Patch delay discussion and news

[Major_Mayhem]

14 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

Stable Version

Current version number: 2.9.5.55918

Next planned update: To be announced 
 

Dear All,

We regret to inform you that additional time is required to thoroughly test the recent fixes, necessitating another delay. We will communicate the new patch date as soon as the tasks are completed.

Thank you for your understanding and continued support.

Eagle Dynamics

 

[Hotdognz]

1 hour ago, Slippa said:

At the risk of getting myself another 40pts for sharing my opinion I’d like to know where we’re supposed to be getting ‘official’ news on everything?

I don’t use discord, never had a FB or Twitter account but I have paid a fair few quid on DCS. I’d have thought this would be the place to go?

I’m not bothered about waiting for updates or whatever so long as they’re dealt with better. Setting dates and making a big deal of it is setting yourselves up for all the nonsense. Having to go hunting to find out what’s happening isn’t what I wanna be doing so I don’t, I come here.

Thanks to everyone for reading, apologies if anyone feels offended or upset and I wish everyone all the very best. 

Im with you I think this should be the place to come for proper updates, you wouldn't want to any where near the ED Discord anyway its full of 12 year old's in the main channel anyway, a couple of the specific topic channels are ok though in small doses.

[MAXsenna]

My .2 Cents worth, 
No option, but to wait... safely released software and working, is my favorite kind of waiting...In the mean time; I will build my Sim-Fab Rotor style seat.
https://simfab.com/product/simfab-rotorcraft-edition-cockpit/
shameless plug...
I seen lots of seats at the Flight Sim Expo, and this one is the best so far, highly modular..

Looks sweet! Congrats, and enjoy your weekend!

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

So, definitely not going to take the time to read through all the drama that this has caused, but I will second the motion of stop announcing a date you’re going to release something until it’s ready to go.
I like a lot of people am a heavy mod user in my personal use of the system, so when getting ready for an update, I disable all my mods and update on a clean install.  The process to reenable them takes hours.  So, now that I disabled them all this morning, prior to this thread being posted…well, you know where I’m going.
Lesson learned though, next time I won’t disable everything until I know that the update/patch is live.
How about you get your patch or update, or product ready to be released and then announce that it will be released in 72 hrs…

Which mod manager are you using that spends hours doing this? Honest question, because that doesn't make sense to me.
Cheers!

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[MAXsenna]

Im with you I think this should be the place to come for proper updates, you wouldn't want to any where near the ED Discord anyway its full of 12 year old's in the main channel anyway, a couple of the specific topic channels are ok though in small doses.

Agree! I use Discord, while I rarely enter ED's for the same reasons.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[RichCotte]

7 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

Which mod manager are you using that spends hours doing this? Honest question, because that doesn't make sense to me.
Cheers!

OvGME

My load time is most likely a product of the fact I store all my mods and liveries on my NAS, not a local drive. So, especially if I'm loading to my laptop over wifi vs my desktop over CAT6, the time to load all mods and liveries can in fact take more than 2.5 hours.

[zildac]

OvGME
My load time is most likely a product of the fact I store all my mods and liveries on my NAS, not a local drive. So, especially if I'm loading to my laptop over wifi vs my desktop over CAT6, the time to load all mods and liveries can in fact take more than 2.5 hours.

Yeah, I think I'd be looking at an alternative solution if it were me. Like just some additional local or even USB attached storage.

[YoYo]

For ED - maybe it's worth considering whether the current policy is good, because as you can see, it simply doesn't work. Unfortunately, for the last 2-3 months, basically everything has been postponed (I think only Kiowa was on time).

Maybe it's better to adopt the strategy that is in MSFS, so:

1/ SimUpdate - patches,

2/ World/Content update - maps, new content, new modules, but not improvements (based on the current SDK from the last patch)

Of course such a „World Update” requires a new version of DCS, but it does not contain improvements that can break DCS and other things. This approach will allow for more flexibility, while not affecting the release of an expansion, campaigns, or anything else (new content) that is bug-free.

Personally, I understand that some improvements could have messed something up, but this just shows that the current policy is bad, because it causes ED to miss the deadline, and it causes frustration for people who bought something and don't get it on time. 

So, maybe the strategy proposed by Microsoft is better - in the other times new things come out, and other times there are patches with fixes. thanks to this, the patch does not affect the timing of new modules which are ok.

A request to consider whether it can be separated into SimUpdate and Content update (without improvements) for the future. I think the division in MSFS (SimUpdate / Content update - the first one contains engine fixes and is released less frequently, the second is new content.) suits me better, at least it's a bit more predictable and less painful if you have to wait, and on the other hand it gives more flexibility for the publisher.

Edited July 5, 2024 by YoYo

[Blazkovitch]

1 minute ago, YoYo said:

For ED - maybe it's worth considering whether the current policy is good, because as you can see, it simply doesn't work. Unfortunately, for the last 2-3 months, basically everything has been postponed (I think only Kiowa was on time).

Maybe it's better to adopt the strategy that is in MSFS, so:

1/ SimUpdate - patches,

2/ World/Content update - maps, new content, new modules, but not improvements

Of course such a „World Update” requires a new version of DCS, but it does not contain improvements that can break DCS and other things. This approach will allow for more flexibility, while not affecting the release of an expansion, campaigns, or anything else (new content) that is bug-free.

Personally, I understand that some improvements could have messed something up, but this just shows that the current policy is bad, because it causes ED to miss the deadline, and it causes frustration for people who bought something and don't get it on time. 

So, maybe the strategy proposed by Microsoft is better - in the other times new things come out, and other times there are patches with fixes. thanks to this, the patch does not affect the timing of new modules which are ok.

I believe that this approach is doable only when nothing in the module depends on new core features. And even then it’s not bulletproof - SU15 has been delayed multiple times. If hordes of devs and PMs in MS are unable to properly estimate amount of work and even then some bugs pop up then how do you think ED can do is? 

Geeez, I really hope people from the forum will never get anyone pregnant because pregnancies have a tendency to not follow the schedule. Not to mention late periods…Too soon?
 

[YoYo]

18 minutes ago, Blazkovitch said:

I believe that this approach is doable only when nothing in the module depends on new core features. And even then it’s not bulletproof - SU15 has been delayed multiple times. If hordes of devs and PMs in MS are unable to properly estimate amount of work and even then some bugs pop up then how do you think ED can do is? 

Geeez, I really hope people from the forum will never get anyone pregnant because pregnancies have a tendency to not follow the schedule. Not to mention late periods…Too soon?
 

But postponed SU15 didnt affect World Upade and new content notice (+ in Marketplace as well) and all it was on the time, here is a biggest problem. Generally, I had no problem with SU15 being postponed and tested (like patches for DCS), but I would be more angry if I didn't receive my product from pre order on time. Also modules cannot contain anything that the DCS SDK does not allow btw.

Edited July 5, 2024 by YoYo

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

Thanks for setting up a thread for whining and debate the injustices of complaining about rushing Cyberpunk 2077 out to the door. Kudos.  I am outta here. Tons of things to try and play on DCS and other sims. Bye!

[Blazkovitch]

27 minutes ago, YoYo said:

But postponed SU15 didnt affect World Upade and new content notice (+ in Marketplace as well) and all it was on the time, here is a biggest problem. Generally, I had no problem with SU15 being postponed and tested (like patches for DCS), but I would be more angry if I didn't receive my product from pre order on time.

World Update was not affected (although i'm not 100% sure if MS had published any concrete dates on the roadmap) but certain modules were - A320Neo was delayed together with the SU15. And we already saw an example that ED is capable of doing this - Kiowa comes to my mind. And even then people got mad beacause of some quirks in the flying model. 

But the solution is quite simple: don't preorder if you are unwilling to understand that delays can (and will happen). Don't buy EA if you are unwilling to wait for the features and accept the bugs. 

8 hours ago, SkateZilla said:

I've seen the Post by Chizh that leads one to believe this, and I'm pretty sure everyone is missing context and mis-interpreting his post,

I really don't care one way or another. His explanation seems reasonable - I'd rather have my tooth pulled than remove an already merged and tested piece of code knowing that it will be merged back in two weeks. 

Edited July 5, 2024 by Blazkovitch

[FR4GGL3]

I would say "take your time". DCS is usable and enjoyable as it is right now. It's better to have an usable "old" Version than a major bugged new Version.

[markturner1960]

13 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Except sometimes, a bug sneaks in that basically breaks the whole thing. Every time such a howler makes it into the patch, the community cries out (rightly) "How did it make it past QA!?". Well, now it didn't, they caught the potential howler in time. Myself, I'm glad that they caught it before it made it out.

Well, I have been playing DCS since 2015 and never NOT been able to use it because of a release that breaks the whole thing.........

 

Anyway, the simple point is that we all understand delays and reasons for them. Thats a given. We all understand EA and bugs .....Just manage it better by adopting a simple scenario of not giving release dates until a patch is completely tested with no showstopping bugs.....then give a date a week hence, test it some more, and release it!!! everyones happy!!! Its the continuingly being told one one thing and getting another that pisses people off.....dunno why ED cant see that.....

Edited July 5, 2024 by markturner1960

[Hotdognz]

What do we do if the patch is so big (as Wags eluded to it being) it keeps breaking stuff. :), soon or later they will need to remove stuff to get some content that is due out.

I like YoYo's idea, I think modules should be kept out of major patches unless they need the core updates to work, and have there own mid patch releases, I'm so glad the F4E, Kiowa and Kola wasn't dependent on this one.

Edited July 5, 2024 by Hotdognz

[YoYo]

1 hour ago, Blazkovitch said:

But the solution is quite simple

What planet are you from? 

Pre Order and EA are the main, main and again main policy for DCS. This policy is also focused on pricing strategy for Pre orders and EA. 2/3 (or even more) producs for DCS are EA still. Secondly, "not EA" status - does not guarantee anything (Kiowa example, issues are present too) just. EA only serves to make the developer assume that there may be bugs, and the customer accepts it and waits, it is convenient for the developer and safe (we have a discount for that, which is fine). It was also never the case that EA's policy presupposed failure to meet the deadline and it was not specified (maybe the F-15E exception). EA assumes bugs, but not lack of release. As far as we know, it is the changes and improvements are that cause the patch to be moved, not the new module (there are exceptions, of course, e.g. CH-47F), but that is understandable. However, I think the Afghanistan map is ok and ready for release, just like other things (new content), and the patch causes the whole thing to be moved.

Edited July 5, 2024 by YoYo

[Hotdognz]

This discussion topic says patch delay and news, have we received any news from ED other than wait for a news letter

[Blazkovitch]

1 minute ago, YoYo said:

What planet are you from? 

Pre Order and EA are the main, main and again main policy for DCS. This policy is also focused on pricing strategy for Pre orders and EA.

Same planet as you - I'm closer than you think   Coincidently, not buying EA is the best way to affect how ED does things. ED is counting on impatient people showing no restraints - I believe the term is "whales'

41 minutes ago, markturner1960 said:

Just manage it better by adopting a simple scenario of not giving release dates until a patch is completely tested with no showstopping bugs

There's no such thing as "no showstopping bugs". It is impossible to prove that the software is bug free.

[Dragon1-1]

52 minutes ago, markturner1960 said:

Well, I have been playing DCS since 2015 and never NOT been able to use it because of a release that breaks the whole thing.........

I do remember it being this bad once or twice in recent years. Usually that got patched quickly, and it didn't completely block the game for everyone, but they broke features a few times that basically made it not worth playing until the hotfix.

1 minute ago, Blazkovitch said:

There's no such thing as "no showstopping bugs". It is impossible to prove that the software is bug free.

This is what we call a "non sequitur". No bugs=/=no showstopping bugs. The latter is quite possible to prove, and tends to be quickly found out by community. A rivet being two centimeters off to the side, with AO for the corresponding hole visible nearby, is a bug. Game crashing when a certain module's wheels leave the ground is a showstopping bug.

[MAXsenna]

OvGME
My load time is most likely a product of the fact I store all my mods and liveries on my NAS, not a local drive. So, especially if I'm loading to my laptop over wifi vs my desktop over CAT6, the time to load all mods and liveries can in fact take more than 2.5 hours.

That makes sense, thanks. 1Gbps network?

Edit: Missed the bit about WiFi, now it makes very much sense. And BTW, Cat6 won't do you any good unless your hardware is up for it. An old Polo won't go any faster even if it got the whole Autobahn for itself.
Cheers!
Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[Blazkovitch]

38 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

This is what we call a "non sequitur". No bugs=/=no showstopping bugs. The latter is quite possible to prove, and tends to be quickly found out by community. A rivet being two centimeters off to the side, with AO for the corresponding hole visible nearby, is a bug. Game crashing when a certain module's wheels leave the ground is a showstopping bug.

How would you prove that the game does not crash after 01/01/2025? It is a showstopper, right? Of course, you could run the game with a clock set to a certain date in the future but I could add a bit steps to the scenario and then you would have to run the test for every module on every map with multiple changes to the clock and this is just impossible (or at least very expensive) to do. Also, certain showstoppers are caused by an environment, e.g. a Patch Tuesday could introduce a bug which would be detected in the last possible moment but would still necessitate a delay. 

 

54 minutes ago, YoYo said:

EA assumes bugs, but not lack of release.

EA assumes that it's up to the developers to determine when they are ready to release. Also, it is possible that the game will never go out of the Early Access. 

Edited July 5, 2024 by Blazkovitch

[Hell0]

Laugh if it came out tomorrow.

[falcon_120]

16 hours ago, Rogue Trooper said:

I can definitely see why Varjo got the hell out of the Public market and went back to the professional market only.

You've got the patience of a saint Bignewy

 

You think the professional market is more civilized/understand patience? I can tell you that being a contractor for some big and even medium companies can feel like hell, if you are not lucky. 

Edited July 5, 2024 by falcon_120

[SSP1]

16 часов назад, BIGNEWY сказал:

We know these delays are disappointing and we are sorry for them, but if we find issues that can not be fixed in time it would not be right to push the issue out to you folks. Delaying is the best option. 

thank you  

BIGNEW, please tell me how many more fools you have in store who are happy to be deceived by you, put likes under your pastes, do not notice (or pretend not to notice) how they are being led by the nose.

[bueno]

It's a software department. So they develop in Agile. At the end there is the QA. They test. Test means : test new code, new features, check if there is regression, sanity tests,...There is a lot. And sometimes, QA say NO! there is a problem so go back in Dev. But you cannot release WHEN you want. So maybe at the end of a sprint they cannot release and now we have to way the next one. How long is a sprint for ED ? I don't know (maybe they are not using sprint to dev...).

But whatever. I'm piloting a team of Dev too and trust me : it's BETTER to delay than to deliver a version with bugs, regression and side effects. 

[YoYo]

Just now, bueno said:

it's BETTER to delay than to deliver a version with bugs, regression and side effects. 

Everyone will agree on that.