Maybe we should have a PWEC section for DCS?

I am not defending anyone.

I am merely stating the fact that it's a choice that people can make and I elect to make choice A. I am certainly not going to berate people for making choice B, or C for that matter. Each to their own. I do however get irritated when people tell me what choice I should be making. WTF is that all about? Can I not make the choice myself? And when I have made my choice, I expect people to respect said choice, even though they vehemently disagree with said choice. It's called common decency. I sure would and do do so, respect other's choices, that is.

Oh yes, I wish I did have the time to support other combat flight sims. Problem is that I do not. I chose DCS and am sticking with it until I get bored of it. Who knows what will happen thereafter. It's like cars: I only drove Land/Range Rovers before and now drive Jeeps. I am not interested in other makes whatsoever even though they might drive better.

Why?

My choice.

Viper, the issue people have is that they do not trust ED nor their 3P's to actually finish the modules (which by all means is a grey zone) due to already have had the income and the last few miles is nothing but cost reducing the profit they already made.
As such what is allowing them to contiue doing half-assed work is the customer base actually buying the future promises that more and more looks like ending up as promises only.

Have a look at a module called Hawk, you can find it as ED forums and if needed I can hand you a link for it.

I can't say those seeing more and more incomplete modules are too wrong so I can see why they dislike other folks choosing A option (like you) not waiting for the B or C option.

Well, the point now is "how dare we tell him which choice he should make?"

It's been explained to him how his choice promotes/encourages/supports ED's current broken production practices and his comeback was that he doesn't care, US$50 is not a big deal for him, he feels he gets his money's worth, etc. which was totally not the point people were making. Sure, he's free to make his own choices. Sure, US$50 is not that big of a deal. Sure, he feels like he's getting his money's worth (he's happy with 60% of a module, he's not bothered that he paid for a full module but got only 60%, he can't be bothered to imagine what it would be like to pay for a full module and enjoy 100% of that module). But nobody was arguing about choices, money, or value.

He's been told how his choice is promoting ED's broken practices and his response is basically, he doesn't care, he's happy with it, suxx to be you. It's right there alongside other Pro-ED arguments such as:
1. Why are you even posting here?
2. If you hate ED so much, go play something else!
3. If we don't support ED, they'll go bankrupt and there'll be nothing else for us to play, so shut up and be thankful that they're doing us a favor.
4. Go fk yourself!

Stellar example of an ED fanboy customer mindset.

depending on the country were you live in - it is not US$50 but the price you buy the dollar in the local currency plus taxes and credit card fees , where I live that would be close to US$65.

Yeah I'm aware of the Hawk and personally would have requested a refund had I pre-purchased but I am rendering my opinion on ED/Belsimtek specifically here as it relates to the Hornet and not third-parties. Apart from the Mig-21 (which was as I recall, a full release?), I have had no desire to pre/purchase any modules from any third-parties, again, choice, but that's off-topic.




I understand and respect that completely: I however am willing to give ED/Belsimtek the benefit of the doubt (iro third-parties, see above), reserving judgement until the end. I am not prepared to judge them by their previous conduct insofar as it relates to their own work and even if I had to, to be honest I have very little complaints about the A-10C, BS2 and Flaming Cliffs, certainly none that taint my enjoyment of the modules. I am after all still around after all these years (11 and counting). And no, being mad at ED for the conduct of their contracted independant third-parties unfortunately does not impute liability on ED themselves by any stretch of the imagination so anyone relying on that argument is, with respect, short-sighted. Yes, the goodwill of ED will obviously be affected by the conduct of the third-parties. ED has however obviously got contractual recourse thereto. How they wish to deal with that is up to them and the subject of another discussion in it's entirety.

Is this naive of me?

If thousands of dollars were at stake, a more comprehensive risk-assessment might have been obligatory.

For a matter of $65 on the basis of 11 years entertainment I have already been afforded by ED?

As far as I am concerned, no.

I think I might have the solution to satisfy incomplete-product-byuers and keep the incentive for ED/3rd party to actually deliver:

- Right now you pay full price or a discounted price for EA. If they don't finish the stuff, you already paid for it.

- How about, they split the product in parts, and people pay for each iteration as it becomes available?
F-18 EA will have a limited A-A radar, limited weapons etc. I'd be happy to pay $10 for it, and pay another $10 when they release the TWS mode, and another $10 for extra weapons etc. All these parts should add up to he $50 or $60 final price.
They release the A-G radar in 5 years? Well, I only paid $10 and the plane flies, so I can't complain. If they want the rest of the money they have to deliver what they promised.

That's actually similar to how most industries work like. You make a down-payment of X%, when you get the product you pay the rest.
In my industry, the client pays 30% when signing a contract for industrial equipment, another 50% at delivery, and 20% at start-up and commissioning. I think something like this would be fair to everyone.

good for you

I feel the same way about flight sims - and have felt like that for close to 30 years.

The best thing you can do:

1. Don't buy anything from ED. You have this covered.
2. Donate to the Benchmark Sim guys. If you already have, donate more.
3. Purchase whatever flight sim you think you will enjoy.

ED will get better, they may get worse, or they may continue delivering on the same level. I don't see why you should care. Put the money where you think it is well spent and prompts good flight sim development practices. As for anyone else? Who cares.

That is the mindset I have taken:

Module looks interesting? Is it almost fully complete? Will I actually use it? I will buy it at full price. I haven't seen one of those is a very long time.

Does it look semi interesting? Will I get 10 hours out of it? Is it mostly finished? Maybe I'll buy it at a reduced price.

Is the module not interesting to me? Is it fully finished and full of great quality? I won't buy it.

Same reason I have not bought BoS. Outside of flying around in the DCS P-51 I can't stand the combat. I could not get into IL-2 1946 or CLoD. So the chances of me buying anything WWII related is very thin at this point. I simply won't buy something of little to no interest regardless of the quality. There is only one developer who makes products I have an interest in and provides a flexible enough mission editor. And I can't imagine the $30-60 I spend every year and a half is keeping them afloat.

Does this make me a fanboy? Fine. Am I supporting a horrible flight sim developer due to my purchasing habits? Fine. You and I both support dozens of worse organizations in our day to day life than any flight sim developer. Therefore I personally do not put much value on that point. Feel free to disagree with me.

The day a flight sim comes out that has superb quality, content I really want to purchase I will be ready to purchase it.

That thing where you have advanced lookdown radar by flying inverted?
Yeah, that's a full release.

Very interesting how/where you started that quote there. Let me fix that for you:


There. Looks more like a proper quote reference and less likely to be interpreted as quote mining.



Yep. My last purchase was DCS BS2, BMS doesn't accept donations so I donate to the community instead and even the DCS community greatly benefited from one of my actions, and I do support developers (not just flight sims) who do take their jobs and roles seriously. Still doesn't mean I can't look at or talk about ED in a critical manner.



Why do you care that I care? Why are we even discussing FEELINGS?? These have no bearing or substance at all. It doesn't matter if I FEEL like ED is doing well if the evidence shows they aren't. It doesn't matter if I FEEL like ED is doing badly if the evidence shows they are. Missing their own deadlines for the Hornet, now publicly announcing that the initial release would be greatly stunted, having the catchphrase of "everything is subject to change", and not even giving a roadmap of their development timelines.... it doesn't matter how I FEEL about ED, but those are the FACTS.

But let me give you a little insight: Why do I care? Because I am a fan of COMBAT flight simulation. I am a fanboy. Just not a fanboi.



Emphasis mine. Strawman argument. I wasn't talking about any of those at all when I called you a fanboi. So that there is no confusion, let me point out where and why I called you a fanboi:





Just as I've asked you not to put words in my mouth, please do not associate me with any groups or organizations without evidence. Thanks!



Nice, and so will I. However, this has absolutely no bearing on our discussion here thus far. You're starting to pull a David_OC here, talking about the future and how great it is.... and there's no way I'm going to dispute how great the future will be. However, let's get back to reality and live in today.

And you thought my screenshot thread was funny??

I read about that exploit.

Also read that it's fixed.

Job well done, the fix, that is.

Trying to avoid continuing from earlier, but you did plenty of the parts in red. But we will likely not see eye to eye on that and it is not really an issue. Going back to my very first response to you, I suppose I could have phrased it better. I think your tone has become overly negative (not to be confused with critical) regarding any bit of info regarding DCS/ED. I can't make you stop posting, but I think you can get your point across in a better way. At first it was humorous but that has worn a bit thin. Perhaps you feel that tone is warranted, in which case that is your choice. But expect to be met with similar tonality from others.

For the part in blue, well I assume you have paid taxes to one if not two governments. Both of which have done more shady things than any flight sim developer.

In any case, I agree with a lot of your criticisms. The only part I don't quite agree with is how you define "fanboi". But to be fair, I can't find "fanboi" in the dictionary so I suppose you are free to define it how you like!

Please take into account I am trying to sound neutral and non-confrontational in this reply. If I did not I do apologize because that is not my intent.

Not really interested in taking it to PMs as this isn't a discussion about FACTS anymore but rather an exposé of Flogger's character.

I'd be happy to continue it on a public space where it is allowed, but I've read the PWEC section rules and immediately take it off as an option due to rule #1. Suggestions?

I have one - take it easy, there is no reason to take it to a personal level

DCS is a nice flight sim with some issues that badly need addressing - some people like it, some don't.

I don't like betas - but that does not mean that I hate DCS or F/A-18, means that I cannot spend time on it right now.

$65 is a lot if you don't have $65 to spend - does not mean that $65 is a heirloom.

etc. etc.

Thanks Tom! Some people do need to take that advice.... they see an attack on ED/DCS as an attack on THEM. Then when they run out of arguments, they start going rogue and go for below-the-belt attacks on points totally outside of flight simulation.


I can accept betas and I've participated in quite a few, so I have nothing against that process at all. In fact, in at least 3 instances, it allowed me to evaluate the product, see if it's something I'd like to play, and then make my full-release purchase decision based on that. However, the way ED executes the process is different, and that's what leaves a bad taste in a lot of people's mouth.

$65 is $65, sure, but again, the price point is not the issue. An example here is Steel Beasts at $125 and worth every penny, no complaints. You could spend $500 and feel like you've gotten it for a steal and you could spend $50 and still be ripped off. $70 for a full-fidelity aircraft with new terrain, campaigns, tutorials, and a comprehensive PDF manual? Sign me up! $70 for a full-fidelity aircraft that is XX years late and doesn't come with full features, no terrain, no campaign, tutorials broken after each patch, and a PDF manual that gets altered after each patch? Pass. I'll wait a few weeks and maybe, maybe get it on a 50% off sale.

our community would be a much happier one if people let bygone be bygones - and I am afraid that it will be much worse by the time 2.5 is out.

betas are fine if you have the time for it - otherwise it can be an endless source of frustration and by the time the product is out of beta you are fed up as well.

as for the $65 - outside the EU, US and Canada it is even more expensive to buy , that is why I guess we have so many sales otherwise there would be even less people playing.



most people don't even know what ED is or who does what , of course when they ban you from their forum is sure does wonders to increase acrimony , if the developer(s) is/are fine with that, that is the way it is.

I think what happens when 2.5 is out will depend on the state of 2.5 when it comes out. 2.5 and the Hornet should be judged by their own merit.


Indeed! However, I also view betas as an opportunity to try the game. Unfortunately, not many games now have demos and even playing the game can be different from watching someone else play it on YouTube, so in that case, I welcome "beta demos"... but again, this isn't really the model ED follows.


I'm fine with people taking up the side of ED/DCS, but again, an attack on ED/DCS is not an attack on the person defending ED/DCS. If I am arguing about the state of the product, the planned release roadmap, the delays, the mismanagement, and other issues with ED/DCS, then let's talk about those topics and any other topics that relates to ED/DCS.