please read change logs Frustrated: Are they ever going to fix the F16?

[TKNARMZ]

Several topics on it already. I stopped playing for about a month hoping they would have it fixed by now.  Came on here and left a report on the TWS/RWS/Dogfight modes a while back.  Was notified it's already been reported but I don't see anywhere if they are even trying to fix it.  I noticed they had a couple updates as well and still no fix.  I tried playing today and still issues, the comms stay on and won't shut up, I have to turn the comms volume down.  Sorry for venting.  I don't really use my pc for anything else.

 

 

[Tenkom]

I know it sucks. But if you want to play a fully working module you need to come back once it's out of early access. Maybe fly the Hornet or A-10? Or if you really want to fly the viper there are... other options.

[TKNARMZ]

9 hours ago, Tenkom said:

I know it sucks. But if you want to play a fully working module you need to come back once it's out of early access. Maybe fly the Hornet or A-10? Or if you really want to fly the viper there are... other options.

might switch to the hornet for a while.

[NineLine]

We are still very actively developing the Viper, and we in fact welcome and enjoy the user feedback to have us look at things that might not be up to snuff, this is one of the many reasons we do Early Access. So maybe take a break and try out the F/A-18C for a while, but trust me, we are not giving up or finished with the Viper at all.

Thanks

[TobiasA]

Tbh there haven't been many bugfixes on the Viper recently, and annoying things as not remembering the last radar mode that was broken several updates ago remain open for quite a long time.
 

[NineLine]

The last one was a little light, but I don't think it is fair to judge based on 1 patch, previous too that there were quite a few, and because of the new patch timeline it can take a little longer to get things out to everyone based on internal testing. 

August 14 (interim patch)

Fixed: RWS target symbols no longer show altitude when cursor is hovering over it 

August 9th (major patch)
Fixed: Crash during rearming in some cases.
Fixed: Freeze/CTD when selecting STN field in TNDL page, from dynamic spawn only
Fixed: FCR is detecting targets ignoring scan volume.
Fixed: HYD OIL PRESS and TO/LDG CONFIG lamp housing.
Fixed: Typo on throttle RNC - RNG.

July 22 (interim patch)
Fixed: Crash during rearming F-16C in some cases. 

July 11 (major patch)
Radar: Introduced false targets. They are caused mainly by internal receiver noise and ambient noises at receiver input. The radar internal circuits maintain false target rate constant with an average frequency of one false alarm per minute. 
Fixed: Сrash when switching weapons when using unlimited weapons.
Fixed: Crash when receiving SEAD Target into steerpoint 127.
Fixed: Crash using GBU-24.
Fixed: ACM modes stop working if you lose lock.
Fixed: Laggy HUD TD box.
Fixed: Level 5 gun piper.
Fixed: ACM lock lagging/lost.
Fixed: Bomb mode selection not updating dynamically.
Fixed: Unable to bug MSI tracks that are correlated to radar memory tracks.
Fixed: Non-selected AGM-65 seekers that are not in TRACK mode are not resetting to SLAVE or BORE modes.
Fixed: Search target hot lines don't work.
Fixed: AGM-65 can become non-space stabilised after launching.
Fixed: Elevation bar scan values are wrong in certain circumstances.
Fixed: Texture artefacts and geometry errors.
Fixed: Maverick seeker LOS slave to FPM at TMS Down Ignores SPI.
Fixed: TGP cannot change level setting in MGC mode.
Fixed: FCR "NONE" hides everything, including your own FCR tracks.
Fixed: FLCS TO/LDG Gains affected by weight-on-wheels.
Fixed: In external view, pilot helmet clips canopy when looking back.
Fixed: Inconsistencies with the JDAM AD CNTL settings.
Fixed: CBU-87/97 inconsistencies with CCIP/CCRP calculations.
Fixed: Impact Distance setup in SMS ripple is halved on impact.
Fixed: Need to reverse left arm patch orientation.
Fixed: TNDL Power resetting to HIGH in ME.
Fixed: HARM in POS missing leading zeros on bearing in HUD.
Fixed: AGM-65 in EO-VIS mode removes range scale after first launch.
Fixed: Switching AG Weapon on SMS page keeps delivery mode of previous selected AG weapon.
Fixed:  Able to move A-G radar cursor without SOI.
Fixed: Rename option on HSD CNTL page 2 to "A SMDL".
Note: Although not ready for this update, the Sniper Advanced Targeting Pods is in advanced development and planned for release later this year.

June 5th (F-4 interim patch))

Fixed: Сrash when switching weapons when using unlimited weapons
Fixed:  Reverse left arm patch orientation 
Fixed:  Bomb mode selection not updating dynamically

May 22 (F-4 Release)
 

Added new model pilot - work in progress.
Added  improved movements of the pilot head and torso - work in progress.
Added Maverick and HMCS Auto-Boresight, automatic for hot starts. Cold starts require manual boresight.
Fixed: Increased G-warmup effect time.
Added Bomb Fuze Options and Settings  from ME  - work in progress - missions where laser code is set to anything but default (1688) will need the code edited in Mission Editor using the new method. 
Fixed: Tuning the IFA alignment and further FIXes.
Fixed: Missing scale on the standby attitude indicator.
Fixed: GPS time starts at 00:00 when entering a mission.
Fixed: FCR Air to Air Header fix.
Fixed: Wheel friction imbalance.
Fixed: FCR target Min/Max altitudes inverted in negative antenna elevation.
Fixed: Handoff from TGP to TV-guided AGM-65's is partially functional using TMS Right.
Fixed: RWR displays radars in "Track" mode in the inner "Missile Launch" ring.
Fixed: CCRP lateral drop limit too small.
Fixed: Scan volume twitching around when bugged target near or beyond gimbal limit.
Fixed: RWR SYS Test no longer functions.
Fixed: True heading on ICP stuck at 00.
Fixed: Boresighting Mavericks is aligning with point mid air.
Fixed:  HSD zoom glitch.
Fixed:  Spotlight scan volume and EXP reference box snap from centre of display instead of appearing directly at cursor location.
Fixed: Entering OVRD while in spotlight search can cause radar to stop working.
Fixed: TGP does not take INS drift into account well (coordinates and height of the point changes).
Fixed: Rolls left under positive G.
Fixed: Search target hotlines don't work.
Fixed: RWS SAM cannot change radar range scale is designated inside an auto-range zone.
Fixed: Maverick seeker LOS Slave to FPM at TMS Down ignores SPI.
Fixed; Right MFD rocker switch labels incorrectly refer to Left MFD.
Fixed: JDAM with nose plugs fitted show 0 second AD in SMS by default.
Fixed: Exhaust "turkey feathers" graphical clipping/misaligned.
NOTE: The Sniper Advanced Targeting Pod is in active development for release later this year.

[_JMax]

Hopefully the F16 will get some fixes in the next patches. Might be because ED has taken over the Mig 21 and is is busy fixin' it..... 

[NineLine]

1 minute ago, _JMax said:

Hopefully the F16 will get some fixes in the next patches. Might be because ED has taken over the Mig 21 and is is busy fixin' it..... 

We havent taken over the MiG-21, so not sure what you mean. 

[_JMax]

Yes,I was just dreamin' it a bit. Just hopeful that such an important aircraft gets more updating etc. soon.....

[TobiasA]

My frustration is not caused by slow progress or something. It is things like the may update (?) that would have been pretty nice if it had not broken the radar mode memory, which might be fixed in the September patch (hopefully) which is five months. And the radar worked fine before. After a few months somebody asked for a track even though this was the third time it appeared on the forum in the bug section. Why do I even write these?

Otherwise, I appreciate the work going into the sandbox DCS and the progress to logistics and such. It's just the 16 that is frustrating from time to time.

[TobiasA]

However, I won't complain any further. I criticized the things I didn't like, and it is up to you what to do with it.

Overall, I appreciate DCS too much for being negative in total. There are more modules than the 16, and some day, even this one will be finished.

Have a nice day everyone. 

[XBlackstoneX]

23 hours ago, NineLine said:

We are still very actively developing the Viper, and we in fact welcome and enjoy the user feedback to have us look at things that might not be up to snuff, this is one of the many reasons we do Early Access. So maybe take a break and try out the F/A-18C for a while, but trust me, we are not giving up or finished with the Viper at all.

Thanks

New player here. I appreciate all your hard work!!!

[NineLine]

14 hours ago, TobiasA said:

However, I won't complain any further. I criticized the things I didn't like, and it is up to you what to do with it.

Overall, I appreciate DCS too much for being negative in total. There are more modules than the 16, and some day, even this one will be finished.

Have a nice day everyone. 

We appreciate the feedback, good and bad. We want you all to keep us honest and keep pushing us to be better. We only ever ask for it to be constructive and mature, which yours has always been as far as I can remember, so no worries at all. We do hear you even if it doesn't feel like it.

13 hours ago, XBlackstoneX said:

New player here. I appreciate all your hard work!!!

Thank you, we appreciate it. 

[dutchili]

Fixing newly introduced bugs doesn't improve customer satisfaction. Consider structured testing, also with your Beta testers. 

[BIGNEWY]

1 hour ago, dutchili said:

Fixing newly introduced bugs doesn't improve customer satisfaction. Consider structured testing, also with your Beta testers. 

Please do not blame the testers, they work very hard and find many issues, not all issues found can be fixed before a patch and sometimes we have to decide if we stop the whole patch for one issue or allow it to be fixed in a later one. 

I get it may not be ideal, no one likes bugs but try to understand the bigger picture and the complexity of what we do, not only with single modules but the whole of DCS and its core. 

thank you 

[dutchili]

IMHO it has nothing to do with customers understanding the bigger picture. It has to do with customers expecting a higher quality level than you are providing and not showing the improvements in quality that we ask for.

I am not blaming your beta testers. I am suggesting that you (as a company) should provide test scenario's to ensure the features work as intended.

Whether the software system is complex or not, has a huge history or not, engineers being of lower quality than you wish for, or whatever factors are in play, it remains a choice whether you deliver tested or non-tested software. Given your response it shows that you choose to deliver non-tested software. Without judgement, that is your choice. Similar to us choosing to still use it.

I truly hope you will introduce structured testing for your engineers, alfa testers and beta testers to fix long existing bugs and reduce the number of newly introduced bugs. 

[BIGNEWY]

5 hours ago, dutchili said:

IMHO it has nothing to do with customers understanding the bigger picture. It has to do with customers expecting a higher quality level than you are providing and not showing the improvements in quality that we ask for.

I am not blaming your beta testers. I am suggesting that you (as a company) should provide test scenario's to ensure the features work as intended.

Whether the software system is complex or not, has a huge history or not, engineers being of lower quality than you wish for, or whatever factors are in play, it remains a choice whether you deliver tested or non-tested software. Given your response it shows that you choose to deliver non-tested software. Without judgement, that is your choice. Similar to us choosing to still use it.

I truly hope you will introduce structured testing for your engineers, alfa testers and beta testers to fix long existing bugs and reduce the number of newly introduced bugs. 

We have both a large external test team and a smaller internal test team. When we prepare a new update, new features naturally receive the lion's share of the test efforts. Given the massive scale of DCS, we simply cannot test everything, and this was a big reason why we earlier had the Open Beta branches. During the course of update testing, there is quite a bit of gameplay testing done out side of the directed efforts, but sometimes things fall between the cracks given the enormity of the game. 

best regards 

bignewy 

 

[NineLine]

I think the OP was already answered so I am going to close this, keep the bug reports coming as you see them. Thanks all.