2021 (and earlier) DCS Newsletter Discussion Thread

On store only modules and game in stable version, and beta version reserved to tester, SYMPLE.

On store only modules and game in stable version, and beta version reserved to tester, SYMPLE.

I hope you don't mean EA only for OB.

bc stable DCS and EA modules work very nicely for me.

All modules obviously also from thirdy part....

Unless you fly in MP as that is where ALL popular servers lie. I would also point out that it has now been a year from a bug I raised re the hornet radar and multiplayer still existing in. Both stable and OB...

Thankfully ED have finally agreed to focus more to ensure OB works better for mp

Could you name those other modern and modernized sims? I don't know any. At least not with modern aircraft. :huh:

That would be against forum rules but Flarpt is correct. There are several other modern sims with modern AC. Whether they're as good, not as good, better, or worse than DCS is the subject of opinion. And again....Not to be discussed on the forums.

All sims have their ups and downs. Many people go back and forth between them depending on whatever issues are going on with any given sim at the time.

We're missing the main issue here. The last update for DCS was BETA. It is there to give you the opportunity to test and see what issues prevail. If you have DCS open beta version, all you can do is offer input and constructive ideas based on your rig and how it all works with what you have. Downing ED based on a BETA program that you agreed to the terms of when you downloaded it is just short sighted.

This particular thread isn't the place for discussing whether you agree or disagree with ED's perspectives, business model, or past problems that aren't getting addressed. It's the update discussion thread. So it is frustrating for many who are trying to solve issues in a positive environment.

My Google must be broken. Every time I search for sims that have FA-18, F-16, F-14, F-5, Viggen, Warbirds, KA-50, MiGs ... in high fidelity with clickable cockpits in a finished or unfinished state I just get one result: DCSW.

 

Yes your google is broken.

 

unless you mean all the above listed aircraft together in 1 sim.

There is exactly one other sim that I know of, meeting the requirements for just one single one of the mentioned airframes. And that's a heavily modded, over two decades old piece of software which literally shows its age up in many aspects. And I'll just quote C.W. Lemoine, a well known former driver of that specific airframe here to conclude this post:

"[The sim that shall not be named] isn't exactly a source."

And ED is working hard on finally putting that sim to a good place in the Hall of Fame of Flight Sims, where it shall rest eventually, being remembered with a good portion of nostalgia. I'm very much looking forward to see things in DCS that the old sim had already, especially the dynamic campaign. But I'd never want to go back there. It's literally like stopping to fly in VR, or with pedals, FFB, TIR or whatever was a big step forward.

Sometimes I still fire up the old FS games in DOSBox that have less sim detail when my time is too limited (since you can't really do anything worthwhile in DCS in less than an hour spent in total for setting up the pit, ensuring every device works flawlessly, firing up the sim, starting up the plane and do the flying - and that's just barely enough for a simple TO, go around and land), but if I want to fly a full-fi sim, I end up running DCS in the Rift without even having to think of any alternative.

It's simpel.

ED have seen the testing was not good enough and opening a closed Betateam. So Flarpt is more or less correct with ED eyes.

Let's all hope it get's better. I think it will get better.

They've always had a closed beta team

They've always had a closed beta team

By current experiences, either that closed beta team has been incompetent, or Ed didn’t address bugs and issues they raise before pushing patches. I see no other explanation for arches like 2.5.6.

So it is GOOD that ED have admitted their QA process has not been good enough, especially wrt Multiplayer.

By current experiences, either that closed beta team has been incompetent, or Ed didn’t address bugs and issues they raise before pushing patches. I see no other explanation for arches like 2.5.6.

I see a third: the team was just too small to encounter all of that issues that the OB users did. So their plan to raise the number of closed beta testers with all their different hardware configs is a good idea. I agree here at 100%.

Good/Cheap/Fast - Pick Two!

There are loud voices demanding both faster releases and better quality, which leaves only one free variable - the price. Maybe increasing the budget, we could expect better quality releases in quicker succession.

One could argue that the price of the modules is not exactly cheap, but then you would think free market would spawn more competition. So we are safe to assume that the price is indeed cheap for this kind of product.

I see a third: the team was just too small to encounter all of that issues that the OB users did. So their plan to raise the number of closed beta testers with all their different hardware configs is a good idea. I agree here at 100%.

This imo is absolutely it. There are few of them and they do work hard and are good at what they do. You simply cannot find the amount of issues that 100s or 1000s of different open beta are able to find due to hardware differences, load put on servers, and simply more eyes/combinations of different ways they implement weapons, etc.

BETA VERSION: reserved only for tester team.

STABLE VERSION: for public and all modules on store will be always in stable version.

Once every one, or two months update to the next stable version.

BETA VERSION: reserved only for tester team.

 

STABLE VERSION: for public and all modules on store will be always in stable version.

 

Once every one, or two months update to the next stable version.

We heard you the first time. No need to labour the point.

We heard you the first time. No need to labour the point.

You are right, will be effect coronavirus ( covid-19).

I see a third: the team was just too small to encounter all of that issues that the OB users did. So their plan to raise the number of closed beta testers with all their different hardware configs is a good idea. I agree here at 100%.

If Multiplayer servers crash within 15 minutes, and two modules cause crash on start up, I would say that that is not something you need a large team to find. Just ensuring there are certain basic things tested as well as the size of the team.

You can have the largest team out there but if they’re only flying the flavour of the month plane in single player (for example) you won’t find very obvious issues impacting other planes and Multiplayer

BETA VERSION: reserved only for tester team.

 

STABLE VERSION: for public and all modules on store will be always in stable version.

 

Once every one, or two months update to the next stable version.

Hope it will not work this way.

Current approach is the best, you have stable version and beta just if you want to test it

While I know nothing's been stated by ED as to what will happen with their beta testing, I do know if I have to wait a couple of months for some sort of stable update and that's all that is accessible to me?

I'll find something else to spend my money and time on, simple as that.

If Multiplayer servers crash within 15 minutes, and two modules cause crash on start up, I would say that that is not something you need a large team to find. Just ensuring there are certain basic things tested as well as the size of the team.

 

You can have the largest team out there but if they’re only flying the flavour of the month plane in single player (for example) you won’t find very obvious issues impacting other planes and Multiplayer

IIRC there had to be 5 or more players for the issue to show? I may be wrong.

While I know nothing's been stated by ED as to what will happen with their beta testing, I do know if I have to wait a couple of months for some sort of stable update and that's all that is accessible to me?

 

I'll find something else to spend my money and time on, simple as that.

Good luck finding other developers, who update their stable versions more frequently than ED. I am used to see big updates only every 6 or 12 months from other game/sim devs, so ED and their 3rd party devs are actually making a good job compared to the others.

Hope it will not work this way.

 

Current approach is the best, you have stable version and beta just if you want to test it

I agree! To me the current method is not broken so don't "fix" it. However I do wonder if we are to expect less frequent updates. Some have gotten spoiled in expecting an update every week and hammering with the question, in these forums "Will there be an update this week"? With a lot of new technology and improved methods on approach to coding things just simply take more time now. I see that it may be a possibility in a way to curb the expectations in the frequency in updates to come.

Good luck finding other developers, who update their stable versions more frequently than ED. I am used to see big updates only every 6 or 12 months from other game/sim devs, so ED and their 3rd party devs are actually making a good job compared to the others.

Oh, it won't be in this genre. I've got other interests wanting part of my gaming budget. :)

Until the products they list as "early access" are out of said early access and into some sort of stable AND completed environment, which I don't see happening any time soon...any trimming of patching to less than every couple of weeks isn't going to work.

Didn't we used to see patches every couple of weeks? That seems like a good timeline, allowing for time to test/analyze/repair major problems. Did the release of more early access products require the need for more patches? I guess it has. If so, they've created this early access cash monster, so they have to feed it or get it on a diet. Or, it'll go find other food. :D

BETA VERSION: reserved only for tester team.

 

STABLE VERSION: for public and all modules on store will be always in stable version.

 

Once every one, or two months update to the next stable version.

+1

DCS is the only game I know which uses its instable beta branch as a quasi main release. The whole EA release method promotes it even more.

People are people. Everyone wants the shiny new stuff right now. But the community needs to be forced to stay in stable. There needs to be restricted access to the beta branch. No way around. Otherwise this mess will happen again and again.

There is a good reason why beta branches are kept behind locked doors. It hurt the companies reputation if half baked stuff is put out into the public.

I have stayed on stable branch because of that...

BETA VERSION: reserved only for tester team.

 

STABLE VERSION: for public and all modules on store will be always in stable version.

 

Once every one, or two months update to the next stable version.

BETA VERSION: For those that understand what a Beta version actually is, tests and help find and report bugs to ED. Must sign a wavier clearly stating what OB is before being allowed to download. This would also apply to purchasing a EA module

Stable Version: For everyone else, so as to eliminate confusion. Updated 4 times a year , not withstanding new releases. Stable version only gets the modules once out of 1st phase of EA (I.E working damage model, 75% of weapons and systems working properly.)

See anyone can do it.