#4492472 - 10/11/19 04:27 PM
Re: DCS: F-16C Viper
[Re: bisher]
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 694
reconmercs
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 694
an island
|
Um. where was ED stating the external model and damage model weren't complete BEFORE the release and BEFORE the discount went away? Same answer you'd have to research that. I'm not doing if for you Please don't mock, it's impolite The answer is NOWHERE. You won't provide anywhere stating the opposite of this but you have no issues shilling for a company that has proven they couldn't care less about their customer base
|
|
#4492495 - 10/11/19 07:01 PM
Re: DCS: F-16C Viper
[Re: Sokol1]
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,922
Paradaz
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,922
UK
|
From today's newsletter..... With the early access release of the Viper, we are now focusing on the most pressing bugs and desired new features for the Hornet and Viper This says it all. Even though ED stated several times the Viper early access wasn't affecting the Hornet work, it should never affect the 'most pressing bugs' on the Hornet anyway - it should always be the highest priority until it's ready for a gold release. This just shows where ED's priorities are and they're desperate for cash, to the point where they drop essential work on the Hornet because they've already received funds for that and focus resources on the next early access mess. To that end, we also know what will happen with the unfinished Hornet and Viper when the next early access is announced... they will be dropped like hot stones and the vicious circle of incompetence continues with the end result being an even bigger selection of unfinished platforms. I assume we'll also see a new push for mission packs for the Viper even though it can barely be classed as an alpha....and every update will break the missions meaning more integration and regression testing needed on every updated build.
On the Eighth day God created Paratroopers and the Devil stood to attention.
|
|
#4492519 - 10/11/19 08:58 PM
Re: DCS: F-16C Viper
[Re: Paradaz]
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 694
reconmercs
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 694
an island
|
From today's newsletter..... With the early access release of the Viper, we are now focusing on the most pressing bugs and desired new features for the Hornet and Viper This says it all. Even though ED stated several times the Viper early access wasn't affecting the Hornet work, it should never affect the 'most pressing bugs' on the Hornet anyway - it should always be the highest priority until it's ready for a gold release. This just shows where ED's priorities are and they're desperate for cash, to the point where they drop essential work on the Hornet because they've already received funds for that and focus resources on the next early access mess. To that end, we also know what will happen with the unfinished Hornet and Viper when the next early access is announced... they will be dropped like hot stones and the vicious circle of incompetence continues with the end result being an even bigger selection of unfinished platforms. I assume we'll also see a new push for mission packs for the Viper even though it can barely be classed as an alpha....and every update will break the missions meaning more integration and regression testing needed on every updated build. Pretty much. Mix and repeat, "Hey guys, Wags here, look at this shiny new Mi-24 coming soon to Early Access, look at that awesome animation of the landing gear moving..this will make you forget all about the unfinished Hornet.. Viper.. FW190..."
|
|
#4492780 - 10/13/19 09:16 PM
Re: DCS: F-16C Viper
[Re: NineLine]
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 694
reconmercs
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 694
an island
|
We have had an internal discussion about it now, was a great way to get some new ideas looked at for better communication and such, so all the top brass saw it, and are taking notes. Glad yall are discussing and open to feedback, hopefully this eventually leads to positive change at ED.
|
|
#4492890 - 10/14/19 07:06 PM
Re: DCS: F-16C Viper
[Re: NineLine]
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,922
Paradaz
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,922
UK
|
We have had an internal discussion about it now, was a great way to get some new ideas looked at for better communication and such, so all the top brass saw it, and are taking notes. You're completely missing the point if you think it's only the 'communication' that needs improving.
On the Eighth day God created Paratroopers and the Devil stood to attention.
|
|
#4492892 - 10/14/19 07:12 PM
Re: DCS: F-16C Viper
[Re: Paradaz]
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 490
NineLine
ED Community Manager
|
ED Community Manager
Member
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 490
BC, Canada
|
We have had an internal discussion about it now, was a great way to get some new ideas looked at for better communication and such, so all the top brass saw it, and are taking notes. You're completely missing the point if you think it's only the 'communication' that needs improving. Nope, and I am sorry I didn't list each point out for you, but it starts with communication, and that includes listening to where the issues are from reports made by the front line people, communication from users, etc. That communication covers every aspect of what is good and bad in DCS, and when it is addressed or acknowledged by the team, the communication back to the user needs to be addressed as well. We might be working on an issue, but you don't know it because it hasn't been communicated properly to you.
|
|
#4492900 - 10/14/19 07:35 PM
Re: DCS: F-16C Viper
[Re: NineLine]
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,922
Paradaz
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,922
UK
|
We have had an internal discussion about it now, was a great way to get some new ideas looked at for better communication and such, so all the top brass saw it, and are taking notes. You're completely missing the point if you think it's only the 'communication' that needs improving. Nope, and I am sorry I didn't list each point out for you, but it starts with communication, and that includes listening to where the issues are from reports made by the front line people, communication from users, etc. That communication covers every aspect of what is good and bad in DCS, and when it is addressed or acknowledged by the team, the communication back to the user needs to be addressed as well. We might be working on an issue, but you don't know it because it hasn't been communicated properly to you. Well, given that ED have had the best part of 20 years in total and 11 years since Black Shark was released.....the message boards at ED and the forums in places like SimHQ have had plenty of information for them to take notice.....yet they haven't bothered to take anything in. How many years have we been saying that ED simply refuse to learn by their mistakes? I really can't see it as any excuse that ED can say they need to listen to where the issues are and reports from front line people.....their own message boards are fully of complaints - or at least half-complaints, because the nature of the boards and the actions by people such as yourself aren't allowing the userbase to actually make a worthwhile criticism for fear of being banned or censored. The video linked above, which you say ED have had an internal discussion about basically just slagged the strategy, integration and end product........if that had been done in text on the ED message boards, the ED community wouldn't have allowed it to stand.....and there goes another huge problem that you and ED have created for yourselves. To be honest, it's irrelevant whether you're working on an issue or not...and not communicating it to the users because the facts are that ED have been constantly 'working on issues' for the last 11 years, and like I've said many times here at SimHQ.........no improvement has been displayed. Whether it's the big 2.5 overhaul, the amount of unfinished platforms, no coherent roadmap, the moving of goalposts and the constant tweak of peripheries such as updating the KA50 cockpit when there are bigger core issues needing fixing, it all comes down to incompetence. I really struggle to see how things will ever improve and all these excuses we've heard before. I mean really....."we have to improve communication"......that could be ED's slogan. I can't even recall how many times that has been stated by ED.
On the Eighth day God created Paratroopers and the Devil stood to attention.
|
|
#4492909 - 10/14/19 08:05 PM
Re: DCS: F-16C Viper
[Re: NineLine]
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,922
Paradaz
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,922
UK
|
That is your opinion, and you are welcome to it, all I can tell you is what I know. And I know that isn't good enough until you see results. It's the first time you've ever said that I'm welcome to my own opinion.....funnily enough it was my own opinion for posts on SimHQ that got me banned on the ED message boards proving that it wasn't welcome at all so I'll take that with a truckload of salt. Too little too late. When I hear there is a module that can be classed as 'gold' or 'complete' I'll entertain starting DCS up again. I won't be holding my breath.
On the Eighth day God created Paratroopers and the Devil stood to attention.
|
|
#4493100 - 10/16/19 01:30 AM
Re: DCS: F-16C Viper
[Re: LOF_Rugg]
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 490
NineLine
ED Community Manager
|
ED Community Manager
Member
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 490
BC, Canada
|
Matt Wagner said mine never would be. Still the case? Username: ruggbutt Seems you don't have an account there anymore (I can't find it so dunno if it was deleted or something else), I was never involved with your go around, I only heard stories (from you here and some from the other side), I think the best course of action for you would be to reach out to Matt directly, it sounds like it got to epic personal and real-world proportions, and just based on that, I don't want to get too deeply involved. Sorry, I can't be more help there.
|
|
#4493208 - 10/16/19 07:22 PM
Re: DCS: F-16C Viper
[Re: Force10]
|
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,572
LOF_Rugg
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,572
|
I'm guessing it's that kind of joking that got you in trouble before Recording our personal phone call and threatening to post it publicly where he talked pretty #%&*$# about his customers and especially the squadrons that were flying LOMAC at the time is what set him off. Because Matt wants to look like the good guy in all aspects when he really isn't. He #%&*$# with me for years, tried to get me thrown off a dev team, caused me problems with an E3 event I was to attend for CombatAce and much more. He tried to cause me problems with CH Products when I was working with them. Instead of confronting him I chose to not attend that E3 event. I thought taking the higher road was the better idea. It wasn't because Matt wouldn't and still won't let it go. Just cuz he's in a wheel chair doesn't mean he's a good dude, and he plays on that #%&*$#. Ask Stormin' Norman.
|
|
|
|