Hornet Roadmap Discussion

[hanab]

 

We believe that by the end of this year, the Hornet will no longer be in an early stage of development and hence we will qualify it as ‘Out of Early Access’. This does not mean that we will stop working on it by any means. It is a definition to assist the prospective Buyer in understanding the status of the product by qualifying its late development status. It is not destined as a message to existing users attempting to shy away from any further investment.

 

Wags, thanks for answering. One more question : Did you consider, when hornet will be out of early acces, it was still in beta state (because many features are not finished) ?

 

Thanks

[Jabbers_]

Wags,

 

I think the picture is missed here. I get what EA is, I understand it's purpose, and I understand why you guys use it (and abuse it sometimes). But I feel you are missing the point of some of the "passion" we are bringing in you ending EA before a product is complete. So, let me explain it with an example of how I was screwed over by another kind of EA product.

 

I bought into the Pimax hype, it was for all intents and purpose an EA program on kick starter... Backers got to provide feedback and communicate during the creation of the HMD, we got the chance to participate in onsite trials of the product before it was released and ultimate, they delivered on part of their promise. I purchased the kickstarter package that included the HMD, 2 controllers, 2 base stations. I have only ever received the HMD. Now, the kick starter is considered finished, I along with quite a few others have yet to receive the entirety of what they invested into and we will likely not get it. I've contacted Pimax and they offer me a discount to upgrade to their new model (which i would still have to pay another $499 for) but no promise on delivery of what I'm owed.

 

Now, this is my round about example of what I see could happen with you guys ending Early Access .... early. With the A-10C and the Black Shark we see examples of how you want to extend their capabilities, but at a cost.. which I am totally fine with. But, what I don't want to see is and Eagle Dynamics that turns this unfulfilled (yet "finished") F-18 into something where you try to charge me to finish the other features because they entail more work than you had anticipated and now you need the funds to continue, I completely see this as a possibility once you take that Early Access tag off and we move a few years into the future with deadlines and being pushed due to unavailable man hours, unforeseen events (like Covid) or something like poor planning and feature creep.

 

Now, despite the recent negative attitude I've had toward the recent struggles we've seen with patches and processes, I 100% would like DCS to overcome these struggles and be successful, I've invested enough into to show at least that much. I don't want this hobby to disappear disappear. I just feel like with each public statement from You, Nick and/or Kate, it gets personal and the words you choose to drop on the community come off that way... maybe its just me, but as example:

 

May I also draw your attention to the less visible side of Early Access and that is user-generated content. Without the thousands and thousands of community created missions, addons, skins and in particular the massive number of videos available online and the tens of millions of views generated during this ongoing Early Access phase, there is simply no way that we would have been able to build the level of awareness and excitement which we have witnessed to-date. This aspect is an important factor in the growth and sustainability of the hardcore simulator genre. Consider this carefully, you are the ones participating with us in the growth of our hobby and this truly is the enabling factor in our common destiny.

 

More specifically the last sentence... This comes off super condescending, almost like we should all be grateful that the all mighty Eagle Dynamics affords us this opportunity and you will smite us if we don't comply. Please stop it.

Edited April 24, 2020 by Jabbers_

[MonnieRock]

Great, we have a protocol. Follow Steam's Early Access definition / guidelines :thumbup:

 

 

But let’s take a small step back and ensure we all agree on the meaning of Early Access. Despite a small number of customers believing that it means ‘feature complete’, the term seems to be self-evident. In fact, it is not defined by us but to us from our friends at Steam. It is one that we will continue to adhere to for the sake of clarity and the avoidance of doubt:

 

 

Great, we have Steam's Early Access definition / guidelines :thumbup:

 

Keywords

1. Steam Early Access

2. Still being developed

3. Unfinished

4. Continue to develop for release

“Steam Early Access enables you to sell your game on Steam while it is still being developed and provide context to customers that a product should be considered "unfinished". Early Access is a place for games that are in a playable alpha or beta state, are worth the current value of the playable build, and that you plan to continue to develop for release.”

 

 

 

Great, we have Matt Wagner's interpretation of Steam's Early Access definition / guidelines :thumbup:

 

Keywords

5. Work in progress

This definition is quite clear and valuable. Delivering a product with the qualifier “Early Access” helps set the context for prospective customers as it provides them with information about the initial state of completeness in addition to describing our aspirations and objectives. The term Early Access ensures that customers fully understand and recognize that they are getting involved with a ‘work in progress’.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Summary of Steam's Early Access definition / guidelines and Matt Wagner's interpretation

Keywords

1. Steam Early Access

2. Still being developed

3. Unfinished

4. Continue to develop for release

5. Work in progress

 

 

 

 

Great, huh what? This is confusing :huh:

 

Keywords

6. No longer be in an early stage of development end of 2020

7. Out of Early Access

8. Late development status

9. Still working on adding / unfinished features

We believe that by the end of this year, the Hornet will no longer be in an early stage of development and hence we will qualify it as ‘Out of Early Access’. This does not mean that we will stop working on it by any means. It is a definition to assist the prospective Buyer in understanding the status of the product by qualifying its late development status.

 

 

 

 

 

Questions

A) Does Steam's Early Access definition / guidelines differentiate "early stage development" from "late stage development?

B) Development means still being developed?

C) Development means work in progress?

D) Development means unfinished?

E) How does the Hornet qualify as "Out of Early Access" if keywords 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 still apply?

 

 

Happy Simming,

Monnie

Edited April 24, 2020 by MonnieRock

[GunslingerII]

S/A and AUTO countermeasure modes... Get it done

[Snoopy]

I've boldended and highlighted all items from this list that I feel are important to users of DCS (A-10C/FA-18C or otherwise).

All of these could be made options available in tabs, the bezel, or on the map of the Mission Planner. We have an interface ready and waiting to support the additional features.

 

Your list doesn't even include CM profiles, programs for S/A or AUTO release modes etc...

 

From your list I've narrowed it down to 12 values which matter. 5 of which are already partially supported by the default Mission Planner interface.

 

That’s your opinion yes. Also unless it translates to MP it’s of no use to that part of the community.

 

And I purposely left out countermeasure stuff because that isn’t releasable to the public.

 

But this isn’t the thread for data cartridge discussions so I’ll leave it be.

Edited April 24, 2020 by Snoopy

[Hippo]

I am certainly not a fan of EA / pre-purchase. Whenever I have gone down this road (and I doubt that I ever will again), I have always accepted that I could lose my money and end up with nothing. I would say to anyone that if they don't accept this, then they shouldn't partake.

 

Personally, I am willing to forgive ED if they might've bitten off more than they could chew with the F-18, and would be ok with paying the same amount again if the current economics mean they can't finish all the features.

 

What I won't be doing is paying for aircraft I don't want to support features (i.e. base engine, VR performance improvements) and aircraft that I do want. I don't see why the base product should be free, considering the amount of work it takes to keep it updated, and think that a lot of ED's problems stem from this decision.

Edited April 24, 2020 by Hippo

[Leadnap]

As primarily a Viper Driver - mentioned here for context - I am satisfied with what ED is putting out here. I think Nick's Hoggit post addressed the most important feature here - which is that in both the F/A-18 and F-16 we at least get to fly them. There is so much we can't do, so much that is frustrating because we paid money to do it - but the alternatives I think would go down even less popularly: not have them until completed, or worse, "done" incomplete and inaccurately.

 

The later part of that is illustrated in the ATFLIR issue - another developer might just say you have the TGP so that's what you're getting. The demand here is intense and critical - with the alternatives non-existent. If ED doesn't deliver the F/A-18 to the degree we expect of them what are we going to do? Go fly it in Warthunder?

 

On the Viper - yea it sucks so much is missing. I'll wait. I'll wait until it is done because I want it done right. I want it accurate. I own the Hornet, and someday when I pick that up to learn I want that correct too. ED could fake it, call it "done" and have it out by the end of the summer. Not only would we all be pissed, but we simply wouldn't have anywhere to turn to (BMS as the closest option).

 

I'll continue to give ED my money, even for EA products. If we want it done sooner, let's start paying $100 per module so a larger staff can tackle it. Lets start paying subscription fees too I suppose. For what we are paying, and for what we are getting - the future looks bright. Even if we have to wait a little bit longer.

[dawgie79]

@Bignewy: understand, thanks for the reply.

@Wags: Thanks for the insight.

 

Cheers guys. :)

[Arctander]

Consider this carefully, you are the ones participating with us in the growth of our hobby and this truly is the enabling factor in our common destiny.

 

 

More specifically the last sentence... This comes off super condescending, almost like we should all be grateful that the all mighty Eagle Dynamics affords us this opportunity and you will smite us if we don't comply. Please stop it.

 

100% agreed.

[VirusAM]

As primarily a Viper Driver - mentioned here for context - I am satisfied with what ED is putting out here. I think Nick's Hoggit post addressed the most important feature here - which is that in both the F/A-18 and F-16 we at least get to fly them. There is so much we can't do, so much that is frustrating because we paid money to do it - but the alternatives I think would go down even less popularly: not have them until completed, or worse, "done" incomplete and inaccurately.

 

 

 

The later part of that is illustrated in the ATFLIR issue - another developer might just say you have the TGP so that's what you're getting. The demand here is intense and critical - with the alternatives non-existent. If ED doesn't deliver the F/A-18 to the degree we expect of them what are we going to do? Go fly it in Warthunder?

 

 

 

On the Viper - yea it sucks so much is missing. I'll wait. I'll wait until it is done because I want it done right. I want it accurate. I own the Hornet, and someday when I pick that up to learn I want that correct too. ED could fake it, call it "done" and have it out by the end of the summer. Not only would we all be pissed, but we simply wouldn't have anywhere to turn to (BMS as the closest option).

 

 

 

I'll continue to give ED my money, even for EA products. If we want it done sooner, let's start paying $100 per module so a larger staff can tackle it. Lets start paying subscription fees too I suppose. For what we are paying, and for what we are getting - the future looks bright. Even if we have to wait a little bit longer.

 

 

 

I cannot add nothing more but I just write that i quote 100% your post.

[Harlikwin]

This is so silly.

 

 

This ability exists today, and nobody apparently knows how to use it.

 

 

Currently this lacks the ability to set a variety of other settings such as laser codes, CM profiles, PP/PB points, ATTCK RADAR range/bar/distance presets.... everything else. But this could all be added.

 

 

The other major feature is that this screen isn't available for Multiplayer. If it was this would probably solve 99% of the mission planning problems users face.

 

Yeah sweet jesus it would, if there is ONE thing that MP really needs beyond fixing MP sync issues it needs some sort of unified planning/aircraft setup tool that you can use after jumping into a slot, and then a radio menu option of Chief setup my plane…

[=Mac=]

First and foremost, I wish to thank Matt and the entire ED team(s) for the unique (niche) product that tens of thousands of us have come to enjoy.

 

Because I have adopted the FA-18 as my primary focus, I am very, very appreciative to know that the intensity of development on the F16 is slowing down a bit and more focus is being placed on my favorite aircraft. I’ll trust the ED team(s) to figure out how best to proceed with it all.

 

Second, I am retired, in “Late Afternoon” in my lifetime and, thus have limited funds to contribute to DCS. But, so too, DCS is important to me BECAUSE I want to put quality stuff in my sunset years. I know this will generate much laughter, but I don’t care how much a module costs so long as it’s (1) realistic and (2) finished. I used to say that, “if it flies, I have it.” But I have not gotten the I-16 nor the second FW-190 because I wanted to focus on the F-18/Super Carrier (I do have the SC pre-purchased.) As you can see, that is the direction of MY wishes.

 

Well over 40 years ago before MS-DOS was on an ALTAIR 8800, Zylog’s Z-80 was a 10 MHz 8 bit chip and the IBM 360 was king, I was writing with compiled code software (COBOL, RPG, FORTRAN, LISP, various Assemblers, and eventually BASIC). I worked with several different companies in the business environment as well as the budding AI research and development environment. There was one rule above all others: The customer NEVER would see a bug. Ever. In fact, most of our documentation was made after a good study by the legal departments to make sure what we said we’d do, we did. Our company’s existence depended on it. As for the complexity of things compared to today’s flight simulators, I’d say what we were creating (with what we had) was just about as complex, especially in the convoluted custom inventory management or corporation payroll schemes often demanded of us. We delivered our software bug free and feature rich. We had to. There were no such things as Alpha or Beta releases (yet). It was, “I want this; I will pay for this; call me when you want to deliver it.” We never had the option to tell an end user, “That’s something we’ll have to fix.” If a delivered computer system had a glitch, a less-than-careful company soon disappeared. To be able, on a regular basis, to deliver an end product (even complex ones), we would spend sometimes years getting it right. But, in the end, I can say that there probably are still some IBM 360’s out there running my flawless code. Even Bell Labs has some of my coding floating around out there, probably.

 

Today, the IT world doesn’t work that way. I acknowledge the limitations and shortcomings. It is what it is. My point, though, is to point out that we, as an advanced computer using society, have allowed this to be. I suggest to ED that they look back at the obsessive focus to flawless coding we had back then and strive to closely approximate it.

 

And finish the FA-18.

[VirusAM]

Wags,

 

 

 

I think the picture is missed here. I get what EA is, I understand it's purpose, and I understand why you guys use it (and abuse it sometimes). But I feel you are missing the point of some of the "passion" we are bringing in you ending EA before a product is complete. So, let me explain it with an example of how I was screwed over by another kind of EA product.

 

 

 

I bought into the Pimax hype, it was for all intents and purpose an EA program on kick starter... Backers got to provide feedback and communicate during the creation of the HMD, we got the chance to participate in onsite trials of the product before it was released and ultimate, they delivered on part of their promise. I purchased the kickstarter package that included the HMD, 2 controllers, 2 base stations. I have only ever received the HMD. Now, the kick starter is considered finished, I along with quite a few others have yet to receive the entirety of what they invested into and we will likely not get it. I've contacted Pimax and they offer me a discount to upgrade to their new model (which i would still have to pay another $499 for) but no promise on delivery of what I'm owed.

 

 

 

Now, this is my round about example of what I see could happen with you guys ending Early Access .... early. With the A-10C and the Black Shark we see examples of how you want to extend their capabilities, but at a cost.. which I am totally fine with. But, what I don't want to see is and Eagle Dynamics that turns this unfulfilled (yet "finished") F-18 into something where you try to charge me to finish the other features because they entail more work than you had anticipated and now you need the funds to continue, I completely see this as a possibility once you take that Early Access tag off and we move a few years into the future with deadlines and being pushed due to unavailable man hours, unforeseen events (like Covid) or something like poor planning and feature creep.

 

 

 

Now, despite the recent negative attitude I've had toward the recent struggles we've seen with patches and processes, I 100% would like DCS to overcome these struggles and be successful, I've invested enough into to show at least that much. I don't want this hobby to disappear disappear. I just feel like with each public statement from You, Nick and/or Kate, it gets personal and the words you choose to drop on the community come off that way... maybe its just me, but as example:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

More specifically the last sentence... This comes off super condescending, almost like we should all be grateful that the all mighty Eagle Dynamics affords us this opportunity and you will smite us if we don't comply. Please stop it.

 

 

 

Come on Jabbers you cannot compare ED with Pimax...ED is here since mid 90ies.

I understand your point, and I understand that you as a prominent youtuber (i love all of your videos) are givinge a voice to what many here fears.

But really are different situations...they are charging us again for the A-10C, true but 1) they are doing after a free 3d cockpit update and 2) they will give us a very different suite.

They won’t charge us again for any update to the Hornet. It won’t make any sense.

They will for sure for a Super Hornet....that’s a logical choice for them.

 

Look at the supercarrier...They invested a lot in doing it, maybe it could have been part of the Hornet package...but i feel that they were honest in discounting it to hornet and persian gulf map owner (and they gave the su33 for free) ...i paid a couple of nuts for it...

Trust me if they sold the supercarrier at full price any hornet owner would have bought in any way...or most of them.

 

Pimax on the other hand...well I didn’t know the issue that you described...if it is so it is a scandal and you should protest also in your channel because then maybe Pimax is a company we cannot trust.

 

Buf for now, i feel, i think and i hope (for the love of flightsimming) that we can trust ED.

I don’t think they never missed a promised delivery of course, there were many release dare missed but that is another story.

[Jabbers_]

Come on Jabbers you cannot compare ED with Pimax...ED is here since mid 90ies.

I understand your point, and I understand that you as a prominent youtuber (i love all of your videos) are givinge a voice to what many here fears.

But really are different situations...they are charging us again for the A-10C, true but 1) they are doing after a free 3d cockpit update and 2) they will give us a very different suite.

They won’t charge us again for any update to the Hornet. It won’t make any sense.

They will for sure for a Super Hornet....that’s a logical choice for them.

 

Look at the supercarrier...They invested a lot in doing it, maybe it could have been part of the Hornet package...but i feel that they were honest in discounting it to hornet and persian gulf map owner (and they gave the su33 for free) ...i paid a couple of nuts for it...

Trust me if they sold the supercarrier at full price any hornet owner would have bought in any way...or most of them.

 

Pimax on the other hand...well I didn’t know the issue that you described...if it is so it is a scandal and you should protest also in your channel because then maybe Pimax is a company we cannot trust.

 

Buf for now, i feel, i think and i hope (for the love of flightsimming) that we can trust ED.

I don’t think they never missed a promised delivery of course, there were many release dare missed but that is another story.

 

Not a direct comparison, just using as an example. I hope you are right, but i dont like wiggle room just because they want to remove "Early Access" from a title, its not accurate. My guess would be it so they can add another Early Access module to their list without having that list look like its growing.

[hanab]

My guess would be it so they can add another Early Access module to their list without having that list look like its growing.

 

totaly agree with that.....

[nighthawk2174]

My guess would be it so they can add another Early Access module to their list without having that list look like its growing.

 

Hind, A10C-2, a couple of maps (including the free one we haven't seen anything about for months), BS3, P47, Mosquito, Assets pack for WWII, F16, F18, MAC, VOIP, an unannounced module, and of course a slew of core improvements. The list is already yuuuuge of stuff not just in EA but will be at some point as well, so yeah probs what you said.

[BarTzi]

 

[*]While we certainly understand the desire for the ATFLIR, we decided to place it in the Out of Early Access list as the Listening TGP will provide virtually all the same functionality. We first wish to prioritize unique Hornet features that are not in place anywhere in the program. However, we do look forward to reviewing the upcoming poll on this matter and will discuss the findings openly.

 

 

The combination of ATFLIR and NAVFLIR is a unique Hornet feature, unlike the LITENING which is featured on three planes as we speak.

It will also go with another module ED plans to release- the Supercarrier. Because we all know LITENING wasn't used in that environment by the US.

 

I understand that the LITENING will have some of the same functionality, but to be honest, after reading this thread:https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=267125 I began to worry.

 

Since the way a pod is simulated in DCS is pretty generic (no disrespect, but there are no optics, wires, or bearings involved when you code it) compared to the real optoelectronic device, can you please share why was it the route taken?

Was there not enough information available? Was this choice made to help the development of the Viper in the long run?

 

As a customer, I'm very concerned that we will end up not seeing this list completed, especially because some items don't add a lot in terms of gameplay value.

[NineLine]

Consider this carefully, you are the ones participating with us in the growth of our hobby and this truly is the enabling factor in our common destiny.

 

 

More specifically the last sentence... This comes off super condescending, almost like we should all be grateful that the all mighty Eagle Dynamics affords us this opportunity and you will smite us if we don't comply. Please stop it.

 

Hey Jabbers, I really think you are taking the sentiment wrong in this case, the fact is without all the different aspects of the DCS World community we wouldn't be able to keep this hobby going, and that like no other type of game, do content creators like you, users, volunteer tests, etc impact and support the growth of DCS, I don't think I have ever seen any other game with a community tied so tightly to it.

 

I do agree that we should all be grateful, not just you guys, but all of us, every member of the ED team should be grateful, especially everyone at ED, that we have people in this community that care, enjoy and feel so passionately about this game. Thanks.

[Temp89]

Despite a small number of customers believing that it means ‘feature complete’, the term seems to be self-evident. In fact, it is not defined by us but to us from our friends at Steam.

 

Regardless of your opinion on the quality of current releases and roadmaps, the above statement is fundamentally wrong:

 

When you consider your product "feature complete" and no longer in a significant state of change, you may transition from Early Access to 'Released.'

 

https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/store/earlyaccess

Edited April 24, 2020 by Temp89

[BuzzU]

I agree with Jabbers. I think the EA handle should stay with a plane until it's finished. Otherwise, it has no meaning.

 

You could also have three different versions for every plane. EA, released, and finished. You can't charge more for it until after the finished handle is applied.

[Jabbers_]

I don't think I have ever seen any other game with a community tied so tightly to it.

 

You must not try other games then. Path of Exile, Tarkov, Bannerlord, Skyrim, Fallout, hell I started my software development career with Ultima Online, a 1997 game and that community is still going strong...

[VirusAM]

I agree with Jabbers. I think the EA handle should stay with a plane until it's finished. Otherwise, it has no meaning.

 

 

 

You could also have three different versions for every plane. EA, released, and finished. You can't charge more for it until after the finished handle is applied.

 

 

 

They never charged more for an unfinished module....

They charged for fc3 and vlack shark2 when were updated to dcs standards (years aftee the previous releases) and they will charge for the A-10C ten years after its initial release but giving us a more modern suite.

[Temp89]

We believe that by the end of this year, the Hornet will no longer be in an early stage of development and hence we will qualify it as ‘Out of Early Access’.

 

Whilst we're on the subject this is also incorrect. You appear to have confused "early development" with "early access". The two phrases are completely unrelated. In fact most EA games are comparatively late in development when up for public release as that's the only way you can have a functioning gameplay loop.

[BuzzU]

Virus......I'm talking about the future, not the past.

 

Just in case.

[NineLine]

You must not try other games then. Path of Exile, Tarkov, Bannerlord, Skyrim, Fallout, hell I started my software development career with Ultima Online, a 1997 game and that community is still going strong...

 

I have and still play many games since the early 90's, and I have never seen a community and developer so closely tied together and interact so much, I am sure there are some that come close, but regardless, the point is, we all are interwoven, and working towards the same desires.

 

Saying we are out to command all and smite the doubters is just missing the message I believe. Thanks.

Edited April 24, 2020 by NineLine