Will you buy FC3

[jp203000]

You know , dcs need radar.

 

From Black shark to warthog then to mustang , I feel increasingly isolated with radar .

Edited June 9, 2012 by 159th_Viper
Posts merged.

[Teapot]

We have an expression: the more chefs, the worse the soup. You can't just "throw people" at a problem and expect it to be solved automatically.

 

I think someone famous once quipped something to the effect that if you get heaps and heaps of engineers playing with Borland C++ (on a PC) you'll eventually get a flight simulator ... I think it was Shakespeare ... or was it Einstein :huh: ... Specifically though, I agree with everything you've said.

Edited June 10, 2012 by Teapot
Sobered up. Inappropriate content 4 family forum!

[voodooman]

what are we paying for in FC3?

 

That question popped in to my mind because i started thinking what have i got with FC1 and FC2 compared to the original LOMAC?

 

To be honest i feel i have payed all ready three times and the game still has bugs from original lomac, and modelling of radars, missle's etc. are still way off.

That's what we havent got. No matter how much we have been askin fixes for these things, (that i feel have a big role suppressing online activity to allmost zero) but no. Pathetic imo.

 

And what have got then? yes, what???? some graphical inprovemets yes, but those should have been plain updates, no way they have proved to be worth the money. What ELSE? really?????

 

I have a strong feeling about FC3 beeing released with these same flaws EVERYBODY has known this game to have since beginning. Yes we get into DCS world, but propably with the same broken game as allways before.

 

But you will get my money again because i love to play online, but my respect you have lost ages ago. Especially because modders have been able to correct much you havent, and you are supposed to be the professionals.

And on top of that, you havent implememted anything to the game you havent made your self.

There was a target step mod for F-15, there aslo was a mod that leaves the russians planes radar scanzone to where you lost the lock. now radar pops to opposite gimbal-limit if you had it there when you locked the bandit. I could go on infinitely but i wont. You know all this like all longtime players do....

Edited August 10, 2012 by voodooman

[EtherealN]

Lomac to FC1: one quick thing that comes to mind is "AFM" and "Su-25T".

 

FC1 to FC2: complete overhaul of all aircraft flight model data, and same for missiles. (And more of course, just as a first thing that comes to mind.)

 

FC3: features yet to be released.

[Axion]

Fast movers in DCSW, it's good enough for me!

[Raven68]

The ability to do multiplayer into DCS: World is enough by itself to justify paying for this. There is work involved in adding/changing code to merge the titles with each other. If there is work then they should get paid for it. It's as simple as that.

[voodooman]

"If there is work then they should get paid for it. It's as simple as that."

 

I fail to see your logic. So lets say you take your car to the shop to be repaired. if the car isn't repaired you would still pay the guy because he tried?

 

YOU are the customer here. Have you forgotten that?

 

and EtherealN, you mentioned complete overhaul on FM's including missles.

 

So howcome the launch platform speed still has no effect on missle speed? A feature of that importance, still not implemented. How can you even market it as a sim in this day and age???

 

You are making excuses for jobs not done. period.

Jobs that a modder could have done, but your pride wont give up to ask the modder community's help.

 

If i would get the money to buy ED. i would sack everyone coding FC! EVERYONE! and fill the spots with modders. If that would have been done 2 years ago, we would be playing a game with more flyable planes with more accurate modelling ATM.

Edited August 10, 2012 by voodooman

[Raven68]

"If there is work then they should get paid for it. It's as simple as that."

 

I fail to see your logic. So lets say you take your car to the shop to be repaired. if the car isn't repaired you would still pay the guy because he tried?

 

YOU are the customer here. Have you forgotten that?

 

The difference is that I am a satisfied customer that I will happily pay for an upgrade ALONG WITH REPAIRS. I can appreciate the work that ED does and would support them because what they have delivered and will deliver. I am not trying to blow sunshine up anyone's a$$, but this genre is barely surviving because of funding and this is my way of supporting it.

[GGTharos]

and EtherealN, you mentioned complete overhaul on FM's including missles.

 

So howcome the launch platform speed still has no effect on missle speed?

 

You are making excuses for jobs not done. period.

 

Just because you don't have a clue as to what was done, does it mean that nothing was done?

 

Jobs that a modder could have done, but your pride wont give up to ask the modder community's help.

 

Ahahahahah! :D

 

If i would get the money to buy ED. i would sack everyone coding FC! EVERYONE! and fill the spots with modders. If that would have been done 2 years ago, we would be playing a game with more flyable planes with more accurate modelling ATM.

 

That's probably one of the most ill-informed statements ever made on this forum.

[Exorcet]

How can you even market it as a sim in this day and age???

How is it not a sim? There is no clear boundary separating simulation from not. It's a spectrum. FC features planes that generally fly as the real ones do, with realistic weapon loads, realistic sensor limits, and realistic combat situations.

 

There is a simulator meant to go further than that called DCS, and ED has made it clear that FC is not going to be DCS. That much should be clear.

 

Given the track record of improvements from LOMAC to FC2, I don't expect to receive the same game again. However even FC3 turned out to be the same game, it would come with increased online activity and better mission building via merging with DCS World.

 

It sounds like you want DCS Fighter. I think most people do, but FC3 is not meant to be that.

[Raven68]

That's probably one of the most ill-informed statements ever made on this forum.

 

+1

[voodooman]

Unsatisfied customer

 

Well thats what i am. But like i said, they will get my money again, but not because i appreciate their work, only because there is no alternative.

 

And IMO that's why all others buy it too. And i think ED is taking advantage of this situation making us pay every year or two for...bits and pieces.

 

You see i play other genre games as well. Usually a new game today will get bugs like these (that we have been patiently waiting to be fixed for years) fixed in months from the release. I know that the size and funding of a company plays a big role in all this, but this goes beyond being a small company, this is just super poor customer service. And leaves this genre vulnerable to bigger companies to take over.

Usually i like to take the side of a small company versus a big company but lately i have started to feel that maybe it would be in our interest to lets some big company take over the Genre. We would still be robbed, and would pay more for sure, but i can't avoid thinking that we would also get MUCH more in return in that situation.

I personally have about 1000€ invested in hotas, pedals, tir etc. so paying 50€ every year would not take me down, but paying 30-40€ for nothing makes me frustrated as hell.

Edited August 10, 2012 by voodooman

[EtherealN]

You are of course entitled to your opinion, but you are not paying for nothing. As I said, there are major things being updated in each of the aforementioned upgrade steps. If you don't want them, don't buy it - you'll still have what you paid for and it will work just as fine as it always did.

 

Just don't make the mistake of thinking that you not understanding what was done means nothing was done. It does take a lot of work to find what was done, which includes extensive flight testing in the simulator as well as crossreferencing with documentation on the actual aircraft, which I admit require some work to get hold of. This latter is even harder when it comes to missiles.

 

There is always things to improve, but you simply cannot expect DCS-level simulation of a half-score of aircraft for the price of half a DCS module. Not going to happen.

[sobek]

Voodooman, there are some big flaws in your argumentation, let me point it out to you:

 

First, you argue that ED is milking its customers and offering little in return. For the sake of the argument, let's assume this to be true. That would mean that essentially, they have a huge margin of profit. Yet you realise that ED is still, after so many years of squeezing money out of people, a very small company?!? If they were making that much money without having costs, why would they not expand and capitalize even more on their monopoly? Heck, why haven't they gone public by now?

 

Second, if it is so easy to mod these shortcomings out, or at least, if ED is such a failure software development wise, then why on gods green earth is there no professional modder making a load of money on mods fixing these problems? Why is there no competitor in this field if ED is growing fat off of no work? Surely others could do this, too...

 

Food for thought.

[Raven68]

You are of course entitled to your opinion, but you are not paying for nothing. As I said, there are major things being updated in each of the aforementioned upgrade steps. If you don't want them, don't buy it - you'll still have what you paid for and it will work just as fine as it always did.

 

Just don't make the mistake of thinking that you not understanding what was done means nothing was done. It does take a lot of work to find what was done, which includes extensive flight testing in the simulator as well as crossreferencing with documentation on the actual aircraft, which I admit require some work to get hold of. This latter is even harder when it comes to missiles.

 

There is always things to improve, but you simply cannot expect DCS-level simulation of a half-score of aircraft for the price of half a DCS module. Not going to happen.

 

Voodooman, there are some big flaws in your argumentation, let me point it out to you:

 

First, you argue that ED is milking its customers and offering little in return. For the sake of the argument, let's assume this to be true. That would mean that essentially, they have a huge margin of profit. Yet you realise that ED is still, after so many years of squeezing money out of people, a very small company?!? If they were making that much money without having costs, why would they not expand and capitalize even more on their monopoly? Heck, why haven't they gone public by now?

 

Second, if it is so easy to mod these shortcomings out, or at least, if ED is such a failure software development wise, then why on gods green earth is there no professional modder making a load of money on mods fixing these problems? Why is there no competitor in this field if ED is growing fat off of no work? Surely others could do this, too...

 

Food for thought.

 

Gosh I love coming to these forums and getting educated!! I mean that with all sincerity! :thumbup:

[voodooman]

I am not expecting FC3 to be DCS.

 

There are just too many bugs that have been there too long. As simple as that.

 

YOU think that if customer doesn't understand what all you have done gives you a pass because you worked hard anyways? How can you even think that way????

 

It's the same if you would go to the doctor and said, look doc my ankle is killing me, please help. And when you wake up from anesthesia the doc says: hey, i didnt fix your ankle but i removed a mole from your thigh, being very proud of his work when saying that to you. You still have your ankle busted, but hey! it doenst matter because you dont have that mole anymore, and the poor doc had to work hard to get it out.

 

While getting the mole out was probably a good idea since they might get nasty, but what did you a CUSTOMER wanted the doc to do?

 

Get the drift?????????????????????????????????

Edited August 10, 2012 by voodooman

[GGTharos]

Actually your example is pretty poor. It is entirely possible that the doctor will not be able to help you despite the treatment - and you will still be paying for the treatment.

 

I will reiterate: Just because you think that some things were too simple, or don't add value (For you) doesn't mean that these were easy or cheap to make. Don't like it, don't pay. You claim you are forced to do this, but you really aren't. Whether it fixes your pet peeves or not, FC has been one of the longest officially supported flight simulation series around, and has brought new capabilities with each iteration.

 

Just because you think that 'oh, it's just these planes in DCSW' makes it easy or not special, doesn't make you correct. DCSW itself opens up huge possibilities for FC3 with its mission editor, not to mention the ability to enjoy other DCSW modules like Nevada, or who knows what other types of add-ons.

 

Sort of like how you pay for the convenience of having your pizza delivered, even though the guy didn't work terribly hard or anything.

 

Get the drift?????????!!?!!!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!????!?!!!!!!!!!!?????????????????????????????????

[sobek]

Don't turn things around here, what you are doing is going to the doc and telling him to fix your ankle and after him doing so and you paying him, you complain that he didn't take out your mole for free in the process, because it's such an easy little fast fix. :)

[HiJack]

Voodooman, chill m8. I agree in one thing and that is that FC2 should be patch one more time, to late now. But hey! They can make all bugs go away now with FC3. And there is opened a thread just to report bugs in FC2 that needed to be fixed in FC3. Have you registered the fixes you need there?

 

And you can not say that FC2 was a flopp? Can you?

 

(HJ)

[voodooman]

you are missing the point your selves here.

 

The thing you forget is that this is the THIRD time we "pay to the doctor".

 

And like i pointed out before, fixes for SOME of these issues have been succesfully correctecd by modders in the past.

 

So what is your excuse for not fixing the funny radar gimbal thing i mentioned before on SU/Mig since it has been done before in a simple lua script?

 

Gimme a good explanation and i 'll shut up for good about this.

[Nate--IRL--]

The thing you forget is that this is the THIRD time we "pay to the doctor".

 

And like i pointed out before, fixes for SOME of these issues have been succesfully correctecd by modders in the past.

 

So what is your excuse for not fixing the funny radar gimbal thing i mentioned before on SU/Mig since it has been done before in a simple lua script?

 

Fixing? isn't that a feature?

 

Nate

[GGTharos]

'Out of scope'. Three big words that are part of any software project that you'll ever run into.

 

Why are they out of scope? That's probably something that won't be revealed, but it could be as simple as the developers determining that it would be too much time to overhaul this old code, and they would rather spend the time completing feature X.

 

Further, a bug is only a big if it does not work according to the developer's intent...not because you think it is a bug.

 

The thing you forget is that this is the THIRD time we "pay to the doctor".

 

And like i pointed out before, fixes for SOME of these issues have been succesfully correctecd by modders in the past.

 

So what is your excuse for not fixing the funny radar gimbal thing i mentioned before on SU/Mig since it has been done before in a simple lua script?

 

Gimme a good explanation and i 'll shut up for good about this.

[voodooman]

"Fixing? isn't that a feature?"

So what you are saying is that in real SU/Mig the radar jumps into other side gimbal-limit if that's where the radar was pointed when i locked the enemy, instead of staying where it was pointing when the lock is broken? If this is true, i apologise.

If not. THAT has been corrected with a lua sript before so i dont understand how can it be "out of scope".

[GGTharos]

Why do you need to understand it for it to be out of scope?

[Nate--IRL--]

"Fixing? isn't that a feature?"

So what you are saying is that in real SU/Mig the radar jumps into other side gimbal-limit if that's where the radar was pointed when i locked the enemy, instead of staying where it was pointing when the lock is broken? If this is true, i apologise.

If not. THAT has been corrected with a lua sript before so i dont understand how can it be "out of scope".

 

Sorry yes - I know what you mean now.

 

Nate