SimHQ interview - DCS Q&A with Matt Wagner

[sobek]

Then again, I don't understand the difficulties some have with updating the current products.

 

Not everybody is sitting on the business end of a massive connection, and since an auto updater updates only the parts that are necessary, it comes with huge bandwith savings for users as well as for eagle dynamics, this also means less waiting for an update to finish.

[tintifaxl]

Not everybody is sitting on the business end of a massive connection, and since an auto updater updates only the parts that are necessary, it comes with huge bandwith savings for users as well as for eagle dynamics, this also means less waiting for an update to finish.

 

Do you happen to know, if the user can select if and what he wants to update?

[Cedaway]

Not everybody is sitting on the business end of a massive connection, and since an auto updater updates only the parts that are necessary, it comes with huge bandwith savings for users as well as for eagle dynamics, this also means less waiting for an update to finish.

 

+1.

And yes, I missed the information about auto-updater.

Any date? Yes, I know, when it's done ;-)

[blaster454]

While I welcome the auto updater for World, as well as all the new 3rd party promises, I still think that ED is really not putting the priority where it would help most.

 

It has been two plus years since I bought the beta of A-10C and finding out that I probably won't be seeing a terrain update (Nevada) for many months is not pleasant.

 

And I somehow feel that ED places us on-line users in a lower priority. I know our squad has had to put DCS on hold because of the MP problems we run into.

 

I just wish I would see more focused effort on a few issues and features than the broad brush being used now to paint a DCS World filled with modules. Yes, I know that's not a very business-oriented outlook ... I was just wishing.

 

I will continue to sit here and wait and watch and support ED with purchases when the product(s) fit my desires.

[rattler]

And those three words are....?

 

......"when it's done"

 

ya, great interview that would make.:music_whistling:

[leafer]

ya, great interview that would make.:music_whistling:

 

LOL I'd love to see Wag answering every single question with "When it's done!" Tell us about Yo-Yo. "When it's done!" :D

[cichlidfan]

Yo-Yo is subject to change. ;)

[NineLine]

If it was simply a case of creating a new map, then it probably would have been done long ago. The issue is that the map is tied to the creation of a new IG system and the integration of the new terrain into it. That in itself is a massive project that has spanned years.

 

How close to after Nevada release do you expect the mapping tools to be made available, or might we see them before so 3rd parties might get started on maps?

[rattler]

LOL I'd love to see Wag answering every single question with "When it's done!" Tell us about Yo-Yo. "When it's done!" :D

 

hahahahahahahahahahahahah:thumbup::D

[Wags]

How close to after Nevada release do you expect the mapping tools to be made available, or might we see them before so 3rd parties might get started on maps?

 

When it's done.

 

 

 

Sorry, couldn't resist.

[NineLine]

When it's done.

 

 

 

Sorry, couldn't resist.

 

Yeah, I deserved that one lol...

[Rikus]

Someone else, feels like this interview and nothing is the same?

 

Greetings

[leafer]

In the meantime, we have started our "Flying Legends" series that was kicked off by DCS: P-51D Mustang.

 

This made my day. I wasn't sure whether they'll release more warbirds, but I take it that was a "Yes, when it's done.".

[MemphisBelle]

Someone else, feels like this interview and nothing is the same?

 

Greetings

 

I wouldnt say that there´s notings. It is clearing up some questions about why thinks happen as they happen.

But what I would like to know (and I wonder why there was no question about it) is the ongoing process about the next DCS Jet module. All I hear is FC3, Nevada, World...that is all fine and I am glad to have those...but I really would also like to know what is about the next fastmover

[Bucic]

Strictly to the point, sentences bearing relevant information and no lies. It doesn't ever resemble politicians' talk :)

 

Yo-Yo is subject to change. ;)

:D

 

'Georgia-ed out' - my new favorite ED-related sentence, right after the 'toilet paper bug' :thumbup:

 

Yesterday I've gone through my usual monthly 'A night with DCS videos' session, as usual on the invaluable Dvdlpt's YouTube channel and I must say there are lots of improvements. The sound, the after-battle scenes (smoking scrap), DCS World platform integration... Wow.

[FunktasticLucky]

I wouldnt say that there´s notings. It is clearing up some questions about why thinks happen as they happen.

But what I would like to know (and I wonder why there was no question about it) is the ongoing process about the next DCS Jet module. All I hear is FC3, Nevada, World...that is all fine and I am glad to have those...but I really would also like to know what is about the next fastmover

 

I feel the same as you. Ever since P-51 and DCS world has come out, there has been no mention of the next module. The last word we got is P-51 has not slowed the progress of the fast mover module. No it probably hasn't. But DCS world, combined arms, and FC3 apparently has. And the Nevada terrain. I'm very thankful for DCS and ED for putting time and resources into these modules. I'm just very disappointed in the lack of information that is released about these projects. My belief here is that the fast mover has been put on hold or canxed and nobody is saying anything.

[HiJack]

Same with Twitter, no updates since 15. july. I think they are hard working on the dedicated server and of course the programmers have summer holiday also.

 

(HJ)

[MemphisBelle]

Same with Twitter, no updates since 15. july. I think they are hard working on the dedicated server and of course the programmers have summer holiday also.

 

(HJ)

 

Not to missunderstand my intention. I respectfully see the reason of the delay and know that there are important processes still ongoing. I also love DCS World. It is so much more enjoyable...not speaking of the outstanding menus and selectable wallpapers...awesome...

all I want to have are some information about the process itself...I would also be glad if ED would confirm that the next Jet Module has been delayed or the dev process has stoped due to mentioned reasons above...only a short message, would make my smile...so much more :)

[Gonzo01]

My interest and support of DCS was due to its work in developing hardcore realistic jet simulations, primarily American Jet aircraft. Your hard work at modeling complex aircraft systems and avionics is what drew my interest. I feel that DCS is getting out of hardcore aircraft simulation, and handing over aircraft development to 3rd party developers. As much as I am sure this will add to more aircraft availability, it can also be responsible for adding to the instability of a very complex aircraft simulator. Myself and many others have given a great deal of our time to help debug and support this sim, which has not been an easy task. The addition of 3rd party aircraft modules will make it almost impossible to add stability to a very complex enviroment. I'm asking ED to communicate how they see this process being incorporated into the this very complex enviroment, and to let us know whether they are going to continue to develope hardcore realistic jet aircraft with the same level of detail that was put into the A-10C? For all our hardwork and dedication, I think many of us would greatly appreciate your response to the future direction of DCS in regards to the development of hardcore realistic jet aircraft.

Edited September 1, 2012 by Gonzo01

[Pyroflash]

My interest and support of DCS was due to its work in developing hardcore realistic jet simulations, primarily American Jet aircraft. Your hard work at modeling complex aircraft systems and avionics is what drew my interest. I feel that DCS is getting out of hardcore aircraft simulation, and handing over aircraft development to 3rd party developers. As much as I am sure this will add to more aircraft availability, it can also be responsible for adding to the instability of a very complex aircraft simulator. Myself and many others have given a great deal of our time to help debug and support this sim, which has not been an easy task. The addition of 3rd party aircraft modules will make it almost impossible to add stability to a very complex enviroment. I'm asking ED to communicate how they see this process being incorporated into the this very complex enviroment, and to let us know whether they are going to continue to develope hardcore realistic jet aircraft with the same level of detail that was put into the A-10C? For all our hardwork and dedication, I think many of us would greatly appreciate your response to the future direction of DCS in regards to the development of hardcore realistic jet aircraft.

 

Stuff like this, you shouldn't have to worry, from the looks of it, The Virtual Patriots, VEAO, Beclz, and others are producing quality products that are at least on par with ED's simulation of the Ka-50. Just because they are a 3rd party does not mean that they will not produce fantastic modules. And while it is true that the environment itself is rather complex, you as a user are free to choose what you do within this environment, so if you don't want to bother with something, don't put it in your mission.