Learn from their identical mistakes? Um, LN is breaking new ground. The first third party to work on a map, the first third party make a two seater combat jet (simplified trainers excluded), creating their own ground radar systems. LN does more than the other third parties. RAZBAM when asked about their next modules, they said they couldn't do anything about things like the A-7 until ED finished the ground radar. LN said 'We'll make our own goddamn radar'. They don't just make the planes then toss in ED code for the parts like other companies, they build their own. Of course they're going to run into delays, of course they're going to have problems. They're blazing new ground and powering through new mistakes and misteps because they're doing what no other third party is.

You latched on to those TWO WORDS??
That was light-hearted anyway... to go along with the rest of my post, but I can see how it would rub others the wrong way.

Back to taking pictures and keeping up with foreign relations...

Sorry to be a banwagon jumper... But I am in. I suspect our wagon will be full to capacity when the Tomcat is released. The Tomcat will be a Yardstick by witch all others sims are measured. Sort of like the Fishbed is...

Just remember that sarcasm in the form of written text doesn't always carry the same feel as spoken word. I was pretty sure you were not too serious...but there's a chance someone will take it the wrong way.

I'm talking about the general trend among all DCS developers of never, ever living up to their own release deadlines, as well as most other of their own deadlines.

I understand that, and I'm saying that in the case of some developers, that makes more sense than others. When you're breaking new ground with what is possible in the sim, you're going to run into problems, unexpected delays that you simply didn't foresee. The second and third runs through are much easier, since you have a general idea of how things go, but in the case of LN, they're creating whole new component systems, and it's proving to be a greater challenge than they realized, so of course their dates slipped. If they were just working on a module with the same sort of systems and characteristics as their earlier MiG-21 then i would have no sympathy, but they're not, they're doing stuff not even ED has done yet.

After reading many of these threads in which Dev X hasnt met a self-imposed deadline, the customer base either calls for their lynching or rescue.

What many don't notice is that these Devs are part time companies. Or at least that's what they claim to be. So, I'm a bit more understanding, to an extent. It doesn't make me like the delays any more than the rest, but I get it. However, if they continue to miss deadlines, then they truly need to ask themselves some tough management questions. And if it is part time, then they cannot expect full time prices on the products that are released in Beta status with drawn out, finalization schedules. As we've read, that is probably one of the most despised practices in this series.

Being in the sim business, I deal with our contractors directly to get something fixed within a prescribed time. Otherwise they'll push it aside to pursue other interests that make a profit. Maybe ED needs to impose a time limit on Beta status to ensure products are completed and not left in limbo. It would help to restore some trust with the community and possibly push more products out.

I've been burned by dev companies on many products over the years. So now I'm very leery of buying anything from them. I let me $$ speak for me and read a lot of reviews before buying, to ensure I'm getting what I want.

Just my $.02
Back to learning to fight in this confounded MiG-21

-Jeff

If DCS was the Battlefield series or the Call of Duty series y'all would be calling for their heads on a pike, delivering an unfinished game.

Just sayin'

In that case "we'd" have somewhat of a point because "we'd" be paying full price for each update every 2 or so years.

In case of DCS, there was so far one paid upgrade, all the others came for free for the last 8 years. Different genre, different communities, different monetization concepts, anything that's not different apart from being computer games?

lol, Bf4 was redonkulous, dont even compare them.

BF4 at launch was equivelent to A pre Alpha code dump to disk and fix later after they generate revenue from everyone that paid for it.

To an enduser, it might not seem that bad,, to someone that knows what went on on the inside... it was stupid crazy.

BF4 was the most rushed and delivered incomplete title Ive seen since 2003.

Bi Yearly Installments of the same content, and rebooted content, and pple throw money at them,

better yet, ppl throw money at EA Sports every year for updated rosters, and some GFX spitshine.

But EDs the bad guys.. shrug..


The MiG and LN are prolly the best 3rd Party Module/Team outside of ED/BST.

The only knocks people can have against them are delays in physical rewards, and TBH, they arent bound to even fulfill those, since the IGG was not theirs.

Seriously, whats the point in pushing for an Install DVD? the Software is updated on a frequency that would make the DVD obsolete before its even pressed/burned.

TShirts and stuff, ok, cool.

As for delays, they happen.

I dont see why ppl get so crazy over delays, its part of software development,

someone misses a pre-planned release window and everyone loses their friggen mind, do you guys go ballistic when other stuff is delayed outside of DCS realm I wonder? or do you simply do it here for the sake of garnering negative attention upon yourselves?

No Software is perfect, No developer is perfect, however DCSW and its modules are in constant development, so they will never be "done"

21 bestest module. Not only do they model the system function but also throw in the wear and tear stuff to reward mechanical sympathy and make it more a machine than something immune to abuse.

It's a shame that it's not quite done and inaccurate in places. Properly GCI and AI wingmen would really make the module shine.

Oh I see. So because ED aren't screwing us to the fullest extent imaginable (because they'd go bankrupt if they did), all the other ways they're screwing us are alright? Thanks for clearing that one up for me!

OMG!!! Me and Troll ("Troll and I") agreeing on something!! 2016 is going to be a magical year!!



You guys can be my wingman anytime!

BS. You can be mine.

Making light of the rewards is only hurting developers at this point. The tiered rewards structure is there to help put more money in the developers pocket to fund the game. The more developers that make a mockery of it and don't honor these rewards makes people shy away from future crowd funding efforts.

And the old "this product changed hands now...so we don't have to honor the original rewards" bs is getting old.

I don't care much about delayed announcements or screenshots etc...but when money has changed hands up front, honoring what you agreed to should be priority one. Don't offer rewards if the funding goal you set isn't enough to cover it.

In my mind this is a semi-moot point now. I think devs used the crowd funding route to get things up and running and now they have turned into nothing but a pain in the butt for both devs and costomers. I seriously doubt we will see crowd funding again in DCS, especially from established devs, pre-purchases not withstanding of coarse. I am satified with the LN/(that other company) campaign, I mean I got the mig for 19$, but I can see how the rewards thing would leave a sour taste with people looking forward to them. Hopefully new fledgling devs can find a different way cause I most likely will never participate in one again. All in all kudos to LN for trying to make things right.

I reached the level where for me it doesn't matter what LNS say will sell next year. LNS for me is now on par with VEAO and AvioDev. The difference is that VEAO stayed on that level from day one but LNS lowered itself there.

It may be a moot point for you but for many others it is most definitely not. Without the crowd funding would the project have even started? Did the devs have the money to start the project or to see it through until release? Developers are starting a business with other folks money, with the promise of rewards. When you take away the rewards after your project is funded you're pretty much spitting in the face of your backers. "Thanks for the startup cash but we lied about the rewards."
I seriously doubt we will see crowd funding in the normal sense again in DCS, because the Crowd have been burned too many times by this platform. We are seeing a kind of crowd funding with the release of betas and alphas for cash. Unfinished products for full price with the only reward being early access. And there are way too many folk willing to accept this business practice. It's so sad it's pitiful.

It seems to be game-industry wide too. Why do you think it is so prevalent?

Nate

And why did you ignore the first part of my post?