Well, I know how to start up, taxi, use the basic functions, having done it for 6 months. That means I can focus on this new content."

 

Would I like progress to be faster? Sure I would. Be great if it was feature complete already, but it takes the time it takes. I'm just glad I can fly it and see the upgrades as they come out, rather than still being without a Hornet. It needs to be completed sometime in the near future, but progress is clearly being made.

 

I don't know if the Hornet progress is drastically slowed because of the F-16. Only ED can answer that, though it's clear they are working on features of the F-16 already completed for the Hornet (exterior and interior modeling, systems we already have working for the Hornet (except maybe bugs), etc), so they may be different people. Phase 1 stuff seems mostly, if not completely is stuff we already see in the Hornet. Since you've been in development, you probably are aware of the fact that sometimes more people doesn't mean better progress, depending on the project.

 

I never said if you don't agree with me you're a whiner. We all know who the whiners are. Just look at this forum about the Viper. All the complaints about a plane that's not even close to release. I was a beta tester for car sims. As testers, we had our own forum that only beta tester could see. We didn't whine and complain. We simply wrote about the problems we found in a constructive manner. As it should be. Some members here really shouldn't buy an EA item.

 

Ok, I had my say. Carry on.

[RaceFuel85]

I don't know enough about the history of the Viper and the different variants to know the full story behind those. I'd sure like to have them myself. If it's as realistic as the A-10's use of triple racks, I hope the community can convince them to put them in like they did on that module (that people argue isn't realistic, but we have it anyway).

 

Either way, it can still be approached calmly. :)

 

In multiple posts people have explained the history of the LAU-88's and double/triple loads of Mavericks, some people simply don't care to listen.

 

To put it simply:

 

The triple Maverick load was never authorized for actual combat use as the exhaust plume from the inboard Maverick would scorch and damage the tail. The LAU-88 itself was always problematic and even double Maverick loadouts were rare. Eventually the LAU-88 itself was removed from F-16 service in 2005.

 

ED has elected to model an F-16C *Block 50* from 2007/2008 and want peoples that the Block 50 never carried (IE the Aim-7) and configurations that it was never cleared for (LAU-88's with triple Mavs) or racks that were not used in 2007/2008 (LAU-88's)

[RaceFuel85]

I’ll calm down when we get the LAU-88 racks for double and triple AGM-65 loadouts, which block 50s were approved to use and DID use for decades.

 

Why did ED decide to be so anally specific on the loadout for the viper but is including everything from IOC to 2007 for the Hornet?

 

Show me a Block 50 carrying triple Mavericks operationally and I'll concede the point that you're right and I am wrong.

[Wags]

It was a typo on the Friday newsletter. Was supposed to say May 24, not 22.

 

No, not a typo. We decided to change the date such that we can include a video at the time of pre-order launch. We are still implementing some features of the cockpit and external model, so the video will not be ready for prime time until Friday.

 

Thanks

[Wags]

Show me a Block 50 carrying triple Mavericks operationally and I'll concede the point that you're right and I am wrong.

 

Indeed, certainly not an operationally valid loadout. However, after talking with the team yesterday, we'll probably allow it for those that want to be so inaccurate.

 

Thanks

[CaptJodan]

No, not a typo. We decided to change the date such that we can include a video at the time of pre-order launch. We are still implementing some features of the cockpit and external model, so the video will not be ready for prime time until Friday.

 

Thanks

 

Ah, sorry about the misinformation. I thought I read that somewhere else. Thanks for clarification.

[BuzzU]

Looking forward to it Wags. Thanks.

[=Mac=]

I loved the F-15 Eagle when it first came out (back when God was a kid.) I flew it until a couple years ago. Of course I complained about the... well, I complained just like everyone else did. But, I FLEW IT for years.

 

Then came the A-10C and I flew that for years. Not sure I complained much about that.

 

Oh, the Huey... Not one word of criticism on that contraption. I fly it often even today! I can't tell you how much I love it.

 

The P-51D is exactly where that Merlin engine needs to be and I fly the Mustang just for the joy of landing and taking off.

 

I know everyone loves the Spitfire and, while I did get it, I love the P-51 more. Sorry, Mr. Churchill.

 

I flew some of the Russian monsters without really knowing how to put the landing gear down but only complained that the F-15 didn't have the (whatever they call their SA page) nor long range IR missiles. Cursed ETs! :)

 

Then some trainers popped in here and there and, yeah, I lost one (financially).

 

For whatever reason the flying gods decided, DCS got the Hornet. Clumsy, way under-powered and has a nasty tendency to hover in full burner if you get her into a stall. But, (2,560 items listed that I am in deep love with, omitted for brevity). The reason I don't fly the Eagle, the Warthog, nor the Mustang much any more is because I am eye-ball deep in my (virtual) squadron's current deployment to the Gulf. I never knew what the difference between Case I recovery and Case III yet I've flow clear skies as well as night rain onto the Stennis precisely like the NATOPS manual depicts. Radio comms and all. (I'm just very careful I don't pull lots of G's enough to get into a stall. Well, I try not to.)

 

The Christen Eagle. God, what a beautiful thing to fly! I just don't have enough time in my life to fly more than an hour or two a week because the Straits of Hormus is acting up and us (virtual) Marines are now deploying there! :) Semper Fi, Magnum, egressing south, four point six.

 

So, sometime in the distant future, we're going to get the Viper? Yea. Or, really YIPPIE! But, well, yea.

 

Complain about it? No. Not yet. Why?

 

TOO BUSY LOVING ALL THE OTHER STUFF THAT ED HAS GIVEN ME. I'll love the Viper when I can pull some G's in it.

 

Finally, whoever reads this yammer, can you please tell ED to turn OUT the lights on the Stennis' island at NIGHT!

[Hentai Paisen]

Indeed, certainly not an operationally valid loadout. However, after talking with the team yesterday, we'll probably allow it for those that want to be so inaccurate.

 

Thanks

 

I could kiss you right now Wags.