Hornet Roadmap Discussion

[Wizard_03]

Nick, Kate, Matt, cm and all ED team,

 

I sincerely believe that there is a problem with most of those who have followed you for years. Everyone who has been playing since the start of lock on or BS1 begins to no longer understand anything about your behavior. After the lack of update on the hornet since December, after the failure of the 2.5.6 and the SC, this announcement of the « out of the early access » but with an incomplete plane is too much.

 

listen to us and keep this plane in EA until it is finished! otherwise you will not sell anything because most of us will no longer trust you.

 

Wow. So people that don’t share your opinion have something wrong with them. That a pretty ignorant outlook.

[fmedges]

Well, quick chime here. The Warthog took some time to be completed, at the end they brought something very different to the market which many of us liked. The F18 and Viper are more complex...you paid for the early access or beta preview, you get unfinished software but is enjoyable and the end you are part of the development that many people would enjoy later on...can we stop the bitching about EA and changes in development? We get more info now compared to 2012 which is a big progress. For me while ED is giving development info every week or so, I'm cool, at least we know the project is moving forward.

 

Beta builds are feature complete so your statement doesn’t make any sense.

[hanab]

Wow. So people that don’t share your opinion have something wrong with them. That a pretty ignorant outlook.

 

I don’t said all but most of. When i saw how many people react here, i think that i’am not alone...it is your opinion and i’ve got mine.

 

Perhaps ED have to made a poll about this : did you think hornet have to be out of early access with incomplete feature or keep this module in early access state until it is finished ?

[Speacy]

Wow. So people that don’t share your opinion have something wrong with them. That a pretty ignorant outlook.

 

And many others share his opinion, also silent people playing since long time on DCS communities.

I think he don't speak for "you" but for many customers who never come here.

 

I think also ED will lost many customers for their early access model, simply from others communities feedbacks.

[headbreaker_ger]

How is that cleaning example even close to what ED does? Arent you able to fly the hornet, operate almost all their systems, enter flight plans or use more than 20 weapons just to name a few things?

 

Just to put thing into perspective. A T-shirt is 14/30$, a pint of beer could be 10$ in some places, a night out is probably 80$. A shitty vr game that you can use for 3 hours is maybe 40$.

 

Many of you here are too used to the client is always right thing. So much that you have made yourself believe you are some kind of heroe with your money spent, it even seems lile you saved a company from misery.

 

Trading and fair market should be a win situation for all, one where you pay a price and you expect a fair good or service in return. In this case, 80$ is a way way low price for a product like ED modules. If you calculate the $ per hour you spent, which is actually a fair metric to use, it is even ridiculous.

 

And the culprit here is precisely that, the point you need to understand is that, because ED is not charging a fair price, something that is sustainable for them, so they can keep the engine up to date while keeping all modules as much bug free as possible while running an ever evolving engine, they are in constant need of creating content just to keep the wheel running and rushing sometimes certain modules into EA. If instead of 80$ per modules, you would be paying a monthly fee like in many other games or services, then you would be right and you would be crying with all the right reasons.

 

I've always thought ED should charge more so some of your cries about unfinished products could actually make any sense.

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

 

Sure things have prices, nothing wrong with that so far, so but know let us think why did ED put this price to the module?mhhh maybe a higher price wouldn sell better? Maybe with a higher price the over all money would be far less?

 

What you are suggested is not only really really short minded at all it also doesn't make sense, so you put a price for the EA and also for the Release, so less people come in EA and less people disagree with the ED behavior,... but ED also makes less Money and at the end of the day Money runs ED.

 

Not your strokes, not this debates, money.

 

So ED, calculated and said "79$ is the way to go" with that they put a list of features and a promise, because without trust, EA dont work and without EA no money while developing.

 

And this whole argument would be much more calm, if ED final would tell us why they think "Features" are just "Improvements", why they want to deliver a not-feature ready Product as final,... or at least as "Not EA" and on Steam that is Release-Version!

 

So ED puts the Hornet out of EA,... great WTF do you guys think what happen at Steam? You think everybody will be that happy as you are? "Oh great the most realistic FA18 by far ( because no competition ) but mhhhh something not quite right ,... oh maybe nothing" And after the Shitstorm a Steam begins,... who is calm the new player and prevent bad Reviews? Because puppy protection is gone after EA,... And even 79$ my be not much money for you and hell yeah nothing for me,... for some people its a lot,... and they want to get what was promised and not a kind of shady businessman "the rules can change anytime"

 

So if ED needs money, find other way,.. heck do a fundraiser what so ever,... I for myself really fly 2 modules but nearly bought all, because thats my way of support, but I'm a point I will not longer support ED as I did before.

 

Don't get me wrong, its total okay, that you are happy and you want to support ED but criticism is also a form of support, because many people here try to prevent problems and tell why they see that in that way,... and if something happen you disagree with, its better to call it our instead of backstrokes and best hopes,... after a disaster everyone known it before ;)

[dawgie79]

I don’t said all but most of. When i saw how many people react here, i think that i’am not alone...it is your opinion and i’ve got mine.

 

You don't know that. "Most of" is a claim based on nothing but your gutfeeling, i.e. nothing.

So again, speak for yourself or don't speak at all. I don't want to be associated with the whining negativity around here. I love ED's products and the fun I have with them.

[hanab]

You don't know that. "Most of" is a claim based on nothing but your gutfeeling, i.e. nothing.

So again, speak for yourself or don't speak at all. I don't want to be associated with the whining negativity around here. I love ED's products and the fun I have with them.

 

So ED have to made a poll to know, haven’t it ?

[dawgie79]

So ED have to made a poll to know, haven’t it ?

No, why?

It is what it is. It'll get finished, maybe a bit later than expected. But hey, life is full of unexpected things. In that regard, every time ED has a message for us, the community, they receive enormous backlash, and for what? For trying their best? Really?

Edited April 25, 2020 by dawgie79

[NineLine]

Dear all, we appreciate all the feedback, good bad and ugly, remember everyone is allowed an opinion, and we can only share our own, not tell someone else what theirs is, speak for yourself, and let others speak for them, thanks all!

[Wags]

Dear all,

 

Thank you all for the feedback and items for us to consider. Nick, Kate, and I will take all your comments to heart and discuss how we can best structure and term the release of our products. All the of the comments are welcome, and even the most critical allow us to better understand where we can do better. In the end, this is your product and we cannot do it without you.

 

Thank you and kind regards,

Matt

[Speacy]

No, why?

It is what it is. It'll get finished, maybe a bit later than expected. But hey, life is full of unexpected things. In that regard, every time ED has a message for us, the community, they receive enormous backlash, and for what? For trying their best? Really?

 

Maybe a little bit more hindsight making us worried by the possibility it'll never be fully featured… Can you understand this point of view even if you don't share the same?

[Flamin_Squirrel]

Maybe a little bit more hindsight making us worried by the possibility it'll never be fully featured… Can you understand this point of view even if you don't share the same?

 

I'd have thought hindsight should make you more positive - ED are still maintaining products that are 10+ years old. Yes it might take time, but they'll get there.

[Haptor]

My 2 cents.

 

 

Although I appreciate the effort ED is doing to keep us informed, I do not like the hornet being taken out of EA with so many features missing. I am afraid they will never be finished this way. I must say I specially appreciate Matt Wagner's posts and videos.

 

 

If we have to choose, I would have the plane finished first, new weapons and pod added later... I also find important the ability to fight at sea (SEA modes radar, HARPOON fixing) as water is a big portion of the maps and it seems it is gonna get bigger.

 

 

I am also looking forward to some kind of aircraft and mission cards that would allow us to have less setup work in cockpit everytime

Edited April 26, 2020 by Haptor

[Notso]

I think there's alot of catastrophising here. So you spent $50 on a piece of software that hasn't met with your dreams and expectations yet. Get over it.

 

Even in their current state ive got my moneys worth out of all the EA modules. And they can only continue to get better. Developing modern high fidelity jets is effing hard. Especially for the price theyre sold at.

 

Yep +100

[Speacy]

I'd have thought hindsight should make you more positive - ED are still maintaining products that are 10+ years old. Yes it might take time, but they'll get there.

 

I'm less optimistic since some years, sure enough the black shark and A-10C was great and still great now (even if the DCS core is more stable now than 10 years ago), but i'm more worried by trade policy than other things like technical issues.

[Snoopy]

Dear all,

 

Thank you all for the feedback and items for us to consider. Nick, Kate, and I will take all your comments to heart and discuss how we can best structure and term the release of our products. All the of the comments are welcome, and even the most critical allow us to better understand where we can do better. In the end, this is your product and we cannot do it without you.

 

Thank you and kind regards,

Matt

 

Are there plans to increase the size for the Modern Jet team? The team must be stretched thin if I'm tracking correctly. Based on newsletters and other posts from yourself, Kate, Nick, and Nineline modern jets currently in some stage of development:

 

• F/A-18C
  
• F-16C
  
• A-10C 2
  
• Secret project

 

With the primary focus being on the Hornet for the remainder of 2020, we know the impact for the Viper but what about the A-10C 2 and secret project?

[Flamin_Squirrel]

I'm less optimistic since some years, sure enough the black shark and A-10C was great and still great now (even if the DCS core is more stable now than 10 years ago), but i'm more worried by trade policy than other things like technical issues.

 

Understandable.

 

I think there are reasons to be positive though: much of the modules and their weapons that they've released over the last couple of years are more complex than anything they've done before. This is a difficult time where they're developing a lot of new tech. I think it'll get better once much of that is in place.

[dawgie79]

Maybe a little bit more hindsight making us worried by the possibility it'll never be fully featured… Can you understand this point of view even if you don't share the same?

Honestly? No. Here's why. And this will be my last reply about this topic because it's offtopic actually. :)

 

ED has stated in the past that the average WWII warbird takes approx. 1,5-2 years to fully develop.

 

The F/A-18C is a modern fighter jet. In Wags' Hornet EP3

he states the different new systems they had to develop first for this jet and that specific video:

 

• Engines
  
• Air turbine Starter (ATS)
  
• Airframe Mounted Accessory Drive (AMAD)
  
• APU
  
• Fuel
  
• Electrical
  
• Hydraulic
  
• Flight Control Systems (FCS)
  
• Caution & Advisory System
  
• Ground Proximity Warning System
  
• Built-in Test (BIT)
  
• Integrated Fuel & Engine Indicators (IFEI)
  
• Fire Test System
  
• Bleed Air System
  
• INS
  

And then there will be the following systems after that (vid):

 

• AA Radar including submodes
  
• AG Radar including submodes
  
• JHMCS
  
• Datalink
  
• IFF
  
• Different new & advanced weaponry, both AA & AG
  
• EW
  
• TGP
  

And I'm sure I forgot a bunch. Now, if I take a look on the product page of the Hornet, I can read the following:

Our Hornet is the culmination of more than 40 man years of intense research, technology development, art creation, and ground-breaking coding. The Hornet brings the first, true, multi-role fighter to the skies of DCS World with equally impressive air-to-surface and air-to-air capabilities.

This tells me ED has taken on a huge task, because they needed to create several new technologies in a way that it's both simulated (not just guesswork) and works as intented, like the real thing.

 

And what? People expect ED to code all this, without bugs, in 1,5 years after the EA release? That's just not realistic. Sure. Maybe ED has had this as a deadline, but given the fact the majority of responses towards ED is negative, I can understand them in wanting to give a deadline in the first place. Even though the task is enormous, and completely new with regards to the tech that needs to be developed.

 

If people would think for a second before blasting of and complain on and on about things not begin finished, they would know the huge and complex task ED has given themselves. That they are trying their best, it's not like Wags, Nick or Kate get up in the morning thinking how they can screw the community that day.

 

I know ED states they thrive on the responses given by the community, and I believe to a certain amount that they do. But nobody, including ED, wants to be criticised on everything they do. It's unreasonable, and not justified.

And they don't need to be told how to run their company as well, it's disrespectful. Like I said, they do their best, let's recognise that for a change.

Edited April 25, 2020 by dawgie79

[fmedges]

I think there's alot of catastrophising here. So you spent $50 on a piece of software that hasn't met with your dreams and expectations yet. Get over it.

 

Even in their current state ive got my moneys worth out of all the EA modules. And they can only continue to get better. Developing modern high fidelity jets is effing hard. Especially for the price theyre sold at.

 

You may set your expectations based on dreams, but I set them based on the product description from the company I am purchasing from. I don’t rate products I buy based on how hard they are to produce, I rate them based on what they are supposed to do and how well they do it.

Edited April 25, 2020 by fmedges

[SDsc0rch]

well said, dawgie!

[fmedges]

Honestly? No. Here's why. And this will be my last reply about this topic because it's offtopic actually. :)

 

ED has stated in the past that the average WWII warbird takes approx. 1,5-2 years to fully develop.

 

The F/A-18C is a modern fighter jet. In Wags' Hornet EP3

he states the different new systems they had to develop first for this jet and that specific video:

 

• Engines
  
• Air turbine Starter (ATS)
  
• Airframe Mounted Accessory Drive (AMAD)
  
• APU
  
• Fuel
  
• Electrical
  
• Hydraulic
  
• Flight Control Systems (FCS)
  
• Caution & Advisory System
  
• Ground Proximity Warning System
  
• Built-in Test (BIT)
  
• Integrated Fuel & Engine Indicators (IFEI)
  
• Fire Test System
  
• Bleed Air System
  
• INS
  

And then there will be the following systems after that (vid):

 

• AA Radar including submodes
  
• AG Radar including submodes
  
• JHMCS
  
• Datalink
  
• IFF
  
• Different new & advanced weaponry, both AA & AG
  
• EW
  
• TGP
  

And I'm sure I forgot a bunch. Now, if I take a look on the product page of the Hornet, I can read the following:

This tells me ED has taken on a huge task, because they needed to create several new technologies in a way that it's both simulated (not just guesswork) and works as intented, like the real thing.

 

And what? People expect ED to code all this, without bugs, in 1,5 years after the EA release? That's just not realistic. Sure. Maybe ED has had this as a deadline, but given the fact the majority of responses towards ED is negative, I can understand them in wanting to give a deadline in the first place. Even though the task is enormous, and completely new with regards to the tech that needs to be developed.

 

If people would think for a second before blasting of and complain on and on about things not begin finished, they would know the huge and complex task ED has given themselves. That they are trying their best, it's not like Wags, Nick or Kate get up in the morning thinking how they can screw the community that day.

 

I know ED states they thrive on the responses given by the community, and I believe to a certain amount that they do. But nobody, including ED, wants to be criticised on everything they do. It's unreasonable, and not justified.

And they don't need to be told how to run their company as well, it's disrespectful. Like I said, they do their best, let's recognise that for a change.

 

Nobody but ED themselves is trying to pull this out of early access. They took on an enormous task sure but they decided to do it and also decided to take money for it. Find me a piece of software not in the gaming world where you sell a product and then claim its finished with 20 or so missing features. The companies that you sold it to won’t be happy and that’s a lawsuit for sure.

 

The fact that some here want to blame the consumer for ED mis estimating their own product and then claiming that it’s in a state which it is not and won’t be is curious.

Edited April 25, 2020 by fmedges

[Svsmokey]

I don't think i ever got a trophy for doing my best .

[hanab]

Nobody but ED themselves is trying to pull this out of early access. They took on an enormous task sure but they decided to do it and also decided to take money for it. Find me a piece of software not in the gaming world where you sell a product and then claim its finished with 20 or so missing features. The companies that you sold it to won’t be happy and that’s a lawsuit for sure.

 

The fact that some here want to blame the consumer for ED mis estimating their own product and then claiming that it’s in a state which it is not and won’t be is curious.

 

Well said !

[falcon_120]

Sure things have prices, nothing wrong with that so far, so but know let us think why did ED put this price to the module?mhhh maybe a higher price wouldn sell better? Maybe with a higher price the over all money would be far less?

 

 

 

What you are suggested is not only really really short minded at all it also doesn't make sense, so you put a price for the EA and also for the Release, so less people come in EA and less people disagree with the ED behavior,... but ED also makes less Money and at the end of the day Money runs ED.

 

 

 

Not your strokes, not this debates, money.

 

 

 

So ED, calculated and said "79$ is the way to go" with that they put a list of features and a promise, because without trust, EA dont work and without EA no money while developing.

 

 

 

 

My whole point is that ED business model is like being between a sword and a wall.

 

They sell at 80$ cause they determine that higher prices would hurt selling units a lot, more than it is affordable, but yet selling at that price is hardly sustainable in such a niche market with maybe 400k users around the globe. To put thing worse, they are in constant need of product bug fixing because they do not sell standalone products, which at least would let them to sell, support it 1 year and then leave it to die and repeat the cycle again ( something like ubisoft or EA would do in any of their franchises).

 

My other point is that the module even in its incomplete state is gorgeous and amazing, and also that ED has always proved they finish their modules (at least what i could consider a finished product), and there is ZERO PROOF that could make us think they will not finish the module. So some of the criticism in here (not all cause ive read some constructive one) is way out of proportion. That is all.

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

[MonnieRock]

Nobody but ED themselves is trying to pull this out of early access. They took on an enormous task sure but they decided to do it and also decided to take money for it. Find me a piece of software not in the gaming world where you sell a product and then claim its finished with 20 or so missing features. The companies that you sold it to won’t be happy and that’s a lawsuit for sure.

 

The fact that some here want to blame the consumer for ED mis estimating their own product and then claiming that it’s in a state which it is not and won’t be is curious.

 

:thumbup: