BS2 and Nevada Map

[BrumTx]

Earliest post I can find is page 310 of this forum

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=32647&page=310 use Google Chrome to translate

[BigBANGtheory]

we seem to have three key issues here:

 

1. DCS Nevada update may or may not be free to people that bought the A-10C beta, which is probably best clarified in the A-10C forum and isn't really relevent to BS2.

 

2. DCS Nevada update which we know is applicable to A-10C logically could also apply to BS2 (with compatibility patch), but may not or worse still could be a seperate DCS BS2 Nevada update.

 

3. ED is being accused of poor information handling by some members of the community with respect to BS2.

 

Personally I have no issue with paying for BS2 and paying for the Nevada update to DCS.

 

I would however have an issue with having paid for the BS2 update and compatibility with A-10C, to then be faced with A-10C branching off again and being incompatible in Nevada scenarios or having to pay twice for the Nevada upate i.e. once for A-10C then again for BS2.

 

The Nevada update is not likely to be too far away so I think its a fair question for BS2 owners and prospective owners, could we please have some clarity on this ED?

[andysim]

what would Russian Ka50s be doing in Nevada anyway? I really want a desert enviroment to fly in and Nevada seems to be it. Really miss it from Beta1/2/3.

[Spetz]

Who says Nevada has to be played as "Nevada".. Seems a perfect substitue for Afghanistan, despite the Ka-50 not being actually deployed there in RL.

[WynnTTr]

I seriously doubt that it would be hard for them to see who bought what. It's very a simple db query afterall. Even you can look up your account details and get your keys from the DCS site.

 

But what has been definitely said with absolute clarity - those that pre-puchased A-10 will be getting Nevada for free.

 

Ofc this doesn't mean that ED will change their minds (and it's their prerogative) but the public outcry will be huge as this has already been stated clearly that it was to be free for pre-purchases. And complaining is our prerogative (note: complain, not whining incessantly).

 

With logic, one would think that those that pre-purchased A-10 and also have BS2 will have access to Nevada for both aircraft. Likewise you'd think that those that only purchased BS2 or A-10 at release would have to pay for Nevada.

Even if they choose to charge $20 for Nevada for the BS to fly in it, I'll still get it. It's up to you if you don't for BS. It was never stated that BS2 would be getting Nevada for free, only pre-purchased A-10's. Just because the two aircraft can fly together it doesn't mean that a map designed for one game should be common to all other separate games. We have a common airspace for that already.

Edited November 7, 2011 by WynnTTr

[BigBANGtheory]

I seriously doubt that it would be hard for them to see who bought what. It's very a simple db query afterall. Even you can look up your account details and get your keys from the DCS site.

 

But what has been definitely said with absolute clarity - those that pre-puchased A-10 will be getting Nevada for free.

 

Ofc this doesn't mean that ED will change their minds (and it's their prerogative) but the public outcry will be huge as this has already been stated clearly that it was to be free for pre-purchases. And complaining is our prerogative (note: complain, not whining incessantly).

 

With logic, one would think that those that pre-purchased A-10 and also have BS2 will have access to Nevada for both aircraft. Likewise you'd think that those that only purchased BS2 or A-10 at release would have to pay for Nevada.

Even if they choose to charge $20 for Nevada for the BS to fly in it, I'll still get it. It's up to you if you don't for BS. It was never stated that BS2 would be getting Nevada for free, only pre-purchased A-10's. Just because the two aircraft can fly together it doesn't mean that a map designed for one game should be common to all other separate games. We have a common airspace for that already.

 

I think that is what people expect, but its far from clear that it is going to happen that way or indeed if we will end up with a 2-tier version of A-10C.

 

The point is though if you are buying BS2 it is reasonable to ask up front what the plan is here, even if the answer is 'no Nevada update for DCS will be an exclusive to A-10C when its released', regardless of cost.

 

I would like to see the KA-50 to be invited for a training exercise next year ;), but if thats not going to happen please don't tell me on the day its released.

[Insanatrix]

As far as BS2 is concerned I don't think many people have trouble parting with $20 bucks for it. It's been more of an issue of how it was marketed so to speak. It would be like if they charged pre purchasers for the Nevada update after they said it would be free for pre purchasers. You would be pretty pissed in a way because in essence it was included with your pre purchase. Common belief as per developer statements and "Wishes" was that BS would be upgraded with every release of a module as part of the program you bought and not as a seperate program you would have to buy new with each module. Hence the reason for most of the so called "Whining".

 

 

As for Nevada update It would seem silly that they wouldn't incorporate it into BS2 just like A-10C in some way. They are supposed to be compatible hence one of the reasons to purchase BS2. However I believe that Nevada is being given free to pre purchasers to somewhat make up for the fact that it wasn't ready for release with A-10C. It was intended as a feature in A-10C from retail until they realized that it would take more time to implement the features. It stands to reason then that since it's another Upgrade, that it's not really a patch for either A-10C or BS2, that you would have to buy it for both programs. I truly hope not but without any confirmation from ED it seems the most logical course of action.

[159th_Viper]

Why not all agree that, rather than flogging this already-departed Equus any longer for fear of fraying the whip, we wait for, as Sobek correctly stated on pg1, official word prior to resorting to a myriad of colourful assumptions, all of which have already been drummed home repeatedly in numerous threads.

 

Ta

[MadTommy]

Why not all agree that, rather than flogging this already-departed Equus any longer for fear of fraying the whip, we wait for, as Sobek correctly stated on pg1, official word prior to resorting to a myriad of colourful assumptions, all of which have already been drummed home repeatedly in numerous threads.

 

Ta

 

I can think of two good reasons that this is being discussed..

 

Rightly people probably fear there will be no word prior to its release. ED have a track record for this.

 

And people rightly would like to have their opinion heard by ED prior to the release / decision being made.

 

While i agree one does not need to act like a dog with a bone... but the initiative is clearly in ED hands, they could simply let us know what they plan to do.. they must have had long enough to decide, and if they haven't decided the community should be making its feeling heard on this subject.

[Cali]

Why not all agree that, rather than flogging this already-departed Equus any longer for fear of fraying the whip, we wait for, as Sobek correctly stated on pg1, official word prior to resorting to a myriad of colourful assumptions, all of which have already been drummed home repeatedly in numerous threads.

 

Ta

 

Waiting on offical word, does that mean when it's released, a few days prior or what?

 

 

Good post MadTommy, even a few days would have been nice. Some people don't care if they had no notice and only saw it when they looked in here or some other forum. Some are upset that it was sprung on them at the last minute. Either be mad or happy, most people are surprised buy the $20 price tag, which isn't much. With that being said, I hope they let us know in advance on things like that. If does seem that the Russian side of the forums gets more or better info then everyone else.

[Insanatrix]

I can think of two good reasons that this is being discussed..

 

Rightly people probably fear there will be no word prior to its release. ED have a track record for this.

 

And people rightly would like to have their opinion heard by ED prior to the release / decision being made.

 

While i agree one does not need to act like a dog with a bone... but the initiative is clearly in ED hands, they could simply let us know what they plan to do.. they must have had long enough to decide, and if they haven't decided the community should be making its feeling heard on this subject.

 

+1

[71st_Mastiff]

I hope we get it and hope to blow up that town

for all the money I lost there!

[159th_Viper]

 

And people rightly would like to have their opinion heard by ED prior to the release / decision being made.

 

 

I agree.

 

I will however reiterate that opinions are being voiced by the same people in numerous threads on countless occasions already. As such I would advise that prior to posting any further on the subject, take a minute and contemplate whether you have not already had your say/voiced your opinion on the very matter you are attempting to belabour ad nauseum.

 

If so, kindly refrain from belabouring the point any further. Repeating the same mantra over and over again will unfortunately not bring anyone any closer to the answers they seek.

[Fish]

So if your a paid for A10 as a beta purchaser, who is entitled to get the nevada update for A10, would you then have to pay for it in BS2 I wonder?

[Insanatrix]

So if your a paid for A10 as a beta purchaser, who is entitled to get the nevada update for A10, would you then have to pay for it in BS2 I wonder?

 

that is what we're wondering.

[WynnTTr]

As far as BS2 is concerned I don't think many people have trouble parting with $20 bucks for it. It's been more of an issue of how it was marketed so to speak. It would be like if they charged pre purchasers for the Nevada update after they said it would be free for pre purchasers. You would be pretty pissed in a way because in essence it was included with your pre purchase.

One flaw in your logic there - ED have NEVER said that the upgrade was going to be free as they have so definitively said that Nevada was going to be for pre-purchasers of the A-10. So you really can't make a statement like that.

 

Common belief as per developer statements and "Wishes" was that BS would be upgraded with every release of a module as part of the program you bought and not as a seperate program you would have to buy new with each module. Hence the reason for most of the so called "Whining".

The key word here is: belief. Again, where have they definitely said that it was going to be free? It's going to be part of a big battlefield yes, but nowhere did they say it's going to be free.

 

As for Nevada update It would seem silly that they wouldn't incorporate it into BS2 just like A-10C in some way. They are supposed to be compatible hence one of the reasons to purchase BS2. However I believe that Nevada is being given free to pre purchasers to somewhat make up for the fact that it wasn't ready for release with A-10C.

I think it's a reward for pre-purchasing A-10, for the early support and faith of the final product (as most rewards for pre-purchases are). If the reason is that it wasn't ready for release then they'd just release it later for everyone free.

 

It stands to reason then that since it's another Upgrade, that it's not really a patch for either A-10C or BS2, that you would have to buy it for both programs. I truly hope not but without any confirmation from ED it seems the most logical course of action.

Gotta remember that Nevada is an A-10 map, not a BS one. As I said previously, just because it's a map designed for one separate game/module doesn't mean it should automatically be available for all other modules. Plenty of sequels in other genres have their own exclusive maps.

[C6_Hellfrog]

the simpler soluce in my personnal opinion,

 

to avoid breaking once again the community,

 

but surely not the best soluce, regarding every people point of view,

 

would be,

if one has to pay for Nevada,

 

would be that Nevada installs on each game, either A10 or BS2.

 

And only A10 beta testers will benefit rebate/no charge on Nevada

 

Doing like that, people have to pay for Nevada development,

but only one time, whatever the simulator they use... and A10 and BS2 will maintain compatibility...

 

my 2 cents...

 

not the BEST utopic soluce, but a realistic one, and not the worse...

[WynnTTr]

the simpler soluce in my personnal opinion,

 

to avoid breaking once again the community,

 

but surely not the best soluce, regarding every people point of view,

 

would be,

if one has to pay for Nevada,

 

would be that Nevada installs on each game, either A10 or BS2.

 

And only A10 beta testers will benefit rebate/no charge on Nevada

 

Doing like that, people have to pay for Nevada development,

but only one time, whatever the simulator they use... and A10 and BS2 will maintain compatibility...

 

my 2 cents...

 

not the BEST utopic soluce, but a realistic one, and not the worse...

Yeah that's what I'm hoping too and would be a better move for the community. Not a smarter move for income though.

[VincentLaw]

I think it's a reward for pre-purchasing A-10, for the early support and faith of the final product (as most rewards for pre-purchases are). If the reason is that it wasn't ready for release then they'd just release it later for everyone free.

During beta, the DCS website stated that Nevada would be a feature in the A-10C release. Since Nevada was not ready for release, but people that already bought A-10C would not be getting everything they were advertised, they were told Nevada would be free for them. It is not simply a reward for faithfulness. That said, the final version of Nevada has much more depth than originally planned.

Gotta remember that Nevada is an A-10 map, not a BS one. As I said previously, just because it's a map designed for one separate game/module doesn't mean it should automatically be available for all other modules. Plenty of sequels in other genres have their own exclusive maps.

At this point it is really neither, Nevada is a stand alone map. Making vehicle exclusive maps for DCS would be directly opposed to cooperative multiplayer and greatly limit DCS. Who doesn't want to fly a helicopter around an urban environment like Vegas?

 

Honestly, if ED makes Fantasy-magical-rainbow-pony-unicorn-candyland map module, I want to be able to fly my Ka-50 and A-10C around it. Would it make sense? not really. Is there any reason I shouldn't be able to? No.

Edited November 11, 2011 by VincentLaw

[WynnTTr]

At this point it is really neither, Nevada is a stand alone map. Making vehicle exclusive maps for DCS would be directly opposed to cooperative multiplayer and greatly limit DCS. Who doesn't want to fly a helicopter around an urban environment like Vegas?

 

Honestly, if ED makes Fantasy-magical-rainbow-pony-unicorn-candyland map module, I want to be able to fly my Ka-50 and A-10C around it. Would it make sense? not really. Is there any reason I shouldn't be able to? No.

True but that doesn't stop ED from charging for it if they wanted to - and that the we shouldn't expect that BS customers would get it automatically either.

 

As I said previously, the only thing we know with absolute certainty - ED have said that pre-purchased A-10 accounts will get Nevada for free.

 

Anything else is in that fantasy-magical-rainbow-pony-unicorn candyland that you mentioned - right along with customer beliefs.

[RustyNuts]

Gentlemen, it is a dead horse.

It won't get up and win the Melbourne Cup no matter how much you flog it.

[BigBANGtheory]

<I don't believe this has been mentioned yet, at least not here>

 

Pre-purchase beta users of A10-C likely paid in the region of $60 at the time, where as now you can buy A10-C for $40 so if the update was to be charged at $20 for 'others' that would not be unreasonable.