Fewer errors

[Robo76]

I wish ED would stop working on new features for at least a year and just fix the huge amount of accumulated bugs. Even after years and many fixes, the warehouses don't work and it's hell for the creators of more complex missions and they have to shut them down in the end. Every update is usually a bigger or smaller disaster and often brings more new bugs than they fix. I'm sure many mission creators have given up on DCS for these reasons. Today I'm tired of DCS bugs again, I have to take a medical break.

[Kang]

If it were only the mission creators...

No, seriously, I agree there are about three or four aircraft carriers worth of gross register tonnes of things that ended up 'on the backlog' for who knows how long. Literal bugs of things not working, plenty of issues of things kinda working but definitely not right and a plethora of things that weren't exactly cutting edge back then but are frankly hideous design choices today.

But I think we all know what ED's reply is going to be. 'It's complicated and takes time', 'We don't have time to work on it because there are so many other things that need doing' and the classic 'provide a track!'.

 

P.S.:
While I'm sure someone will kindly point out how I am not a software developer and thus have no idea about that, it isn't made better by the fact that a lot of these things (mind you definitely not all) are pretty much copy/paste jobs for an afternoon, which we know, because community members, past and present, have provided these fixes in mods previously.

Edited Sunday at 08:27 PM by Kang
Post Scriptum

[Rudel_chw]

51 minutes ago, Robo76 said:

I wish ED would stop working on new features for at least a year and just fix the huge amount of accumulated bugs.

I’ve seen this wish several times before, but not once have I seen how do they propose to keep the company afloat during that year.

[Robo76]

If this has been proposed here several times in the past and nothing has changed, something is wrong. Unfortunately, ED is gradually bringing this situation to its own attention with its approach. When they cannot distribute efforts and resources so that mistakes do not occur over time, they only complicate the situation cumulatively in the future, until it may eventually become unsolvable. I estimate that they must already be focused on newspaper income and they have no time or money left for old mistakes-debts. And on top of that, there are legal - economic issues with RAZBAM. I am also sure that a lot of people will come to explain to us that it is okay.

[Rudel_chw]

2 hours ago, Robo76 said:

If this has been proposed here several times in the past and nothing has changed, something is wrong. 

another thing that I’ve seen a lot on this Forum, are new users that think they know best how to run a software development company… maybe you are the exception and a true genius at running business, but so far I’m not impressed.

Edited Monday at 12:42 AM by Rudel_chw

[Kang]

21 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

I’ve seen this wish several times before, but not once have I seen how do they propose to keep the company afloat during that year.

Selling a lot of the modules that are actually released and would become a whole lot less annoying to use, I presume.

I know that probably doesn't work out, but it is no secret that the enormous backlog of errors is only getting bigger and bigger, and it sure hampers DCS' progress and in turn sales. Now, I'd say that ED isn't exactly a prime example of being geniuses at running a business either, but to be honest - they might have us morons figured out just right and manage to just scrape by despite the releases to - as you said - stay afloat during the year, coming ever quicker and - some people say - being less and less impressive.

[Rudel_chw]

19 minutes ago, Kang said:

I'd say that ED isn't exactly a prime example of being geniuses at running a business either

 

They have been running their business for almost 35 years, can you tell me which other simulation software company has run as long? 

No, microsoft doesn't count ... their original Flight Sim series ran from 1982 to 2009, and their current FS 2020 series was comissioned to a french software house, with no relation to the prior product, while IL-2 dates from 2001 ... so ED seems pretty sucessful to me.

[TBarina]

Modules are not freeware. We pay for them and we have the right to have bugs fixed in a reasoneable time. I'm not going to wait 35 years to get them fixed.

I'm also available to pay for enhanced bug free versions of some module but so far I don't even get an answer in the forum.

 

[Rudel_chw]

44 minutes ago, TBarina said:

we have the right to have bugs fixed in a reasoneable time

 

From the end-user license you agreed to when purchasing modules:

 

3. LICENCE CONDITIONS

...

3.2 You acknowledge that the Program has not been developed to meet your individual requirements and that it is therefore your responsibility to ensure that the facilities and functions of the Program as described in the Documentation meet your requirements.
3.3 You acknowledge that the Program may not be free of errors or bugs and you agree that the existence of any minor errors shall not constitute a breach of this Licence.

[TBarina]

In my opinion some are not minor errors: having ATC to give the wrong IAF for approaching the runway in bad weather? Or having the wingmen repeat endlessly the same things when they spot enemies? Or having wingmen crash on the tarmac?

By citing Licence Conditions to defend ED position for  the huge list of accumulated issues  means throwing away the concept of "passion and support".

 

There are incredibly talented community members who work hard to maintain fantastic solutions for DCS (without which I fear DCS wouldn't be what it is today) and campaign creators who put in a tremendous amount of effort to provide us with decent missions.

It's high time for ED to do its part and dedicate the necessary time to fixing the legacy, otherwise we risk making life difficult even for those who are passionate about it.

(BTW: I honestly don't think they'd even dream of mentioning the licensing terms. Luckily they are not an Insurance company )

[diego999]

5 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

 

They have been running their business for almost 35 years, can you tell me which other simulation software company has run as long? 

No, microsoft doesn't count ... their original Flight Sim series ran from 1982 to 2009, and their current FS 2020 series was comissioned to a french software house, with no relation to the prior product, while IL-2 dates from 2001 ... so ED seems pretty sucessful to me.

 

From your post count and your knowledge it's clear you've been playing for decades, and that's amazing. But you have to understand that probably the majority of us aren't as passionate about the game as you are, and in the end ED cannot survive on a handful of whales buying everything.

Right now they're hyping up the WW2 stuff with the Corsair, ww2 Marianas, asset pack, etc. Yet you have zombie planes still flying in circles after being destroyed, and it's been that way for two months.

Do you honestly think that's acceptable?

 

 

[Rudel_chw]

44 minutes ago, TBarina said:

By citing Licence Conditions to defend ED position

I just cited them because you said:  " we have the right …"

wasnt defending, just pointed out the incongruency

[Rudel_chw]

4 minutes ago, diego999 said:

Do you honestly think that's acceptable?

it’s not … but I have this obsession for accuracy, so when one user that has been here a bit over a year, attempts to teach ED how to run their business… I feel this urge to put things into perspective, an urge that I can’t really explain.

 

but as  obviously many users feel that my accuracy is miss placed, I will stop following this thread, so you can keep suggesting ED how to do things, bye.

[waterman]

3 hours ago, diego999 said:

Yet you have zombie planes still flying in circles after being destroyed, and it's been that way for two months.

Do you honestly think that's acceptable?

Could be related to the Deactivated Zombie Trains problem as they are doing a similar thing - Trains just continue for ever up in the sky on grass or out to sea locked in a direction when deactivated.

 

 

[Pipe]

On 8/10/2025 at 2:00 PM, Rudel_chw said:

I’ve seen this wish several times before, but not once have I seen how do they propose to keep the company afloat during that year.

Perhaps with other devs money…

[cfrag]

I believe that the decline in DCS's quality is quite obvious, and the reason why ED can't prioritize fixing what's wrong is equally obvious: they must sell new stuff, they have no time to finish stuff that they sold yesterday. ED have actively decided against a steady-revenue-stream model (a.k.a. "subscription"). That (a subscription model) could allow ED to fix many of their current shortcomings, and - yes - it would alienate many of their existing customers. TBH, ED offends those anyway with their current neglect. And that is of little consequence, because existing customers are only relevant for a company to keep happy should these customers subscribe. We currently don't, and aren't kept happy. Because we don't matter.

14 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

They have been running their business for almost 35 years,

IMHO DCS' quality is in freefall for all but the cash cows. ED seem to have adopted the "Kodak strategy": "we've been successful for so long, so we must know what we are doing". Then, Digital Photography killed Kodak. Let's not forget, Steve Sasson, a Kodak Engineer, invented the digital camera. So Kodak was uniquely positioned to grow BIG. They thought they knew better. Kodak went bankrupt in 2012, after more than 120 years of phenomenal success. Kodak's Ektachrome is *still* the best film I ever used. That didn't save them. 
DCS is still one of the best FS around. I don't think that alone will save ED. DCS must also become a good *game*. ED know how to make a good FS. IMHO, they have no idea how to create a good, engaging game. Look at their content, content creation tools, look at how they engage with us, their *fans*. "Bleak" is what comes to my mind. So, subscriptions to help finance fixing the core, and re-tooling DCS to become engaging: now that's a monumentally tall order.

Low product quality and lack of engagement are the main reasons that I'm withdrawing from contributing to DCS. It pains me to witness DCS' current state, and I hope that I'm not watching a re-run of "The Kodak Story", the story about a great company unable to change. Change is hard. Hopefully not too hard for the developers of my favourite FS.
 

[Mr_sukebe]

"A decline in DCS's quality is quite obvious".

Not to me.  Yes, I know there are bugs, but IMO, it's better than it was say 2-3 years ago.  ED have seemingly learned to reduce the amount of "overpromise and under-deliver" for one thing.  The forums are significantly quieter than they were.

As part of that, I do believe that testing has improved, which is probably why the circling dead aircraft issue still exists.  Slapping out what might appear to be a very simple fix into a very complex model can create substantially more trouble than it solves long term.

It's also worth considering that every time a new terrain or module is added, that the unit will need ongoing maintenance, refinement and patches to meet changing standards.  As there's been a LOT of new modules in say the last 5 years, that's a LOT of effort being required.

Personally, I believe that ED do a good (no, not perfect) job of balancing their workload.

Above all, I also own the other key sims (both Civ and combat), yet spend pretty much all of my time in DCS.  That to me is the final arbiter of the quality of their product.

[BIGNEWY]

On 8/10/2025 at 9:05 PM, Robo76 said:

I wish ED would stop working on new features for at least a year and just fix the huge amount of accumulated bugs. Even after years and many fixes, the warehouses don't work and it's hell for the creators of more complex missions and they have to shut them down in the end. Every update is usually a bigger or smaller disaster and often brings more new bugs than they fix. I'm sure many mission creators have given up on DCS for these reasons. Today I'm tired of DCS bugs again, I have to take a medical break.

You are under some misconception about what we are working on. 

First of all more than half of our team work on the core of DCS, you can see the core of DCS at the start of each change log, it is a huge focus for the team. 
https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/news/changelog/

Then we have teams that work on modules, teams that work on terrains, artist, back end / infrastructure staff, marketing, community and many more departments. 

The teams work extremely hard, there will always be bugs to fix, its the nature of DCS and its complexity, and the project managers decide what tasks are priority or not. That choice wont always align with what you want or what I want, but they are the best people to decide which work gets done as they have the full picture of current and future work being done. 

56 minutes ago, cfrag said:

I believe that the decline in DCS's quality is quite obvious, and the reason why ED can't prioritize fixing what's wrong is equally obvious: they must sell new stuff, they have no time to finish stuff that they sold yesterday. ED have actively decided against a steady-revenue-stream model (a.k.a. "subscription"). That (a subscription model) could allow ED to fix many of their current shortcomings, and - yes - it would alienate many of their existing customers. TBH, ED offends those anyway with their current neglect. And that is of little consequence, because existing customers are only relevant for a company to keep happy should these customers subscribe. We currently don't, and aren't kept happy. Because we don't matter.

Hi Cfrag, good to see you return. 

I dont agree about your comments, if anything quality has improved in DCS, but DCS is also growing and with that the complexity. Subscription model would not fix what you think is wrong, we have a team that is large enough for the work being done, but that has to happen at a steady rate and with it new module releases for revenue, a subscription model is not planned. 

thank you  

[Hiob]

Am I the only one that get a very strong "Groundhog Day"-Vibe from the forum? 

On Topic: I'm with DCS for five years now. As far as I can tell, it has improved a lot. Both, regarding stability AND performance (granted, part of the latter has been eaten up by new features and eye candy). But what would be the alternative. Have a perfectly stable and performant DCS with the looks and features from 2020? No thanks!

[BIGNEWY]

4 minutes ago, Hiob said:

Am I the only one that get a very strong "Groundhog Day"-Vibe from the forum? 

Ive been active on the form since 2011, yes we do see posts like this occasionally, and I get it, for some it is frustrating when we do not do what they wont or how they want it. Everyone has wishes, hopes and dreams and when those are not realised it can be frustrating. 
Hopefully most of you enjoy DCS and want to see it continue to grow, and it is growing which is great to see, new people joining and falling in love with DCS. 
  

[Hiob]

3 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said:

Hopefully most of you enjoy DCS and want to see it continue to grow, and it is growing which is great to see, new people joining and falling in love with DCS. 
  

I think we do (as far as I can tell). Never forget that someone who is dissatisfied with something is several times more likely to voice his/her opinion than somebody who is happy. So the forum will always be a misrepresentation about the state of affairs.

Main problem will always be that you can't align the priorities of all individual customers and the business anyway.

[BIGNEWY]

12 minutes ago, Hiob said:

I think we do (as far as I can tell). Never forget that someone who is dissatisfied with something is several times more likely to voice his/her opinion than somebody who is happy. So the forum will always be a misrepresentation about the state of affairs.

Main problem will always be that you can't align the priorities of all individual customers and the business anyway.

Agreed, we can not please everyone all of the time, but hopefully along the journey of DCS development we can bring some fun and joy to people who love the combat flight sim genre. 
We get lots of private messages from people who want to complain or want to tell us how much they like DCS, the forum is only a snap shot of what is going on. Overall I feel its positive feedback we are getting, but we will always listen to the negative feedback, it gives us insight and often gives us new ideas to work on. 

thank you  

 

[Moxica]

Looking at DCS objectively, one has to recognize what an incredible achievement it is.
The sound design alone is a marvel.
Yes, there are some "weirdities" here and there, but I've noticed that ED has "the eye on the ball" and are steadily patching up stuff.
Many fixes have not impacted me, and I often view them as a disappointment. Which of course a completely emotional/subjective thing.
When looking at changelogs I allways look for stuff I personally would see improved. Sometimes it is there. Other times not.
..and I can not believe why they didn't adress that.
All in all I can't believe how lucky I am to be able to take part in the experience.
-A huge source of joy, and also one of some frustration.
But when frustrated; I try to remember my first line here: It is an Incredible, almost unbelievable achievement.

[JimF1]

24 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said:

Agreed, we can not please everyone all of the time, but hopefully along the journey of DCS development we can bring some fun and joy to people who love the combat flight sim genre. 
We get lots of private messages from people who want to complain or want to tell us how much they like DCS, the forum is only a snap shot of what is going on. Overall I feel its positive feedback we are getting, but we will always listen to the negative feedback, it gives us insight and often gives us new ideas to work on. 

thank you  

 

I agree sometimes negative feedback can seem like a pain to listen to but we as humans are always learning and sometimes negative feedback is just as important as positive, having said that it's always nice to get more positive just so you know you're heading in the right direction

[buceador]

5 years in and I enjoy DCS - during that time many, many things have improved.  Do the changelogs meet my personal expectations? Rarely.
I think the concept that DCS is not tailored to meet individual needs is often overlooked when people post about the shortcomings.
More importantly, for me, is that DCS represents approximately 4% of my waking week, the other 96% is given over to real life