The complaints are a sign that there is still a healthy interest in the platform. Unless the developers listen and act, like other developers have, the interest and enthusiasm for the platform will dwindle. The only modules being released will be diluted military contracts because 3rd parties will disappear due to poor sales. How many 3rd parties sales have suffered due to the current state of DCS world? The mirage, the gazelle, the F5 and the viggens sales, I'm sure, could have been so much better. I myself may have bought a couple of them just to support the platform if the platform was worth supporting. In its current state I don't see it as worth supporting. Add to that The insulting way ED treats some of its customers and it's going to be a very long time before I open my wallet.

Just got 10% warning because i used humor in dcs forums (and one moderator got his feelings hurt somehow) it was very wtf moment , everyone got joke but not this childish mod

I wonder how long it will take until they notice how stupid that is and maybe then get new moderator.

I hope you have a different name over there or you've probably just got another 90% added by the ED forum police that scour other forums looking for heinous crimes.... such as that post above!

One doesn't need 100% to get the big boot.

Nope, i have same name there also.

I work as psyciatric nurse so im used to weird behavior (dcs forums is full of weird behavior)

And here we go, i just got 20% warning and short ban because dcs forums rule 1.5

It's really is weird forum. And only because they let one modederator to be idiot.

Whatever happened to "you can post here but don't be an ass?" Why is your posting rights/status on that forum dependent on whether or not you're "being an ass" on another site?

Rule 1.5? Tom wouldn't last long over there!!

Also, so much for "It's not the opinion that breaks the rules, its the delivery of that opinion."
So much hypocrisy!

As a matter of interest, how many DCS products do you own? I find the moderation of those forums to be a hindrance towards future sales. To treat customers the way they do, let's face facts, the folk who post on those forums are customers and at $50 a module, highly invested customers. The moderators seem oblivious to the idea that the customer is going to think twice about buying the next module, unless it's a highly desirable module and not the "obscure" (can't think of a better word) aircraft/maps that's been released recently. The cracks/problems in the platform are glaringly obvious, the choice of modules is strange, the moderation is appalling, the development is glacial and they treat their customers like cr@p. How on earth are they still in business? Is it a cult thing? "Everything is subject to change". Let's hope so and let's hope they start with the moderators.

I think it's because the market is more for "casually hardcore" gamers who prefer a wide stable of aircraft over being able to actually DO SOMETHING with those aircraft.

With no DC and limited campaign replayability, the "investment" of $50 or so starts to run dry, and so the customer starts looking for his next "fix," his next module. Also, if you think $50 is a "highly invested" customer, you've got it all wrong. Just look at how many people are going along with "This is the best simulation evah! I have every module DCS has released and I can't get enough!!" **THAT** is their market.

Well i have Ka-50, FC-3 , A-10C , F-86, Huey (great), Hawk (crap for now) , Mig-21 (buggy) and Nevada etc..

Of course I can only speak for myself and a couple of other guys at the ED Forums, but I find the currently released and upcoming modules very well chosen.

I don't care about balanced "plane versus plane" stuff. I'm a single-player guy that just wants to learn as many different systems as possible and do as many different things as possible.

But what I don't understand is how they close off DCS for new people.

In "the good old days" for €60 a module contained:

- A plane that was finished
- A manual that was as complete as possible, with all info you could wish for
- A lot of different "random failure" options in the Game Editor
- Training missions
- A variety of unique and interesting Quick Flight missions
- A single player campaign

Today you get:

- A plane, riddled with bugs, that tends to be forgotten in 2 years.


That is literally it.

How the hell must this convince people to go for DCS? The free stuff is better than the paid stuff, which is the weirdest business model ever.

Thank god we still have Leatherneck Simulations that understands this issue and does something about it, but how in hell can new people know about it?

I would love to hear from an "ED minion" how this practice of stripping down modules to "just a half-working airplane" will attract new people to DCS

Why sell the "complete package" for $50 when you can chop it up and end up with $70 or $80?

New people get lured in by the great graphics and working free aircraft and whatever is broken on the newly-purchased module is explained away as "the product is in Beta." The question is how many "the product is in Beta" responses can the new player stomach before wising up?

As far as being a single-player guy, well, how many ways can you drop a bomb, really? The button presses required prior may be slightly different, the HUD symbology will be different, but the general idea is the same. How many ways can you practice the different methods of dropping a bomb before you need to move on to something else? In other words, how many practice runs do you need before you take the training wheels off?

A single multi-role aircraft with a DC makes the process of dropping a bomb much more interesting.... not because it changes the way you must drop the bomb but rather the challenges presented to you en-route to your target and maybe even AFTER you drop the bomb. Or can you even make it that far into enemy territory to drop the bomb in the first place?

Two things I would like to talk about. The dilution of Early Access and the Crimininalization of Customers with an opinion.

They diluted the release states from "release" to "beta" to "early access". All of this happened long AFTER the DCS quality level was lowered by certain modules. They simply retroactively started noticing complaints and then decided to very quietly label new releases with the different terms.

And it is a race to the bottom. Early access means how low can the quality level be on release before the customer stops accepting it.

The hawk completely destroyed the minimum quality level required for a product to be in DCS. It is complete #%&*$# and the developers are inept fools. And so is the Mirage and the CC101.

The LN products are of very high quality in comparison however they have glaring quality assurance problems.


My second point is the way ED treats customers. They are trying to push it as acceptable standard to criminalize customer opinion. Whenever I lose a new ED forum account (one for each module I bought, and I own all modules except 4), it is because a moderator deletes my post for not being respectful. Then I complain about the deletion and the ban the account because I broke a rule that forbids discussing moderators screwin up.

Now here is what ED does not get or is willfully ignoring:

As a customer I do not have to be respectful. If I pay 60€ for your products and I do not like one rivet on your plane I am going to tell you it is #%&*$#. I do not have to be constructive or polite or humane.

Hang on a minute there!!

The Hawk was a product by VEAO... are you telling me that ED **HAS** to be responsible for Q-A'ing products by 3rd party devs before they put it up for sale? Why are you blaming ED for a bad product when ED did not make said product?

interesting point of view..sounds like a good way of being banned/thrown out of a lot of places

ED is responsible for allowing the Hawk. They allowed that piece of trash to pass quality assurance.




If ED screws people of out of 60€ then that is what they get.

I am not defending ED's practices but if you act like an asshat on the premises of most any physical establishment (store, restaurant, etc.) they are likely to ask you to leave.

Online video game business is not a physical establishment. And the impulse to be polite was removed a long time ago when the moderators treated customers like assholes.

And a physical establishment would very quickly be out of business if it would tell people at the front door how they have to behave or else.

See? the problem is right there! People acts like if there is a supernatural difference between online and physical store, there isn't. If you believe that a service does not worth your money then you should just stop buying anything from them and leave them just die and go out of business (or at least not be a part of it). But videogames are a totally new concept where people actually worship a company and keep defending that company no matter what or keep criticizing but still buy something from them in others words keep supporting what they keep criticizing (which turns into whining rather than protests).
If you read some reviews on steam you will find this recurrent pattern where players tends to not accept negative review and attack the reviewer, only god know the mental process that leads to this behaviors.
What makes me laugh is that customers has the power to drag the price down, to restore the old fashioned way where you bought a full game with no DLC or season pass scam, by just not injecting money to any developer/publisher that is just aiming for bad practices but instead what these players do? Yell "shut up and take my money", some will complain later but still when a new version comes out they will still be there yelling "shut up and take my money".

Speaking of DCS i don't care whether the f-18 might be the most realistic aircraft, theoretically speaking, as long as they keep with this bad behavior, bad development and sterile gameplay i will just keep my wallet closed. Why should i keep supporting a company, ED, that just gave me headaches a very little entertainment?!

You must be so much fun at parties...