Jump to content

Didn’t buy anything during Summer Sale


Recommended Posts

If DCS can’t even straighten out the bugs in the Yak-52 I have no interest in adding to my DCS collection. Total b.s. how this bugs are being addressed or not addressed in this SIMPLE low tech a/c module and others.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Considering how simple the Yak-52 is compared to any modern fighter yet.... It is amazing that it has been allowed to have bugs for so long.

 

Like, wouldn't it be just far better to complete such as Yak-52 ASAP so you get it out as Early Access, add one more to your "completed modules" list in store and just clear your development To-Do lists same time?

 

It is understandable that F/A-18C takes time, but that Yak-52 shouldn't after all the process that has already done to complete it (counting that there is nothing in the DCS engines etc that is waiting completion).

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Every hour spent working on the Yak-52 costs money. It will lower the earnings per sold Yak-52 module and that hour might also be more profitable or better used on another project. Simple as that. Not saying that it won't ever get fixed, but that is how this circus goes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless. I expect the modules I've bought to be completed someday, and since many of them are still in various stages of (in)completion, I'm now waiting for them to finish before buying anything else.

The DCS Mi-8MTV2. The best aviational BBW experience you could ever dream of.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Every hour spent working on the Yak-52 costs money. It will lower the earnings per sold Yak-52 module and that hour might also be more profitable or better used on another project.

Excusing ED producing incomplete/unsupported "civilian" modules like the NS430 or Yak-52 because they aren't profitable, is self fulfilling.

 

I would love to buy a second copy of the Yak-52 to fly with my son but don't feel I should reward/encourage ED selling an incomplete "civilian" module.

 

When I bought the Yak-52 I expected it to be finished to a similar level as the TF-51D/L-39, not sold "as is", without a development plan or the resources to be completed in a reasonable (2 year) time scale.

 

As a result, when reviewing any product from ED, I now warn users not to rely on ED's promises about future features (i.e. F-16 mavericks, ground radar, etc) and to only buy modules based on their current functionality.

 

IMHO many Yak-52 modules are sold due to the reputation ED have built with quality modules like the A-10C, P-51D, etc. and by not finishing these "simpler" modules to a similar level, they damage their future sales/reputation.

 

IMHO, as a short term strategy, ED can stand the damage to their rep. but in the long run it will damage customer confidence/sales.

 

ED are likely aware of the issue as they have promised to "finish" the Yak-52 this year (or at least take it out of early access), only time will tell if they follow through with their promise but TBH I'm not hopeful.

i9 9900K @4.7GHz, 32GB DDR4, RTX2070 Super 8GB, 1TB NVMe, 6+4TB HD, 1+1TB SSD, MSFFB2 joystick, X52 Pro Throttle, TIR5, Win 10 Pro x64, 1920X1080

Link to post
Share on other sites
Excusing ED producing incomplete/unsupported "civilian" modules like the NS430 or Yak-52 because they aren't profitable, is self fulfilling.

 

I would love to buy a second copy of the Yak-52 to fly with my son but don't feel I should reward/encourage ED selling an incomplete "civilian" module.

 

When I bought the Yak-52 I expected it to be finished to a similar level as the TF-51D/L-39, not sold "as is", without a development plan or the resources to be completed in a reasonable (2 year) time scale.

 

As a result, when reviewing any product from ED, I now warn users not to rely on ED's promises about future features (i.e. F-16 mavericks, ground radar, etc) and to only buy modules based on their current functionality.

 

IMHO many Yak-52 modules are sold due to the reputation ED have built with quality modules like the A-10C, P-51D, etc. and by not finishing these "simpler" modules to a similar level, they damage their future sales/reputation.

 

IMHO, as a short term strategy, ED can stand the damage to their rep. but in the long run it will damage customer confidence/sales.

 

ED are likely aware of the issue as they have promised to "finish" the Yak-52 this year (or at least take it out of early access), only time will tell if they follow through with their promise but TBH I'm not hopeful.

 

I did not excuse anything, it is my subjective opinions on why there is not much development on the Yak-52. I also own other modules that are in the same boat, like the F-5E. On a positive note. There is competition in the "civilian sim" market, with a big title releasing 18th of Aug :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO many Yak-52 modules are sold due to the reputation ED have built with quality modules like the A-10C, P-51D, etc. and by not finishing these "simpler" modules to a similar level, they damage their future sales/reputation.

 

Yep, their former reputation was a key to sales. Since then, that rep has been greatly tarnished and no longer represents quality and customer service.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They said they wanted to finish this module in 2020.

 

 

More than half a year in 2020 they didn't make any progress.

 

I think I've learned enough with the Yak-52 and the Viper to consider buy any early access module.

Link to post
Share on other sites
They said they wanted to finish this module in 2020.

 

 

More than half a year in 2020 they didn't make any progress.

 

I think I've learned enough with the Yak-52 and the Viper to consider buy any early access module.

They did state by the _end_ of 2020. Not defending it being broken, but pitchforks should be saved until mid-December at the earliest.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Saved? But of course. We're not using them yet, we're just sharpening them now ;) :D

 

We're out of pitchforks, they are all being used in the F-16 threads, Two weeks without an update??!! how dare you.... :music_whistling: :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
ADF was fixed in the last month or so - probably some other stuff I forget - progress has been made.

 

Are you sure? ADF was fixed?

I didnt notice it in any changelog but maybe I miss something. Didnt try yet.

Webmaster of http://www.yoyosims.pl

Yoyosimsbanner.gif

Win 10 64, i9 9900k, RTX  3090 24Gb OC, RAM 32Gb Corsair Vengeance LED OC@3200MHz,, 3xSSD+2xSSD M.2 NVMe, Predator XB271HU res.2560x1440 27'' G-sync, Sound Blaster Z + 5.1, TiR5, [MSFS, P3Dv5, DCS, RoF, Condor2, IL-2 CoD/BoX] VR fly only: HP Reverb v2

Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you sure? ADF was fixed?

I didnt notice it in any changelog but maybe I miss something.

Yes,the ADF needle was fixed ( now the ADF audio is broken), it wasn't in the changelogs.

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=4345934#post4345934


Edited by Ramsay
Add link

i9 9900K @4.7GHz, 32GB DDR4, RTX2070 Super 8GB, 1TB NVMe, 6+4TB HD, 1+1TB SSD, MSFFB2 joystick, X52 Pro Throttle, TIR5, Win 10 Pro x64, 1920X1080

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice to hear it, thx Ramsay.

Webmaster of http://www.yoyosims.pl

Yoyosimsbanner.gif

Win 10 64, i9 9900k, RTX  3090 24Gb OC, RAM 32Gb Corsair Vengeance LED OC@3200MHz,, 3xSSD+2xSSD M.2 NVMe, Predator XB271HU res.2560x1440 27'' G-sync, Sound Blaster Z + 5.1, TiR5, [MSFS, P3Dv5, DCS, RoF, Condor2, IL-2 CoD/BoX] VR fly only: HP Reverb v2

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

My understanding of the Yak52 is that it was developed for another private client and made available to ED's user base upon permission from them. My question then has to be: Is this other client getting a better, more finished version, or are they too having issues. If they purchased it for training, it stands to reason that they know this aircraft inside out and therefore must be fully aware of these issues. It kind of baffles my mind a little.

Link to post
Share on other sites
My understanding of the Yak52 is that it was developed for another private client and made available to ED's user base upon permission from them. My question then has to be: Is this other client getting a better, more finished version, or are they too having issues. If they purchased it for training, it stands to reason that they know this aircraft inside out and therefore must be fully aware of these issues. It kind of baffles my mind a little.

Speculation

 

IIRC the original client (with a limited budget) required a clickable cockpit for training purposes, not a flyable DCS module - the flying portion of their program would likely be done in the real aircraft with the RL flight hours eventually counting towards a PPL, etc.

 

AFAIK, having created the cockpit, avionics and 3D model, ED then got permission to add the flight model, etc. necessary to sell it to the public.

 

Comment

In some respects we are lucky to get the Yak-52 in DCS as, without the private client, ED would not otherwise have developed it for DCS. It's just a shame ED haven't been able to find/justify the resources necessary to bring it to the same level as the L-39/TF-52D in a timely manner.


Edited by Ramsay

i9 9900K @4.7GHz, 32GB DDR4, RTX2070 Super 8GB, 1TB NVMe, 6+4TB HD, 1+1TB SSD, MSFFB2 joystick, X52 Pro Throttle, TIR5, Win 10 Pro x64, 1920X1080

Link to post
Share on other sites
Speculation

 

IIRC the original client (with a limited budget) required a clickable cockpit for training purposes, not a flyable DCS module - the flying portion of their program would likely be done in the real aircraft with the RL flight hours eventually counting towards a PPL, etc.

 

AFAIK, having created the cockpit, avionics and 3D model, ED then got permission to add the flight model, etc. necessary to sell it to the public.

 

Comment

In some respects we are lucky to get the Yak-52 in DCS as, without the private client, ED would not otherwise have developed it for DCS. It's just a shame ED haven't been able to find/justify the resources necessary to bring it to the same level as the L-39/TF-52D in a timely manner.

 

To be honest, I really haven't flown it all that much. Maybe a few times when it was first released. I have always seen thread after thread complaining about it's incompleteness though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

YAK-52 work is still planned, but I don't have a time frame currently, the teams are still working from home and it has had a knock on effect for some plans.

 

As soon as I know for sure I will post news in this forum section.

 

thanks

  • Like 1

smallCATPILOT.PNG.04bbece1b27ff1b2c193b174ec410fc0.PNG

Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status

Windows 10 Pro x64, NVIDIA MSI RTX 2080Ti VENTUS GP, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 32GB DDR @3000, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, HP Reverb G2

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

 

It's just a shame ED haven't been able to find/justify the resources necessary to bring it to the same level as the L-39/TF-52D in a timely manner.

 

I thought we all paid for it no? At least I did, I double-checked and that money is definitely not on my account since a couple of years... :huh:

Windows 10 - Intel i7 7700K 4.2 Ghz (no OC) - Asus Strix GTX 1080 8Gb - 16GB DDR4 (3000 MHz) - SSD 500GB + WD Black FZEX 1TB 6Gb/s

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...