Work is going well with the updated Caucasus map and the summer map is ready to go! However, there is still work to do on the Spring, Autumn, and Winter maps. Much of this revolves around integration of the new SpeedTree tech. This is a rather time consuming process and not a case of just dropping in new tech.
Additionally, a lot of work continues on updating the hundreds of missions and campaigns that need to be adjusted for the map changes. This primarily entails moving units and their routes out of the many new forested areas on the map.
Finally, we have the holiday season fast approaching and we need to give our staff time with the loved ones.
Given this, we will be releasing DCS World 2.5 by late-January 2018. This is not an estimate, this is a promise.
In order to avoid confusion and any update issues, DCS World 2.5 will be released as a new download. The current Open Beta will be updated to DCS World 2.5, the Open Alpha will be removed, and DCS World 1.5 will remain but be unsupported.
Movement of DCS World 2.5 would then soon follow to Steam.
Thanks, Matt “Wags” Wagner Eagle Dynamic SA, Senior Producer
Anyone taking bets on this?
So will 2.5 be released with only Summer map available? And no compatibility with currently-released missions and campaigns? I don't see them doing Spring/Autumn/Winter plus mission/campaign fix in 6.5 weeks with maybe a week or so of holiday time in there, so maybe 5.5 weeks?
The skeptical part of me says they won't hit this release date.... or if they do, it'll be barebones.
Joined: Mar 2003 Posts: 3,922Paradaz
Senior Member
Paradaz
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,922
UK
Quote
Additionally, a lot of work continues on updating the hundreds of missions and campaigns that need to be adjusted for the map changes. This primarily entails moving units and their routes out of the many new forested areas on the map.
Who would have thought!
Perhaps if they had focused on the 2.5 build in late 2015 it would have been completed without wasting all those funds and resources......only for them to have to re-tread over all this ground again. The same old faces argued this wouldn't be the case but it was highlighted on these forums many times. Their greed in trying to get funds by putting so much effort into supporting payware campaigns has just taken a massive hit.....but no surprise they couldn't see this coming. Four working weeks also seems quite tight given the amount of work identified as incomplete. At the same time, ED's 'promise' counts for nothing.
On the Eighth day God created Paratroopers and the Devil stood to attention.
Does this mean all betas alphas or what the #%&*$# Evers will all be united into one simple edition?
In order to avoid confusion and any update issues, DCS World 2.5 will be released as a new download. The current Open Beta will be updated to DCS World 2.5, the Open Alpha will be removed, and DCS World 1.5 will remain but be unsupported.
Ferengi Rule of acquisition #1 Once you have their money ... never give it back.
Yeah.... someone on another forum just tried saying that plans don't mean anything whereas a promise is a different thing and you can count on a promise...
Force10 I'm just a Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,183
CA
I actually think they will make this date. I can't recall ED ever using the word "promise" when it comes to release times. They're usually very vague to keep expectations low.
Asus Z87 Sabertooth motherboard Windows 7 64 bit Home edition Intel I5 4670K @ 4.4 ghz 16 gig 1866mhz Corsair Vengence Pro memory EVGA GTX 970 Superclocked 4gb Video Card Intel 510 series 120gb SSD (boot drive) Samsung 840 1TB SSD Onboard Realtek sound ______________________________________________________
Oddball from Kelly's Heroes: "If we're late, it's cause we're dead"
Joined: Mar 2003 Posts: 3,922Paradaz
Senior Member
Paradaz
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,922
UK
I also think they'll make the release......but it will simply be pushed out at whatever state it's in and totally unfinished with the other seasons, lighting and patches that will follow whenever they are ready.
The last statement by Wags was just a pre-cursor to the disclaimer that will come with it on release. It's obviously still.going to be a beta with a '2.5' prefix and the Hornet will supplement it nicely with all the unfinished content that comes with that module too. I'm tempted to plump for the Xplane 11 version of the F18.....there's probably more combat in it anyway
On the Eighth day God created Paratroopers and the Devil stood to attention.
The skeptical part of me says they won't hit this release date.... or if they do, it'll be barebones.
They've no qualms releasing Hornet with most of the interesting stuff missing, I'm sure they'll have no qualms doing the same with "2.5"
I was tempted by the Collimata F-18... carrier ops, the latest version of XP allowing weapons again, but most of the switches are INOP and the videos I've found have failed to impress.....
Being late to the DCS party...what is the version history as of late? I got DCS on Steam and it is currently 1.5.8. What is this alpha and beta you speak of? And what does it mean for me when it goes to 2.5? What will work, what won't, what do I need to do to get things to work?
Also I noticed snooping around the file folders that there is a Nevada Test Range on my hard drive. I can't get it to work. Is this some beta or alpha, or is it only operable when you buy NTTR from Steam via DRM or something?
v6, boNes
"Also, I would prefer a back seater over the extra gas any day. I would have 80 pounds of flesh to eat and a pair of glasses to start a fire." --F/A-18 Hornet pilot
I would suggest that you just wait for 2.5 release at the end of January 2018 which is sure to come because it's not an estimate, it's a promise!!
NTTR is an extra map that you can get by either buying it or for free if you pre-ordered DCS A10C . Depending on how old your Nevada files are, you may either own NTTR or you played with DCS A10C Beta 2 or Beta 3 when Nevada was available to fly in.... either way, you should beable to play with NTTR.
Speaking of this "it's not an estimate, it's a promise" nonsense (which they repeat again in the newsletter today), is it just me or does this make ED look even more comical?? Since when did companies have to "promise" on product delivery?? Since when is "deadline" not a good-enough word?
Joined: Mar 2003 Posts: 3,922Paradaz
Senior Member
Paradaz
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,922
UK
You have to 'promise' something when you've consistently failed to meet your own deadlines over the previous 10 years and your customer base doesn't believe a word you say.
On the Eighth day God created Paratroopers and the Devil stood to attention.
I would suggest that you just wait for 2.5 release at the end of January 2018 which is sure to come because it's not an estimate, it's a promise!!
NTTR is an extra map that you can get by either buying it or for free if you pre-ordered DCS A10C . Depending on how old your Nevada files are, you may either own NTTR or you played with DCS A10C Beta 2 or Beta 3 when Nevada was available to fly in.... either way, you should beable to play with NTTR
OK, I didn't pre-order A-10 and I didn't buy NTTR. SO why do I have it? In case it is activated? I also have Normandy, but the same way...It's on my hard drive but I can't get it to work. What did you mean I should be able to play with NTTR?
Also, I tried to PM you but I can't...wanted to ask you some questions since to me you are a DCS guru.
v6, boNes
"Also, I would prefer a back seater over the extra gas any day. I would have 80 pounds of flesh to eat and a pair of glasses to start a fire." --F/A-18 Hornet pilot
NTTR and Normandy are for DCS 2.x, currently 2.2, and as you have 1.5.8 installed, the maps are useless. As Ice noted, you can wait for 2.5 (end of January) and upgrade your 1.5.8 for free. If you then want the NTTR/Normandy maps, you have to buy a key/serial number.
OK, I didn't pre-order A-10 and I didn't buy NTTR. SO why do I have it? In case it is activated? I also have Normandy, but the same way...It's on my hard drive but I can't get it to work. What did you mean I should be able to play with NTTR?
You can play with NTTR either by buying the map module or if you pre-ordered DCS A10C before Dec 2010 or Feb 2011 IIRC. I assumed you have done either one as you've said you had files on your HDD. If you hadn't and still have the files, I don't really know why they'd be there. Maybe just small tidbits of files so that these modules show up on your DCS menu? I'm not exactly sure as you've not stated what files or folders you have.
Originally Posted by bones
Also, I tried to PM you but I can't...wanted to ask you some questions since to me you are a DCS guru.
Haha!! Thanks for the nice words but I am in no way a "guru." I am simply a critical DCS fan I've sent you a PM so feel free to respond to that or if you wish, do post here on the forums as there are more people that have more current DCS experience than I do
Originally Posted by Paradaz
You have to 'promise' something when you've consistently failed to meet your own deadlines over the previous 10 years and your customer base doesn't believe a word you say.
Indeed! They've worn out their credibility and reputation that they now have to use words not normally used in this area. If they ever start talking about target dates again, I hope people start asking them "is that an estimate or is that a promise?"
Anyone can have any of the files for any of the modules at any time. I could download the Viggen files without problem, I just wouldn't be able to activate and use it without a key.
If you think you have NTTR access you can download the Open Alpha branch client and try it.
Will Wags look stupid when ED can't deliver on their estimates and can't deliver on their promise? Will 2.5 be released as planned but have so many things wrong with it? Will 2.5 be released as planned but with missing features?
Or will we all be in awe of ED's programming prowess as 2.5 blows all expectations out of the water?
From what I understood, there will be a "released" version which will be 2.5 and there will be a "beta" versions of 2.5.XXX, but that's it. 1.5.whatever will still be available but will no longer be worked on or supported. Hopefully, once this is in place, they can move forward at a better pace.
Honestly I wouldn’t give these guys any cash after past performances.
That weird business with dcs ww2 where we backed the project on Kickstarter. The whole thing fell over and bizarrely they took over but since seem to have abandoned it.
Then you ask reasonable questions about when you will get what you paid for and get banned on their site.
What are these idiots thinking? With only a few weeks left to go from, hopefully, a 2.5 release, they release a Viggen campaign? I suppose there's no work needed to convert it from whatever it is now to be compatible with 2.5? Or do they just really, really need the cash?
I suppose there's no work needed to convert it from whatever it is now to be compatible with 2.5?
The Viggen campaign is based on Red Flag. That means it is based on the NTTR theatre. The NTTR theatre won't change much from 2.2 to 2.5, at least not that i'm aware of.
Joined: Mar 2003 Posts: 3,922Paradaz
Senior Member
Paradaz
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,922
UK
Originally Posted by - Ice
What are these idiots thinking? With only a few weeks left to go from, hopefully, a 2.5 release, they release a Viggen campaign? I suppose there's no work needed to convert it from whatever it is now to be compatible with 2.5? Or do they just really, really need the cash?
You underestimate the incompetence of ED.
On the Eighth day God created Paratroopers and the Devil stood to attention.
#4398593 - 01/06/1807:52 PMRe: 2..5 Release Date ANNOUNCED!!
[Re: Sobek]
The Viggen campaign is based on Red Flag. That means it is based on the NTTR theatre. The NTTR theatre won't change much from 2.2 to 2.5, at least not that i'm aware of.
As opposed to waiting a few weeks and releasing it under 2.5???
The Viggen campaign is based on Red Flag. That means it is based on the NTTR theatre. The NTTR theatre won't change much from 2.2 to 2.5, at least not that i'm aware of.
As opposed to waiting a few weeks and releasing it under 2.5???
How would that change anything?
#4398734 - 01/07/1807:21 PMRe: 2..5 Release Date ANNOUNCED!!
[Re: Sobek]
Ice, if you thinking that the rework needed for Caucasus campaigns/missions will also be needed for those that are build for Nevada, there is no likely reason for that to be the case since Nevada has not been changed, nor will it be.
Ice, if you thinking that the rework needed for Caucasus campaigns/missions will also be needed for those that are build for Nevada, there is no likely reason for that to be the case since Nevada has not been changed, nor will it be.
I hope so.... but I wasn't just thinking of that. I remember how things would break between patches and going from 2.XXX to 2.5 isn't really just a patch now, is it?
Care to buy the campaign and tell us whether 2.5 borks it?
Ice, if you thinking that the rework needed for Caucasus campaigns/missions will also be needed for those that are build for Nevada, there is no likely reason for that to be the case since Nevada has not been changed, nor will it be.
I hope so.... but I wasn't just thinking of that. I remember how things would break between patches and going from 2.XXX to 2.5 isn't really just a patch now, is it?
Care to buy the campaign and tell us whether 2.5 borks it?
The possibility of any given patch breaking something is always there. I just don't think the v2.5 release is going to be all that earth shattering for Nevada based missions.
As for me buying the campaign to test it, no thanks.
2 weeks to go. Who's taking bets? it's getting close. A promise is a promise.
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
I'm guessing they'll chuck whatever they have out the door and call it 2.5 and if anyone complains of missing features, we'll get the "everything is subject to change" line and Wags will lose whatever credibility he has left.
I'm guessing they'll chuck whatever they have out the door and call it 2.5 and if anyone complains of missing features, we'll get the "everything is subject to change" line and Wags will lose whatever credibility he has left.
Yeah i'm pretty sure they'l just throw it out and if the "everything is subject to change" line doesn't work there's always the moderators to "clean" things up over there.
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
Gentlemen, here is some explanations how your current 1.5 (and/or 2.2) will be converted to 2.5, please take a look the attached diagram. Transition will be made in 2 stages:
1 stage: Beta-version. 1.5.8 Open Beta will be updated to 2.5.0 Open Beta. Updater will check 2.2.0 (Alpha) and add necessary modules to 2.5.0. Then Open Alpha 2.2.0 will be uninstalled (user will be prompted about 2.2.0 removing).
1.5.8 release remains as is on this stage.
Some time (maybe one-two weeks, we hope no more) for wide test of this procedure.
2 stage: Release version. 1.5.8 release updated to 2.5.0. User will be prompted before update about saving 1.5.8 Final version in the separate directory.
Modules from 2.2.0 Open Alpha (or 2.5.0 beta - see 1st stage) version will be used for 2.5.0 installation, after that old 2.2.0 will be uninstalled (user prompted).
Open Alpha 2.2.0: this branch is no longer supported. If user have only 2.2.0 Open Alpha, updater will suggest to download 2.5 installer - it will install 2.5 release and remove 2.2.0 Open Alpha.
Home folders (Saved Games\DCS) remains the same (Saved Games\DCS and Saved Games\DCS.openbeta). New Saved Games\DCS.release_1_5 will be created for 1.5 Final version and all content will be copied into it from Saved Games\DCS. We also strongly suggest to remove Saved Games\DCS\Config\options.lua and make graphic tuning from scratch using DCS GUI because of 1.5 and 2.5 renders are significantly different.
Activations. All activation keys are saved in Windows Registry and NO additional activation needed.
1.5.8 Final version installer will be available on DCS site.
and they have a wee picture as well, excellent
Ferengi Rule of acquisition #1 Once you have their money ... never give it back.
So only the beta version gets updated to 2.5 in January? Then 2 weeks later the release, maybe, "depending on wide test of this procedure"? Sounding like a promise breaking to me.
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
So only the beta version gets updated to 2.5 in January? Then 2 weeks later the release, maybe, "depending on wide test of this procedure"? Sounding like a promise breaking to me.
No, it looks like they will be testing this the next 2 weeks. and the new 2.5 takes from all the versions and combines it in stages to 2.5.. No Promise broken yet
So only the beta version gets updated to 2.5 in January? Then 2 weeks later the release, maybe, "depending on wide test of this procedure"? Sounding like a promise breaking to me.
No, it looks like they will be testing this the next 2 weeks. and the new 2.5 takes from all the versions and combines it in stages to 2.5.. No Promise broken yet
"2.5 Open Beta coming January 31, 2018."
"Given this, we will be releasing DCS World 2.5 by late-January 2018. This is not an estimate, this is a promise." Nothing there about Open beta. It clearly states we will be releasing DCS World 2.5 by late January 2018. Not 2.5 Open Beta Sounds like a broken promise to me. Sounds like ED have missed yet another deadline. Oh well I doubt anybody really thought ED would keep a promise and meet a deadline. Why change now?
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
Given this, we will be releasing DCS World 2.5 by late-January 2018. This is not an estimate, this is a promise.
Quote
Stage 1: 2.5.0 Open Beta. The 1.5.8 Open Beta will be updated to the 2.5.0 Open Beta. The updater will check for 2.2.0 (Open Alpha) and add necessary modules from 2.2.0 to 2.5.0 to avoid unnecessary downloads. Over the next one to two weeks, we will be carefully monitoring 2.5.0 Open Beta reports in order to move to Stage 2. Stage 2: 2.5.0 Release. The 1.5.8 Release version will be updated to the 2.5.0 Release version. You will be prompted before updating to 2.5.0, and you will have an option to save a 1.5.8 Final version to a separate directory.
And there we have it! 2.5 is being thrown out the door at whatever state it's in... now called "Open Beta" and careful monitoring is now their excuse for any succeeding delays. I'm sure there'll be bugs that will delay 2.5 Release that NOBODY could've foreseen, surely not this company that's been in this business for 27 (?) years.
Anyone taking bets that Stage 2 will be more than "next one to two weeks"?
So now "late January" stands for "end of January and Beta"? For me "late of" is NOT "at the end of", but english isn't my native language. So is "late of" now at "the End of"? But why do we need a "late of" if that always means "at the end of"? Word gaming... lol! It's a promise? For sure it never wasn't! !
"late January" could mean anything during the 2nd half or last 2 weeks of January... or even last week of January as weeks 2-3 would be "mid-January." Knowing ED, I think most of us interpreted this as 31st January 2018 on 23:55:55
Also, as we can see now, "releasing DCS World 2.5 by late-January 2018" means releasing DCS World 2.5 Open Beta. Like I said, they'll chuck whatever they have out the door on the deadline and now they've added the "Open Beta" wording so nobody can really complain when they find out that it's still bug-ridden and in a poor state. "Why do you people complain about a Beta? If you wanted a polished product, wait until Release comes around!" and now they can use that line as their defense.
I got trolled by them prior the Viggen release. Planned a full evening and stockpiled beer and such only to have the stellar news day before release that we 1.5 series customers was out of luck since the release was going open beta at "promised" date (website still said 1.5 days after release, I don't think they ever wrote anything else but 1.5 actually).
Can you guys see how much I expected this 2.5 to be released as promised?
Yeah, spot on.
Why the hell would you even announce when betatesters are to receive stuff? Wags is very very different from the project managers and producers I've met in my professional life.
I know he is a very dedicated simmer, just listen to him on that Viggen sortie they did, and I actually like him as a simmer but some days I would like to see on what grounds ED hired him as a producer.
I got trolled by them prior the Viggen release. Planned a full evening and stockpiled beer and such only to have the stellar news day before release that we 1.5 series customers was out of luck since the release was going open beta at "promised" date (website still said 1.5 days after release, I don't think they ever wrote anything else but 1.5 actually).
Can you guys see how much I expected this 2.5 to be released as promised?
Yeah, spot on.
Why the hell would you even announce when betatesters are to receive stuff? Wags is very very different from the project managers and producers I've met in my professional life.
I know he is a very dedicated simmer, just listen to him on that Viggen sortie they did, and I actually like him as a simmer but some days I would like to see on what grounds ED hired him as a producer.
I dunno, maybe there are no wheelchair ramps at ED HQ and he cant get in to work most days? There must be some reason for his lack of competence. His credability has just hit a new low with me. A promise! "I know most folk dont trust what i say anymore and so dont get frustrated anymore. This time I'll promise! That way folk will trust and get frustrated all over again".
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
Your mistake, Johnny, was that you failed to see the difference between a promise and a pinky promise. Promises can be broken, but not pinky promises! Pinky promises are along the same level as: cross my heart and hope to die swear on my mother's grave swear on the heads/lives of my children in the name of all things holy
I hope now you can see and appreciate the difference and you can adjust future expectations accordingly.
Today's update says 2.5 Open Beta will be released JAN 31st. The actual release version of 2.5 won't come out until "one or two weeks later". Good news for those who like the open betas but for those who only use actual stable release versions...we're still going to be waiting.
Today's update says 2.5 Open Beta will be released JAN 31st. The actual release version of 2.5 won't come out until "one or two weeks later". Good news for those who like the open betas but for those who only use actual stable release versions...we're still going to be waiting.
The original announcement says the Beta is what's being upgraded to 2.5. I'm not sure that it would have made much difference anyway if the release was non beta as I don't think 2.5 was ever supposed to be "feature complete" on launch.
Today's update says 2.5 Open Beta will be released JAN 31st. The actual release version of 2.5 won't come out until "one or two weeks later". Good news for those who like the open betas but for those who only use actual stable release versions...we're still going to be waiting.
Considering that the 'stable' release isn't all that stable, I don't see an issue here. We are still talking about two versions, at different patch levels, neither of which has been tested at any depth. This is obvious when the release version is updated to the OB patch level within just a week or two. You can't do comprehensive testing and patching in that time frame and if you could then the release version number should be different since the code should be different. The version numbers are indicative of the fact that they don't actually fix anything between the Beta and the Release, but instead just pass the same code and call it 'released'. IMHO.
Today's update says 2.5 Open Beta will be released JAN 31st. The actual release version of 2.5 won't come out until "one or two weeks later". Good news for those who like the open betas but for those who only use actual stable release versions...we're still going to be waiting.
Is it actually going to be "released" or will it just be Open Beta slapped on with a different title?
Originally Posted by Exorcet
The original announcement says the Beta is what's being upgraded to 2.5. I'm not sure that it would have made much difference anyway if the release was non beta as I don't think 2.5 was ever supposed to be "feature complete" on launch.
Yeah.... expecting ED to be working years on something and then expecting that to be feature complete on launch is just asking for too much, right? We see this for 2.5, we see this for the Hornet.... why, oh, why were we hoping for any different?
Originally Posted by cichlidfan
Considering that the 'stable' release isn't all that stable, I don't see an issue here.
Haha, true! Doesn't really matter, this is just really to show that ED can't even deliver on their promises and will rely on word play to get out.
Originally Posted by cichlidfan
We are still talking about two versions, at different patch levels, neither of which has been tested at any depth.
Well, the testers are supposed to be "hammering away" at the Open Beta version..... but we've all experienced stuff before that made us scratch our heads and wonder how bugs made it past the supposed internal beta team.
Also note that what will come out on Jan 31st will be an update to the Open Beta while the full installer will come out on Feb 1st.... what's the difference? Those who want it on Jan 31st will simply install the Open Beta now and upgrade it to 2.5 on that day.....
Yeah.... expecting ED to be working years on something and then expecting that to be feature complete on launch is just asking for too much, right? We see this for 2.5, we see this for the Hornet.... why, oh, why were we hoping for any different?
Well the thing is DCS can't really be feature complete. It's updated continuously. The difference between Open Beta and final release won't mean much because of this outside of bugs perhaps.
In particular I think ED has hinted that planned features like ATC, missile guidance, and damage model aren't necessarily releasing with 2.5. I can't say for sure because I don't have quotes on hand.
Yeah.... expecting ED to be working years on something and then expecting that to be feature complete on launch is just asking for too much, right? We see this for 2.5, we see this for the Hornet.... why, oh, why were we hoping for any different?
Well the thing is DCS can't really be feature complete. It's updated continuously. The difference between Open Beta and final release won't mean much because of this outside of bugs perhaps.
In particular I think ED has hinted that planned features like ATC, missile guidance, and damage model aren't necessarily releasing with 2.5. I can't say for sure because I don't have quotes on hand.
but some days I would like to see on what grounds ED hired him as a producer.
Well... he did produce that Jane's F-18 thingy back in the the 90's and has been a producer for ED since the LockOn days (or even as far back as Flanker. not sure about that). So, yes! He brings a lot of experience with him and is, obviously, very successful at his job. They wouldn't be here if he did such a lousy job, right?
I'm disappointed but not surprised that the usual suspects around these here parts would obviously like to see ED fail. Why do you even frequent this board if all you do is spread negativity. I just don't understand that attitude...
The nature of this business is such that "everything is subject to change", schedules are missed repeatedly and the end-product does not appeal to all of the potential customers. Oh well, deal with it. Do something constructive with your time as opposed to trolling and turning other people off that might actually enjoy using ED's products, warts and all.
"It's not the years honey, it's the mileage..."
#4402105 - 01/27/1805:35 PMRe: 2..5 Release Date ANNOUNCED!!
[Re: Chaos]
I'm disappointed but not surprised that the usual suspects around these here parts would obviously like to see ED fail.
Oh on the contrary I would like to see ED succeed just once. I'd love ED to succeed just frikin once in hitting a deadline/release date. It's beyond incompetent to promise a release then miss it. Or hide their incompetence behind a "beta". They probably had that ready to go weeks ago but held it back in case Wags failed to live up to his promise. And here we are ED fail all the time. It's nothing new and nothing anyone enjoys
Last edited by Johnny_Redd; 01/27/1805:38 PM.
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
#4402119 - 01/27/1806:23 PMRe: 2..5 Release Date ANNOUNCED!!
[Re: Chaos]
He brings a lot of experience with him and is, obviously, very successful at his job. They wouldn't be here if he did such a lousy job, right?
Considering the mayhem DCS been last few years with the need to use 3 installs and the fear of even "stable" going, despite open beta, up in smoke when normal customers get their hands on it I'm pretty sure you and I do not share views here. We could extend this to look at the 3rd party adventure but as I said, let's agree to disagree. Only thing I know for sure is, ED should be helluva happy to have customers of your kind. You know, the apologistas flocking over at the Orwellian forums. I good screenshot is all we need, right?
Oh on the contrary I would like to see ED succeed just once. I'd love ED to succeed just frikin once in hitting a deadline/release date. It's beyond incompetent to promise a release then miss it. Or hide their incompetence behind a "beta". They probably had that ready to go weeks ago but held it back in case Wags failed to live up to his promise. And here we are ED fail all the time. It's nothing new and nothing anyone enjoys
The negativity here is just overwhelming. So even if they release on time you would still bash them and accuse that they "had that ready to go weeks ago". Even if many devs do that to ensure they have margin for error. After so many delayed releases why wouldn't they play it safe?
I had my own criticism over ED but what's going on here is just silly.
I'm just glad they' still in the flight sim genre business. They are certainly not perfect, but that's the market shaped them this way I guess. Since they are still afloat however, they must be doing something right, unlike all those dev studios that perished long time ago (RIP Microprose, Spectrum Holobyte, Origin ...)
#4402125 - 01/27/1806:55 PMRe: 2..5 Release Date ANNOUNCED!!
[Re: damson]
Oh on the contrary I would like to see ED succeed just once. I'd love ED to succeed just frikin once in hitting a deadline/release date. It's beyond incompetent to promise a release then miss it. Or hide their incompetence behind a "beta". They probably had that ready to go weeks ago but held it back in case Wags failed to live up to his promise. And here we are ED fail all the time. It's nothing new and nothing anyone enjoys
The negativity here is just overwhelming. So even if they release on time you would still bash them and accuse that they "had that ready to go weeks ago". Even if many devs do that to ensure they have margin for error. After so many delayed releases why wouldn't they play it safe?
I had my own criticism over ED but what's going on here is just silly.
I'm just glad they' still in the flight sim genre business. They are certainly not perfect, but that's the market shaped them this way I guess. Since they are still afloat however, they must be doing something right, unlike all those dev studios that perished long time ago (RIP Microprose, Spectrum Holobyte, Origin ...)
Playing it safe would be to not promise anything. Playing it safe would be to tell their customers we hope we can bring you the release of 2.5 at the end of January. Unfortunately we cannot guarantee that but we are definitely going to try. But no Wags promised. not an estimate but a promise. Hardly playing it safe in anybodies book but yours apparently.
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
Playing it safe would be to not promise anything. Playing it safe would be to tell their customers we hope we can bring you the release of 2.5 at the end of January. Unfortunately we cannot guarantee that but we are definitely going to try. But no Wags promised. not an estimate but a promise. Hardly playing it safe in anybodies book but yours apparently.
Well I guess we will have to see for ourselves if his promise will be true. Four more days ...
#4402135 - 01/27/1807:38 PMRe: 2..5 Release Date ANNOUNCED!!
[Re: damson]
Well I guess we will have to see for ourselves if his promise will be true. Four more days ...
Am I missing something here? Isn't it already confirmed the release is not in January but mid or end of February? Unless you're a spare-time unpaid beta-tester?
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
DCS World 2.5.0 Update Yes, we are still on track to release by the end of this month! Last week we created a test version of the DCS World 2.5.0 branch and we and our testers are hammering away on it. DCS World 2.5.0 will be released as an update to the Open Beta on 31 January 2018, and the 2.5.0 Open Beta installer will be available the next day. We are staggering these to avoid overloading our file servers.
The 2.5.0 "Release" version will launch a week or two later, depending on how the Open Beta release goes.
The Steam version will come a week after the 2.5.0 Release version is launched.
In parallel, we are also preparing the final update for DCS World 1.5.8. This will continue 1.5.8’s availability, but it will be unsupported following the release of DCS World 2.5.
What am I missing? That the version released first will be open beta? This platform is in constant developement, so frankly I don't mind that.
Joined: Mar 2003 Posts: 3,922Paradaz
Senior Member
Paradaz
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,922
UK
Damson, If this platform is in constant development, then it can be nothing other than a 'beta' at every single stage and will never become a stable release......that's what you seem to be referring to here and also what ED use as a particularly weak excuse as to their incompetence in never finishing any of their content.
There is nothing stopping ED from finishing the modules they started, creating a baseline whereby a particular build becomes a fully tested release and then working on the integration of modular content with patches and updated builds (it is no way modular now and the evidence of that is how they have to patch the core game just to support campaigns and other new content). They clearly have no idea of how to manage this project properly and that has been clear from a number of years.
Originally Posted by "Chaos"
The nature of this business is such that "everything is subject to change"
No, that's absolutely rubbish.... That particular line is really only used by ED because they have no road map and are constantly letting feature creep, their lack of planning and management of integration activities and their reaction to commercial products steer this rudderless ship. I can't think of any other developer in any genre that consistently miss deadlines not by days and months, but by years and no other dev uses the 'everything is subject to change' as part of their company mission-statement and branding.
The anger from some members in SimHQ comes in the utter frustration of something that has so much potential yet is absolutely wasted by the people in charge of ED. For me, 2.5 is the last chance......I'm fed up of the consistent let-downs and their inability to learn from all the previous mistakes and they've had more than long enough to sort this mess out. It really doesn't look like promising news though that the 2.5 merger/release is rapidly turning into a pre-release/alpha/beta with what sounds like a lot more work still to come before it gets close to what we were really expecting......it's already over 4 years late from their intended 2.0 release which is what all these core changes were based on.
On the Eighth day God created Paratroopers and the Devil stood to attention.
I get your point Paradaz, really I do. All I can say is that I reconciled with what ED is doing with their platform. It's really complicated piece of software and many had failed at building their business around it. ED is doing rather well I suppose so I'm just glad I'm able to use it and it didn't turned into another vaporware project.
#4402225 - 01/28/1802:13 PMRe: 2..5 Release Date ANNOUNCED!!
[Re: damson]
Well the thing is DCS can't really be feature complete. It's updated continuously. The difference between Open Beta and final release won't mean much because of this outside of bugs perhaps.
In particular I think ED has hinted that planned features like ATC, missile guidance, and damage model aren't necessarily releasing with 2.5. I can't say for sure because I don't have quotes on hand.
Lol!! So if something gets new features and fixes, then it's in perpetual beta, huh? So I guess Windows 10 was never "released" as we then had the Anniversary Update, Creators Update, and Fall Creators Update... all this time we were using Windows 10 Beta. Such wow! Many logic! Amazement!!
I guess you do have to start thinking this way if you want to try defending ED
Originally Posted by Winfield
the rectum lickers of ED
Somebody's gotta do it!!
Originally Posted by Chaos
He brings a lot of experience with him and is, obviously, very successful at his job. They wouldn't be here if he did such a lousy job, right?
Please explain how years of delay does not equal "lousy job".... I'll wait.
Originally Posted by Chaos
I'm disappointed but not surprised that the usual suspects around these here parts would obviously like to see ED fail. Why do you even frequent this board if all you do is spread negativity. I just don't understand that attitude...
Obviously, you have no clue about what you speak of..... I've mentioned multiple times that I'd love ED to prove me wrong, and for a good time now, the ball has been squarely in ED's court. Spread negativity? Or just give you a dose of reality? Maybe try to discern the difference.
Originally Posted by Chaos
The nature of this business is such that "everything is subject to change", schedules are missed repeatedly and the end-product does not appeal to all of the potential customers. Oh well, deal with it. Do something constructive with your time as opposed to trolling and turning other people off that might actually enjoy using ED's products, warts and all.
Please show me another game company that has repeatedly delivered years late and is still in business..... I'll wait.
If you're content to dine on what scraps fall off of ED's table, that's on you. Some of us want more for our money.
Originally Posted by damson
The negativity here is just overwhelming.
Hmmm.... I wonder if there's no other location you can go to where there is no negativity.... any idea guys? No? Damn.
Originally Posted by damson
So even if they release on time you would still bash them and accuse that they "had that ready to go weeks ago". Even if many devs do that to ensure they have margin for error. After so many delayed releases why wouldn't they play it safe?
Tell you what..... get them to release something on time THEN see if we bash them. And no, 2.5 "release" no longer counts as we've already called this and ED has proven us correct.
Originally Posted by damson
Since they are still afloat however, they must be doing something right, unlike all those dev studios that perished long time ago (RIP Microprose, Spectrum Holobyte, Origin ...)
Or they just have legions of blind, brainwashed masses who are happy to pay 100% for 40% of a product and then wait years for the remaining 60%. Just because they're afloat doesn't mean they're doing something right. Just because other dev studios perished doesn't mean they did something wrong (ie, the market interest just went elsewhere).
Originally Posted by damson
What am I missing? That the version released first will be open beta? This platform is in constant developement, so frankly I don't mind that.
What you're missing is that Wags promised a release by the end of January. What we're getting is Open Beta. If you can't figure out the difference between RELEASE and OPEN BETA at this stage, I don't think any explanation will fix that. If you insist that constant development = open beta, please cite a couple of software that had no development after release? Please cite a couple of software that remained open beta for years because their developers were constantly developing the software and thus did not "release" it? Again, such wow! Many logic! Amazement!!
Now they're stating Release will follow 1-2 weeks after Open Beta.... let's see if they'll actually make that window. I'm not holding my breath on that one.
Originally Posted by damson
I get your point Paradaz, really I do. All I can say is that I reconciled with what ED is doing with their platform. It's really complicated piece of software and many had failed at building their business around it. ED is doing rather well I suppose so I'm just glad I'm able to use it and it didn't turned into another vaporware project.
If you've made your peace with ED, then understand that there are those of us that haven't and still hold ED's feet to the fire. Funny how you can understand ED but then cannot understand the negativity that is the result of ED.
What an odd forum Yes Ice there are actually forums that have been able to keep a positive spin on this announcement. GASP! lol But of course these must be the brainwashed simple minded folk
And you obviously missed the sarcasm.
Please do be so kind as to show us how being promised a RELEASE and then being given an OPEN BETA can be given a positive spin!!
I would point out that they said that they would release, as in make available to the public, v2.5. Nobody ever said that the 'release' version would be available on a given date. If you thought otherwise then you have not followed the release of any module in the past 8 years.
By the way, with regard to the 'unpaid beta testers' comments. The beta testers for pretty much every game are unpaid. Ask anyone that is/has taken part in a beta testing program. They volunteer/apply for the opportunity and the only compensation is the early access to the game content.
Large studios do have a paid testing staff but what they test is pre-release alpha content that is most certainly not ready for public consumption. I am basing this, not on speculation, but on conversations with the head of a AAA gaming studio.
I would point out that they said that they would release, as in make available to the public, v2.5. Nobody ever said that the 'release' version would be available on a given date. If you thought otherwise then you have not followed the release of any module in the past 8 years.
Technically you are correct. "Given this, we will be releasing DCS World 2.5 by late-January 2018. This is not an estimate, this is a promise." No given date just late-January. " they said that they would release, as in make available to the public, v2.5." and you know this because? Because you're privy to the goings on in Wagners mind? Please explain this then "In order to avoid confusion and any update issues, DCS World 2.5 will be released as a new download. The current Open Beta will be updated to DCS World 2.5, the Open Alpha will be removed, and DCS World 1.5 will remain but be unsupported."
"Dear all,
Work is going well with the updated Caucasus map and the summer map is ready to go! However, there is still work to do on the Spring, Autumn, and Winter maps. Much of this revolves around integration of the new SpeedTree tech. This is a rather time consuming process and not a case of just dropping in new tech.
Additionally, a lot of work continues on updating the hundreds of missions and campaigns that need to be adjusted for the map changes. This primarily entails moving units and their routes out of the many new forested areas on the map.
Finally, we have the holiday season fast approaching and we need to give our staff time with the loved ones.
Given this, we will be releasing DCS World 2.5 by late-January 2018. This is not an estimate, this is a promise.
In order to avoid confusion and any update issues, DCS World 2.5 will be released as a new download. The current Open Beta will be updated to DCS World 2.5, the Open Alpha will be removed, and DCS World 1.5 will remain but be unsupported.
Movement of DCS World 2.5 would then soon follow to Steam.
Thanks, Matt “Wags” Wagner Eagle Dynamic SA, Senior Producer"
You may feel the need to defend ED and Wagner for whatever reason but I'm sorry your post is nothing short of spin and BS
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
You read what you want into my reply. Technically you were correct that Nobody ever said that the 'release' version would be available on a given date. because there was no given date just late January. Everything else in your post was spin and BS
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
You read what you want into my reply. Technically you were correct that Nobody ever said that the 'release' version would be available on a given date. because there was no given date just late January. Everything else in your post was spin and BS
Ok, I will rephrase. Nobody ever said that the release version would be available in late January. They said that v2.5 would be released in late January. Nobody specified anything about the state of the release (whether beta or release candidate or anything else) and if you expected it to be anything other than the open beta then you were fooling yourself.
Quote
The current Open Beta will be updated to DCS World 2.5...
What part of that doesn't imply that v2.5 will be an open beta? You obviously don't comprehend how the Release and Open Beta are development branches and not 'versions'. I am certainly not the biggest fan of ED, and, by far, not a spin doctor for them. However, in this instance, you are trying to make their normal release pattern seem like a head fake when it is, actually, just business as usual.
This part DCS World 2.5 will be released as a new download.
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
This part DCS World 2.5 will be released as a new download.
So what? That just means that they built a scratch installer. It doesn't speak to the purported state of the code in any way. Sometimes a game update is so different from the previous version that applying a patch is impractical, which is what is likely the case here.
Have you ever used MakeMKV? Every single update requires removal of the old version prior to the installation of the new one, even though it is still a 'beta' product. This is actually the simplest way to update a software package.
I give up. That doesn't change the fact that ED and wags are full of sh1t. It just means I'm not going to argue the fact with you.
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
Oh I'm sorry. I didn't realize. I actually was discussing that. I have no idea what you were discussing then. My apologies.
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
Oh I'm sorry. I didn't realize. I actually was discussing that. I have no idea what you were discussing then. My apologies.
Wow, in which post, prior to your last, did you mention ED/Wags being FoS? I am sorry that you lost track of the discussion so quickly, I will speak slower next time. As a reminder, we were discussing the specifics of the v2.5 release announcement.
Joined: Mar 2003 Posts: 3,922Paradaz
Senior Member
Paradaz
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,922
UK
So Cichlidfan....when you think the 'release' version of DCS World 2.5 will become available?
I will estimate......NEVER. Because like others have said it will always be in a state of perpetual beta. What's strange is that ED for the first time are actually calling this the 'release version' which indicates some polish but it's quite clear that this is merely following their normal procedure and of course 'everything is subject to change' and there will undoubtedly be a lack of polish. Don't believe me that they are calling it the 'release version'?...then click here, it's a link to their newsletter.
On a more serious note, my biggest concern with this whole 2.5 mess is the way ED has recently stated that "The 2.5.0 “Release” version will launch a week or two later, depending on how the Open Beta release goes"......so ED really think that their software can go from Open Beta to 'Release' in two weeks?.....either that, or right there is the disclaimer for the release version to be delayed even further due to the amount of problems and bugs that are found with the modules and campaigns that have been integrated with the 2.5 core game. The mere fact that the software is getting tested for the first time by the community suggests that the 'release' version as they are calling it is not a release at all, merely an update that will be available to their customers at whatever state it's in at that point in time. If that is the case, then why are they calling it the release version now and never have done before?
In summary..... ED continue to talk crap, don't learn from any of their previous mistakes but it looks like they are trying to pull the wool over their customers eyes. What is more weird is that the ED defence force like to move the goalposts and try to align their expectations with what is a version and what isn't even though they go against the very language that ED are speaking themselves.
On the Eighth day God created Paratroopers and the Devil stood to attention.
So Cichlidfan....when you think the 'release' version of DCS World 2.5 will become available?
I have no clue. Personally, I hope that they will have all four seasons looking decent by the end of this year. Currently the fall season shows deciduous trees where the winter season shows only evergreens (how does that happen?).
Originally Posted by Paradaz
On a more serious note, my biggest concern with this whole 2.5 mess is the way ED has recently stated that "The 2.5.0 “Release” version will launch a week or two later, depending on how the Open Beta release goes"......so ED really think that their software can go from Open Beta to 'Release' in two weeks?
I have already mentioned, previously, that (historically) I thought that the move from OB to release was not indicative of anything since there are no notable changes between the two and that the time frame is insufficient for a meaningful amount of code to be corrected.
When we start having to do word play tactics to distinguish between a RELEASE and an OPEN BETA being made available, we know that the ball has been dropped yet again.
Quote
Given this, we will be releasing DCS World 2.5 by late-January 2018. This is not an estimate, this is a promise.
There is no mention of Beta, Open Beta, or Early Access in that statement. Having to clarify the phrase "releasing DCS World 2.5" as whether it is RELEASE or OPEN BETA is like asking Wags whether anything he says is an ESTIMATE or a PROMISE. This just isn't done in normal conversation.... and having to do it here just shows how ED is now (and in the past) resorting to word play in order to try and look less foolish when already caught out.
Oh I'm sorry. I didn't realize. I actually was discussing that. I have no idea what you were discussing then. My apologies.
Wow, in which post, prior to your last, did you mention ED/Wags being FoS? I am sorry that you lost track of the discussion so quickly, I will speak slower next time. As a reminder, we were discussing the specifics of the v2.5 release announcement.
Go back and read all my posts in this thread. You may believe the discussion started when you showed up. You may believe "ED/wags didn't promise the release in January" "they promised the open beta in January" You can believe the conversation is whatever you want it to be. You can go a slow as you'd like feel free, take as long as you like. I was, and have always been, discussing EDs/wags volume of sh1t. no matter what you wish to believe. I don't care what you believe. I don't care that you've resorted to insults because folk don't believe your paper thin argument.
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
so ED really think that their software can go from Open Beta to 'Release' in two weeks?.....
Typically open beta comes right before release and is the final round of testing. It isn't exactly uncommon. It actually is quickly becoming standard procedure for AAA multiplayer games. It is also very common for other sandbox style games. Even ArmA 3 was released in ahlpa for almost a year before it got to a released state, and another 6 months (or more) for the campaign. The exception to this rule are story based SP campaign games. So it certainly isn't uncommon. I imagine the beta version is close to what ED would be releasing in the "Release Branch".
I think I will wait until the "release" version is ready. I don't have much interest is playing around with more installs. I have the current "release" version and "Open Alpha". If I could update one of those I'd try it but it sounds like I need the open beta?
Typically open beta comes right before release and is the final round of testing. It isn't exactly uncommon. It actually is quickly becoming standard procedure for AAA multiplayer games.
Why are we suddenly comparing ED with other dev studios and AAA ones at that? The fact that a procedure is common and that it is exercised by AAA studios does not mean that ED exercising the same procedure will generate the same results in the same timeframe.
Originally Posted by Flogger23m
I think I will wait until the "release" version is ready. I don't have much interest is playing around with more installs. I have the current "release" version and "Open Alpha". If I could update one of those I'd try it but it sounds like I need the open beta?
Well, if you follow the "logic" of some people on here, there won't be much difference between Open Beta and Release version
There already isn't. People are joining the same server with OB and release causing minor discrepancies. Someone I play with hasn't updated their release in like 9 months. He just considered OB "the game" and has been playing that 100%.
Typically open beta comes right before release and is the final round of testing. It isn't exactly uncommon. It actually is quickly becoming standard procedure for AAA multiplayer games.
Why are we suddenly comparing ED with other dev studios and AAA ones at that?
Because the question/complaint I quoted is very commonplace. It certainly isn't my favorite trend either, but to take issue with a practice that is becoming almost standard industry wide is fairly superfluous. A big, free platform update? I'd almost expect an open beta before a release in 2018. That is just reality whether it is good or bad.
Originally Posted by - Ice
Well, if you follow the "logic" of some people on here, there won't be much difference between Open Beta and Release version
Well assuming ED did their job right the difference should be small. Open Betas are supposed to represent a fairly stable build of the game. The majority of the bugs should already have been ironed out, meaning the difference shouldn't be that large between the Open Beta and release.
Because the question/complaint I quoted is very commonplace.
Again, yes..... the question/complaint/solution is very commonplace. Still doesn't justify comparing ED with other dev studios especially AAA ones. Like I said before, just because other studios are doing this does not mean ED is excused for doing so and besides, ED practicing the same procedure as a AAA studio does not mean ED will get the same results under the same timeframe as AAA studios.
Originally Posted by Flogger23m
Well assuming ED did their job right the difference should be small.
Big assumption right there. The fact that we're getting an Open Beta now does not support that assumption. Please show me a AAA title or dev studio that promised a release date on [DATE] and when that happened, the customers got an Open Beta? Did we get an Open Beta on the release date of Assassin's Creed or Project Cars 2 or The Witcher 3?
Originally Posted by Flogger23m
Open Betas are supposed to represent a fairly stable build of the game. The majority of the bugs should already have been ironed out, meaning the difference shouldn't be that large between the Open Beta and release.
Damson, If this platform is in constant development, then it can be nothing other than a 'beta' at every single stage and will never become a stable release
Not necessarily. It just means that getting the release version doesn't get you the final product. There can be a released 2.5, but it's probably going to be superseded by 2.6 at some point. If that's the case, then I don't see why release versions are special except perhaps in the case of significant bugginess as I mentioned. If the 2.5 OB is a stable piece of software though, then it's as good as a release version.
Originally Posted by - Ice
Lol!! So if something gets new features and fixes, then it's in perpetual beta, huh? So I guess Windows 10 was never "released" as we then had the Anniversary Update, Creators Update, and Fall Creators Update... all this time we were using Windows 10 Beta. Such wow! Many logic! Amazement!!
I guess it depends on your definition of beta, but the label isn't the point. It's about the software we get. If the OB is the same as the release version, minus having OB in the title, what's the difference? Especially if 2.5 will only ever be an intermediate state of DCS.
Again, yes..... the question/complaint/solution is very commonplace. Still doesn't justify comparing ED with other dev studios especially AAA ones. Like I said before, just because other studios are doing this does not mean ED is excused for doing so and besides...
Why not?
Originally Posted by - Ice
...ED practicing the same procedure as a AAA studio does not mean ED will get the same results under the same timeframe as AAA studios.
I'd imagine it will be similar to other independent games of similar scale, which typically ranges from months to years.
Originally Posted by - Ice
Big assumption right there. The fact that we're getting an Open Beta now does not support that assumption.
What is why I said should.
Originally Posted by - Ice
Please show me a AAA title or dev studio that promised a release date on [DATE] and when that happened, the customers got an Open Beta? Did we get an Open Beta on the release date of Assassin's Creed or Project Cars 2 or The Witcher 3?
Not necessarily. It just means that getting the release version doesn't get you the final product. There can be a released 2.5, but it's probably going to be superseded by 2.6 at some point. If that's the case, then I don't see why release versions are special except perhaps in the case of significant bugginess as I mentioned. If the 2.5 OB is a stable piece of software though, then it's as good as a release version.
So why are we getting an Open Beta and not a Release version?
Originally Posted by Exorcet
I guess it depends on your definition of beta, but the label isn't the point. It's about the software we get. If the OB is the same as the release version, minus having OB in the title, what's the difference? Especially if 2.5 will only ever be an intermediate state of DCS.
The label **IS** the point. If you get a product full of bugs, "Oh, what do you expect? It's a Beta!" can be a perfectly valid excuse which they cannot utilize if the product is labelled Release Everyone here understands the difference between Beta and Release versions.... it's only you guys that is insisting on different definitions and even stating 2.5 will only ever be an intermediate state? **ALL** products that get developed or get post-release support are in an intermediate state, but none of them blur the lines of Beta and Release like you're insisting for DCS. Windows 10 was RELEASED although it's in an intermediate state, then Windows 10 Anniversarry Edition was RELEASED although it's in an intermediate state.... Elite Dangerous was released, then we got Horizons which was released, then we're getting [forgot the name] which is going to be released. We were **NOT** playing with Windows Beta all this time; we were **NOT** playing with Elite Dangerous Beta all this time.
Originally Posted by Flogger23m
Why not?
Aaaannnddd.... we're going 'round in circles now. Re-read the posts as to why not.
Originally Posted by Flogger23m
I'd imagine it will be similar to other independent games of similar scale, which typically ranges from months to years.
You can imagine all you want.
Originally Posted by Flogger23m
What is why I said should.
Why even make an assumption when we can already see that the assumption is already wrong. ED *should* do their job right and so the work between Open Beta and Release *should* be small.... but then why are we getting the Open Beta on the RELEASE date and not before?
Originally Posted by Flogger23m
I never made that argument.
That was just a follow up to my statement about Open Beta being released on the RELEASE date.... something no other dev group or studio does. Why should we then compare ED to other dev studios and AAA groups when ED clearly does things its own way and none of the other studios do this? Why should we accept ED's "commonplace" practice when it clearly results in a non-commonplace outcome (Open Beta on release date)?
Originally Posted by Flogger23m
Originally Posted by - Ice
That remains to be seen
One can only hope.
Well, I can see your level of confidence on ED seeing as you've not taken any of the wagers set earlier
Joined: Mar 2003 Posts: 3,922Paradaz
Senior Member
Paradaz
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,922
UK
I think it's pretty clear that if we're discussing or arguing what the definition of EDs 'release version' is then everyone else is just as confused too.
So ED have pulled the wool over everyone's eyes and can happily release 2.5 in whatever state they want knowing they have a fall-back position of claiming the release build/release version is still unfinished and was never intended to be either, and their cycle of never finishing their content continues as normal.
Great.
What's the odds on the presence of some absolute howlers come the end of the month and whats the chances of a multitude of campaigns not being fully integrated/compatible? I guess we'll see the first indication in a couple of days.
On the Eighth day God created Paratroopers and the Devil stood to attention.
I'm pretty sure he references the increased details
But, this got me thinking - will 2.5 stop AI from shooting missiles (AT-3 Sagger for instance) right through 7 store buildings like they can today? Or is it just eye-candy all the way?
I'm pretty sure he references the increased details
ah....to the naked eye, I made comment on what is the obvious.....put yourself in the backers\supporters or those who are directly or indirectly sponsored by ED\TFCs shoes who comment\reply on posts here at SimHQ that state the obvious (or do they)......I would have my name in the credits within the 'DCS World' would I not?
numerous posts that 'state the obvious' get responses such as mine by those who are directly or indirectly endorsed by ED....(this includes those who at some stage were 'moderators' over the fence and are no longer 'moderators' or 'testers' yet comment on what is perceived to be 'the obvious'
did I really seek clarification on what actually is the obvious? or was I just asking someone to point out the obvious........
#4402558 - 01/30/1812:17 PMRe: 2..5 Release Date ANNOUNCED!!
[Re: KeyCat]
I'm pretty sure he references the increased details
But, this got me thinking - will 2.5 stop AI from shooting missiles (AT-3 Sagger for instance) right through 7 store buildings like they can today?
That's what I read and makes us rotor heads spinning round on the floor
We will know tomorrow.
perhaps KeyCat...or will it be an unmitigated disaster.....like Nevada, WW2 map and any other major update which no doubt will break the download and have Huckleberry Finn come up with the 'community' solution on utorrent outside of DCS\TFC that solves the download issue for the end user.
I popped on here a few minutes ago to see a thread announcing it was out so I dashed off to do the update only to find it's not and the thread had gone.
Not showing up for me yet. I'm running both the 1.5.8 release and the 2.0 Open Alpha. I'll try later.
The update is for the 1.5 OB. Since you don't have it installed you will have to wait for the v2.5 installer exe to be posted which probably won't happen for a day or two.
I had OB 1.5.8 installed, wanted to fly it today before 2.5 comes. I was very surprised when it asked me if I want to update to 2.5. Currently downloading, 20% complete!
Try running this command from your 1.5 DCS\biin folder.
DCS_Updater.exe update @openbeta
However, this will replace your v1.5 with v2.5 OB. Come to think of it, you could run that command from your v2.2 folder and it would replace your v2.2 with v2.5 OB.
Would be nice to hear reviews from those that have it.... but I thought it won't get here till tomorrow?
When's the standalone installer going to be available? 2nd Feb?
Thanks!
I'm pleased with the release, had few flights - the sim runs fine, comparable to 1.5.8 on my rig (i5 6600K, GTX970, 16GB RAM). I captured some footage from one of the flights. Will post the link when the vid finishes uploading to youtube (9GB 2-3 hours).
I'm not sure about standalone installer, I had my open beta (1.5.8) updated to 2.5.0.
Edit: Since I'm going to sleep soon, I will throw the link here:
the video is still uploading and will take additional time to process by YT to high quality. It should be ready in less than 3 hours, maybe even 2.
Would be nice to hear reviews from those that have it.
Menus are a little slow for whatever reason, but I had my OB installed on my backup HDD and not my SSD, so I can't make a direct comparison to 1.5/2.0 which are on my SSD.
I'm running the Georgia map on custom high settings, GTX970:
30-40 FPS is the norm, though I've hit 60 near the ground when not directly over dense areas. I haven't really played with settings yet. So far it's working fine, but I spotted a couple of minor bugs. One related to changing the resolution and the other to a blue shine appearing on bridges and some buildings.
#4402709 - 01/31/1804:56 AMRe: 2..5 Release Date ANNOUNCED!!
[Re: damson]
Still no standalone version so I guess that'll come tomorrow or the 2nd Feb.
Not watched the whole video, only the first few minutes but found it weird to have different draw distances for the buildings and the trees... with the trees fading in much closer-in. Made the further mountains look barren. The lack of grass looked weird too.... but maybe it's just because I've not flown in DCS for so long. How does high-altitude look like? I remember one Nevada screenshot here with the terrain looking very out-of-focus on a high-altitude screenshot.
I'll need to get set up again in the gaming room to give this a proper try.
The color palette is far too pastel tones for my liking & outside the cockpit is way too light and shiny whilst inside the cockpit is way too dark.
Also take a look at the real Caucasus mountains are jagged angular bastards, in game it looks like someone has draped a massive green blanket over them, everything just looks soft. The baseline textures also seem to be way worse than 1.5.8
I'm pretty sure he references the increased details
But, this got me thinking - will 2.5 stop AI from shooting missiles (AT-3 Sagger for instance) right through 7 store buildings like they can today?
That's what I read and makes us rotor heads spinning round on the floor
We will know tomorrow.
perhaps KeyCat...or will it be an unmitigated disaster.....like Nevada, WW2 map and any other major update which no doubt will break the download and have Huckleberry Finn come up with the 'community' solution on utorrent outside of DCS\TFC that solves the download issue for the end user.
Just took the Gazelle for a short test run and pleased to see...
Hugging a tree = Booom! Tree (and other objects) = No AI LOS Higer mesh resolution I rate this as one of the best updates since LOMAC 1.0 for all rotor heads as well as CA commanders
Originally Posted by Haukka81
Fps will stay high but do not use msaa and defered shading same time, they wont work well together.
Unfortunately so but without MSAA it is jaggies all over, at least for me on a 2K monitor but I maybe doing something wrong, still early days.
Performance wise I lost quite a few FPS down low in the weeds with the Gazelle (~35-40 vs 45-60) but I'm still tweaking and I do use MSAA 2x along with deffered shading since I can't stand the "back to the 90's jaggies" but I need to check all my settings so I don't miss something. 1.58 is crystal clear on my 2560x1440 screen in that regard :-/
Is it perfect? Most likely not and I still miss my AH-64A/D . But at least the 4+ years of waiting for EDGE is over and hopefully things will speed up at ED - some positive thinking and time will tell...
Last edited by KeyCat; 01/31/1801:34 PM.
>> It's all about teamwork! <<
#4402733 - 01/31/1801:28 PMRe: 2..5 Release Date ANNOUNCED!!
[Re: KeyCat]
Quite a few people are complaing that the sim doesn’t look at all like the videos on YT. In order to fix that, do the following... In order to let DCS rebuild shaders - go to: Saved Games>DCS.openbeta> - delete fxo folder, options.lua and metashaders and switch off MSAA.
Performance should be on par with previous versions. Quite extraordinary considering 2.5 is such a step up, visually.
"It's not the years honey, it's the mileage..."
#4402739 - 01/31/1802:16 PMRe: 2..5 Release Date ANNOUNCED!!
[Re: KeyCat]
Hugging a tree = Booom! Tree (and other objects) = No AI LOS Higer mesh resolution
Great News! Keep reporting new finds for us non betatesters Anything on AI side, do you (as a horrible swede) fly Viggen? If so, do AI respond to formation orders etc? Looks are a bit secondary for me, I need better simulation.
I'm a shame LOL - don't have Viggen, to little time I guess
I've only mucked around in the Gazelle and a few minutes in Su-33 to check up in the blue (it really looks good if u bump up the trees). I gonna try to fix my AA problems and just downloaded ReShade to see if things change. Gonna try DSR as well.
As a side note: I you fly the Gazelle the rudder trim options is gone in the GUI (huuuhhh ???) but I found a work around. Just edit the file "options.lua" in your config folder and change ["RudderTrim"] = false, to ["RudderTrim"] = true,
Quite a few people are complaing that the sim doesn’t look at all like the videos on YT. In order to fix that, do the following... In order to let DCS rebuild shaders - go to: Saved Games>DCS.openbeta> - delete fxo folder, options.lua and metashaders and switch off MSAA.
Performance should be on par with previous versions. Quite extraordinary considering 2.5 is such a step up, visually.
I deleted options.lua only and saw a jump in FPS and a lot less stuttering around cities. I'll have to try the shader rebuild later too.
At the moment performance is very good, but I've only been flying solo. Now that I have settings nearly sorted I can start some stress testing.
Thanks for the feedback guys! I do hope this is the start for more positive things on ED!
I don't really care much for graphics now, but DCS always looked pretty. Any chance of on-the-runway pics? It seems like the grass doesn't show up from aerial shots? With more trees, the open spaces now just looks more flat, but like I said, I just may be remembering DCS wrong. Also, with more trees, the further mountains look barren or less 3D.... won't be an issue for helo pilots or low-flying A-10s but for others.... but again, this may be a slider/setting issue.
I may need to dig in my old Photobucket account to see if I have some old screenshots to compare against.
Still no standalone version so I guess that'll come tomorrow or the 2nd Feb.
Not watched the whole video, only the first few minutes but found it weird to have different draw distances for the buildings and the trees... with the trees fading in much closer-in. Made the further mountains look barren. The lack of grass looked weird too.... but maybe it's just because I've not flown in DCS for so long. How does high-altitude look like? I remember one Nevada screenshot here with the terrain looking very out-of-focus on a high-altitude screenshot.
I'll need to get set up again in the gaming room to give this a proper try.
In my environment, visibility settings in option menu needs to be set to "Ultra" otherwise tree pop up is very visible
lucky people on steam , having decent servers to download from ... not crap slow ED ones
You'll typically find when torrenting the DCS updates that your upload speed is far higher than your download speed. Normally it's the other way around but not with the DCS community.
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
Reading that some people have slightly less fps makes me a bit nervous - for VR things seemed to be really on the casp: I had no issues running the old map, even the Nevada (more recently. Initially it was worse I think), but Normandy was still a stutter fest. Anyway, it's not like I'm going to try it anytime soon as long as baby cries every 10min every night - I'm lucky if I can get a 10min break to play something and not pass out instead...
FYI: I now (mostly) fixed my issue with the jaggies
All settings in nVidia CPL to Application controlled , deleted shader caches in config folder and loaded SMAA with ReShade 3.1.1 it is not as good as MSAA x8 I use in 1.58 a major improvement
ReShade was the key, you can still see some jaggies on some objects if you looking for it but as I said, major improvement. Some object like power line towers still shimmers a bit but I can't have it all I guess
6 hours download on Virgin Vivo 200 here, 2 hours trying to set up 3 screens in nvidia surround...I give up.
Every time I reinstall this game it beggars belief the level of configuration it takes to get it up and running,hours of trawling forums looking at 7 year old posts to try and find out the line of .lua I need to change, while trying to comprehend why not a single user friendly feature has been implemented over the years.
It's still an utter #%&*$# fest of conflated nerdish config.
...anyway I don't know if it's because of the beta state or something I'm doing wrong on my end, what I do know is a few checkbox's in the GUI would save a ton of frustration, something ED are clearly incapable of grasping.
I have DCS alpha on my PC. I deleted the other yonks ago to play Normandy and Nevada.
So what am I doing here?
Downloading a whole new module?
And what happens then to my activations? I’m thinking about buying a new PC soon and am worried all these various installs and re-installs will wipe the number of activations I have for aircraft (this system is outrageous by the way - surely when u buy the module you should get to keep it).
Your activations are in your registry so they will remain untouched regardless of the downloads/updates.
However, if you are going to build/buy a new machine, you will want to deactivate each module on the old machine before installing on the new machine. This will allow you to save an activation for each module.
Well I had high hopes for 2.5. I see no difference in performance from the alpha. Nevada, the empty wasteland, is the only map that has no stutters. As a VR experience DCS is piss poor unless one drops all sliders then the tree pop ins are just rediculous. Like theyre growing right in front of you. Thank you ED and those folk who say the "release" will basicaly be the same as the beta. I have absolutely no doubt now that DCS is a complete waste of time for myself. So many years in development for such a disapointment.
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
Your activations are in your registry so they will remain untouched regardless of the downloads/updates.
However, if you are going to build/buy a new machine, you will want to deactivate each module on the old machine before installing on the new machine. This will allow you to save an activation for each module.
Thanks but am I downloading something completely new? I can’t follow all the various strains of releases any more
You could update the alpha to the new beta through the command line. Or you could download the new stand alone beta 2.5 from the downloads page at Dcs website. It is "something completely new" however as you have the alpha it will transfer data from your alpha to the beta directory so your download will be smaller but still take hours to complete. I didnt have to re activate anything. Sorry it wont transfer data it will copy the data from alpha to beta.
Last edited by Johnny_Redd; 02/02/1803:36 AM.
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
Well I had high hopes for 2.5. I see no difference in performance from the alpha. Nevada, the empty wasteland, is the only map that has no stutters. As a VR experience DCS is piss poor unless one drops all sliders then the tree pop ins are just rediculous. Like theyre growing right in front of you. Thank you ED and those folk who say the "release" will basicaly be the same as the beta. I have absolutely no doubt now that DCS is a complete waste of time for myself. So many years in development for such a disapointment.
Try setting the slider to 100% and then set object shadow to Flat, no popups for me and by doing so I gained ~15 FPS with my GTX 980.
That i dont know. I would assume you'd have to download the 2.5 "release" and it would transfer data from your alpha/beta to the "release". But once you get your new PC you'd have to do it all again
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
#4403037 - 02/02/1802:48 PMRe: 2..5 Release Date ANNOUNCED!!
[Re: KeyCat]
Well I had high hopes for 2.5. I see no difference in performance from the alpha. Nevada, the empty wasteland, is the only map that has no stutters. As a VR experience DCS is piss poor unless one drops all sliders then the tree pop ins are just rediculous. Like theyre growing right in front of you. Thank you ED and those folk who say the "release" will basicaly be the same as the beta. I have absolutely no doubt now that DCS is a complete waste of time for myself. So many years in development for such a disapointment.
Try setting the slider to 100% and then set object shadow to Flat, no popups for me and by doing so I gained ~15 FPS with my GTX 980.
I have my shadows on flat. I have a 1080ti i have a 4.6 cpu. BoS looks increadable in VR. Its smooth as silk at a constant 90fps. DCS just hasn't got it right. Sure it looks good on a flat monitor, performance is good on a flat monitor but VR is the future. Judging by EDs track record it will take them a decade at least to get VR acceptable for me. After so many years in development its so disappointing. Thanks for the suggestion but I will uninstall and once its possible i will gift all my modules. I will forget all about this platform. To frustrating and too disappointing.
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
Yeah ok call it rage quit. Whatever man. Performance bugs? Throw them on the to-do pile of other bugs. I'll play something else. I'll free up multiple GB on my hard drive. Im not playing on your PC so.... what does your performance have to do with me? You may be happy with a shimmering, jaggy stutter fest i am not. Can you grasp that? I hope they do "iron out" the performance bugs for everybody who purchased anything for DCS. I hop y'all have fun
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
Just play something else until performance bug’s are ironed out.
I get quite good performance with my rig(in sig)
Also, if you insist on VR being perfect, that is your own self-imposed limitation. I still enjoy flying on my 4k monitor.
Yes it is my self imposed limitations. Thats how i want my experience to be. Why do you make it sound like a bad thing? Its my choice. BoS offers that experience. DCS does not so far.
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
I have my shadows on flat. I have a 1080ti i have a 4.6 cpu. BoS looks increadable in VR. Its smooth as silk at a constant 90fps. DCS just hasn't got it right. Sure it looks good on a flat monitor, performance is good on a flat monitor but VR is the future. Judging by EDs track record it will take them a decade at least to get VR acceptable for me. After so many years in development its so disappointing. Thanks for the suggestion but I will uninstall and once its possible i will gift all my modules. I will forget all about this platform. To frustrating and too disappointing.
Thanks for the suggestion but I will uninstall and once its possible i will gift all my modules.
You may have to wait for years for the ability to gift modules again
Well they're all deactivated. They all have 9 activation's remaining. They will sit gathering dust but not on my hard drive. Maybe when the p47 and 262 are released and the "Copy of any Eagle Dynamics developed DCS product" are available ED may get around to customer support and I can give them away. Until then adios amigos.
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
Joined: Mar 2003 Posts: 3,922Paradaz
Senior Member
Paradaz
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,922
UK
Originally Posted by cichlidfan
Also, if you insist on VR being perfect, that is your own self-imposed limitation. I still enjoy flying on my 4k monitor.
What graphical settings are you using in-game? I noticed you are playing with very similar spec to me (6700K @4.6GHz, GTX 1080 OC, 32GB RAM) and a 4K monitor too and the framerate is chugging at anything above medium. MSAA off, AF on x4 and flat shadows. Performance is a lot worse than before where I could have the majority of settings at High with 8 x AF
On the Eighth day God created Paratroopers and the Devil stood to attention.
I am not at home right now. My recollection is that most things are set to high, flat terrain shadows, MSAA off. I haven't done a frame rate test since v2.5 installation but if feels smooth from my test flights in the Huey and A-10C. I will be home, and able to test, in about 18 hours.
Joined: Mar 2003 Posts: 3,922Paradaz
Senior Member
Paradaz
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,922
UK
Just looked at the ED forum message board. I think this probably explains it. 2.5 is clearly an unoptimised mess. The biggest problem is abnormal RAM and VRAM usage with low GPU utilisation. In multiplayer the RAM usage jumps from 8-10GB single-player up to 16-20GB which is ridiculous. Anyone with 8GB system RAM is going to be crippled in multiplayer until it’s fixed.
But it’s a beta? Yep, a beta that has been thrown out in whatever state it was in at the end of Jan! What happened to the internal team hard at work doing their testing?
I thought there was either something wrong with my settings but everyone has stated the same regarding those lime green trees (over-saturated deferred shading?) and little variation in the the base models, it’s all so garish. I think I’ll wait until ED unleash the ‘release’ version but I can’t see this happening for a while with so many performance issues.
For anyone wanting to persevere with the beta, a temp workaround on the borked lighting/colour palette after removing all the cached shaders etc. is to;
Deactivate Deferred Shading Activate HDR Go into Caucasus and fly anywhere (game rebuilds shader config) Exit map Deactivate HDR Activate Deferred Shading
It should look a lot better but overall performance won’t change
Back to XPlane 11 and BOS it is then.
On the Eighth day God created Paratroopers and the Devil stood to attention.
a beta that has been thrown out in whatever state it was in at the end of Jan!
Pretty much where I'm at with this too, they've stuck a few new trees in, subdivided a mesh, and tweaked some textures, but at it's core it is still an un-optimised undeveloped bug ridden legacy mess.
...just enough to hold up overpriced modules for those with the patience to endure the issues...no change there then.
You mean to tell me flying tanks is not realistic?
Okay, okay, 2.5 is a mess, but it's not like that's a surprise. We suspected they'll release 2.5 in whatever state it's in, at least they had the decency to call it an Open Beta and not insist it's a Release version. Now who's taking bets that Release will come in 1-2 weeks as they originally stated?
I think DCS WW2 will suffer heavily when Bodenplatte gets released reducing ED's market, and this sorry excuse for ground unit sim CA module has made its best to get a lousy reputation since release so they can call it "authentic and realistic simulation" all they want.
Ice, I'm sure 2.5 will release within February but as Paradaz says, it will take 1 or 2 years before it's what it should've been.
Look at my half-assed DCS Viggen module, features comes and goes and now, more than a year from "release" they have removed the beta status (last summer autumn even IIRC?) but it's still the same weak product with missing features, bugged features, ai not able to loft bomb and going for circles a few tries before unloading a rocket salvo (if at all), no working bort numbers connected to editor and the 8 points I have in a textfile that I check after each release.
Since this is ED's definition of a complete, out-of-beta module, then this is what we can expect from all other modules.
Put it on the marked under beta flag to block people from complaining and do nothing for a year then sell it as complete. This is what we get for paying in advance, why bring more costs to your project when you already have the dollars.
Bloody Hell if I'm not getting annoyed when writing this, I need to go fly il2-1946 another hour.
Johnny Redd, if you're really gonna gift your modules I'd love to try out the Spitfire! If you have it, of course. But yeah, I think it took me about four or so hours to finally download this. Then when I finally got it started....it froze on me. Had to turn of my laptop and restart it. Then I got a slideshow when I got it running. Eventually I got it sorted out by playing with the settings but I'm not really thrilled with the look. My Mustang cockpit looks white when the sun is on it. The F-86, too. And the A-10 is too black! I'm happy to see that it doesn't replace your 1.5 install. I do love flying my Sabre, so I can go back to that until they fix this. Or, never, I suppose, 'cause I was actually fine with 1.5.
"From our orbital vantage point, we observe an earth without borders, full of peace, beauty and magnificence, and we pray that humanity as a whole can imagine a borderless world as we see it, and strive to live as one in peace." Astronaut William C. McCool RIP, January 29, 2003 - Space Shuttle Columbia
#4403253 - 02/03/1810:49 PMRe: 2..5 Release Date ANNOUNCED!!
[Re: Dondy]
14 hours ago (edited) Sometimes i wonder just what on earth developers must think when something this unexpected is happens with their game...
I have often wondered that myself when people find major flaws in their game.....However this just proves that the official testers are spending too much time in the hornet to bother actually doing their job and test the software being released to run the Hornet.
$19.99USD for a neglected POS module that the 'official' testers gave up testing back in 1.2.0
I love it when I see video's and posts\quotes from the Devs telling the consumers how far their development has come only for some Joe-Blow Public to prove them wrong.
ED's response is quite similar to Bill Gates at the end of this video
In ED's case, they already shipped the software already even with the flaws\bugs and nothing actually being tested by those endorsed by the developers. It's like, release it in a broken state and then go back to working on the hornet, then find some other new module to work on for the next few years before actually fixing the software the modules are designed to function in.
The price is a steal because he paid $19.99 for a neglected POS module when it could very well be $39.99 for a neglected POS module?
CA isn't just an MP JTAC module, at least that's not the plan for it:
Quote
Assume the role of a Joint Terminal Attack Controller (JTAC) in multiplayer and designate targets for player-controlled close air support aircraft, or directly control armor vehicles or air defense weapons and engage the enemy.
When it was first released, the plan was for it to be basically DCS Ground Combat from what I heard... one of my buddies bought the module and was just gushing about how cool it was.
Thanks for the suggestion but I will uninstall and once its possible i will gift all my modules.
You may have to wait for years for the ability to gift modules again
Well they're all deactivated. They all have 9 activation's remaining. They will sit gathering dust but not on my hard drive. Maybe when the p47 and 262 are released and the "Copy of any Eagle Dynamics developed DCS product" are available ED may get around to customer support and I can give them away. Until then adios amigos.
If you ever figure out a way to gift them I'd gladly take a module or two off your hands.
However this just proves that the official testers are spending too much time in the hornet to bother actually doing their job and test the software being released to run the Hornet.
I don't know how big DCS's QA team is, but I'm gonna guess it's small, real small. I was QA lead for Acclaim Entertainment's Austin studio back in the early 2000's, and we dealt with console titles exclusively. I had 18 guys working for me at any given time, which at the time was the worlds largest studio QA team (sure sounded good on my resume). That was for a publisher with AAA titles, huge budgets etc., 18 testers. It would take my guys a week to roll through a platformer, so imagine what testing something as free form as DCS would be like? The publishers are where the big groups of testers are (corporate had between 100-300 testers on at any given time depending on what was getting close to release), and ED doesn't have a publisher to provide that kind of support.
So not saying that particular bug should/shouldn't have made it out into the wild (also remember 2.5 is beta, not release). Just remember that ED probably doesn't have near the resources to do as thorough a job testing as most assume they do/should.
Joined: Mar 2003 Posts: 3,922Paradaz
Senior Member
Paradaz
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,922
UK
Exactly, so what sort of progress do you really think will be made when they only start 'testing' mid January on a complex title like DCS? I'm not sure why people still defend ED like this.......it doesn't reflect on the community not understanding the issues, it reflects on ED management being utterly incompetent because it's them that aren't planning, resourcing and setting the correct timeframes for their integration and test activities.
Oh, but it's a beta so we should expect lots of bugs and problems? No, not to this extent......this is software that is already 5 years late and has allegedly being worked on as a priority for a long time now.
On the Eighth day God created Paratroopers and the Devil stood to attention.
However this just proves that the official testers are spending too much time in the hornet to bother actually doing their job and test the software being released to run the Hornet.
I don't know how big DCS's QA team is, but I'm gonna guess it's small, real small. I was QA lead for Acclaim Entertainment's Austin studio back in the early 2000's, and we dealt with console titles exclusively. I had 18 guys working for me at any given time, which at the time was the worlds largest studio QA team (sure sounded good on my resume). That was for a publisher with AAA titles, huge budgets etc., 18 testers. It would take my guys a week to roll through a platformer, so imagine what testing something as free form as DCS would be like? The publishers are where the big groups of testers are (corporate had between 100-300 testers on at any given time depending on what was getting close to release), and ED doesn't have a publisher to provide that kind of support.
So not saying that particular bug should/shouldn't have made it out into the wild (also remember 2.5 is beta, not release). Just remember that ED probably doesn't have near the resources to do as thorough a job testing as most assume they do/should.
-Jenrick
I agree jenrick,
Many of the DCS community are happy to help out here, that's why it's in beta first, that's why there are bug sections in each of the sub module forums, there is 1000s of things you could test in DCS, you would need an army to fully test out "all possibilities" for bugs, and in the first stage of the merge too.
Take just the A-10C, how long would it take to fully test out this one module in DCS with all it's systems and weapons.
I'm happy to help and report the bugs in beta builds, I don't go out of my way, just fly missions in a module, if I come across something I will report it.
Originally Posted by Paradaz
Exactly, so what sort of progress do you really think will be made when they only start 'testing' mid January on a complex title like DCS? I'm not sure why people still defend ED like this.......it doesn't reflect on the community not understanding the issues, it reflects on ED management being utterly incompetent because it's them that aren't planning, resourcing and setting the correct timeframes for their integration and test activities.
Oh, but it's a beta so we should expect lots of bugs and problems? No, not to this extent......this is software that is already 5 years late and has allegedly being worked on as a priority for a long time now.
It's the merge finally!! With a new free updated map, that is very well done and most people are seeing better performance too, yes it needs some tweaking still, especially for VR, looking forward to them adding the Vulkan API, should boost up the fps quite a bit.
From my travels around the net lately, most people seem happy with the free update, and no it's not on the ED forum, places like YouTube and all the DCS 2.5 videos, this is the only place, generally, to look at anything in a negative light, so you can keep crapping on ED.
So not saying that particular bug should/shouldn't have made it out into the wild (also remember 2.5 is beta, not release). Just remember that ED probably doesn't have near the resources to do as thorough a job testing as most assume they do/should.
Thanks for sharing! I agree, ED's team is probably tiny but I did not think it would just be 1-2 guys, maybe 5 max? I would've thought there'd be more. But then that's why they have Open Beta, right? However, if they did want to make the end-of-January release date, maybe instead of promising the release at the end of Dec 2017, Wags should've opened the Beta at that point and the community would've been able to play the heck out of the game during the Christmas break and the dev team would've come back by mid-January to a big list of bug reports they could sift through.
Promising a release date and then releasing the Open Beta at that date just doesn't look good for them. If they don't release the Release version by the 3rd week of February, or just release 2.5 in whatever state it's in and call it "Release," it'll look worse.