StevanJ
-
Posts
865 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by StevanJ
-
-
10 minutes ago, Черный Дракул said:
Sadly, ED seems to have bitten more than they can chew. They keep pumping out EA modules which can then possibly take years to complete. This is a vicious cycle, and overhyped players feed it by buying EA modules, therefore allowing for such strategy. Sadly, this kind of relationship is not regulated by government and law, so there's no limit on stretching the release window, feature completeness, feature quality... or almost anything else, for that matter. And players in flight community are usually pretty isolated from other gaming communities, meaning they are far less cynical and easily hyped for their own good.
I don't see a solution to this situation. Well, personally I stopped purchasing anything EA, but this is a bandaid that will affect nothing on the global scale. Thus, for me one module completion is not a justification of getting another which is still in EA -- instead, that second module's release can be one. Only when almost every buying player follows this logic, the vicious cycle described above can be broken, but that is not actually possible due to the reason stated above. There is no escape © Hades.
2 minutes ago, Jester986 said:I can tolerate EA. But it has been abused from time to time. I know everyone hates the idea but DCS really needs to be a subscription service to incentivize module maintenance versus the new release conveyor belt.
Does anyone know the final price on the Yak?
Apparently its already been discounted but their is no RRP on the shop.-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, Callsign112 said:
@StevanJ, its not that I think your argument is poor, its that I think it is misdirected. An issue that repeats in your posts is that you seem to think DCS World is overpriced, and there is really no argument I can offer to counter that view point because it is essentially 100% subjective.
Aside from the fact that both you and I have absolutely no insight into how ED works as a company or the amount of work it has to do to realistically simulate something like an F/A-18 Hornet, all that can be said on this point is that my view is completely opposite to yours. I don't think DCS World is overpriced at all, and I believe it offers excellent value as a REAL digital combat learning simulator. A digital combat simulator that strives for realism in everything it does.
You wouldn't be the only one disappointed with the amount of time it takes to develop any of the DCS World modules/assets/maps, but I think the fact that it does should give us a clue as to the amount of work required and associated costs vs the available resources.
But I think this discussion has run its course, and I don't see how you and I will resolve anything in a circular argument about subjective view points, especially when you seem intent on purposely misinterpreting/misdirect my comments.
Case-in-point, you suggested that anyone buying into DCS WWII doesn't get the same value for their money as someone buying into the modern modules in DCS World.
Truth be told, If I bought the Hornet, and you bought the Mustang, we could both use the free maps to create missions/game play on. Now if we wanted to add a purpose built map for our planes of choice, I might buy the Persian Gulf, and you might by Normandy map. So far not too bad, although I would have spent a little more than you at this point. Then we both might want to add a tech pack to add even more options/realism to our game play, so I might buy the Super Carrier and you might buy the WWII assets pack. Again, you seem to be coming out a little ahead in terms of money spent. At this point, we might also want to add even more immersion so we both add Combined Arms, which costs the same regardless of the era you are interested in. The point isn't the subjective value you assign to any of the above mentioned modules, the point is that road maps and the reasons/decisions used to form them are complex, and now you are complicating the matter even further by throwing a third party into the mix. I doubt very much that you are privy to the relationship between ED and Deka, let alone where the incentive comes from to make the Chinese assets pack.
So while the purpose of my question to you regarding the cost of WWII vs modern era and the availability of related assets was clear, you reference cost of the available campaigns to purposefully misinterpret/misdirect my question. The cost of the Hornet is almost double the cost of the Mustang, and the cost of the Persian Gulf map and related Tech Pack for modern era scenarios also costs more than their WWII counterparts.
But as a conclusion to my contribution to this thread, I will leave you with this thought; follow in the footsteps of Reflected Simulations and provide an Eagle Dynamics recognized WWII campaign for sale on its website that requires either the P-51/P-47, the WWII assets pack, and either the Channel or Normandy maps, and I will give two free copies of the WWII assets pack to any two members of your group in support of your efforts. That is a serious offer, and you can PM me if you would like to discuss it further.
No, You seem to think its overpriced.. I buy modules on EA release day. Youre openly waiting for sales before buying them..
If you honestly dont believe DCS World is overpriced.. Buy the Yak now, stop waiting for sales..
The next paragraph can be answered by the search engine. We all know how much work goes into a module, They tease us, then it goes to EA, then it goes to module complete.
This discussion ran its course weeks ago, buy you keep quoting me so here we are in the midst of yet another pointless discussion with regard personal opinion.
Truth be told- Here you are yet again, not reading the question and side tracking the question by pushing the conversation Off Topic.
Heres a forum mod and his opinion on the openly suffering MP game (granted it was before the release of the GS server- lets see how that does).
The question was how much to play the campaign YOU recommended to me, vs how much to play the campaign I recommended to you.
All you had to do is add up the module, and the requirements..
You point refuse to answer. This is the poor argument i talk of.
Despite the majority views towards the subject of any assets. You just cant help but argue and swerve the question..
So i dont think you and i will ever reach a point where you'll be empathetic to the general opinion of assets.
I dont care if the relationship is goods between ED and third parties, I care if the product i buy isnt performing how it should be.
And thats the bottom line.
As a conclusion, youre suggesting i make a Campaign (which i know im good at) with the Asset Pack - For ED to sell on its website? That i have to maintain for the rest of my life after ED's Open Beta patch breaks it? That is two things i dont ever want to do.
My campaigns are free to everyone. Not just those who buy the Asset pack.
Not only that, the AP isnt optimised and runs like kack on my friends machine.. So no..
Well thats offensive, you feel a campaign is worth £80 of my time? Well now i know your trolling..
3 minutes ago, Rudel_chw said:
You are wasting your time debating with this person, I have him on the ignore list to preserve my enjoyment of visiting this Forum.
Hey man, did you manage to complete Schnellkampfgeschwader 10 I. Gruppe?-
1
-
-
Seriously just go through his videos and stop having a defeatist attitude..
Practice x
I believe in you.. -
2 minutes ago, grafspee said:
I can wheel land every plane in dcs. Only p47 seems almost impossible to wheel land it. I dont have as much hours on p47 as on other warbirds
Ive watched your videos man, Youve got some very serious skills..
Keep up the good work..Check this landing out..
-
So you asked this before, and @grafspee uploaded you a video to show you its possible..
-
Just now, Hawkeye91 said:
I'm not talking about landing, I'm talking about WHEEL landings, please read the post before commenting. If you don't know, a wheel landing is a landing on the front main wheels only of a conventional gear aircraft. Wheel landings inherently carry a little more speed and power on landing to keep the tail of the ground on touch down, because if you come in slow, you'll 3 point land it which is fine, but no the goal of what I'm trying to achieve. Each technique has advantages and disadvantages, and is often a topic of religion among tail dragger pilots which is better, but I like to be able to do both.
See my post above.. I know what you meant.. -
If you bounce, youve come in too hard, or with a speed thats too high..
A non bounce landing is easy with thorough practice.-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said:
The Yak-52 is still in early access and is still discounted. This is a thread about the Yak-52, so you can see the perspective I have read your post in.
https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/shop/modules/yak52/
If it is not about the Yak-52 please make a new thread so we dont go off topicthanks
Just to ask' what's the discount?
What will it normally be sold at?
If you look at the other EA modules you can see the RRP, then it's discount.
You've also previously discounted the yak from this price' which is why we believed it was the RRP.
To which I think is the whole argument and the double standard towards this module.
-
1
-
-
Just now, BIGNEWY said:
StevanJ I give you all the information I can give you, its the truth, nothing hidden, cards on the table, I have already said its long overdue, the team are well aware, its still very much in our plans to complete and as soon as we have time we will complete it. If that is not enough communication for you I can not help you. Regarding compensation, no not possible.
You have given your feedback and I have listened and replied, that is all I can do for now.
thanks
Personally, I know how hard it is to trawl through these forums and do your job.
I get that dealing with peoples complaints is very hard work, it is not a job that I could do.
I respect your position, and I'm not trying to go about 'being negative' genuinely- I'm just sharing an opinion.
But if I'm being unbiased, we're not talking about the odd module.
We're talking about alot of modules.
And a recurring theme.
Is there nothing you can do for the players that frequent the forums?
Can't you just send an email to whom it matters, and get us information for some of the modules?
Even if it takes us 3 years to see some modules finished, while me might complain- we will know.
-
2
-
-
19 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said:
Work on the YAK-52 is long overdue, and the team have planed for the work to be completed, its just a matter of time sadly, but it is on our list and not forgotten.
thanks
Stop proclaiming things dead when they are not, the team are working as hard and fast as they can, we have issues reported, we have tasks to complete and they will be completed as soon as the teams have the time. Appreciate its been a long time but your negativity is not helping.
thanks
How about an update to regards where we are with bugs and modules?
While I'm sure you believe me to 'be negative', we've had no updates from you or ED to point out where we are in relationship to the numbering bugs that are being racked up.
I'd love to push things more positively, but I can't help but feel the communication with the users is none existant
Rather than just talking to us and being honest (yes I know that some will complain that things aren't happening quick enough- me included) all you do is lock posts, which means the complaints then rack up.
I mean all you keep telling us is that 'youll get around to it'
I've been hearing that since the start of lockdown and you've not really give us any insight.
What would be the possibility of recieving compensation (miles points will do) for the modules that haven't received the maintenance they need or aren't finished considering that they were promised?
-
2
-
2
-
-
14 hours ago, HotTom said:
Greg, it isn't just the bombs dropping. Its the number of objects. It's a huge FPS hit on my quite high end machine. I get what you're tying to do and it's admirable (don't take my comments personally!) but it makes your excellent missions into a slide show. It's not you, it's the computer limitations. S!
In my experience its one or two certain assets, much like new modules, alot of them havent yet been optimised.
When me and a friend fly using the Asset Pack, (him on an RTX 2070 and me on a 2080ti) we have a bad time when using certain assets..
Swapping the asset pack for non A/Pack stuff seems to give a much better performance for both of us..
In most experiences, you can add quite a considerable amount of non asset pack assets, and you barely see a dip in performance.
Then after you pick out the assets causing the issue, youre left with the effects..
But the minute you start adding certain assets and effects, you see a visible and considerable hit.
When we deleted the asset pack as a whole in a short campaign we made, we found we could add a huge amount more assets- Flak, Havocs, Enemy fighters and the cost to performance was much lower. Then after highlighting the issues, youre left with managing effects, which again- need much more and better optimisation.
Alot more time needs spending on the Warbirds game.
A few updates ago we got it down to one or two assets that werent optimised. With the last few updates, we've seen really poor performance with assets across the whole of warbirds.
Im scratching at walls waiting for improvements. -
Is this the Russian voice we need?
-
6
-
-
On 10/21/2020 at 7:55 PM, Bob1 said:
Was just passing by in the forums and have to say the f/86 sabre and mig-15 is just 2 awsome planes with so much grit and spirit. Dogfighting AI migs or sabres in VR are so beutiful. Hope there will be more modules from 50-60-70s.
I concur.. -
On 2/5/2016 at 3:16 PM, zerO_crash said:
Nice Speez, way to go
Pleasing the crowd has its advantages you see.. -
Just now, hazzer said:
Sorry you have flawed logic there. If we pay for something it's expected that it should be finished. The only circumstances which I would say that not be the case is if the producer of said product went out of business. You mention the Dora, if that has issues then you should press for them to be fixed, don't use it as a reason to leave the Yakolev unfinished.
What did support say when you asked them? -
10 hours ago, Jester986 said:
Three years old. Only a handful of updates with so little work (compared to other props) left to actually do. Three warbirds have been released in the mean time. Please finish this module. It’s a really nice plane. I enjoy it. But it’s frustrating that it’s not given any time because it wasn’t a money maker. I still paid for two or three of them.
Its time to move on, there will always be a bigger and better plane to work on.
DCS Yak is dead, and we must salute the module and allow it to be lost..
Even if it gets updated/finished, can you imagine the speed at which bugs will be fixed, considering how long its been ignored..
Were still waiting on the Dora's engine to be fixed 3 years on, and that module is popular.. -
Yes, ROE - Rules of Engagement, Hold Fire..
Yes, Random Flag Value set- If Flag value is 1 Spawn unit 1 from this direction with preset instructions to do this..
If Flag value is 2 Spawn unit 2 from that direction with preset instructions to do that..
I dont think you can yet..
As above, The sea part of the war hasnt been developed.
If im mistaken can someone point me out on it, cheers. -
14 hours ago, Mars Exulte said:
Eugel, the people who make these kinds of polls are rarely capable of grasping that sort of nuance, thus the poorly worded selections. They want people to agree with their ideas, typically weight the selections to their ''favor'', ignore the results if they're unfavorable, and decry people who either disagree with or point out flaws in their reasoning/selections.
It's like Reddit karma farming, without the karma (thank god, I used to get PMs ''like for like?'' all the time).
I liked this comment..-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, Callsign112 said:
"The habits of younger players- who game, have changed, and now the same person that buys the FA18 gets one hell of a decent game for their money.
They dont get anything like the same game for MORE of their money, in Warbirds."See how that worked, you posted something and I read it!
Here's my response.
I get the point your trying to make. One could easily argue whether ED did the right thing by making a number of the WWII assets free, as they run the risk of making the people who bought WWII assets feel left out. But notice that the WWII assets pack is still listed as "EARLY ACCESS", so there is always hope that the early supporters can still expect it to be filled out.
But at the same time, I also sense that it was an effort to help grow interest in DCS WWII, which is a good thing IMO. Imagine if there were no free maps and planes, and the only way you could experience DCS World would be to purchase a map and plane of your choice from the get go? I think the barrier to attract new people would be much higher under those circumstances. So what we have at the moment are a couple free maps with two free planes, free trial periods, and to help make game play a little more interesting, a few free assets.
But to answer your question more directly, the H-6 is a post WWII asset that is being supplied by a third party. I have absolutely no knowledge of the relationship that exists between ED and DEKA, but I am quite happy to receive anything they are willing to model for the community. Does this mean that I shouldn't buy the WWII assets pack if that is the era I am interested in? No it does not IMO.
Have you ever considered the price difference between the P-51 and the F/18? I'm not saying it's an obligation of ED's, but I see having a few extra assets for the modern jet scenarios I might want to make as a good thing.
I think this point of view goes against current market trends quite frankly. All you have to do is google what the average gamer spends on gaming in a year to realize the "Can't" in your statement cannot be true.
I recognize that some here have gotten stuck in an argument that seems to be based on principle, and regardless of where those principles lay, the petty cost of the Assets pack especially when it is on sale can hardly be seen as a serious factor.
I encourage anyone with an interest in WWII mission making to get the assets pack and make the most interesting missions you can with it. It doesn't take long for news of something really interesting to travel. And who knows, someone with your talent Stevan could easily turn the energy you spend arguing against it on the forums into something more positive like this:
This is such a poor argument...
Who could argue that? Are you arguing that? Im not..
EA, Yes.. And while im waiting for an appropriate amount of assets to be released for the air, sea and civil units, weve just recieved another tank..
You can find it described as 'DCS: WWII Asset Pack will be receiving yet another free of charge update.' - I mean that sentence is bordering on patronising, we should be grateful yeah?
Again, the free stuff we have for modern- Is not even on the level we have for stuff for warbirds and we've all paid to contribute to that pack being developed.. And its not growing at a rate that the free stuff is.. You work that out.
The asset pack is being supplied by a third party. Notice how modern assets are being released free, nearly every update, and yet were still only getting tanks while waiting long and far for the paid assets?
The difference between the P-51 and the FA18
So, whats the difference in cost- between the two modules? If a new user wanted to purchase each of these campaigns?How much would it cost for me to play your campaign in the P51, vs how much would it cost to play mine in the FA18?
The 'cant' in my statement.. Notice the first and most upvoted comment, and then the name that goes with it?
My arguments are not a personal vendetta towards ED, My arguments are for the player base.
I want a larger player base, Ive waited, Ive struggled to watch people try and grow it, and nothing has happened so far.
Why would anyone wait for the asset pack to go on sale? Which is my point- Everyone with a brain, waits for the sales- Youve given us the number one reason for NOT buying the module, they are naturally far too expensive...
Something more Positive.. Show me what youve spent your energy on...
What i know,
We will always get modern assets for free (because the new users that plow their pocket money into that part of the game, will NEVER pay for them)..
Warbirds will always be second fiddle and at a higher cost, because it only sells to the mature player, and the model is wrong to attract the new players..
EA only works for ED, not the customer..-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Callsign112 said:
@StevanJ, I was just giving you an example of how to make your survey questions clearer. That is why I said... "Do you see the difference?".
To be honest, it is not really clear to me what your intentions are, like you mention "one off Asset models for the Mission Editor" as a perk for donating, but I know you are very vocal about people being locked out of your missions because they don't have access to the assets.
So does this mean you are changing your view on the paid for Assets pack?
Dearest Callsign112, Its been so long since we've shared many a discussion.
Perhaps, if you arent clear on a topic, maybe you should just leave it alone.
I cant help but feel like you follow me around, Which is okay too.
My intention? To discuss the topic. To seek out what people value, and compare it to previous discussions and see if players are interested in anything like whats mentioned in the opening question...
In my day, You used to get a free Airfix kit, with every copy of Takeoff Magazine. So why not free skins, with every purchase of DCS eZine?
Changing my view in what way?
Do PLEASE keep the discussion on topic, if youd like to take the conversation away from the topic, feel free to PM me, or start another topic, and tag me..
Many thanks, Dear Callsign112..
-
1
-
-
So weve just been given the Xian H-6 for free, The question is why was this for free?
And not part of a DLC Asset Pack- I mean we all want to support DCS with module purchases right?
Surely they'd allow us to buy the DLC pack with all the Chinese Assets in it?
ED isnt that stupid, they know what would happen if they tried to charge the 'new market' for assets..
However, they also know that us 'mature gamers', are used to the other flight sims that have come along, and the way they used to do business.They cant approach the kids and say 'buy this DLC target pack' it just wont fly.
If we look carefully over the last 2 years, nearly every youtuber has tried (and failed) to get new users into some sort of WW2 server.
You can see the numbers on the new GS WW2 server. Its down to a total of 6 players as of this moment and guess what, its 2 weeks after it launched.
Last night in my normally prime time it was 7.. And 5 of the players werent even in the air..
Why have i paid for the Asset Pack, and still not seeing the same amount of Assets coming through that pack, that ED are giving away for free to the FA18 customers..
While us 'mature gamers' are fans of the game, and want to do 'everything we can' to help ED', the newer players that are coming through and into the game, arent here in this forum.
The habits of younger players- who game, have changed, and now the same person that buys the FA18 gets one hell of a decent game for their money.
They dont get anything like the same game for MORE of their money, in Warbirds.
QuoteYour focus shouldn't be on the person that wont play your mission, it should be on the person that will!
While yes' we can be ignorant to users that 'wont' play our 'Asset Pack' missions, its more about the focus on the person that 'Cant' play our missions..
A majority of people (including youtubers) are ploughing bad reviews into the Asset Pack, and ED's lack of awareness towards the MP game, and the younger people that want to take the game over, are actively damaging Warbirds with bad press.
This is because us older folk, are far too stubborn to accept change, in welcoming new players come into the game.
Young gamers shouldnt be treated like fools, theyre the generation who will own the Warbird game in 10-20 years..
Instead of having one standard towards Assets and A/Packs- Like we do in the modern game, we have two standards.. And thats why we have two very different opinions in this forum.
19 hours ago, sirrah said:Ok, fair enough..
To be honest, I create missions because I just like doing it. But I guess I'm going off topic once again.
On the matter of paid asset packs. It also quite depends on the extent of the packs. I guess I'm afraid that we'd be heading in a microtransaction kinda direction...
If they were to add these packs, I'd certainly hope they would make them big. I'd rather see one huge asset pack, for a ff module price (or even double that if necessary), than seeing all kind of small $10 asset packs..
Ive heard were going that way anyway..-
2
-
-
It can be anything you want it to be..
As long as you use the correct assets for each task
-
About a 7..
-
Am i right in thinking these are new ground units?
Im talking about the infantry at these two moments..
-
2
-
Assets pack please
in Wish List
Posted
Thanks for the support, All im doing is responding to a user.
Youd never hear about it from me, if said user wouldnt start the conversation with me.
Ive asked, Ive pleaded and yet here we are..