Best news for 2020: Focus on CORE of simulation

[JetwasH]

Every time i see a what plane can we have next comment i cringe, The core, current aircraft, ai & modules need to be sorted bad. At the moment its wow look at my amazing F-14 as i fly past a 500 poly model thats been ingame since the beginning...and do an amazing cold start in my F-16 but wait i cant find the runway because the lights dont work... Have loved this sim since the beginning and still do, but i must admit theres a whole pile of things getting left behind as we get the next early release module.

 

I have most modules that have been released but at this point, I'd prefer to pay for an updated DCS than anything else...

Edited March 11, 2020 by JetwasH

[The Falcon]

Awesomeness! This stuff is exactly what DCS World needs, instead of more early-release modules that won't get finished for 5 years :)

Absolutely

[MacEwan]

Every time i see a what plane can we have next comment i cringe, The core, current aircraft, ai & modules need to be sorted bad. At the moment its wow look at my amazing F-14 as i fly past a 500 poly model thats been ingame since the beginning...and do an amazing cold start in my F-16 but wait i cant find the runway because the lights dont work... Have loved this sim since the beginning and still do, but i must admit theres a whole pile of things getting left behind as we get the next early release module.

 

I have most modules that have been released but at this point, I'd prefer to pay for an updated DCS than anything else...

 

Agree 100%

[iborg]

Well frankly, I would t mind paying a small monthly subscription to fund developments on the core software. Between Netflix, Xbox and iTunes Music I mean, it wouldn’t be a huge sacrifice. This should not be mandatory to play the game though. Just a mean to fund DCS development outside of buying modules.

[BoneDust]

Well frankly, I would t mind paying a small monthly subscription to fund developments on the core software. Between Netflix, Xbox and iTunes Music I mean, it wouldn’t be a huge sacrifice. This should not be mandatory to play the game though. Just a mean to fund DCS development outside of buying modules.

 

I am not against this either if it means developing a modern and stable core for the sim.

[BoneDust]

Every time i see a what plane can we have next comment i cringe, The core, current aircraft, ai & modules need to be sorted bad. At the moment its wow look at my amazing F-14 as i fly past a 500 poly model thats been ingame since the beginning...and do an amazing cold start in my F-16 but wait i cant find the runway because the lights dont work... Have loved this sim since the beginning and still do, but i must admit theres a whole pile of things getting left behind as we get the next early release module.

 

I have most modules that have been released but at this point, I'd prefer to pay for an updated DCS than anything else...

 

I agree mate. :thumbup:

[GVO]

Well frankly, I would t mind paying a small monthly subscription to fund developments on the core software. Between Netflix, Xbox and iTunes Music I mean, it wouldn’t be a huge sacrifice. This should not be mandatory to play the game though. Just a mean to fund DCS development outside of buying modules.

 

Agreed, I would definitely do that!

[KWard]

Well frankly, I would t mind paying a small monthly subscription to fund developments on the core software. Between Netflix, Xbox and iTunes Music I mean, it wouldn’t be a huge sacrifice. This should not be mandatory to play the game though. Just a mean to fund DCS development outside of buying modules.

 

I am not against this either if it means developing a modern and stable core for the sim.

 

Agreed, I would definitely do that!

 

 

Fourthed.

[30mikemike]

Well frankly, I would t mind paying a small monthly subscription to fund developments on the core software. Between Netflix, Xbox and iTunes Music I mean, it wouldn’t be a huge sacrifice. This should not be mandatory to play the game though. Just a mean to fund DCS development outside of buying modules.

 

100% with this...

[Baco]

Maybe a good idea would be to charge a small suscription fee to acces EA models and Discounts. You kill two birds with one stone, less demanding "new planes" crowd, and less whining for double the income. Beacuse lets face it DCS is our fix and we will pay up and get a new module every so often no matter what hoops and obstacles we have to hurdle...

[71st_Mastiff]

Maybe a good idea would be to charge a small suscription fee to acces EA models and Discounts. You kill two birds with one stone, less demanding "new planes" crowd, and less whining for double the income. Beacuse lets face it DCS is our fix and we will pay up and get a new module every so often no matter what hoops and obstacles we have to hurdle...

 

Problem with that is people who pay the subscription prices would feel entitled to think they own it and then they will really complain and try to give direction to eagle dynamics.

[despinoza]

Problem with that is people who pay the subscription prices would feel entitled to think they own it and then they will really complain and try to give direction to eagle dynamics.

 

Not quite, iRacing has been doing this for a long time with no mayor problems.

[Hawkeye_UK]

Makes me wince people even on this post asking when are the new clouds and weather coming......

 

Clearly Single Player users only. Before new textures the priority should be getting the same clouds in the same place for all users in multiplayer. Basics first, bells and whistle's after.

 

ED need to focus all resources on sorting out the mess that is Combined Arms and Multiplayer, and finishing the existing modules of F18 / F16 - then worry about adding more modules that will only cause further bugs and over stretch of what clearly is limited resources.

 

As for a subscription model - this would meet massive resistance and given the feeling in some sectors of online play at the moment result in further loss of player numbers not more. As per charging for EA model - its a 2 way street, the community is currently the primary beta tester for the product, a free resource for ED.

[GunSlingerAUS]

Not quite, iRacing has been doing this for a long time with no mayor problems.

 

Shhhh the penny pinchers don't want evidence. They'd rather watch the game continue to die a slow and painful death.

[GunSlingerAUS]

Fourthed.

 

Sorry, but the community has spoken. They're too cheap to even consider this.

[BoneDust]

Problem with that is people who pay the subscription prices would feel entitled to think they own it and then they will really complain and try to give direction to eagle dynamics.

 

Not quite, iRacing has been doing this for a long time with no mayor problems.

 

Yes, IRacing is a good example that subscriptions work. :thumbup:

[Thump]

Maybe a good idea would be to charge a small suscription fee to acces EA models and Discounts. You kill two birds with one stone, less demanding "new planes" crowd, and less whining for double the income. Beacuse lets face it DCS is our fix and we will pay up and get a new module every so often no matter what hoops and obstacles we have to hurdle...

 

That is a horrendous idea. If you're paying for a discount, then it isn't a discount. It also isn't logical to pay a fee to play EA as it will limit their desire to get as many testers that they need/want in that program. They have already said it is the only way they can accomplish modules. Not to mention, it also defeats a main purpose of buying EA (the discounts). The last sentence is the worst as it is awful for consumers (i.e. you) and only emboldens ED to continue with products not being completed.

[Fisu_MAD]

Well frankly, I would t mind paying a small monthly subscription to fund developments on the core software. Between Netflix, Xbox and iTunes Music I mean, it wouldn’t be a huge sacrifice. This should not be mandatory to play the game though. Just a mean to fund DCS development outside of buying modules.

-10000

 

This over time is called pay to win. The model is changed and the game will be changed, since if you pay you have to have some type of benefit on which it does not pay. You are not going to do it altruistically, no matter how much you write it here.

 

I would change from simulator to kill kill, a more expensive War Thunder.

 

DCS has already passed version 1.2 .... it is its core, why we have not to pay for its CORE that is freeee, we have enough to pay for modules that are not cheap at all. Modules that stay in EA for years, I pay for these modules over a free CORE man. Don't give absurd ideas.

Edited March 13, 2020 by Fisu_MAD

[iborg]

-10000

 

This over time is called pay to win. The model is changed and the game will be changed, since if you pay you have to have some type of benefit on which it does not pay. You are not going to do it altruistically, no matter how much you write it here.

 

I would change from simulator to kill kill, a more expensive War Thunder.

 

DCS has already passed version 1.2 .... it is its core, why we have not to pay for its CORE that is freeee, we have enough to pay for modules that are not cheap at all. Modules that stay in EA for years, I pay for these modules over a free CORE man. Don't give absurd ideas.

 

 

Obviously I wouldn't want to get any "advantage" à la "better missilez / gold ammo" by paying :P Really. As you say there's War Thunder for that. Any such subscription scheme should NOT translate to a competitive advantage over non-paying players.

I'd settle for a special forum badge, for the thousand messages I post here anyway :music_whistling:

[112th_Rossi]

-10000

 

This over time is called pay to win. The model is changed and the game will be changed, since if you pay you have to have some type of benefit on which it does not pay. You are not going to do it altruistically, no matter how much you write it here.

 

I would change from simulator to kill kill, a more expensive War Thunder.

 

DCS has already passed version 1.2 .... it is its core, why we have not to pay for its CORE that is freeee, we have enough to pay for modules that are not cheap at all. Modules that stay in EA for years, I pay for these modules over a free CORE man. Don't give absurd ideas.

 

Never heard such nonsense.

 

A subscription to access all the aircraft or some of them (tier based) does not equate to a War Thunder type game. Jesus christ.

[schmiefel]

Never heard such nonsense.

 

A subscription to access all the aircraft or some of them (tier based) does not equate to a War Thunder type game. Jesus christ.

 

No I don't think thats nonsense:

 

Just think what about

- already payed modules?

- only for MP usage or SP as well?

- access only as long as one pays the subscription fee?

 

To just list some quick problems with implementing such a new payment model.

 

Everyone that thinks iRacing could be a good model for that should take a look at the big picture. iRacing is only for MP racing and organizing such events. You even have to rent server modules If one wants to host something on its own.

 

Or do you think the much bigger SP community would pay as well on a periodical base just to get access to something they already payed some good money for?

[nighthawk2174]

This is what i'd like to see in terms of a subscription:

 

- Access to MP missions with the asset packs (buy to use in ME and SP),

- Get access to the supercarrier 3d models in MP (such as the ability to land not necessarily all

the bells and whistles but get absolute minimum access.

- Get access to free trials of all the aircraft and maps, and discounts in the ED store.

- Access to dedicated server (not 100% sure on this yet)

- Access to EA modules is interesting but i'm not sure what to think of it yet

 

I don't think any of these points would be controversial but would provide at least a reason to purchase it.

[Northstar98]

The subscription model has been discussed ad nauseum and the resounding majority answer is no way, absolutely out of the question, Jose. And ED seem to agree.

 

The notion that we can achieve everything so much more quickly just by throwing money at it is borderline fictional, albeit maybe in an un-intuitive sense.

 

Especially in light of what's been said by Kate Perederko, ED's COO, this problem isn't going going to magically go away because more money is being thrown in. I'd take a note of Brook's law here...

 

That said I am willing to pay for upgrade packs (like the WWII asset pack) although I know that even that is controversial.

 

If ED offer to overhaul CA , and it's work that can't be done for free? Fine I'll pay for upgrades because god knows it needs it, in pretty much all areas.

 

Paid theatres? Fine, I understand it's a financial undertaking (among other things) and how the world works says that it has to come from somewhere.

 

Even new weather or new AI units - fine I'm willing to pay if I can justify the cost.

Edited March 15, 2020 by Northstar98

[Harker]

I wouldn't mind a subscription model, but the problem is that I don't see what it could offer, that we don't have right now. I, for example, am mostly into modern aircraft, so I'll likely take a pass on the 2020 offerings and don't care about EA access to them. And I've already paid for everything, so why would I pay a sub fee? The problem is that you can't take away existing features and retroactively lock them behind a subscription.

 

The only thing I see being interesting for players that already own a lot of modules, is EA to future ones. And even like that, I think that people would still opt to just buy the thing, if the option was there. Plus, requiring a subscription for EA access risks costing the developers a lot of the pre-order and EA revenue they need in order to develop the EA module in the first place. They'd have to take a risk and see if it works.

 

Also, this doesn't solve the issue of putting modules before core development, since people are likely to drop their subscription if they're unsatisfied with the rate of the module's development (which is a frequent case) and resume it after some time or wait for the complete thing. This risk doesn't exist if the user has already paid up-front.

 

Another thing that might work for subscriptions, is subscription-only content, such as maps. However, this also runs the risk of everyone remaining on the four existing ones (mostly on the free Caucasus map) and again, making the subscription kinda useless if you want to play with a lot of people. This could work if the sub-only maps were significantly superior to the paid ones though, or very requested (such as a very well made Vietnam map, for example).

 

What I would definitely pay for though, would be asset packs, such as the WWII and the SC (assuming they can justify their price), as well as good campaigns etc.

[Worrazen]

Clearly Single Player users only. Before new textures the priority should be getting the same clouds in the same place for all users in multiplayer. Basics first, bells and whistle's after.

 

That's a valid argument, but I don't agree they should spend all resources on MP. I'm SP primairly and I always considered the MP component to be a tack-on and kinda still do but that's my personal thingy, I can't ignore and not appreciate the effort they put for dedicated server, so that's great certainly. But this MP being in the way it is isn't really anything new or a secret or even limited to DCS, all MPs are are relatively inaccurate except a few, how many errors is there in the scoreboards due to networking factors, a lot more than average players imagine, CSGO is some kind of PRO thing, well I didn't dug deep into that but I saw on LTT how the server/game process doesn't even run fast enough to detect things above certain FPS, and hitboxes are like still just boxes and not high-fidelity outlines that match the geometry/animations.

 

So it's natual that the MP component will be rewritten from ground up, it's well known within the industry MP is very hard, it's not just some "netcode", that's a legacy term that stuck, probably originates from programmer slang, which I think has a much lesser connotation that downplays the complexity of what MP code of today is and is required to be.

 

To get an idea here's a dev talk but ofcourse only the general things are relevant, engine specific things ofcourse don't count necessairly.

(i just hope this isn't considered "competitor", there's just a logo but no paid products AFAIK, primarily tech talk)

Edited March 16, 2020 by Worrazen