DCS Update discussion February 2024

[draconus]

8 hours ago, Dangerzone said:

...since there's been no announcements, so I suspect that the next patch won't give us new features, but just more tweaks, fixes and enhancements.

That's unfounded - they never announced every feature coming for the next update.

2 hours ago, NineLine said:

...the Yak was always a special module...

This sounds bad - do we have other "special" modules that can use such excuses for neglecting?

[BIGNEWY]

28 minutes ago, Hotdognz said:

Thanks for replying NL, but the the Yak is still early access according to your web site

There are still very active bug reports on items broken on the Yak52 with no attention too them at all, I'm sure you have logs with reports about bugs and broken stuff, well at least ED should if they are actively tracking bugs.

null

We are well aware of the issues and bugs for the Yak-52 but as Nineline mentioned they are not game breaking, please use the bugs forum section if you wish to report any more and we can add it to the system. Thank you 

4 minutes ago, draconus said:

That's unfounded - they never announced every feature coming for the next update.

Correct, always best to wait for the change logs for additions, fixes, and tweaks. 

As you are probably aware now we have a new INS/GPS system coming for the DCS:F-16C in the next patch planned now for the 10th April. 

[Hotdognz]

13 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said:

We are well aware of the issues and bugs for the Yak-52 but as Nineline mentioned they are not game breaking, please use the bugs forum section if you wish to report any more and we can add it to the system. Thank you 

Correct, always best to wait for the change logs for additions, fixes, and tweaks. 

As you are probably aware now we have a new INS/GPS system coming for the DCS:F-16C in the next patch planned now for the 10th April. 

Sorry BN, he mentioned it was not early access,  I pointed out it still was.

But really if ED is so aware of the bugs that affect the Yak52 why don't ED just fix them instead of asking for more bug reports on bugs that have posted and report a long time ago and finish the Yak52 off and remove it from EA, agreed they are not game breaking but are annoying at best to me and I'm your customer who purchased it in good faith, and still like to fly it, warts and all.

[BIGNEWY]

19 minutes ago, Hotdognz said:

Sorry BN, he mentioned it was not early access,  I pointed out it still was.

But really if ED is so aware of the bugs that affect the Yak52 why don't ED just fix them instead of asking for more bug reports on bugs that have posted and report a long time ago and finish the Yak52 off and remove it from EA, agreed they are not game breaking but are annoying at best to me and I'm your customer who purchased it in good faith, and still like to fly it, warts and all.

We do not have endless resources, everything we do requires free dev time and we have to work on priorities, those priorities may not align with what you think or what I think is important. The teams have a lot of work to do and the project managers are the best people to decide what work that is. 

thank you

[cfrag]

Just now, BIGNEWY said:

We are well aware of the issues and bugs for the Yak-52 but as Nineline mentioned they are not game breaking, please use the bugs forum section if you wish to report any more and we can add it to the system

I believe that the issue aren't the particulars of some bugs by themselves, but the perception that bugs, after being reported, aren't responded to adequately.

As a fellow Yak-52 owner (I own all modules, and am a strong supporter of ED and all things DCS) I'm sure I'm not the only one who read your January 26, 2020 statement that said

Quote

As mentioned in previous posts the team are aware and have set the goal of having the YAK 52 feature complete this year

Now, we may differ on the definition of "feature complete" but I think we can agree that the '52 still has some way to go. But again, the specifics aren't as important as the perception that too many things in DCS are moving slow, and ED's focus seemingly is on creating new modules rather than finishing existing. Since DCS's income stream is based on one-off sales of modules, that makes complete business sense: money spent on an obscure, released module like the '52 can generate only a tiny fraction of the expected return if it was invested in a new module with much greater mass appeal; 99% of all Yak-52 sales have likely already been made. That's heartbreaking to me, but understood. "Caveat Emptor" applies to anyone who enters the "Early Access Lottery" and I knew what I was getting into.

What I do find a bit irritating is what appears to be some attempts at gaslighting: claiming that everything is fine, and all that needs to be done is to report bugs in the proper forums and things will be perfect. I own, fly and love all DCS modules. Many of them have issues, and the time it takes to fix them does seem to greatly correlate with their module's popularity, meaning that known issues can linger for years in modules that aren't top sellers. 

I now see that ED have changed from a 4-week to a 6-week (currently it looks more like a 7 week) cycle. That's fine with me. I'm sure that ED understand that with longer cycles their customer's expectation rise as well. And people do get frustrated when, after eagerly browsing the change log, their pet peeve wasn't addressed again, and the next fix is at least 6 weeks away. That's bad. But it's worse when we hear from the perspective of ED that everything is actually fine, and all we need to do is merely report bugs in the forum and they will be addressed. Many aren't and unfortunately, too few are commented on by someone in authority at ED (and by "commented" I mean "acknowledged, reproduced, scheduled for fix"). That is what I feel chafes at people's minds (I'm speaking for myself, and reading the comments I think I am not alone). Mind you, I'm not accusing ED of being lazy (far from it), it's that many of us feel too little of the effort that ED pours into the modules that we bought. We'd love to hear more, and more frank, updates. Tell us if fixing a bug has low priority for ED. I would understand and manage my expectation accordingly. I think we can handle the truth  (admittedly, also browsing the comments, that's not a universal trait exhibited here). 

[Silver_Dragon]

2 hours ago, giullep said:

if I can express my opinion, I love ED and their products and I have almost all the modules, I preordered also the complete Afghanistan's map to support them..but precisely because I love this reality, my personal impression is that this year the usual dynamism that perhaps we were used to with the non-unified version is missing..I talking about video (Wags), update aupdates and new functions for modules, news information that revived the community and kept us constantly (every 2 or 3 weeks) more aware and interested..I won't deny that unfortunately lately I've been feeling a little bored and I've lost interest because everything seems more "static" to me. I hope it's just my impression and that the usual videos, additions, new systems for our modules will arrive soon...on the other hand, in the projects (all or almost all) in EA, it is these continuous updates that make it nice and interesting to follow their development and finance the project..

my reflection as a lover of the ED world

On fact, on the CasmoTV Afganistan map interview, Wags has talked about show your head more to answer more questions.

[BIGNEWY]

12 minutes ago, cfrag said:

I believe that the issue aren't the particulars of some bugs by themselves, but the perception that bugs, after being reported, aren't responded to adequately.

As a fellow Yak-52 owner (I own all modules, and am a strong supporter of ED and all things DCS) I'm sure I'm not the only one who read your January 26, 2020 statement that said

Now, we may differ on the definition of "feature complete" but I think we can agree that the '52 still has some way to go. But again, the specifics aren't as important as the perception that too many things in DCS are moving slow, and ED's focus seemingly is on creating new modules rather than finishing existing. Since DCS's income stream is based on one-off sales of modules, that makes complete business sense: money spent on an obscure, released module like the '52 can generate only a tiny fraction of the expected return if it was invested in a new module with much greater mass appeal; 99% of all Yak-52 sales have likely already been made. That's heartbreaking to me, but understood. "Caveat Emptor" applies to anyone who enters the "Early Access Lottery" and I knew what I was getting into.

What I do find a bit irritating is what appears to be some attempts at gaslighting: claiming that everything is fine, and all that needs to be done is to report bugs in the proper forums and things will be perfect. I own, fly and love all DCS modules. Many of them have issues, and the time it takes to fix them does seem to greatly correlate with their module's popularity, meaning that known issues can linger for years in modules that aren't top sellers. 

I now see that ED have changed from a 4-week to a 6-week (currently it looks more like a 7 week) cycle. That's fine with me. I'm sure that ED understand that with longer cycles their customer's expectation rise as well. And people do get frustrated when, after eagerly browsing the change log, their pet peeve wasn't addressed again, and the next fix is at least 6 weeks away. That's bad. But it's worse when we hear from the perspective of ED that everything is actually fine, and all we need to do is merely report bugs in the forum and they will be addressed. Many aren't and unfortunately, too few are commented on by someone in authority at ED (and by "commented" I mean "acknowledged, reproduced, scheduled for fix"). That is what I feel chafes at people's minds (I'm speaking for myself, and reading the comments I think I am not alone). Mind you, I'm not accusing ED of being lazy (far from it), it's that many of us feel too little of the effort that ED pours into the modules that we bought. We'd love to hear more, and more frank, updates. Tell us if fixing a bug has low priority for ED. I would understand and manage my expectation accordingly. I think we can handle the truth  (admittedly, also browsing the comments, that's not a universal trait exhibited here). 

We get it, and we are constantly feeding back to the team. 

Regarding the patch cycle, yes it will seem slightly longer now we have moved to a single public version, it is necessary as DCS is huge and requires a lot of testing, as you can see the testing works as we found issues that needs fixing before we can patch. 

Please also note that while the time between patches may seem slightly longer for some, those who were stable users only in the past are now getting patches quicker. 

thank you 

[buceador]

This is my 4th year of DCS, so in many ways I am late to the party! I was recently reviewing a couple of cinematic videos that I made back in 2020/21 and I was astounded how poor they looked compared to my more recent 'productions'.  It is easy to lose sight of how much has changed and how much has been improved upon in recent years. 

There are thousands of DCS acolytes with an equal number of opinions, agendas and personal desires as to what should take precedence.

Ultimately DCS is a hobby, a pastime, a diversion, sometimes an obsession but not actually essential to life! 

So, without being too sycophantic, for my part, thank you ED, looking forward to exciting times.

[Hiob]

7 minutes ago, buceador said:

.....but not actually essential to life! 

WHAT?! Say again....? 

[vgilsoler]

44 minutes ago, cfrag said:

I believe that the issue aren't the particulars of some bugs by themselves, but the perception that bugs, after being reported, aren't responded to adequately.

As a fellow Yak-52 owner (I own all modules, and am a strong supporter of ED and all things DCS) I'm sure I'm not the only one who read your January 26, 2020 statement that said

Now, we may differ on the definition of "feature complete" but I think we can agree that the '52 still has some way to go. But again, the specifics aren't as important as the perception that too many things in DCS are moving slow, and ED's focus seemingly is on creating new modules rather than finishing existing. Since DCS's income stream is based on one-off sales of modules, that makes complete business sense: money spent on an obscure, released module like the '52 can generate only a tiny fraction of the expected return if it was invested in a new module with much greater mass appeal; 99% of all Yak-52 sales have likely already been made. That's heartbreaking to me, but understood. "Caveat Emptor" applies to anyone who enters the "Early Access Lottery" and I knew what I was getting into.

What I do find a bit irritating is what appears to be some attempts at gaslighting: claiming that everything is fine, and all that needs to be done is to report bugs in the proper forums and things will be perfect. I own, fly and love all DCS modules. Many of them have issues, and the time it takes to fix them does seem to greatly correlate with their module's popularity, meaning that known issues can linger for years in modules that aren't top sellers. 

I now see that ED have changed from a 4-week to a 6-week (currently it looks more like a 7 week) cycle. That's fine with me. I'm sure that ED understand that with longer cycles their customer's expectation rise as well. And people do get frustrated when, after eagerly browsing the change log, their pet peeve wasn't addressed again, and the next fix is at least 6 weeks away. That's bad. But it's worse when we hear from the perspective of ED that everything is actually fine, and all we need to do is merely report bugs in the forum and they will be addressed. Many aren't and unfortunately, too few are commented on by someone in authority at ED (and by "commented" I mean "acknowledged, reproduced, scheduled for fix"). That is what I feel chafes at people's minds (I'm speaking for myself, and reading the comments I think I am not alone). Mind you, I'm not accusing ED of being lazy (far from it), it's that many of us feel too little of the effort that ED pours into the modules that we bought. We'd love to hear more, and more frank, updates. Tell us if fixing a bug has low priority for ED. I would understand and manage my expectation accordingly. I think we can handle the truth  (admittedly, also browsing the comments, that's not a universal trait exhibited here). 

+1, totally agree.

[Bucic]

15 minutes ago, Hiob said:

WHAT?! Say again....? 

[Beirut]

Ya gotta love that with all the talk of Strike Eagles and Phantoms, the Yak-52 still has such a fan base. 

[BIGNEWY]

8 minutes ago, Beirut said:

Ya gotta love that with all the talk of Strike Eagles and Phantoms, the Yak-52 still has such a fan base. 

Yak-52 is a lot of fun, I usually enjoy it for a Sunday VR relaxing flight

[Beirut]

3 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said:

Yak-52 is a lot of fun, I usually enjoy it for a Sunday VR relaxing flight

 

Yep. Excellent for Scenery Appreciation Day. 

[ngreenaway]

4 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

We are well aware of the issues and bugs for the Yak-52 but as Nineline mentioned they are not game breaking, please use the bugs forum section if you wish to report any more and we can add it to the system. Thank you 

The lack of even a rudimentary damage model arguably is . At minimum, it's a serious omission 

[Tom Kazansky]

3 hours ago, buceador said:

DCS is... not actually essential to life! 

wait a few years more of DCS and we speak gain

 

[draconus]

3 hours ago, cfrag said:

Since DCS's income stream is based on one-off sales of modules, that makes complete business sense: money spent on an obscure, released module like the '52 can generate only a tiny fraction of the expected return if it was invested in a new module with much greater mass appeal; 99% of all Yak-52 sales have likely already been made.

This doesn't include opportunity cost, ripple effect and churn rate - it doesn't happen overnight but I hope the "managers" know better. Sometimes new people ask around before buying - things like "hasn't been updated for years" or "5 years in, still EA" makes them think twice.

[SMH]

1 hour ago, ngreenaway said:

The lack of even a rudimentary damage model arguably is . At minimum, it's a serious omission 

I'd have bought it by now if not for that. Sends the absolute wrong message about product support. It rapidly becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy if they punish paying customers for not being numerous enough.

[cfrag]

42 minutes ago, draconus said:

This doesn't include opportunity cost, ripple effect and churn rate - it doesn't happen overnight but I hope the "managers" know better

I believe they do. No opportunity cost, ripple effect or churn rate will ever account for the disparity TODAY in unit sales of, say the Hornet or Viper versus the Yak-52. Let's be gracious and say the Hornet outsells the '52 by 10:1 (it's probably closer to 100:1 or worse). So any cent invested in the Yak has to overcome that 10x (or 100x) leverage to be financially viable. That is why investment in low-selling modules is so sparingly: ED must know that it's worth their investment. Those "feature complete" and "not game-breaking" references were spot-on an not random: they allow ED to focus on other modules that better 'earn their keep' (remember: all DCS sales are one-off, no steady income stream other than that). To have some 'neglected near-orphans' in your line-up (e.g. Yak-52) isn't as reputation-killing as people might think -- if enough other pieces in your line-up pick up the slack (Hornet, Viper, Apache, Hog). Just look at CA (shudder). Oh, yeah, and I own the Hawk too - and I'm still an ED/DCS fan (and slow learner / glutton for punishment?). We know that low-selling modules take longer to receive fixes, and we understand why. And yeah, I'll still get the 'Nook even though my Huey really needs some fixing. Oh, and I don't have a problem, I can quit DCS any time   

Edited April 4, 2024 by cfrag

[draconus]

1 hour ago, cfrag said:

To have some 'neglected near-orphans' in your line-up (e.g. Yak-52) isn't as reputation-killing as people might think -- if enough other pieces in your line-up pick up the slack (Hornet, Viper, Apache, Hog).

I'm reluctant to buy much more for DCS just because of such behavior. See how it spreads to other modules, thus sales? Let's see what comes with these new mystery products.

[cfrag]

13 minutes ago, draconus said:

I'm reluctant to buy much more for DCS just because of such behavior. See how it spreads to other modules, thus sales?

No, I really don't -- you have already made your purchases, and I suspect that you, like me, are way ahead on the curve in terms of purchases per average users. Technically, we are already written off as low potential buyers. New users -- now they are the ones that bring in cash because they are bushy-tailed hot-shots, not old, disillusioned and bitter types like you and I   New users want the hot stuff - Maverick's Hornet, an Eagle or Hog. Maybe later they'd get a Cat. And they hardly give a flying *&%! about a non-weaponized tandem seater with a single prop that you can't even (for lack of a damage model) use to ram other planes. They are Hotel Sierra pilots, and we are just sad downers that obsess about old stuff. Might as well sign up for Facebook or something. The world's harsh. I fly DCS because it still helps me make it a bit brighter. 

Edited April 4, 2024 by cfrag

[Hiob]

FFS..... it's about time the sun comes out. People are in deperate need of some vitamine D to brighten up the mood....... 

[Rudel_chw]

6 hours ago, buceador said:

It is easy to lose sight of how much has changed and how much has been improved upon in recent years. 

 

+1 ... I have to agree.

For example I've returned to the Viggen after a 6 years hiatus (I flew it a lot on its first year, 2017) ... and the new maps, lighting and weather effects make it feel almost like a brand-new module and thus I'm having a blast re-learning it, in anticipation to flying it on the Kola map (fingers crossed on having it arrive soon)   

[buceador]

23 minutes ago, Hiob said:

FFS..... it's about time the sun comes out. People are in deperate need of some vitamine D to brighten up the mood..

It's very sunny where I live...

[NineLine]

8 hours ago, draconus said:

 

This sounds bad - do we have other "special" modules that can use such excuses for neglecting?

Why does it sound bad? And how is it an excuse it's simply a matter of not having the manpower right now to focus much attention on it? For any shortcomings, it might still have It's still my go-to for just simple flights around maps. I have not seen anything with it that would block my enjoyment of the aircraft. Do I want to see some things polished up on it? Sure but this goes for almost every module I look hard enough.

But now we are waaaaaay off topic:

 

Quote

 

DCS Update discussion February 2024

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/news/changelog/

 

This thread was meant to discuss things in the changelog. Any bugs or issues with the Yak or anything else, please take those to those sections. Thanks.