VEAO & Hawk discussion (please mind the forum rules)

It's acting like a module where you don't have a key for it, so I suspect that is why it won't let us fly it, so why not re-enable the module, and if it works great, if some or even all systems don't work then ok, fine I can accept that.

 

But if it has been removed "just in case", as I am now suspecting, then that's not really the way to do things.

 

 

If at some point it being there causes DCS to crash, THEN remove it.

 

 

This is not about whether DCS crashes or not, or if some part of the system modelling is unavailable. For the module to be flyable in DCS, certain module dll files need to be recompiled for every new release, otherwise they simply do not work. Without the source code there is no way to keep the module available in DCS. AI assets do not rely on these files (basically, all you need is the 3d model and a few lua files with basic flight parameters).

 

 

 

You may not like or understand it, but that's they way things are. The Hawk is dead. Forget it and move on.

First, it's not supporting when you ask for kind of refund in return. Bonus points or what ever it is. It is a refund and that s not how people support.

 

Second, learn to read. I said get back a few bucks OR feel well treated. You pretend to be in the second group. So where is the lie?

 

To both points, if you are a supporter, you don't ask for money back, bonus points just that you feel well treated as a customer.

 

Things went South with VEAO, that was already a knife in EDs back, no need that you stir it further.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G965F mit Tapatalk

 

Geez. I said a GESTURE (in term of bonus, for example) would have been appreciated. As in I didn't like the way they dealt with the issue. Because you still fail to argue about what has been said, but what you would like me to have said. And the only reason I keep arguing my point is because you keep distorting my position and lying about my intention.

 

I can be a supporter and still voice my opinion about not being treated well by the company I have always supported and bought my products from. because in the long term, I believe another solution would have costed them less.

 

Maybe in Germany that's not how you do things.. but that's how they are done in other places.

 

Anyway. I'm done with this thr3ad and you. Arguing with someone like you is a waste of time

Edited December 30, 2018 by FZG_Immel

 

 

LOOK! It moved!

 

 

LOOK! It moved!

 

You are absolutely right.

 

I admit I am weak for feeling the need to address the BS from that guy. You'd think he has ED stocks or something.

 

But again you are right.

 

I am out

Ps: I didn't think you guys in Tejas rode mules :p

Geez. I said a GESTURE (in term of bonus, for example) would have been appreciated. As in I didn't like the way they dealt with the issue. Because you still fail to argue about what has been said, but what you would like me to have said. And the only reason I keep arguing my point is because you keep distorting my position and lying about my intention.

 

I can be a supporter and still voice my opinion about not being treated well by the company I have always supported and bought my products from. because in the long term, I believe another solution would have costed them less.

 

Maybe in Germany that's not how you do things.. but that's how they are done in other places.

 

Anyway. I'm done with this thr3ad and you. Arguing with someone like you is a waste of time

What part of this DONT you undrrstand?v what for you is cost free gesture, is a hell of of money to ED! You truly have a problem

 

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G965F mit Tapatalk

FZG_Immel,I fully agree with what you wrote,this situation is shameful.

Ps: I didn't think you guys in Tejas rode mules :p

 

Ummm... I a city slicker, sir. Animals are things I watch on the Discovery Channel.

Sucking it up.

 

I felt duly warned that ED brokers risky "early access" modules (a lot of them) - many of which went into my portfolio anyway. I've only been burned once - feeling lucky.

You are absolutely right.

 

I admit I am weak for feeling the need to address the BS from that guy. You'd think he has ED stocks or something.

 

But again you are right.

 

I am out

We all kind of all do have stock in ED.

We all kind of all do have stock in ED.

 

No you don't. You either own stock or you don't and since ED is a privately held company, you don't. Even if you did, your voice is still negligible. I own stock in a number of companies (Facebook, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, etc.) and yet I have no significant ability to affect how they conduct their business.

Edited December 30, 2018 by cichlidfan

LOL, I'd dump my FB stock if I were you cichlidfan…

No you don't. You either own stock or you don't and since ED is a privately held company, you don't. Even if you did, your voice is still negligible. I own stock in a number of companies (Facebook, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, etc.) and yet I have no significant ability to affect how they conduct their business.

I'm pretty sure he means it in a way that we have stakes in ED since it is giving us a combat simulator that is unique in the market and we depend on them. And he was answer the idiotic comment that I own stocks in ED (It seems that the other user doesn't make a difference between a private and public company, after all he thinks that ED making a gesture giving him bonus dollars has no cost to ED)

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G965F mit Tapatalk

LOL' date=' I'd dump my FB stock if I were you cichlidfan…[/quote']

 

Bought at less than $60, not worried. It's like getting a dent in an old car that you don't plan on selling.

Edited December 30, 2018 by cichlidfan

LOL' date=' I'd dump my FB stock if I were you cichlidfan…[/quote']

 

Ehhh, they're diversified enough we'll be stuck with that smarmy looking bastard for years to come.

Ehhh, they're diversified enough we'll be stuck with that smarmy looking bastard for years to come.

 

Those were my thoughts about Uncle Bill (Gates) many years ago, but I have come to appreciate him.

You are absolutely right.

 

I admit I am weak for feeling the need to address the BS from that guy. You'd think he has ED stocks or something.

 

I am out

 

Eagle Dynamics is a private Company and if memory serves 80% owned by The Fighter Collection (majority shareholder) The Company Eagle Dynamics was set up (again if memory serves) in early 1990s by Igor Tishin (R.I.P.) (20%) and Nick Grey (80%). There is NO stock so maybe you can read up a bit about how business works and the difference between Public (stock Exchange) and Private Companies.

 

cichlidfan et.al. are well respected members of this community and being abusive only speaks volumes about your attitude over spilt milk. Take your attitude to VEAO direct because they are the problem and you need to bash them, email them with your disdain for their incompetence but stop bashing ED. By the way, don't let the door hit your arse on the way out.

 

Now take a chill pill and best regards for the future.

 

A smiley beaming Mizzy :)

Those were my thoughts about Uncle Bill (Gates) many years ago, but I have come to appreciate him.

 

True, but he's not nearly as smarmy looking. I'm referring to the senate hearings =) He is one creepy looking dude, and I say that AS a creepy dude. Regardless, character is less a concern as to whether they're worthy investments. They both did something right, obviously :p

Regardless, character is less a concern as to whether they're worthy investments. They both did something right, obviously :p

 

Quite true. Bezos is an asshat, as far as I am concerned, but he makes for a profitable investment.

Ehhh, they're diversified enough we'll be stuck with that smarmy looking bastard for years to come.

 

Yep, Succer looks like a guy I could slap all day and not get tired. I'm sure he's a nice boy really !

 

Mizzy

cichlidfan et.al. are well respected members of this community

 

I don't know about that. I just have a higher post count than everyone else, except those working for or associated with ED. :santa:

I have to agree with Cap'n kamikaze on much of this discussion. I fail to see why the Hawk can't be left available to fly in the latest DCS version, with it simply becoming broken over time (if that's unavoidable). It feels like ED has purposely removed the Hawk module, while that may not have been necessary.

 

I'm a software developer and have some (long ago :) ) experience with compiling EXEs and DLLs to work with different versions. Of course I don't know the specifics here, but it seems plausible that as the base DCS engine is updated, the various modules could continue to work by linking to older engine DLL versions left in the deployment. Again, I have ZERO idea if that could actually work with DCS, but it seems it ought to be built that way, if not.

 

Although I'd appreciate some minor compensation for having effectively lost access to this module, that's not a particularly big deal to me (having spent only ~$10 for it back in 2015 and then flying it only a few times). What I'm much more concerned about is the risk to all of our other modules. I have all of them (DCS and third-party) and will be getting the F-14 soon and wanted to buy the Christen Eagle, as well. ED has said this in the official announcement: "To avoid such issues in the future, all future 3rd party agreements are now required to make the game files available in case they are no longer able to support their product."

 

What does that really mean? We already have ~11 third-party modules. I assume they aren't included in this "all future 3rd party agreements" statement. Are these also at risk if the developer gives up? I understand that VEAO seemed particularly weak, but I sure hope all of our other modules aren't exposed to this same risk of outright module loss.

 

Does anyone know? Can ED confirm?

 

Thanks!

Justin

I have to agree with Cap'n kamikaze on much of this discussion. I fail to see why the Hawk can't be left available to fly in the latest DCS version, with it simply becoming broken over time (if that's unavoidable). It feels like ED has purposely removed the Hawk module, while that may not have been necessary.

 

 

 

I'm a software developer and have some (long ago :) ) experience with compiling EXEs and DLLs to work with different versions. Of course I don't know the specifics here, but it seems plausible that as the base DCS engine is updated, the various modules could continue to work by linking to older engine DLL versions left in the deployment. Again, I have ZERO idea if that could actually work with DCS, but it seems it ought to be built that way, if not.

 

 

 

Although I'd appreciate some minor compensation for having effectively lost access to this module, that's not a particularly big deal to me (having spent only ~$10 for it back in 2015 and then flying it only a few times). What I'm much more concerned about is the risk to all of our other modules. I have all of them (DCS and third-party) and will be getting the F-14 soon and wanted to buy the Christen Eagle, as well. ED has said this in the official announcement: "To avoid such issues in the future, all future 3rd party agreements are now required to make the game files available in case they are no longer able to support their product."

 

 

 

What does that really mean? We already have ~11 third-party modules. I assume they aren't included in this "all future 3rd party agreements" statement. Are these also at risk if the developer gives up? I understand that VEAO seemed particularly weak, but I sure hope all of our other modules aren't exposed to this same risk of outright module loss.

 

 

 

Does anyone know? Can ED confirm?

 

 

 

Thanks!

 

Justin

You can ask VEAO for compensation. That's a fair request.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G965F mit Tapatalk

No, nobody can guarantee all this shit won't go belly up. Seriously, smh. It's not a big deal and no it doesn't call into question the nature of the universe.

What does that really mean? We already have ~11 third-party modules. I assume they aren't included in this "all future 3rd party agreements" statement. Are these also at risk if the developer gives up?

 

Yes they are. Just like any other product you buy (some with a lifetime warranty) when the developer goes out of business. Such is life.