Since discussion about Nevada seems to be verboten in the other threads, I though I'd open one up here. I'm here to try and speculate about what's going on with Nevada, and to make guesses as to when we might see it, not to chastise ED. But feel free to speak your mind.

All comments welcome.

So as I was saying in the September newsletter discussion, when it comes to Nevada, I've gleaned a not very optimistic prognosis from Wag's last three updates on the subject. Take a look:





Read between the lines and you'll see that those are all basically identical statements, just reworded. It looks like they've been stuck on integrating edge into DCS for the last six months, to the point where their updates contain no concrete signs of progress (which isn't to say there's been no progress, just that the updates contain no such indications). I find the brevity of these Nevada/EDGE updates, as well as their consistency to be very discouraging. I think that if we were anywhere near seeing Nevada, we'd be getting a little more than identical, vague, two line updates every three months. But I'll be happy to be proven wrong.

What do we actually know about EDGE right now? We've all seen the videos of oddball EDGE maps being used on professional simulators (Bagram, Corsica(?) etc). Do we know for a fact that EDGE is running on desktop PCs yet? Or are all the recent EDGE Black Sea screenshots coming from a supercomputer/proefession simulator setup like those Bagram and Corsica videos?

While those statement's sound very similar they are not exactly the same. I would say the first statement is about the main features like terrain and airbases being more or less complete, finishing the details, waiting for EDGE, the second statement is more of the same: Map is now more polished and waiting for EDGE to be far enough in development to implement the map into the game.
Now from the statement in the latest newsletter I take that they are actually working on the implementation of the map into DCS World and that there isn't actually much new stuff to show at this point. Of course they could probably show more screens of the Map in the map editor but I'd much rather wait until they can show the Map running in EDGE

We know that ED testers have access to the old map running in EDGE, so yes it's running on desktop PCs and there are videos on youtube that show it. For example I saw one where the the Sabre is taking off from Batumi in EDGE.

The fact that the VEAO team and Glowing Amraam have released a number of screens and videos featuring EDGE footage strongly suggests that it's running on desktop PCs.

Equally, the fact that EDGE is slated for release this year all but guarantees that it's running on desktop PCs unless ED are engaged in a monstrously huge deception.

I've also seen numerous posts from testers on the ED forums that have intimated that they've been playing alpha builds of EDGE for several months.

In terms of an ETA for Nevada, who knows. If we're getting DCS 2.0 and EDGE by the turn of the year, I'd expect to see Nevada either very late this year or early next, but I have nothing solid to base that on.

My issue about Nevada is how ED handled it. When it was released with the beta, they then pulled it because it was buggy if I remember right. I think the better option would have been to patch it as best they could and we would have been able to fly it for a couple years.

I understand that they were creating a new engine with Edge…but the old engine has been good enough for them to continue to release modules for…and fly around the Crimea for 3 years when Nevada was supposed to be released. It just seems Nevada wouldn't be the most difficult terrain to handle…not much flora/fauna or exotic trees….mostly sand rocks and a mountain range. If they were doing Vietnam or similar, then that would probably be a more difficult task and I could understand better…but we're talking about a friggin desert wasteland here! lol


Thoughts?

I see two major categories of progress - The actual modeling of the Nevada map, and the incorporation of the Nevada map (via EDGE) into DCS.

Based on Pizzicato's comments, it would certainly seem that EDGE is working in DCSW on desktop machines, meaning the hangup is in getting Nevada work in EDGE/DCSW. So I'll amend my original stance and say that while the first two posts from Wags are essentially identical, the "EDGE incorporated into DCS" part seems to be done, yet Nevada still needs to be incorporated into EDGE/DCSW. Not quite as bleak an outlook as I orginally had, but still a lot of room for uncertainty. And again, the vagueness, brevity and and rarity of these updates is very discouraging, givne how huge the new terrain is going to be for DCSW. I think the new terrain will be the biggest leap forward for DCSW yet, and I'm not really feeling the hype (or much optimism) from ED on that front. Again, I'll be happy to be proved wrong.



Hell, even if they didn't patch it, and just left it as it was with the clear disclaimer that this was an incomplete module and that a brand new replacement was in the works. That would still have been better than providing Nevada as advertized, then taking it away. The tired terrain is a common complaint about DCSW (and is the reason I don't really play DCSW very often anymore). Having an incomplete map as an alternative could only have dulled that sentiment by giving players a change of scenery (albeit an incomplete one). And no, sorry, I don't accept the rationale that players could work around this by pulling Nevada from their Beta install and copy/pasting it into DCSW. ED clearly meant to take the old Nevada map away, hence it disappeared when you updated. If they intended for you to have it, it would be there without you haveing to slip it in the back door.

I left the ED Testers team back in late spring and we were testing the early stages of EDGE back then. NDA so I can't speak to any further details.

The problem with just including the beta map is DCS World has evolved a lot since then. You can't even communicate between aircraft and tankers or AWACS now if flying the beta Nevada in DCS World.

I don't read too much into this at all. (Extremely) limited communication is pretty much par for the course with ED.

It could be a psychological byproduct of their secretive military contracts. It could be a cultural byproduct of the fact that they're Russian. It could be that they're sick of dealing with the outpourings of negativity from some quarters that accompanies any update or announcement. It could be that they're just really, really terrible at marketing and PR. Who knows.

What I do know is that this kind of big, bold "roadmap" announcement is very unusual. That tells me that they're feeling confident about their promises. That seems doubly true given the short (end of the year) timelines for most of the features and modules in the newsletter.




I don't agree with this for two reasons:

1. ED are going to have professional pride. I don't see them leaving a massive and obviously half-finished chunk of badness in the game for months or even years. It's just not in their best interests and it harms the perception of the product. Pulling the map brings its own perception issues, of course, but it's a question of the lesser of two evils.

2. Even if they caveated the presence of a half-finished map, they'd still have to deal with an endless stream of new players turning up on the forums to complain about the crapness of the Nevada map.

What I suspect happened was that ED realised too late how much effort it was going to take to get a half-finished third-party mod to a shippable standard. At some point during that process, they decided that they needed to build a better graphics engine. There was no point spending large amounts of time and money on a map that would become redundant once the graphics engine shipped, so they shelved it.

The problem, of course, relates to how long it's taken to build an entire new engine. Maybe that surprised them. Maybe they had to move resources into their military contracts. Again - who knows.

Regardless, my assumptions seem reasonable to me.

My overall take, though, is that things are about to happen. The unusual levels of communication in the newsletter and the specificity about dates suggests that the big DCS 2.0 shift is about to happen and that, in turn, is going to open the gates a wide range of new content for the sim.

I'm positive, upbeat and excited.

Let's see what happens next.

Ok, I'll buy that. I guess I hadn't considered the possible PR cost of having a half-baked Nevada residing in everyone's DCS folder for years.

But I'm not here to harp on that. I'm looking for educated guesses as to when. And I guess the first page of this thread has left me somewhat more optimistic than when I created this thread.

[edit - and all it took was some mature, rational discussion]

Well personally I think we'll see it in say about....... wait for it........



Seriously though I don't mind the wait I'm glad they're taking their time to do it right and I love that we have a developer that's investing heavily into modern simulation products even if they take forever with some stuff.

My honest answer is that I'm really not sure and don't want to make a guess of it arriving some time this year and then be disappointed. For me, and as painful as it can be - it arrives when it arrives!

For a company that has a well used motto of 'Everything is subject to change' I've got to the point where it's hard to believe the statements they make these days and I think that has also come around from the changes in direction and what appears to be a real lack of understanding in their initial target of fully integrated modules on top of the engine and what appears to be a lack of understanding in the size of many of the work packages hence the delays.

As for the 3 statements which Chris referred to in the first post, I would also agree that there doesn't appear to be much progress at all. I just hope that it isn't an 'update' for update sake. Many people may this as nothing but negativity, but it only stems from the disappointment in waiting so long whilst everything remains in a beta or unreleasable stage when DCS and the platform modules are head and shoulders above any competing product.

I've elevated my outlook from pessimistic to cautiously optimistic. Derby may be right in his interpretation that the latest tidbit about Nevada could be a sign of progress over the previous two updates. But then again, it could still be read as a re-wording of the last two updates. So I'm not getting my hopes up too much.

The reason I care so much is because the tired old black sea map has pretty much made the game unplayable for me. Even with the new modules coming out, I still can't get past the old terrain. The novelty of new aircraft is no longer enough to outweigh the staleness of the overall game experience. The EDGE version of the Black Sea map will be nice, but I imagine the novelty of the superficial graphics improvements will quickly fade leaving us again with the same old terrain.

So I'm looking forward to a new terrain coming out because that's what will get me back into DCS. And it's not just about the change of scenery for me. I'm a CA fan, and CA is basically useless in a low-res terrain mesh where the poly faces are all like a kilometer wide, leaving you no terrain to use for maneuvering. Right now, playing CA is like fighting on a series of gigantic parking lots. No hull downs, no concealed approaches. Nevada will be a huge game changer for CA.

I've done my share of complaining and jokes about the release of NTTR. I'm at a point now where I don't care if it ever comes out. Haven't touched DCSW in months. Not interested in any of the recently released modules, or any of the 3rd party ones in development. Last one I bought was the Mi-8. As far as the DCS F/A-18 goes, that's too far down the road for me to get excited about. When NTTR and EDGE come out I will check them out,

That's pretty much where I'm at too, except I bought the F-86, flew it a couple of times over two days, then stopped playing DCSW again. That's why I'm impatiently awaiting NTTR.

I thought I'd throw in the entire list of NTTR screens in chronological order, just to add some colour to the thread (let me know if I missed any):

12 Sept 2013






















8 Oct 2013






9 Oct 2013






11 Oct 2013





11 Nov 2013




22 Nov 2013




26 Nov 2013






11 Jan 2014











6 Mar 2014




17 Mar 2014


4 Sept 2014

Having never seen these before, I'm amazed they spent that much effort re-creating the Vegas strip. Are they going to keep up with new hotels as they're added? Are they destructable? Dropping a GBU onto the Ferrari dealership at the Wynn would be worth the price of the map right there.

Sorry Steve... training accident.

Of course, now we know why the map is delayed... can't release it without the High Roller. Too big a landmark.

Not sure how destructible the new Nevada map will be. But I know for sure that the buildings on the strip in the old Nevada map were not...

I'm at the same stage with the MiG-21 now to be honest. Over half a year ago it was "definitely going to be released this time". Now we're sitting here again, with claims that "there's definitely a release date being announced in the first days of September", but nothing yet and questions are rather blatantly ignored. You just can't replicate that near release hype an infinite number of times, and I fell they lost me at this one. And adding to that, preview copies have been out right, left and center for what, a month now? Most of them I understand, but why a few, like a YT channel with a measly 200 subscribers ever qualified for one is beyond me. Apart from the distrust caused by a number of "definitely close to release" claims turning into dust, seeing so incredibly much on YouTube about it makes me feel there won't be much fun for me learning it. DCS is solely a study sim, beyond learning how to fly and operate aircraft there's maybe 15% enjoyment at most. Now, how fun will I have when there are YT series's that seem to cover every, single, feature before it's even released?

And when this many release dates are blown, just that is enough. I bought the Mi-8, expecting zero enjoyment or even use of it to support BST. It turned out to be way more fun than anticipated though. But here's a module I was actually looking very much forward to, and I'm slipping on the proverbial fence towards not buying it. Not for enjoyment, and definitely not even for support when it comes with that many let downs. Seriously, it's just messed up that it's come to that.

/rant mode off

Same here. Hopefully, NTTR map is out soon.

While I appreciate the passion of expressing your opinions and being heard, can we please keep the comments reserved for thread specific topics? I'm tired of seeing so many threads locked in such a short time because people forget how to discuss and interact and resort to childish stacks and slander because their ego's can't handle a difference of opinions.

Stay focused and take personal attacks in private messaging...please

I'm willing to bet when it's eventually out you'll be blasting around the skies at Mach 2 in it

Nate