Perpetual Open Beta

Hi folks,

Just a couple of questions to try and gauge the lay of the land.

Question 1. How much longer can we expect to have the open beta version of this flight simulation perpetually running alongside the standard release version? Or is this part of a permanent business model?

Question 2. With the beta version being used as the continually open lead version of this simulation, is it causing a dilution of the community, particularly in relation to the on-line multiplayer base.

I ask these questions because I don't want to be a beta tester or hold 2 versions of the simulation on my PC, but then find that my options are rather limited on multiplayer, particularly with regard to WWII flying, as the popular servers all appear to be running the beta version :((

As a result, despite recently purchasing a new expensive PC to run DCS, it looks like I shall be putting DCS to one side, yet again, in favour of other titles that lead with a stable release version that includes everybody.

I stand to be corrected if I have got hold of the wrong end of the stick.

Thank you for your consideration.

Happy landings,

Talisman

1) yes, the beta is always there. Sometimes the release version and beta are on an equal number and therefore equal.

2) Switching from beta to release only takes a minute. Server owners are often choosing the most stable or better version.

I think it's time to release a new version.

Cause the 2.5.0 has compared to the latest Beta, many, many performance problems (for me).

Hi folks,

 

Just a couple of questions to try and gauge the lay of the land.

 

Question 1. How much longer can we expect to have the open beta version of this flight simulation perpetually running alongside the standard release version? Or is this part of a permanent business model?

 

 

Question 2. With the beta version being used as the continually open lead version of this simulation, is it causing a dilution of the community, particularly in relation to the on-line multiplayer base.

 

 

I ask these questions because I don't want to be a beta tester or hold 2 versions of the simulation on my PC, but then find that my options are rather limited on multiplayer, particularly with regard to WWII flying, as the popular servers all appear to be running the beta version :((

 

As a result, despite recently purchasing a new expensive PC to run DCS, it looks like I shall be putting DCS to one side, yet again, in favour of other titles that lead with a stable release version that includes everybody.

 

I stand to be corrected if I have got hold of the wrong end of the stick.

 

Thank you for your consideration.

 

Happy landings,

 

 

Talisman

I don’t know the facts, but I would think that the ‘multiplayer base’ is tiny compared to single player. Look at the number of people on each server these days. Dozens compared to the hundreds of thousands of DCS users.

Look at the number of people on each server these days. Dozens compared to the hundreds of thousands of DCS users.

No one but ED is privy to the actual numbers but I highly doubt this figure of hundreds of thousands. There are only 67,000 forum registrants and the vast majority of those go back 8 or 9 years since I've been a member and a lot are dormant accounts since they never delete user accounts on the forum. Not everyone registers for the forum but it is highly encouraged by ED and the staff so I would say it's probably close to the number of actual accounts. The simulation community is tiny compared to FPS games.

As mentioned it takes only a few minutes to switch back and forth. If the servers you want to play on are running a specific version, then you should run that same version. This is just overly dramatic @@ It's no different than running a required mod like SRS. Meet the servers requirements or don't, that has nothing to do with ED and is 100% a personal problem.

@Vannipo

You shouldn't be running 2.5.0 anyway, it should be like 2.5.2 or 2.5.3 nowadays. So.... yeah, if that's the version you're running, it's probably got issues =)

(...) This is just overly dramatic @@ It's no different than running a required mod like SRS. Meet the servers requirements or don't, that has nothing to do with ED and is 100% a personal problem. (...)

That's pretty harsh...

Most casual gamers in other genres would expect to have a definitive version that they could play alongside the bulk of the community.

I's not unreasonable for the OP t expect the same.

That said, I expect the open-beta / stable version situation to continue indefinitely.

DCS is in constant evolution, and it's too complicated a project and too small a dev + closed testing team to expect to catch all issues without an open beta, and not reasonable to not supply a beta tested, stable version to those that would rather have stability than early access to new features.

So - both need to exist, and so presumably both will continue to do so...

Zhukov was correct though - it doesn't usually take very long - or that much data - to switch versions if both a current.

If there's a big update happened, you'll usually have seen that in the forums and be forewarned...

No one but ED is privy to the actual numbers but I highly doubt this figure of hundreds of thousands. There are only 67,000 forum registrants and the vast majority of those go back 8 or 9 years since I've been a member and a lot are dormant accounts since they never delete user accounts on the forum. Not everyone registers for the forum but it is highly encouraged by ED and the staff so I would say it's probably close to the number of actual accounts. The simulation community is tiny compared to FPS games.

Of course, compared to other games, flight sims have small sales. GTA 5 has sold almost 10m so far! I suspect, however, that DCS sales are higher than you imagine over the last few years.

You are right that only ED know the true figure, but I have seen figures of 400-500k mentioned before. Don’t forget the Steam community and their separate forums. I would imagine that a lot less people use forums than you think. I suspect DCS would not be financially viable at any less than the figures I mention.

For example what proportion buy the Spitfire, or the Kurfurst etc.? Even the Hornet? The development costs of aircraft modules must be huge, and the sales have to cover the cost of the ‘free’ DCS game and Caucasus map. 50,000 sales gives approximately $3m, 10 engineers at a modest $50k pa is $1.5m over a 3 year dev period. And that is just wages, not to mention the other zillion business costs.

Of course this is all total speculation based on no facts at all, but whatever the figures, I’m sure the proportion of DCS ‘owners’ using multiplayer servers is very small indeed.

A core thought is regarding the model used for DCS to deliver ongoing updates ina fairly Agile manner. This is when compared to “Big Bang” updates, as you’d find with say a move from Fallout 3 to Fallout 4. Linked to that is the sheer complexity of DCS, the a availability of mods and the demanding nature of the player base for new aircraft, maps, weapons, game engine updates etc.

Putting it another way, by drawing a line in the sand and declaring a fixed end build, you’re at best delaying updates and fixes to say every 3 months.

As a fellow player, yes I’d like the convenience of not feeling obliged to allocate 150GB of Disk space to an alternative version, but frankly, it’s just not a big deal, and from a cost perspective is now no more than a single DCS module. In short, I accept the associated niggles for the benefits provided.

It is a problem. I can’t hold two installation because my SSD space, no mention the maps space if you have two versions that situation become crazy.

240GB SSD = £37. If I post a link, it will only be amazon Uk. I’m assuming you can use you own equivalent.

Problem solved

Although I have both versions installed, the only time I ever use the release version is if there is a show-stopping bug in the OB. That very rarely happens, and when it does, ED usually produce a hot fix within days.

It’s not just drive space, it’s syncing control settings, options, campaign progress, log book progress, etc. etc.

In my opinion, very little point in having 2 versions installed these days. When we had 1.5 as release and 2.0 as OB, then yes, but now, I personally don’t think it’s worth it.

That's pretty harsh...

 

Most casual gamers in other genres would expect to have a definitive version that they could play alongside the bulk of the community.

 

I's not unreasonable for the OP t expect the same.

 

That said, I expect the open-beta / stable version situation to continue indefinitely.

 

DCS is in constant evolution, and it's too complicated a project and too small a dev + closed testing team to expect to catch all issues without an open beta, and not reasonable to not supply a beta tested, stable version to those that would rather have stability than early access to new features.

 

So - both need to exist, and so presumably both will continue to do so...

 

Zhukov was correct though - it doesn't usually take very long - or that much data - to switch versions if both a current.

 

If there's a big update happened, you'll usually have seen that in the forums and be forewarned...

It's reasonable to expect from a MMO. 90% of these sort of.things run heavily modded out in the wild. Example Arma = vanilla servers are virtually non-existent. Whether it's a game version or a mod, same difference. It's not harsh at all, each community has its own 'MO'. Some run heavily modded, some don't. In DCS many of the servers run the beta version. It's just the way it is, if you want to play online you run the beta. Or play offline. Simple as that.

Whatever any given server is doing, you meet their requirements or you don't play there.

Open Beta is definitely splitting the community, it's a fact, not everybody has both versions installed. I personnally wish we didn't have an open beta quite frankly.

not everybody has both versions installed

There is no need to: you can switch between them whenever you want.

Of course but it doesn't fix the problem. By having only one version installed at a given time, some people are still split between the two versions.

It is a problem. I can’t hold two installation because my SSD space, no mention the maps space if you have two versions that situation become crazy.

dude there is no need to have 2 separate installations, just download open beta or stable, and via a simple comand you can simply switch from stable to beta , or viceversa at anytime within a few minutes.

And I am happy with the BETA because I have the possibility to try all the new devs, all the new updates etc instead of having to wait for months for a "stable".

I dont care about stable, the open-beta is indeed "stable", I've never had problems with the open-beta exepct in very rare occasions, peformance of beta and stable on my end are equal.

As DCS is a project in costant evolution we're lucky to have an open-beta version:smilewink:

via a simple comand you can simply switch from stable to beta , or viceversa at anytime within a few minutes.

*if you have a good internet connection

Personnally, it could take me a while, depending on how much gap there is between the two versions.

And I am happy with the BETA because I have the possibility to try all the new devs, all the new updates etc instead of having to wait for months for a "stable".

 

I dont care about stable, the open-beta is indeed "stable", I've never had problems with the open-beta exepct in very rare occasions, peformance of beta and stable on my end are equal.

 

As DCS is a project in costant evolution we're lucky to have an open-beta version:smilewink:

+1 Until the F/A-18 appeared I didn't even consider to use the open beta and now I don't see any reason to 'downgrade' to the stable version.

I don't want to be a beta tester or hold 2 versions of the simulation on my PC, but then find that my options are rather limited on multiplayer, particularly with regard to WWII flying, as the popular servers all appear to be running the beta version :(

It's quite logical that servers using recent modules run in Beta, since those modules can be much more advanced in the Beta branch, with less bugs, new features, etc.

I only use the OpenBeta.

As opposed to a perpetual release, which would mean the openbeta is useless ? The openbeta branch is serving it's purpose perfectly, bugs are reported by the users that play on it and are fixed before a new release update is brought out.

It makes alot more sense to have major bugs on the open beta branch then on the release branch which is what you would get if ED release a new bugged patch immediatly to release because people can't wait to play on multiplayer servers that they could have gone to by just switching to the OB branch with a very simple command. You would also get the same bugs anyways.

EDIT : Also people who play singleplayer, which is a large portion of the community, would most likely wait for crash/major bug free version on the release branch.

To these people whinging about the community being split, who cares? Are there people on the server you're playing on? Yes? Then stop whinging about a problem that only exists between your ears. Maps split the community. Paid for modules split the community. System requirements split the community. Yet the universe trundles along peacefully.

They're both on the same update right now. It won't last long but they do come together now and then.

They're both on the same update right now. It won't last long but they do come together now and then.

Actually, they come together for every stable release since 2.5!