DCS World roadmap update

[MAXsenna]

+1000

 

 

Keep 2/3 of the paying customers waiting for weeks, for something they could have had today, so mayyyyybe the other 1/3 can have their cake and eat it too at a later date.

 

 

 

 

 

 

If I did that I'd be unemployed by the end of the day and I'd deserve it.

+2000

 

And that's why I asked her for the numbers.

But she came through on those though....

 

Sent from my ANE-LX1 using Tapatalk

[MAXsenna]

Was it really only $20? I can't remember anymore; that's not even a case of Pauliner.

 

 

 

I wish ED would get the Channel map and P-47 into pre-release so I can give them more money. They're very hard to get along with some days.

I rest my case!!! LMAO

 

Sent from my ANE-LX1 using Tapatalk

[MAXsenna]

A technical delay is one thing - a PR ball dropped from an egregious height is another.

 

 

This was badly handled from a customer relations point of view.

That's the case. People just don't seem to get it reading through the thread...

 

Sent from my ANE-LX1 using Tapatalk

[BSS_Sniper]

This is what I wish ED would do:

 

- stop development of the super carrier

- fix the performance issues and core problems

- finish the F-18. We're coming up on two years since it's debut

- after the F-18 is done, finish the F-16

 

THEN start talking about releasing new modules, and taking money for pre-orders. Nothing is getting finished. Everything is perpetually in development. The A-10C is the last module I can remember that actually released "completed".

 

Why can't the other modules release like the A-10C did?

 

Yes, and stop a steady stream of income so everything can come to a grinding halt...let the people handling the business do just that.

[umland]

Indeed. Shame on you Guys, who troll here.

How annoying. Sry Kate, Matt and Dev´s that you have to read and deal with this.

They don't appreciate what you do for us.

 

I think you should really lock this thread and give new announcements

only in a read only thread.

 

unbelievable...

 

 

This thread is a sight to behold!

 

I've occasionally been critical of ED's poor communication in the past, and now find myself thinking careful what you wish for.

Finally, someone from ED is put forward who actually has an in-depth knowledge of what is going on... and they're just thrown to the wolves. To have to spend a day reading and replying to 356 (so far) mostly vacuous or vitriolic posts, from a mob of flightsim nerds: no-one deserves this. Have mercy.

 

Here's an idea - have mods or whoever collate the top 10 concerns per month, present them to Ms Perederko, and have her post a reply to them. Lock that thread immediately. She can then get on with her day job / life.

 

No-one should have to put up with this s***.

Edited April 15, 2020 by umland

[bradleyjs]

I too am not surprised about the delay and don’t have any issue with the decision. And to be honest, I’m a “little - very little” bummed it wasn’t released today. But, I will just keep “Moving On” —- An excerpt from an earlier Triumph song in the late 70’s.

 

However, I literally have ~fifteen other minor projects that I’m working on simultaneously (not job related, as I’m now retired now). So, when SC is done baking, then I’ll take a bite! :joystick: i

 

So, ED just keep us informed and we’ll take it from there!!

 

Thanks!

[zaelu]

Yes, and stop a steady stream of income so everything can come to a grinding halt...let the people handling the business do just that.

 

Wait... what? So it's OK as long as things don't go to a grinding halt? What if it goes to a halt? What do you fear it will happen? I will tell you. Nothing. At least nothing of your fears.

[oldcrusty]

Vaccine or carrier first?

 

 

Place yer bets, gentlemen!

 

It better not be "vaccine or no carrier".... If bill gates + who decides...

 

Well, I had to say something... the words of wisdom have already been spoken. Hell, I spotted a few hibernated old timers that haven't been heard from in a while:huh:

[AEOLUS3]

one of the very important things that i would like to mention for the hornet is the drag. please do something for that. in reality this ship is not so draggi !

 

Fyi

 

F/A-18C maximum speed at level flight in altitudes of 36,089 ft. Mach 1.7. Here in DCS does not exist that ! Do something for that please

[key_stroked]

Yes, and stop a steady stream of income so everything can come to a grinding halt...let the people handling the business do just that.

 

That income is supposed to go towards finishing modules, not starting development of new ones. Case in point, they pulled development from the F-18 to boot the F-16 out the door, and it wasn't even in an 'ok' state.

 

Things would not come grinding to a halt. Things would actually improve, instead of continuing this ponzi like structure they have going on now.

 

And I stand by my original question. The A-10C released pretty darn complete. Why couldn't modules like the F-18 and F-16 have been released the same way?

[falcon_120]

The answer is quite obvious, the F18 in its current "uncomplete state" is probably already more complex that a complete fleshed out A10c.

 

If you take out all radar modes, a2a weapons, jhmcs, carrier ops, etc... and you only finish a TGP pod, you get the A10c or close to it.

 

Im probsbly exagerating a little, but people needs to put a module like the F18 into perspective.

 

 

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

[TAW_Blaze]

The answer is quite obvious, the F18 in its current "uncomplete state" is probably already more complex that a complete fleshed out A10c.

 

If you take out all radar modes, a2a weapons, jhmcs, carrier ops, etc... and you only finish a TGP pod, you get the A10c or close to it.

 

Im probsbly exagerating a little, but people needs to put a module like the F18 into perspective.

 

 

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

 

.. and the fact that DCS is a "little" bit more than what it was when the A-10C was developed.

[jasonbirder]

Thanks for the communication from ED - always welcome to hear from the company.

As ED have access to alot of user data - (such as the SP/MP split - which ED have confirmed demonstrates SP is overwhelmingly the larger of the two user bases)

COuld ED share same data for the Stable Version vs Open Beta version split? And, (as they obviously have that data) - if not would they be prepared to answer why not?

 

 

I think many people, given the obvious low priority ED seems to give to the stable version (which in any software/SAAS I've ever dealt with commercially would be the priority) are curious as to why stable users seem so unimportant/under-valued by ED and wonder if thats because they (as ED priorities would seem to imply) are a vanishingly small minority?

[maverickmj]

Yes to relax the atmosphere;)

 

 

https://imgur.com/a/yTLgnSL

[Worrazen]

Yes to relax the atmosphere;)

 

 

Listen to the expert, he knows it all. Has a masters degree on multiplayer netcode.

 

No need to click the links, it's a troll.

 

Edited April 15, 2020 by Worrazen

[BoneDust]

Good call to delay. We have far too many bugs now, so yes good call. Focus on the core of the sim because without that the modules are irrelevant.

 

Centralize your communications so stakeholders do not have to spend hours searching; you have a great forum here, which should be the primary source. Not sure the "near term" stuff is clear because the starting point is not mentioned. For example, to say improved effects near term, is that based from today or from 3 months ago. I still think you should consider a subscription base revenue stream. Perhaps offer it to consumers to see who is interested maybe provide insider information, earlier access before those who do not subscribe, and or further discounts on products. Business need a constant revenue stream and many software companies have already gone that route; IRacing, Adobe, etc.

 

cheers

Edited April 16, 2020 by BoneDust

[theIRIEone]

 

During the spring and summer, we plan to work on a range of Flight Model enhancements that include Automatic Carrier Landing System (ACLS), autopilot modes, and about 30 related features and issues.

 

 

That is the best news i ever read since my beloved Hornet was released for DCS, Thanks a Ton for still having an eye on all those "little things"!

I already thought it would've been forgotten with all the fancy toys we received in meantime / still in planning. Glad it's not :)

 

However, i can't help but to point out what strikes my eye in the otherwise well written, and very well received, announcement:

 

The plan is to have the Hornet being out of EA end of December, with the new FLIR engine being labeled [long term], which as far as i understood means minimum 9months+.

 

When the LITENING pod was released, it was said that the ATFLIR needs the new render engine in order to be implemented.

Now i read "Hornet out of EA in Dec" & "new FLIR engine some unknown time after that" - Without wanting to speculate, what does that mean for the ATFLIR? Is this still on scope as well? It should be, considering the fact the our Hornet is a very specific version, US Navy Lot 20.

Either way i would love to have some light shed on this matter.

 

Again, thank you for releasing the Roadmap and being very open and transparent with your development plans.

That quoted line alone was reason enough to be excited for today, even though i can't wait for the boat to be finished.. Good things take time to come together, it is what it is.

 

I'm really appreciating ED and the passion that goes along with it. Thanks for striving to bring us perfection in detail, it's what get us sim nerds really excited!

[Flamin_Squirrel]

That income is supposed to go towards finishing modules, not starting development of new ones. Case in point, they pulled development from the F-18 to boot the F-16 out the door, and it wasn't even in an 'ok' state.

 

Things would not come grinding to a halt. Things would actually improve, instead of continuing this ponzi like structure they have going on now.

 

And I stand by my original question. The A-10C released pretty darn complete. Why couldn't modules like the F-18 and F-16 have been released the same way?

 

Much of what they're working on for these two planes is isn't just for those aircraft. They are creating the tech that can be used on these and future projects.

 

I can see where your view comes from, but I don't think this is going to be the way ED operate long term; it's some short term irritation for the long term benefit of DCS as a whole. Future modules should go more smoothly, fingers crossed.

[UrgentSiesta]

sad for the delays, but better late than overly buggy.

 

please keep/increase your efforts on The World and performance increases like Vulkan, et al. The payoff will be there even if it's not apparent.

[MAXsenna]

Thanks for the communication from ED - always welcome to hear from the company.

As ED have access to alot of user data - (such as the SP/MP split - which ED have confirmed demonstrates SP is overwhelmingly the larger of the two user bases)

COuld ED share same data for the Stable Version vs Open Beta version split? And, (as they obviously have that data) - if not would they be prepared to answer why not?

 

 

I think many people, given the obvious low priority ED seems to give to the stable version (which in any software/SAAS I've ever dealt with commercially would be the priority) are curious as to why stable users seem so unimportant/under-valued by ED and wonder if thats because they (as ED priorities would seem to imply) are a vanishingly small minority?

I believe they shared the numbers stable vs OB in this or the other thread. 60vs30 and the rest 10 on 1.2 and 1.5.

 

Sent from my ANE-LX1 using Tapatalk

[UrgentSiesta]

well since 2.5.6 i cant play anymore frames in vr are just tht bad

 

not sure of your config, but many folks are reporting that the latest nvidia drivers have really tanked performance. you might try rolling back to an earlier nvidia version if that's a possible source.

[jasonbirder]

I believe they shared the numbers stable vs OB in this or the other thread. 60vs30 and the rest 10 on 1.2 and 1.5.

 

 

Many thanks for that! I'd been looking for the figures for a while. Much appreciated!

 

 

 

If TWICE as many are on stable as on Open Beta - you'd think they wouldn't give up on it like they have huh!

[Phantom88]

FYI...Wags posted on Hornet AG Radar in Mini updates....

Great to see Wags Posting…I was getting a little Worried

" Dear all,

 

One of the biggest new items in development for the Hornet is the Air-to-Ground (AG) radar. We will start with the Real Beam MAP mode, and then implement other modes that include Ground Moving Target (GMT), Sea Search (SEA), and Terrain Avoidance (TA).

 

Today was a milestone in that we introduced the AG radar rendering into our internal development version (what we term the trunk). This is still very much work-in-progress, but as we flesh it out, I’ll be sure to bring you updates.

 

Kind regards,

Matt

[BSS_Sniper]

Wait... what? So it's OK as long as things don't go to a grinding halt? What if it goes to a halt? What do you fear it will happen? I will tell you. Nothing. At least nothing of your fears.

 

 

Don't by EA if it upsets you so much. I buy them understanding how it works and don't cry about it afterwards.

[Sharpe_95]

Good update and thanks for sharing all this information.

 

It's really good to know, allows us all to manage our expectations and excitement whilst having an idea of what things are being done in the near/mid/long term.

 

Many thanks and good luck with all the tasks.

 

-S

Edited April 16, 2020 by Sharpe_95