Iraq Preview & Pre-Order

[BIGNEWY]

1 minute ago, mikey69420 said:

Just to make it clear, when on the product page it is written:

"Eagle Dynamics and all of our third parties strive to make this period as short as possible. Once the module exits Early Access, you will automatically have the Release version."

Does this mean that your company has a contractual obligation towards the customers to develop the product out of early access or are you not obligated to do so ? 

We share our plans for early access, once those plans and tasks have been completed we usually take a product out of early access and continue to tweak and refine the product.  

[buceador]

9 minutes ago, Thamiel said:

EA is akin to a builder asking for a proportion of the payment in advance in order to purchase the necessary materials (*), this is common practice in the construction world, [...]

Agreed!

[BIGNEWY]

Just now, HILOK said:

If you’re not making money, you don’t have a product

i feel like these 2 posts need more attention:

at some point, i fear both ED and we, the customers, may have to face that the only way forward might be to pause on new modules and go with some kind of subscription model. this would allow ED at last to focus on fixing and finishing what's already there.
-maybe not the worst thing, considering many people, as they say, buy all modules not to use them but simply to support DCS

Please lets not derail this thread with the subscription topic, it is not something that would work for us and not planned. 

thank you 

[mikey69420]

10 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said:

We share our plans for early access, once those plans and tasks have been completed we usually take a product out of early access and continue to tweak and refine the product.  

Thanks but you haven't really answered my question, is the customer legally protected if your company or a third party decides to either modify the original plans for early access or to straight up not deliver on them ?
Basically, does buying into EA guarantees (legally) that the product will developed up to the original plans of early access ?

[JohnRedcorn]

Well I have to say my word. It will be a little off-topic but I just want to say what I'm not happy about in this game. (I will back to topic at the end of my post, I promise )

The huge problem for me is an AI. It is bad in a way that it can't perform even a simple task.

What is even more annoying, that ED always ruining AI even more.

Just a little story. I have tried creating a free campaign for this game twice. The first one I have tried to create on Caucasus map. The second one, on Syria map. Both times I spent around month and half to make these 4 - 5 missions work as intended, fighting the AI stupidity. And then both times the update comes and ruined everything, because ED has changed something in AI and triggering system. And it was O.K. for me if they were fixing things, so I should able to get rid of all the crutches, but they have ruined the crutches and didn't fixed the native triggers. So the month and half of AI fighting were just thrown away.

 

I have never tried again to create a campaign for this game. And it was actually a reason why I have stopped buying new modules for DCS. And this is actually a main thing, people complain in their comments under the "Iraq map pre-purchace" video on "youtube".

And this is a signal to ED what they need to fix, because a lot of people on "youtube" telling that they will not prepurchase "Iraq" map because everyting else is just not working for them in this game. I know that ED is the only studio on the market that creating a modern military aircraft simulator. But if it will continue like this then there is a chance that there will be no companies that creates military aircraft simulators at all.

People just not happy with the fact that the core game is not working as intended (The last update also caused a huge performance reduction for a lot of people with high-end PCs) and ED continue releasing new modules (including maps) for a game which doesn't work. And yes, we all know that those are different teams, but hte overall image just doesn't looks good from the customer's point of view.

 

Now back on track.

As for me, I will not prepurchase this map, because as I mentioned above, I have stop buying modules for this game, because of the bad AI.

As for the maps. Well I don't see a huge diffrences between "Caucasus" and other maps. Even "Syria" map which looks better is just the same thing. The ground is indestructible. The explosion craters where updated to a 3D craters, but they are still a "ground patches". The trees are indestructible and with the addition of a wind blow effect, when the bomb is dropped into a forest, the trees begin to sway in different directions like rubber tumblers. The trees are non-flammable. You can drop any amount of bombs into a forest and there will never be a fire.

Why I'm talking so much about the forests? Because there is a lot of forests on the "Kola" map. Which makes the only possible solution for creating ground strike missions on this map is setting "cutting forest zones", otherwise it will be impossible to destroy any ground unit at all. And the mission creators have to set all the units to hold their places, otherwise they might drive into a forested area and, well the rest you know.

 

In the video presentation of this speciffic map I have noticed the same canion which was displayed from different angles and a city. The city looks good, but there was shown only a part of it. So nobody knows how the rest of the map looks like.

Anyway, I have enough modules already, but I'm not happy with the core game at all (to the point that I even have no desire to learn the already puchased modules), so I'm flying the modules I have already learned, from time to time but mostly I prefer to play something else which have modern graphics and all features working as intended. I even play old games with old graphics but all features working.

So the key for DCS to success in my opinion is to make all features working and stop throwing new products to a customer's faces for a game which is working like a broken car.

[Lionel Mandrake]

23 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said:

Early access is optional, if people don't like to use it they wont, and that is fine, I would rather people wait if they are not happy. However a large portion of the community do enjoy early access, the process of helping with reports on the forum, giving feedback and making wishes for what they want to see added helps us make the product better. 

 The FAQ is there to share information, if information changes or we need to clarify for some we will edit it.
 

Updating information is a necessary evil no doubt, but to say "make purchases based on the available information", change said information, then say to people "you made a purchase based on our (old) information so be that on your head" doesn't address the issue being raised by Thamiel. His issue isn't that the information was changed, his issue is that you are blaming him for not being aware of information that was not available at the time of his purchase. Hence the term gaslighting.

[BIGNEWY]

3 minutes ago, Lionel Mandrake said:

Updating information is a necessary evil no doubt, but to say "make purchases based on the available information", change said information, then say to people "you made a purchase based on our (old) information so be that on your head" doesn't address the issue being raised by Thamiel. His issue isn't that the information was changed, his issue is that you are blaming him for not being aware of information that was not available at the time of his purchase. Hence the term gaslighting.

we are just going to go in circles here. 

Early access is a really simple process, we announce a product for early access, share the information with you all, you can decide if you want to participate or not, we listen to feedback and if we need to adjust the FAQ we will. If people are not happy with that or have lost confidence we understand if they want to wait or not participate in early access. Early access is optional and waiting for a finished product is perfectly fine. 

[pjbunnyru]

12 минут назад, mikey69420 сказал:

Thanks but you haven't really answered my question, is the customer legally protected if your company or a third party decides to either modify the original plans for early access or to straight up not deliver on them ?
Basically, does buying into EA guarantees (legally) that the product will developed up to the original plans of early access ?

here the issue is also, who of end buyers saw this plan and for how long will it be completed?

if work is not completed acording to agreement, what responsibiliti does seler/creator?

there are many questions and some of them are inconvenient for seling party.

[BIGNEWY]

6 minutes ago, pjbunnyru said:

here the issue is also, who of end buyers saw this plan and for how long will it be completed?

if work is not completed acording to agreement, what responsibiliti does seler/creator?

there are many questions and some of them are inconvenient for seling party.

Early access can be a long process, teams are often small ( especially 3rd parties ) but they are passionate about what they do and work very hard. Every team wants to complete a project, but it does take time. 

[Lionel Mandrake]

41 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said:

we are just going to go in circles here. 

Early access is a really simple process, we announce a product for early access, share the information with you all, you can decide if you want to participate or not, we listen to feedback and if we need to adjust the FAQ we will. If people are not happy with that or have lost confidence we understand if they want to wait or not participate in early access. Early access is optional and waiting for a finished product is perfectly fine. 

Yes we are going in circles because you're not addressing the issue raised by Thamiel. What recourse to EA participants have when the terms change AFTER they have purchased? An answer to that would provide resolution.

Also clearly EA is not a "really simple process" as evidenced by the litany of questions/issues people have with EA, what it means specifically and it's associated timelines. It may be simple in your mind sure, but obviously a significant portion of the community does not share that view. And before you say it people buying into EA means it's all good, it is no indication that people actually understand what they're getting, again evidence by the litany of discussion on the matter.

Edited October 23, 2024 by Lionel Mandrake

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

15 hours ago, Schmidtfire said:

It's just not a good value proposition at launch

While I agree with that, I am confident that things will improve over time and I will still have paid that same initial price for a module/terrain that eventually (even if it does take 5+ years) WILL be good value.
The SA map was heavily marketed as helo-heaven. It is not, not even close. But the recent updates to that map made a MASSIVE difference and now I think it is a very good looking map (for fast-movers anyway).
Kola (on my system) uses textures that are minecraft/tetris-quality (even the "new" summer textures) and looks quite ugly to be quite frank - on my system with my settings. I do hope it will get at the very least the same treatment the SA map got: apparently it had to do with compatibility with ED's lighting engine.
Afghanistan looks very pretty from higher up but indeed lacks down low and slow. I read the intent to improve low-level textures later on if memory permits and while I do understand you can't have everything even with modern hardware, in the end business-level decisions are also important (the fixed wing crowd is likely MUCH larger than the helo crowd) if we want ED to survive... 
I did buy the Iraq map because ED hasn't let me down yet (long-term) when it comes to maps, but I will probably not use it very much in the first few months/years.

[BIGNEWY]

Just now, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

While I agree with that, I am confident that things will improve over time and I will still have paid that same initial price for a module/terrain that eventually (even if it does take 5+ years) WILL be good value.
The SA map was heavily marketed as helo-heaven. It is not, not even close. But the recent updates to that map made a MASSIVE difference and now I think it is a very good looking map (for fast-movers anyway).
Kola (on my system) uses textures that are minecraft/tetris-quality (even the "new" summer textures) and looks quite ugly to be quite frank - on my system with my settings. I do hope it will get at the very least the same treatment the SA map got: apparently it had to do with compatibility with ED's lighting engine.
Afghanistan looks very pretty from higher up but indeed lacks down low and slow. I read the intent to improve low-level textures later on if memory permits and while I do understand you can't have everything even with modern hardware, in the end business-level decisions are also important (the fixed wing crowd is likely MUCH larger than the helo crowd) if we want ED to survive... 
I did buy the Iraq map because ED hasn't let me down yet (long-term) when it comes to maps, but I will probably not use it very much in the first few months/years.

Thank you for the purchase and the feedback, for Iraq and Afghanistan I think you will see during early access the low down terrain improve, the work does take time however. I hope we can share some more news soon on this. I fly helicopters mostly so its something I want the team to get right. 

thank you 

[pjbunnyru]

39 минут назад, BIGNEWY сказал:

Thank you for the purchase and the feedback, for Iraq and Afghanistan I think you will see during early access the low down terrain improve, the work does take time however. I hope we can share some more news soon on this. I fly helicopters mostly so its something I want the team to get right. 

thank you 

if without compromising performance!
my not best system has high loads on empty afganistan with dlss setings, when I fly alone on map.
cola has become better now, but also loads my system very heavili at bottom.

[draconus]

52 minutes ago, Lionel Mandrake said:

What recourse to EA participants have when the terms change AFTER they have purchased?

It might get me into trouble and you won't hear it from devs but I'll tell you: they have no contractual obligations, you have no guarantee and you can not do anything about it. Harsh and enlightening are EULAs but remember ED still has the will and incentive to finish the products.

Fly more, rant less

[Rudel_chw]

3 minutes ago, draconus said:

Fly more, rant less

I couldn’t have said it better … I’m so tired of all the ranting, not just on this thread but on almost every section of the Forum 

[Lionel Mandrake]

18 minutes ago, Rudel_chw said:

I couldn’t have said it better … I’m so tired of all the ranting, not just on this thread but on almost every section of the Forum 

And yet somehow it's lost on you why people are showing their discontent all over the forum.

[Rudel_chw]

16 minutes ago, Lionel Mandrake said:

And yet somehow it's lost on you why people are showing their discontent all over the forum.

 

If they were truly discontent, they would surely have moved on to another game, dont you think?

[buceador]

3 minutes ago, Rudel_chw said:

If they were truly discontent, they would surely have moved on to another game, dont you think?

Actually, much as I respect your comments @Rudel_chw, that is a little naive;  in that in the world of realistic aerial combat simulators DCS is a one horse race...

[NIAGARA MOHAWK]

Also the fact of all the $$$ already invested .. I have a good amount $$ in .. But I see some have Hugh Amounts of $$$$ Invested .

and agreed DCS is TOP TIER Flight Sim .  So ' so far I hold on ... 

 

Posted 21 minutes ago

  28 minutes ago, Rudel_chw said:

If they were truly discontent, they would surely have moved on to another game, dont you think?

Actually, much as I respect your comments @Rudel_chw, that is a little naive;  in that in the world of realistic aerial combat simulators DCS is a one horse race...

[Rudel_chw]

29 minutes ago, buceador said:

... that is a little naive;  in that in the world of realistic aerial combat simulators DCS is a one horse race...

 

I can't name sim alternatives here, but there is at least one other realistic modern combat sim available, plus at least another for WW2 combat ....  and even if DCS were the only horse, what's the point on racing with it if it just brings discontent to you? I'd rather change hobby  

[draconus]

12 minutes ago, NIAGARA MOHAWK said:

Also the fact of all the $$$ already invested .. I have a good amount $$ in .. But I see some have Hugh Amounts of $$$$ Invested .

Go to the logbook and check your flight hours. Do you consider it good investment?

[buceador]

22 minutes ago, Rudel_chw said:

what's the point on racing with it if it just brings discontent to you

I imagine, as with many concepts in life, they balance one against the other.

[Thamiel]

5 minutes ago, draconus said:

Go to the logbook and check your flight hours. Do you consider it good investment?

Depends on how long I will be still capable of enjoying it (aka. how many flight hours I will get in the future). My guess is: in approx. 2 years and pending no hardware upgrade or further investment will be necessary during that time, playing DCS will lose its leading role as my current most expansive hobby to learn for my RL gliding license. It was even more expensive than obtaining and supporting my local hunting license 10 years back and for Germany, that is saying something.

[NIAGARA MOHAWK]

25 minutes ago, draconus said:

Go to the logbook and check your flight hours. Do you consider it good investment?

OK : not a complaint here : I am just wondering how your investment formula works for flight hours ? do i get to subtract the hours of frustration trying to make the enemy ground units .  AA/ FLAK work again after a DCS update made them inoperative. after the weeks / months of building SP missions ?? also other issues going on after updates ..?  like i said  DCS is the best when it works !

and i know all about the other WWII sims . been there done that starting way back when = good but . I prefer DCS clickable Cockpits / Visuals / Dynamics and such ... So ' so far i hang on . 

also in my investment formula = promise of new WWII content . that after like a  8 months or so not a hint or any info of any progress, just the same old " when we have something to share we will " 

" its a smaller team  "  OK : I get that . but for Christs Sake !  there has to have been some progress made that can be shared ?????? ======= don't you think ??   so i would have left this alone .

==== But you had to go and tell me how to Think .. your way is not everybody's way .. just saying .

 

 

 

[MAXsenna]

There is one thing I am interested in Iraq map tech - in the early seconds of the video it seems that ground clutter / vegetation is NOT popping up like it does in the sim, instead it is rendered nicely.
@BIGNEWY is there any info about whether it was just "trailer magic" or in fact ground clutter is now rendering to the max of PC potential ?

I noticed that too. Excellent question!

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk