Have the Hornet devs moved back from the Viper?

Of course. My intention as well.

Which would make it 10 weeks. At what point has the team ‘helped get the Viper over the line’ enough, ED hasn’t said and I’m getting very concerned that it is an open ended move and there is no plan/expectation that they will move back in anything approaching a timescale measured in weeks, hence my request for ED to provide a commitment to time gate the deprioritisation of the Hornet avionics.

I agree. But do not wait for a clear answer from them. they work on a lot of projects so it's normal that everything takes time.

Hmmm... you might really be a manager. That's quite the collection of "management speak" cliches you've trotted out in this thread. :smilewink:

Haha! Stick the word ‘Project’ in front of ‘Manager’ and that’s me! I did neglect to talk about the information radiator, timeboxes and of course the perennial favourite ‘going forwards’ :-)

Did I just read the cliff notes of "How to win friends and influence people", or possibly "The CEO next door"?

Doh, it popped right after NineLine's post . . . this is not in regards to that.

Don't think the OP was attempting to micro manage, he was looking for clarification, equally he is not in a position to micro manage the ED dev team at any rate.

 

As for just letting them do their jobs - part of any commercial entity is to communicate with the customer, the fact that people raise such issues combined with the lack of hornet development in the last quarter and no real detailed milestone discussions from ED means that from a PR perspective they have failed aka part of their job. Luckily for them their is no competition in this sector, they have an excellent product with a devoted and loyal customer base and thus get away with their substandard communication.

 

Being critical of their Public Relations is separate from being critical of the dev team.

here here

Thank you Nineline for providing the clarity (with provisos) that was requested.

Our focus is currently on cleaning up the F-16C enough to release it to the “stable” version. There are several items this entails, and one of them is the Track While Scan (TWS) radar mode because it was earlier listed as an at-release feature. There is also work on the flight dynamics and cockpit systems of the F-16C to get it out of the Open Beta-only stage. Meanwhile, other team members are at work on the Hornet weapon systems and developing technology and tools that will benefit both aircraft. We expect a hard push on the Hornet’s radar and targeting pod by the end of the month. Please note that this is our current planning and sometimes plans can change (like it did with sharing development staff between the Viper and Hornet). While we try our best to keep you informed of our intent, please understand that this is never a promise but rather us relaying to you our current intent. Thank you for your patience.

Yes thanks for this News. But what do you mean with hard push on hornet radar ? Tws ?

Great !

Look forward to it.

Thank you for the heads-up.

......... . Meanwhile, other team members are at work on the Hornet weapon systems and developing technology and tools ............

Good news indeed. Thank you for the update.

Some people should really be barred from early access, and should wait instead until the product is feature complete. Maybe ED should really put some form of "Fit for early access?" type quiz before the option to purchase an ea module unlocks. ;)

 

 

 

Those of us who are aware what early access entails (e.g., developing new sensor tech, ground radar, updated FLIR, a slew of other things we're not aware of, etc, etc,) and don't mind waiting for it, usually enjoy what get got and happily wait until things get added.

The one answering him if any, wont't be a developer, or it should not be one, meaning that loosing dev time is in fact a stupidity.

I agree that EA has some special T&C and that is not for everyone, but some people here carry this to an unhealthy way of thinking, while they criticise others for doing a totally respectful behavior.

Different would have been a non constructive critic expressed in bad manners.

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

I understand why folks are frustrated. Look what was released today. I never had an issue with the SA page but after today's update I spent 4 hours rebuilding our server, HMD worked on one sortie and not on the next, Rad Alt worked on one sortie and not the next. 6 slammers fired within 10 miles none hit. Some pilots seeing static models on the carrier, other seeing some models, while others see none, lowered gear and flaps to trap and the jet went into a deep left bank; which I couldn't get trimmed until I retracted gear and flaps and tried again, cannot get TGP to LSS with autolase JTAC. It use to work with another player lasing, and DCS is very slow loading now compared to a few months ago.

There's so much potential but we are clearly not moving ahead. We just keep introducing new bugs. I don't care about new avionics or weapons right now. I'd like to see these nuisance bugs fixed first. With all of the products ED says they are working on I can see why things are such a mess; feels like the old BMS days again.

I guess the only thing that has changed, since this song was originally released, is the range of responses that are open to the "hole digger". ;)

And some people should learn that asking is allowed. The OP asked a fair question in a respectful manner. It is a good way of presenting a concern as a client.

 

The one answering him if any, wont't be a developer, or it should not be one, meaning that loosing dev time is in fact a stupidity.

 

I agree that EA has some special T&C and that is not for everyone, but some people here carry this to an unhealthy way of thinking, while they criticise others for doing a totally respectful behavior.

 

Different would have been a non constructive critic expressed in bad manners.

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

I never get why people are so quick to criticize anyone who dares ask a question about early access particularly when there appears to be a lack of progress on key systems. If you are happy with the drip feed then great, however some people are clearly not, and I think that the release of the Viper drawing staff away from the Hornet has added to that feeling and it is only natural to ask questions.

I never get why people are so quick to criticize anyone who dares ask a question about early access particularly when there appears to be a lack of progress on key systems. If you are happy with the drip feed then great, however some people are clearly not, and I think that the release of the Viper drawing staff away from the Hornet has added to that feeling and it is only natural to ask questions.

+1

The Early Access promise is intentionally vague. Agreements like this made in such an ambiguous manner (give us some money now, and we promise, in a REASONABLE time frame to deliver a FEATURE FULL product) are destined for confusion. The caps are the things up for interpretation. How long is reasonable? If the Hornet is in EA for 10 years, are you ok with that? How about 5? 2? Where do you draw the line? More importantly, where do the devs draw the line? What is feature full? How many bugs or missing features are permitted to call the product "complete"?

None of these things are fully defined, and so all of the repeat questions you see in these forums are directed to these areas. It is not unreasonable to ask what's going on. We were told Hornet development would not be slowed by Viper development. That turned out to be wrong. So that means things have changed, the timelines are different, and your investment becomes ever murkier. Remember, you paid a slightly discounted rate to get into EA in contemplation of a full product. You have every right to wonder when and how that full product is delivered.

I, for one, never jump in to initial EA. It just doesn't suit me. I usually set a milestone I would like to see, then hold off until that feature is stable. For me, that DLZ's for JDAMS and SLAM-ER weapons. That will give me an accurate representation of a mission type and capability not possessed by any other DCS aircraft.

If the JF17 comes out first, I will buy that and wait for the Hornet to have AG radar modes before purchasing. It's arbitrary, but I've set the limit of what I'm comfortable with having for about a 1 yr period before the next major feature releases. Not saying you should all do what I do, but just throwing my thought process out there.

Very glad to see some of the more reasonable , balanced and sane posts above, instead of usual reflexive „It‘s EA, don‘t buy if you don‘t get it and btw you have abandoned any right to question or criticize“ quickdraw drivel.

Can only hope ED slowly gets it.

Regards,

Snappy

"In the future, all modules will be completed!" I have no doubt about that. Because ED is a great company! But how long do we have to wait? No one knows and can't answer. But deep down, we still want someone to answer this question. Since its release, Dahuang peak has been developing and adding new weapons and functions, but it may still take many years to complete. If time can go back to the past, I will never buy any EA stage products. Except for products close to completion like jf17 and F14, because such products, even if not updated for a long time, have high playability and rich content. Don't have to wait long

Very glad to see some of the more reasonable , balanced and sane posts above, instead of usual reflexive „It‘s EA, don‘t buy if you don‘t get it and btw you have abandoned any right to question or criticize“ quickdraw drivel.

 

Can only hope ED slowly gets it.

 

Regards,

 

 

Snappy

Indeed, it appears to be a bit of a sea change where this type of reasonable, balanced and sane responses to concerns by other members of the community are now the majority, not the minority.

I also hope ED gets it, but quickly, not slowly!

The Early Access promise is intentionally vague. Agreements like this made in such an ambiguous manner (give us some money now, and we promise, in a REASONABLE time frame to deliver a FEATURE FULL product) are destined for confusion. The caps are the things up for interpretation. How long is reasonable? If the Hornet is in EA for 10 years, are you ok with that? How about 5? 2? Where do you draw the line? More importantly, where do the devs draw the line? What is feature full? How many bugs or missing features are permitted to call the product "complete"?

 

None of these things are fully defined, and so all of the repeat questions you see in these forums are directed to these areas. It is not unreasonable to ask what's going on. We were told Hornet development would not be slowed by Viper development. That turned out to be wrong. So that means things have changed, the timelines are different, and your investment becomes ever murkier. Remember, you paid a slightly discounted rate to get into EA in contemplation of a full product. You have every right to wonder when and how that full product is delivered.

 

Exactly what I've been saying from day 1. There is simply no proper regulation. Different interpretations, ambiguity, different expectations, no deadlines (even movable ones are fair enough) to drive project prioritisation and completion, etc. Those who put their full trust in EA/ED seemingly with no regard for outcome, cannot expect all other paying customers to think the same and knock them if they don't. It's the real world of transactions, not DCS world. Where money has been paid for a promised to be completed product, the owner (yes) of that product definitely has some say in these things. "But it's an EA" would have been a more reasonable excuse if a timeline with estimated dates had been given. But now it's wide open for interpretation and debate. Deadlines are not just for accountability but help drive project completion. But since there is no clarity, regulation or enforcement, buyers just have to learn from experience and decide if they want to put money down on the next EA.

I'd be surprised if we see TWS, INS or any core system improvements to the Hornet this year.

They moved on to the Cobra :P

Jokes a part, It is a valid concern. More defined milestones would alleviate concerns maybe.

As long as they stick to them of course...

And Yes I understand Software planning is not a precise science, still every developer outside gaming gets to stick to a certain time table.

I'd be surprised if we see TWS, INS or any core system improvements to the Hornet this year.

I agree at the current progression rate and the up coming holidays maybe Q1, 2020.

great, everyone's a manager

Yes, even a facility manager is a manager. In Germany janitors call themselves "facility manager" lately... :lol: