How best to support DCS

[some1]

Don't kid yourself, I got 40% warn and a month long ban on this forum for reporting too many bugs and complaining about lack of proper QA on the developer's side.

Bug reporting is mostly for your personal gain, as you have a chance of getting a better product in the end. A product for which you've usually paid in advance BTW.

 

If the thread author wants to help ED, there are better ways to do that than sending more work their way. :)

Edited August 6, 2020 by some1

[stormrider]

I as many of the DCS veterans have supported ED and paid their wages for years , even purchasing modules I've never used.

 

 

In the current state customers are pretty upset due to very poor optimized performance and the lack of many many things we'asked for decades.

 

+1

[NineLine]

Don't kid yourself, I got 40% warn and a month long ban on this forum for reporting too many bugs and complaining about lack of proper QA on the developer's side.

Bug reporting is mostly for your personal gain, as you have a chance of getting a better product in the end. A product for which you've usually paid in advance BTW.

 

If the thread author wants to help ED, there are better ways to do that than sending more work their way. :)

 

Nobody has ever been banned or given a warning for reporting too many bugs, sorry.

[Harker]

If the thread author wants to help ED, there are better ways to do that than sending more work their way. :)

Bug reporting doesn't send more work their way, it helps them deal with bugs faster, without them having to try and find them first.

 

Imagine that you've encountered a bug once or twice, but you're not sure why it happens code-wise and what sequence of events causes it. You have to try and trigger it consistently, so you can narrow down the likely systems (pieces of code) responsible. And then, a nice bug report comes and does that for you.

 

Everyone wins. We get a better product and the devs get free testers. Does it mean that all bugs are addressed in a timely manner (or at all)? No. But on our side, that's how we can help.

[some1]

You describe one type of bugs: hard to find, easy to reproduce, easy to fix.

In all other categories, (Hard to reproduce - even with tracks, or hard to fix), your help is negligible compared to amount of work the devs need to put in order to solve the problem.

 

But yeah, in the end we get a better product, so our motivations don't matter that much.

 

 

Nobody has ever been banned or given a warning for reporting too many bugs, sorry.

 

Of course not! Officially it was for "I don't believe it was tested" comment in one of the reports, which surely qualifies for a ban here.

[mhe]

That is indeed a great question. I for one care about improvements to the core engine first and foremost, I'd happily pay for proper multithreading and Vulkan support over any module they could possibly publish.

 

However, I think that modules and terrains being the only meaningful way they generate revenue on the entertainment side (besides their professional gigs for militaries etc), they also have what economists call a perverse incentive, namely an incentive to throw out one module after the other for the money and then the modules are stuck in early access for ages.

 

And the core engine only gets kinda dragged along, it only improves as much as required for new modules and terrains to happen. And I for one think that sucks, I'd happily pay for a Premium core engine "module" if that means I get multithreading, Vulkan, good ATC and better weather and clouds.

 

So how do I send them funds without them directing them into the development of yet another perpetually unfinished plane?

[stormrider]

 

So how do I send them funds without them directing them into the development of yet another perpetually unfinished plane?

 

If you do the opposite and stop buying their stuff perhaps they will have no choice but to stop this promiscuous business model. That's the best way to help ED to fix its ways.

Edited August 7, 2020 by stormridersp

[mhe]

That would be not accurate feedback as well. I think there needs to be a balance. I do for sure appreciate new modules and want them to keep making them, but at the same time I'd like them to give the core a higher priority and there is no way I can vote with my wallet for that to happen.

 

Imho there should be a way to financially incentivize core engine improvements. Because if there isn't, you inevitable end up with the status quo, where a beancounter says that the highest priority of the company are those endeavours that keep the money rolling in. And it is not wrong to think that way, but they also sabotage themselves by solely pursuing this particular approach of revenue generation.

 

All I'd want is a way to help fund a bunch of people inside ED who do nothing but make the engine better for all of us instead of the engine being some kind of side project and most of the manpower goes towards content because of money.

[stormrider]

That would be not accurate feedback as well. I think there needs to be a balance. I do for sure appreciate new modules and want them to keep making them, but at the same time I'd like them to give the core a higher priority and there is no way I can vote with my wallet for that to happen.

 

Imho there should be a way to financially incentivize core engine improvements. Because if there isn't, you inevitable end up with the status quo, where a beancounter says that the highest priority of the company are those endeavours that keep the money rolling in. And it is not wrong to think that way, but they also sabotage themselves by solely pursuing this particular approach of revenue generation.

 

All I'd want is a way to help fund a bunch of people inside ED who do nothing but make the engine better for all of us instead of the engine being some kind of side project and most of the manpower goes towards content because of money.

 

I understand your point of view and we're on the same page. IMO, it's nearly impossible to expect different results by doing the same thing. If they are filling their pockets by releasing unfinished modules before others are finished and repeating, then there's no reason to change a "winning team". Also IMO, the only way to make the Core engine a priority is make it profitable, which means changing the very core of DCS' business model. In a way, the current DCS business model is unsustainable: there's only so many new modules that they can release before the costumer base is saturated and worse, there's only so many unfinished modules that they can sell before negative feedback starts to become overwhelming even on top of overwhelming revisionism and censorship, so I insist, the only viable way I see fit to break a monopoly' status quo is to stop giving them money until they fix their ways. Many have already expressed their intentions of not buying any more openbeta stuff and some even are going as far as not buying anything at all anymore.

 

The only other variable in this equation that I can think of is how big is their "fanboy-collector-buy-all-customer-base" and is it enough to sustain their business model in the face of a general boycott?

 

Is the door open for competition? I truly think it is and the time is now.

[NineLine]

 

Of course not! Officially it was for "I don't believe it was tested" comment in one of the reports, which surely qualifies for a ban here.

 

It was worded slightly differently, but it was the fact that you reached a certain level of warning points that you received a suspension, same as anyone. But thanks for admitting that it wasn't for reporting too many bugs.

[probad]

its absolutely insulting that you all keep acting like you somehow act like you have ed's interests at heart when its pretty clear that you're just trying to leverage for your own interests

[mhe]

I understand your point of view and we're on the same page. IMO, it's nearly impossible to expect different results by doing the same thing. If they are filling their pockets by releasing unfinished modules before others are finished and repeating, then there's no reason to change a "winning team". Also IMO, the only way to make the Core engine a priority is make it profitable, which means changing the very core of DCS' business model. In a way, the current DCS business model is unsustainable: there's only so many new modules that they can release before the costumer base is saturated and worse, there's only so many unfinished modules that they can sell before negative feedback starts to become overwhelming even on top of overwhelming revisionism and censorship, so I insist, the only viable way I see fit to break a monopoly' status quo is to stop giving them money until they fix their ways. Many have already expressed their intentions of not buying any more openbeta stuff and some even are going as far as not buying anything at all anymore.

 

The only other variable in this equation that I can think of is how big is their "fanboy-collector-buy-all-customer-base" and is it enough to sustain their business model in the face of a general boycott?

 

Is the door open for competition? I truly think it is and the time is now.

 

Well, competition usually is the key, but there is not a single combat simulation out there that can hold a candle to what DCS provides at this point in time and ED is very well aware of that. However, I can imagine that if they want to push the large battlefield simulation aspect further (which would also appeal to wider audience than "just" planes), there is no way around making the core engine compatible with those ambitions.

 

However, we are still stuck on the main issue. How do we provide funds and resources for anything other than aircraft modules and terrains? I'd happily pay for something like a VR deluxe package if I get an enhanced core engine that gives me the framerates I would love to have. I don't expect any freebies, in fact I really wonder whether ED is helping themselves by making the core F2P but they must have hard numbers on that, so I guess it does.

 

I proposed in the past some kind of tiered premium "engine" model if you will. I'd happily pay the full price of a module for the core engine if it really delivers. So for example when we moved from 1.5 to 2.5, the engine became vastly better. I would have had no problem to get early access to that core for a price.

 

Think of it as the Open Beta but just paid access for it and way ahead in terms of tech. That way, there would be an incentive to pay for the better engine, ED could dedicate people to the development of said better engine and once a certain milestone or set of features is complete, it transitions over to the F2P part and the next round starts.

 

So that way, everybody gets the good engine eventually, just the people who are willing and able to support it, can get it sooner and ED would have dedicated resources to make it happen quicker for everyone.

 

tl;dr: offer me a premium version of the DCS core engine, I'll happily pay up if it gives me multithreading, Vulkan, great VR framerates, better ATC, better weather etc sooner. Once those funds have been used to complete it faster it normally would have been, make it the standard F2P core for all and start another generation of the core engine with early paid access to fund its development.

[some1]

It was worded slightly differently, but it was the fact that you reached a certain level of warning points that you received a suspension, same as anyone. But thanks for admitting that it wasn't for reporting too many bugs.

 

40% that never expires just for saying "don't tell me anybody is testing this thing, I won't believe you"? Somebody must have felt offended after I posted four or five bug reports withing half an hour just for one aircraft and found the first opportunity to send me on a forced holiday. I don't see any other reason, people make such comments here all the time.

 

I also did not have any active warning points before that, so please don't spin it like I made multiple offences and this was just the last one.

Edited August 7, 2020 by some1

[gavagai]

I as many of the DCS veterans have supported ED and paid their wages for years , even purchasing modules I've never used.

 

 

In the current state customers are pretty upset due to very poor optimized performance and the lack of many many things we'asked for decades.

 

What? DCS performs better than it ever has right now. How much do you think they have to spend to built a Hornet or F-16 compared to what they earn on it?

 

If you want to see more development for core features, then encourage your friends to fly DCS. Other game genres bring in hundreds of millions in gross revenue, but you can be pretty certain ED grosses a fraction of that because high fidelity simulation isn't "fun" for most kids these days.

[NineLine]

40% that never expires just for saying "don't tell me anybody is testing this thing, I won't believe you"? Somebody must have felt offended after I posted four or five bug reports withing half an hour just for one aircraft and found the first opportunity to send me on a forced holiday. I don't see any other reason, people make such comments here all the time.

 

I also did not have any active warning points before that, so please don't spin it like I made multiple offences and this was just the last one.

 

If you have an issue with your warning points you should take it to PM, I was only trying to specify you were not suspended or banned for multiple bug reports as you claimed.

[chrisgrind]

In the meantime how can I support DCS?

 

If you're happy with $50 a month, you could run a "competition" every month and gift a member $50 of module on steam? or two people $25. That way you are helping ED, and another person. Two for the price of one!

 

The competition could be whatever you want, some ideas:

 

1. A straight up "put your name in here and I'll pick one"
   
2. Why should I pick you thread once a month?
   
3. A secret random selection based on someone that helped you, or others - and tell them not to tell anyone, so no-one realises there is a competition happening.
   
4. Select someone that is deciding between x or y module, and buy one for them so they get both.
   
5. Find big youtube game vloggers that have influence and offer to buy them a copy of the latest map to bring advertising to ED (Though really, they could do that themselves at zero cost to them)
    
   

 

As long as you do it through steam, you just need their steam account, and you can gift it straight to them. If you want to reduce the number of people entering, then make it for a specific differnt module each month (eg/ I'd be keen on Syria give away, but I already have Gulf, so wouldn't bother)

[gcompc]

I'd be interested in DCS Merch. Some cool shirts with huds, DCS aircraft, mugs, baseball caps etc. Maybe they could contract it out, but the whole idea is for profits from the merchandise to go into development. May be more hassle than it's worth or there may be merchandise already and I don't know where to look. I'd buy!

[Pikey]

Nah, it's a thankless job, often more frustrating than it's worth.

 

 

I do it, and have done, for many years. But I don't expect thanks. I'm fully aware of how it works and what you dont get told about. I've seen my stuff ignored. I've seen it reach hotfixes, I've seen it reach production after years of wishing. The truth is, you won't get much, if any, feedback, for reporting bugs. But, you do get it read. And sometimes it's seen as important enough to fix and sometimes it isn't, no matter what you feel like.

 

 

The sooner you can be at peace with this, the easier it comes. What you cannot do, is be frustrated. Your bugs are not yours, this game is not yours. Either do, or do not, emotion/frustration is wasted.

[CAmastersgt]

Interesting idea. I'd love to see an F-4 fund, F-111 Fund, F-104 Fund, etc....