My wish list? No more planes for now.

I know some people is asking to ED for more planes. "Please, ED, the F-111", "Pretty please, the Tornado", "No, ED, the Su-24, Su-17, Mig-17, Yak-3, Mirage, AMX, Eurofighter, Super Sabre, B-1, DC-3..." And I suppose that new planes are the "money maker" of ED, specially during pre-purchase campaing... But I think it´s time to stop for a while and centering the efforts of ED's people in finishing and improving what already is done in DCS.

In my case, I don't want or going to buy more planes. I already have at least 4 great planes that I don´t fly simply because I don´t have the time to study the manuals. It was 5, but after the "Hawk affaire"... You know. :( I think I´m not the only one in that situation, with several cool planes in the waiting list :music_whistling:

As much I would like a ride in the fabulous Tomcat, the Hornet or the Viper, I´m not going to buy them soon. I know that if I buy them, I´m going to fly them a couple of times "bozo style" without knowing to use 90% of the systems of the planes, and then would relegate them until I have the time to properly learn to fly them... and that could be years.

Righ now, my wish list for ED aren´t more planes. It´s a better AI. Better ATC. Better tools to make a flightplan with the editor. An editor easier to use for people like me that know nothing about programming. Better weather engine and themes; real-life weather engine FSX style, would be the best. I want a simulator and planes as free as bugs as posible. And all the planes already done, finished at 100%.

I´m going to buy new sceneries though. If you have a plane, you want places to fly it, and it´s boring to fly always the same places. But no more planes at least for a couple or three years, even if they are the hottest, coolest jets, like the Hornet or the Viper.

Module teams (aircrafts, helos, ships, etc) has outside of functionality / engine team. The same situation, map teams and others (IA, etc).

- better ATC in progress (first steep has Carrier ATC, after move to Base ATC).

- Meteorology require implement Humidity first to better effects. Has in progress on better clouds and some weather effects.

- Engine moving to implement Vulkan API.

- 3 maps on working by ED (one free), other maps in progress by 3rd parties.

If you like see the actual "plans", check the "unofficial" Roadmap.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=116893

What I would love if they took the time from working on new stuff is to go through and get rid of bugs that have been around for so long. Each aircraft, map, base game and get them all to an good quality with little or no issues.

Module teams (aircrafts, helos, ships, etc) has outside of functionality / engine team. The same situation, map teams and others (IA, etc).

 

- better ATC in progress (first steep has Carrier ATC, after move to Base ATC).

- Meteorology require implement Humidity first to better effects. Has in progress on better clouds and some weather effects.

- Engine moving to implement Vulkan API.

- 3 maps on working by ED (one free), other maps in progress by 3rd parties.

 

If you like see the actual "plans", check the "unofficial" Roadmap.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=116893

Its nice to hear Engine moving to implement Vulkan API. i hope it come in soon future :)

Its nice to hear Engine moving to implement Vulkan API. i hope it come in soon future :)

There's high chances it's not going to happen any time soon. Rewriting everything for Vulkan would be extremely time consuming and the return on investment would not be great for ED...

I feel the same!

With the debate about the carrier module, i once again was wondering how long this business model is sustainable, when DCS is mainly funded by selling more and more aircraft.

There are so many things (that are technically absoulutely doable, as shown by other sims/games) that i feel are way more important than even more aircraft.

On the other hand it is nearly impossible to sell improvments to the core features of the sim, without alienating the player base, segmenting the MP community and leading the "free to play" moniker ad absurdum.

Even the paid terrain modules are problematic, with the possibility of older terrains not getting updated and therefore looking and performing worse compared to newer ones. Which is somewhat expected and not even unfair business practice. Still it does feel very dissatisfying from a user perspevtive.

I think a decent way to deal with the problem could be the upcoming ka-50 upgrade (if it's handled well by ED), by providing a free update and a paid upgrade that offers a slightly newer version without negatively affecting the "old" one (hopefully).

However if you think it through, wouldn't it be way more simple to completely cut the "free to play" aspect and have DCS at a base price with a new significatly updated version coming every two, or three years or so?

Older versions would at some point stop receiving new updates, but would be playable still, while all owned modules would automatically transfer to the new version, if you buy it.

I fear that with the free to play model, DCS will become the Star Citizen of flight simming, where newcrafts are getting shoved out to keep the busness running, without much else going on...

An option to maintain long term sustainability is to work on a subscription model. Don't shoot me, I'm pretty sure ED is thinking of it already ;-)

Many software company did switch to such a model years ago and it's now pretty common. It gives recurrent revenue to the editor and better visibility on cost for the customers. I do prefer it to micro payments and it would avoid the perpetual rush to release new things just to generate short term cash.

It's not incompatible with free to play, as soon as plans are well defined. It's even possible to make it work in parallel with the existing model.

M

I think the in the past ED have stated that they use modules to fund some core game features, like AFM missile introduced through FC3, A2G radar in the Hornet, etc. They could perhaps more explicitly link these things with respective modules.

A subscription model doesn't really sound attractive to me.

My wish is that people should stop polluting the forum with pointless wishlists that no one either cares about or has any interest in.

But of course for me to state what my wishes are is both self-indulgent, totally redundant and wrong. Because in a word, ED have their own priorities and although they are listening, I would never expect them to change their policies to indulge one individual.

Go figure?

An option to maintain long term sustainability is to work on a subscription model.

Well it's just my opinion, but I'd say #*%$ NO!

I (and many people) have paid a lot of money for modules, if suddenly we can't use them without paying continuously there will be riots...

A subscription model would also dissuade new players from trying it the way they can now.

An option to maintain long term sustainability is to work on a subscription model. Don't shoot me, I'm pretty sure ED is thinking of it already ;-)

 

They can´t sell you a module and after some time, say to you "you can´t use this module that you purchased for 60, 70, 80 $ when you want, you have to pay X money every month for that". That would be the end of ED and the rise of Falcon BMS, IL-2 or others.

I think a lot of users or DCS's products have the same fear: the fear that this business model has too much in common with a Ponzi scheme (not in the sense of a fraud, of course): the planes are the money maker because... who can resists to a new hot jet as the Hornet or the Viper? :joystick:

And they sell most of them during "pre-purchase" phase, so they need more planes to maintain the shop open. That incentivates to develop new planes more than to finish and improve older ones, or to improve DCS world. This is WAY more evident with some third parties (ejem... razbam... ejem... :music_whistling: ) but there are "symptoms" of that "illness" in ED too, IMO.

Well, I´m sorry but I´m done with new planes for a while. I´ll buy sceneries, but not going to buy new planes. I´m not going to colaborate with that dynamic of more and more planes in beta state for years, and bugs that will be solved and improvements that will be implemented... in two weeks. :lol:

Agree with the Op. There are a few more jets that could be done, but come on, we're going to start running out of mainstream ones soon. Campaign like in Falcon would be very nice. More work on the maps building wise ( nothing but basic boxes with windows get a little boring ). More helicopters, and even Vehicle modules would be very welcome. FPS would be good, and bring in a LOT of new players. I understand what ED is doing for now, but the future beckons.

Agree with the Op. There are a few more jets that could be done, but come on, we're going to start running out of mainstream ones soon. Campaign like in Falcon would be very nice. More work on the maps building wise ( nothing but basic boxes with windows get a little boring ). More helicopters, and even Vehicle modules would be very welcome. FPS would be good, and bring in a LOT of new players. I understand what ED is doing for now, but the future beckons.

Core features as well, making CA less of a train wreck, etc. All would be much preferred for me to any more jets.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The team members working on aircraft wouldnt be working on things like ATC, the editor and weather, so the two dont get in the way of each other.

Exactly. You guys would bring in new teams that are experienced in maps, vehicles and FPS to do such things.

@Buckeye - Yeah, it would be nice to see a much more realistic CA somewhere along the lines of Steel Beasts. I always find it exasperating that there's little intelligence down on the ground. Mostly just simple AI.

The team members working on aircraft wouldnt be working on things like ATC, the editor and weather, so the two dont get in the way of each other.

I'm quite sure, the team members working on new aircraft could do some bug-tracking too, so we could have less bugs and unfinished functionalities in DCS World and in the already finished modules. But I also understand, that ED has to earn money in order to keep things running. So new modules are OK from my perspective, but giving us a good working environment we can fly in and finished modules should be as important. We all know, we have really old bugs, that were not addressed until now (night lighting, poor infrared vision of targeting pods - to mention just two of them).

if the team of programmers of DCS and a few people, I prefer that I now plan new airplanes the better they are to satisfy all the nations of the world.

after completing a list of important airplanes, I believe it is right that they are dedicated to the planning of new maps or the rehabilitation of various bugs.

I mentioned it earlier already:

Wouldn't it be best to just have each major DCS version as a paid product, like most other games do it?!

Modules would carry over to the new version, but if you don't feel like updating, you could keep runnng your modules with the old version (and play multiplayer with other people on the old version).

With other games, it is common that every other year, there is a new version coming out and people don't complain about having to buy it if they get an existential upgrade compared to the old version.

You could still have a free version - like a demo - with caucasus only and MP compatibility. The barrier of entry for the whole experience would then be "base price" + "module price", while right now you would only have the price for the first module.

But with things like paid maps, carrier module, WWII asset packs the whole idea of "free to play"/"low entry barrier" is already invalid.

I think it would be good to at least think about it. I am sure the product will be better with this...

The new clouds that should have been implemented years ago would be nice.

I know some people is asking to ED for more planes. "Please, ED, the F-111", "Pretty please, the Tornado", "No, ED, the Su-24, Su-17, Mig-17, Yak-3, Mirage, AMX, Eurofighter, Super Sabre, B-1, DC-3..." And I suppose that new planes are the "money maker" of ED, specially during pre-purchase campaing... But I think it´s time to stop for a while and centering the efforts of ED's people in finishing and improving what already is done in DCS.

 

In my case, I don't want or going to buy more planes. I already have at least 4 great planes that I don´t fly simply because I don´t have the time to study the manuals. It was 5, but after the "Hawk affaire"... You know. :( I think I´m not the only one in that situation, with several cool planes in the waiting list :music_whistling:

 

As much I would like a ride in the fabulous Tomcat, the Hornet or the Viper, I´m not going to buy them soon. I know that if I buy them, I´m going to fly them a couple of times "bozo style" without knowing to use 90% of the systems of the planes, and then would relegate them until I have the time to properly learn to fly them... and that could be years.

 

Righ now, my wish list for ED aren´t more planes. It´s a better AI. Better ATC. Better tools to make a flightplan with the editor. An editor easier to use for people like me that know nothing about programming. Better weather engine and themes; real-life weather engine FSX style, would be the best. I want a simulator and planes as free as bugs as posible. And all the planes already done, finished at 100%.

 

I´m going to buy new sceneries though. If you have a plane, you want places to fly it, and it´s boring to fly always the same places. But no more planes at least for a couple or three years, even if they are the hottest, coolest jets, like the Hornet or the Viper.

IF you don't want to fly a Hornet or Viper, because you don't have time, that's fine. ( although if you really badly are into such aircraft its on you to make the time, even if it means cutting the time flying something else) Not everyone here is an aircraft collector, or has time to learn them all./ But realize that maybe others are interested flying those specific models ( or just future wish listed items) but not other airplanes that you are currently flying or are interested that they would wish to dedicate their time learning, and then flying.

Like it or Not ED already have a list of Fixed wing aircraft in the plans of the near future as well as helicopters that are fairly iconic , have a following, and respective fans would like to fly them.

I think the biggest concern here is not so much adding new features to the sim, it's mostly doing a better job regarding bugs. Right now there are too many major bugs and unfinished work that impact the quality of the experience.

For example, the home fuel deedle with the Hornet. It's been there for a few months now and it's extremely annoying, especially when doing carrier landings.

There is also the example of the TACAN being buggy in all modules. Sometimes it works fine and sometimes the range indication freezes on its own and you have to turn the thing on/off to get it to work again. This bug has been there for years...

I guess the point the OP wants to make is that ED should focus on providing a good experience with their sim instead of trying to push out more and more early access modules constantly.

Certainly true, but sometimes I wonder why some things seem to get no attention at all.

The lighting bug is one of those, it can't be *that* difficult to fix?

I guess the point the OP wants to make is that ED should focus on providing a good experience with their sim instead of trying to push out more and more early access modules constantly.

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup: