rfxcasey

I'm not really seeing how ED is treated as an "evil mega corp", barring perhaps the occasional outlier. Seems like an exaggeration frankly, "by some" meaning what, one or two users out of thousands? Yeah, not really seeing all this "hate" or getting that vibe at all, mostly just folks concerned about recent events regarding one of their favorite sims. And while not a term I use personally, I feel "fanboy" would apply more to anyone who instinctively jumps to "defend" something or someone against legitimate and reasonable questions or concerns. A bit short sighted perhaps. Once again, augment if not totally replace this type of work, now and in the future. AI is in its infancy, its advancement is and will be exponential, today, tomorrow and beyond. I wouldn't discount it simply because it doesn't do everything you need it to perfectly today. It will most certainly replace you at some point.

Well, yes generally, but ED should let folks know future support of Razbam modules is questionable before they purchase them.

TLDR Version: I won't attempt to dissuade anyone from speculating, but casting aspersions at this point isn't justifiable in my humble opinion. Long Version: Speculating on the cause of the dispute is one thing, everyone is entitled to their opinions, but placing blame at this point seems premature given how little we know. That said, it seems to me Razbam has gained a little bit of a reputation toward drama over the years, whether deserved or not, and the current statements we have from them seem to fall in line with that. I'm not taking sides, and I don't think it's wise to do so at this point, but, ED has appeared to be fairly stand up in the past that's all I'll say.

I honestly don't believe it would be quite as difficult as you think, besides, much of this kind of work will be augmented by, if not completely performed by, AI in the very near future. And I mean VERY near future, if not already. Yeah, typically not an early adopter of software and definitely don't historically subscribe to the 'pre-order' model, I usually like to let things mature for a while before getting onboard. Early Access is a bit of a different animal in my opinion especially as its gone with ED in the past. I've never really had a lack of confidence when it came to early access, fully knowing that the product would be lacking features or unfinished, but never considered a potential total death of the module while DCS World still breathed. I did, however, pre-order the F-4 Phantom II, which was quite a bit out of character for me. It is after all, an F-4 Phantom II from Heatblur so take that into consideration.

While I appreciate individuals the unfortunate truth is almost anyone can be replaced though it might cause delays, so I'm not too worried about that, not that it's a good sign either. But to my original point, that ED hasn't placed a disclaimer on the Razbam products they are selling informing potential buyers of the current status (that doesn't look too promising from our consumer standpoint) it's not in line with honest business practices. There hasn't even been a statement of continued support from ED of Razbam products regardless of reconciliation. The official response from ED (if you can even call it that) was definitely lacking in my honest opinion.

How do we know there isn't an issue? Public statements were made from several folks at Razbam and ED's reply was essentially, we're working to resolve the issue. ED's reps acknowledged the issue on these forums, so there is an issue and it hasn't been resolved. If and when it is resolved there will surely be a public statement made by ED, which there hasn't been to date. So yeah, it's still up in the air, no pun intended.

This is a perfect example of why I made my original post regarding a disclaimer, folks shouldn't have to stumble across the current status of the project before buying, it should be crystal clear on the ED website/e-shop page.

Copy pasting a disclaimer from a random game on Steam has absolutely no relevance to the matter at hand. Every publisher will have their own policies. Razbam modules aren't even a "game" per say, DCS world is the game, Razbam modules are paid DLC. You seem to be grabbing at straws with irrelevant arguments.

Just a heads up if it hasn't already been mentioned but it appears Microsoft will be discontinuing Windows Mixed Reality (if they haven't already, haven't checked) potentially putting the future use of your Mixed Reality Headset, e.g. Reverb G2, in jeopardy. My hope is there will be a work around that doesn't require not updating your Windows 11 or going back to Windows 10. I haven't done any serious digging on the subject but the hype suggests prospects aren't good. If Windows 11 does "brick" your Reverb G2 and other WMR headsets, it wouldn't surprise me if some lawsuits weren't filed, if at all possible under current law, consumer protection or otherwise.

Yes, if you're coming from a 16:9 monitor I can see VR having even more WOW factor. I'm flying at 3440x1440 on a 34 inch curved ultrawide and it makes a huge difference when comparing 2D to VR. I can max out my settings, including view distance, and still average over 100FPS all day long, the experience is silky smooth. With VR I have to make compromises to get anywhere close to the same performance, though I use a Reverb G2 V2 and imagine the foveated rendering of some newer VR headsets might negate performance loss a bit.

I read this but I also read a suggestion that the issue causing Razbam to not get paid was they weren't giving up their source code to ED. I've also read it suggested that the issue was Razbam mishandling ED's source code in violation of ED's agreement with 3rd party devs. Admittedly its all speculative and we may never actually know what the cause of the dispute was.

Yeah, got to love folks that just can't believe anyone would have a different opinion then theirs, bless their hearts, like theirs is the only one that matters.

Yup, many. Nothing beats the convenience, ease of use and clarity of 2D. VR is great for driving sims and simpler flying like WWI/WWII/General aviation stuff but its definitely not the end all be all. And people that say this always sound like they are asserting it must be all one or the other. I fly VR sometimes for the experience and fun, but most of the time I'm 2D personally. It is actually possible to go back and forth between the two ya know.

Just a thought, but if Razbam reps have publicly stated they will no longer be supporting their modules, wouldn't it behoove ED to place a disclaimer notice for Razbam modules while they continue selling them? As it currently stands, ED has the F-15E plastered on their title page like nothing is afoot. Seems a little dishonest to carry on with business as usual without at least notifying potential buyers of potential end of support life, especially while several modules are still in "early access". Otherwise, if it's "fake news" then ED needs to assure us it is in fact "fake news".

Have you read some of the posts on these forums? That said, without knowing the full details of the issue, its currently my opinion that EA needs to do whatever needs to happen to fix the situation, be that negotiating an agreement with Razbam or purchasing the source codes and supporting Razbam's modules themselves. Whatever caused this problem should have never been capable of happening in the first place, had no one ever considered the possibility and adopted a contingency plan? Not trying to bash ED, but no matter who is at fault my feeling is that they need to make this right and fulfill their commitments to their customers. Even if Razbam's modules never get updated again and stay in their current state of development forever, ED needs to be able to fix them if a DCS World update breaks them completely.

Finally got mine, looks like a good quality T-shirt. Thanks HB, really looking forward to the Phantom II.

Yeah I had estimated something like that, I believe Cosmo speculated around that in his interview with Wags. It'd be nice if we could get an estimate on the sizes of the different versions, I don't know that that'll use the whole map enough to justify having the full version, but I could probably live with one of the regions occupying a permanent space on my system. Guessing that if one buys the whole map we'll be able to pick and choose which full fidelity regions we'll have installed at any given time? Or will it be an all or nothing thing? I'm surely nickel and diming here, I'll probably just take out a 1TB m.2 and replace it with a 4TB, but it'd still be nice information for us to have. ED has to have a very close approximation they could throw at us.

Any estimate on the disk space that will be required for the various version, its something to consider?

It's probably Vladimir upset about the upcoming full fidelity Mig-29.

While I definitely sympathize with those having ghosting issues, I'm more concerned with any performance gains. I haven't done anything other than anecdotal observations, curious to know if anyone else has found a performance difference between DLSS dynamic-link library versions?

I find it interesting and counterintuitive that less actual scenery, i.e. sea, would cause worse performance. Any chance of getting a technical explanation as to why that is? Speed comes at a price and I always put DCS world on the fastest drive I have, same goes for Microsoft Flight Simulator and other sims. Having several drives of various capacity and capabilities while also considering motherboard limitations, i.e. the number of M.2 slots available and their associated capabilities means you're left with inevitable decisions that have to be made. If your motherboard only supports 2 M.2 SSD drives do I eliminate a 2TB M.2 SDD to replace with a 4TB M.2? Do I purchase a PCI-e expansion card so I can have more than 2 M.2 drives capability? I think you're oversimplifying the issue in relation to your particular system and considerations. It's often not a simple as just buying another 2TB M.2 SSD, popping it in and and letting it roll.

I know saying this won't change anything but I'm just going to say it anyways, and I'm sure I'll get a lot of heat in return, but I'm not a huge fan of this guessing game us customers are having to navigate, allow me to explain. If you take the chance and pre purchase a newly releasing map like Afghanistan, you get it at a sizable discount, but another anticipated map, like Kola peninsula surely won't release until a previous map is out of pre purchase status and hence no longer discounted. Maps, and modules for that matter, typically don't seem to go on sale till at least a year if not two or so once they are released so we consumers are left with the conundrum of choosing to take a chance on the pre purchase and subsequent discount of a map that upon release we may not be happy with for various reasons or waiting for a following map that may or may not be all we hoped for. Since reviews and side by side comparisons of, for example, Afghanistan, Iraq and Kola peninsula won't be possible with still being eligible for pre purchase discount, it seems the customer is put in an awkward position of rolling the dice to a certain degree or, if they do purchase a map after said reviews are available, feeling like they got a bit of a raw deal. Not to mention the hard drive space required and potential investment of more/bigger SSD drives which can be hundreds of dollars and require system reconfiguration considerations often. Realizing the space requirements are just the nature of the beast, still, even with the 5TB of space on my system I've found myself uninstalling DCS maps I don't fly often to make room for other modules and programs. It would just be nice to know if a map or module is something I'm actually going to like and use on a regular basis before purchasing in lieu of a sizable discount offering. I'd much prefer if that whole "pre purchase" discount model be done away with and prices adjusted accordingly, making the maps one set price a few dollars cheaper and forgo the "pre purchase" crap shoot. And now, splitting maps into individually purchasable sections just seems to exacerbate the issue. Then there is always the consideration of how many other folks are actually going to buy and fly a particular map. Persian gulf in particular I somewhat regret purchasing especially in comparison to Syria and Sinai. Trust me, I've spent plenty on DCS World and I support ED and its partners, I just don't like being put in a position where I have to make tough choices. The money could always be put toward something we'll use more like hardware or aircraft modules. I don't know, perhaps I am splitting hairs here but it just makes me feel kind of weird having to play this hype game. That said, I won a free Apache module in a contest before it was actually released, which offsets my cringe factor a bit, but still. I thought I'd fly it a lot more than I do. I know several folks who fly it almost exclusively. And yes, I pre ordered the F-4 Phantom II though there is little chance of regret regarding that module.

Waiting on Kola peninsula release, but I'm sure Afghanistan will be a great map for ground pounding and helicopters.

Still waiting on T-Shirt, North Carolina USA.

I save about 6-7 deg Fahrenheit with it on. Since I'm usually flying for several hours I'll take any temp reduction I can get.