#4191409 - 11/06/15 10:16 AM
Gazelle "might" get multicrew
|
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 156
straycat
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 156
|
Originally Posted by LeGordian View Post I just wanted to ask if there are any news on that now that multicrew-multiplayer seems to be around the corner. Will it be feasible to add to the Gazelle? Obviously, there are possible sources which could prevent this, so I thought it would be worth to check. @ LeGordian: We are not giving away anything to the community about that particular question. I am sorry. We will announce anything if new to this as soon there is something to present. Even if we knew some time scale it is not up to us to promote such functionality as it is a mature change ED will aquire first. We thank you for your honest comprehension Sven I thought multicrew was a mandatory feature for modules than naturally are supposed to have it. Sounds like they might skip it if it is "too hard", like VEAO did. I mean why even start a module that needs it, without knowing if they can do it? Especially on teh gazelle it is critical, because, at least from the looks of it, to use the missiles it requires a dedicated gunner to use the camera, and its not possible for the pilot to use the weapons alone like in the huey. DCS is stuck with multicrew on the L39 at the least that might come out some time in 2016-2017 whenever ED feels like completing it. And the other teams trailing behind. At least on LN and BST we can be sure they will have it. What is interesting how all teams seem to wait for ED to complete it, however a tester admitted the functionality is there and it is not ED holding them back. The wording ranges from "will be ready when ED has it" (BST) to "help the walls are closing in" (VEAO) (not exact quotes) So when did DCS slip from shipping complete products with minor beta issues to open ended early access? Seriously what the #%&*$# is wrong with them? Looks like supreme levels of crap project management.
|
|
#4191419 - 11/06/15 10:48 AM
Re: Gazelle "might" get multicrew
[Re: straycat]
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 8,771
Para_Bellum
Oberkriegkaboomführer
|
Oberkriegkaboomführer
Hotshot
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 8,771
Germany
|
So when did DCS slip from shipping complete products with minor beta issues to open ended early access? Seriously what the #%&*$# is wrong with them? Looks like supreme levels of crap project management.
You really need to calm down a bit about this computer game mate. What I read into this is that the devs simply can't give hard infos about multi-crew until it has been implemented by ED in the first place. Nothing more, nothing less. And why start developing a multi-crew aircraft without the ability to multi-crew in the first place? Uhmm... why not? I seriously doubt the vast majority of DCS players will play such modules exclusively in MP with another human anyway. Look at the Huey: a multi-crew helicopter that works just fine without the multi-crew feature. Give me an AI autopilot with a couple of basic functions such as level flight, hover, pop up, and the Gazelle should work well enough even without multi-crew.
"...late afternoon the Air Tasking Order came in [and] we found the A-10 part and we said, "We are going where!? We are doing what!?"
Capt. Todd Sheehy, Hog pilot, on receiving orders during Operation Desert Storm
|
|
#4191456 - 11/06/15 01:18 PM
Re: Gazelle "might" get multicrew
[Re: VincentLaw]
|
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 156
straycat
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 156
|
My guess is like the Hawk the reason it may not be done is because how much work it would take to redo code because how ED is implementing multicrew. ED declared multicrew as a 2.0 feature of DCS. Which means I will assume all aircraft that would need it by design are supposed to get it. These being F-14, any jet trainer plane. The Huey still works without the second crew man as a gunner because most weapons can be reasonably accurately fired from boresight. The Mi-8 does not really need multicrew because most of the weapons only need the pilot for use. And just being the flight engineer or second pilot to flip a switch a few times is not that necessary for mp, but still BST is probably going to add it. I am wondering who is to "blame" for the situation. Currently I have 2 theories: 1. Something drastic changed in code for multicrew which caused all but the most skilled developers to break down. 2. Some developers simply underestimated the work and gave up. Or perhaps I am imagining too much and multicrew will suddenly work in most modules in a reasonable time. But I think even the L39 fully working with multicrew is at least 6 months away.
|
|
#4191461 - 11/06/15 01:33 PM
Re: Gazelle "might" get multicrew
[Re: straycat]
|
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 488
Snoopy_476th
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 488
Warner Robins Ga, USA
|
I can't speak for other developers but I know why VEAO is unlikely to do it. It has nothing to do with being to complicated and everything to do with how the code for the hawk is written. eD multicrew has only been in work a short time in comparison with the Hawk.
Last edited by Snoopy_476th; 11/06/15 01:51 PM.
|
|
#4191478 - 11/06/15 02:17 PM
Re: Gazelle "might" get multicrew
[Re: Snoopy_476th]
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,130
EagleEye[GER]
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,130
Germany
|
I can't speak for other developers but I know why VEAO is unlikely to do it. It has nothing to do with being to complicated and everything to do with how the code for the hawk is written. eD multicrew has only been in work a short time in comparison with the Hawk. From my understanding: The multicrew-API is relative new, and the HAWK code have to be re-written to use the (new?) API. The 3rd party guys started with coding their stuff with the API`s available at that time and now ED comes with the multicrew-API. It`s now a matter of time, ressources and so on to adapt the code to use the multicrew API. It may be that Polychop didnt have the time yet to evaluate if they could "adapt" the mutlicrew-API for the Gazelle.
Last edited by EagleEye[GER]; 11/06/15 02:18 PM.
|
|
#4191508 - 11/06/15 03:19 PM
Re: Gazelle "might" get multicrew
[Re: straycat]
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,042
cichlidfan
Member
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,042
Woodbridge, VA, USA
|
The problem here is very simple. A vendor proposed an idea for a horse so some other vendors decided to build horse drawn carts based on how they thought the horse would look. Unfortunately, the horse vendor delivered an elephant and none of the horse carts were designed to accommodate an elephant.
ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero, i7-6700K, Noctua NH-D14 Cooler, Crucial 32GB DDR4 2133, Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 256GB, Samsung EVO 250GB & 500GB SSD, 2TB Caviar Black, Zotac GTX 1080 AMP! Extreme 8GB, Corsair HX1000i, Phillips BDM4065UC 40" 4k monitor, VX2258 TouchScreen, TIR 5 w/ProClip, TM Warthog, VKB Gladiator Pro, Saitek X56, et. al., MFG Crosswind Pedals #1199, VolairSim Pit, Rift CV1
|
|
#4191531 - 11/06/15 04:24 PM
Re: Gazelle "might" get multicrew
[Re: straycat]
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 17,632
SkateZilla
Skate Zilla Graphics
|
Skate Zilla Graphics
Veteran
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 17,632
Virginia Beach, VA
|
MultiCrew is not required.
HAF922, Corsair RM850, ASRock Fata1ity 990FX Pro, Modified Corsair H100, AMD FX8350 @ 5.31GHz, 16GB G.SKILL@DDR2133, 2x R7970 Lightnings, +1 HD7950 @ 1.1/6.0GHz, Creative XFi Fata1ity Platinum Champ., 3x ASUS VS248HP + Hanns�G HZ201HPB + Acer AL2002 (5760x1080+1600x900+1680x1050), Oculus Rift CV CH Fighterstick, Pro Throt., Pro Pedals, TM Warthog & MFDs, Fanatec CSR Wheel/Shifter, Elite Pedals Intensity Pro 10-Bit, TrackIR 4 Pro, WD Black 1.5TB, WD Black 640GB, Samsung 850 500GB, My Book 4TB
|
|
#4191533 - 11/06/15 04:27 PM
Re: Gazelle "might" get multicrew
[Re: Snoopy_476th]
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,971
EricJ
Me, just me.
|
Me, just me.
Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,971
Baltimore, MD
|
My guess is like the Hawk the reason it may not be done is because how much work it would take to redo code because how ED is implementing multicrew. Back months ago the topic of multicrew came up for the Super Hornet, but given the code isn't ready yet, and so on, i just put that issue on the backburner. Yes a capability I wanted to implement when it was either stable or ready to implement. But given that there are certain other issues, it may not have happened.
| My Books | Home Page | http://562.combatace.com/ | - 'Nearly everyone felt the need to express their views on all wars to me, starting with mine. I found myself thinking, “I ate the crap sandwich, you didn’t, so please don’t tell me how it tastes.”' - CPT Cole, US Army - "...parade ground soldiers always felt that way (contempt) about killers in uniform." -Counting The Cost, Hammer's Slammers
|
|
#4191534 - 11/06/15 04:33 PM
Re: Gazelle "might" get multicrew
[Re: SkateZilla]
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 864
Charlie_SB
Member
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 864
|
MultiCrew is not required. Exactly! -C-
|
|
#4191545 - 11/06/15 05:08 PM
Re: Gazelle "might" get multicrew
[Re: straycat]
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,429
enigma6584
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,429
Wisconsin, USA
|
Here Straycat, this might help you when you get the next urge to post something.
[edited]
That image is NSFW.
Be more mindful of what you post and don't do it again.
Last edited by Force10; 11/06/15 05:12 PM. Reason: NSFW
|
|
#4191613 - 11/06/15 06:58 PM
Re: Gazelle "might" get multicrew
[Re: straycat]
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,922
Paradaz
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,922
UK
|
Seriously what the #%&*$# is wrong with them? Looks like supreme levels of crap project management. Why would anything that ED mess up come as any sort of surprise? Since the day the first module (Black Shark) was announced they have proven they make it up as they go along. No company could ever have a roadmap that involves 'integrated' modules that need to be re-written in order to actually be integrated......maps that can't be used without an engine re-write, a completely random order of aircraft which are supplied without foes and era associated content........5 year delays......... content that never leaves beta and change logs that are distributed from memory. You couldn't make it up.
On the Eighth day God created Paratroopers and the Devil stood to attention.
|
|
#4191616 - 11/06/15 07:02 PM
Re: Gazelle "might" get multicrew
[Re: Paradaz]
|
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 481
Mustang60348
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 481
|
Seriously what the #%&*$# is wrong with them? Looks like supreme levels of crap project management. Why would anything that ED mess up come as any sort of surprise? Since the day the first module (Black Shark) was announced they have proven they make it up as they go along. No company could ever have a roadmap that involves 'integrated' modules that need to be re-written in order to actually be integrated......maps that can't be used without an engine re-write, a completely random order of aircraft which are supplied without foes and era associated content........5 year delays......... content that never leaves beta and change logs that are distributed from memory. You couldn't make it up. I 100% disagree, they can make it up. Why because they have a virtual monopoly on Jet simulation at the moment. For those in North America, think back to the days when Bell had a monopoly on the phone systems. They could and would demand immediate payment of phone calls you just made or they would cut off your phone. They would demand much higher prices for services than they do now. This is no different. If there was competition ED would not be doing half the stuff they are doing.
|
|
#4191648 - 11/06/15 08:11 PM
Re: Gazelle "might" get multicrew
[Re: straycat]
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,943
Nate
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,943
Dublin, Ireland
|
ED declared multicrew as a 2.0 feature of DCS. Which means I will assume all aircraft that would need it by design are supposed to get it.
Unless you've seen in writing that a certain module is to utilise that feature, you can't assume anything really. The infrastructure for the feature should be available to use in 2.0, for the Devs that wish to make use of it. It is up to them if they want to put work into implementing it, using that infrastructure. Nate
|
|
|
|
Exodus
by RedOneAlpha. 04/18/24 05:46 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|