Really? show me where.

(unnecessary, inflammatory and stupid comment deleted by me) I was trying to have a decent conversation but I see that's not possible. I made a mistake with the P-40 obviously but everything else I said was valid. If you can't learn to have a decent conversation with other people then you need to just learn to refrain from posting anything at all until you can learn to do that.

Sensitive soul arent you. I suggested you do some research, you call me a moron and you accuse me of being insulting? Really?

Im sorry. I get irritated by the continual use if siths post. Its full of lies and excuses that are contrary to what is written on the kickstarter page. I apologize. Sorry Striker

I shouldn't have called you or anyone a moron or reacted to anything anyone has said in the past. I'll try to keep it civil from here on out.

I think that the thing is I really don't care if anyone likes DCS or hates it. It's just a sim. I like it and I know that ED has a lot of problems but it's still a great sim. The forums over there have become really toxic or at least they were because of the way it was moderated. I came over here because of that. I'm just trying to provide any information I have that can help. So I apologize as well for lashing out the way I did.

I think that something must have happened because I think that they've been trying to change that but only time will tell. I have noticed a slight change of tone in the moderation over there lately. It's very subtle but at least it's a little better. A little less heavy handiness. I honestly don't think it's going to help much though. The numbers on the forums have dropped so drastically that it's going to take years to claw back anything respectable in my opinion. I used to see thousands of participants and now only 30-40. That translates "INTO SALES", or at least it does help. So I think that ED has kind of realized that it's been somewhat of a disaster to have it so problematic.

Anyhow, I should have looked up the P-40 thing so that's inexcusable, but what I was trying to say is that ED is probably going to have to step in and do something about it. The P-40 was a very prominent aircraft in the beginning of WWII and should be included in the picture. Also, one of our main squadrons, the 75th VFS Tiger Sharks is based on the original 23rd fighter wing which included the P-40. So I have a personal interest in seeing it developed. Whatever happens to VEAO, it should end up being part of the stable.

ED have no obligation to step in with the P40. VEAO will have to issue refunds if their contract for the P40 is not renewed. This is the point i'm trying to make. ED had an obligation to continue the development of the ww2 kickstarter because they were part of the joint venture with RRG dispite what sith says. It is written for all to see on the kickstarter page.
VEAO have access to some interesting aircraft unfortunately i, and this is my opinion, believe they lack the skillset to accomplish what they claim. The P40 will have to wait until the hawk is finished and then we will see if VEAO will remain dedecated in continuing developing for DCS after their sales of the hawk and their reputation have taken a beating.

Yes, I'm sure you are quite correct on all of this. I should have read that more carefully and I wasn't aware of that difference.

My gut feeling is that things are not going well for them right now. I honestly don't see them finishing the Hawk or the P-40 for that matter at least not any time soon.

I applaud both of you for the quick growing up you just did! Nice to see that, truly.

The thing is, we like DCS. I personally liked DCS. Note the past tense. They have taken the sim in a very wrong direction and we (the so-called anti-ED crowd) are simply calling out the mistakes and BS as we go along. I've said it time and time again... given the correct audience, DCS A10C and DCS BS2 are great modules and well worth the money. However, it's very frustrating to see so much potential wasted on side-projects, poor planning, and even poorer excuses. People who enjoy DCS are connected to it emotionally, but so are the people who enjoyed (note past tense) DCS so it is natural that we can get emotional in our arguments and discussions. Nothing wrong with that at all. Going personal, however, is uncalled for.


"Should" being a keyword here. Even if ED does step in, where does it go on the priority ladder? With everything else on ED's plate, any new addition will push any further projects back by 5-10 years.

Just to step in with my 2 cents....and I won't go over my thoughts on the whole circus that is now ED as most people are more than aware......

I just can't believe that ED and VAEO are having this out in public but Sith has determined that a running commentary on 3 different websites is a good way of handling it. Not only are the companies involved looking very amateurish, Sith is pulling them further into the mire in his attempts to keep EDs name untarnished.

The car crash has already happened, bodies are getting publicly dragged onto a pedestal now with a viewing gallery pencilled in for the near future too. Bonkers - it will be televised in a courtroom next, with Judge Judy on one side backing up the yanks and that bell-end Judge Rinder on the other side making smutty innuendo for the Brits! Can't wait.

Well, we need entertainment somehow....

On the ED forums it was stated that they plan on finishing the Hawk and the P-40, so we shall see.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3179314&postcount=70

Although his heart is in the right place what exactly is this guy saying?
Abburo post #67
https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3179314#post3179314
Throw more money at the problem? He's actually advocating throwing more fuel on the fire? That's exactly what DCS needs right now, more pi$$ed of customers.
What ED need to do is stop the ridiculous early access/beta shambles and only put finished modules in their store. All of EDs problems stem from the fact that the whole mess is a work in progress the foundations are still a work in progress everything is a work in progress. They need your hard earned money to finish their work in progress and they're hoping enough folk are willing to part with their hard earned money or it all fails. Unfortunately the guys doing the work are incompetent, if that sounds to harsh to some you just have to look at the time its taken and is still taking to get to 2.5. There is no solid business plan from ED or their 3rd parties, not one that I can see, in hoping enough folk buy early access to continue. Especially in a niche market, especially in a niche market where ones reputation for incompetence, EDs and their 3rd parties, is growing. It's beyond irresponsible, no matter how heart felt the plea, to ask the community for more money.

I've sat back and read through several forums/sites worth of posts and replies on this and the DCS World in general. Some are backing but many are pretty ticked.

IMO, ED is seeing their product/rep is in trouble. The 2.1 release was another disaster. They knowingly released a product visually different than what was shown to the public. And it made flying in certain atmospheric conditions, impossible. All of this leads to a reputation problem. Compounded by a Community Manager that lurks on other forums and bans people when they speak out and give the truth.
People complain and point out the lack of 2.1 servers in comparison to 1.5 and use it as a gauge. Thats inaccurate, as 1.5 is free and 2.1 is not. Despite NTTR being sterile and boring to some (I love it), it costs money and the majority of the sim community are cheap a$$es that will shell out $60 for a plane/helo but not a proper place to fly it.

Now the VEAO thing. Call it a contractual issue, but the fact is they failed to meet obligations and were finally called on it. I just wish ED could have the same done on them. But the instant gratification crowd in this community will continue to give their money away for alpha releases. Simply put, VEAO are in over their heads. They used old code and it finally caught up to them. As I'm seeing it, they arent interested in DCS at all, but in the potential of gov contracts. Dividing the company into two entities says enough. But the Hawk, if it is ever completed, needs to be incredible. Otherwise their rep is done. If SkateZilla can build a Super Hornet from scratch on spare time, then dedicated programmers/artists should be able to knock it out quickly if proper attention was being given. But it is not.

Aviodev is not far behind and needs to use VEAO's predicament as a wake up call.

The E3 F/A-18 preview was, IMO, a slap to the face. They knowingly hyped up the community for a release announcement but did not delivery much of anything. Something that is long overdue, continues to be out of reach for the unforeseeable future. Honesty, is not part of EDs policy until backed into a corner. Even then, they'll deflect as much as they can.

I'm still a supporter of DCS World. I enjoy it, but feel its so closed off to proper customer input, it will always be the sim that could have been.

^^^^^^ Exactly......

and the post above from 'ST0RM'

I'm about to go and buy a Lamborghini Huracan, there is absolutely no way I can afford it, but....I might just give 'Abburo' a call from the DCS Message Board and see if he can get a collection started!

I do agree with just about everything your saying Storm. All of the delays, problems and excuses have been a huge slap in the community face. We all need them to start getting it in gear and get these releases finished and working properly and that includes 2.5 and the new Caucuses and Normandy maps. Every day they delay just makes it worse for all of us. I do think that the E3 was a positive thing though. Our group has been waiting for over 3 years now on the Hornet and we're finally starting to see a tiny sliver of light at the end of the tunnel or at least that's what it feels like. Hopefully my gut feeling is not too far off.

Or maybe the majority of the sim community have wisened up to ED's tactics? Also, Nevada isn't really a "proper place to fly" anything unless what you're flying is training missions in Red Flag or some such.


True. Weren't they saying they'll give a release date on the Hornet once Normandy is out? How long ago was Normandy released now?


+1



I would've liked to say he was probably a new member, but he's not... shows he's joined in 2013... so maybe he's just one of those who simply refuse to see the whole picture and believe that their optimism will help win the day.



Over 3 years? How about more like 5? Regardless, Wags wasn't even talking about a release date, so I'm thinking more likely late 2018. We'll see the A-G radar in next year's Thrustmaster E3 booth.

I simply dont see that. Most simmers are kids or pretty close. This is evident in the public servers where they SPAMRAAM everything in sight and/or buzz the runway at full blower. They'll buy anything new and shiny.
The hardcore group is rather small and stays within their own circles. They specifically fly one or two types and are smarter with their purchases.

As for Nevada and your impression of it being a training grounds only. What is the difference between it and the Caucasus map? Or Normandy? Its another place to fly. None of them are populated with AI units or targets. And without, they all are sterile until they get life.

The same will be for Hormuz in 2020. Just an empty map until the AI gets dropped in.

Totally wrong in one important aspect regarding how many 1.5 Vs 2.1 servers online

If you want to run a 2.1 "dedicated" (meaning not running as a client and hosting) server you have to buy a copy of NTTR

Pretty much this is the reason why there are not as many 2.1 servers, no other game / sim asks you to pay out for content if you want to host a server
eg Arma3 , you do NOT have to pay to host a server , the current situation is of ED making, them being money grabbing a$$holes IMO

I run a 1.5.6 server 24/7 open to all, to allow pilots to train on (and its pretty popular) , but I will not host a 2.1 server because I will not pay for NTTR twice , once was more than enough