fianally...in cockpit comms

If not... Well... Then why are you complaining? Post count? Negativity for negativity's sake? What?

Can be asked to you too. Until we see what ED can do with the comms system, people can just express their opinions, good or bad.

Well... People have clearly stated that it isn't better than SRS and used that as an excuse as to why the new system wouldn't be used.

Not quite. It doesn't have to be better — it just have to achieve some semblance of parity, and maybe just for a decent subset of the modules out there. But it needs to actually do the things that you'd use it for: being tied to the plane radios and using proper frequency separation; being available for GCI/ATC duty; and preferably not being reliant on the client to run.

 

The other stuff, the goodies that would make it a credible replacement in the long term (integration in all planes, including the ones with no radio controls; full VR compatibility; hooks that would integrate with stuff like LotATC; transmission strength and sight line simulation; encryption just to name a few) can come later, but there is a minimum level needed for it to be worth-while putting in the client at all otherwise it's just dead code.

 

I'm arguing the negative approach to the feedback about ED trying to implement something like SRS in-game.

It's the best approach for them right now. Before they sink a ton of effort into trying to get feedback on a pointless subset of functionality, it is very much worth explaining that this effort is likely wasted because it won't actually yield any of that desired feedback in practice. A bad idea will only be made worse by being mollycoddled.

 

I'm asking the people who just say "Well it's not as good as SRS so it won't get used" if they thought it would be better than SRS on day one.

No-one has suggested any such expectation. Saying that its lack of the most basic of useful functionality means it won't be used does not imply any notion that it absolutely must be as good or better. That's a logical leap that is wholly invented by people who want to complain about the feedback.

 

The reasons for the complaints against what this first version will bring have been very clearly stated. Repeating the question when it has been answered over and over and over again is, as you put it, dumb.

Edited November 27, 2019 by Tippis

Me got your point, Tippis. But why being so upset and summoning the bad ghosts of past early access discussion with some fear in mind it might never get to the point where it should be?

 

ED also clearly stated, that this is the first step and approach to implement a basic VOIP system.

It was also stated clearly how VOIP will be developed and at this point it does not need to be clearly stated, that every new feature coming to DCS is a first approach for further development.

 

Give it some time, you´re just a bit too early to damnate a feature, which is just some hours ago presented in the very earliest access of its development.

Has anyone used it yet? Also, where do you set a PTT?

Me got your point, Tippis. But why being so upset and summoning the bad ghosts of past early access discussion with some fear in mind it might never get to the point where it should be?

This has already been answered. Many times. :huh:

So no, I distinctly get the feeling that you haven't gotten the point.

 

ED also clearly stated, that this is the first step and approach to implement a basic VOIP system.

And as has been clearly stated, it's not a good first step for all the reasons explained.

Has anyone used it yet? Also, where do you set a PTT?

 

PTT could be set in the ´GUI layer´ section.

Me got your point, Tippis. But why being so upset and summoning the bad ghosts of past early access discussion with some fear in mind it might never get to the point where it should be?

 

ED also clearly stated, that this is the first step and approach to implement a basic VOIP system.

It was also stated clearly how VOIP will be developed and at this point it does not need to be clearly stated, that every new feature coming to DCS is a first approach for further development.

 

Give it some time, you´re just a bit too early to damnate a feature, which is just some hours ago presented in the very earliest access of its development.

 

I think part of the problem ED has is this:

 

They don't get a feeling up front of what is needed or expected from the community for EA or modules etc. Yes, we all want it to be complete on day 1 and that's unrealistic, BUT there needs to be a minimum level of functionality there otherwise the torch and pitchfork brigade comes out. In business terms its called involving your stakeholders. Of whom customers are a part.

 

In this specific case, my minimum functionality and I think I'm not alone in saying it is that you can use the radios like you do with SRS. I have whole long ass list of things it should be able to do, but on day 1 it MUST be able to do that or I dont't think anyone in the MP community will use it. Its called "Buy-in", and ED didn't get it in this case IMO.

 

And if they don't use it, there won't be feedback and the whole thing will be a fiasco, and will take longer to develop.

 

There are plenty of other examples on ED's part where they haven't done this, I can point to the waypoint thing and other "problems" on the F16 as a recent ones. But in the case of planes its harder to select an initial feature set IMO. In this case, they literally gave us a 1990's era "feature set" that most MP players are facepalming at. Yes, its great that we have 3 rooms, but I don't want to use "Roger wilco" functionality in 2019. If they have played on MP servers they would get that's how DCS (and IRL) comms work with radios and that's how people use them on most online servers.

 

I mean it begs the question, do ED folks actually play online? Do they see how things work there? Because from recent experience I'd wager no or not enough to understand the community. OR, no one is listening to those people that do that which is an internal problem on their end.

Let's not dramatize too much. Even in basic form, ED will eventually get some feedback about the reliability of the critical core design they apparently want to test at highest priority. The few MP players will have to judge the whole thing later.

Always like to chat or discuss with you, Harlikwin, but in this particular discussion the problem does not come from ED, as anyone could think by themselve. ED developers are surely aware of everything you expect from this feature. There was already a post by Nineline or Chizh about the implementation of VOIP today.

 

Discussing about how much expectations might differentiate from one to another doesn´t make so much sense. Surely I would expect the same as you, but don´t consist that my expectations need to be fullfilled right now in this case, that´s not how grown ups react.

 

The VOIP feature gave me a big smile today ( more because of how it works with my sound setup ) - happy about it and already thought of joining more often multiplayer server, because it makes communication with other people online much more easier in the first place. Hope it will not end up with people belching into their microphones :megalol:

 

Anyway, SRS still could be used. It´s not taken away from anyone.

 

But already found a bug with it. Just took a ride in the Mig21 and the sound of the landing gear retracting came over the headphones instead the environmental sound system. Now, that is a reason to complain :smilewink:

couple of other things in this audio change to check though, even if we cant mass test the single coalition lobby.

 

 

Different sound sources ... streamers and tinkers will enjoy looking at this.

Well our group uses Teamspeak when we 1st join the server to sort out what channels we will be using in SRS so what we are going to do instead of Moaning about this new feature we will be dropping teamspeak and testing this feature and provide feedback to ED to help bring it along.

 

:thumbup:

If the server I'm flying on is not set up for DCS voice will the voice communication window that I open on screen be inactive?

Does nobody read how this is a basic implementation before it goes above and beyond srs. Jesus christ.

 

There's no credit for works in progress. Welcome to the internet.

 

When DCS can replace SRS, feature-wise, I'll care about DCS voice comms... but for now, I wont be bothered to set it up... especeially when Discord works, SRS works... I'm actually kind of confused as to why they're (ED) expanding their footprint into this area when there are such well fleshed out options already there. Is this some kind of prep for the long delayed MAC or FC4?

I agree. Our wing will not use it because having 8-10 guys in one channel would be a comms nightmare. Once they have it frequency based then yes it will be good.

 

THIS.

There's no credit for works in progress. Welcome to the internet.

 

When DCS can replace SRS, feature-wise, I'll care about DCS voice comms... but for now, I wont be bothered to set it up... especeially when Discord works, SRS works... I'm actually kind of confused as to why they're (ED) expanding their footprint into this area when there are such well fleshed out options already there. Is this some kind of prep for the long delayed MAC or FC4?

 

Its not even that. I'm glad ED is doing it, but why rush it out the door like this? I mean they aren't charging for it so it makes little sense to let it out "Early" like they did with the viper. Its just a weird choice IMO. I have yet to see a single server use it.

In this specific case, my minimum functionality and I think I'm not alone in saying it is that you can use the radios like you do with SRS. I have whole long ass list of things it should be able to do, but on day 1 it MUST be able to do that or I dont't think anyone in the MP community will use it. Its called "Buy-in", and ED didn't get it in this case IMO.

 

That's all I needed.

 

So looks like the answer to my questions is yes. At least one (and he's sure he's not the only one) person feels like it should be the same as SRS on day one.

 

Well... Now that I got an answer to such a simple question :)...

 

 

I disagree :).

 

I think putting it in game completely BARE BONES was a great idea. It will simplify the troubleshooting process significantly once they start implementing the list of features they've already said they'll implement. They know for sure that it works in a base state. There's some bug fixes (like the Mig landing gear) to iron out, but then they'll start adding features :).

 

Maybe you're just not ready for open beta Harley?

I think putting it in game completely BARE BONES was a great idea. It will simplify the troubleshooting process significantly once they start implementing the list of features they've already said they'll implement.

Seeing as how people are having trouble testing it, the troubleshooting isn't all that simple. And why is it difficult to test? Simple: because it is not worth setting up and using in its bare-bones state.

That's all I needed.

 

So looks like the answer to my questions is yes. At least one (and he's sure he's not the only one) person feels like it should be the same as SRS on day one.

 

Well... Now that I got an answer to such a simple question :)...

 

 

I disagree :).

 

I think putting it in game completely BARE BONES was a great idea. It will simplify the troubleshooting process significantly once they start implementing the list of features they've already said they'll implement. They know for sure that it works in a base state. There's some bug fixes (like the Mig landing gear) to iron out, but then they'll start adding features :).

 

Maybe you're just not ready for open beta Harley?

 

I mean you're not wrong, I've done actual beta testing for a living, and nope I'm not paying ED for the privilege :) (well, sadly enough I am). If they want to send me a paycheck we can talk more. But I'll provide my "free" and hilarious* feedback, which is worth exactly what they paid for it, or a track or two if something actually bothers me enough or if I'm the only one seeing it though.

 

And actually I think the only "feature" it needs from SRS is the ability to use with the aircraft radios. SRS does way more than that, but that is the one "core" bit of functionality that they should have had from day 1 (and is planned for the last phase 3) since thats the bare minimum expectation from users that use SRS daily. And IMO a big reason almost no server is bothering with the current implementation, I mean I haven't seen it on a single public server I fly on they are all still using SRS.

 

*hilarious is subject to ones actual sense of humor or lack therof, and the performance of "hilarious" as represented is historical” and that “past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results and investors may not recover the full amount invested.

Edited December 2, 2019 by Harlikwin

Well... I agree that those/that feature will be great.

 

Also... I'm not too sure that initial rollout was intended to kick SRS to the curb and to be used on actual servers really. I think it was an initial proof of concept and attempt at integrating the two services and look for any initial bugs in a production environment. Makes perfect sense to me. I mean... isn't it only in Open Beta so far??? It may not be the way EA does it but... Whatevs...

 

I feel like that's the only place we really disagree.

 

You feel like they should have replaced SRS completely with something super shiny and complete on initial release... I feel like they made a good "technical" first step.

 

I think you're just looking at this with selfish lenses. At the least... You SOUND like you're just saying "It's not good enough for me to use and replace the solution I currently have, therefore it's a wasted effort and shouldn't have been released".

 

Well...

 

Good thing you aren't a professional beta tester any more...

 

IMO of course :).

My point is a bit more nuanced than that. And its entirely not about "me", rather what I see in MP world. I've tried to get it working, It doesn't for me or none of the servers I've tried are configured for it. I have personally given it a "go" just to see how it is.

 

IMO most people won't use it until it can hit some sort bare minimum functionality metric for them, because there are already solutions that do work. Its not "me" its literally most people that aren't going to bother doing it because its a step back. Thats the only point I'm trying to make. I mean I hear it being openly mocked online by SRS guys.

 

SRS and how its used (hooked into the radio) in MP is the basic benchmark and using it with radios is what people want and use online, not some janky 90's era roger wilco chatroom.

 

I literally haven't seen it in use on single server since its been released. 95% of folks are saying they can't get it to work in the poll. And I bet if you had the option "I haven't bothered" that would be 95% and the remaining 5% that tried couldn't.

 

I dunno if hooking it into the AC radios is super hard or something, but at guess no, probably not given that SRS is able to do it with some minimal scripting. But most of the actual problems seem to be autoconnecting to the server anyway.

 

I'm super glad I went to do far far better things in my life than software beta testing too :)

SRS and how its used (hooked into the radio) in MP is the basic benchmark and using it with radios is what people want and use online, not some janky 90's era roger wilco chatroom.

 

See this is the issue I'm taking. The point of initial release isn't exactly for it to be used. Especially not as an SRS replacement. It isn't. Everyone knows that. Especially ED.

 

The fact that you keep bringing up the point that it isn't better than SRS is missing the point of the release... release into Open Beta...

 

The point is to be sure it doesn't wreck someone's PC, or somehow take 90% of bandwidth for no reason, or get hacked into becoming a bitcoin mining system, or whatever else...

 

Not to be an SRS replacement...

I see current "Rooms" as option for a few friends who just want to have fun, or some small group doing PvE or acrobatics etc.

 

But if it would had in first day a integration to radio, so either AM and FM and same frequency and you could have talked to anyone.... It would had changed a lot of things.

 

Then start implementing more core features like frequency roster per player in country or area, range effects, LOS effects and then later the weather effects when new engine comes out.

 

It really would have been good start to have frequencies to enable voice. So having a two radios in use would have been great in multiplayer.

 

But, maybe ED really needs to start from the begin. A chat rooms for server lobby, a chat room to super carrier ready room, briefing room, radio station etc...