Tell me I am not Dreaming

[tempusmurphy]

might they have a military contract now? 

[Fri13]

I believe that ED has solved problems to make Apache. A dual cockpit, a A-G radar and many others that was not challenge to Black Shark.

[S. Low]

On 3/19/2021 at 4:41 PM, Fri13 said:

I believe that ED has solved problems to make Apache. A dual cockpit, a A-G radar and many others that was not challenge to Black Shark.

Seems like a good explanation. Plus they are a business so I wouldn’t put it past them to fib a little. But ultimately the Apache is coming and the sim is in a great state IMO to accept it as a new arrival. I can’t wait

[Dragon1-1]

What was missing for the Apache was the dual cockpit tech. Ka-50 is so obscure that it would never have made it into the sim, had it not been the only single-seat attack helo in the world. Only recently did real multicrew/AI copilot tech become a thing.

[veenee]

I find it quite strange that FCR has not been mentioned at all in the recent dev report, where many of the features of upcoming module were listed.

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/news/2021-02-26/

 

Why not to list it, along with AGM-114L's with a mention they might come a little later?

Are they still not sure if it's going to be included at all?

[S. Low]

2 hours ago, veenee said:

I find it quite strange that FCR has not been mentioned at all in the recent dev report, where many of the features of upcoming module were listed.

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/news/2021-02-26/

 

Why not to list it, along with AGM-114L's with a mention they might come a little later?

Are they still not sure if it's going to be included at all?

It was stated that the Apache will release without the FCR, and that the FCR will come later. I’m sorry but I don’t remember where this was posted.

[DaemonPhobos]

There is literally no chance on earth they don't model the apg-78 with the L model hellfires, there is a lot of information easily available to model said systems, much easier to find than anything like the hornet or viper weapons specifics.

There are official maximum effective range numbers for the radar (8 km moving targets, 6km stationary targets), and detailed performance and functional description of both SAL and RF hellfire missiles.

If they don't add them at early access, they will add them later.

 

 

[Rick50]

agreed, but that radar system it's modes, and the missiles, are all "new" to DCS, are quite complex, and so it's probable that it'll take many working hours of researching, planning to implement, programming and testing to get it right. Thus, it'll have to wait for after the Apache is ready for early access... that way we get a bird to fly, they get some revenue to help pay for development of the radar system, and get time to actually do it. While we get to fire regular laser Hellfires and do stupid things like fly Apaches under bridges for the Lulz!!

[M1Combat]

I seem to recall it was stated that the FCR "might" come later.

"agreed, but that radar system it's modes, and the missiles, are all "new" to DCS, are quite complex, and so it's probable that it'll take many working hours"

 

Exactly...  which is why 1 MILLION people need to buy it...  So that development gets funded to finish it

[veenee]

2 hours ago, M1Combat said:

I seem to recall it was stated that the FCR "might" come later.

"agreed, but that radar system it's modes, and the missiles, are all "new" to DCS, are quite complex, and so it's probable that it'll take many working hours"

 

Exactly...  which is why 1 MILLION people need to buy it...  So that development gets funded to finish it

Let's hope this is not the plan and FCR is confirmed sooner rather than later.

I am sure many people will think twice before buying as long as it is not.

[S. Low]

17 hours ago, Rick50 said:

agreed, but that radar system it's modes, and the missiles, are all "new" to DCS, are quite complex, and so it's probable that it'll take many working hours of researching, planning to implement, programming and testing to get it right. Thus, it'll have to wait for after the Apache is ready for early access... that way we get a bird to fly, they get some revenue to help pay for development of the radar system, and get time to actually do it. While we get to fire regular laser Hellfires and do stupid things like fly Apaches under bridges for the Lulz!!

Honestly I care more about properimplementation of the m230 lol

13 hours ago, veenee said:

Let's hope this is not the plan and FCR is confirmed sooner rather than later.

I am sure many people will think twice before buying as long as it is not.

I want to say I understand this position, but I really don’t. I’ve been messing around with Apache sims for years and we’ve never had a truly accurate FCR. Getting a full fidelity ah64 even without the FCR is still amazing and I’m fine waiting for it as long as I get 30mm, rockets, and K models to play with 

[veenee]

I am not going to buy it just because it is an Apache, which I like, but not to that degree that I want it regardless.

 

Other people are much bigger fans of that platform, and will buy it anyway, which is absolutely fine.

 

However, "I want to say I understand this position, but I really don't" - it is those fans of AH-64D who should demand the highest level of realism and features, not just something which is 'almost a Longbow'.

Edited March 26, 2021 by veenee

[S. Low]

52 minutes ago, veenee said:

I am not going to buy it just because it is an Apache, which I like, but not to that degree that I want it regardless.

 

Other people are much bigger fans of that platform, and will buy it anyway, which is absolutely fine.

 

However, "I want to say I understand this position, but I really don't" - it is those fans of AH-64D who should demand the highest level of realism and features, not just something which is 'almost a Longbow'.

 

I’m sorry I think you misunderstood me or I wasn’t very clear. If they are marketing it as a longbow then I expect a top notch FCR to be developed for it because they have a reputation for high quality products.

 

I sort of understand the position as a consumer of wanting the module fully completed before paying for it. But I personally don’t agree with this sentiment with regard to eagle dynamics and their products.

 

ED has produced fantastic work with continual improvement over the years and I can therefore be confident in a track record. That’s why I don’t mind paying for an ED AH64D that launches in EA without FCR or L’s.

 

As a point of reference, I’m not certain I will buy PC’s Kiowa at release because I don’t have the same trust for their track record. I’ll wait for reviews and then consider purchasing it.

 

So yes I absolutely agree that the module being marketed as ah64d full fidelity should have a properly designed FCR, but given ED’s track record I’m fine with using the m230/rockets/K model while I wait for the FCR later in the life of the module.

[veenee]

I think we are going off topic here, one thing is EA modules from ED and if one is willing to buy them in advance, and another is to know exactly what is going to be delivered at the end.

 

But apprently FCR is going to be confirmed ('planned' doesn't really cut it) before pre sales, so everyone should be able to make an informed decision.

 

Can't see anything controversial in wanting to know what I pay for in advance.

[StrongHarm]

I just hope ED doesn't decide to stop EA because of the wide misconception of what "early access" actually means, and the abuse they take because of that (Hornet being a great example).  Of course, I don't blame people for the misunderstanding, I blame the practices of the "video game" industry.  DCS does not fit within that category and should be viewed from an entirely different angle, but that's another losing battle with most end users.

[notproplayer3]

1 hour ago, StrongHarm said:

I just hope ED doesn't decide to stop EA because of the wide misconception of what "early access" actually means, and the abuse they take because of that (Hornet being a great example).  Of course, I don't blame people for the misunderstanding, I blame the practices of the "video game" industry.  DCS does not fit within that category and should be viewed from an entirely different angle, but that's another losing battle with most end users.

Hope I'm not going too off topic but the thing they did with the hind pre-order by stating clearly on the shop page which features would be ready on launch and which features would be coming further down the road seemed like a really good thing to me. Let's still wait until launch to see if it's accurate but hey, seems to be a great step into that direction. 

On the topic of the Apache, because it is a more complex module systems wise, I still hope they can be as precise as possible with what people are going to get on launch day (which mfd pages are working, which systems are fully operational or not...). 

I believe this could solve a lot of the problems, of course it probably won't shield them entirely if they launch the module in a stupidly barebones state like they did with the viper (no external lights, no basic damage model etc...)

[TZeer]

Instead of calling it early access, they could call it beta access  ??

[Rick50]

10 hours ago, TZeer said:

Instead of calling it early access, they could call it beta access  ??

 

Eh... but it's not the same thing. At all. Beta is part of testing. As in, expect MANY bugs. Not missing features, full on bugs. Things not working, crash to desktop, strobe screens, half the features missing, all long BEFORE launch to public. No you won't be flying missions for a campaign, you'll be doing flights 20 minutes long, then spending 30 minutes filling out bug reports. Trust me, if you actually got a beta, if we were all given beta products, we'd never buy the product, thinking it was gonna be garbage.

 

But if you feel that way, then maybe don't pay for any Early Access product at all. That means no Viper, no Hornet, as both are still EA. Hornet's been EA for over 3 years... but was it really in a Beta state upon EA launch? No, just no. Now the Viper... yea, there was a few things that were Beta-ish, and had too few completed features. ED has admited that they agree they dropped the ball on the Viper launch, it was not ready for Early Access and should have waited until it was properly ready.

 

Fact is, Early Access is the only way we are gonna get high complexity simulations. The ONLY way. ED is the only one making complex simulations of truly modern combat aircraft, they are basically the only game in town. No EA? Then prepare to wait 5 years for the Longbow. And without EA revenue maybe ED folds, out of biz. Maybe. And you never get to fly your favorite. 

[TZeer]

I agree what you are saying.

 

What I meant was maybe calling it something else then "early access" or whatever. Something to really drive it home to those who buy early access that it is not a finished product.

 

Cause sometimes it feels that people do not know what early access is. And when they then fly early access products on top of doing it in DCS World Beta, and then complaining about missing features and bugs... What do they expect?

[stormrider]

If they hadn't officially confirmed it so far, I assume that's ED being ED. They're gonna say later that they never promised it.

[Rick50]

On 4/4/2021 at 11:32 PM, TZeer said:

I agree what you are saying.

 

What I meant was maybe calling it something else then "early access" or whatever. Something to really drive it home to those who buy early access that it is not a finished product.

 

Cause sometimes it feels that people do not know what early access is. And when they then fly early access products on top of doing it in DCS World Beta, and then complaining about missing features and bugs... What do they expect?

 

Yea, I see the problem you describe. 

 

Thing is though, isn't "early access" an industry term? I think I've seen it used to describe other games you can buy, but that aren't finished either, like maybe not nearly enough maps or levels, not enough types and units, missing features. I'm not entirely sure if changing what they call this purgatory period would even be legal... no they wouldn't be charged or anything, but if they changed how it was worded, it might open up ED to possibly being sued by a money hungry jerk (meaning not a flight sim fan, just pretending to be for the purposes of suing)?

 

The other thing is, regular good faith customers who don't know what that means have the obligation to educate themselves on the subject, and it's not exactly hidden. Sure, you need to click on a link, but it's there, not in the browsing of modules, but in the shop it's mentioned, and a link provided to a description:

 

Quote

Early access (What is DCS World Early Access?)
What is DCS World Early Access?
Early Access is an option for you to play this module in an early state, but it will be incomplete with bugs. The time a product remains in Early Access can vary widely based on the scope of the project, technical hurdles, and how complete the module is when it enters Early Access. Eagle Dynamics and all of our third parties strive to make this period as short as possible. An Early Access module can be played on both the Open Beta and Release versions of DCS World. Once the module exits Early Access, you will automatically have the Release version.

 

There will ALWAYS be a percentage of people who don't read the fine print. Or don't read. And don't notice a single detail. Every nown and then, I'll miss a detail myself, sometimes it doesn't matter, sometimes it kinda does.  

 

Some people will see a situation that is clearly marked as a hazardous location: yellow safety tape, orange cones and signs, people wearing hardhats, and high visibility safety vests, gloves and safety glarsses to chooch... and none of it registers. 99% will see and know to avoid... 1% will step over the yellow tape, without taking a look around, making sure to not scuff their $600 shoes and $2000 suit, very nearly risking getting crushed. Saw three very highly paid maroons do EXACTLY that, not one care or clue of the danger.  My point? That no matter how much you warn people, there will always be a few that simply won't pay attention. There's a limit how much you can protect people from themselves. You can try to do more, but it just dosen't have any effect on the percentage that just doesn't care to listen or see.

 

That said, I do think that the full description ought to be put right in the module description, akin to the System Requirements, rather than a link to a paragraph. 

 

One thing about an Apache module: maybe after a few weeks we'll start to see some cool fictional liveries!  Except the Israeli Apaches, all the others seem to have the same boring dark green, and that's ok for real world, but visually boring for gaming!  Look to the UH-1 Huey, that's seen more liveries than Bob Ross could paint! 

[Sarge55]

So basically you're saying "You can't beat stupid", eh?

 

I agree.

Edited April 7, 2021 by Sarge55

[Hiob]

If you make everything suitable for the dumbest possible individual, you're not doing the world any good... IMHO!

 

EDIT: I often skip reading the manual, but before I blame the product or the producer for anything I will RTFM! (...or ask in a forum...)

Edited April 8, 2021 by Hiob

[M1Combat]

Early access is the right term.

 

The problem is the expectation of the user.

 

The very word early indicates something else will happen "later".  If you aren't considering what that might be...  you've got nothing to complain about when you realize it is the fact it will be done...  later...

[DaemonPhobos]

Early access is subjective, so there is always somebody that will complain.

But I agree that I wouldn't release it on a level equivalent to the F-16C EA.

That said, since there is a document that covers all of the systems in the aircraft (except some ASE stuff) available to download, it's going to be easy to calculate the level of systems implementation at release.