DCS OpenBeta Community Relationship Solutions

[Worrazen]

The whole DCS reddit/dev/buggy/soon/openbeta/news/behavior stuff can be explained/remedied in a sum of a few points, at least partially the ones I have on my mind right now, I didn't want to go into a heavy write up in this case, so it's bullet points.

 

There's probably more, but still, most of it is background noise, he said, she said, he though, they thought, of just chatter and stuff, but these things may all lead into common root causes or points which could be used to remedy the situation. (sometimes you can fix a problem in many ways so those don't actually count as the root cause, because kinda equal, its hard to say which one would be the root)

 

*******************

OpenBeta Distinction:

*******************

 

Community got used to the OpenBeta too much IMO. It's natural to use something experimental at your own risk, and complaining about it shouldn't be fair.

 

Solution is to hammer the idea of OpenBeta/EA so that nobody forgets or uses an argument they didn't know about it or whatever.

 

I have disagreed with the popular use of OB in the Multiplayer from the beginning.

 

---------------------

Visual distinction:

 

A natural repellant: Depending on various factors including the general community feeling, a balanced strenght level of this visual distinction could be applied to the OpenBeta build. A too agressive (high) strength of this visual distinction would keep the most amount of people away as it wouldn't allow them to use the product for purely entertainment purpose in the most comfortable of conditions, but that would make it count for a closed Beta so not that much. This visual distinction is a natural repellant for freeloaders and fake testers, the Developer does not need to use/waste any communication effort for this to work.

 

Examples of visual distinctions versus Release build:

 

• Color, style and/or texture overlay of the general GUI elements that is not intended for comfort and denotes a development environment, a yellow/black "under-construction" pattern comes to mind or similar.
  
• Text indication overlay in all the options/settings pages
  
• Text indication overlay in the loading screens.
  
• Text indication in certain Mission Editor GUI elements.
  
• Text indication in the F2 View Status Bar.
  
• Other subtle indicators.
  

 

 

--------------------

Legal distinction:

 

Open Beta Disclaimer could be placed in particular on:

 

• Docs
  
• Forum FAQs
  
• Customer Support FAQ
  
• Main Website, before downloading the installer.
  
• In a dialog before first starting DCS OpenBeta, with an "I understand" and "Quit" button. Dialog resets every OB update, excluding small hotfix. (aka choice remembered until next update)
  
• As a shortened version in a recurring dialog after connecting and loading into a Multiplayer mission, with an "OK" button.
  
• In a dialog or console when launching the OpenBeta dedicated server, with an "I understand" and "Quit" button (Yes/No for console). Dialog/answer resets every OB update.
  
• In case of a crash, additional crash reporter text to add note that user was using OB when it crashed and it's to be expected, and that "consider switching to Release if this issue persists", etc, or something.
  

 

What would the OB disclaimer contain?

 

-- I kinda lost track of this paragraph, boy the way I write threads, not linearly, it's too late to fill some of my thoughts in right now, tired.

 

 

******************

Their own problems:

******************

 

This one is simply like how much communicational effort does the Developer wish to spend on some of the potential customers on those who don't follow any basic rules, fairness and disclaimers.

 

• They're not serious customers let them make up their own mind and hope new ones come.*
  
• Try to go out of bounds and use free time to play babysitter (what COO is doing now)
  
• Hope that they realize ony their own they may be wrong in their style of feedback or the logic behind them.
  

 

*Core community plays a role and provides communicational support as usual, more or less, so even if Developer doesn't do anything the situation could remedy slowly/slower but it's not assured, new generations and new fresh players come all the time, more or less a general thing that is not DCS specific anyway.

 

----------------

Snotty Noses:

 

It looks like some of these people seek to have a sniff at internal drama more than they seek a finished product and the primary content and service that is sold and provided by the Developer.

 

That said, loyalty can be a double-edged sword, it makes the core community defensive about genuine shortcomings and other concerns, because when you do search for a treasue you may eventually find it while going through a ton of false positives, but not necessairly.

If there is truth to the internal drama that Snotty Noses disovered as being the biggest root cause of all the issues everyone have with DCS then fine, so be it, it still depends on hard evidence tho, and if they believe it they can, discuss it now, but it's not okay to act like having free reign over everything and spam/bully/shout at others.

The developer is still producing something that is not a life requirement, it's not the backbone of the civilization, it doesn't have to do with health/wellbeing directly, it's not the government, so they can't just demand things like that.

The developer can still do what they want and sell it to whoever likes to buy it and who doesn't like it is a non concern for the civilization at large. If the loyalists have their enjoyment in DCS then so be it, everyone can decide with their own head, how they're satisfied, how long they'll be playing before they deplete the current session and motivation and are ready for something new, etc etc.

 

We can give the newcomers the acknowledgement that they come from previous experiences where they have been treated relatively unfairly, but it shouldn't give them free pass of accusing without research and mirroring their habits, drama and the-way-things-work from over there.

 

Pictured: A classic example of snotty nose behavior (top), as well as someone imagining DCS Developer being a character in a Japanese manga cartoon. (bottom)

 

 

----------------------------------------------------

Invalid and/or Unfair and/or Illogical Arguments:

 

Some people want all the benefits. They want the latest possible, that is relatively stable in their own definition, and if it's not soon enoguh it's bad Developer supposably. So more testing had to happen in some public Alpha or internal stage-tow to do a longer testing procedure so the OB will be "more stable", while the time it takes to make OB less buggy would mean increasing the time it takes to provide the OB, so what's the point ?!?!?

 

Infact, I do support the idea of larger internal QA effort, but with different context/reasons; (which that was unveiled in the last February newsletter), everything will take longer down the line, great ... but wrong, it won't take longer, it will take the time it's suppose to take. It's all how you view it, how you percieve it, is that piece of food more expensive, is it not worth it? I found eggs that are cheaper, I'll buy those, really, is that egg the same, does it have the same nutrient contents?

 

Pictured: An example of a freeloder, a supposable tester who has no intention of testing anything.

 

And that should be enough right here, you guys go ahead and discuss other solutions, and keept this sort as much already being done and said elsewhere.

Edited March 3, 2020 by Worrazen

[Worrazen]

Reserved for possible updates.

[probad]

or this: if one patch isnt that good for you, just wait and do something else until the next patch. you're not gonna die, dcs isn't gonna die.

 

video games shouldnt be a drug.

[Mr. Big.Biggs]

Its about ego and bullying.

The ego forces people into Beta because “only noobs fly release”.

The more people chasing the “experts” shifts server focus and participation to Beta

Folks then on beta DEMAND A working product!

As frustration grows, the internet trolls and bullies show up to do what makes them feel valid.

Same story in every hobby, club or organization I have been in from high school, Fire service, classic cars, RC airplanes, neighborhood HOA.

It’s human nature to want to belong, then once accepted fight to the top of the pecking order...

I’m grateful for ED and all of the folks that have got me up and flying, having a blast.

I drive a production car, not a prototype.....

See y’all in the air!

T

[Chapa]

So much noise because in fact ED are used to release so good open beta patches than people believe today that it must be something else than a beta version...

 

ED is not perfect as everybody but I find players at least not fair at all...

[Pikey]

The problem is clearly OB being mainstream and there are a number of reasons.

 

 

The first one is that it's often not that different or compelling than the Live branch. So why wait? Until that is, you get the last patch, which was visually beautiful on top and underneath an utter disaster with very strong game-breaking levels of errors underneath especially in MP and for mission builders and scripters extending the game past "Quick start".

 

 

The second is multiplayer itself. The most obvious cause is that because of the above and because people want to see and use new things, servers go up on MP. It becomes dominant, therefore anyone who is on the fence has to choose between Live and OB and goes with what the servers are running. Before long that's the absolute Status Quo, people go with the MP common branch.

 

Individual users offline can go between whatever suits them without any surrounding impact. Squadrons however have to keep together on the same version. This is absolutely required. You just have to see what two people on different DCS versions did for the Pilot/RIO relationship on certain versions. Same with other items of incompatibility and that also builds into server instability - joining, leaving, lagging and bringing the entire thing down. And sometimes OB and Live just aren't compatible because of a module change or a network code change, which is fairly common because modules and assets arrive at a steady pace and are always introduced through a DCSW update.

 

 

 

Until the servers move back to Live, the multiplayers will stay where the servers are. If you are multiplayer or streaming something new, the version envy kicks in also. "He has what I want, so i want it to". Pretty normal reaction.

 

Human nature won't change. Something has to be "different" to change the current way OB is used. People cannot make good choices by themselves, they will stick with the crowd. The crowd only needs a slight majority and then the ones on the fence or people caught up in the push tend to just go along with it. Case in point... you want to build a community because you have a good server and idea and you want a good server to play on too, with the public. Why would you put it on Live if most of the people are playing Open Beta? Did you choose that? No. But are you caught up in that? Yes, and the situation propels itself, maybe you work on someones script in OB and its changed and you have to keep on OB, or you support some community scripting or thing, or you make a mod and the textue and lighting changed so you need to fix it on OB, or you stream and want to show new content...there's just too much compelling for OB and the negatives are stil not enough to push people off until it gets so bad that you simply cannot play on it or there are no servers. And no matter how bad it get's, people will still try! They stream with these static planes 30 feet in the air just to show the new lighting effect, or they remove features on the server with statics and carry on, or whatever to keep it moving.

 

Whilst some people say you cannot fix humans I believe that you can decide exactly what you want them to do, you just need courage. There will be complaint, moaning, wailing, and all sorts of backlash, but in the long run, if you want to produce a better product and have it seen looking better and being talked about positively, you have to reduce the exposure of your testing by force, because people know no other way of reason. They will hack it around, find workarounds, show that SCUD flying improperly liek a cruise missile, uncomment the code to enable neutral coaltions, and generally life finds a way. Only way is a very serious and mandatory change and I just dont see it ever happening because of one thing...

 

 

Eagle Dynamics needs us to test and dont want to damage that. They have to find the right mix of somewhat playable versus unplayable, and keep us testing for them to cut costs.

 

 

Or they could spend 1000 space bucks on glaasses for their testers so they can spot that an airplane static is hovering 20-30ft in the air.

[NineLine]

@Worrazen, you have a good post there, but don't ruin it by calling out people directly please, its only going to turn this thread into a name calling exchange.

[Hunter_5E]

It would be handy if the server browser stated clearly which servers are running stable and which are running beta.

 

Seems there is currently no indication what version is running unless the server creator puts it in the server name or description. That's just adding more stress to the situation if you don't know who's running what. Often puts me off going online to be honest.

 

I'm in the minority camp, in that I only run with stable as I know there are often issues with the betas. I'd love to have the new Ka-50 cockpit but I can wait until the issues are worked out and 2.5.6 goes to stable. I am however of the older generation that grew up without internet or smartphones so I inherently have more patience than the younger generation. How many of you remember rotary dial phones and having to rewind a VHS video tape? The good old days.. lol.

 

Modern connectivity with smart devices and fast internet makes people impatient - they want and expect everything NOW! Unfortunately the internet also provides a buffer for people to feel safe behind. They feel they can say what they want without any real consequence, since they're not standing face to face with the target of their aggression. Would be a fair bit different if they had to be face to face.

 

Anyway, I personally think you should restrict the Beta versions to a select group of trusted testers and force Joe Public to go with Stable only. I'm sure you already know a large enough number of trusted people to effectively test and iron out bugs in a closed and civilised environment. That's my two cents worth.

[Worrazen]

@Worrazen, you have a good post there, but don't ruin it by calling out people directly please, its only going to turn this thread into a name calling exchange.

 

That was definitely a mistake, I was trying to avoid just that, but I wrote the second paragraph later in the evening, actually I think it was written in a span of two days so yeah ... sorry about that.

 

That's why I kept using "The Developer" and other and I was about to start writing Stage2 of why it's good to not name directly, which I would have posted when I was writing an earlier post before this thread but my browser crashed, I managed to recover the text but haven't extracted it from the memory dump yet.

 

I did not want to reference the external site directly but apparently I see now I forgot to remove it in one place.

 

 

EDIT: Oh, I guess it's also about the drama seekers, perhaps I should have left it with that term, tho it's actually the same phrase President Putin used when he responded to the media about whether he's in a relationship with Alina Kabayeva. (I just know that from being a newshound and coming across it :p) So I thought it was relatively safe.

 

I might modify some stuff but ... I kinda modify threads too much after I post them all the time. If I have to then sure, but I guess I won't use that again in this thread. I didn't even mean to discuss much further over the same points, rather more about solutions which is more appropriate for the official forum to discuss rather than go back and forth with them directly, I agree, we have a partial summary of the problem and that's it, I could have went over and made a list of all the posts from that reddit thread which I would argue against in various ways, I decided to only 2 cases. The thread looks big because of formatting but I made good effort to make it relatively short if I compare to my usual trends.

Edited March 3, 2020 by Worrazen

[Wizard_03]

or this: if one patch isnt that good for you, just wait and do something else until the next patch. you're not gonna die, dcs isn't gonna die.

 

video games shouldnt be a drug.

 

That’s where I’m at, gonna take a lil break from DCS and wait till we see some progress on the things mentioned in the yearly newsletter. 2.5.6. Seems to have thrown a wrench into everything. Progress on EA modules has ground to a halt, and the core game is a mess as well. Gonna check back in when things settle down.

 

Not mad anymore, just tired.