Jump to content

VEAO & Hawk discussion (please mind the forum rules)


Recommended Posts

Horse manure.

 

 

 

People like us who buy early access never get to use their bonus anyway. I have 30$ bonus there and they will never get spent. Either because we buy early access and then products are almost never full price.

 

 

 

Again, I don't care.

 

 

 

But I would have cared about the GESTURE. It would have given me the impression ED didn't just say "too bad for you. Nothing we can do about a product you bought on our shop and that we endorsed"

 

 

 

Seems like you just don't understand customer relations

I only buy early access from day one as well. I know how it works.

 

If you cared about DCS and the devs, you wouldn't ask for costly gestures from ED to cover on the fault of third party that screwed its customers.

 

By the way, don't exhaust yourself with insults, I don't respond to them :)

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G965F mit Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 460
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It's just an assumption on my side, but what if the original code was done by an by an external developer and the contracted work cannot be shared with another party, say ED for legal reasons?

 

Would it then still be the "decent move" or just another bad coincidence in a project that ran in to sooo many obstacles along the road, that it finally broke?

 

There would be a serious legal problem with that arrangement. If VEAO didn't own their own code but leased it, rented it or whatever, then how did they get a licence as a third party ? That would mean ED were the third party of their own OS using the Hawk code under licence from someone else !! Nah, that can't be right because if it was and ED didn't know about this speculated arrangement, they would have legal rights to initiate formal litigation. No I believe (and the evidence points to this) the code is in such poor condition that it's moribund and more cost effective to start from scratch, but it's only speculation. One thing we do know is a lot of things are broken and don't work (the code is naff) so I will stick with my theory :)

 

Didn't VEAO state the code was scheduled to be totally overhaul, effectively admitting it was GIGO that was written? I'm presuming the language is C (++) so there are not many people that can write slick code in this language but again, I am just talking crap and need to get out more !!

 

Mizzy

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sure sure. I believe you, you are writing all those posts to defend a principal that you should get bonus points back. I believe you.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G965F mit Tapatalk

 

How old are you ? You don't care about principles ?

 

The fact that you don't believe this, actually tells a lot more about you than it does about me. Hope you realize that.

 

Do you think I care about 15$ when I have 1500$ in this game ?

 

I sent a 34$ module gift last week. I offered to PayPal 50$ to some0ne on this board so he could buy a proper joystick earlier today...

 

Yes, I would have appreciated the gesture from ED a lot. And I voice the fact that they didn't.

 

And the only reason I am still in this thread is only because of people like you who lie about me, my intentions, and call me toxic.

[sIGPIC]https://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic70550_3.gif[/sIGPIC]

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
I only buy early access from day one as well. I know how it works.

 

If you cared about DCS and the devs, you wouldn't ask for costly gestures from ED to cover on the fault of third party that screwed its customers.

 

By the way, don't exhaust yourself with insults, I don't respond to them :)

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G965F mit Tapatalk

 

1st. It wouldn't have been costly to them. First because people like us don't get to use their bonus anyway, and 2nd because what they might have lost in revenue would be way more compensated by additional sales and earned trust.

 

Second. I never dealt with a 3rd party' I dealt with ED. Sure I have my responsibility for purchasing this product, but ED certainly share it, by endorsing their product on their own platform, and partnering with bad people/

 

Most of us never dealt with VEAO. We trusted ED to do this, since we purchased from ED, them having given their "blessing"

[sIGPIC]https://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic70550_3.gif[/sIGPIC]

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
How old are you ? You don't care about principles ?

 

 

 

The fact that you don't believe this, actually tells a lot more about you than it does about me. Hope you realize that.

 

 

 

Do you think I care about 15$ when I have 1500$ in this game ?

 

 

 

I sent a 34$ module gift last week. I offered to PayPal 50$ to some0ne on this board so he could buy a proper joystick earlier today...

 

 

 

Yes, I would have appreciated the gesture from ED a lot. And I voice the fact that they didn't.

 

 

 

And the only reason I am still in this thread is only because of people like you who lie about me, my intentions, and call me toxic.

Again I don't respond to personal attacks and questions.

 

No company with profit and loss responsibility, would do a gesture with high potential cost and without sensible gain. Especially if it thinks it is not a fault and that it's customers understand that.

 

If principles are important for you, then by principle, someone should not pay for the mistakes of another: ED should not pay for VEAO. And yes bonus points and discounts are a form of payment.

 

If you buy early access by principle to support devs and ED, then hold to your principle and stop non sense arguments for costly gestures

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G965F mit Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
Again I don't respond to personal attacks and questions.

 

No company with profit and loss responsibility, would do a gesture with high potential cost and without sensible gain. Especially if it thinks it is not a fault and that it's customers understand that.

 

If principles are important for you, then by principle, someone should not pay for the mistakes of another: ED should not pay for VEAO. And yes bonus points and discounts are a form of payment.

 

If you buy early access by principle to support devs and ED, then hold to your principle and stop non sense arguments for costly gestures

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G965F mit Tapatalk

 

You don't respond to personal attacks yet you lie about people, and call them toxic? That's pretty rich.

 

It was not an attack. It was an honest question.

 

Again, you are wrong. Offering a bonus to hawk customers would have costed them nothing in the long term. Quite the opposite. The gesture would have brought them more than it would have costed them.

 

And also, you blame us for purchasing the hawk without informing ourselves about VEAO, yet you hold ED responsible for nothing for partnering for a shitty partner, and releasing a sub alpha product.. that's a bit of a nonsense. But at this point, nothing surprises me...

[sIGPIC]https://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic70550_3.gif[/sIGPIC]

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
1st. It wouldn't have been costly to them. First because people like us don't get to use their bonus anyway, and 2nd because what they might have lost in revenue would be way more compensated by additional sales and earned trust.

 

 

 

Second. I never dealt with a 3rd party' I dealt with ED. Sure I have my responsibility for purchasing this product, but ED certainly share it, by endorsing their product on their own platform, and partnering with bad people/

 

 

 

Most of us never dealt with VEAO. We trusted ED to do this, since we purchased from ED, them having given their "blessing"

It wouldn't be costly cause most of you don't get to use their bonuses: again you think you are alone in this world. Yes you and me buy early access and don't use the bonus. Many others do use their bonuses. Thats a lot of money for ED. You know companies when they calculate costs, they calculate potential cost and the worst case. It doesn't matter if you don't use your bonuses. They would calculate the business case as you do!

 

You repeat that you didn't deal with VEAO. You clearly say that the module is from VEAO, you are a veteran here. It doesn't matter if you bought it on the ED store, you know that the company supporting the product is VEAO not ED. If you want a fix or a wishlist, you go to VEAO. If you want to see the progress of the module you go to VEAO.

Yet now you tell us you don't care about VEAO you only want to talk to ED and it was your only interface. You knew very well that VEAO was the owner and the responsible of the Hawk. Not ED.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G965F mit Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
It wouldn't be costly cause most of you don't get to use their bonuses: again you think you are alone in this world. Yes you and me buy early access and don't use the bonus. Many others do use their bonuses. Thats a lot of money for ED. You know companies when they calculate costs, they calculate potential cost and the worst case. It doesn't matter if you don't use your bonuses. They would calculate the business case as you do!

 

You repeat that you didn't deal with VEAO. You clearly say that the module is from VEAO, you are a veteran here. It doesn't matter if you bought it on the ED store, you know that the company supporting the product is VEAO not ED. If you want a fix or a wishlist, you go to VEAO. If you want to see the progress of the module you go to VEAO.

Yet now you tell us you don't care about VEAO you only want to talk to ED and it was your only interface. You knew very well that VEAO was the owner and the responsible of the Hawk. Not ED.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G965F mit Tapatalk

 

I don't agree that people use their bonus. Either they buy early access at a discount , or they buy later on at a discount. I both case you don't get to use the bonus. What sense does it make to purchase full price in between even with a bonus ?

 

Fact is, if you do, you end up paying the same price than with the normal discount/ which proves ED isn't losing any money over this.

 

First time I came to this board was when I opened this deleted thread to tell VEAO what I thought of them. Never dealt with them before.

 

 

Of course VEAO was the owner/ but ED is responsible for partnering with them, and for endorsing and selling this product on their shop.

 

It's absolutely insane that you think that customers have responsibilities for getting screwed while you pretend ED has none.

[sIGPIC]https://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic70550_3.gif[/sIGPIC]

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
You don't respond to personal attacks yet you lie about people, and call them toxic? That's pretty rich.

 

It was not an attack. It was an honest question.

 

Again, you are wrong. Offering a bonus to hawk customers would have costed them nothing in the long term. Quite the opposite. The gesture would have brought them more than it would have costed them.

 

And also, you blame us for purchasing the hawk without informing ourselves about VEAO, yet you hold ED responsible for nothing for partnering for a shitty partner, and releasing a sub alpha product.. that's a bit of a nonsense. But at this point, nothing surprises me...

You know better than ED that bonus points to hawk users doesn't cost anything. I wonder who has these comemrcial data, you or ED.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G965F mit Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't agree that people use their bonus. Either they buy early access at a discount , or they buy later on at a discount. I both case you don't get to use the bonus. What sense does it make to purchase full price in between even with a bonus ?

 

 

 

Fact is, if you do, you end up paying the same price than with the normal discount/ which proves ED isn't losing any money over this.

 

 

 

First time I came to this board was when I opened this deleted thread to tell VEAO what I thought of them. Never dealt with them before.

 

 

 

 

 

Of course VEAO was the owner/ but ED is responsible for partnering with them, and for endorsing and selling this product on their shop.

 

 

 

It's absolutely insane that you think that customers have responsibilities for getting screwed while you pretend ED has none.

Partners? They are not partners. Only Belsimtek had the status of partner before the merge. All the others, including HB are third party providers. Not partners.

Therefore, the third party devs are responsible for their products. Not ED.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G965F mit Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
It wouldn't be costly cause most of you don't get to use their bonuses: again you think you are alone in this world. Yes you and me buy early access and don't use the bonus. Many others do use their bonuses. Thats a lot of money for ED. You know companies when they calculate costs, they calculate potential cost and the worst case. It doesn't matter if you don't use your bonuses. They would calculate the business case as you do!

 

You repeat that you didn't deal with VEAO. You clearly say that the module is from VEAO, you are a veteran here. It doesn't matter if you bought it on the ED store, you know that the company supporting the product is VEAO not ED. If you want a fix or a wishlist, you go to VEAO. If you want to see the progress of the module you go to VEAO.

Yet now you tell us you don't care about VEAO you only want to talk to ED and it was your only interface. You knew very well that VEAO was the owner and the responsible of the Hawk. Not ED.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G965F mit Tapatalk

 

Ultimately ED should be responsible. It was sold on their eStore. It was endorsed and approved by them to be part of DCS.

Customers trusted ED.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You know better than ED that bonus points to hawk users doesn't cost anything. I wonder who has these comemrcial data, you or ED.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G965F mit Tapatalk

 

ED has never been known to be good communicators, that's for sure.

 

And I am pretty sure that in the long run, this will cost them more than what a gesture would have costed them. Especially given the fact that small bonus don't cost them anything, as shown earlier.

 

You are free to have a different opinion. What you are not free to do though, is lie about other people and call them toxic.

[sIGPIC]https://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic70550_3.gif[/sIGPIC]

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ultimately ED should be responsible. It was sold on their eStore. It was endorsed and approved by them to be part of DCS.

Customers trusted ED.

Being it sold on their store doesn't make them responsible for it. Give me one example in the market in any software industry that would take responsibility of software sold on their store please?

 

It was part of DCS is your own wording. It was even marketed "Hawk for DCS" Not "DCS: Hawk". It is said nowhere in contact reacts or marketing material that it is part of DCS.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G965F mit Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
Partners? They are not partners. Only Belsimtek had the status of partner before the merge. All the others, including HB are third party providers. Not partners.

Therefore, the third party devs are responsible for their products. Not ED.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G965F mit Tapatalk

 

Horseshit;

 

ED does the final integration of the module into DCS. They are the ones releasing a new version of the game in which you can install and use the module. Without ED approval and endorsement, nothing happens.

 

To say these third parties are not chosen and endorsed by them, especially when they sell it on their shop it bad faith, at best.

 

The only real third party plane these days, is the a-4

[sIGPIC]https://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic70550_3.gif[/sIGPIC]

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
Horseshit;

 

 

 

ED does the final integration of the module into DCS. They are the ones releasing a new version of the game in which you can install and use the module. Without ED approval and endorsement, nothing happens.

 

 

 

To say these third parties are not chosen and endorsed by them, especially when they sell it on their shop it bad faith, at best.

 

 

 

The only real third party plane these days, is the a-4

You are unable to think and draw conclusion.

 

Yes, ED is the integrator. It doesn't mean they are the responsible for the software!

 

When you install an app on your phone, the OS of the phone does it and integrates on your phone. If one day the app is not supported and you do an OS update the app will be there and it will crash on opening. It doesn't mean that the OS provider and the app store owner is responsible for that app.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G965F mit Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
You are unable to think and draw conclusion.

 

Yes, ED is the integrator. It doesn't mean they are the responsible for the software!

 

When you install an app on your phone, the OS of the phone does it and integrates on your phone. If one day the app is not supported and you do an OS update the app will be there and it will crash on opening. It doesn't mean that the OS provider and the app store owner is responsible for that app.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G965F mit Tapatalk

 

What you say makes no sense.

 

Basically you are telling customers are responsible for purchasing from a bad company (on ED shop as well), yet, you tell us ED has no responsibilities for working with and integrating the sub alpha product, from a company that is also totally unreliable.

 

Brilliant

 

This is not the Apple Store. This is ED and DCS. We , as a community and supporters, have different expectations.

 

Again, I'm not disputing the legal facts here. It makes no doubt that ED wasnt legally forced to do anything.

But the moral ones. Which may be more costly, in the long run, than unused bonuses


Edited by FZG_Immel

[sIGPIC]https://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic70550_3.gif[/sIGPIC]

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wanna jump in and say that a seller is responsible for a product when it is sold through them, responsibility doesn't lie with the manufacturer unless the manufacturer is the seller.

 

Hence it is ED's responsibility if it is bought through the DCS shop, and VEAO's responsibility if it is bought direct from them. In many cases it was bought through the DCS shop.

 

I'm not sure if a refund is an entitlement so we'll assume it isn't, but I know in my country that if digital content is not fit for purpose, as described by the seller, or of satisfactory quality, it is my right for it to be repaired or replaced.

 

No idea how this works in practise, so I won't say more than some sort of a gesture from ED would be appreciated. Let's move into 2019 on a high note.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I’ve got a better idea… what’s done is done, time to move into 2019 and leave 2018 behind. We all get far more value from DCS by moving on.

 

I agree, but can understand why some (and to an extent myself) don't feel in such a position to forget this yet.


Edited by Birko
Link to post
Share on other sites
I’ve got a better idea… what’s done is done, time to move into 2019 and leave 2018 behind. We all get far more value from DCS by moving on.

 

You are absolutely right/

 

Yet it is difficult to say nothing when you get people lying about you and calling you toxic.

 

As I said earlier, I personally won't change my attitude toward ED and other parters they have.

 

Yet, their lack of gesture towards us in this case disappointed me.

[sIGPIC]https://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic70550_3.gif[/sIGPIC]

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
What you makes no sense.

 

 

 

Basically you are telling customers are responsible for purchasing from a bad company (on ED shop as well), yet, you tell us ED has no responsibilities for working with and integrating the sub alpha product, from a company that is also totally unreliable.

 

 

 

Brilliant

If ED does their integratuon job badly, they are responsible. If the software provider doesn't deliver his software or stops delivering he is responsible.

 

Sure, I have said it before, ED should have let VEAO be a licensed third party dev. It only diminished the quality of the DCS experience when flying in MP. But this responsibility of ED has nothing to do with a refund.

 

Those who are responsible for the mess are first VEAO and second customers who blindly bought a product without informing themselves. That principle is valid for your eveyrday life too.

I bought tons of shit that I regret it. I don't expect refunds after a certain period. I hold myself responsible for that.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G965F mit Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
Being it sold on their store doesn't make them responsible for it. Give me one example in the market in any software industry that would take responsibility of software sold on their store please?

 

It was part of DCS is your own wording. It was even marketed "Hawk for DCS" Not "DCS: Hawk". It is said nowhere in contact reacts or marketing material that it is part of DCS.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G965F mit Tapatalk

 

You really like twisting words don't you. Are you related to ED or something.

Anyhow the Hawk was endorsed by ED on their website as the latest and greatest thing. So yes they do have responsibility.

I'm only one person but I don't think I'm alone. I personally won't be purchasing anymore half baked modules unless they are fully functioning and feature complete modules like any other paid software. And what do you think the chances of that happening are, given recent history?

Even though I probably couldn't use a discount anyway, it may help me to trust ED again and get back on the purchase wagon.


Edited by onefox
Link to post
Share on other sites
I wanna jump in and say that a seller is responsible for a product when it is sold through them, responsibility doesn't lie with the manufacturer unless the manufacturer is the seller.

 

May I ask you, on which basis are you saying that? Why the software distributor is responsible for the distributed software after 3 months of purchase?

Do you have other examples that do that? Steam?

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G965F mit Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
You really like twisting words don't you. Are you related to ED or something.

 

Anyhow the Hawk was endorsed by ED on their website as the latest and greatest thing. So yes they do have responsibility.

 

I'm only one person but I don't think I'm alone. I personally won't be purchasing anymore modules unless they are fully functioning and feature complete modules like any other paid software. And what do you think the chances of that happening are, given recent history?

 

Even though I probably couldn't use a discount anyway, it may help me to trust ED again and get back on the purchase wagon.

Show me where I twisted a single word of your posts please.

 

It was clearly mentioned as beta and or early access. And it was marketed as HAWK for DCS

Latest and greatest ? You are twisting the reality. Not me.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G965F mit Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...