#4391936 - 11/29/17 09:57 PM
Re: A letter from Eagle Dynamics
[Re: AggressorBLUE]
|
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 5
Scorlhov
Junior Member
|
Junior Member
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 5
|
A plane with a "lesser" flight model* and non-clickable pit,
Not true, BOX has better flght model and ground handling than DCS. An.Petrovich the chief programmer of BOX was the man who give the first AFM to ED (with su25 and su25T). He give them the "know how" and today he develop flight models for BOX planes
Last edited by Scorlhov; 11/29/17 10:02 PM.
|
|
#4391967 - 11/30/17 03:08 AM
Re: A letter from Eagle Dynamics
[Re: - Ice]
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,168
Flogger23m
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,168
US
|
And so where is ED's WWII stuff compared to BoS?
The big problem seems to be the way the 3rd party imploded so early into development. I don't recall if any of them were directly hired to work for ED, but that situation was certainly a mess and likely a large reason for the excessive delay. Maybe not the only reason, but in large part. But there certainly have been a number of WWII planes and a map/AI content released. No idea how it all is because I only have the P-51D. I also fail to see how "build upon old content" is in any way a factor.... this isn't like BMS where the old content was done by totally different people under a different company. While you could argue that people who made the old content in DCS may no longer be working for ED, fact still remains that the old content was developed under ED and the new content is being developed under ED. Surely there's some documentation somewhere.... so how is old content in ED's case a factor?
The difference is ED has to update old content and make sure it is compatible. On the other hand, 777 may build new content but there is a larger potential profit for new content. I'm sure there are still people buying that old KA-50, but probably not very many. But it does have to be updated. Again, this is certainly a downside to the DCS World concept. When you have modules that apparently take 2-3 years each it becomes difficult to keep everything updated due to the length between releases. WWII planes or simplified modern aircraft seem like a more ideal module type for this business model. It doesn't seem sustainable to me, but maybe something will change in the future...
|
|
#4391969 - 11/30/17 04:15 AM
Re: A letter from Eagle Dynamics
[Re: Flogger23m]
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 772
Johnny_Redd
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 772
|
And so where is ED's WWII stuff compared to BoS?
The big problem seems to be the way the 3rd party imploded so early into development. I don't recall if any of them were directly hired to work for ED, but that situation was certainly a mess and likely a large reason for the excessive delay. Maybe not the only reason, but in large part. But there certainly have been a number of WWII planes and a map/AI content released. No idea how it all is because I only have the P-51D. I also fail to see how "build upon old content" is in any way a factor.... this isn't like BMS where the old content was done by totally different people under a different company. While you could argue that people who made the old content in DCS may no longer be working for ED, fact still remains that the old content was developed under ED and the new content is being developed under ED. Surely there's some documentation somewhere.... so how is old content in ED's case a factor?
The difference is ED has to update old content and make sure it is compatible. On the other hand, 777 may build new content but there is a larger potential profit for new content. I'm sure there are still people buying that old KA-50, but probably not very many. But it does have to be updated. Again, this is certainly a downside to the DCS World concept. When you have modules that apparently take 2-3 years each it becomes difficult to keep everything updated due to the length between releases. WWII planes or simplified modern aircraft seem like a more ideal module type for this business model. It doesn't seem sustainable to me, but maybe something will change in the future... Currently it is sustainable due to the fact that modern era CFS are pretty slim. There is no real competition. So whatever is released is snapped up by the desperate. The WW2 aircraft are no longer sustainable due to 1c and their much better all round theatre, development time, customer relations/dev diaries etc. Hence wags letter. 777 are constantly updating. Theyve just released new FMs accross the board. They have introduced impressive VR support consistent 90fps. 64 bit upgrade to their engine. They have shown and are about to release better draw distances, lighting. They have done all this while still releasing their aircraft and theatre within the timeframe set out. There are no excuses from 1c/777 because they do not fail to meet their deadlines. ED are full of BS excuses because they suck at what they do. Im not talking about aircraft, some are ok, I'm talking about management, public relations, development time, lies and no real direction. If somebody brought out a modern third wire series there would be another one of these letters from wags. Edit. I was sorely tempted by the harrier much more interesting than the hornet or the F14 but i just cannot bring myself to part with any more money while the management #%&*$# show continues Edit 2. Plus i have combat air patrol 2 which i should spend more time with.
Last edited by Johnny_Redd; 11/30/17 04:51 AM.
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
|
|
#4391970 - 11/30/17 04:15 AM
Re: A letter from Eagle Dynamics
[Re: 159th_Viper]
|
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 11,234
LukeFF
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 11,234
Redlands, California
|
..... A plane with a "lesser" flight model* and non-clickable pit,...
Exactly the reason why some of us will never bother with 777. Snobbery at its finest.
|
|
#4391973 - 11/30/17 04:49 AM
Re: A letter from Eagle Dynamics
[Re: LukeFF]
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,042
cichlidfan
Member
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,042
Woodbridge, VA, USA
|
..... A plane with a "lesser" flight model* and non-clickable pit,...
Exactly the reason why some of us will never bother with 777. Snobbery at its finest. So what? Personally, I enjoyed my time with ROF even though the FM was a bit questionable. What difference does it make if someone thinks that the product is beneath their standards? I won't eat at most fast food establishments but nobody, that I know, considers me a snob for it. It is my dining choice and, as it happens, it does not interfere with theirs. Snobbery works both ways, and you have just demonstrated that fact. I seem to recall that more than a few people would, and have, referred to you as a sycophant (I would not, but it is out there) and that is also unfair. Just because you and someone else have different opinions does not make either of you correct or incorrect.
Last edited by cichlidfan; 11/30/17 04:58 AM.
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
|
|
#4391985 - 11/30/17 06:45 AM
Re: A letter from Eagle Dynamics
[Re: leaf_on_the_wind]
|
Joined: Nov 2016
Posts: 203
FartHog
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2016
Posts: 203
UK
|
2.5 released in what state ? ..other than the GFX and meshes how improved will it be ? How many bugs will it have that will remain unaddressed and ignored for the next 6 years ? "Dear valued DCS World customers," Over the past several YEARS, we have read your concerns and frustrations regarding aspects of the growth of DCS World and done absolutely nothing about it. We will continue to employ shills and minions to man our forums and cull out the slightest criticism of our simulation...that's how much we care about what you think...nothing has changed. It will take more than a few paragraphs of lies, false platitudes and excuses to swing me round...the proof is definitely in the flavour of the pudding. ...still would be nice to treat myself to a Warthog and Track IR this Christmas and fire up the (still unfinished) A10 again.
|
|
#4392009 - 11/30/17 10:54 AM
Re: A letter from Eagle Dynamics
[Re: LukeFF]
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,614
theOden
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,614
|
..... A plane with a "lesser" flight model* and non-clickable pit,...
Exactly the reason why some of us will never bother with 777. Snobbery at its finest. Care to elaborate on that?
|
|
#4392056 - 11/30/17 03:08 PM
Re: A letter from Eagle Dynamics
[Re: FartHog]
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 772
Johnny_Redd
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 772
|
"Dear valued DCS World customers," Over the past several YEARS, we have read your concerns and frustrations regarding aspects of the growth of DCS World and done absolutely nothing about it. We will continue to employ shills and minions to man our forums and cull out the slightest criticism of our simulation...that's how much we care about what you think...nothing has changed. In a nutshell!!! They have done nothing to address the concerns and frustrations. They have noted them, banned folk for voicing them, ignored them and then gone right back to business as usual. Lies and incompetence.
Last edited by Johnny_Redd; 11/30/17 03:09 PM.
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
|
|
#4392066 - 11/30/17 03:39 PM
Re: A letter from Eagle Dynamics
[Re: leaf_on_the_wind]
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 772
Johnny_Redd
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 772
|
Every year, around this time, since i remember there is an announcement of a release just around the corner. Whether its EDGE, Normandy whatever. It never happens. Its become an ED Christmas tradition. Its a sales pitch. Buy our stuff because X is just around the corner. 2.5 will not appear for at least 6 more months. There will be the inevitable delay. Its a pitch to sell the harrier.
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
|
|
#4392070 - 11/30/17 03:46 PM
Re: A letter from Eagle Dynamics
[Re: LukeFF]
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 517
159th_Viper
Flyin' it like I Stole it......Always!
|
Flyin' it like I Stole it......Always!
Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 517
Texas, USA
|
..... A plane with a "lesser" flight model* and non-clickable pit,...
Exactly the reason why some of us will never bother with 777. Snobbery at its finest. If that is your perception then I apologise. I do not think of 777 as inferior in the slightest. On the contrary, I am sure that they do some things better than 99% of other developers out there. What I intended to convey was that what involves me in DCS is the clickable cockpits, the switchology etc etc etc and the fact that I am able to virtually fly a modern machine with the Flight Model as close as dammit to the real thing as possible as attested to by real-life SME's. If I wanted to be immersed in a real-life war environment where more emphasis is placed on story/environment/battle re-enactments then I'd probably be better off with 777. Horses for courses.
|
|
#4392075 - 11/30/17 04:07 PM
Re: A letter from Eagle Dynamics
[Re: FartHog]
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
|
The big problem seems to be the way the 3rd party imploded so early into development. I don't recall if any of them were directly hired to work for ED, but that situation was certainly a mess and likely a large reason for the excessive delay. Maybe not the only reason, but in large part. But there certainly have been a number of WWII planes and a map/AI content released. No idea how it all is because I only have the P-51D. I have only a little knowledge of the WWII fiasco but again, it all boils down to ED's management. Just as they've branched out into 3 dev branches, they've also branched out into different aircraft eras.... nobody there to blame except whoever makes decisions in ED. One could argue that BoS/BoM/etc. is more comprehensive in terms of aircraft, theatres, and assets compared to ED..... and at an insanely lower cost compared to ED's offerings. Is it study-sim level? I don't know, but I wager there's not very many systems to model in a WWII aircraft compared to modern ones. The difference is ED has to update old content and make sure it is compatible. On the other hand, 777 may build new content but there is a larger potential profit for new content. I'm sure there are still people buying that old KA-50, but probably not very many. But it does have to be updated. And the old content vs new content is again down to ED's management. All arguments about "make sure it is compatible" is moot as the "World" concept has been ED's baby for a long time now so they should have had the foundations for this.... Again, this is certainly a downside to the DCS World concept. When you have modules that apparently take 2-3 years each it becomes difficult to keep everything updated due to the length between releases. WWII planes or simplified modern aircraft seem like a more ideal module type for this business model. It doesn't seem sustainable to me, but maybe something will change in the future... So are you saying that ED has not considered the dev time for modules when they build their World concept? Who is at fault for that then? 777 are constantly updating. Theyve just released new FMs accross the board. They have introduced impressive VR support consistent 90fps. 64 bit upgrade to their engine. They have shown and are about to release better draw distances, lighting. They have done all this while still releasing their aircraft and theatre within the timeframe set out. There are no excuses from 1c/777 because they do not fail to meet their deadlines. ED are full of BS excuses because they suck at what they do. Im not talking about aircraft, some are ok, I'm talking about management, public relations, development time, lies and no real direction. If somebody brought out a modern third wire series there would be another one of these letters from wags. I was tempted to support CAP2 on the recent Steam sales, but if whatyou are saying about 777 is true, I have the premium copy of BoS and I just might give that another try!! I've always harped about having difficulty doing cockpit work when using a VR headset..... but there's not much to do in a WWII bird so this may just be perfect! Thanks for that heads up! So what?
Personally, I enjoyed my time with ROF even though the FM was a bit questionable. What difference does it make if someone thinks that the product is beneath their standards? Something not being up to standard and being a snob are two different things. As you've said, you can dislike something but not be a snob about it.... ...still would be nice to treat myself to a Warthog and Track IR this Xmas and fire up the (still unfinished) A10 again. Do it!! Have a read of someone who went from an X52 to a Warthog --- Click HERE!!
- Ice
|
|
#4392087 - 11/30/17 04:44 PM
Re: A letter from Eagle Dynamics
[Re: - Ice]
|
Joined: Nov 2016
Posts: 203
FartHog
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2016
Posts: 203
UK
|
...still would be nice to treat myself to a Warthog and Track IR this Xmas and fire up the (still unfinished) A10 again. Do it!! Have a read of someone who went from an X52 to a Warthog --- Click HERE!! Waiting to see how bad 2.5 is first, any news on how they've improved it other than convert a map? new FLIR system ? Improved ATC...anything ?
|
|
#4392094 - 11/30/17 04:53 PM
Re: A letter from Eagle Dynamics
[Re: FartHog]
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
|
Waiting to see how bad 2.5 is first, any news on how they've improved it other than convert a map?
new FLIR system ? Improved ATC...anything ? Oh, your purchase decision is tied to DCS? There are other sims to try. I would also say that firing up DCS A10C and getting a TM WH to fly it properly is a no-brainer.
- Ice
|
|
#4392113 - 11/30/17 05:44 PM
Re: A letter from Eagle Dynamics
[Re: leaf_on_the_wind]
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 5,503
Pooch
Hotshot
|
Hotshot
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 5,503
Orlando, FL
|
"From our orbital vantage point, we observe an earth without borders, full of peace, beauty and magnificence, and we pray that humanity as a whole can imagine a borderless world as we see it, and strive to live as one in peace." Astronaut William C. McCool RIP, January 29, 2003 - Space Shuttle Columbia
|
|
#4392142 - 11/30/17 07:19 PM
Re: A letter from Eagle Dynamics
[Re: FartHog]
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
|
So... been lurking the DCS forum to decide whether it was worth the investment.... NOPE..I was actually looking forward to F/A-18 Hornet until I realized it was gonna be another unfinished product.... how they've managed to survive this long as a company with these bad of business practices is beyond me... anyone continuing to spend their hard earned money on this company .. well... yeah, have fun with that In the interest of fairness, I would say this depends on your expectations and which module you would buy. While I would be first to discourage you from most of ED's offerings, this "worth the investment" bit is simply not fair to modules like FC3, DCS A10C and DCS BS2. Assuming a novice flight simmer who isn't looking for a dynamic campaign and would not mind scripted missions and training scenarios, I would say that those three modules are worth what you pay for them. I would say they are unfinished, but they are complete enough for most simmers. I want to see how good the shiny new FLIR system they've been promising for years is first, and if this newfound concern for valued customers is enough for them to finally fix the mark-point system in the A10...amongst other things that I can't remember that have been broken for eternity in the DCS world. What's wrong with the markpoint system? I used to use it to be able to fire 6 Mavs in one pass....
- Ice
|
|
#4392145 - 11/30/17 07:29 PM
Re: A letter from Eagle Dynamics
[Re: - Ice]
|
Joined: Nov 2016
Posts: 203
FartHog
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2016
Posts: 203
UK
|
What's wrong with the markpoint system? I used to use it to be able to fire 6 Mavs in one pass.... Try deleting them. edit: The company that values it's customers were made aware nearly 7 years ago. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=70719
Last edited by FartHog; 11/30/17 07:36 PM.
|
|
#4392156 - 11/30/17 08:02 PM
Re: A letter from Eagle Dynamics
[Re: FartHog]
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
|
Touché! I never tried to do so... I'm assuming this is possible in the real A10?
- Ice
|
|
|
|