for them, it has become a hobby as well, they are the hard core exception - while in flight sims, you have that as a rule, that is why there are so many people connected with a single flight sim, the amount of time needed to master it requires that.

That is why people like me tend to grow caustic towards a developer like the one that develops DCS, years and years of frustration tend to make you less and less forgiving, I´ve been supporting their products for 11 years.

if you want only positive posts - I invite you to go to a website I am part of

www.lockonfiles.com

there, you will find ONLY positive reviews of everything the developer does - reading those pages you would think I am fanboy - does than not bother you ? should I be more objective there and be more critical and realistic about their work ?



and all the skins I make - does that not count toward a positive constructive attitude ?

as always, my 2c.

time to go, bye, bye.

Why the dichotomy?

Nate

simple :

here I am posting my opinions (good or bad) as a member of SimHQ - always within the rules of SimHQ and respectful of the moderation.

at LockOnFiles I am posting news and information to our community - in doing that I am setting the tone of the website, which is a Mod support & News website ( Lockon ... FILES ) that has a forum, it is not a forum website like SimHQ.

the fact that I am personally disappointed with the progress of DCSW and personally very much offended by the attitude of many people connected with the developer towards me I keep separate.

This is where Eagle Dynamics are up the creek with whatever they do ... a portion of the fan base (on both sides) is so passionate (bordering on fanaticism) that a software company can do no right thing, release too early and there are bugs and get jumped on or hold the release they get accused of missing deadlines. Also the communication afforded by the internet with the devs is also a two edged sword, It gives the customer direct access to the devs for information about the game, it also in some cases gives the customer the assumption that they can influence the game company's decisions

I have been playing flight sim games for the past 34 years and I am still blown away by what DCS ( and BMS or even 777) have achieved, So maybe I come from a different generation of gamer who doesn't expect quite as much info from the games company's(all you had was a advert in a computer magazine a couple of weeks before the game was released) and back in the day without the internet there were no "day one patches" Games where probably better tested but nowhere as complicated as the games of today

So all I am saying is that fair enough it may be a persons hobby/passion but at the end of the day there is nothing you or I can do by jumping up and down screaming on forums. If you like the product buy it and play it ... If you don't like the product then don't buy it simple

Yea I don't get the difference either...Is Lockonfiles.com your happy place and SimHQ your anger management room?

You only give us the choice of you being more objective there, is there a check box for you being more fanboy here?

You have contributed more to the community than I ever hope to, but the juxtaposition can be tough to reconcile sometimes..

Edit: Saw your post above Tom while I was typing and I can see that, one is professional and one is private..I get it.

can you imagine me posting at our front page things that are posted in these pages ...

Seriously- you are pretty good at texturing but I've reached a point where I simply can't stand your half backed "opinions" anymore.

I'm a little sorry I have to insert you in my ignore list. Cheers.

Nice newsletter. It's the facts presented honestly and humbly. I can't get upset about delays, like Jesus not showing up to his appointment. Until he walks up and shakes your hand, just pretend he's not coming. I didn't realize WWII was a 1st party project. I really hope they go through an open beta phase as that should catch a lot of bugs.



This needs to stop being a thing to say. Something being a game, its gameness, is independent of it being a simulation. Being a simulation doesn't mean it's not a game and being a game doesn't mean it's not a simulation. They aren't opposites. "It's a game!" "Nuh uh! It's a sim!" This feels like watching two people argue if a green car is green or a car, as if one statement invalided the other's. The implied slings and arrows and motivation behind each assertion (more implying what it's not than what it is) are so obvious and juvenile.

Similarly the statement "it's just a game" has never meant anything. The common implication that something being a game put limits on how detailed, important, serious, frivolous, etc. something was allowed to be is baseless. A game is a human activity like any other and none have any inherit superiority over any other given enough scrutiny. What is really meant when someone says "it's just a game?" You're not allowed it take it seriously? You're only allowed to care so much? You can't be mad at me when I teamkill you? Says who? Anything is just as important and involved as the person experiencing it makes it. "It's just a _____" is a groundless statement no matter what you fill in the blank.



I understand that you care about it and it is weird they don't release it (presumably it exists for their own work) but few people share your concern. Your habit of playing dress up dolly (to put it in the perspective of a uninterested party) with the visuals is fine but it's not aligned with the common user.



Sometimes the "people have extreme views and everyone is staunchly in one or another camp" view says way more about the observer than the situation. The world view that people are fighting and opposed is largely in the eye of the beholder. I don't think Weiss is a fanatic opponent any more than I think murphy is a fanatic proponent. The people that really don't like ED/DCS simply aren't here. Everyone commenting has interest in DCS; how they express that is somewhat different. Disposition probably has more to do with what corner they paint themselves in or others have painted them in in this needlessly antagonistic relationship. Stop with the preloaded "Oh I bet X is gunna hate all over this" or "I guarantee Y is gunna fanboy" and you'll get a chance at an unspoiled conversation.



No. Please communicate. This attitude of "like it or leave" is a bad one. Community input and involvement has a real effect and should be used positively. I won't accept the idea that the only acceptable opinion is positive opinion. Be constructive toward some end but a horde of yes men is doing no one any good.

I agree with this. This is a discussion forum so everyone is entitled to post as long as it's within the rules. I see some posts more or less stating that Tom should't post anything at all...that's not what discussion forums are about. I also see some asking what his motivations are for his posts...we don't have to make it personal. If you don't agree with what an opinion is...counter it with your own. I'm getting tired of members telling other members not to post because they don't agree with their opinion.




This I don't agree with. The "dress up dolly" comment is a borderline personal insult first off.

Secondly, while you may not be interested in skins or making skins...the WWII simming crowd especially has always been after historically accurate skins. While the "common user" may not be interested templates to make skins, that same user may be interested in downloading nicer or more accurate skins. You need a talented skinner that has access to templates for that.

This has been all that's been stated about DCS 2 for the last half year. Why anyone trusts anything written in those newsletters, especially regarding EDGE/DCS 2 anymore is beyond me. "Right around the corner" for 6 months, and now it's "wow, this is so not ready for release". Did it actually take them 6 months to realize what they just told us?

And yes, I do realize that this is really just me and all the other "haters'" fault. I deeply apologize for ruining DCS 2 for everyone else in advance.

Staying on topic because any comments about the fine work Tom does in his own free time in order to maintain a level of authentic fidelity not found in the default game/sim is out of context....

ED quite simply, failed to meet their own estimation in regards to release date. This isn't just once or twice, this is an ongoing trend.

Regardless of promises, previous estimates, ....best guesses - they are seemingly incompetent at the estimation process, be that in the amount of work required, resources needed, funding, concurrent development of commercial coding/contracts or a combination of any of the above they are simply showing a ridiculous amount of INEPTITUDE to the business they are supposedly experts in.

To some people, making excuses, further promises or 'estimates' is good enough.....but for me, no - absolutely not. They have failed to deliver.....I don't care whether 'EVERYTHING IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE', not to this extent it isn't - if they can't forsee an element of risk/change/budget/resources and account for that, then it makes them incompetent without excuse, especially when the delay is consistently for another 6 months or seemingly in this case indefinitely, and especially after previous excuses and failed release dates.

Defend them all you like, create excuses why this is OK - but I find the initial release of KA52, the sudden realisation of 'modular' components needing a complete re-write of the supporting engine, followed by repetitive delays, ongoing BETAS (some modules never leaving beta), an engine re-write and the inability to release the new code in a pre-alpha multiple times a demonstration of INCOMPETENCE.

Slag me off all you like, however as a purchaser of all but one of the available DCS modules I'd struggle to see how anyone could suggest I'm not a supporter/sponsor of ED - this entire post is an advertisement of my level of disdain when there is so much potential given the fact that they are one of very few devs prepared to invest their time and resources into these sims/games doesn't detract that they wouldn't be there in the first place if they weren't making a profit also shows massive inconsideration to their customers and the people that are prepared to lay down funds for an incomplete product in view of releasing something that resembles a 'gold' release further down the line.

The reason I won't post this on their own forums is simply because I know what would happen........if anyone associated with ED cares to reply in public or via PM I'll gladly show you me real disappointment in ED's incompetence because what I'm posting here is tame, however I'll make a best guess that the usual faces will be fairly quiet given the circumstances especially as I can link my own posts from 6 months ago which suggest that ED planning is massively sub-par and that no-one associated with ED seem to have any faith in their own release dates.

The recent newsletter is proof alone that they are way behind a prospective release of end of June 2015, and it wasn't even close as stated in their last newsletter.

There is no pleasing some of you people. It's half way a good thing sims are dying off.

Lets's not blur the truth in order to back up your argument.

Can you give a single example where ED have released a product early? I assume this actually comes down to your definition of 'early' and whether this includes 'alpha' or 'beta'. As far as I'm aware, ED have not released a single DCSW module that is labelled or could be considered 'gold' - to that end, everything they release is defined as 'early', 'beta' or 'alpha', so we (and they) would surely expect bugs to be reported.

Let's also not try to merge the definition of direct customer access, because if you're referring to the official forums, these are stringently developer/customer interaction of positive comments only. There is nothing 'direct access' about it given that the same moderators are also 'community users' on this forum too and official information isn't exclusively released on the ED boards.

If there is an assumption that customer information can influence ED decisions, that should probably be nipped in the bud now.....unless of course anyone associated with ED can give an example that quantifies this.

Everyone reacts to delays differently. I would say that if nobody complained of the delay and there was silence...ED would have real worries as that would mostly mean many have given up and aren't interested anymore.

You're absolutley right.....we should be pleased that a product that was given a release date of +/- years ago has further delays and is consistently given further delays. Yep, I can see the bright side and I have a vision of pure excellence, trust and competence in the developer that is showing me these attributes.

As 'Force's suggests, I'm not here wasting my time in a developer I have no interest in. I'm here because I'm wanting to experience the fidelity that ED has shown previously. It's just their planning/announcements shows complete ineptitude and is backed up by their own announcements. I seriously struggle to see how anyone can, or would want to defend them. They are digging their own grave.

It's funny how people use words like "incompetence" and "ineptitude" when they haven't shown anyone able to do anything better that meets the standards of a combat study sim like DCS does. As a guy who works in a very similar field of work, I think that they deserve my utmost respect. What they do is HARD, in case some of you haven't noticed. Companies who do commercial flight simulators for pilot training have teams of hundreds of people who work around the clock. ED's staff is much, much less numerous than that. And they don't sell their sims for millions of dollars.

There is a reason why game devs do not do flight sims anymore. Few people buy their products, they work with small teams and their game engine is super complex in comparison to big AAA engines.

Good. Fast. Cheap. Pick two.

This is true in every field of engineering, especially flight sims.

Anything better?For example bms.Ed and dcs lie for years.I think that this the people are unable to forgive them.

Are you absolutely certain ED don't sell their sims for millions of dollars? Can you show me their net/gross sales figures for commercial/desktop products? Just because another company isn't doing anything better doesn't mean that ED are a complete liability. You seem to insinuate that there needs to be a benchmark of 1/10 in order to give ED a 2/10.......no, ED seem to be unable to meet THEIR OWN DEADLINES regardless of whether another company is involved or not. That is incompetence, ineptitude and given that both resources and a timeline is based on funding then their financial management is also up for question!

Respect is earned, and whilst individuals may be different...I tend not to give my respect to companies that promote/announce and then fail to deliver. I usually go by the rule of companies that actually do deliver, against timelines, constraints and general day-to-day hardship whilst communicating efficently and truthfully. ED, if they haven't already fallen out of this category have failed long ago.

Whilst I admire ED for what they have achieved so far, I half wish another company comes along and gives them a kick up the backside they so royally deserve. I'm quite sure if this was the case there would be a sudden upturn in productivity and quality.

This is certainly a true statement.

In much of business delays of this sort aren't OK and I fully allow customers to express that their expectation hasn't been met. I would like to vocal about it but I don't see it doing any good. It's a kind of product (sim entertainment software) that isn't as timely as other products in general (cars, bread, clothes, etc.) and there's not much one can do about it. I choose to deal with it by strongly managing my expectations. You're welcome to be upset but I advise finding an alternative not because you have no reason but that it does little good.

I do have antipathy for hollow platitudes though. Misfortune I can handle, but B.S. gets on my nerves. Some people feel they have to manage perception; perhaps it is how they cope. "Pee on my leg and tell me it's raining." It's the latter part that will upset me more. That's why this newsletter is fine to me. It's some bad news but has zero B.S. content. I put that in the win column. I can't feel any poor feelings for the programmers. I know they want to make a software product in half the time with no bugs. They want DCSW2 final more than any customer. If they aren't good enough it's not likely from lack of trying. They are the competency they are, no more and no less. Maybe marketing and development aren't on the same page, that's something to gripe about perhaps.

It's a weird situation where we should permit the process to happen at the process happens, but we also have to acknowledge that customers aren't happy with these delays or marketing is setting up disappointing expectations. Our discontent has to be kept visible and up to date so it doesn't get forgotten but no more than that. Be cynical but keep reminding the world we'd rather not have to be cynical: something like that?