What about a DCS:BS patch?

[isoul]

It was 15 days after the official release of DCS:Warthog and a patch was out addressing numerous bugs for that product.

 

On the other hand there are months since last patch for DCS:BS and I heard no official word for patching and addressing issues with BS. ED only announced that, for A-10C, the patches will be released more often and will be smaller reducing the chance of implementing new issues along with fixes.

 

I am sorry to say that I feel that ED's other product (DCS:BS) seems to be forgotten and its audience "forced", in some indirect way, to buy the next chapter of DCS series, in order to get patches more often, or stay with BS 1.0.2 and all the bugs and other issues. This is making me ever more reluctant to buy DCS:Warthog since I find ED's way of thinking about patching their products quite odd.

 

I understand that DCS:Warthog is their brand new product and needs support to take its place in the market... but BS needs support too to satisfy it's audience and make a name for ED that it stays committed to their products by not letting them "rot" in a timely manner.

 

DCS supposed to be a series and, as we imagine that something new will come up next, we ought not to forget the already released titles. We need to move forward but a glance in the past titles can be useful too. At least, when we talk about "series", I understand that there will be the same quality and the same attention, in terms of support, for all the products in that series.

Edited March 10, 2011 by isoul

[ShalashakaDS]

Havent they said that they are already working on a compatibility patch for warthog and black shark? As i understand, this should give black shark the same features and bug fixes we got for the hog, right?

Edited March 10, 2011 by ShalashakaDS

[159th_Viper]

It was 15 days after the official release of DCS:Warthog and a patch was out addressing numerous bugs for that product....

 

Assuming here that you missed the 'Long and Large' vs 'Short and Small' explanation given?

[martinistripes]

+1 isoul

 

The quick realease of a patch for A-10C astounded me, when BS has been left stagnating for so long.

[msalama]

Compatibility between the two is of course a good thing, but patching DCS:BS to use the current resource-intensive Warthog engine can still be problematic for folks like me using older computers. A good case in point is my aging Dell Optiplex, which nevertheless exceeds the original minimum requirements for BS, in that it gives me steady and stutter-free 30ish FPS in the cockpit running the Shark but just can't run the Hog at all. So how will I know if I can still play the chopper on this machine if I decide to install the patch?

[galagamo]

Compatibility between the two is of course a good thing, but patching DCS:BS to use the current resource-intensive Warthog engine can still be problematic for folks like me using older computers.

You know you can decrease&disable all that stuff right? No impact:music_whistling:

[martinistripes]

So how will I know if I can still play the chopper on this machine if I decide to install the patch?

 

You won't. But there are always options to increase or decrease graphics quality. Also, you can't hold back progress simply because some users want to play on their older machines.

[riboyster]

You know you can decrease&disable all that stuff right? No impact:music_whistling:

 

I can run BS on medium settings with a beautiful framerate.

I run Warthog on lowest settings and it's unflyable. Point being, if you don't have a top of the line computer, you're screwed. I won't be downloading the patch.

[msalama]

You know you can decrease&disable all that stuff right?

 

You know I already did this very successfully with the Shark, but it didn't help with the Hog at all, right?

[msalama]

I won't be downloading the patch.

 

Seems like I won't download it either as long as I'm using this POS Dell. A pity... but then one should upgrade one's pooter every now and then too I think ;)

 

Will they up the official minimum specs for DCS:BS too when the patch comes out remains to be seen, however. IMHO they should, because a computer conforming to the old specs still up on the website definitely won't be able to run the patched game!

[Rusty_M]

Seems like I won't download it either as long as I'm using this POS Dell. A pity... but then one should upgrade one's pooter every now and then too I think ;)

 

Will they up the official minimum specs for DCS:BS too when the patch comes out remains to be seen, however. IMHO they should, because a computer conforming to the old specs still up on the website definitely won't be able to run the patched game!

 

I understand your point, and I'm not sure where I personally stand on the issue of whether they should update system requirements. Maybe they should up the recommended, but not the minimum, as people will still be able to run BS. If this does polarise users, then I hope that some servers will still be able to run 1.02, as I dont like the idea of people being left out.

 

I, however, look forward to the patch.

[connos]

I stop playing BS due to bugs. I like playing missions alone not multiplayer and in BS with latest patch install the wingman is a total idiot. With latest patch installed they totally destroy it. It was somehow usable before latest patch. I support ED and I went and preorder the A10 even if I am not planning to play it (this may change though) as a respect to them and also as hope they will fix BS and bring all the improvements to AI etc to BS. I hope they do as I am more to helis than planes but if they don't fix BS to the level of A10 I am not buying any other product from them as much I love this company and of what they accomplish.

 

Also what made me angry. Check my suggestions bellow.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=650118#post650118

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=650164#post650164

 

I suggest this model regarding smaller patches and read their respond. Time consuming etc etc. Thats totally unfair I am really disappointment with something that should got me exited.

Edited March 10, 2011 by connos

[sobek]

Guys, you can't honestly expect them to do everything at once. Let them get the A-10 up to speed, then there will be room to worry about other things.

[connos]

Guys, you can't honestly expect them to do everything at once. Let them get the A-10 up to speed, then there will be room to worry about other things.

 

I was expecting them to first fix BS and then move to A10. If they are planing to fix it I don't care when or how much time it will take them but at least I want BS to get fixed.

Edited March 10, 2011 by connos

[galagamo]

You know it didn't help with the Hog at all, right?

No, I didn't know, that's why I suggested it, just in case.

[msalama]

No, I didn't know, that's why I suggested it, just in case.

 

Roger that Sir. It's just that you seemingly can't run the new engine at all without a 64-bit environment and a high-end machine, which of course leaves us poor low-tek buggers up the proverbial creek without a paddle for now ;) Ach, the hell with it, gotta get me a new pooter at some point then and meanwhile just fly BS v1.02...

[msalama]

Let them get the A-10 up to speed, then there will be room to worry about other things.

 

I agree, as much as I'd like to see a new BS patch myself. I've a hunch they want to optimize the A-10 a bit further ASAP, because according to some folks the new engine tends to kill framerates even on a fast machine if you turn AA on - and that's something they'll need to fix pretty sharpish I think.

 

And hey, us guys with slow machines may ALSO benefit from some further optimization, no :)

[sobek]

Roger that Sir. It's just that you seemingly can't run the new engine at all without a 64-bit environment and a high-end machine, which of course leaves us poor low-tek buggers up the proverbial creek without a paddle for now ;) Ach, the hell with it, gotta get me a new pooter at some point then and meanwhile just fly BS v1.02...

 

My machine is approaching 5 years of age (with a few minor upgrades in the meantime, namely switching from a C2D E6600 to E8400 and from 2Gb to 6 Gb DDR2 Ram) and it runs the hog just fine(not at max settings, but close enough). On the other hand, there is no denying that this is an expensive hobby. ;)

[Bodo]

I'm not expecting any patch for DCS 'till they're happy with the performance of A10 on the whole. I also don't think that will take a huge amount of time.

 

I'm in no rush. I just hope they don't all burn themselves out and we're left with a bunch of devs who go insane and start making shopping trolley simulators!

[shea1980]

I have noticed that a-10 works alot better than black shark for some weard reason

[isoul]

Assuming here that you missed the 'Long and Large' vs 'Short and Small' explanation given?

 

Unfortunately, 159th_Viper, I didn't miss that explanation which is referring solely to DCS:A-10C Warthog, neither I criticize the "short and small" approach decided by ED on the A-10C.

 

What I am talking about here is the "Large and Long" approach on the Black Shark. To be more specific :

 

DCS Black Shark released (English Language) : 10 December 2008

Patch 1.0.1 released : 10 August 2009 (9 months since release)

Patch 1.0.2 released : 14 May 2010 (9 months since last patch)

Today is : 10 March 2011 (10 months since last patch)

 

Still we have issues in a "wait list" since release (ex. Wingman behaviour/skill). I wish ED team adopted the "small and short" approach for DCS:BS too but the announcement leaves little room for hope, ED mentioned nothing! The whole announcement was Warthog-wise. No one bothered telling us what plans are there (if there are any) about addressing BS issues.

 

What I got from that announcement? ED is going to put more effort on its new product while BS is in a waiting queue for 10 months. This means that BS patch will be pushed further into the future and the BS audience will have to wait even longer... I hope I am not right but... ED did almost nothing for BS in the past 10 months. Now that the Warthog is out and requires attention I can't help feeling that our "wish" (about patching the Shark) will go down to the bottom of the drain.

 

Personally I don't care if I can fly with Warthog pilots while my game is at the state it was one year ago.

Edited March 10, 2011 by isoul

[martinistripes]

Let's just hope they don't begin work on another module until there's a bit of polish on the two they already released.

 

You know, on 1C Company's IL2 forum news is posted regularly. The people there seem rather happy (apart from the odd ranter) and appreciative. Can we not try again with the news here and just ignore the disgruntled idiots?

[Boberro]

They will be compatibility patch, it should solve all minor bugs in BS and WH and I hope in LO3 too :)

[S77th-konkussion]

Compatibility between the two is of course a good thing, but patching DCS:BS to use the current resource-intensive Warthog engine can still be problematic for folks like me using older computers. A good case in point is my aging Dell Optiplex, which nevertheless exceeds the original minimum requirements for BS, in that it gives me steady and stutter-free 30ish FPS in the cockpit running the Shark but just can't run the Hog at all. So how will I know if I can still play the chopper on this machine if I decide to install the patch?

 

Time marches on. So does hardware. People who write software cannot accommodate everyone.

[104th_Crunch]

What would be the point of patching BS first then working on A-10C? ED plan to make all DCS modules compatible, so it makes sense to tidy up A-10C, then make the compatibility patch for Ka-50, at the same time hopefully fixing some Ka-50 bugs.

 

Why patch Ka-50, then patch A-10, then make compatibility patch for Ka-50? Very inefficient I think. If you patch Ka-50 now then make compatibilty patch you might break somethjing from the first patch.

Edited March 10, 2011 by Crunch