I don't think this is a deliberate delaying tactic, no. I don't think it's malicious, no.

I do wonder between the two possibilities of "knew it wasn't going to make that date and decided to wait till it was passed to update date" and "didn't know it wasn't going to make that date and internal communication was insufficient to get that info out" which is more likely.

There were certainly SOME people who had to know it wouldn't, programmers still working on it at a minimum.

But my point about calling it pre-alpha stands. You shouldn't call something that just missed a release date "pre-alpha". If they said it was in closed beta, totally makes sense, yes. Going to open beta in a month or so out yet, fine. But if it was still in pre-alpha in November, in what universe will it be released by the end of December?
The very title of the development stage should've rung some bells that it wasn't going to happen.

Maybe they should've kept the "pre-alpha" moniker to themselves, because to me that's the smoking gun that the Dec release was far too ambitious.



The Jedi Master

Far as I understood it, RRG took over certain aspects of the 190, documentation, cockpit and cockpit coding, etc... but alas, all water under the bridge at this point. Sometimes we need to let go of our bitterness and just remember what is important in life

Far as I am concerned, the 109 and 190 were mere days delayed... but I guess its like Obi wan said, from a certain point of view...

It was supposed to be released to testers, not open beta or anything. You still wouldn't be seeing it for months - but that's just Nevada.



Fair enough. I'd call it pre-beta, but I don't know what criteria are used for this internally. There are still features to add, and I don't know if it is feature/mission creep, changing of the guard, or EDGE becoming more capable. In any case, they're trying to make it an absolutely kick-ass piece of terrain.

I see a lot of that on the various forums I peruse and have to smack them upside their heads (especially on the BI forums) and one time on the ED forums I think one guy was like "Just make a waypoint" and Everything Is Solved Regarding CAS. While I've never been a real pilot I know that CAS is more than just a pilot making a waypoint, etc. Matter of fact I had to do a talk on to an A-10C pilot (non-contact) and tell him where a village was. Sure he had his TAD and all his doohickeys but again it was bare bones simple skills at work. Sure you can pass a grid whoopdie-do, but still even with high-tech stuff everything is still very basic there. And quite frankly it's just the new generation man, as I've seen one guy on the BI Forums tell a vet who was in the area for real, told that they had "enough information" and didn't need a veteran's help. Which is why I always support veteran gamers more than civilians, regardless of what game or simulation it is. Granted yeah,some civilians have good ideas but they're still dumb when it comes to real-world applications of things they're supposed to model, "But I read the-" Yeah whatever.

I'm of the opinion that these are video games and not much else.

Agreed, which is why I don't or really roll my eyes when everybody quotes real world specs sometimes too. Yeah that's really great, but simulation performance is what I evaluate. Now if you're flying an Su-27 and you get better mileage with a Mig-29 then something is not right, but still regarding that I'd still ask a vet who's used that system to get a feel for how to apply it to a game or so on. Every game or simulation has it's limitation but again, on the whole I'd ask somebody who actually flew or used X thing and go from there.

There are many Alpha's on the Road to Beta's.....

Forget Nevada, I just want EDGE for the Black Sea at this point.



The Jedi Master