VEAO ends all their DCS development

This is what I call cyber-thievery...

It's really hard to believe that they wouldn't release the P-40. A year ago they claimed that it was ready for EA, but they were going to hold it back until 2.0 so they didn't have to keep up with the client updates/bugs.

It seems that releasing a whole new module would be pretty lucrative when it's almost completed already...

Unfortunately, they already made a "we're stopping all future development" post way back, which would mean this is a "we're not doing anything for DCS anymore and will be cutting off our DCS products." post exactly as you read it.

True that, I remember the thread. They already discontinued further devwork and were 'maintenance only'. Hard to interpret this as anything other than a full cessation of activity.

I suppose I'll join the others in a final flight. Farewwll, Hawk, we hardly knew ye :p

True that, I remember the thread. They already discontinued further devwork and were 'maintenance only'. Hard to interpret this as anything other than a full cessation of activity.

I think the worst part about this situation is that here we see how beloved the Hawk truly was. Sure, lots of people knew it to be the worst of the DCS modules, but that didn't make it unloved. I don't think anyone's truly upset about a bad product, they're upset about the loss of a beautiful aircraft that should have been flying next to the rest of the DCS lineup.

I think the true take from this whole situation is the poor management overall. While it's early morning in the UK, which is the likely reason for VEAO's lack of any response, a message as big as the one left on their Facebook page should have been better prepared for and more fully thought out -- such as what this means for P-40 pre-purchasers. That answer should have been available right away. Now, regardless of the truth that emerges in the days to come, there is a practical beehive of angry DCSers that want answers that won't be satisfactory enough, despite the fact that all they truly want is a working version of the plane they paid for -- which is ultimately why VEAO went silent in the first place.

I wish they'd been a bit more open about it. The downfall here was the choice to be quiet rather than open about their development and to own up to mistakes, and likely the push to put their hands in so many other baskets -- the VEAO Facebook page was alive with event activities but never once described anything truly of any weight in regards to the Hawk or the P-40. Had people seen slow but steady progress, at least the faithful could have silenced the trolls.

You can't show what you don't have. The "trolls" were 100% right. The writing was on the wall when the P-40F went from a planned release date of a few weeks after the pre-purchase announcement to years of nothing for DCS World, but a Flight Sim World version was sold under the new "Blue Sky" name. I would seriously be surprised if VEAO did anything more than apologize to P-40F pre-purchasers. They can't release a finished product nor give back money they don't have, so what more do you expect than "Sorry, thanks for the fish!"

From my email records:

2014/10/19 DCS:Hawk Beta (EFM) Pre-Sale 20% Discount $39.99 USD

2015/07/02 DCS: P-40F Kittyhawk (EFM) Beta (Pre-Sale) $34.99 USD

They can't release a finished product nor give back money they don't have, so what more do you expect than "Sorry, thanks for the fish!"

I think the only thing people can expect now is what they've asked for -- someone to finish the Hawk. I don't think they'll get that either. Pity, it has so much potential. And with a tailhook, it would have been great to run a pipeline for the F-18 and F-14.

This is what I call cyber-thievery...

I doubt VEAO were trying to be thieves. In my eyes, they were a 3rd party with high aspirations to make full fledged products for DCS and failed in delivering all the promises they made. Yes, it does suck that people lost their money and left, but they definitely aren't con artists.

You can't show what you don't have. The "trolls" were 100% right.

Now you see that peoples with their opinions were right and you are calling them trolls ? LOL

I doubt VEAO were trying to be thieves. In my eyes, they were a 3rd party with high aspirations to make full fledged products for DCS and failed in delivering all the promises they made. Yes, it does suck that people lost their money and left, but they definitely aren't con artists.

Sure, I think we can all give them the benefit of the doubt that their intentions were legitimate and they truly wanted to produce an exceptional product, but their execution and lack of professionalism left a lot to be desired -- and subsequently has left us with a beyond sub-par product that ED (if they care about the quality of what they sell) has a responsibility to clean up the mess of. It's safe to say the majority of us have invested significant amounts of money into DCS and its modules; ED can afford to allocate some resources to slowly mold this into what we were all looking for.

Or they could just give us the Hornet for free and call it a day :smilewink:

Now you see that peoples with their opinions were right and you are calling them trolls ? LOL

I believe he's quoting my usage of "trolls" on that regarding the way VEAO went silent and stopped updating about their progress was because they were getting hammered pretty hard a few years ago.

One reason for deleting the post would be the absence of paragraphs or formatting to make it readable....

Whats even more confusing is why not just lock the thread.........

One reason for deleting the post would be the absence of paragraphs or formatting to make it readable....

You'd think Blade_meister would go back in and tweak it for readability. Otherwise, valid concerns voiced.

Good move Norm - thanks for the update.

VEAO knows this will come.

Why they did not spoke with ED first and solve the license/earlyaccess/further dev question and then post the info on FB?

This shows how unproffesional they are.

This situation may happen in future. Nothing last forever. So I would like ED to think about some legal statements in licenses like "if dev is out, ED can update the module when DCS enviroment changes".

(I'm aware that cleaning a mess after someone is not easy thing to do)

Be optimistic! We no longer have a less than reliable producer to worry about. :pilotfly:

Refund

How do I get a refund for the P40 I pre ordered and now won't receive?

“Pman, Chris, Pete + VEAO team”

Say anything here?

Disappeared?

Any update? Ahahahahah

Well their website is dead and they've closed their email addresses down so it looks like it.

“Escaped with full bag” Christmas movie on PC.

Guys, I am about to go to bed, the bad part about being on the West Coast, everyone is ahead of me.

 

I will say this right now, we are planning on pulling the Hawk from the E-Shop and Steam until we can determine VEAO's intentions towards the support of the Hawk.

 

Once that is established, we will have a better idea of how the Hawk will fit into the future of DCS World. I would love to give you all more info, but that is all we have right now.

 

Thanks, and sorry guys.

Thanks Sith! That's all we can ask for, as it's neither your nor EDs fault :thumbup:

Having ordered the Hawk long ago I was hesitant to order any further VEAO products. I feel for the P-40 pre-order people. Personally i'm just moving on. By moving on i mean by Deleting the Hawk Module on my computer and that's the end of it. DCS is alive and evolving month to month with many exciting upgrades and modules in the near future.

I won't be looking back and wishing for the Hawk back somehow. All i can wish for is that ED - TFC take the lessons from this to the future, so it does not repeat.

Actually, come to think of it, is there any way to get my DCS to stop reminding me that i have a module (aka the Hawk) pending installation?

This is the info I have right now, I have no other info at this time telling me they will 100% abandon support for the Hawk, just the development has stopped, what that says to me is it will be maintained at its current level, but not developed further, but I have no other info right now. I am sure all will be clear soon.

 

And you can reply without insulting me as well, no need for the "you do have eyes right?" comment.

Insult's get us no where and ED are trying to handle the fall out.

It's clear that ED know as much as we do at this point as VEAO did not have the courtesy to discuss this with ED which put ED in a difficult position and shows VEAO do not care for their customers.

Pulling it from the shop is the right thing to do.

In a short time I hope this is sorted with the customers of VEAO in mind.

Again I know this is not ED fault and VEAO have let both the ED and us down. But I hope ED will bare in mind that people paid for a full module,upfront, on trust under the ED banner.

For people to have trust in the future it is important the customers are seen to be treated fairly.