03 and 07 May 2013 Updates

[pepin1234]

 

Is the above correct? And if it is correct, in the worst scenario, if I buy FC3 today, I may need to pay more money to have the improved model, and eventually more money again to purchase (finally) the most advanced ones. To no count the fact that in MP (in the future) I may find ppl with the same airplane but with different physics, etc.

 

I'm confused... :\

 

You understand all well. If you want buy FC3 you get 8 aircrafts ( actually you get two of them with AFM, Su-25 and 25T, also they are making the A-10A AFM for FC3 ). The Su-27 and F-15 add-ons will have AFM with the same 3D cockpit and you can buy it separatly like a single module without ubisoft Lockon priority.

[Rikus]

ED is an expert selling the same product many times:

 

From FC1 to FC2, it´s ok, the entry to DCS world and fly with other products but:

 

FC2 to FC3. And now FC3 to SU27 and F15 AFM

 

BS1 to BS2

 

Now, i´m happy i don´t bought FC3, because i will buy the Su27 AFM alone

 

I know many people very angry because they bought FC3 and now knows about the DCS Su27 AFM. If they knew it, they wont buy FC3 and wait till SU27 AFM, but as i said, ED is an expert selling the same many times

 

Greetings

[ishtmail]

No need to restart this all again, Isht.

All your questions have been answered, in multiple different ways. Read back this thread, please. Stop trying to pick a fight.

 

I've read and re-read this entire thread. All I see is a misunderstanding and a thorough misconception of how fast a DCS module can be developed (months?), and the resulting false expectation of when such a DCS module can be expected (this year?), and a vast misunderstanding of what lo-fi module release means for the DCS module (delay?).

 

All these misconceptions should be addressed and cast away.

 

A DCS module takes YEARS to develop.

There was no announcement for a DCS module to be released soon (as in this year).

Lo-fi module will not delay development of DCS modules.

 

 

I understand that people WISH for a DCS module by ED to be released soon (even this year). But some of you EXPECTED it? This I don't understand.

 

 

My questions remain unanswered, and I am not trying to pick a fight, I am trying to make you realize you're being unrealistic in your expectations.

[statrekmike]

Hold on:

 

Why would we have to wait much longer than we had expected for DCS modules?

We all knew that work has not yet begun on DCS F15C and DCS SU27. We all know that developing DCS titles can take a hardened team like ED a year or more. There was never any doubt about the time it will take, never has anyone mentioned months for a DCS module.

 

In best case scenario, we would get DCS F15C and DCS SU27 in late 2014 or early 2015.

 

Questions for you:

- At what point did you expect these two DCS modules sooner?

- What exactly gave you the idea that these DCS modules would/might be released any time soon?

- Where did you get the information or notion that it would take 'months' to develop DCS F15C and DCS SU27?

 

And what exactly has changed with the announcement of lo-fidelity modules? Nothing. These two DCS modules will be developed in exactly the same time frame as they would be without lo-fidelity modules. Why? Because releasing lo-fi modules will not take any time from DCS development - this bonus is only going to harvest AFM which is being developed for DCS modules anyway, and integrate it into existing FC3 airplanes.

 

In fact, there is only one thing that will delay DCS F15C and DCS SU27: and that's DCS FA18. which, as I understand, will come out first, before any other DCS modules developed by ED.

 

 

 

You are clearly trying to pick a fight here so I will just answer your questions and if that is not enough, well, I don't know what else I can say to make it any clearer for you.

 

1.) We had no way of knowing what was going on behind closed doors, many of us assumed that some sort of development had already taken place (beyond what had come out already for FC3).

 

2. This is essentially the same as the last question so I will give you the same answer, DCS A-10C came out years ago, it would not be outside the realm of possibility to assume that some work had already been done beyond what we have thus far seen with FC3.

 

3.) I did not say it would take only "months" to finish a entire module, in fact, I make it very clear (at least two times) in my previous post that I am very aware that it takes a great deal of time, I (and a few others here) simply did not know (due to lack of solid information) what had already been done in regards to work on the next DCS level module.

 

Finally, this also applies to the F/A-18 Hornet, at the moment, we have no way of knowing just how far along they are with that so it could take anywhere between a year to three years to actually complete, as far as many are concerned, this is pretty unpleasant news as we have already been waiting a great deal of time.

 

I suppose we should be thankful that the MiG-21 is pretty far along (as we know the development status of that) so that should be coming soon enough, still, we want a modern DCS level aircraft and at the moment ED has the best show going in that regard, that is why we are all so eager to get our hands on the next fast mover and why it is sad to have so much uncertainty about it's release progress (even in a general sense).

[pepin1234]

ED is an expert selling the same product many times:

 

From FC1 to FC2, it´s ok, the entry to DCS world and fly with other products but:

 

FC2 to FC3. And now FC3 to SU27 and F15 AFM

 

BS1 to BS2

 

Now, i´m happy i don´t bought FC3, because i will buy the Su27 AFM alone

 

I know many people very angry because they bought FC3 and now knows about the DCS Su27 AFM. If they knew it, they wont buy FC3 and wait till SU27 AFM, but as i said, ED is an expert selling the same many times

 

Greetings

 

Sorry but you have not rights. The word " Simulation ", means take one aircraft and one military hardware into the software, not make something like improvement that does not exist.

 

The FC3 have a great graphic and have 3D cockpits, also have the possibility to play against human ground forces ( combined arms ) where the level of simulation is so high, then you can flight using the A-10C or Ka-50 inside the mission.

 

So tell me where is the same, because the Mig-29 and Su-33 have the Ricardo pit like official addon.

 

You get the Su-27 AFM or F-15 AFM but then you have not Su-25/25T AFM, A-10A AFM and Mig-29S, Su-33, F-15, Su-27 all they SFM. So is your choise.

 

So FC2 and FC3 is not the same product, or you already forget the FC2 editor

Edited May 9, 2013 by pepin1234

[howie87]

The more I think about it, the more I'm excited by the advanced flight model.

 

I really hope there is a free upgrade option for FC3 owners though, as I'd like see the SFM done away with altogether one day.

 

Considering I bought A-10C for $15, Black shark 2 for $20 and P-51 for $10... I think FC3 is a little expensive for what it is at the moment.

 

$20 for F-15C, $20 for SU27 and $50 for FC3 including both seems like fair pricing to me. Although I'm sure many would disagree.

Edited May 9, 2013 by howie87

[Levinsky]

1.) We had no way of knowing what was going on behind closed doors, many of us assumed that some sort of development had already taken place (beyond what had come out already for FC3).

 

Well you know what they say about assumptions right? I think here in lies the biggest issue I've seen in this thread. I wouldn't presume to know what goes on at ED except a group of guys who could probably earn more money doing something else but are working very hard on something that no one else seems to be doing, that they are very passionate about and hope we'll all get a kick out of.

 

2. This is essentially the same as the last question so I will give you the same answer, DCS A-10C came out years ago, it would not be outside the realm of possibility to assume that some work had already been done beyond what we have thus far seen with FC3.

 

Why would you assume anything? Again you're creating an assumption and then getting upset when ED don't live up to it.

 

3.) I did not say it would take only "months" to finish a entire module, in fact, I make it very clear (at least two times) in my previous post that I am very aware that it takes a great deal of time, I (and a few others here) simply did not know (due to lack of solid information) what had already been done in regards to work on the next DCS level module.

 

So we all know the world is full of change. Plans and priorities change over time - I think everyone understands that. Given a lot of the responses on this thread would you want to try and give "more solid" information if you were ED? I mean come on.

 

Finally, this also applies to the F/A-18 Hornet, at the moment, we have no way of knowing just how far along they are with that so it could take anywhere between a year to three years to actually complete, as far as many are concerned, this is pretty unpleasant news as we have already been waiting a great deal of time.

 

So you think threads like this one will make ED share more information with us about their internal planning? If I were ED I would have just continued work on F-18 without telling anyone and just announce it. That way no one gets excited or disappointed.

 

Guys it would be far easier for ED to say nothing. Honestly from this thread as much as myself and a great number of other people would hate to see the updates vanish - I'm starting to think it's the right thing to do.

 

I'll leave everyone with something my grandfather used to say to me when I was young........

 

Fools should never be shown half finished work

 

From this thread I'd say we all look pretty foolish.

 

Ken.

[npole]

Honestly it's not only about money, but about the separation of having the same aircraft in 3 different variants. Imagine in a MP server, i'm dog-fighting against someone else without knowing if he's using a Su27 from FC3, a Su27 with the AFM, or a Su-27 at DCS level .. it sounds very odd to me.

 

I would love to pay today $50 to have a SINGLE plane, at "basic" level that would evolves into the "DCS level", even if this will happens in 2 years, so I will certainly ends with the "complete" aircraft, and much important: there will be only ONE type of these aircrafts around.

 

I mean, it is already a "mess" now with all these games, mix of things.. didn't they created DCS World to simplify it? Then make it simple!: one module - one version - one thing!

[TZeer]

People who expect a free upgrade of their FC3 series for their F-15/SU-27 AFM should calm down a little and not get their hopes up.

 

1: F-15/SU-27 modules will be standalone products.

 

2: Due to this, they will most likely have nothing to do with FC3.

 

3: Reason for this is to separate it from the Ubisoft and all the issues around that. The need for lock on to install FC3. Copyrights+++

 

Imo this is a good thing. As it makes the modules no longer attached to Ubisoft in any way or form.

[Darkwolf]

There is nothing to say about the F-16 at this time. (wags)

 

 

That direct answer mean they is something to speculate about the F16

[ishtmail]

I am just as eager to get a DCS:fast_mover as the next guy.

 

But Wags' latest updates left absolutely no room for speculation regarding DCS modules and their stage of development:

 

NO DCS modules have any significant development stage at this point, and although there were hints of DCS FA18, F15 and SU27 in march and april newsletters, that is only a month ago, which means nothing serious could have been developed since those newsletters.

 

DCS:FA18 is being PLANNED, meaning they're probably still gathering the necessary info and documentation (here I am, making assumptions).

DCS:SU27 and DCS:F15C have not begun yet, and there was never any information that could lead anyone to assume they were already being developed. However, they WILL start with DCS F15 and SU27 development, by first doing the AFM.

AFM will be integrated into existing FC3 models and released as standalone lo-fi versions.

 

 

This is all the official word, and everything else are false assumptions, misconceptions and misinterpretations of the known facts.

That these false assumtions were leading into disappointment is obvious, but you'll have to deal with this: the false assumptions were yours alone and ED is not to blame, meaning that such bickering online is inappropriate.

[TZeer]

Honestly it's not only about money, but about the separation of having the same aircraft in 3 different variants. Imagine in a MP server, i'm dog-fighting against someone else without knowing if he's using a Su27 from FC3, a Su27 with the AFM, or a Su-27 at DCS level .. it sounds very odd to me.

 

I would love to pay today $50 to have a SINGLE plane, at "basic" level that would evolves into the "DCS level", even if this will happens in 2 years, so I will certainly ends with the "complete" aircraft, and much important: there will be only ONE type of these aircrafts around.

 

I mean, it is already a "mess" now with all these games, mix of things.. didn't they created DCS World to simplify it? Then make it simple!: one module - one version - one thing!

 

Not an issue.

 

Simply restrict the type of planes in the mission.

 

And if you are in a dogfight, there will be no difference between the Su27 AFM and the DCS Su27, since they are both rocking the same AFM....

 

Unless the DCS version have some sort of an helmet mounted sight to help aim their heat seekers.

[jp203000]

It would be useless to say anything more. I bet the DCS fast mover won't come out at least in 3 years .

[TZeer]

AFM will be integrated into existing FC3 models and released as standalone lo-fi versions.

 

Source for that? Missed my radar.

[TZeer]

Nevermind, found it, and your info is wrong.

 

There has been no decision regarding discounts to current FC3 customers or including the advanced flight models as free FC3 update. This is certainly something that we will be discussing internally over the coming weeks.

 

 

No wonder people go apeshit when rumors like this is spread around, and it turns out it's wrong, and they just find out right before release.

[ishtmail]

Source for that? Missed my radar.

 

I assumed you read the May 7 update, since that's what we're discussing in this thread. But we've established that assumptions don't lead to anywhere good, so here goes:

 

7 May 2013 Update

 

/.../

we are working on releasing the F-15C Eagle and Su-27 Flanker for DCS World later this year.

/.../

Both of these aircraft will have the same detailed 3D models, cockpits and sounds of the Flaming Cliffs 3 versions, but we will be adding an Advanced Flight Model (AFM) for each.

/.../

At a later point, we will further develop these aircraft to include mouse clickable cockpit and the same level of detail as the DCS: A-10C Warthog, but that is a massive effort that will take time.

 

So:

SU27 and F15C, as they are in FC3, will get AFM and will get released as standalone modules.

They will then be further developed into proper DCS modules. Meaning that the work done on AFM will be in the end done for the DCS modules, ergo no time will be 'wasted'.

 

Good enough?

 

 

EDIT: and again, you've misunderstood what I wrote.

I didn't write that AFM will be released FOR FC3 models, but that it will be integrated INTO those existing models and offered as a standalone product.

[howie87]

People who expect a free upgrade of their FC3 series for their F-15/SU-27 AFM should calm down a little and not get their hopes up.

 

1: F-15/SU-27 modules will be standalone products.

 

2: Due to this, they will most likely have nothing to do with FC3.

 

3: Reason for this is to separate it from the Ubisoft and all the issues around that. The need for lock on to install FC3. Copyrights+++

 

Imo this is a good thing. As it makes the modules no longer attached to Ubisoft in any way or form.

 

I agree with you on parts 1 and 3 but from what Wags has said so far it sounds like the avionics, external model, sounds and cockpit will be the same as in FC3.

 

While I would be happy to pay an upgrade fee for the improved flight model, I would not be happy to pay the full price for an identical product with a different flight model.

 

Imagine if Black Shark 2 had been announced a week after the final release of Black shark, as a 'standalone product' that people could not upgrade to...

 

The only reason I would like to see it made free for FC3 owners is so ED could do away with the SFM eventually and not have to continue supporting it for those who do not want to pay for the upgrade.

 

I would be happy to pay however.

Edited May 9, 2013 by howie87

[TZeer]

I assumed you read the May 7 update, since that's what we're discussing in this thread. But we've established that assumptions don't lead to anywhere good, so here goes:

 

 

 

So:

SU27 and F15C, as they are in FC3, will get AFM and will get released as standalone modules.

They will then be further developed into proper DCS modules. Meaning that the work done on AFM will be in the end done for the DCS modules, ergo no time will be 'wasted'.

 

Good enough?

 

 

EDIT: and again, you've misunderstood what I wrote.

I didn't write that AFM will be released FOR FC3 models, but that it will be integrated INTO those existing models and offered as a standalone product.

 

Saw it now :) my bad.

 

But it can be misinterpreted by people who don't have english as their first language etc. Or they simply interpret it the way their mind want it to be. In this case, intergrated into FC3, and released separately.

 

And with all the assumptions going on on these forums we all know how that will go :p

[statrekmike]

Well you know what they say about assumptions right? I think here in lies the biggest issue I've seen in this thread. I wouldn't presume to know what goes on at ED except a group of guys who could probably earn more money doing something else but are working very hard on something that no one else seems to be doing, that they are very passionate about and hope we'll all get a kick out of.

 

 

 

Why would you assume anything? Again you're creating an assumption and then getting upset when ED don't live up to it.

 

 

 

So we all know the world is full of change. Plans and priorities change over time - I think everyone understands that. Given a lot of the responses on this thread would you want to try and give "more solid" information if you were ED? I mean come on.

 

 

 

So you think threads like this one will make ED share more information with us about their internal planning? If I were ED I would have just continued work on F-18 without telling anyone and just announce it. That way no one gets excited or disappointed.

 

Guys it would be far easier for ED to say nothing. Honestly from this thread as much as myself and a great number of other people would hate to see the updates vanish - I'm starting to think it's the right thing to do.

 

I'll leave everyone with something my grandfather used to say to me when I was young........

 

Fools should never be shown half finished work

 

From this thread I'd say we all look pretty foolish.

 

Ken.

 

I am just as eager to get a DCS:fast_mover as the next guy.

 

But Wags' latest updates left absolutely no room for speculation regarding DCS modules and their stage of development:

 

NO DCS modules have any significant development stage at this point, and although there were hints of DCS FA18, F15 and SU27 in march and april newsletters, that is only a month ago, which means nothing serious could have been developed since those newsletters.

 

DCS:FA18 is being PLANNED, meaning they're probably still gathering the necessary info and documentation (here I am, making assumptions).

DCS:SU27 and DCS:F15C have not begun yet, and there was never any information that could lead anyone to assume they were already being developed. However, they WILL start with DCS F15 and SU27 development, by first doing the AFM.

AFM will be integrated into existing FC3 models and released as standalone lo-fi versions.

 

 

This is all the official word, and everything else are false assumptions, misconceptions and misinterpretations of the known facts.

That these false assumtions were leading into disappointment is obvious, but you'll have to deal with this: the false assumptions were yours alone and ED is not to blame, meaning that such bickering online is inappropriate.

 

 

 

Why is everyone here assuming that I am hopping mad about this, I have OPENLY said that a lot of the disappointment from the May 7th update came from false assumptions that there had already been some work done on the fast mover between the time that A-10C came out and now.

 

I mean, it has been awhile and ED has been very quiet about a fast mover for a long time now also, many just thought they would announce something when they had more to show and left it at that.

 

Were we wrong to speculate on the status of projects? perhaps but that comes with the territory and it was not like anyone was saying "But I want it right now!", we were just kinda shocked that nothing had been really started yet.

 

So, I don't know why I am being cast as the Debbie downer here, I have been very clear from the beginning that I have no anger about this, just was not clear about the status of the next DCS aircraft and had assumed that something had been done thus far, that was my fault and I openly admit it and I am not terribly upset about it either, I am just pointing out WHY I was saddened the day I saw the May 7th announcement.

 

We are not children, stop slinging mud around (by saying that anyone who dislikes this news in any way is somehow part of a problem despite how civil and polite many of those who were cast as "negative" actually were).

 

Finally, there is no reason for the news to stop, I am sure we can still handle it despite the snide remarks that we can't and that we get upset over everything.

 

In fact, more information will help clear up false assumptions in the future.

[ishtmail]

Abraham Lincoln put it best:

If it's on the internet, it must be true.

 

The same goes for this forum: people post stuff that they assume must be true (for example: ED did not write anything in a while, so it's assumed they're working on DCS modules). Other people read these assumptions and suddenly those false assumptions become fact. This is especially true if people want something really bad and read everything through those desires.

 

Which is why we shouldn't assume anything and should only accept official updates (from Wags) as fact.

[howie87]

The way I see it:

 

1. Standalone only = Angry FC3 customers and lower sales.

 

2. Standalone and free upgrade for FC3 owners = Happy FC3 customers and lowest sales.

 

3. ????

 

4. Standalone and paid upgrade for FC3 owners = PROFIT!!!

[ishtmail]

Even better:

 

Kickstarter projects for DCS:SU27 and DCS:F15C.

 

Pledge of $15 will give you the finished low fidelity module with AFM (possible release date summer 2013).

Pledge of $30 will give you the finished DCS module (possible release date in 2015).

Pledge of $40 will give you the finished DCS module + beta testing.

Pledge of $60 will give you the finished DCS module, beta testing, and a free AFM upgrade for FC3 (or a free standalone lo-fi module)

Pledge of $200 will give you everything plus alpha testing.

Pledge of $500 will give you everything above plus the boxed version plus colored resin model of the respective aircraft you're pledging for.

Limited offer with Thrustmaster: $1000 will give you everything above plus TM Warthog (or, if TM decides to do a proper SU27 joystick, that would be pretty sweet too).

 

I bet a lot of people would jump at a chance to do alpha testing. ED would have nothing to lose with the Kickstarter project, if they set their goal realistically.

 

They get funding, we contribute and get our desired modules when released. Basically, WIN WIN WIN.

[sobek]

The way i see it, ED would NEVER let people buy into closed testing. There is too much at stake for them.

[Pelmo]

Even better:

 

Kickstarter projects for DCS:SU27 and DCS:F15C.

 

Pledge of $15 will give you the finished low fidelity module with AFM (possible release date summer 2013).

Pledge of $30 will give you the finished DCS module (possible release date in 2015).

Pledge of $40 will give you the finished DCS module + beta testing.

Pledge of $60 will give you the finished DCS module, beta testing, and a free AFM upgrade for FC3 (or a free standalone lo-fi module)

Pledge of $200 will give you everything plus alpha testing.

Pledge of $500 will give you everything above plus the boxed version plus colored resin model of the respective aircraft you're pledging for.

Limited offer with Thrustmaster: $1000 will give you everything above plus TM Warthog (or, if TM decides to do a proper SU27 joystick, that would be pretty sweet too).

 

I bet a lot of people would jump at a chance to do alpha testing. ED would have nothing to lose with the Kickstarter project, if they set their goal realistically.

 

They get funding, we contribute and get our desired modules when released. Basically, WIN WIN WIN.

 

 

Very good +1

[Bucic]

I think this is a difficult road to walk.

We as customers that want the "hardcore" modules have two options:

1. Buy the medium fidelity modules to support ED and give them more money to use for the development of the modules we want.
   
2. Don't buy the medium fidelity modules to show the developer that we're waiting for the hardcore stuff.
   

Unfortunately, these options seems to be a text book catch-22.

 

• If you go with option 1 you end up strengthening the notion that most people want the medium fidelity modules, something that may make ED more likely to put more money and development time on those modules.
  
• If you go with option 2 however, ED might not get the money they need for developing the hardcore modules and they will still be forced to put more effort towards medium fidelity modules.
  

Really, we should get a question when we buy a module.

Why are you buying this module?

 

• I want to fly/drive one or more of the aircraft/vehicles in this module.
  
• I want ED to take my money and use it to get the hardcore modules released faster!
  

I realized this only now!

There is no real incentive for ED for making hifi modules because they don't even know why a certain lofi module has been bought. If there is no such information then ED hasn'teven evaluated a 'put more effort into hifi modules and increase their pricing by 25%' scenario.

 

A simple solution would be a thickbox called 'bought only to supporthifi modules'.

 

You say lofi doesn't impact hifi development. I don't buy this. There are always people who could quit their lofi tasks and move to hifi related tasks.

 

I'm not saying that hifi fans should quit buying lofi modules. I'm just saying that knowing that my Money flows where I'd like it to flow would be nice. The way it is now I think even donating $40 would be better than buying FC3.

Edited May 9, 2013 by Bucic