Jump to content

PSA: F-14 Performance/FM Development Status + Guided Discussion


IronMike

Recommended Posts

On 8/3/2022 at 5:52 PM, lunaticfringe said:

And we also know the fundamental root cause of that issue, too.  But I don't see anybody barking up that tree. 

Regarding this....

11 hours ago, IronMike said:

Yes, please, everybody - ED is very helpful with the issues that cross over between us - but they, too, need to follow their own priority list - you can imagine they have to deal with many more issues than we have to. In principle, it is our responsibility to finish the FM polish, which steps need to be taken in the background is not really relevant.

The remaining/ open issues with the F-14 are not lost on us, and the effort to resolve them all is continuing. Thank you for your very kind patience with us.

I have to go with this.

As a software engineer i often face the same predicament, especially when the backend and the frontend a outsourced to different contractors. And one of those may be lagging behind the schedule due to some reason or other. But that is NEVER a client issue. The client expects results for the price/fee he/she has paid. 


Edited by captain_dalan
  • Like 1

Modules: FC3, Mirage 2000C, Harrier AV-8B NA, F-5, AJS-37 Viggen, F-14B, F-14A, Combined Arms, F/A-18C, F-16C, MiG-19P, F-86, MiG-15, FW-190A, Spitfire Mk IX, UH-1 Huey, Su-25, P-51PD, Caucasus map, Nevada map, Persian Gulf map, Marianas map, Syria Map, Super Carrier, Sinai map, Mosquito, P-51, AH-64 Apache

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, captain_dalan said:

Regarding this....

I have to go with this.

As a software engineer i often face the same predicament, especially when the backend and the frontend a outsourced to different contractors. And one of those may be lagging behind the schedule due to some reason or other. But that is NEVER a client issue. The client expects results for the price/fee he/she has paid. 

 

I mean, as a client, the expectation is the thing offered at the price offered has already been planned out to have the things offered at the price because that’s how most products not software work. (When not on Kickstarter) 

For instance, Garmin didn’t sell G1000’s until they built tested and built again at production scale. Everything they sold the system as worked as advertised out the box. When they came up with new features and tricks they updated the software without it having an effect on any of the previously working parts. And then they developed a new fully upgraded system and sold that.

They never sold “Early Access” G1000’s or had version updates that broke things that worked previously, or added features that could work and will work at some later update but don’t use it now even though its there.

Software Development has a very “Figure it out as we go, after charging you” feel to it that makes people insecure. Especially in the Game space where devs do just walk away.


Edited by RustBelt
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, RustBelt said:

... <snip> ...

Software Development has a very “Figure it out as we go, after charging you” feel to it that makes people insecure. Especially in the Game space where devs do just walk away.

 

That's because nowadays most software doesn't exist until a client actually orders it, and that client tends to participate at least partially in its development through shifting requirements and providing feedback. It's quite often then even the client itself has no idea what they want when the order is initially placed, and the product crystalizes during the development cycle. 

  • Like 1

Modules: FC3, Mirage 2000C, Harrier AV-8B NA, F-5, AJS-37 Viggen, F-14B, F-14A, Combined Arms, F/A-18C, F-16C, MiG-19P, F-86, MiG-15, FW-190A, Spitfire Mk IX, UH-1 Huey, Su-25, P-51PD, Caucasus map, Nevada map, Persian Gulf map, Marianas map, Syria Map, Super Carrier, Sinai map, Mosquito, P-51, AH-64 Apache

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, captain_dalan said:

That's because nowadays most software doesn't exist until a client actually orders it, and that client tends to participate at least partially in its development through shifting requirements and providing feedback. It's quite often then even the client itself has no idea what they want when the order is initially placed, and the product crystalizes during the development cycle. 

Enterprise software sure. Games not so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, RustBelt said:

Enterprise software sure. Games not so much.

True, but as you said yourself in one of your previous posts, the advent of early access changes that too, and more and more game are developed with constant feedback from the user base as well. These forums after all, are on such example. 

Modules: FC3, Mirage 2000C, Harrier AV-8B NA, F-5, AJS-37 Viggen, F-14B, F-14A, Combined Arms, F/A-18C, F-16C, MiG-19P, F-86, MiG-15, FW-190A, Spitfire Mk IX, UH-1 Huey, Su-25, P-51PD, Caucasus map, Nevada map, Persian Gulf map, Marianas map, Syria Map, Super Carrier, Sinai map, Mosquito, P-51, AH-64 Apache

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
On 8/7/2022 at 8:32 AM, RustBelt said:

Hmmm, yea, nothing I like more than doing my job AND other peoples job too. The game industry best shape up real soon. They've been playing with fire the last 5 years or so, and they're only making it worse.

I dunno rust; that analogy doesn’t seem to port well… look at what we are getting vs what was offered; an F-14b and 3 different variants of the A against originally just the b and an a. 
 

Heatblur have worked continuously and listened to a lot of customer feedback to prioritise delivery of content in a way that not just suited their development roadmap but also has given greater bang for the buck than was originally in scope. That’s way outside of any purchase model for physical objects I’ve ever seen where generally you’re wallet takes a hit for every optional upgrade….

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing is, too much of game development has abandoned the clear vision of a focused personality. The worst example being the self contained corruption of one Mr. Chris Roberts. Or the Rejection of the new way by Andy “Downshift” Hollis retiring.

For enterprise software sure, you work with a client and develop a bespoke (or semi-bespoke) solution. For a game…..as the last 10 years have shown, that doesn’t really work. Earner games are formulaic corporate crap, and real, meaningful games that hold a fanbase are few and far between and increasingly being meddled with by the suits.

In the middle there’s just a lot of aimless Middling performers that still require massive investment to just middle in the hopes that their users will crack the code for it as to what will make it blow up. Which frequently ends in disinterest and abandonment by the users because no one dev can give everyone EVERYTHING. That’s just not possible. So everyone shares in the disappointment.


Edited by RustBelt
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, RustBelt said:

The only thing is, too much of game development has abandoned the clear vision of a focused personality. The worst example being the self contained corruption of one Mr. Chris Roberts. Or the Rejection of the new way by Andy “Downshift” Hollis retiring.

For enterprise software sure, you work with a client and develop a bespoke (or semi-bespoke) solution. For a game…..as the last 10 years have shown, that doesn’t really work. Earner games are formulaic corporate crap, and real, meaningful games that hold a fanbase are few and far between and increasingly being meddled with by the suits.

In the middle there’s just a lot of aimless Middling performers that still require massive investment to just middle in the hopes that their users will crack the code for it as to what will make it blow up. Which frequently ends in disinterest and abandonment by the users because no one dev can give everyone EVERYTHING. That’s just not possible. So everyone shares in the disappointment.

Sir, this is a Wendy's.  

But seriously- in that ramble you touch on a number of factors, complaining about what may in fact be the key, but not effectively identifying it:

Those guys from upstairs- the suits.  You know why they're the suits?  Because they answer to the board, and to the shareholder.  The answering and decision making takes place because if the shareholders aren't placated in seeing the value in the firm, valuation is lost, access to financing evaporates, and nobody gets paid- which means nobody has games to play, all because nobody works from the ground up for free. 

The mention of Hollis isn't as compelling an argument as you think, frankly, because he came up in the era when one or two kids fresh out of college could produce content that could make a massive return in the early and mid-80s. Sid Meier wrote Hellcat Ace alone in 10 weeks and MicroProse turned its first profit two months later.  Three years after Hollis signed on they broke $10 million in annual sales. 

That doesn't scale to today, and not remotely in this genre.  Sorry, but I'm not interested in 320x200 pixel resolution sprite-based graphics and paper thin gameplay and modeling, zero connectivity to anyone that isn't at the same desktop and no interoperability between titles.  That might work for somebody's nostalgia-laden Steam upload for $3.99, but that doesn't (literally or figuratively) fly here. 

So what happens to the guys in the middle?  Who have the skills and specialization to break through, but can't secure the financing (and no, nobody is venture financing the serious flight sim genre)?  Software licenses cost money.  If you want a shot at seriously producing a product, you need a core who maintain it as their day to day, who bring the talents and experience required to have the drive and best chances of getting it out the door- that means they need to get paid as their 9-5. 

And that's just the core 3 to 5 people.  The bigger the scope, the more rapid the expectations to complete (and thus survive), the greater the need for capital. At some point in the process they have to get an influx to keep the lights on and the project moving forward. But if the bank won't back them, and venture capital laughs them off- who is left?  

The people that want it.  

You don't have to invest or assume the risk if you don't want to.  By the same token, life is short, and the costs invested at the user are tiny in the larger scheme.  $50 to $90 bucks invested in a title, a thousand hours invested, and still people come back raging for the idiosyncrasies and their pet points that are still in the development cycle and being done- all while things are getting concurrently fixed in real time should they break. 

Unless, of course, you've hit for Poweball and have a nice $1-5 million capital infusion you'd like to toss at a third party studio to help them jump start the process for a module.  You'll still be 3+ years out to competition from jump, but at least you won't seemingly have your heart strings pulled during the normal EA period since the man-hours can all now be paid for up front. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, lunaticfringe said:

Sir, this is a Wendy's.  

But seriously- in that ramble you touch on a number of factors, complaining about what may in fact be the key, but not effectively identifying it:

Those guys from upstairs- the suits.  You know why they're the suits?  Because they answer to the board, and to the shareholder.  The answering and decision making takes place because if the shareholders aren't placated in seeing the value in the firm, valuation is lost, access to financing evaporates, and nobody gets paid- which means nobody has games to play, all because nobody works from the ground up for free. 

The mention of Hollis isn't as compelling an argument as you think, frankly, because he came up in the era when one or two kids fresh out of college could produce content that could make a massive return in the early and mid-80s. Sid Meier wrote Hellcat Ace alone in 10 weeks and MicroProse turned its first profit two months later.  Three years after Hollis signed on they broke $10 million in annual sales. 

That doesn't scale to today, and not remotely in this genre.  Sorry, but I'm not interested in 320x200 pixel resolution sprite-based graphics and paper thin gameplay and modeling, zero connectivity to anyone that isn't at the same desktop and no interoperability between titles.  That might work for somebody's nostalgia-laden Steam upload for $3.99, but that doesn't (literally or figuratively) fly here. 

So what happens to the guys in the middle?  Who have the skills and specialization to break through, but can't secure the financing (and no, nobody is venture financing the serious flight sim genre)?  Software licenses cost money.  If you want a shot at seriously producing a product, you need a core who maintain it as their day to day, who bring the talents and experience required to have the drive and best chances of getting it out the door- that means they need to get paid as their 9-5. 

And that's just the core 3 to 5 people.  The bigger the scope, the more rapid the expectations to complete (and thus survive), the greater the need for capital. At some point in the process they have to get an influx to keep the lights on and the project moving forward. But if the bank won't back them, and venture capital laughs them off- who is left?  

The people that want it.  

You don't have to invest or assume the risk if you don't want to.  By the same token, life is short, and the costs invested at the user are tiny in the larger scheme.  $50 to $90 bucks invested in a title, a thousand hours invested, and still people come back raging for the idiosyncrasies and their pet points that are still in the development cycle and being done- all while things are getting concurrently fixed in real time should they break. 

Unless, of course, you've hit for Poweball and have a nice $1-5 million capital infusion you'd like to toss at a third party studio to help them jump start the process for a module.  You'll still be 3+ years out to competition from jump, but at least you won't seemingly have your heart strings pulled during the normal EA period since the man-hours can all now be paid for up front. 

Hey, Duder brought the topic back up 2 MONTHS later. 

I don't want to hear corporate excuses. And I don't want to hear crying about the "Middle Guys" That's what Indy Games exist for. And What I definitely see as a significant danger to the whole gaming industry is this Enterprise style moronic AGILE development model. This isn't a Lifetime product, it's a game. A little bit of Early Access to basically "Gamma Test" the product is fine with a clear outlay of what is and is not working. But, to think buying in to help the developer DECIDE what their actual project will be is crazy talk. AGILE is just a fancy word for unending Mission Creep in a game. 

And I know that Deep down DCS is technically just an off shoot of an enterprise solution for real training software. But, to release a product 3 YEARS early with no concrete plan for completion, into an infrastructure that is in a constant state of seemingly random change, that's just asking for problems down the line. Here in DCS or the last few years of blitheringly incompetent AAA console releases. If you can even BUY the hardware for any of it. 


Edited by RustBelt
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey IronMike, you might be unable to comment on this currently, but I remember y’all gave us an update, I think it was on your Facebook page back in July, and one of the comments on it mentioned y’all were working on the ALR-45 sounds, which when done was one of the last major hurtles for the Early F-14A, and Iranian version. How is that work going?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/19/2022 at 6:37 AM, tms0018 said:

Hey IronMike, you might be unable to comment on this currently, but I remember y’all gave us an update, I think it was on your Facebook page back in July, and one of the comments on it mentioned y’all were working on the ALR-45 sounds, which when done was one of the last major hurtles for the Early F-14A, and Iranian version. How is that work going?

Am i wrong or this is F-14 Performance/FM Development Status + Guided Discussion?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok maybe it was not the entirely right subforum to post this question in, but I would argue that RWR development will affect the F-14s performance. Which is why I thought it would fit here in the first place. 

More importantly, if you are mad/annoyed with the post because you don't think it belongs here, please ignore it and post something about the flight model development to get the discussion "back on track". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, tms0018 said:

Ok maybe it was not the entirely right subforum to post this question in, but I would argue that RWR development will affect the F-14s performance. Which is why I thought it would fit here in the first place. 

More importantly, if you are mad/annoyed with the post because you don't think it belongs here, please ignore it and post something about the flight model development to get the discussion "back on track". 

You have a very simple way to follow if you need answers: open a thread and ask your questions 🙂

This is already a very difficult thread even without OT 🙂 Thanks


Edited by maxsin72
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, tms0018 said:

...I would argue that RWR development will affect the F-14s performance.

It's about aircraft performance as in engines' thrust, airframe drag, acceleration, turn rates, etc. Read the OP. Hope it's clear now 🙂

  • Thanks 1

🖥️ Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX3060   🥽 Rift S   🕹️ T16000M HOTAS   ✈️ FC3, F-14A/B, F-15E   ⚙️ CA   🚢 SC   🌐 NTTR, PG, Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

More than one year has been passed since the last update and the FM is still underperforming in acceleration, about 2 years have been passed since the FM update that heavily tanked the F14B  and about 3 months has been passed, since HB told us they will work on FM. So please, please and again please don't tell me to be patient, a huge amount of time has been passed 🙂

I think now it's time to tell us something of concrete, sorry but it's no more time to be patient and still wait other years 🙂

Thank you

 


Edited by maxsin72
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, maxsin72 said:

More than one year has been passed since the last update and the FM is still underperforming in acceleration, about 2 years have been passed since the FM update that heavily tanked the F14B  and about 3 months has been passed, since HB told us they will work on FM. So please, please and again please don't tell me to be patient, a huge amount of time has been passed 🙂

I think now it's time to tell us something of concrete, sorry but it's no more time to be patient and still wait other years 🙂

Thank you

 

 

The fact simply remains that @fat creason is busy with his normal job, and until he has time to take up the matter again, we need to be patient, all of us together. We don't want to give this to someone else, because this is his baby. The margin is not so big to have any really severe impact, and I think we all owe it to him to simply sit tight, until he has some space to breathe again. Thank you for your kind understanding and tremendous patience. 🙂

  • Like 8

Heatblur Simulations

 

Please feel free to contact me anytime, either via PM here, on the forums, or via email through the contact form on our homepage.

 

http://www.heatblur.com/

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, IronMike said:

The fact simply remains that @fat creason is busy with his normal job, and until he has time to take up the matter again, we need to be patient, all of us together. We don't want to give this to someone else, because this is his baby. The margin is not so big to have any really severe impact, and I think we all owe it to him to simply sit tight, until he has some space to breathe again. Thank you for your kind understanding and tremendous patience. 🙂

Thank you for your kind reply

I understand and i hope that fat creason will have soon the necessary time to do it, otherwise i understand he need time for his life but, in this case, it would be necessary that someone else will do the job.

When you fight in BFM also few degrees in a turn could make the difference between life or death 🙂

So it is not a question of severe impact, also a mild impact could lead to a lost fight and, as you can see, almost nobody is still using F14 in BFM tournaments in the last 2 years, and this is very sad.

Thank you

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, maxsin72 said:

 

So it is not a question of severe impact, also a mild impact could lead to a lost fight and, as you can see, almost nobody is still using F14 in BFM tournaments in the last 2 years, and this is very sad.

 

With enough practice the F-14 can win BFM against any DCS Module.  Period.  If no one is using it that is because they don't want to put in the time to become untouchable.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Spurts said:

With enough practice the F-14 can win BFM against any DCS Module.  Period.  If no one is using it that is because they don't want to put in the time to become untouchable.

You don't even know what are you talking about... What you have written is correct only if you change "F14" with "F18".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, maxsin72 said:

You don't even know what are you talking about... What you have written is correct only if you change "F14" with "F18".

And your statement proves my point.  I have dominated F/A-18s in the F-14 because it can generate much more lift for tighter turn radii, you just have to practice to be able to still control it.  You have to practice AoA control, using rudders, knowing when to use cross control lateral stick inputs, knowing when you can and cannot put the big flaps down.  In the Hornet the FBW nannies do all the work for you but also limit your capability.  The F-14 is more capable, but it is not easy to get and use that capability.  The Hornet is a very dangerous opponent and is very easy to use which means even those with lower skills/experience can do great, but the F-14 can do more in the hands of someone who knows how to wring everything out of it.  In the hands of a novice, or someone who tries to fly it like it's an F/A-18, the F-14 is more dangerous to the pilot than the opponent.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, maxsin72 said:

Thank you for your kind reply

I understand and i hope that fat creason will have soon the necessary time to do it, otherwise i understand he need time for his life but, in this case, it would be necessary that someone else will do the job.

When you fight in BFM also few degrees in a turn could make the difference between life or death 🙂

So it is not a question of severe impact, also a mild impact could lead to a lost fight and, as you can see, almost nobody is still using F14 in BFM tournaments in the last 2 years, and this is very sad.

Thank you

Replacing an expert with a new person does not mean that the changes are implemented any sooner, quite the opposite.

  • Like 4
full_tiny.pngfull_tiny.png
full_tiny.png

"Cogito, ergo RIO"
Virtual Backseaters Volume I: F-14 Radar Intercept Officer - Fifth Public Draft
Virtual Backseaters Volume II: F-4E Weapon Systems Officer - Internal Draft WIP

Phantom Phamiliarisation Video Series | F-4E/F-14 Kneeboard Pack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...