Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
#4482761 - 07/14/19 10:38 AM PC Pilot favours DCS modules  
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 753
Winfield Offline
model citizen
Winfield  Offline
model citizen
Member

Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 753
QLD
There is definitely biased reviews regarding DCS World modules when compared to reviews of other platform reviews such as FSX\Prepar 3d

Watch as I take you on journey over the last 2 editions of PC Pilot, the most respected (and only) PC flight sim magazine in this country of Australia.

now, it is my personal opinion that ED\DCS and it's 3rd party modules that are reviewed in this well regarded magazine are a protected species when compared
to modules released on other platforms in this editorial.

Let's take an in depth look at the March\April edition where the contributor stands behind a cloud of 'Early Access' regarding Heatblur's F-14....

The contributor tests the F-14 module, at the beginning of the module the contributor states, and I quote

"The Heatblur F-14 will soon be released into an Early Access state. The developers have stated that there will be some minor missing features and some
incomplete specific funtionality in major systems, some bugs, incomplete content such as missions and a number of features that still require significant work such
as dual cockpit"

Let's pause for a minute and think about that statement.

Does that not follow the same lines as 90% of the modules ED endorse and contracted 3rd party modules?

all of them have 'some minor missing features' and 'some incomplete functionality in major systems' and all of them have 'some bugs' even in Beta or release status.

Yet with this specific module review, which happens to cost as much as 2 DCS campaigns (when on sale) at $17.20 AUD for this March\April edition of PC Pilot...
the Premier and only flight sim magazine available in Australia. I am disappointed at the contributor for not mentioning any of the "some bugs" or "incomplete functionality in major systems"
yet fails to specify any of the "some minor missing features" in the entire review.

There is a hint of a missing texture but the author fails to specify where exactly on the model that texture actually is.

The 'First impressions'

no mention of any of the above, seems that the disclaimer has been put at the beginning of the review rather than at the end. "Early Access\Beta, has bugs, incomplete blah blah blah
we all know the drill when complaining about bugs in modules that are not 'feature complete' or in Beta state, Invokes the ban hammer from Nine Line and the likes of Skatezilla and the ED cohorts.

Why doesn't PC Pilot review feature complete DCS aircraft? the author is more than happy to provide reviews for feature complete aircraft like the MD-82 etc on other platforms
like FSX\Prepar 3d and Xplane but it seems that DCS is off limits for reviews on feature complete aircraft. 90% remain in an unfinished state of affairs.
hence why reviews in PC Pilot are in Early Access\Beta. Perhaps that is as far the author will ever see the modules in question and why the reviews are always Early Access.

I will admit that being March\April edition of PC Pilot, this review was possibly carried out in December\January for submission to the editorial and print department.

out of the entire review, no mention of any bugs with the aircraft that this contributor found with this aircraft. Seems as though it is a green light from the author
and not one issue other than the "ED official NDA" regarding every review must state Early Access, bugs, incomplete etc as has been the norm for every module over the last 10 years.

"given the quality of what we've seen thus far, I think Heatblur's F-14 is going to be a stunning success"

perhaps.....perhaps, but I would rather read about the faults and flaws mentioned at the beginning of the article rather than the 'stunning success' predicted at the end of the article.

If I was to buy this module based on a respected magazine review, I would only consider buying if the author actually picked faults in the aircraft and wrote about them as well as the good points
found in this aircraft. Being an endorsed and no doubt paid reviewer for PC Pilot that the author no doubt is, I have mentioned this many times.....
"You will only see and hear good points for modules for ED, life is always a rainbow at ED and the bugs, flaws etc are dusted under the carper and not mentioned publicly.

Much like the handling of the ED Forums.

Further proof is in the May\June edition of PC Pilot.

this very same author reviews the Maddog X MD-82 for FSX\Prepar 3d.

This module is not in Early Access or Beta but a 'feature complete release'

most noteworthy, there is no ED Early Access disclaimer or the crap spewed which would see this author banned or posts removed if mentioned at ED's official forum if bugs were
mentioned specifically or features pointed out.

yet the author goes on to write a mudspike worthy review of a module for another platform and state it's flaws.

and I quote "Unfortunately, the quality of the interior sounds does not extend to the external sounds. I was disappointed that the distinctive Pratt & Whitney JT8D roar,
tinged with a bit of high pitch whine, is very underrepresented in the external views"

now what real life pilot is able to fly an aircraft externally? drone pilot perhaps? and then the sounds are muffled altogether in the bunker under ground.

Even possible flaws mentioned by this real life aviator in this review such as the following quote is yet to be seen in any ED\3rd party review.

"I was sceptical of the engine throttle response lag after flying the module for a bit, with 20 seconds seeming to be too long of an interval from initial power application to the
engines reaching the computed Engine Power Ratio (EPR),

turns out to not be a flaw\bug at all after a bit of education from none other than online video's with a stopwatch in hand.....

"but after watching some cockpit videos online with stopwatch in hand, I found the engine behaviour to be exactly right"

which makes me wonder.....did the author test the spool time for Heatblur's F-14 up to full throttle? perhaps that kind of dedicated stopwatch test wasn't carried out as the
tomcat is in 'Early Access' I am interested to know when this paid author will 'stopwatch' test the F-14 spool time to ensure an honest review of a module's suspected defect.

This review gives it's very own "PC Pilot Verdict" 95\100...not bad. No DCS aircraft in living memory has ever had a "PC Pilot Verdict" of 95\100 due to never actually being fully functional and
out of Beta\Early Access.

In the May|June edition of PC Pilot....none other than Leatherneck's Christen Eagle..(how old are the reviews, isn't it magnitude?)

not a bug mentioned relating to the module specifically. Much like the F-14 with it's disclaimer that during the review the author notes zero of what could be found in the disclaimer....

yet here the author writes with convincing enthusiasm.....you guessed it, regurgitated lighting issues with every module in the sim.

"as wonderful as the aircraft is, two small bugs jumped out at me during testing. First, with your smoke on, the cockpit floor shows the smoke outside through
the solid footwell. The second involved an unexpected taxiing accident at Sochi where the aircraft left the tarmac and 'tilted over' a non-existend edge.
Both bugs are probably related to DCS World itself rather than the Eagle but that second one was a real surprise.

No mention of the flaws in any DCS review....


DCS F-14 Tomcat by Heatblur Simulations


Fixed very frequent CTD due to Jester sound missing.
Increased roll moment from missing wings
Increased drag due to aerodynamic damage
Decreased lift due to aerodynamic damage
Tuned thrust for better adherence to level acceleration tests
Corrected refuel keybind to support 2-pos and 3-pos switches
Prevent gun drum counter reaching 7XX
Prevented JESTER from turning off radar at the start of a mission
Limit the sidewinder seeker-driven HUD movable reticle to the HUD FOV
Implemented ability to hide the stick grip.
Tweaked IR signature coefficient in non-AB and AB.
Fixed typos in RIO keybinds
Made Sidewinder pattern scan slightly tighter.
Play sidewinder lock tone only when explicitly SEAM locked.
Allow SEAM lock from sidewinder boresight mode.
Don’t play tape player button sounds when changing volume
Added more FFB effects: trim, airspeed & G effects
Corrected inlet efficiency reductions
Corrected lack of weathering on all tail surfaces in default liveries
Fixed VF-103 Hi-viz spelling errors
Fixed Autopilot off keybind
Fixed JESTER going crazy and rambling during A2A refueling
Tweaked wing overstress logic.
Wings will now continue to sweep past 5g.
Added night lighting to CAP drum
Added night lighting to LANTIRN panel (known issue: too weak)
RIO helmet in cockpit now matches exterior
Adjusted AIM-9 SEAM lock tone to be less ear murder-y
Fixed CTD with Jester sound memory allocation
Sidewinder volume input entries corrected
Removed 'ECM Jam Toggle' from the pilot input.
Jester "tune TAC" and "tune ground station" channel number fixed for channels >= 64Y (previously Jester was adding one to the channel number for that range).
Fixed Jester swapping X and Y when using TACAN manual tune.
LANTIRN sensitivity to fog and dust adjusted/fixed. Should now be possible to engage tracking with dust enabled.
Countermeasures mission editor preset loading fixed.
Fixed datalink frequency keybinds not updating panel rollers.
Tuned core and afterburner thrust slightly.
Adjusted inlet efficiency.
Adjusted compressor stall and other engine issue probabilities in SEC mode.
Redesigned FFB model to more closely match artificial feel system.
Fixed SEC mode nozzle behavior (always commanded closed now).
Tweak HUD VVI and AoA error (E bracket) towards realism per SME feedback.
Added Sidewinder circle scan (note: not visible!)
Fixed pilot+RIO ICS hot/cold/override keybinds.
Fixed sticky master caution keybind.
Add some community-supplied keybinds for: throttle mode, oxygen, emer wing sweep cover, eng/probe anti ice, asymm thrust limiter, hydraulic transfer pump, fuel feed, anti skid
Show IM/IN alternating with MV on HSD if mag var greater than 5deg.
Show TACAN info on HSD/ECMD in LDG display mode with AWL/PCD steering mode.
Reset guarded switch states for hydraulic transfer pump, emergency flight hydraulics, fuel feed, emergency generator
Radar: use selected elevation bars for supersearch and acquisition scan patterns.
Fix SP/PH missile firing order when not all 6 stations are fitted.
Fix for DDD aspect switch unit scaling for supersearch & acquisition.
Fix for being able to fill dropped external tanks.
Adjustments to structural integrity and wing snap code (hopefully corrects less lenient structural damage with higher network latencies)
Fixed floating gear emergency extension handle.
New: Added radar beam structure emulation to the RWR.
RWR gains and signal strength thresholds adjusted.
RWR threat library version changed to "R9D2".
Hook bypass switch input fix.
Tweaked 6-dof view limits. Less goosing through the canopy.
Converted some lua option strings to facilitate translation.
Added custom cockpit livery option.
Removed l10n folder from coremods.
Added another option to RADIO MENU AND PTT BEHAVIOUR: DON'T USE DEFAULT PTT (RADIO MENU) BUTTONS FOR SRS.
Additional push to talk entries for controlling SRS without interacting with the radio menus.
Added clickspots for the AN/ARC-159 buttons: LOAD and TONE.
Fixed ground air and electrical still on after flight.
Multicrew sync of ejection arm switches.
Fixed jester landing calls special option not working.
Restore functionality to show HUD movable reticle (pipper) for TCS in STT modes (hiding HUD steering tee implicitly).
Changed default Jester ripple quantity options to 2,3,4,6,8,16,28.
Fix Sidewinder keybind volume adjustment infinite loop.
Adjusted aerodynamic damage effects.
Small adjustments to thrust and drag models
Fixed the names of the RIO CMS input commands (AN/ALE-39).
Fixed the kneeboard displaying wrong mag var values for Nevada (first page).
NEW: JESTER now uses RWS and ground stabilize if asked for
Fixed trim speed ramp-up
Added close jester menu bindable command
Fixed some command categorizations
Added AFCS SAS Channel toggle switches
Fixed flap axis range
Fixed various flap input bugs
(JESTER) No “lost lock” call-out in dogfights
Fixed SAMs engaging with multiple subsystems not triggering the RWR
Hawk CVAR added to threat library
Threat library updated to version R9D3
Updated various single player missions & reactivated alert 5 mission
Updated Caucasus Free flight mission
Fixed JESTER menu opening when JESTER is incapacitated
Fixed MAK-79 loadout on right rear station
Released F-14 Paintkit: http://media.heatblur.se/HB-F-14_Paintkit-v1.0.rar
Quickstart missions: Caucasus: Free Flight tanker orbit fixed, Persian Gulf: Alert 5 readded
Fixed Mak79 MK-83 loadout on right rear station.
Mission fixes (AI radio and triggers) with voice overs from forum user “beppe_goodoldrebel”: Bear Intercept, Iran Flogger Faceoff, Tomcat Meets Foxhound, MiG-28 Furball - thank you!
Fixed Iran Reactor Strike and Trench Run Reactor Strike missions (added target waypoints in target area)
Fixed M61 and AIM-9 tutorial missions
Added SP and COOP missions “Operation Timber - Paving the Way” and “Night Hunter”
Fixed SAMs engaging with multiple subsystems not triggering the launch warning when the missile guiding subsystem wasn't the first strongest lobe of the tracking subsystems.
RWR threat library changed to R9D4: added HAWK CWAR, Blindfire (BF) and Rapier launcher (RP).
Renamed TCS roughnet map
Added Fictional Chromecat Homage skin (“the developer’s delight”)
Added B-side for tape player
Enabled CRS selector in AWL/PCD
Fixed some flap input bugs
Fixed flap axis range
Fixed flaps blowback bug
Added AFCS SAS channel toggle switches
Fixed some more key binding categorizations
Fixed some command categorizations
Added close jester menu bindable command
Ensure SEAM LOCK lamp lights up in LTS test even without sidewinder present
Ensure COLLISION lamp is lit during LTS test
Fix typo in keybinds: Enviroment -> Environment
Added some inertia to the turn and slip ball
Rearranged Iceman relative heading menu entries
When fenced in, Jester uses CMS mode switch position selected from the menu
Fixed Jester menu category icon being displayed for disabled options
Fixed Jester close menu while incapacitated
Jester menu fixed in VR
Jester will no longer give lost lock callout during dogfights
Improved missile announcement logic for Jester
Jester was sent to a fast typing course - waypoint entering speed has been improved
INS GO NOW reworked - it displays the type of alignment which would be used with GO NOW.
GO NOW should enter AHRS/AM if COARSE alignment is not achieved (previously IMU/AM).
Jester will interrupt entering the waypoints and switch to INS when the requested alignment option is reached; he will continue entering the rest of the waypoints after "ready to taxi"
Fixed current waypoint initialization for missions with no waypoints set.
It should no longer require to select another waypoint before selecting WP1
Ensure STT lock is lost when radar is disabled
Added new auto tune test conditions
Fix for Jester being unable to re-align the INS after landing
Jester now sets correct ARC-182 modulation when using "Tune ATC"
Jester menu options can be selected with the ICS PTT when using 'OPEN MENU: RADIO MENU KEY FOLLOWED BY PTT (SRS PRIORITY)'.
When using "OPEN MENU: RADIO MENU KEY FOLLOWED BY PTT (SRS PRIORITY)", the menu will hide only with a valid radio option selected or when the radio menu key is pressed again, but it won't hide with any PTT.
The minimum ICS volume exported to SRS is set to 0.2 - this emulates ability to communicate without intercom
Added custom viewport for Jester menu. Use "F14_JESTER_MENU" in your MonitorSetup file.
When "F14_JESTER_MENU" is not set, it defaults to "GU_MAIN_VIEWPORT"
Added special option to repeat RIO weapon type wheel on TID (VR readability vs realism.)
Added special option to require weapon selector press between OFF and GUN (disabled per default)
Corrected main menu sound files: fixes non looping soundtrack & black screen on exit
Added SUU-25 to RIO weapons roller
NEW: JESTER now uses RWS and ground stabilize if asked for.
Ground stab can auto recenter after a preselect time,
Jester can switch back to TWS automatically if needed
Jester uses wider scan pattern in RWS mode
Fixed radar pattern resetting to center in multiplayer/multicrew when changing modes
Some tweaks to phoenix PN and lofting params
Temporarily disabled automatic TWS MAN to AUTO mode change on phoenix launch pending TWS-AUTO final implementation
Ensure TWS missile tracking only goes to radar targets
Fix LZ showing on TID when vel vector is disabled on toggle button
Fixed countermeasures programs being initiated (one release pulse) with power set to OFF
Fix for time-to-impact not showing on TID for STT phoenix shots
Engine performance tuning
Fixed trim speed ramp-in
Adjusted pitch and phugoid damping
Adjusted rudder roll power at high AOA
Adjusted pitch with power effects
Adjusted drag in turning situations
Adjusted lift in turning situations
Adjust pitch trim ramp-in speed
Fixed nozzle position bug when losing oil pressure
Decreased max afterburner fuel flow above 55k feet
Added slight yaw moment due to fuel probe deployment
Fixed AP not being able to engage when using FFB stick

Known Issue: Afterburners are invisible.

Marginal list of bugs Christen Eagle bugs

here



seems that with DCS, you will only read the good things about modules....absolutely no specific bugs or related flaws are ever mentioned.

The author is biased.....I believe that articles in PC Pilot need a disclaimer that said "Paid review by paid actors" much like the advertisements after 10PM
convincing consume's to by piss poor products.












"

Inline advert (2nd and 3rd post)

#4483013 - 07/16/19 05:50 PM Re: PC Pilot favours DCS modules [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 84
Exorcet Offline
Junior Member
Exorcet  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 84
I don't read the magazine, but I agree that the author should have listed the issues. Especially for an early access product where certain features are missing.

That said the F-14 doesn't feel particularly EA to me. I'm using it essentially as a finished module, however since I've been working on other things in DCS I admit that I haven't dived into it all the way. It's also validating my concerns over 2 seat modules. I like Jerster overall and I think other AI should be immersive in a similar manner, but AI will always have limitations and I definitely prefer single seat DCS aircraft. At least for the moment.

If the review was intended as a quick one that would only just touch on the value of the module, then the lack of any specific flaws seems potentially fair to me. I've not really experienced anything that keeps me from using the F-14, as opposed to the F-18 which has seemingly more weapons limitations (that even impact adding it as AI), changing behavior (currently because of updates to HARM the AI will not properly judge whether it's in range of a SAM or not and waste missiles) and the lack of some major features (understandable in EA) like ground radar and avionics modes.

#4483032 - 07/16/19 10:00 PM Re: PC Pilot favours DCS modules [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 31
SinCityJet Offline
Junior Member
SinCityJet  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 31
Perhaps a link to the article would be helpful to others, as well as to me?

Just a reminder; online reviews are as reliable as the word and honor of those typing them. Here's a detailed review of a Saitek/MadCatz flight sim service from January of 2013:

FlightSim.com Review: Combat Pilot https://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/content.php?13411-Review-Combat-Pilot#comments

#4483047 - 07/17/19 12:55 AM Re: PC Pilot favours DCS modules [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 245
IceecI Offline
1975-1997 R.I.P.
IceecI  Offline
1975-1997 R.I.P.
Member

Joined: May 2011
Posts: 245
Game reviews in general are paid reviews, that's what it's all about, keep the wheel turning and keep getting rich people richer. I actually would be suprised if I found a honest review.

PC game mazazines and reviewers are for promoting the stuff, and they sure as hell don't wanna pay for every single game they review, so keeping relations good with game companies and make some nice reviews ensures that the firm continues getting game's free from developers to review.

Last edited by IceecI; 07/17/19 01:10 AM.

Give a man fish and he gets food, give a man a fishing rod and he asks for another one.
#4483061 - 07/17/19 08:30 AM Re: PC Pilot favours DCS modules [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 753
Winfield Offline
model citizen
Winfield  Offline
model citizen
Member

Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 753
QLD
Post a link?

Originally Posted by Ed's most promising future community manager

Watch as I take you on journey over the last 2 editions of PC Pilot, the most respected (and only) PC flight sim magazine in this country of Australia.


A link would mean a paid online subscription, a magazine means I purchased
A paper copy from a newsagent.

I might take a few dodgy pics of the pages then laugh as PC Pilot
Authors try and sue me over copyright and reproduction laws.

#4483119 - 07/17/19 04:38 PM Re: PC Pilot favours DCS modules [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 220
Cobra847 Offline
Member
Cobra847  Offline
Member

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 220
A few things;

1) The article you reference is a preview. Not a review. It was based on a build from (IIRC) months before actual launch. Previews do generally not critique a product heavily as per entertainment industry standards.
Additionally, some of the missing bits and pieces mentioned weren't actually missing, it's just an error in the article (the big one is the lack of "dual-seat"). Mistakes happen.

2) There are no strings attached with preview builds. I make that explicitly clear every time we send something out.
Not everything is a conspiracy. The key we sent out even expired after some time, so technically it's not even a paid review in the sense of getting a free product.

3) Our F-14 has launched to near-universal praise, excellent reviews and both we and practically the entire community considers it's functionally complete.
If a preview makes the same determination; is it because praise is a given, or because the product is actually good?
Early Access does not have to mean, nor does it imply, a poor product. I think the F-14 is proof enough of that.

Are all the other 9/10's and 9.5/10's lying too?

4) Are you seriously using a patch changelog as proof that a review/preview is flawed because it did not mention errors, or that said software is poor and buggy?
The best , most well-developed software on the planet will have bugs and flaws. We could've kept developing the F-14 for another 10 years and we'd still be patching something after launch.



Last edited by Cobra847; 07/17/19 04:46 PM.

Director | Art Director

Heatblur Simulations
#4483137 - 07/17/19 07:11 PM Re: PC Pilot favours DCS modules [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 9,055
KraziKanuK Online content
Hotshot
KraziKanuK  Online Content
Hotshot

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 9,055
Ottawa Canada
Considering that ED/DCS doesn't allow any negativity regarding their products, so naturally there will be only positive (pre)reviews.


There was only 16 squadrons of RAF fighters that used 100 octane during the BoB.
The Fw190A could not fly with the outer cannon removed.
There was no Fw190A-8s flying with the JGs in 1945.
#4483139 - 07/17/19 07:39 PM Re: PC Pilot favours DCS modules [Re: KraziKanuK]  
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,789
ST0RM Offline
Senior Member
ST0RM  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,789
Altus, Ok
Originally Posted by KraziKanuK
Considering that ED/DCS doesn't allow any negativity regarding their products, so naturally there will be only positive (pre)reviews.


+1

Originally Posted by Iceecl
PC game mazazines and reviewers are for promoting the stuff, and they sure as hell don't wanna pay for every single game they review, so keeping relations good with game companies and make some nice reviews ensures that the firm continues getting game's free from developers to review.


Yep, my thoughts as well. The only honest reviews are typically from people who pay their ow money on a product. Unless you're trying to break into pro reviewing (DCS youtubers), you can actually tell the truth.
While the review may be fluffy, HB set the bar very high on the Tomcat and it's completeness. They made ED look like chumps. The flip side, it took a really looooong time. Sorry Nick, but its true.

#4483206 - 07/18/19 10:26 AM Re: PC Pilot favours DCS modules [Re: Cobra847]  
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 753
Winfield Offline
model citizen
Winfield  Offline
model citizen
Member

Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 753
QLD
Originally Posted by Cobra847
A few things;

1) The article you reference is a preview. Not a review. It was based on a build from (IIRC) months before actual launch. Previews do generally not critique a product heavily as per entertainment industry standards.
Additionally, some of the missing bits and pieces mentioned weren't actually missing, it's just an error in the article (the big one is the lack of "dual-seat"). Mistakes happen.

2) There are no strings attached with preview builds. I make that explicitly clear every time we send something out.
Not everything is a conspiracy. The key we sent out even expired after some time, so technically it's not even a paid review in the sense of getting a free product.

3) Our F-14 has launched to near-universal praise, excellent reviews and both we and practically the entire community considers it's functionally complete.
If a preview makes the same determination; is it because praise is a given, or because the product is actually good?
Early Access does not have to mean, nor does it imply, a poor product. I think the F-14 is proof enough of that.

Are all the other 9/10's and 9.5/10's lying too?

4) Are you seriously using a patch changelog as proof that a review/preview is flawed because it did not mention errors, or that said software is poor and buggy?
The best , most well-developed software on the planet will have bugs and flaws. We could've kept developing the F-14 for another 10 years and we'd still be patching something after launch.





What about this response aimed at someone who dare imply a problem with
A module made by Heatblur/Leatherneck



Originally Posted by Cobra847

I really do make it a point not to accept critiscism when the product in question is an alpha version and the customer has a perfectly functioning alternate version to fly in. (that is, unless it's constructive)

I'm really not sure where the desync is supposed to lie either. Everyone, from top to bottom was aware that the MiG-21 was crashing in this particular revision. Considering, again, that the product in question is an alpha, such issues are not (and should not) be considered blockers.

Certainly- I now better understand why some companies are very reluctant to host open, public testversions.


Obviousy Cobra and the rest of the cohorts at ED do not take lightly to any form of
Criticism of their products.

But hey, who said SimHQ was dead these days. Posts here still draw ED and Co's attention.

Is Cobra is in breech of forum rule 23.1?: Attempting to cast a rainbow over at the dark side for ED atheists and non believers.

Could a moderator check that out and perhaps issue cobra a 70% warning level?

Of course the developer would jump in carping on about their aircraft
But of course, zero mention of any flaws hence the patch log

'Chucks' review at mudspike and 'Nutsacks' review in PC Pilot fail to mention
Any bugs........the patch list lists numerous 'bugs'

The response to a flaw in the mig was met in the manner as the f-14
Above.

Heatblur have potential and the backing of ED's community at the restricted
And heavily moderated forums. However their aircraft will never be as good as the
Highly rated and 10/10 those same people who reviewed the f-14
Cobra mentioned gave VEAO's Hawk.....

If you wish to compare aircraft Cobra, compare it to the Hawk.

Outsource your reviews to non dcs authors. People who dont have associations
With ED, and its moderators/ community managers dont frequent the
Forums.

I am sure anyone here would be more than happy to write a review that shows both good
And the flaws.






#4483226 - 07/18/19 01:20 PM Re: PC Pilot favours DCS modules [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 84
Exorcet Offline
Junior Member
Exorcet  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 84
Originally Posted by Winfield
Of course the developer would jump in carping on about their aircraft
But of course, zero mention of any flaws hence the patch log



Out of curiosity, did you read through the log? Also is this an amalgamation of all the changes that have happened at different times? Going through the list, the majority of items seem to be things a player might not even notice. If the list spans across a wide amount of time it's also conceivable that some issues might not have even existed when the preview occurred.

The list is long granted, but on its own I don't really see the point of bringing it up. My own experience, admittedly as someone not looking for problems, with the F-14 is that it has not had many visible major issues. I can treat it as a finished product because it essentially acts like one.

#4483254 - 07/18/19 07:25 PM Re: PC Pilot favours DCS modules [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,246
rollnloop. Offline
Member
rollnloop.  Offline
Member

Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,246
France
Same here.

I'm not totally fond of ED, but this F-14 will be a gem.

It's already my only ride, I have much fun with it and will probably fly it for a few years at worst, hopefully more like half a decade, and no level of negativity will spoil my fun.

#4483574 - 07/21/19 06:35 AM Re: PC Pilot favours DCS modules [Re: Exorcet]  
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 753
Winfield Offline
model citizen
Winfield  Offline
model citizen
Member

Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 753
QLD
As expected, this aircraft is not on sale. released more than 8 months ago to those who get paid to write reviews of DCS aircraft from taking cut of sales from online subscriptions or magazine sales for PC Pilot.

Originally Posted by ED
Starting at 0900 GMT on 18 July 2019 and lasting until 0900 GMT on 1 August 2019, we will have our Summer 2019 bonus point sale! During this period, you can use bonus points to purchase up to 50% of the price on all Eagle Dynamics modules released. For example: if a product is priced at USD 29.99 and you have enough bonus points then you can use them for up to a maximum value of USD 14.99, the remainder would need to be paid for as usual. (Heatblur Simulations and Magnitude 3 LLC are not participating in the sale.)



a bug list is a bug list.....whether it has a bearing on what appears in the awesome screenshot editor that DCS is, deserves another thread for that kind of discussion.


Moderated by  Force10, RacerGT 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

If you shop on Amazon use this Amazon link to support SimHQ
.
Social


Recent Topics
Happy Thanksgiving
by No105_Archie. 10/13/19 05:15 PM
Happy Birthday US Navy
by oldgrognard. 10/13/19 04:31 PM
American Civil War photos
by KraziKanuK. 10/12/19 04:18 AM
“Masters of Air”
by PanzerMeyer. 10/11/19 10:51 PM
WW2 still finding bodies
by Alicatt. 10/10/19 04:10 PM
That moment in time....
by Bill_Grant. 10/09/19 01:35 PM
A minister, a priest and a rabbi ....
by Bill_Grant. 10/08/19 04:56 PM
Old folks and old tricks
by Sluggish Controls. 10/08/19 06:11 AM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0