Jump to content

Constructive feedback from a professional community


Recommended Posts

I just read everything about VEAO yesterday and their company dropping DCS. I, like everyone else, was furious they decided to drop DCS and then go with another company utilizing DCS images and talking about their success while planning to develop for another sim.

 

I could go on like so many others have a right to do, but at the end of the day, I created this forum to give ED a legitimate constructive approach for their customers. I do not want this to turn into another easy bash fest on VEAO.

 

From what I have read, their are several ways VEAO could repay the community for 13 years of non fulfilled promises. I would first like to start by saying ED does NOT have an obligation to repay us. The third party took our money and dropped the ball, not ED. Clearly their was money to start developing for another company the first time, and now a second time. I would also like to say it is unfair to bash the people like myself who prepaid for a promised module by a company we put our trust in. That is a cop out. We realized their was risk, but if I had any inclination the business would not survive, I firmly believe all of us would not have put down any money.

 

I think above all, VEAO owes it to us, and MOST of all ED, to stop utilizing DCS images to gain revenue we will never see for yet another company they are merging with. Second, they need to stop referring to their success with DCS. This is not a true statement and should not be used to promote anything with the company they merged with.

 

I think the biggest gesture VEAO could give to the community is releasing what they already have to a competent third party developer who could turn that diamond in the rough into a diamond we want to buy. Does this mean repaying for the module again? Probably, because I would not expect a third party to do it for free, but I would gladly fund another dev to do it right.

 

To me, I grew up around these War birds and fighters. I am an aviation enthusiast and lover of all aviation. DCS is a great combat simulation, but to me, they are more than that. The fidelity and accuracy of each module helps keep the memory alive of these aircraft and the important roles they have played throughout history and pays homage to the men/women who flew them. We have virtual airshows, current and former pilots from every corner of aviation flying on DCS, and more people joining our community at an increasing rate. DCS is a virtual portal back in time, especially with VR, to those of us who will never be able to sit in the real cockpits and fly these legends.

 

The Hawk and P-40 still deserve a spot in our hangars. I think VEAO at least owes us that. Give the rights and everything you have on the two aircraft over to a dev who can complete what you guys could not. This I would be satisfied with, even if it means paying a second time for them.

 

Again guys, out of respect for ED, lets not turn this into a shit throwing contest. If you guys/girls have any other constructive ideas or solutions, I would like to hear them.


Edited by robert.clark251
Link to comment

It's not like we have an abundance of 3rd party developers who are desperately searching for another model to make. It's the opposite, DCS developers have usually more plans than manpower. Even if one of them takes over Hawk or P-40 project, it will be at the expense of the current and planned developments. So would you rather see ED work on the Hawk or the Hornet? P47 or P40? Should Razbam postpone finishing the Harrier again? Or Heatblur move the Tomcat and whatever they plan next to 2020?

 

And we haven't even started discussing the quality of VEAO's work and how much of it would need to be redone to match the standards of other DCS modules.

Hardware: VPForce Rhino, FSSB R3 Ultra, Virpil T-50CM, Hotas Warthog, Winwing F15EX, Slaw Rudder, GVL224 Trio Throttle, Thrustmaster MFDs, Saitek Trim wheel, Trackir 5, Quest Pro

Link to comment

I see this sentiment a lot "give us or a third party all of your code and models so they can fix your shit", however I think it's a naive argument. First of all, who is a competent developer? Heatblur? They're busy as all hell. RAZBAM? Aside from my problems with how their management has treated their customer base, they are also busy as all hell. ED has its hands so full they reabsorbed all of BST to help fix their problems and and expand to handle the stuff they're already responsible for. After that you've got the less super star module makes, M5, Polychop and Aviodev, all who have way bigger fish to fry than taking on two more modules.

 

 

Also, we don't know how their code is written. Given the absolute metric ton of problems we've seen from the Hawk and the issues we've heard about from the P-40 (suddenly one day the engine couldn't breathe air...) how well documented and written do you think that code is? It sounds like it's just a jumbled mess of spaghetti code that you'd likely be better off scrapping and rewriting entirely. Hell, companies like Heatblur have already started talking about their custom workflows so adding in work from another developer, a developer who's demonstrated time and time again that they're not very good, would any of that previous work be useful?

 

 

And even if their code is trash, which I'd go out on a limb and suspect it is, are their models even any good? Their models and texturework frankly aren't anything special. How many times did they say they were retexturing or remodeling things only to never look as good as the MiG-21Bis did back in DCS 1.5?

 

 

At the end of the day, I don't think VEAO has anything to offer the community on the front of signing over their modules. You'd be better off petitioning one of the third parties to start from scratch as I suspect that's what would end up happening anyway.

Link to comment
I would first like to start by saying ED does NOT have an obligation to repay us. The third party took our money and dropped the ball, not ED.

Do you know ED takes 30%(standard deal) on every 3:rd party module sold from ED's site & Steam? If bought trough ED site then they do have an obligation since you bought it from ED not the actual 3:rd party.

i7 8700k@4.7, 1080ti, DDR4 32GB, 2x SSD , HD 2TB, W10, ASUS 27", TrackIr5, TMWH, X-56, GProR.

Link to comment
Do you know ED takes 30%(standard deal) on every 3:rd party module sold from ED's site & Steam? If bought trough ED site then they do have an obligation since you bought it from ED not the actual 3:rd party.

 

Ed has no obligation just like Steam has no obligation to fix all those failed early access games they have in store. That's the risk of early access, you pay in advance for something no one is obliged to deliver.

Hardware: VPForce Rhino, FSSB R3 Ultra, Virpil T-50CM, Hotas Warthog, Winwing F15EX, Slaw Rudder, GVL224 Trio Throttle, Thrustmaster MFDs, Saitek Trim wheel, Trackir 5, Quest Pro

Link to comment
I just read everything about VEAO yesterday and their company dropping DCS. I, like everyone else, was furious they decided to drop DCS and then go with another company utilizing DCS images and talking about their success while planning to develop for another sim.

What is this other company you are talking of?

 

VEAO is being dissolved.

Bluesky FS has been dissolved.

 

Porrima is supposed to be a joint company between VEAO and another according to the website. It's still active, but its last filing dating accounts to end of Dec 2017 shows it had ~£500 of assets after liabilities.

If they've transfered everything to Porrima, we'll find out next month when they submit the accounts again.


Edited by Buzzles
Link to comment
Do you know ED takes 30%(standard deal) on every 3:rd party module sold from ED's site & Steam? If bought trough ED site then they do have an obligation since you bought it from ED not the actual 3:rd party.

 

 

I think it's ED's right to take 30% form every 3rd pary module, because they provide and develop DCS-World as a base platform to use those modules. What could you do with a module, if there was noch DCS-World?

A-10A, A-10C, A-10C II, AV-8B, F-5E, F-16C, F/A-18C, F-86F, Yak-52, Nevada, Persian Gulf, Syria, Supercarrier, Combined Arms, FW 190 A-8, FW 190 D-9, Spitfire LF Mk. IX, Normandy + WWII Assets Pack

 

Link to comment

Buzzles, here is the website of the company they merged with. I do not feel like the statements made about VEAO in this article are accurate. http://porrimasimulations.co.uk/about/

 

As far as the rest of the comments go about handing the projects over to another dev, I see your point and concur with what is said. These are things I did not think take into account when making the statement. However, I do realize how busy the other third parties are and in no means did I mean to put any project on the back burner to start these up.

 

I was just suggesting they would still be a welcomed module to DCS. As always gents thanks for the comments. And let me know what you think about the link above. Maybe I am taking it out of context, but I do believe those are photos taken from DCS, specifically the Nevada map and used to promote how successful of a developer they were. I disagree and would be pissed off if I was ED. To see the photos, click on the links at the top of the page. Their are some photos of them on the flight deck with DCS Nevada map

Link to comment
Do you know ED takes 30%(standard deal) on every 3:rd party module sold from ED's site & Steam?
That's irrelevant.

 

If bought trough ED site then they do have an obligation since you bought it from ED not the actual 3:rd party.
ED is not responsible for what 3rd parties do, deliver or fail to deliver.

Win 10 Pro 64Bit | 49" UWHD AOC 5120x1440p | AMD 5900x | 64Gb DDR4 | RX 6900XT

Link to comment

I actually think ED does have some responsibility in all of this. ED decides who they allow to be a third party developer and they also set the standard of quality. They thoroughly test each third party module before release. The way I see it, ED should have stepped it along time ago. VEAO's poor quality and lack of production did not happen overnight...it's been like that for years. ED's reputation and standards of quality are represented by the third parties as well.

i5 7600K @4.8GHz | 1080 Ti | 32GB 3200MHz | SSD | DCS SETTINGS | "COCKPIT"

Link to comment
Buzzles, here is the website of the company they merged with. I do not feel like the statements made about VEAO in this article are accurate. http://porrimasimulations.co.uk/about/

I think you're very much leaping as to what Porrima is.

It's definitely not new. I learned about it from these forums well over 12 months ago. It's been around since 2016 according to CH.

 

They're not merging into them from what I can see. That company has been effectively dormant for ages. I wouldn't be surprised to see that company dissolve in the near future too.

 

I could be wrong, but equally so could you. So, maybe lets not all jump to conclusions of bad practice?

Link to comment

Buzzles,

 

Sounds fair enough. I was not aware they had been around for so long and dormant. I was going based off of some other info I read on a thread that was pulled down because it became a bash fest.

 

I guess the reality of this whole situation is we will just have to face the fact that we bet on something and lost. Just time to move on and look forward to other great modules to come. Leave it up to the moderator as to shut this thread down or not. I saw some ED bashing after my last post. I did not want to see that become a part of this thread. Thanks for the constructive feedback man. Look forward to seeing you in the skies sometime in the near future.

 

Rob

Link to comment
Buzzles,

 

Sounds fair enough. I was not aware they had been around for so long and dormant. I was going based off of some other info I read on a thread that was pulled down because it became a bash fest.

 

I guess the reality of this whole situation is we will just have to face the fact that we bet on something and lost. Just time to move on and look forward to other great modules to come. Leave it up to the moderator as to shut this thread down or not. I saw some ED bashing after my last post. I did not want to see that become a part of this thread. Thanks for the constructive feedback man. Look forward to seeing you in the skies sometime in the near future.

 

Rob

 

 

Indeed, we can do nothing but wait until either Ells can clear it up, or ED make a statement.

 

 

It's just a sad state of affairs all round.

Link to comment

This thread is utterly pointless. It's just armchair lawyering and nonsensical 'gibe code' that is all totally out of touch with reality.

 

There are professionals dealing with the situation. Wait and see what develops, there's no point in throwing in unwanted ignorant opinions. The only relevant comment the community can make is that they're unhappy with what happened. Everybody knows that, and it's kind of a given. Beyond that, nobody cares what 'the community' thinks about business or development decisions, and nobody in 'the community' knows enough about the matter to actually have an intelligent opinion to offer.

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Nice opinion offered there....
Not very subtle or nice, but he is pretty much correct with his statement.

Shagrat

 

- Flying Sims since 1984 -:pilotfly:

Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 64GB | GeForce RTX 3090 - Asus VG34VQL1B  | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VIRPIL CM 50 Stick & Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Plus/Apache64 Grip | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | WW Top Gun MIP | a hand made AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)

Link to comment
Buzzles, here is the website of the company they merged with. I do not feel like the statements made about VEAO in this article are accurate. http://porrimasimulations.co.uk/about/

 

As far as the rest of the comments go about handing the projects over to another dev, I see your point and concur with what is said. These are things I did not think take into account when making the statement. However, I do realize how busy the other third parties are and in no means did I mean to put any project on the back burner to start these up.

 

I was just suggesting they would still be a welcomed module to DCS. As always gents thanks for the comments. And let me know what you think about the link above. Maybe I am taking it out of context, but I do believe those are photos taken from DCS, specifically the Nevada map and used to promote how successful of a developer they were. I disagree and would be pissed off if I was ED. To see the photos, click on the links at the top of the page. Their are some photos of them on the flight deck with DCS Nevada map

 

 

:lol::lol::lol: I'm still drying the tears in my eyes after reading the statement on the Porrima Simulations site: "VEAO Simulations develops realistic, high quality consumer aircraft products for use in leading market flight simulators. These include true-to-life clickable cockpit, flight model, damage model, and weapons panels including deployment, full systems models for multi-function displays, fuel, hydraulics, engine, electrical and realistic terrain models. Its vision is to simulate air combat operations around the world in hypothetical war theatres for use by real world or virtual pilots using the latest synthetic flight simulation software and hardware. Aircraft development to date include the BAE Hawk T.1A, Eurofighter Typhoon, classic single engine jet aircraft and classic WWII War Birds."


Edited by norbot

A-10A, A-10C, A-10C II, AV-8B, F-5E, F-16C, F/A-18C, F-86F, Yak-52, Nevada, Persian Gulf, Syria, Supercarrier, Combined Arms, FW 190 A-8, FW 190 D-9, Spitfire LF Mk. IX, Normandy + WWII Assets Pack

 

Link to comment

To be honest I was struck by the use of the Hawk and what appears to be DCS world imagery on the Porrima page. It's fair to at least put that on EDs radar to make sure that is all above board. It seems to me someone who is unfamiliar with DCS may conclude those images are taken from a sim designed by Porrima.

 

Sent from my SM-J320V using Tapatalk

Link to comment

Maybe not the perfect place to place my statement here, but I have to.

 

I am sad about the fact that the HAWK doesn't get love anymore.

This DCS module is great (although there are some things that could be made better - 2 seater controls e.g.), and I would hate to miss the HAWK in DCS in the future.

 

My wish to ED / VEAO:

Please guys, sit together and find a solution which keeps the HAWK alive at least as is right now, and re-start selling it (I recently wanted to buy it as a present for a friend since we love to fly together in one pit).

 

Additionally, I wouldn't have anything against buying it for a second time to support the financial transition to a new "owner" (lets say $10 or so would be OK for me personally).

Everything else IMHO would be waste of much life time of so many persons, for which I can't find suitable words.

 

If I am honest, I am upset about this, really!

Visit https://www.viggen.training
...Viggen... what more can you ask for?

my computer:
AMD Ryzen 5600G | NVIDIA GTX 1080 Ti OC 11GB | 32 GB 3200 MHz DDR4 DUAL | SSD 980 256 GB SYS + SSD 2TB DCS | TM Warthog Stick + Throttle + TPR | Rift CV1

 

Link to comment
Maybe not the perfect place to place my statement here, but I have to.

 

I am sad about the fact that the HAWK doesn't get love anymore.

This DCS module is great (although there are some things that could be made better - 2 seater controls e.g.), and I would hate to miss the HAWK in DCS in the future.

 

My wish to ED / VEAO:

Please guys, sit together and find a solution which keeps the HAWK alive at least as is right now, and re-start selling it (I recently wanted to buy it as a present for a friend since we love to fly together in one pit).

 

Additionally, I wouldn't have anything against buying it for a second time to support the financial transition to a new "owner" (lets say $10 or so would be OK for me personally).

Everything else IMHO would be waste of much life time of so many persons, for which I can't find suitable words.

 

If I am honest, I am upset about this, really!

 

+1

Real War, Youtube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCs1uki5QsyuHUdvtmWJTOg?view_as=subscriber

 

Real War, Voice Chat: https://discord.gg/UGa3KMe

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment

I am not trying to instigate any hate on this matter, this is just my opinion on the whole topic. My whole belief on this matter is that VEAO was a 3rd party that had aspirations to make great full-pledged modules and did not meet up to the quota to which they were promising. From what seemed to be said from the announcement they made, it was implied that this was outside of their control.

 

Many here have bashed the developers in the heads, calling them thieves or unsuitable company workers. Others see this as a respectful move on their behalf due to misfortune. I personally do not see them as the con artist like men that many perceive them to be, and have always wished for them to strive and become better than they were before.

 

I perfectly understand the hate from the numerous amount of customers that was given because of paying money for a broken module. However, I would like to emphasize that as types of groups have noted, you always have the ability to wait to buy a product, especially one that is in Early Access. Until we hear any further from ED on this matter or a statement from VEAO, we have no exact definition of what happened behind the curtains ourselves.

 

Otherwise, I hope to hear more on this officially from the developers' standpoint themselves.

Link to comment
I am not trying to instigate any hate on this matter, this is just my opinion on the whole topic. My whole belief on this matter is that VEAO was a 3rd party that had aspirations to make great full-pledged modules and did not meet up to the quota to which they were promising. From what seemed to be said from the announcement they made, it was implied that this was outside of their control.

 

Many here have bashed the developers in the heads, calling them thieves or unsuitable company workers. Others see this as a respectful move on their behalf due to misfortune. I personally do not see them as the con artist like men that many perceive them to be, and have always wished for them to strive and become better than they were before.

 

I perfectly understand the hate from the numerous amount of customers that was given because of paying money for a broken module. However, I would like to emphasize that as types of groups have noted, you always have the ability to wait to buy a product, especially one that is in Early Access. Until we hear any further from ED on this matter or a statement from VEAO, we have no exact definition of what happened behind the curtains ourselves.

 

Otherwise, I hope to hear more on this officially from the developers' standpoint themselves.

 

I think like always the "truth" is somewhere in between. I am sure that VEAO had the best intentions and were excited to be developing for DCS... they just couldn't overcome the challenges (both technical and financial).

 

There is a reason there are so few devs for DCS compared to some other games out there... it is a niche product... and very complicated. So, I can forgive them for that portion, in the end they just had to throw in the towel as they couldn't carry on as a company.

 

Now, where they are at fault (and this is obviously an outsider looking in, I have no details) is pushing another product, the P40, out for preorder when they couldn't even finish the hawk. Maybe they figured a warbird would be easier for them but it may have been "too little too late" for lack of a better term. Maybe they thought if they got enough money from preorders they could survive long enough to get that module out, then it would sell decently? But I wonder if the lack of preorders due to their questionable reputation is what did them in before they could deliver on the P40.

 

Just my random thoughts on the matter. It sucks to lose a 3rd party dev since there are so few... DCS as a whole would be better off if VEAO was having success, but not everyone can make the cut.

5900X - 32 GB 3600 RAM - 1080TI

My Twitch Channel

~Moo

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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