VEAO & Hawk discussion (please mind the forum rules) - Page 47 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-15-2019, 07:13 PM   #461
Voodoo_One
Member
 
Voodoo_One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Germany / Bavaria
Posts: 273
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flamin_Squirrel View Post
Who'd be mad enough to want to buy such a garbage module even if they could.
Luckily noone
__________________
1000 flights - 1000 crashes
perfect record
Voodoo_One is offline  
Old 05-25-2019, 11:18 PM   #462
bigian
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 154
Default

I was mad enough to buy it but only because I watched them fly through the highlands of Scotland being chased by the old tornado which has sadly retired. Now there’s a module I’d buy twice! I saw veal were talking about a typhoon and Tucano so thought that would be a great trio to fly in similar to what the RAF real world pilots do. Shame I wasted my money and the company folded. ED were right to dump them when they couldn’t make deadlines and just talked the talk. Sure I feel aggrieved about being cheated out of cash in buying a module I can’t fly however I’ve spent a fortune on scenery and planes in FSX which I rarely fly now and instead love the scenery and realism that DCS brings. I do believe Flying endless circuits around Bantumi helped me get my real world pilots licence although you would ask what does an A10 have in common with a Cessna 152 ! Well they’re both quite slow !, so the moral of the tale, don’t bear a grudge I’m happy to applaud ED with what they’ve achieved and the pleasure they’ve brought to me and will continue to support them as time goes on.
bigian is offline  
Old 05-26-2019, 06:23 AM   #463
IanHx2
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 50
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SonofEil View Post
Quite the statement. I agree with the community that VEAO had more than enough time to complete the Hawk and their failure is mostly due to a lack of talent and/or resource mismanagement. Their statement is obviously an attempt to save some face while airing dirty laundry and deflecting blame. But, just because the laundry’s dirty doesn’t make it untrue.
We all know there are plenty of decade+ old bugs that ED refuses to acknowledge, much less address. While we find it annoying, imagine having to work intimately with and around that code with little documentation or support, hoping change after change doesn’t break your own product. Still, their statement says, “an example being 4 bugs...in 2014”, then fails to give any actual example. I find it hard to believe ED would hold VEAO financially liable for ED’s own bugs, and even if they tried such a boneheaded move there is recourse for such things. But penalties for letting your own bugs languish for eternity? Sounds good to me, I just wish ED were subject to their own rules.
And a post of mine from December:

It’s honestly kind of shocking to learn that ED may now require 3rd party source code in escrow. Like it or not VEAO’s code is their IP and likely one of their only assets. To be required to relinquish control of this asset in the event you need it most (business failing) would be a huge liability for any company, and certainly a non-starter for any potential investor in said company. Because of this I actually doubt the escrow requirement is true as portrayed in the statement, or at most it’s a small part of a much bigger picture. But if it is true it’s going to cause some serious reconsideration by any future third parties about developing for DCS World.
Anyways, an interesting read for sure, as long as you take it with a lot of salt and recognize the author’s motivations. While it doesn’t change my almost entirely negative opinion of VEAO, it does provide a small glimpse into the murky behind-the-scenes dealings that ED engages in.
Oh, and the “as a British business” thing is pure bullshit.
Good riddance VEAO.
Saw the VEAO statement, couple of thoughts as someone who writes software for a living :
1. Holding the source code in escrow sounds like a reasonable request.
2. Being fined for bugs in someone else's code does not. I would have walked away too if somebody tried to foist that on me.

I appreciate that there may have been things that needed fixing in the commercial arrangements between VEAO and ED, I just hope that the cure wasn't worse than the illness when it comes to encouraging a thriving third- party add-on environment.....

Last edited by IanHx2; 05-26-2019 at 06:31 AM.
IanHx2 is offline  
Closed Thread

Tags
hawk disabled, hawk withdrawn, return my hawk

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:44 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.