Simulation development philosophy - a question for the Forum

[Gierasimov]

Option 1 for me.

You all have got some valid points, for me current model works well.

 

I actually enjoy being part of DCS Beta. This game is in constant development, and I can't imagine releasing it other than as it is now.

[Notso]

"I was pondering the other day about how ED releases modules into a Beta stream for public use and then adds features/systems over time. It seems an unusual business model in the aviation simulation world but I think I understand their reasoning. I'll get to that later. I don't know how other "gaming" companies release similar products, but in the actual flight simulation world, a product would be developed for a year or more and then released pretty much feature complete. And then there would be a development cycle where any updates would be released on a 12-18 month cycle unless there was something really wrong with the functioning of the sim. I recently worked for a major global aviation simulator company and this was their and most of the industry's model."

 

 

Notso, was the "major global aviation simulator company" that you worked for in the business of developing and manufacturing simulators for the aviation industry? If so, I would submit that there is absolutely no comparison between that and ED's business model for the fact that the simulator companies have complete control over all of the hardware as well as the software that the customer buys. Not only that, the simulator is usually delivered by the manufacturer and set up and then calibrated and approved by an aviation authority such as the FAA or CASA or ENAC etc. etc.

 

 

 

When ED or any of the 3rd party developers put something out to this community, they have absolutely no control over any of their customers' hardware, much less the abilities of the customers to deal with some of the issues that routinely pop up that may or may not have anything to do with the product yet may greatly affect how well it runs, or how poorly it runs. I don't see how ED or any other "game" developer could do it any other way. They surely could wait longer for their engineers to be fairly certain that the product is stable and feature complete but that would not cure the requirement for constant updates to account for an infinite number of possible problems caused by the infinite combinations of hardware out there in all of our homes.

 

 

I, for one, have no issues with the way ED is doing things, other than the normal frustrations of waiting for the next update to either cure a glitch caused by a prior update or for a much anticipated new feature for my favorite ride at the moment. :pilotfly:

 

You are correct that large simulation companies do all of what you describe above as the end to end process is generally (but not always) under their control. However, you are missing the point of what I was discussing. I very clearly was talking about Features & capabilities not hardware or SW bug fixes. Of course any Sim company is going to have to issue patches to address glitches caused by many issues out of their control.

 

But what I’m talking about is the slow drip of features and capabilities released over time. Imagine if Boeing sold their simulator of the new 777X aircraft to United or American but the Flight model was a WIP, the Cockpit FMS was incomplete with “buttons to be added later” labels, and the autopilot was not exactly the way it was supposed to be. But the promise was that these would be added over time. I doubt that would go over well.

 

So again, I get that ED is not a Boeing or Airbus or Raytheon and they have a different business model. I’m in no way criticizing their choices for how they develop and market their products. This thread was simply asking the customers of that product which they would prefer. To wait longer for a product to have all the features and aircraft capabilities included all at once at release or to get a partial solution sooner and get the features added along the way? That’s all.

Edited March 9, 2020 by Notso

[AG-51_Razor]

You are absolutely right. I did miss the point of your post. My apologies :ermm: It's been happening a lot lately.