2 months since TGP release and today's OB was...

[nickmow]

Disappointing.

 

We are patient as a community - but i can sense a growing resentment in ED rushing out new products (with no IFF???) with so many ongoing projects / problems. I know many committed players that this time around didn't jump in on the Viper EA pre launch for this very reason out of principle.

 

.

 

 

See you lost me right there, how many people own DCS world, how many have you spoken to, what questions did you ask, how did you publish the results.

 

"we" who elected you as a spokesman, hush now poppet nobody cares , shhhhhhhhhhh

[oldcrusty]

I'm in the 'wait and see" crowd. Not much I can do... other then skipping the Viper for now. I'm sticking to Hornet even if all I could do is fly around between the boat and the tanker. Properly functioning PA mode FCS update will probably never happen but we can 'will' the Hornet with brute force...

 

Carrier Module!?… almost forgot about that one. I hope it's not too far away!

 

BTW, perhaps the genre is coming back... "some" company (one of the masters of the universe;)) decided to take on their abandoned sim. Non combat but... some small jets are coming. Who knows, good things could follow.

[fitness88]

In such case, the practice is to release one final update to remove drm. That's what big publishers tend to do.

 

 

 

Thanks

[CarbonFox]

I'm simply hoping with the release of the F-16 that development of the Hornet accelerates and we start seeing not only the WIP stuff get finished but new systems arrive sooner than anticipated. Would love to see the Tpod get completed in the next OB update or two.

 

 

I'm also in the wait and see category though. I bought the Falcon knowing what I was getting into.

[*Aquila*]

Can't wait to see what new module they'll need to release in order to develop the originally intended ATFLIR. Because you guys remember that the Litening is not exactly what we were initially waiting for, right ?

[BarTzi]

Would love to see the Tpod get completed in the next OB update or two.

 

They are probably focusing on Viper bugs and, want to push an update to the stable branch. No one can tell when the Hornet will take priority at the moment.

[Hawkeye_UK]

See you lost me right there, how many people own DCS world, how many have you spoken to, what questions did you ask, how did you publish the results.

 

"we" who elected you as a spokesman, hush now poppet nobody cares , shhhhhhhhhhh

 

lol this made me laugh, the fact this has had 55 replies in less than 24 hours and is a busy post i think people do care some of which like myself have been in the online sphere since 98 with Janes F15 and falcon 4 etc. I never said i was a spokesman and it is a fair assessment that we as a community are patient, i stand by what i said. This was a discussion i raised to actually assist ED in their approach - you know 360 feedback. If you think their is not a growing resentment i advise you to go and discuss across various leading pvp MP servers and their communities either in voicecomms or their discord general chat these last few months.

[*Aquila*]

If you think their is not a growing resentment i advise you to go and discuss across various leading pvp MP servers and their communities either in voicecomms or their discord general chat these last few months.

I strongly agree. While not being able to properly quantify the phenomenon like a polling institute could do, I see around me a lot of people who confidently bought the Hornet and didn't buy the Viper. And I'm one of them. After more than 20 years playing military flight sims online, it's the first time I feel so little enthusiasm at the release of a major plane like the F-16. Sad and worrying feeling.

[gekoiq]

I also bought the Hornet Day1, Hour0. I did not and will not buy the Viper until I see positive progress on the Hornet again, once I do I will purchase the viper even though I have zero interest in flying it, just to support ED, if/when they regain my faith.

[*Aquila*]

I also bought the Hornet Day1, Hour0. I did not and will not buy the Viper until I see positive progress on the Hornet again, once I do I will purchase the viper even though I have zero interest in flying it, just to support ED, if/when they regain my faith.

Once again, I agree. Among us, only a fool could wish for ED anything else than long-term success. But trust can not be and must not be a one-way street.

[Ahmed]

From a business stand point ED needs to do what IRacing did; yearly subscriptions so they have a constant revenue stream

 

Indeed they should consider something like that, as the current EA model is sooner or later going to ruin this game.

[Preendog]

+1 for subscription model.

 

There is no reason for ED to work on a product after revenue has jumped the shark. The only motivators after that are personal interest of the devs, and threats by early adopters, neither of which are reliable.

 

It also encourages hacking together features and leaving them in an unoptimized or buggy state, and the overall game accumulates spaghetti and code rot. This could be why so many obvious omissions or bugs persist for months or years, some only one line of code or even one single character. Eg. F-18 engines run underwater; one line. Radar elevation control freezes if you lose a target that was locked by autoacq; nobody tested that before release and it's not remotely an edge case. Parachutist view control is backwards and that's literally 2 character edits.

 

If subscription model, income would be basically constant as long as people continue using the module, and development effort would be financially justified. No more honor system.

 

More, I only own F-18 and kinda feel bad that I only paid that much for such a deep game. I'm either not interested in the other modules or I don't like the steep price for a module I might not like. Online servers rarely use the paid maps because few people buy them. If players can buy modules monthly they would get waaay more modules, and then likely forget to cancel the subscription. More variety online, less risk for players and more money overall for ED.

 

I understand there would be a huge upfront effort to implement that system, but it is the way things are going for large games that are supported and expanded over actual decades. Steel Beasts also comes to mind.

Edited October 5, 2019 by Preendog

[MacEwan]

Honestly I think there's a solid number of modules in game at this point and the focus needs to shift to completing the current modules and base game systems before moving on to whatever is next.

[TWC_SLAG]

Could it be that DCS has bitten off more than they can chew? That the newer modules are more complicated than envisioned? That they are now stumbling along, trying to keep up a decent revenue stream, while not having the resources/expertise to finish what they start?

 

I don’t know.

 

Please don’t ban me.

[MacEwan]

Could it be that DCS has bitten off more than they can chew? That the newer modules are more complicated than envisioned? That they are now stumbling along, trying to keep up a decent revenue stream, while not having the resources/expertise to finish what they start?

 

I don’t know.

 

Please don’t ban me.

 

I think so too. These are complex systems and in a sim like DCS they can't fudge things for the sake of gameplay like other dev's can with a regular game. I'm just hoping that the commonality between the F-18 and F-16 will help speed things along now.

[Spiceman]

I totally agree with the subscription. Initially, it will be like dragging a drug addict (in this case addicted to a mostly free game) into rehab... at first they’ll kick and scream, cry, attempt to reason, threaten to run away... but after a while they’ll enjoy their new life so much they won’t be able to imagine it any other way.

[MacEwan]

I'm all for a subscription based model but can someone explain to me how this would incentivize a developer to fix bugs, complete modules, and add new functionality to the game?

[Thump]

I'm all for a subscription based model but can someone explain to me how this would incentivize a developer to fix bugs, complete modules, and add new functionality to the game?

 

Immediate and drastic loss of revenue as people cancel subscriptions which they would be dependent upon as the modules themselves would not be bought. They could obviously buffer this by forcing a 6 or 12 month pay model. But that only gives them a limited time to fix whatever they've done to cause the drop rate.

 

My problem would be that I've now lost control over the very modules I've already paid for. Unless they were willing to give one to one subscription duration equivalent to the money already spent. Even then, I'd might balk at upping the sub again once past that given date.

[TWC_SLAG]

I think so too. These are complex systems and in a sim like DCS they can't fudge things for the sake of gameplay like other dev's can with a regular game. I'm just hoping that the commonality between the F-18 and F-16 will help speed things along now.

 

I want the Hornet, but will not buy it until it is fixed.

[Wizard_03]

I think many of the newcomers to DCSW are not used to the length of time ED historically spends on things. It took literally 5 years for the Nevada map to come out because ED decided to create a whole new engine for the game. The result was the greatest environment model for a commercial or military sim in history.

 

But it took time, a lot of time. When ED does something they commit to the best possible implementation. The reason A2A radar modes like TWS aren’t available is because the are re-doing the entire radar code system from scratch, same thing with supersonic FM, FBW, FLIR, yada yada. The Benefits are apparently lost on many people IMO but the cost is time. It proves that ED is not profit driven but rather quality driven by people that are interested in the subject.

The reality of that is it takes time and sometimes they have to pump things out to keep the lights on.

 

A subscription service would alienate the core DCS community that has been supporting ED since Lomac. We just need to be positive and patient, they’ve delivered in the past and they continue to do so. They are still supporting products like the A-10 and KA-50 coming up on 10 years after their release. Have some faith in them :)

[Sn8ke]

Although ED stated the Viper production wouldn’t hamper further updates to the Hornet, there has suspiciously been almost 2 months without hornet updates since they ramped up the viper release.

[TWC_SLAG]

I think many of the newcomers to DCSW are not used to the length of time ED historically spends on things. It took literally 5 years for the Nevada map to come out because ED decided to create a whole new engine for the game. The result was the greatest environment model for a commercial or military sim in history.

 

But it took time, a lot of time. When ED does something they commit to the best possible implementation. The reason A2A radar modes like TWS aren’t available is because the are re-doing the entire radar code system from scratch, same thing with supersonic FM, FBW, FLIR, yada yada. The Benefits are apparently lost on many people IMO but the cost is time. It proves that ED is not profit driven but rather quality driven by people that are interested in the subject.

The reality of that is it takes time and sometimes they have to pump things out to keep the lights on.

 

A subscription service would alienate the core DCS community that has been supporting ED since Lomac. We just need to be positive and patient, they’ve delivered in the past and they continue to do so. They are still supporting products like the A-10 and KA-50 coming up on 10 years after their release. Have some faith in them :)

 

Define a newcomer. I’ve been here longer then you have.

Why not give us the old radar code system while the new one is being developed?

How long would Nevada have taken if the new engine was already developed?

“ED is not profit driven” then “Sometimes they have to pump things out to keep the lights

on”. Boy, is that enlightening.

 

You are definitely not their PR man. :)

 

Most of us understand, and accept, the difficulties in creating modules and scenery. The problem is getting an unfinished product, and then waiting months/years/never to get a completed product, because developers are too busy working on the next big thing.

 

This is what I was alluding to when I suggested DCS may have bitten off more than they could chew.

 

I support DCS and think they have the best flight sim products. Hands down. But, they could do better by us.

Edited October 5, 2019 by TWC_SLAG

[Mokkeri]

Although ED stated the Viper production wouldn’t hamper further updates to the Hornet, there has suspiciously been almost 2 months without hornet updates since they ramped up the viper release.[/quote

 

That is not true, every patch have something new to F-18. You can check chagelogs.

[Padonis]

I paid a lot of money for various modules, I can't imagine paying for the subscription yet. Subscribing or buying modules are two different rules. But what about people who have already bought modules? Will you tell them that they bought something under certain conditions and now they have to pay again? It's not that simple, two systems would have to exist simultaneously. That a new customer will have a choice and not hurt old customers. Without it, there will be processes.

[Capn Penguin]

Not concerned at all. ED has not forced me to buy anything and I understand they have a business to run. I enjoy the product they have created and even though I medically can't fly much right now I still purchase what they put out to support the "war effort", including some modules I know I will never fly.

 

I'm very thankful ED is there and as an end consumer, it's not my position to challenge them on how they run the business. If I don't like it I can take my ball and go play elsewhere.

 

Fortunately for me I do like it.... Very very much. :)

 

Back to my cave...