Jump to content

TFC/ED Newsletter


MTFDarkEagle

Recommended Posts

Yeah, there's a slight difference between a general statement of "this is what we want to do" and a contractual obligation... :P

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Daniel "EtherealN" Agorander | Даниэль "эфирныйн" Агорандер

Intel i7 2600K @ 4.4GHz, ASUS Sabertooth P67, 8GB Corsair Vengeance @ 1600MHz, ASUS GTX 560Ti DirectCU II 1GB, Samsung 830series 512GB SSD, Corsair AX850w, two BENQ screens and TM HOTAS Warthog

DCS: A-10C Warthog FAQ | DCS: P-51D FAQ | Remember to read the Forum Rules |

|
| Life of a Game Tester
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 110
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

My opinion (which doesn't count) is that ED has a great ideas, a well planned developmental road but a lack of programmer-funds-time... (choose any).

I believe ED is programming the ideas they've had long time before only now because of lack of time.

So it is, to develop 1 game/sim like FC3 is complicated.

To dev a game/sim like FC3 + DCS P-51 + DCS (next US fixed...) + the improvements in DCS graphic engine (EDGE) + integrate all that in a newly-designed 'core-based-system' (+ eventually official governmental projects) might be time/energy consuming and can be achieved only by fully dedicated programmers.

 

All that, I can understand.

 

But, can we have just few screenshots of EDGE Nevada terrain / effects, a short vid of the P-51, combined arms (...), instead of words, please ED?

 

An image talks more than hundred words.

 

(yeah, yeah, I know: from Wags '... not until May...'. But it costs nothing to try ;-)

DCS Wish: Turbulences affecting surrounding aircraft...

[sIGPIC] [/sIGPIC]

Gigabyte GA-Z170-HD3P - Intel Core i5 6600K - 16Gb RAM DDR4-2133 - Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1080 G1 Gaming - 8 Go - 2 x SSD Crucial MX300 - 750 Go RAID0 - Screens: HP OMEN 32'' 2560x1440 + Oculus Rift CV1 - Win 10 - 64bits - TM WARTHOG #889 - Saitek Pro Rudder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well call me neagative or what ever but I have to agree with Rhinox... you can't say there's a difference in what ED wishes to do and what they are obligated to do and Wag's comment" Everything is subject to change" shouldn't be used as excuse for changes from statements ED made few yers back.

 

ED did say they WILL make DCS modular from start and they did say every new module will be integrated into main DCS module or be used as standalone product. They did not say that this is what they wish to do, they said this is what they will do.

 

Of course we all know now they changed their route from modular to all DCS modules being standalone but as they have recently realised this is not sustainable any more because workload just to made modules compatible is very high with just 2 modules, and will be too much to do in same way in future... and only lately did they start work on actual Modular DCS... this is few years after... and it should have been done from the start.

 

Lastly "everything is subject to change" is not such a good thing to say because that actually means anything ED say's doesn't have to be true or will happen... I think this way ED loses credibility because this way they can say anything they want and change their mind at any time about anything... it means you can't take their word for granted about anything... it's explainable why they are not saying much at all any more and only make announcements when things are alreayd done and out or are about to be out (like BS2 that came out of nothing and no one expected ;))


Edited by Kuky

No longer active in DCS...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It means they're not making any promises, which is the point. They may want to do something, but they may have to change course. Since people will typically follow your way of thinking (where in fact, ED does have the right to do whatever they want with their business, and have no obligation to make things happen that you take as a promise) ED may as well say nothing, and then no one mistakes a desired course for a promise, since nothing was said. And then people complain about 'lack of communication' ;)

 

it means you can't take their word for granted about anything.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this way ed looses credibility because this way they can say anything they want and change their mind at any time about anything...

If an ED project hits a hard-block when developing some of the promised feature (this might have happened with the core concept in the beginning). Do you want ED to.

a)Spent ton of time on resolving the block, blowing dead-lines, and possibly making the project a failure money-wise.

b)or to sack/change the feature to implementable one?

Because you cannot foresee all the blocks you'll encounter when developing any product.

 

Even the richest of companies, i.e. Blizzard, state that nothing is promised and every feature is a subject to change.


Edited by winz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They CAN say what they are working on and if they have issues etc... I don't see why they can't do this. They can also say "we plan on release F-XX" or what ever if the military contract allows for civilian sim... why not?

 

Anyway, I still think they could be more fortcoming about what they are working on... it's been 8 months since last A-10C version... a year is a long time not to have any news on progress or what's next (beside Nevada, Combined Armes etc)... I bet you everyone wants to know what is the Fighter they are working on... no matter how early they are in their progress.


Edited by Kuky
hm.. typos

No longer active in DCS...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course we all know now they changed their route from modular to all DCS modules being standalone but as they have recently realised this is not sustainable any more because workload just to made modules compatible is very high with just 2 modules, and will be too much to do in same way in future... and only lately did they start work on actual Modular DCS... this is few years after... and it should have been done from the start.

 

They didn't change their route, but at that time other issues were more pressing and they decided that it would have to wait since there were only 2 modules out at that point. You think that a company that is in the software business for more than 10 years was not able to anticipate that they would have to move to modular? You cannot be serious.

 

ED lives in a world of incredibly limited resources and so far they have succeeded by being very flexible and having a good hand for prioritizing issues. You just can't always get what you want, that goes for ED as much as for us as customers.

 

Lastly "everything is subject to change" is not such a good thing to say because that actually means anything ED say's doesn't have to be true or will happen... this way ed looses credibility because this way they can say anything they want and change their mind at any time about anything... it means you can't take their word for granted.

 

Sorry Kuky, but welcome to the real world. There are no guarantees for anything. The pea counters have driven ED to actually adding "we hope to, but no promises" after every sentence, what do you expect more? This has already crossed the line of ridiculousness.

 

I know that we live in a time of unprecedented stability, but taking it for granted and applying it to a market that does not obey said stability and always burning ED for when they adjust to changing circumstances, well, i don't wish for you to be in their spot.

 

It would be like me hating on Porsche if they moved to fuel economic cars in a world were i can neither afford their high performance line nor the gas for it.


Edited by sobek

Good, fast, cheap. Choose any two.

Come let's eat grandpa!

Use punctuation, save lives!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, they CAN, but they don't want to. There are a number of reasons for this, not all of which might make sense to someone who isn't in that particular business, in that particular part of the world, in the particular set of circumstances that ED finds itself in.

 

They CAN say what they are working on and if they have issues etc... I don't see why they can't do this. They can also say "we plan on release F-XX" or what ever if the military contract allows for civilian sim... why not?

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not burning ED, I am aware they have limitations like any business but I also think they shouldn't always be defended either. It's not always those who criticize ED that are wrong and its human to make mistake and you need to be a big man to accept and acknowldege when you make a mistake.

 

I hope I do live in real world most of the time, I don't know... you can't blame me for wanting to know what they are working on... I still think they could simply just say it.

 

I guess maybe it is better not to say anything untill they are sure 100% it's about to be completed and released, the feeling of thinking somehting will be out and then it never happens is not good (we all know this), but you see Nevada terrain was announced long time ago already and it was still very early so what's the difference between ED being OK to announce this and P-51, FC3, Combines Armes etc but not what the Jet fighter is? Seomething being early in stage can still be announced (as it has been done) so I only think reason they are not saying what Jet fighter is, is because they are working on one for the military market, and are not sure if they can release it as civilian sim.... or they are workin on more than one aircraft and don't know which one will be done first... either way... I don't understand what's the big secret about.

 

EDIT: never mind... just keep on waiting...

 

PS: how's my new sig?


Edited by Kuky

No longer active in DCS...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but you see Nevada terrain was announced long time ago already and it was still very early so what's the difference between ED being OK to announce this and P-51, FC3, Combines Armes etc but not what the Jet fighter is?

 

Because when Nevada was announced, it was supposed to be shipped with the release of A-10. Then it was decided to build it inside the new engine that was never going to make the release of DCSW, that's why you have known about it for so long.

 

Edit: And thx. btw. for making another point why not to release info early. :);)


Edited by sobek

Good, fast, cheap. Choose any two.

Come let's eat grandpa!

Use punctuation, save lives!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not burning ED, I am aware they have limitations like any business but I also think they shouldn't always be defended either. It's not always those who criticize ED that are wrong and its human to make mistake and you need to be a big man to accept and acknowldege when you make a mistake.

 

But it isn't necessarily a mistake either. eg. take the Nevada thing - that was a decision based on new ... resources, I guess, for lack of a better word. It was no mistake, at least IMHO.

 

I hope I do live in real world most of the time, I don't know... you can't blame me for wanting to know what they are working on... I still think they could simply just say it.

 

No, I sure can't blame you for that. On the other hand it's also unfair to say that ED is doing something wrong by not talking.

 

so I only think reason they are not saying what Jet fighter is, is because they are working on one for the military market, and are not sure if they can release it as civilian sim.... or they are workin on more than one aircraft and don't know which one will be done first... either way... I don't understand what's the big secret about.

 

Those are valid guesses. There are other possibilities as well. As for secrecy making sense - it only has to make sense to those keeping secrects, no? :)

 

PS: how's my new sig?

 

Every time I see that bug I check if there's something crawling on my screen for real ... :/

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kuky, don't waste your breath, just fly DCS,FC2...whatever and don't count on anythng being released...until it IS released! That way you won't get disappointed or mad. Hope into BMS or we could play some Arma again.

i7-4820k @ 3.7, Windows 7 64-bit, 16GB 1866mhz EVGA GTX 970 2GB, 256GB SSD, 500GB WD, TM Warthog, TM Cougar MFD's, Saitek Combat Pedals, TrackIR 5, G15 keyboard, 55" 4K LED

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No problem here... I am mostly just working a lot lately anyway and I am not even using my gaming PC for days in row... FC2 doesn't hold me any more... BMS I just can't get into again also, maybe I'm just too tied up into work... at least I can earn extra money by doing OT and one lovely day that jet will come out of that hangar and all will be good again.

No longer active in DCS...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

nice discussion about sense and nonsense of ED´s communication politics..but in fact we can be happy, other dev teams keep beeing silent way longer and they dont inform their customers at all (i.e: Valve)

As I already mentioned. We´re just too close here in front of the developers workbench. We can hear them working, but because we cant see anythings we get mad. That´s why I stoped complaining about that...it could be worse..

 

only thing I miss somehow is to see some people of ED infront of a camera. There´s JimMack only who sometimes steps in fron of a camera, but that´s all (OK, he´s responsible for public relations or somethings similar). I´d like to see a Video of Wags or EB1 one day, just to see how these guys look like...that might sound funny...but I think that is important as well.

DCS-Tutorial-Collection       

BlackSharkDen - Helicopter only

Specs:: ASrock Z790 Pro RS; Intel i5-13600K @5,1Ghz; 64GB DDR5 RAM; RTX 3080 @10GB; Corsair RMX Serie 750; 2x SSD 850 EVO 1x860 EVO 500GB 1x nvme M.2 970 EVO 1TB; 1x nvme M.2 980 Pro 2TB+ 3 TB HDD

Hardware: Oculus Rift S; HOTAS Warthog; Saitek Rudder Pedals, K-51 Collective

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw the new ED newsletter and it indicated you could sign up to be on the -email list. Where and how do you sign up to get the newsletters via e-mail?

 

thanks!

 

as far as I know so it will be send automatically to your registered email on digitalcombatsimulator.com but I haven´t recieved any as well...so basically I´d be interested in this question too..

DCS-Tutorial-Collection       

BlackSharkDen - Helicopter only

Specs:: ASrock Z790 Pro RS; Intel i5-13600K @5,1Ghz; 64GB DDR5 RAM; RTX 3080 @10GB; Corsair RMX Serie 750; 2x SSD 850 EVO 1x860 EVO 500GB 1x nvme M.2 970 EVO 1TB; 1x nvme M.2 980 Pro 2TB+ 3 TB HDD

Hardware: Oculus Rift S; HOTAS Warthog; Saitek Rudder Pedals, K-51 Collective

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kuky, don't waste your breath, just fly DCS,FC2...whatever and don't count on anythng being released...until it IS released! That way you won't get disappointed or mad. Hope into BMS or we could play some Arma again.

 

I couldn't agree more. I look forward to whatever is later released, but I don't count on it. I enjoy what I already have, because Black Shark is great, A10 is great. I still have so much to do in those, and as an aside, I'm trying to learn BMS.

 

Just working on enjoying what I have.

 

The old proverb goes "don't count your chickens before they've hatched"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theres some interesting news there. But it does raise some more questions:

 

I'll ask them anyway.

 

1. The core based system is a good move. But how will this affect multiplayer? Will players have to fork out for the module to play on a particular server or will there be 'world models' to allow folk who don't have the module to play, yet not be able to access said module?

 

2. Again on multiplayer, are we going to see something along the lines of a dedicated server? If the game is going to expand rapidly, it would make sense to see multiplayer expand too.

 

For me, multiplayer makes the game so much more immersive and I beleive ED needs to promote this a bit more.

 

Just my 2p.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 - Do you currently have to purchase BS2 to play A-10C online? ;)

 

Now, if a given server only has a specific aircraft as flyables in the missions it is running, then yes, obviously you'd need to have a license. I don't see any reason why a Core system would change anything compared to today regarding licensing.

 

2 - That's something I cannot comment on, sorry.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Daniel "EtherealN" Agorander | Даниэль "эфирныйн" Агорандер

Intel i7 2600K @ 4.4GHz, ASUS Sabertooth P67, 8GB Corsair Vengeance @ 1600MHz, ASUS GTX 560Ti DirectCU II 1GB, Samsung 830series 512GB SSD, Corsair AX850w, two BENQ screens and TM HOTAS Warthog

DCS: A-10C Warthog FAQ | DCS: P-51D FAQ | Remember to read the Forum Rules |

|
| Life of a Game Tester
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 - Do you currently have to purchase BS2 to play A-10C online? ;)

 

Now, if a given server only has a specific aircraft as flyables in the missions it is running, then yes, obviously you'd need to have a license. I don't see any reason why a Core system would change anything compared to today regarding licensing.

 

2 - That's something I cannot comment on, sorry.

 

Thats cool.

 

I'm wondering though, lets say that someone purchases an F18 module and joins a server that also knows about the F18 module, that person can then fly around in his F18. However, if someone who does not have the F18 module joins, would be possible for them to see, but not fly, the F18?

 

I'm just wondering, because imagine if a server has multiple modules installed, it would be a bit of a nightmare for other players who do not have all the modules to have to go and purchase them all just to play. I'm worried that multiplayer could become a bit fractured because of all the different installations combinations possible.

 

My solution would be the ability to download a 'free' version of the module that only contains the models so that other players can see them in game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats cool.

 

I'm wondering though, lets say that someone purchases an F18 module and joins a server that also knows about the F18 module, that person can then fly around in his F18. However, if someone who does not have the F18 module joins, would be possible for them to see, but not fly, the F18?

 

Yes. That's what the core is all about. All the 3d models, skins, AI etc etc are the 'core'. The pay modules are the playable objects(ie the ability to actually fly/control things).

 

Spoiler

Intel 13900K (5Ghz), 64Gb 6400Mhz, MSi RTX 3090, Schiit Modi/Magi DAC/AMP, ASUS PG43UQ, Hotas Warthog, RealSimulator FSSB3, 2x TM MFDs + DCS MFDs, MFG Crosswinds, Elgato Steamdeck XL

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rossi, the general concept would be similar to RoF - I think, at least. How it's done behind the scenes may or may not be similar (I wouldn't know - I don't have access to the nuts and bolts of DCS, and I don't know much about how RoF does it, but I know the "end result" of RoF's system and like it), but you don't end up blocked from RoF servers just because you haven't purchased all planes.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Daniel "EtherealN" Agorander | Даниэль "эфирныйн" Агорандер

Intel i7 2600K @ 4.4GHz, ASUS Sabertooth P67, 8GB Corsair Vengeance @ 1600MHz, ASUS GTX 560Ti DirectCU II 1GB, Samsung 830series 512GB SSD, Corsair AX850w, two BENQ screens and TM HOTAS Warthog

DCS: A-10C Warthog FAQ | DCS: P-51D FAQ | Remember to read the Forum Rules |

|
| Life of a Game Tester
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...