VEAO & Hawk discussion (please mind the forum rules) - Page 31 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-02-2019, 12:29 AM   #301
TomCatMucDe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 1,920
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NineLine View Post
Ok guys & gals, all these issues happened last year, time to put them behind us
+1

Gesendet von meinem SM-G965F mit Tapatalk
TomCatMucDe is offline  
Old 01-02-2019, 07:37 PM   #302
FZG_Immel
Senior Member
 
FZG_Immel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 1,246
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mizzy View Post
I think in your own mind you are posting positive things, in reality it's just bitter bile. I have been on this forum a lot longer than you so I take offence at being called a troll. Is that not also breaking the forum rules Nineline as this person has been offensive to me more than once ? I think I will put an official complaint in about him!
Happy new year

Mizzy
funny !

Happy new year to you too !
__________________
https://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic70550_3.gif
Asus Z390-H - SSD M.2 EVO 970 - Intel I9 @5.0ghz - 32gb DDR4 4000 - ZOTAC 2080ti AMP Extreme Core - Cougar FSSB + Cougar NN_Dan + HOTAS Warthog + Virpil WRBRD + Hornet Stick - Thrustmaster TPR Pedals - Track IR5
FZG_Immel is offline  
Old 01-03-2019, 09:35 PM   #303
Sirius
Member
 
Sirius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: North Carolina, USA
Posts: 704
Default

Let's be optimistic about the future, and hope for the best.
__________________
"Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree,
then it will live its whole life believing it is stupid." - Albert Einstein


Spoiler:

PC Specs: AMD Ryzen 5, AMD Radeon RX 580, 24 GB DDR4, 128 SSD, 2 TB HDD
Modules: All but Mi-8, MiG-15, MiG-21, and Normandy.
Discord: Sirius#0002
Sirius is offline  
Old 01-04-2019, 07:07 AM   #304
Eazzy
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: South Africa
Posts: 17
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NineLine View Post
Ok guys & gals, all these issues happened last year, time to put them behind us
Moving forward, I think ED should develop the Hawk Mk 127 LIF It would be a great replacement
__________________
| ARMA 3 | DCS MODULES : M2000C | HUEY | A10C | F/A 18 C | Ka-50 | Hawk T1A | Yak 52 | AV-8B | Su 27 | F15C | Persian Gulf | NTTR | Viper( loading )

Last edited by Eazzy; 01-04-2019 at 07:10 AM.
Eazzy is offline  
Old 01-04-2019, 10:51 AM   #305
Tenebrae666
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 17
Default

Not having been affected directly by the issue at hand I just thought I'd contribute some input that seems fair.

We can all agree that although the early access model has its perks it also has its risks. People should accept this when buying into early access products of any kind, be it kickstarters, a 2£ rogue-like on steam, a 60£ DCS module or a multi-million investment into a startup as a business angel.

Sometimes it happens that the development cycle collapses, either by dev/management inexperience or a myriad of other possibilities. This is exactly what happened here. People that back these projects early on are at more of a risk because they're buying early and they are given access to its perks earlier than everyone else, on the other hand they will have no security net if the proverbial excrement hits the spinney thingy.

It is a given of this business model and it has to be accepted as such. Early backers are literally cannon fodder for capital injection. Such is the harsh reality of the venture capital model where early access gets its workings from. This is what "this product is sold as is" means.

Eagle Dynamics although not being directly responsible for VEAO's cock-up has to still keep its face as they are an ongoing business with a very demanding client base. In allowing late backers to get their money back they are doing what they can with what resources they have available.

Now let's imagine (merely hypothetical) they fold and the F18 is no more as they have to divert resources to something else. I personally have opted in to that early access module. I have a few hundred hours in with it and have enjoyed it thoroughly even in its unfinished state. I have reaped the perks of the early access backing. Honestly if - as it has been suggested - I was offered a symbolic value for it I would give it back knowing that ED would put it to better use somewhere else.

Hypothetically as well let's suppose the F14 by Heatblur dies on its tracks. Without even having come out to the public. Then this type of complaint might make more sense as it was just vapour ware, but even then if they did a runner with the money there wouldn't be much anyone who bought in early could do about it. That's why you have to measure up the credibility of whoever you are giving your money away to. That's why you have to treat early access as investment.

I think this is just a matter of adjusting mentalities; you can't expect to have early access to experimental stuff, knowing the risks associated with the model, reaping the profits of it and then complain when things don't work out that you want your money back. The moment you press that pay button the money is no longer yours.

In a suggestive tone since I've seen that NineLine is following this thread maybe it's time ED review their third party/early access partnerships further to avoid further disappointment down the line. Maybe introduce mandatory code share in the case of failure to deliver to at least avoid the same thing?

Last edited by Tenebrae666; 01-04-2019 at 09:03 PM.
Tenebrae666 is offline  
Old 01-04-2019, 12:53 PM   #306
Flamin_Squirrel
Senior Member
 
Flamin_Squirrel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 2,189
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenebrae666 View Post
Not having been affected directly by the issue at hand I just thought I'd contribute some input that seems fair.

We can all agree that although the early access model has its perks it also has its risks. People should accept this when buying into early access products of any kind, be it kickstarters, a 2£ rogue-like on steam, a 60£ DCS module or a multi-million investment into a startup as a business angel.

Sometimes it happens that the development cycle collapses, either by dev/management inexperience or a myriad of other possibilities. This is exactly what happened here. People that back these projects early on are at more of a risk because they're buying early and they are given access to its perks earlier than everyone else, on the other hand they will have no security net if the proverbial excrement hits the spinney thingy.

It is a given of this business model and it has to be accepted as such. Early backers are literally cannon fodder for capital injection. Such is the harsh reality of the venture capital model where early access gets its workings from. This is what "this product is sold as is" means.

Eagle Dynamics although not being directly responsible for VEAO's cock-up has to still keep its face as they are an ongoing business with a very demanding client base. In allowing late backers to get their money back they are doing what they can with what resources they have available.

Now let's imagine (merely hypothetical) they fold and the F18 is no more as they have to divert resources to something else. I personally have opted in to that early access module. I have a few hundred hours in with it and have enjoyed it thoroughly even in its unfinished state. I have reaped the perks of the early access backing. Honestly if - as it has been suggested - I was offered a symbolic value for it I would give it back knowing that ED would put it to better use somewhere else.

Hypothetically as well let's suppose the F14 by Heatblur dies on its tracks. Without even having come out to the public. Then this type of complaint might make more sense as it was just vapour ware, but even then if they did a runner with the money there wouldn't be much anyone who bought in early could do about it. That's why you have to measure up the credibility of whoever you are giving your money away to. That's why you have to treat early access as investment.

I think this is just a matter of adjusting mentalities; you can't expect to have early access to experimental stuff, knowing the risks associated with the model, reaping the profits of it and then complain when things don't work out that you want your money back. The moment you press that pay button the money is no longer yours.

In a suggestive tone since I've seen that NineLine is following this thread maybe it's time ED review their third party/early access partnerships further to avoid further disappointment down the line.
This is totally and utterly untrue. We are CUSTOMERS, not investors.

Traditionally companies requiring the involvement of venture capilalists would approach investors who would use their experience to decide whether to accept the risk based on an understanding of a (potentially large) reward from owning part of the company.

The kickstarter model allows startups to offload the financial risk without giving up any of their ownership of their company onto people who may have no idea what they're getting into and will enjoy none of the benefits of the 'investment' that they made.

I would not be at all surprised to see the kickstarter business model come under increasing scrutiny by the authorities, if it hasn't already.

The only 'risk' regarding early access is undefined time scales for product completion. Arguably until a product is complete then it's still a pre-purchase, and even that (undefined time scales) has been banned in Germany by the looks of it.
Flamin_Squirrel is offline  
Old 01-04-2019, 03:19 PM   #307
ivo
Member
 
ivo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Fighter town
Posts: 701
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flamin_Squirrel View Post
This is totally and utterly untrue. We are CUSTOMERS, not investors.

Traditionally companies requiring the involvement of venture capilalists would approach investors who would use their experience to decide whether to accept the risk based on an understanding of a (potentially large) reward from owning part of the company.

The kickstarter model allows startups to offload the financial risk without giving up any of their ownership of their company onto people who may have no idea what they're getting into and will enjoy none of the benefits of the 'investment' that they made.

I would not be at all surprised to see the kickstarter business model come under increasing scrutiny by the authorities, if it hasn't already.

The only 'risk' regarding early access is undefined time scales for product completion. Arguably until a product is complete then it's still a pre-purchase, and even that (undefined time scales) has been banned in Germany by the looks of it.
+1000000000
__________________
cpu:I7-6700k Z170 16GB Ram DDR4 Gtx 1080 8Gb DDR5 11GBs SSD 500 Gb 2 HDD 1Tb Evga supernova G2 850w Case Bequiet series 800 Silent base Win 10 pro 64 bit

My wishlist: F16C/F-35/B-17G/F4U Corsair/Yak-3/P-40C Tomawhak

ivo is online now  
Old 01-04-2019, 04:37 PM   #308
Birko
Member
 
Birko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 243
Default

I know that I'm a lot more careful with pre-orders and early access than I was 3 years ago. I trust ED and Heatblur so I got the F-18 and I've pre-ordered the Tomcat, and I trust Razbam (to admittedly a slightly lesser degree) so picked up the Harrier in the sale.

But agree, there shouldn't be risk with a purchase just because something is in early access, but it's the way things are and of course I don't like it in most (but not entirely all) cases. Surprised so little has been done about this culture to protect customers.

Belated happy new year everyone!
Birko is offline  
Old 01-04-2019, 06:05 PM   #309
T53FCU
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 13
Default

After reading all 311 posts, I have come to the realization that some people just have never had any business schooling. In order to convey ED's decision a little better, maybe it is helpful to illustrate it with numbers. With that in mind, it is worth noting that VEAO using ED's store to sell their product is like consignment. ED allows VEAO to use their sales medium for a small cut, for my purpose I will use 10% as I do not have access to actual numbers, but it isn't going to be a lot and VEAO is still 100% responsible for their product and quality of it.

Ok, so lets say that over the course of the Hawk being available for purchase, 10,000 people in total purchased it. I don't know what the numbers were for full price and all of the sales, but I will use $22 usd as a base average. Again, please remember these numbers are not indicative of the actual numbers, this is just to illustrate a point. So, 10,000 people at $22 is $220,000. Now, ED gets 10% of that, so they claim $22,000 for the total sales.

Now that those numbers are out of the way, lets look at the last few months. Lets say 5% of all of those people bought it in the last few months. That is 500 sales for a total of $11,000, of which ED collects $1,100. Now, VEAO flops and disappears and ED steps in and says, "Ok, we will give a full refund for anyone who bought the module after Oct. 1st. Well, they only made $1,100 in profit, but now they are paying out $11,000 for a loss of $9,900 for the last few months, and decreasing their total profits from $22,000 to $11,000.

Now, people want just a "small" compensation. Ok, lets say they give everyone who bought the Hawk $3. That's $30,000. Ok, now they are -$19,000 on a module that they don't even own or have rights to nor are they responsible for. You ask for a "symbolic gesture", but completely ignore the fact that they HAVE given a gesture which cuts into their profits.

As a final word, Early Access IS NOT a new thing. It's been around for a long time and the consequences of such are known by just about everyone. Even before computers and digital content, EA was around in the form of investing in a business just starting up. If it took off, great. If it flopped, you were out money. It is ALWAYS a chance you take when investing in a product or business that doesn't have a finished product, but that decision to take that risk lies SOLEY on the invester, in this case, the consumers who paid for the Hawk. It is not EDs responsibility to compensate or do anything other than say sorry for what happened becuase you decided to spend YOUR money on an unfinished product instead of waiting. ED learned that they need to have a clause in their contracts that give them rights to the code should something like this happen again, and you as a consumer learned that you need to be more responsible with your money, and if you can't afford to take risks with it, don't. This isn't about refunds, this is about the fact that ED is already paying out of pocket for VEAO. They ABSOLUTELY have no responsibility to do anymore, nor do they have a responsibility to do what they are doing.
T53FCU is offline  
Old 01-04-2019, 06:15 PM   #310
Flamin_Squirrel
Senior Member
 
Flamin_Squirrel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 2,189
Default

You haven't read all 311 posts, because as I've already said, we are NOT INVESTORS, we're CUSTOMERS.

While that doesn't mean I believe ED should refund everyone (I agree with your assessment) all this victim blaming is complete rubbish.
Flamin_Squirrel is offline  
Closed Thread

Tags
hawk disabled, hawk withdrawn, return my hawk

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 02:48 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.