Concerned Customer

[LawnDart]

Hopefully there will be SDKs and tools to help these 3rd party devs see their DCS projects come to fruition and reach their potential. There certainly is a lot of untapped talent out there!

 

BTW, thanks for taking the time to answer questions and concerns Nate!

[Grab]

Capitalism should be allowed to work in the sim world, too.

 

I couldn't agree with this more. If I were a 3rd party developer working on a project and getting it to a point where it can be submitted to ED for licensing and I see another developer posting renders of every airplane in the encyclopedia as if they are reserving the right to it, I would be extremely deflated.

 

That's what I'm talking about!

 

So, how come these (relatively unknown) 3rd party devs are allowed to post images using DCS logos and title their WIP projects as DCS or add 'DCS Series' as a watermark on their render shots? That's sending expectations sky-rocketing and in some cases skepticism, too.

 

If it truly is a legal issue, having an unapproved product (that's in development) using DCS in the main title seems almost more misleading. (Just playing devil's advocate here).

 

This is exactly what prompted my concerns and exactly why it posted. From the outside looking in it looks like ED isn't providing enough oversight and control over what is going on with the licensing.

 

To everyone who has wondering why it's a big deal and why people are so invested in this issue it's simple. I'll go out on a limb and say that a LOT of the users on this forum and that use these products have spent hundreds, thousands of dollars on pits, computers, controls you name it. When something like this is your primary hobby and you spend that much money on it, you are very invested in it's future.

[HiJack]

When something like this is your primary hobby and you spend that much money on it, you are very invested in it's future.

Well, that is completely your decision, not ED's.

[Grab]

Well, that is completely your decision, not ED's.

 

You have completely missed the point.

[metalnwood]

I have spent more than most on their setup. Not a cent was spent on any expectation for future products other than enhancing what I already had.

 

If you do there is only one person to blame, thankfully when you do it adds to life experience and you don't do it again.

[metalnwood]

You have completely missed the point.

 

I missed your point as well, you said some people were invested because of the amount of money they spent.

[aaron886]

I missed your point as well, you said some people were invested because of the amount of money they spent.

 

He was providing one reason why people are invested in the future of this hobby. ED knows they have an implicit responsibility to help shape the future of combat flight simulation. (And flight simulation in general.) Quite a valid statement.

[BIGNEWY]

It does not matter what level of aircraft is introduced to the Sim, at the end of the day its up to the mission designer to include or exclude aircraft from a mission.

[metalnwood]

He was providing one reason why people are invested in the future of this hobby. ED knows they have an implicit responsibility to help shape the future of combat flight simulation. (And flight simulation in general.) Quite a valid statement.

 

Yes, I am sure it's just one example. If someone spends money betting on the future and the gamble doesn't pay off then don't blame the casino for any implicit responsibility you may have thought they had to provide you money for a holiday.

 

Edit, lets put it this way. IMHO the only investment you should really feel let down on is your love for the game. It never sat well with me that people might say I spent $$$, now it's owed to me.

 

Only lobbyists get that return.

Edited June 18, 2012 by metalnwood

[nemises]

I don't believe such comments are accurate.

 

Consider all the Open Source projects that succeed even without funds (a large proportion all of the Internet/Web/email/Google infrastructure is run on Open Source, but this is invisible to most users).

 

Then consider how much has been done by unpaid modders in FC1 and FC2.

 

Flight simulation is indeed a niche compared to the blockbuster first-person-shooter titles. That means that giants like EA or Microsoft cannot support their heavy infrastructure (big offices and layers and layers of management) with flight sim products.

 

However the smaller and nimbler Eagle Dynamics seems to be thriving with flight simulation and they probably are sufficiently profitable to keep going (even if not in the same scale as EA or Microsoft).

 

So please don't mistake the flight simulation niche as unprofitable or at risk of evaporating.

 

For small capital outlays there can be modest profits in developing extensions to flight simulators (read the introduction to the VRS SuperBug where they provide a perspective on this).

 

For those that develop good add-ons to DCS they will probably get sufficient returns to make it worthwhile (and the funny thing is, they will be more profitable than giants like Sony who make billions in losses, although revenues are obviously smaller - but that makes even this niche a better use of capital than the capital in Sony's consumer electronics!).

 

Finally, I think it is a statement to the incredible success and innovation of the DCS products that the community here is worried that the high standard will be maintained. As much as it must be a pain for the moderators to read, you guys should take it as a pat on the back for both the product and the community you have built and maintain.

 

Just wanted to quote this valuable post as I think it got lost at the end of page 10 there..

Good post Moa

[Kuky]

I am now "concerned" also... many 3rd part developers have emerged in past 1-2 weeks and I am bit disapointed that I see no Russian aircraft are on the list, with exception of beczl's MiG-21. I would hope at least every 3rd/4th aircraft announced would be Russian make... but so far they are all US and 2 european.

 

Also, I really want to know what the hell is ED making since we have 3rd party making F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18, F-22 pretty much all US fighters are out on the open... so what is this popular US fixed wing aircraft ED is cooking? I am very curious now!

 

Could it be the harrier?

[Ells228]

Could it be the harrier?

 

(sarcasm) I thought Nate was developing that hehe (/sarcasm)

[112th_Rossi]

Colour me concerned also.

 

I'm a bit worried that the sim will be flooded with any old toss.

[winz]

I don't care, as long it's not ED lowering the bar on it's own products.

Everything else is just a bonus opposed to the situation where ED would not open its platform for 3rd party developers.

If it's good, I'll buy it... If it's not, I'll just move along. Having a choice is never a bad thing.

[Pyroflash]

I would rather be stranded by myself on a life raft than be an ED team member right now.

 

Why?

 

Because I wouldn't have a forum full of people trying to question my command of said life raft.

[Ells228]

Everything else is just a bonus opposed to the situation where ED would not open its platform for 3rd party developers.

 

ED has always opened its platform for developers.

 

We developed for LockOn, FC1 and FC2 and now DCS ??

 

The thing with LockOn is that no-one charged for their "mods".

 

Also the thing to remember here is that similar to the FSX market, you chose which products to buy and not to buy. No one is forcing you to buy "any old toss" and your decision will be based on screenshots, videos and people's experience of the add-on.

 

From a development and sales point of view, if a team makes a bad add-on then it won't sell and that team will have a bad reputation in the community and future sales will drop.

Once you lose trust from your customer base, it's very hard to recover from it, even if a kick-ass product is made.

 

I would rather be stranded by myself on a life raft than be an ED team member right now.

 

Why?

 

Because I wouldn't have a forum full of people trying to question my command of said life raft.

 

People will always question the command of said life-raft becuase they think they can do better, or don't fully understand why some commands are given. That's the nature of life and freedom of speach.

Edited June 18, 2012 by Ells228

[112th_Rossi]

My concern is that if 3rd Party addons do not consistently meet the quality we've all come to expect from ED, the reputation of ED and the platform itself will become diluted.

 

I appreciate the fact that users can review the addon first and get feedback from existing users but I think I would prefer a handfull of awesomely modelled addons upto the quality of ED products, than a whole collection of items of questionable quality.

 

Thats not to say that the open platform is not a good thing but over the last couple of weeks we've seen enthusiastic posts from 3rd Party devs who have elevated the expectation of the community to great heights. The promise of jets that we all know have highly top secret aspects have to be greeted with some sort of scepticism. And this begs the question, why bother with a 3rd Party addon that is dumbed down since the data it's built on is a best guess?

 

This is my main concern, I would be more excited if jets were being made for which we knew the devs could get hold of reliable and accurate data. I know we have a choice, but I won't be rushing out to buy the F-22 because I know it'll be a fantasy mod rather than something as real as it can be.

[Jinja]

+1 to those around page 10-13 that conversed with Nate in distilling the souce of the concern from people, around 3rd parties announcing planes a la DCS: F16.

The expectation is that any such monikored release is identical in quality/FM to A-10/BS/P51

 

I think all party planes should be released as:

 

Iris: F-22

 

And great fanfare is then made when such a product is given the elevated distinction of being allowed to be titled DCS:F-22 by Iris.

 

My only 2-cents in this thread!

[HiJack]

I am now "concerned" also... many 3rd part developers have emerged in past 1-2 weeks and I am bit disapointed that I see no Russian aircraft are on the list, with exception of beczl's MiG-21. I would hope at least every 3rd/4th aircraft announced would be Russian make... but so far they are all US and 2 european.

 

Also, I really want to know what the hell is ED making since we have 3rd party making F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18, F-22 pretty much all US fighters are out on the open... so what is this popular US fixed wing aircraft ED is cooking? I am very curious now!

 

Could it be the harrier?

As I have said looong ago, ED is building the F-35 :D And as we all know the F-35 cant land on a carrier with the hook so I guess they are all trying different modells to overcome the problem. Can you see there are months of testing with this :doh:

[Fox One]

My concern is that if 3rd Party addons do not consistently meet the quality we've all come to expect from ED, the reputation of ED and the platform itself will become diluted.

 

I appreciate the fact that users can review the addon first and get feedback from existing users but I think I would prefer a handfull of awesomely modelled addons upto the quality of ED products, than a whole collection of items of questionable quality.

 

Thats not to say that the open platform is not a good thing but over the last couple of weeks we've seen enthusiastic posts from 3rd Party devs who have elevated the expectation of the community to great heights. The promise of jets that we all know have highly top secret aspects have to be greeted with some sort of scepticism. And this begs the question, why bother with a 3rd Party addon that is dumbed down since the data it's built on is a best guess?

 

This is my main concern, I would be more excited if jets were being made for which we knew the devs could get hold of reliable and accurate data. I know we have a choice, but I won't be rushing out to buy the F-22 because I know it'll be a fantasy mod rather than something as real as it can be.

 

Great post. I feel the same.

[secret1962]

+1 to those around page 10-13 that conversed with Nate in distilling the souce of the concern from people, around 3rd parties announcing planes a la DCS: F16.

The expectation is that any such monikored release is identical in quality/FM to A-10/BS/P51

 

I think all party planes should be released as:

 

Iris: F-22

 

And great fanfare is then made when such a product is given the elevated distinction of being allowed to be titled DCS:F-22 by Iris.

 

My only 2-cents in this thread!

 

Or DCS: Iris F-22

[winz]

ED has always opened its platform for developers.

 

We developed for LockOn, FC1 and FC2 and now DCS ??

 

The thing with LockOn is that no-one charged for their "mods".

 

Also the thing to remember here is that similar to the FSX market, you chose which products to buy and not to buy. No one is forcing you to buy "any old toss" and your decision will be based on screenshots, videos and people's experience of the add-on.

 

From a development and sales point of view, if a team makes a bad add-on then it won't sell and that team will have a bad reputation in the community and future sales will drop.

Once you lose trust from your customer base, it's very hard to recover from it, even if a kick-ass product is made.

Most likely poor choice of words on my side. I didn't ment to imply that Lockon/DCS was unmoddable or ED was restrictive in modding. But afaik most of modders knowledge was based on reverse engineering EDs products and some areas were problematic (i.e. cockpit controls). Yes ED did provide basic tools for i.e. model export or some basic support for the enthusiastic modders, but it never got big and ED never provided some coherent API for 3rd party developes, nor did it seek to form a payware addon market (as you mention). That's what I ment with 'closed'.

 

As you say, I have an option to choose the products I want to buy and those that I won't. And that's why I have no problem with 3rd party developers. I would be satisfied even If only one of those product is worth my money, because that's one more sim I wouldn't otherwise had. Tbh, I think more then one good product will come from 3rd parties ;)

[Wolfie]

I am now "concerned" also... many 3rd part developers have emerged in past 1-2 weeks and I am bit disapointed that I see no Russian aircraft are on the list, with exception of beczl's MiG-21. I would hope at least every 3rd/4th aircraft announced would be Russian make... but so far they are all US and 2 european.

 

Also, I really want to know what the hell is ED making since we have 3rd party making F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18, F-22 pretty much all US fighters are out on the open... so what is this popular US fixed wing aircraft ED is cooking? I am very curious now!

 

Could it be the harrier?

 

As far as I can tell, no one has announced F-16C, F-18C

[nemises]

I can't see how having more choice could ever be a bad thing?

..if the modules 3rd parties release don't meet your standards...don't buy them?..

 

ED are still doing whatever it is they are doing..that hasn't changed..

 

how does other people doing other stuff on top somehow become a negative?

 

comon chaps...I may live in England, but you seem to be the ones complaining over nothing?

[Double_D]

I can't see how having more choice could ever be a bad thing?

..if the modules 3rd parties release don't meet your standards...don't buy them?..

 

ED are still doing whatever it is they are doing..that hasn't changed..

 

how does other people doing other stuff on top somehow become a negative?

 

comon chaps...I may live in England, but you seem to be the ones complaining over nothing?

 

I agree:thumbup:

 

Isn't it that always...about " Nothing " :music_whistling: