Black Shark 2 Released

[Cali]

I presume that the FC3 release wouldn't be too far ahead now. I'm actually looking forward to that one (since I don't care about the Ka-50 and A-10 that much) as IMHO the current DCS improvements make a much bigger impact there rather than in BS, even though there probably won't be any specific changes to the FC platforms.

 

But this naming and installation procedure is getting out of hand.. I'd prefer if this was like a DCS: BS patch 2.0 and just applied over the original with an extra activation required (same for FC2 rather than having an FC3).

 

 

FC3 is still a dream, no one knows if that will ever happen, but many would like it to happen. There are still a lot of things wrong with FC2, like missiles. Would be nice to have some of the radar stuff also.

[orbiter28]

Sorry for my english, i past lot of time on one post.

 

Some system are not completed in black shark... as the inertial heat for exemple, or something about the VHF2.

I buy black shark 1 essentialy for the simulation aspect and not for the graphic engine, as lot of player, if they can finish just some system model, i will buy KA-50 with happiest, without that, so dcs a-10 have a good graphic and is good for simulation, and as lot of player, i prefer aircraft, then i am very not sur of my interest about DCS KA-50 2 if it's just that upgrade :)

[sobek]

Everything else is already available in WH.

 

:huh: Oh really? You should have a closer look at the changelog then. There is a considerable amount of dev work that happened since 1.1.0.9. Stuff that is not in WH.

[digitaljjd]

People are complaining that ED can't release modules fast enough? Sheesh... talk about biting the hand that feeds them.

 

No wonder there are no development houses making sims anymore. I know I wouldn't start one up with the amount of bitching. I'd rather just cater to the masses and watch the money roll in.

 

-I think people just reaaally want Nevada. (For a-10C) A prettier cockpit is nice and all, perhaps if they would have upgraded the training missions to the current WH standard or made the KA-52 flyable (get it? Black Shark-2), I think there would have been no gripes.

[Griffin]

People are complaining that ED can't release modules fast enough? Sheesh... talk about biting the hand that feeds them.

 

No wonder there are no development houses making sims anymore. I know I wouldn't start one up with the amount of bitching. I'd rather just cater to the masses and watch the money roll in.

 

Personally I don't mind the current schedule but what Kuky is right about is the fact that this kind of system just doesn't work. They must have a unified base package on which to build upon. This will very quickly become impossible for ED. They must be completely aware of it and that's what worries me here. They cannot but dump the compatibility idea between each module with current way of doing this...

Each time a new module is released it will take more and more time to do the compatibility patch for previous ones and it's already been a long time since the Warthog has been released. :(

[Cali]

-I think people just reaaally want Nevada. A prettier cockpit is nice and all, perhaps if they would have upgraded the training missions to the current WH standard or made the KA-52 flyable (get it? Black Shark-2), I think there would have been no gripes.

 

Then you don't know people, they are going to complain about anything and everything. :D

[71st_Mastiff]

Dude seriously to fast to delet I was editing that.

 

I wasn't finished editing that but ok everyone can voice an opinion but me?

Know I need your editing approval I see, well I can start an eagel dynamics blog if that's

the case.

[Kuky]

Personally I don't mind the current schedule but what Kuky is right about is the fact that this kind of system just doesn't work. They must have a unified base package on which to build upon. This will very quickly become impossible for ED. They must be completely aware of it and that's what worries me here. They cannot but dump the compatibility idea between each module with current way of doing this...

Each time a new module is released it will take more and more time to do the compatibility patch for previous ones and it's already been a long time since the Warthog has been released. :(

 

Exactly... just one DCS module to make compatible and ED already feel/think the work to make the compatibility is too much for it to be free so some payment is required... now just think what they will think when Nevada is out and then they have 2 modules to be updated with Nevada? Double the work of what they already think is lot of work... now add next DCS module... tripple the work and so on... I just don;t see it happen and I think too ED will soon decide to drop this compatibility idea as it's not feasible... you just wait for it and you'll see it happen exactly like this... but I hope I bite my toungue and they prove me wrong... as per Wags latest sig: "everythig is subject to change" now remember?

Edited November 3, 2011 by Kuky

[sobek]

[...]

 

As Wags said, the current state of things doesn't have to be the be-all-end-all.

[kobac]

I know that ED is not much care for my opinion, but I'll still say: Correct would be to we pay only for new aircraft models. All patches and upgrades should be free.

[71st_Mastiff]

Before I was rudely deleted, I don't mind paying for up grades

what the, community needs is a combined system to be able

to multiplayer across all aircraft. This single player single aircraft is getting old

Ed has plans with in plans. What are they so we can share. Esims is doing a good job with

steal beast we should see an upgrade for

FC3?

Edited November 3, 2011 by Mastiff

[159th_Viper]

...Each time a new module is released it will take more and more time to do the compatibility patch for previous ones and it's already been a long time since the Warthog has been released. :(

 

At the outset - not having a jab at you so apologies for any inference to the contrary :)

 

That said - the amount of times I have been hearing this has me worried.........I cannot fathom whether ignorance, mere oversight or just plain old provocation is to blame. I'm willing to hedge my bets and claim 'oversight'. Now - where was I? Oh yeah, the 'time-card' people love to play:

 

It's been 3 years since BS1/It's been so long since Warthog was released/We have been waiting for two years etc etc etc

 

Here's the facts:

 

# - It was originally mentioned that the goal was 9 months per module from date of Retail Release of the previous module. A fact conveniently ignored by some, never mind the fact that you cannot reasonably expect for things not to change.

 

# - People forget the year and a half dev cycle of FC2 between retail BS1 and A-10C. They wanted it, they got it, but ignore it when it suits the need.

 

# - Retail release for the A-10C is not yet finalized so in essence the 9-month cycle has not yet even begun. In the interim BS2 has been released.

 

Am I trying to make excuses for what some perceive as delays amounting to the unreasonable?

 

No!

 

I just wish that people would avail themselves of ALL the facts and at the very least acknowledge them prior to making assumptions/skewing facts to suit their individual needs.

[Insanatrix]

I don't think he's complaining about delays between modules Viper. I think what he was trying to say is that as they develop more and more modules It's going to become harder and harder for ED to keep up with taking older sims and making it compatible with the newer sims.

[nomdeplume]

I know that ED is not much care for my opinion, but I'll still say: Correct would be to we pay only for new aircraft models. All patches and upgrades should be free.

 

Well in that case, I suppose ED could just declare that they, like every other developer/publisher who has tried it in the past, are dropping the notion of an integrated high-fidelity virtual battlefield, because supporting a game for 10+ years off of the back of a one-off payment of $60 per copy is not viable.

 

Would that make you happy? If so, why? It's not as if you're forced to buy the upgrade. If you're happy with a game being released, patched a bit while it was current, and then receiving no further updates (like, say, every other simulator that's ever been released) - you already have that, and nobody's taking it from you.

 

Also I can't get the BS2 patch and fly with FC2 anymore, I'd have to stay with BS1.

 

The products are separate, so you can have both BS1 and BS2 installed. If you want to fly with FC2 mates, you can run BS1. Just means you miss out on the new features and goodies, but you're no worse off.

 

It took 1 1/2 years for FC2......really!?!? and new new aircraft......

 

Software development is hard. :)

[Moa]

Exactly... just one DCS module to make compatible and ED already feel/think the work to make the compatibility is too much for it to be free so some payment is required... now just think what they will think when Nevada is out and then they have 2 modules to be updated with Nevada? Double the work of what they already think is lot of work... now add next DCS module... tripple the work and so on... I just don;t see it happen and I think too ED will soon decide to drop this compatibility idea as it's not feasible... you just wait for it and you'll see it happen exactly like this... but I hope I bite my toungue and they prove me wrong... as per Wags latest sig: "everythig is subject to change" now remember?

 

Interesting. Tk and his Strike Fighters series was able to make a common engine and add aircraft to it in a modular fashion, same with X-Plane etc. It ought to be possible, even though those sims are (mostly) far below the level of sophistication of the ED sims.

 

Also do note that Strike Fighters 2 was not a free upgrade, although all the versions within series 1 were free upgrades. The Black Shark 2 situation has a similar level of change to the leap from Strike Fighters 1 to SF2. People paid for that and most were happy (although losing multiplayer sucked).

 

If ED do have modular as a design goal then that work has to start in earnest *now*, it can't be retrofitted later (pain threshold will be too high). At the moment there are aspects of the sim that are not particularly modular (at least to the modders).

[digitaljjd]

Originally Posted by 159th_Viper

IIRC Videos were never broke - might very well be mistaken though. You referring to the tracks per chance?

 

Yes. Tracks. You are correct, just had my coffee. :doh: i.e. Does the training work now/again, or is the same ole' "If you want to view this section uninstall our patches" message still present?

 

*Bump*

[Scudslaker]

so can t they build modulized packages:

 

one core package with:

 

AI objects and units

weapons

landscapes

general gfx engine

mission editor

general options menu

 

single aircraft modules

adding model

dynamics

sound

effects

 

so they can easily patch the core if needed..or release an airplane module.

 

second pos effect, the traffic will get smaller too

[Kayh]

Any option to export control config from BS102 to BS2?, or we have to remap again?

 

Regards

[EvilBivol-1]

We've been pleased to see this thread stay on quite a level track, but it seems like it may be slipping, so I would like to take a second and note that while we respect everyone's right to voice their opinion, including a disapproving one as you can hopefully see by the number of them already posted, we expect posts to be made in a polite manner with respect to users, developers, and the product in general. Whether you are showing support or disagreement with our plans, please consider the tone and language of your post before hitting the Post button.

Edited November 3, 2011 by EvilBivol-1

[Insanatrix]

Interesting. Tk and his Strike Fighters series was able to make a common engine and add aircraft to it in a modular fashion, same with X-Plane etc. It ought to be possible, even though those sims are (mostly) far below the level of sophistication of the ED sims.

 

Also do note that Strike Fighters 2 was not a free upgrade, although all the versions within series 1 were free upgrades. The Black Shark 2 situation has a similar level of change to the leap from Strike Fighters 1 to SF2. People paid for that and most were happy (although losing multiplayer sucked).

 

If ED do have modular as a design goal then that work has to start in earnest *now*, it can't be retrofitted later (pain threshold will be too high). At the moment there are aspects of the sim that are not particularly modular (at least to the modders).

 

I would think it would be possible. It seems honestly like even now would be too late since they have begun development on whatever the next plane is going to be. What would really make sense is a core engine that would be the sim itself and what you buy is the flight model and the plane model and so on. Then if you had an upgrade for the engine itself it would only need to be bought once and irregardless of the planes you did own it would always be compatible and you would only need to buy the upgrade once.

 

The way they are doing it right now is going to cost them more and us more.

[159th_Viper]

 

*Bump*

 

Apologies

 

Hang on and I'll attempt to find out for you - I'm however 75% certain you download training videos and view via the training section of the SP GUI as per BS1.

[nomdeplume]

I would think it would be possible. It seems honestly like even now would be too late since they have begun development on whatever the next plane is going to be. What would really make sense is a core engine that would be the sim itself and what you buy is the flight model and the plane model and so on.

 

Anything's possible, it's just a matter of where you spend your time; i.e. priorities. The directory structure of BS/FC2/A10C etc. strongly suggests they're keeping modularity in mind. It's just not the highest priority at the moment so they're not delaying development and improvements in order to maintain the modularity.

Then if you had an upgrade for the engine itself it would only need to be bought once and irregardless of the planes you did own it would always be compatible and you would only need to buy the upgrade once.

That assumes an engine upgrade wouldn't require any additional work/updates made to the aircraft themselves. That seems like a pretty bold assumption. Unless of course you're talking low-fidelity aircraft with little integration with the game world and only a set of generic parameters to adjust in order to give them unique flight models, weapons, sensors, etc. Or engine upgrades which have no meaningful effect on the flight experience...?

 

The way they are doing it right now is going to cost them more and us more.

I don't think there's any reason to assume that the current model is the only one they'll ever use. Then again, it may be the only that's actually viable. Maybe having an integrated battlefield with every platform simulated in high detail costs more than $60 per product...

 

I think ED/TFC could have and should have communicated this plan better, but I don't think it's a bad plan. The main issue I can see is with die-hard rotorheads who only bought Warthog in order to support development of the engine, when they were under the impression they'd eventually get the new features developed for Warthog 'for free'. Now they're finding they actually have to pay for them 'again'. Many are probably happy to do so, but it'd be nicer to have the options presented up front rather than being 'tricked' into being extra-generous.

Edited November 3, 2011 by nomdeplume

[Boberro]

That's a bummer.

 

Very big bummer.

I assume FC3 is currently under development? :smilewink:

 

FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 FC3 (...)

[Tucano_uy]

They are addons to the original product, what is the problem? You don't have to buy them.

 

Nate

 

The problem, in my opinion, is that people keeps calling and thinking about DCS products as "Modules" (parts of a larger common thing) as it was announced years ago.

 

It seems to me that DCS with time took another route. The truth is that nowadays the 2 DCS products that we have and probably the future ones, are modules of nothing, they're actually stand alone simulations that can be interconected (sometimes, and to get that, we have to pay). That's not bad per se, or a criticism. It just doesn't seem to be the original plan or the ideal.

 

Guys, make peace with it, that's the way it is and DCS needs to get money from us every now and then to keep going.

 

Ideally, in my view, updates or upgrades to the core module (executable files, installation folders, scenarios, maps, ME, physics, textures, etc) would be common for all aircraft and then aircraft modules would sort of plug into that structure. I'm sure that this can't be done due technical reasons and not just because.

 

It is obvious that with the current model, in the future it will be very expensive to keep everything up to date, and I'm not talking about the aircraft themselves but the scenarios and game engine. And compatibility then it will be a nightmare. Until there's a common playground, if it ever happens.

Edited November 3, 2011 by Tucano_uy
Ok, I wrote this when I was on page 12 of the thread. The idea may have been repeated 20 times since then and page 44.

[Kuky]

I dream of the day when DCS Su-27 or DCS MiG-29 or similar comes out... the day I will start planning/building my home cockpit... ah, the dreams... ED certainly has it in them, they just need to bring it

Edited November 3, 2011 by Kuky