not planned Why don't allow to download a "DEMO" version of the Apache, as it is now?

[daemon1808]

First of all, I don't want this thread to turn into a fight between those who prefer to wait and those who prefer to have at least something to play now (and I don't pretent another thread to flame ED either)
I only want to offer respectfully a mixed option, that can please both sides of the table.

Before explaing what I mean with "DEMO", some points to be considered:
1) Yes, we understand the delay. 2020 and 2021 have been hard years for all of us. Many have lost friends, relatives, had the COVID, etc. (I am an IT project manager myself, and I fully understand your situation)
    Said that... I don't know, but the product seems enjoyable enough to me, based on testers comments and Wags videos.
2) NO, what I propose it is not the same as the "early access" version. The problem with DCS "early access" is that people have high expectations about EA product. 
    This is because most of the players use Open Beta, many of the products are "early access" for years (and even when they come out "early access" state, they are not finished) and nearly all the learning curve for a new module in DCS is done in EA state.
    So EA is an euphemism for v1.X and people want EA with a lot of quality. So DEMO is not EA.
3) NO, this is not the same escenario as what happened with F-16 release. IMHO the problem with the F-16 was not about the quality, but the expectations and lack of information before the release.
    People was expecting at least 80%-90% of the EA "you will have" list achieved, and nobody told different before the release. So, when the EA come out with all the fanfares related with an EA release, many where highly dissapointed.
        And what is worse, they did not know what to expect in the near future ("having into account other EA rate of updates, is this going to be like this for months, years or what?").
        Proof of this is, as a few weeks goes by and they verify that the module was not forgotten but is constantly updated, the complains almost disappear soon.
4) If you prefer to wait for the EA version, just do not download the DEMO. For myself (and I think for many others too) I prefer to have something now to play, enjoy and learn some systems, than wait 2-3 months to have it and spend 1-2 months playing in my spare time to have enough skills to enjoy it.

Then, what I propose is allow to download a DEMO for those that have purchased EA:
1) Maintain your timeline. Maintanin that EA discount, maintain Wags demostrative videos, etc. Just give us the posibilitiy to download it (and, please, for STEAM users too. Do not punish us )
2) Give us a real list of what can be done and not for this DEMO. At the Apache is as it is now, you don't have to guess it and deal with the failure in the expectations when the DEMO is downloaded.
        "You will be able to fly around, use the head mounted display, gun down targets, use hellfires, hover, crash, use 40% of computerized funcionalities... or whatever"
        "You will not be able to cold start, buddy lase, use datalink, use multicrew, use AI, damage model is not good so wou will not be killed by missiles, expect close to desktop 50% of the flights... or whatever."
3) Allow it only in single player. Just to avoid nearly-imposible-to-kill Apaches (as happened with the F-16 in MP)         
4) Since this is a DEMO, be clear that it will not be updated. Is only a cookie to make us happy while we wait for the "full" EA. 

This way you'll have both sides of the table "happy" (and those that are not, will not be happy whatever you do).
And, even having to change your deadline again because any reason, people were less disapointed because we already will have this "toy" version to play a couple of weeks or months.

Please consider it and thanks in advance

[Bri01]

I suggested this a while back. Had no problem with f16 when it was released. It had some major problems but I knew it was EA. If they released it it they would find a lot of bugs quicker. If people would report bugs and not complain about features missing. My .02 cents

[EightyDuce]

Simply because some people will still complain about bugs/lack of "promised" features and demand action. Then, they'll continue to complain that fixes are taking too long or ED isn't listening to "customers".

Same reason we can't have nice things.... People.

Edited January 22, 2022 by EightyDuce

[TZeer]

"Demo" version as you call it is the early access.

EA is already an unfinished product, where you as a customer have the ability to purchase the module at a discount, but with the knowledge that the product will be missing features from the final version and bugs can be expected to some degree. That's also why it is released on the open beta version of DCS first, to iron out any obvious bugs that may have slipped, before it's released on the final build.

The "problem" is that some treat open beta as a final build sometimes. Or gotten used to running open beta. So when new modules need some extra love before letting it out in the open beta build, they already forget they are getting the module way earlier then if they would have to wait for a final build release, or module being 100% complete.

Anyone purchasing EA modules should be well aware of what they are buying and time of release is not set in stone.

Also, diverting resources to push a "demo" build so close to the actual release, just to please some peeps who clearly have not read what EA is about, would be poor management of resources.

 

 

[hannibal]

my dooooode.

instead of taking resources for a demo let them finish their early access.

we lucky to even get early access rather waiting for full product.. if anything the early access is the demo, sir

 

if u didnt follow the F16 release, they dont want to repeat that.

[FZG_Immel]

1 hour ago, hannibal said:

my dooooode.

instead of taking resources for a demo let them finish their early access.

we lucky to even get early access rather waiting for full product.. if anything the early access is the demo, sir

 

if u didnt follow the F16 release, they dont want to repeat that.

not if you pay before hand, nope. has nothing to do with luck

[EightyDuce]

Still blows my mind that people pay money, knowing full well they're paying for early access whenever it is released, then complain that things get delayed and that they are owed a product because they paid for early access, cursing ED for "never releasing early access on time". Then the same people buy another EA module and restart the cycle.

I'm over here wondering where people are getting all of this free time to sit around and have nothing to do if a DCS EA module isn't released when projected.

[Cab]

"Why don't allow to download a "DEMO" version of the Apache, as it is now?"

Because people will treat it like the "real" version and complain accordingly.

Just like they can't accept the difference between the Beta and Stable versions of the game.

[daemon1808]

sorry, but you haven´t understood it.

I´m not suggesting taking resources to develop a demo, or build a package with only some functionalities among all that are ready now... or something like that.

I´m suggesting to allow it to be downloaded as it is now and call it a "demo". There is no need to divert a significant amount  of resources from devopment. ED only have to "deploy" it Should be easy. Maybe 1 day of work?

No, again, a demo is not an EA. Demos has existed from the very begining of the computer games. EA versions not.

EA are more complex than a demo. A demo usually consist on 1 stage of the game, or 5-15 minutes of gameplay, to allow users to take a first contact with the game. And in this context EA are updated frequently, but a demo don´t. (F-18, F-16, Hind are EA.... I wouldn´d dare to call them a demo)

So, the idea is deploy it as it is with no significant cost on resources or time. And leave as it is until the EA is finish.

Techically it shouldn´t be a big deal. The cost shouldn´d be a big deal. ED will not have more complains by doing it, posibly they will have less.

If ED have  another reasons to don´t do it, it´s ok. it is only a sugestion.

 

[Ironious]

We all want it now. ED knows what's best for their product. Have faith.

[daemon1808]

Again, please: Do not kidnap this thread for another "I have pay for this and I want what I have paid for"  vs "you have no right to complain because this is a EA"

This is a sugestion that can release some of the pressure on the Apache deadline. I´m pretty sure that it will not worse the current situation (i think)

[EightyDuce]

8 minutes ago, daemon1808 said:

Again, please: Do not kidnap this thread for another "I have pay for this and I want what I have paid for"  vs "you have no right to complain because this is a EA"

This is a sugestion that can release some of the pressure on the Apache deadline. I´m pretty sure that it will not worse the current situation (i think)

Unfortunately it won't do what you want it to do because, well, it already exists and is called Early Access. It is a means to "release some of the pressure on the XXXXXXX deadline" for a finished product and attempt to quell the loud masses who are foaming at the mouth for the product (while at the same time provide additional cash flow for continued development). A DEMO for an early release will only create more "bad press" as people cry about lack of features in said demo as continue to bug the devs for release of Early Access/Finished Product.

 

I think you're underestimating the self-entitlement and need for instant gratification of some of our more "vocal" folks.

 

ED, keep on keeping on.

Edited January 22, 2022 by EightyDuce

[FZG_Immel]

1 hour ago, Steel Jaw said:

Your evidence of this alleged malfeasance?

Pro tip:  you have none.

I have none, you are right. but im not stupid enough to not see things that are evident

[Cathnan]

I get what you mean, but I guess it's not feasible because people are people. Not matter what the communication is, there will be people who complain because X, y, z is missing and a,b,c is bugged. And they will be loud. Loud enough for it not being worth it.
And iirc quite a while back Wags gave an interview in which he explained how EA came to be. It was basically the reasoning behind your demo idea. People were bugging them because they wanted to have it, no matter the state it's in. So in a way we do have the demos you are taking about. Just in a more polished way than you are talking about.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[hannibal]

lets keep positive

we already have a toxic culture from the AAA studios.. let us no bring it here.

the ED team already shared what they shared. reality is a demo is not happening.

ppl dont like should have not have put money into it.

lets just be patient and let the team do what they have to do and be supportive.

amazon spoiled this generation.

most have issues with how ED runs things, i mean they can run off to MSFS... what we have is what we have.

be grateful for what we have.

i still enjoy tomcat and the existing modules.

come on guys

well be in out AH64s soon.. 

[FZG_Immel]

1 hour ago, hannibal said:

lets keep positive

we already have a toxic culture from the AAA studios.. let us no bring it here.

the ED team already shared what they shared. reality is a demo is not happening.

ppl dont like should have not have put money into it.

lets just be patient and let the team do what they have to do and be supportive.

amazon spoiled this generation.

most have issues with how ED runs things, i mean they can run off to MSFS... what we have is what we have.

be grateful for what we have.

i still enjoy tomcat and the existing modules.

come on guys

well be in out AH64s soon.. 

I disagree. ED is guilty of giving a false date. ppl put money because they were given term. issues can happen, and the first delay was more than acceptable. the second delay proves the first date was clearly never meant to be respected in the first place.                                      

[Remco]

For the most part the type of people that you try to appease with this demo idea are the same type of people that will complain regardless. It solves nothing.

Edited January 22, 2022 by Remco

[BIGNEWY]

please remember the forum rules when posting, thread cleaned of 1.10 violation, please keep the feedback constructive. 

[daemon1808]

10 people are customers. 5 people are happy waiting because they want "100% quality". 3 people are unhappy waiting, and don´t care if they have "50% quality" at this stage. 2 people will complain anyway

ED release a demo

5 people do not download the demo and keep waiting happily. 3 people are happy with the demo. 2 people will complain

2 is less than 5

 

Again, ok if ED have their own reasons to do not deploy a demo version meanwhile we keep on waiting a couple of months. But do not use the "people will complain anyway", because it is not true for all of us

[BIGNEWY]

45 minutes ago, FZG_Immel said:

I disagree. ED is guilty of giving a false date. ppl put money because they were given term. issues can happen, and the first delay was more than acceptable. the second delay proves the first date was clearly never meant to be respected in the first place.                                      

We share our planned date, as we have needed to adjust those dates based on project status we have informed you all. Its that simple, no false information, and claiming such is not welcome here. 

[llOPPOTATOll]

Theres a reason why closed betas exist

[EightyDuce]

42 minutes ago, daemon1808 said:

10 people are customers. 5 people are happy waiting because they want "100% quality". 3 people are unhappy waiting, and don´t care if they have "50% quality" at this stage. 2 people will complain anyway

ED release a demo

5 people do not download the demo and keep waiting happily. 3 people are happy with the demo. 2 people will complain

2 is less than 5

 

Again, ok if ED have their own reasons to do not deploy a demo version meanwhile we keep on waiting a couple of months. But do not use the "people will complain anyway", because it is not true for all of us

Unfortunately your math doesn't add up when it comes to internet warriors.

While 2 is less the 5, the 2 will make exponentially more negative noise online than the positive/silent 5. Which creates a situation where a newcomer may be dissuaded from DCS all together because of the loud minority spewing whiny garbage all over the web. And just all around create drama.

Edited January 22, 2022 by EightyDuce

[BIGNEWY]

We will never be able to please everyone, our current approach of using early access is the best way for us and you to see development in progress. 

But we have to be sure it is ready for the early access with enough features working that you can hit the ground running and enjoy it. 

Then your feedback and bug reports during early access help us make the product better. 

 

thanks

[daemon1808]

14 minutes ago, EightyDuce said:

Unfortunately your math doesn't add up when it comes to internet warriors.

While 2 is less the 5, the 2 will make exponentially more negative noise online than the positive/silent 5. Which creates a situation where a newcomer may be dissuaded from DCS all together because of the loud minority spewing whiny garbage all over the web. And just all around create drama.

 

So, you said that the 2 complaining people are complaining less for the delay than they will complain for a demo version?

I disagree. And proof of that is the offtopic in this same threat ^_^

12 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said:

We will never be able to please everyone, our current approach of using early access is the best way for us and you to see development in progress. 

But we have to be sure it is ready for the early access with enough features working that you can hit the ground running and enjoy it. 

Then your feedback and bug reports during early access help us make the product better. 

 

thanks

Ok, thanks Bignewy. It's a pity

[Steel Jaw]

WTF is wrong with people nowadays.  This thread:  same ol same ol.