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.


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%.

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.



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.

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.



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?



That remains to be seen

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 There can be a released 2.5, but it's probably going to be superseded by 2.6 at some point.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.



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.

Why not?



I'd imagine it will be similar to other independent games of similar scale, which typically ranges from months to years.



What is why I said should.



I never made that argument.



One can only hope.

So why are we getting an Open Beta and not a Release version?



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.



Aaaannnddd.... we're going 'round in circles now. Re-read the posts as to why not.


You can imagine all you want.


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?


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)?


Well, I can see your level of confidence on ED seeing as you've not taken any of the wagers set earlier

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.

Two more sleeps

Two more weeks?

Damnit bisher, you've joined the dark side of unpaid betatesters offering gigabytes of space on your hard earned SSD too?

One more Night to go!

Im ready to 2.5 beta or not , finally terrain to use shark and Hueys , trees ahead


And if 2.5 is not bug fest too much i will buy least mirage maybe even hornet ( or may i say 30% of hornet :P

umm, there has always been terrain to use the shark and huey.....

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?

That's what I read and makes us rotor heads spinning round on the floor

We will know tomorrow.

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........

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.

Someone jumped the gun a little

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.

so once 2.5 is out, what,s the normal procedure?

should we uninstall 1.5.XXXX?

will it update from the current OB of 2.2.XXXX ?

or better to uninstall all and reinstall fresh?

That was me. I was a little early. But many on Reddit are reporting they are downloading right now.