This leads me to speculate that perhaps with 1.5 there was new issues that were so massive it caused all 3rd party teams to delay their things, which shows in different degrees, with veao dropping 2 seats on hawk, cc101 getting delayed again, M2000c having very weird wording on their product page (end of december for pre-orders), and LN completely going silent on "2 modules this year!".

Interesting are the reactions from all teams, The cc101 and hawk teams basically went "help the walls are closing in" and LN just elegantly does not say anything. Obviously no team can openly say what the issue is because NDA but it looks like a pattern with all teams having sudden delays just after 1.5 hits.

You sure do suspect stuff about delays a lot. Go play the game, it's less stressful

Technically it's still in Beta; so maybe they're waiting until official release...whenever that will be

A lot of studios have "gone dark" not only because of NDAs, but player's attitudes and the subsequent decision that players attitudes have hindered production and so on on the various forums. They don't need our input and if they desired to do sso then they would ask for it. True 1.5 may change things, but seriously posting speculative posts and hoping for a studio to respond is a waste of time. As mentioned above play the sim, and just worry about the here and now.

And as a case in point one reason I cancelled the Super Hornet project was because:

- One notable idiot moderator who doesn't know his job by any stretch.
- Constant legal threats on lame issues, I mean seriously what the #%&*$# Eagle Dynamics?
- And players, mainly idiotic players telling me #%&*$# I already knew.

And were I to restart it I sure as #%&*$# wouldn't come to the communities for news and advice.

I think you have nothing better to do that post conspiracy theory threads all of a sudden.

I think thats because you cant find anything to realistically complain about.

love how a user reads a few lines and speculates, while over looking pbvious things.

had a bad day at the office Skate ?

I bet a small bit of forum activity overestimates its impact. "Player attitudes" do not hinder production. Emotional disposition is one thing but programming a software product is a get up, coffee, work job and most teams have a community liaison which allows the production side to keep focused. Any competent developer is going to have no problem with the overall positive and supportive community. You don't even want to know what a low quality community looks like.

It is funny to see a developer complain about "users telling me stuff I knew." I remember ED (or rather forum mods which are not the same) got mad at me because I would point out bugs but they said they knew about them on internal SECRET UNPUBLISHED issue tracker. It seems so weird to get upset about people having independent thoughts and discoveries when it is a deliberate decision to keep users uniformed. I feel no regret for all the bugs I point out that I discovered on my own and again a reminder 12+ mo later when they are not fixed. You have to get used to the idea that there is no "community" with one brain. If you tell Billy you can't get mad at Bob for not knowing. People are individuals with an air gap between their brain. The best you can do is create an informed blob of users that can help the rest. I've seen this work very well. It keeps the FAQ noob questions controlled on autopilot.

Look, bear in mind that maybe it's not a total excuse, but it's also from seeing how people interact, and interact with the public as a whole. So also bear in mind that I've been doing modding for about 15, 16 years now for various platforms:

Arma 3
Arma (very little)
Arma 2 (very little, though I just play the game now)
Flanker 2.51
LOMAC
DCS
VBS1
Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 1 and 2
Strike Fighters 2
FSX

So if I have a negative attitude of the majority of players, it's because I've dealt with, and deal with a lot of players like straycat who believe they're somehow entitled to dictate what me, or a studio does. Whearas you yeah I know you're a sane individual who makes very informed, and logical comments. But you're just a player, not a developer, modder, or related "title" to describe what you do. SO I hear and see all the BS from a lot of gamers, so yes do you make valid points? Of course. But that's from a player's not somebody who maintains communication with people in order to pitch their product.

Become a modder, become relatively successful, and then see where your opinion lies and how you feel at the end of the day about your average player, who doesn't do the work. And also doesn't get beat down by requirements, the need to provide a reliable product, and so on. Listen to them complain about inane things, think that they're experts in something you've already and relatively researched, and may have some other knowledge that they don't. OH and have them tell you how to run your project, as they're not doing the work you are. Or offer their "way of doing things" and you'll see how frustrated you get having to waste valuable time in reading it. Sure there are valid complaints and I fix them but more often not 95% of the stuff I deal with is utter BS.

So excuse me while I voice an honest feeling that most developers feel about they're customers. The old adage "The Customer is Always Right" is in fact said by those who don't do the work.

Negative ghost rider, the pattern is full.

good.

Work, DCS and Hockey are all that keep me sane, hahaha

my own therapy is making skins - I am most fortunate for that.

I understand the loud "you should fire X" or "but you promised the product by Christmas" are bordering limits of the reasonable involvement of the customer but...

How much of that is there really? Users are mostly energy and not too much knowledge. If you go to a real "zoo" like a modern semi-casual game forum you get so much worse it's not funny.

The enemy of noise is signal. "I think the dev has abandoned us and flown to Cuba" is make believe but the mind abhors a vacuum. People assume all sorts of funny things if:

1. Lots of NDA and secrecy.
2. Lack of info.
3. Transparent saving face / not admitting fault

Then again Star Citizen practically runs a 24/7 TV studio showing exactly what they are doing in an open and honest way and there is a large sector of people that think the development is super slow. Maybe you can't win that one.

Of course the old F-15 mechanic that knows everything is rare. People have more opinions than facts but at least it's enthusiasm. It's hipocritical to want 10,000 customers with 10,000 separate bank accounts but not want to answer questions as if they are 10,000 individuals. Customers aren't a hive mind and just because the question is asked 100 times that day, the 100th person deserves the same treatment as the first. Wanting another result requires effort into some sort of informational scheme.

I've developed/modded/coded and yes people are demanding and underestimate the work but you just have to be honest. I think it is two-faced to not be honest about limitations but get upset when people have imaginations that the scope is unlimited. People want everything and perfect and yesterday. If you don't come out and say "I realize the phases of the moon aren't right in this fishing game but that's just beyond our desires" then that's fine. But DCS development rarely does that. It feels like they will never admit their genius is finite and yet act persecuted that unlimited genius is expected. I don't sympathize.

I've also been a moderator for the Ubi Soft forums back in the day (2001ish I believe, it's been a minute) too (Flanker562) so it's not a "simple issue" and nothing new for Eagle Dynamics, which I don't think you realize. Remember I've been associated with the company for about over little over a decade (not now of course) but realize this:

- Everybody has access to the internet, and therefore become "Experts" on all manner of flight regimes, and lo and behold, expect classified information to be released as well, or goes to WikiLeaks and expects ED or any company for it to be exact, when really, there are levels of classification that prevents it to be 100% modeled. For example, the Super Hornet project, ED can't issue a License Agreement regardless of developer because to be honest, foreign nationals are not allowed to access that information (Australia of course isn't because they use it) and foreign nationals do work for ED, or any flight simulation company, it's just how things are now. So VRS was allowed to but again it's probably nerfed as needed in order for it to be portrayed at least as best as possible.

So I see your join date as of 2009, and the big thing is that even back then we got tired of "please make it realistic" when there are legitimate hurdles that a flight simulation company can't always cross. So back then it was annoying, and still is annoying so you're not on track man. I'm sorry, you can #%&*$#, moan and complain about it but the fact of the matter is that if they don't want to model accurately because of military restrictions then that's it man. Seriously the opinion isn't going to change no matter how many times you bring it up. In some cases they may relent, but overall No means NO man, deal with it.

Simply put man the mantra is not going to change. Yes I have a negative opinion of how ED handles some things, got it. But drop the issue man, even I'm tired of hearing complaints about it.

But this isn't Star Citizen, and this is DCS. They're not mutually exclusive and not the same. Star Citizen gets away with it because it's a SPACE simulation, not like DCS, where you can model real world instruments correctly of real world aircraft. So again, developers have seen how players act, and decided that it would be better if they not openly discuss development. I don't understand how such a simple concept is hard to accept. And pretty much shows the community is afraid to admit that they were wrong too.

I can assure you...there are just as many people tired of someone telling members not to talk about something because they don't agree with it.

I'm not sure at what point flight sim developers were elevated to the point of Gods that are beyond reproach, criticism, or speculation...but they offer a non-refundable product for money...so they are subjected to the same scrutiny that anyone else that sells a retail product is.

I would understand your position more if straycat's post was a about a mod that was worked on for free...but that's not the case. I have used and enjoyed free mods made by others forever...and I have not once complained about anything because I didn't pay anything for them.

That sucks if what you describe is happening to you when you're creating something for free...but straycat wasn't talking about a free mod.

Bottom line: This is a discussion forum and folks are free to speculate and have opinions as long as they follow the rules.

Rog, but after so long it just gets to you, fair enough.

I totally understand that. You volunteer your time to give the community a lot of free content...it makes me a little pissed to hear that you go through what you stated when you are providing these things for free. People that #%&*$#, moan, badger or complain to someone that is providing content for them at no cost...yeah...I have an issue with that.

Since straycat was talking about ED and their 3rd party devs...it's a different situation.

I put the complainers on Ignore. Problem solved. Rarely, rarely do I Show Post. Not worth it. Life is good. Fly it, and stop speculating.

WC

I understand and you're obviously right. But I think overall though, that for example if I got along with ED again, and was granted a License Agreement for a Sopwith Camel. SO then now I can charge for the product, and as a developer, texture artist and Lead, will ensure that when a player hops in virtually, he or she will get the money's worth.

But I think overall thuogh, that while the buyer can determine that they don't feel like buying it because it's "not their standard" and so on, is natural. I like the L-39 so had no problem buying it, as Good or Bad, ED made a good little jet, and for the most part feel it was worth it. I'm having some fun doing some skins and so on.

But even then? I still draw the line at consumers "Feeling the need" to dictate certain things, or feel they have overall say in my project, or product. Sure to some degree I have to listen to the consumers, but again, while I have done most of my work for free, a very small part I actually got paid for my work given I did provide my services to their specification. So while i understand me as a consumer can decide whether or not I should buy it, is my right. But even then, if I were to do a paid product I'd still not post news as much as I do my freeware stuff, because while I value the money (one reason I'm selling a product of course) but that doesn't give a player the right, or position to dictate how I proceed with my product. Sure it's not "right", but from a business standpoint and VEAO came to the conclusion (to which I agree with) that player's requests, and so on had become detrimental to their focus. They were honest with their news, but given how players ineracted they reasonably felt that it was better to Do as they wish. Regardless of paid or unpaid, a product doesn't get started by you or me. It's people investing time and money, resources into a paid or unpaid product, and if the customers Feel the Need to Dicatate and the mod team has it's own agenda and it's not jiving, then things get to where they are.

So maybe I did get a little off track, the overall issue is that for some people like me, and some Development teams, that the Customer doesn't have a say in their process. And frankly I believe straycat while he's allowed to post whatever he feels like, assumes that his opinion matters and in a sense dictating what they should do. And the reality has become to an extent that development teams have stopped caring what players want, because I know quite a few of them to a degree, are honest workers and not out to deliver a bad product. But suggesting how to do things has become a player trend, not only for DCS, but for Arma 3 example. I've seen plenty of players start dictating what to do, and what not to do. I'm sorry, I don't see that as a Right that a player has in any sense.

Also you also can't please everybody. You don't want to spend money on a product that's "not to your standard" the tools are available, so if they can do better, then they should.

As a developer, you are not obligated to share anything with the community. If you do share stuff with the community, expect to get criticism. It's really that simple. VEAO couldn't handle the criticism, so they stopped sharing screenshots. It's their prerogative.