Talk about lame add-ons. A Yak-52?

My vote for...

I'm convinced that the dev team have a huge book of aircraft they keep on a shelf at their offices.

When it's time to pick a new aircraft to develop, they get the tea-lady to flick through the book and they all shout 'stop'! Whatever's on the page goes through for development*

*This may in fact not be true but I can't think of another plausible explanation.

This could prove to be a formidable foe against the Hornet

This would bring some new tactics to air to ground missions.

This doll would provide very professional flight model, it flies like a dream and lands practically itself. This would really redefine DCS as we know it and bring some new life into it. That & chemtrail addon = Win.
Next week? Maybe?

Another thread?

One not enough when bad-mouthing a developer's product-line?

Suppose not, free speech and all

Personally glad about the release myself. Will afford virtual Russian squadrons a realistic training regime, from props to trainer jets to fighter jets.

Sound decision.

Since this was explicitly stated to be a public release of a privately contracted project, it is silly to say such things. While I am not thrilled with the announcement, we have always known that non-commercial contracts provide the core of ED's revenue stream. Personally, I doubt they could have survived without these sort of projects.

What's next? An add-on which integrates 'The Sims' to DCS World? Because after all, everyone needs to nurture a baby through adolescence, into teens and then signing up to the relevant air-force before they can even become a pilot in the first place before their training starts for real. Perhaps there could also be a 'sleep simulator'...every wannabe pilot needs rest, preferably a good 8 hours before strapping themselves into the cockpit.

DCS
Digital Combat Simulator? Not really.




You're absolutely right, and why is that?...........because of incompetence and mismanagement of all the other relevant content.

No. At least that is not the most likely primary reason. What is more likely is that they always underestimated the potential revenue from a given portion of the project and fail to comprehend that they have put far too much time and money into something that they are giving away for free.

Look at P3D for example. They don't give anything away for free, for the most part, and major updates require a new purchase of the product. It may not be as attractive but it makes sure the lights stay on and the bills are paid.

Keywords there...'underestimated', 'failure to comprehend' and 'put too much time and money into something they give away for free'

That's just three examples of the incompetence and mismanagement that I mention, you're disagreeing but then just select words out of the theasurus that mean exactly the same thing....not sure why people try to justify or make excuses on ED's behalf.

I would say that the 3rd example of too much time and money isn't a true reflection. It's not focusing on getting the foundation in place first (the engine) before concentrating on the other content, because they have made more work for themselves and 3rd parties by having to revisit and patch all the modules when the baseline moves. If the planning had been done correctly in the first place whilst accounting for potential risk then they would never have let it slip like it has done and they certainly wouldn't have had to have all the different dev streams in place that they work on concurrently.

There is a difference between being wrong and being incompetent. Without a lot more information I am loath to deem someone incompetent (you really need a lot of inside info to come to that conclusion). The folks that code are probably doing what they can do within the parameters they are given and low level managers are doing the same. The higher level management may have goals that are not apparent. There are too many unknowns to come to a solid explanation as to why things are the way they are.

Regarding the last part, the revenue stream is vital, no matter what else happens. If money is not coming in it does not matter how good, or bad, the plans for the future are. The fact that they can maintain an income is probably far more important than any given milestone for the base environment.

I am not saying that this plan has long term viability but it has, without question, served them so far, else they would not still be producing a product of any kind.

You got my vote!

Why not just find another sim to play and a different forum to visit?

Too much whining. Nobody is forcing you to pay for it.

It is still possible to play DCS entirely for free you know.

You could try doing that yourself

I totally agree with you....however, ED are repeatedly getting it wrong and aren't learning from their mistakes; when we're seeing the same mistakes and delays year after year they're not just mistakes anymore. It's absolutely the definition of 'incompetent' because they are clearly unable to rectify the problem.

I was wondering what my opinion was going to be. Thanks for telling me; I would have never guessed it myself.

Soundtrack link:

https://m.soundcloud.com/btd/soundtrack-for-dcs-yak-52

You don't have the ability to discuss both positive and negative elements of DCS? Most people within SimHQ can do that just fine as proven by the 1000's of threads. If you're recommending people play a different sim and use a different forum, is this because you don't want to see any negativity and would prefer to only see smoke blown up ED's backside? They have their own censored forums message boards for that so I could say the same to you about visiting a different forum...I won't though, SimHQ is here for people to discuss all aspects of DCS and users should know that all opinions can be voiced, and read/heard. Look up what the definition of a forum is if you are unsure.....SimHQ fits the description, the ED boards don't.

Is this addon free or payware?

It hasn't been said but you can bet it won't be free.