Things You wouldn't Hear

In the wake of a ton of posts from people taking this whole DCS saga far too seriously, regarding a self censoring "company" that takes themselves far too seriously....In the UK we have a program called "Mock the Week", within that program there's a hilarious section called "Things You wouldn't Hear"....so....:

Things You wouldn't Hear from Eagle Dynamics....I'll go first...ahem..:

"It's finished"

We listen to our customers feedback and act accordingly

We'll accept criticism.

We thoroughly test our products before release

"We're releasing this product ahead of schedule."

"We decided to stop all work on [Module X] in order to concentrate our efforts on getting [DCS Core] out the door quicker."

"This aircraft comes with it's own campaign."

"There is one count where we will concede that the DCS project
sucks: We have really lousy incompetent stupid boring trolls."

"Like that crazy ex who just won't let go, even our trolls are still into us."

"Our main focus is single player."

"We realize we've bitten off more than we can chew..."

FFS, what happened to people who liked flight sims?

I'd suggest that a few of you go outside and take a deep breath, you know... think about life for a bit?

What is this, The Daily Bile? This forum is getting so tedious.

The irony in all of this is that despite all the accusations that are put forward against ED of not learning from their mistakes, self-reflection is really not the strong point of the SimHQ DCS community themselves. It's quite amusing at times.

just before I go Sobek, same applies to you



this is a forum, not an echo chamber for PR.

Yes it is amusing. What ED does is amusing too. Like watching laurel and hardy try to build a house. Unfortunately folk have paid laurel and hardy to build their simulator. Let them let off steam and don't take it so personally.

Nothing happened to people who liked flight sims, we are still here, but able to
1. like flight sims
2. use critical thought to understand that it is NOT black and white (or so the simple folks believe) you might like flight sims but not like SOME of the decisions made by a producer of flight sims

Back on topic
Things you won't hear from ED tomorrow
We are pleased to announce the early access release of the spitfire.

"Hands up, we didn't get that quite right"

I see that whilst many people are still talking about DCS, there are others more interested in talking about the people that play DCS.

"All terrain tools are now public and available for download"

"Everything goes through QA before we can release it"

"Yes you can have your money back"

Yes you're right, 5 years is too long for a beta.

Then I suggest ED stop buying our products from us. Maybe if we lose them as a customer, it will cause some serious introspection and reflection and lead to a change in our path.

If you are unable to see that as the business selling the product, ED is in a wholly different situation than we customers who are purchasing the product, I don't understand how you can participate in any meaningful dialog at all.




The Jedi Master

"you guys spend a lot of money on our stuff, we appreciate that, and thanks for your support, we would not be here if it were not for you all."

You missed the point entirely, i didn't suggest that the SimHQ community is selling anything, that's a rather absurd strawman argument, at least coming from you. The point is that this community has driven away a lot of SimHQs most active long time supporters and content creators, yet there is no change in direction at all, it's just full steam ahead of the same BS day in day out. See the irony now?

I don't see any BS at all.

Take this thread for example.....check the title out, the tongue in cheek first post. And now let us know if ED have ever said any of these things.

If you can identify some evidence and/or give an example or post a link to that evidence then you can call BS as much as you want safe in the knowledge you're absolutely correct.

I have a feeling this thread has plenty of legs especially as ED don't learn from their previous mistakes and keep making the same errors over and over and over and over again - there is ammunition for sarcasm at every turn ED make. I think we do well to keep the DCS forum so active given how repetitive the problems and issues are.

I often ask myself why I play DCS so much given all the issues. I bet others do too.

On topic..... "SimHQ is a reputable site and it's great how people are allowed to discuss both positive and negative aspects of DCS"

Are you saying ED hasn't driven away longtime supporters? (Eric J, Noodle, diveplane...etc)

It's just more bashing, and it does no good long term.The flight sim community is small enough as it is. Do carry on though if it makes people feel better.

Thanks for your approval and permission

Anyone can crate a thread that discusses only the faultless things that ED do and we can go wax lyrical about how great they are.

In fact, I'll start it myself.........just as soon as ED pull their finger out and start delivering.

For the record, it's now the "other side" that has chosen to derail the thread.



We're still here. We're just poking some fun at ED's incompetence. You know, there are threads like "You know you play too much Mechwarrior when..." but this is slightly different.




You're free to visit "less tedious" forums anytime, Speyer. Nobody's forcing you to be here, or to read this thread, or to reply to it. I see your "forum member bashing" makes you feel better though.




The irony is that you've STILL not realized that BUSINESS is different from CUSTOMER. While a CUSTOMER can complain about a business and stand to lose nothing but perhaps the product being complained about in the first place, the BUSINESS cannot afford to do a similar thing because it may stand to lose much, much more. That's why businesses have PR departments. Ever hear of a customer having a PR department? No? Why is that, you think? Curious, is it not?

As for having driven away long time supporters and content creators, care to back up that statement? Or will you just go back into the cave where you came from after spouting falsehood? Troll seems to be the favorite example, but note that Troll left of his own accord and I suspect will be welcome should he decide to come back. Any OTHER supporters? Any content creator at all? Compare SimHQ's record of driving people away vs. ED's own record and you'll see how your point does not stand strutiny. Oh, the irony!!


Now that these people have been put in their place, back to your regular scheduled ED fun-bashing.
ps. Note that it's not OUR fault that it's so easy to do this. We've had loads of help over the years from ED.

Gladly. You already mentioned Troll, then there's Chris Frishmuth, Eric Pierce, i could go on but i'd have to look up the names.

I am still here

you are still here

we are still here

but most importantly

you are still here

and that is what matters.

Really? Because it seems like the point was "you're asking for more from ED than you exhibit yourself."

THAT is absurd and meaningless. They want us to buy their product. Ergo, YES, we expect more from them. We are customers, the only thing we owe them is our money for the product. They don't deserve anything. There is no automatic level of deference or respect conferred.

We should NOT be grateful they're deigning to make something for us, they should be grateful we're buying it.

We should NOT be grateful that they participate in the community with us, they should be grateful we've created a community.

We do not pay them to be honored by their existence, they should be honored at our willingness to pay them.



When exploding airbags were killing their customers, the CEO of Honda said nothing about people needing to be happy they're even building cars, because they could just go build farm equipment or something instead. He said nothing about the relatives of the dead behaving improperly in their dealings with the company.
They apologized profusely, recalled the defective cars, paid to fix it, and did their best to make up for it. While there's no doubt that situation was far more serious, the principle is identical. A company does not get to dictate to its customers. It can choose to ignore their demands at its own peril.



We owe them nothing. They got our money for a working product, not for a lesson in how we're supposed to deal with them.

If you honestly believe the community has made mistakes in dealing with ED, well...you're delusional. By definition of the relationship between company and customer that can never happen. We're not equals. We're not, as you so masterfully pointed out, selling anything to them. It's a one way street.

The customer isn't always right, but they are never wrong. Treat them like they are and you find you have ever decreasing numbers of customers. Some customers must be dealt with, like someone ignoring a "no shirt, no shoes, no service" sign or being disruptive in their store, but that should be on a rare case-by-case basis.

A store that goes kicking out every customer they hear saying disparaging things about them, true or not, is going too far.


"Welcome to Old Navy."
"This place sucks!"
"Get out, you are banned for life."
"What? You can't kick my friend out for that!"
"You are questioning how we run our store, you're banned as well. And that guy over by the sweaters, too, I was at Starbucks yesterday and heard him telling someone else we suck."



The Jedi Master

Please quit the strawman arguments. I do not nor have i ever argued that you should not criticize ED when they screw up. I simply raised a point of critique about the SimHQ DCS community. And you guys have nothing better to do than tell me that my critique of SimHQ is invalid because of how much ED sucks. Are you so stuck in your rut that that is the only argument that anybody can ever come up with on this board? How irrational is this?

The irony is almost too much at this point.

It's invalid because SimHQ is a free service...if you are unhappy with the service, you can walk away and you've lost nothing. Has nothing to do with ED's flaws.

There are just some simple rules to follow...and you're fine. One of them...is not to use the free service provided to you at no cost...to use it as a sounding board for how much you hate SimHQ.

Simple really...

Your critique about SimHQ is indifferent to the vast majority of us. We're here discussing the DCS product and the company that provides it. You seem more intent about discussing the community that play DCS. In my opinion that's not what the forum or objective of these threads are for otherwise we'd see threads with someone's username as part of the title.

I agree with everything Jedi has said above, but would also add that in a lot of cases we're not just buying their product, we've already handed money over and we've already bought it. ED are not delivering on their side of the bargain though. It's a joke that 'early access' products are still alpha/beta many years after payment has been issued and don't progress in timely fashion whilst at the same time more products are started.

Back on topic: "We'd love to hear your views"

I can and frequently do because honestly, this place pisses me off. It didn't used to, in fact this was a place that provided well made content, good natured but critical discussion, all courtesy of its community, but not so any more. It's not true that nothing was lost.



For the love of baby jesus, finally something that we agree on. But is that all that this forum is about? If yes, be done with it and admit it, at least then we know where we really stand.



I simply said that the current state that the DCS community here is in has driven away some long term supporters and also very active content creators, are you going to dispute that? Is pointing out the obvious doing harm to SimHQ? You yourself have repeatedly stated in what disarray the DCS forum is.

I'm trying to start a discussion in how a thing like that could be avoided in the future, you know, help SimHQ make more money by becoming more attractive again, get more clicks and all. But yeah, screw me for having good intentions. You are beyond helping.

All hail the status quo, by all means, don't let me interrupt your attempts at being humorous.

"2.5 is ready"

You and many others...that are only interested in ED...and therefore when you mention SimHQ, all you think about is the DCS section of SimHQ. Every other section of SimHQ operates just fine and members get along and help each other.

I'm glad you're concerned for SimHQ...but we just hit 40,000 members...up from 26,000 in 2015...so it's doing just fine.

If you want to see how well the community can get along...head over to the WOFF section here and see what mutual respect between a developer and customer looks like.

Yes...the attitude of the DCS section here has evolved over the last few years...but that's a reflection of how ED's business practice has changed with releasing unfinished work and it staying that way for years...among other things.

The flight sim community has been a hotbed of debates, arguments etc...since there have been flight sims. Just because developers now have their own forums and can sanitize them at will...doesn't mean the independent forums have to follow suit.

ED is just fine, however this forum would be better with an unbiased moderator.

You mean one that hides negative criticism and bans folks for being unhappy? Not sure that's the definition of being unbiased.

Speaking for myself as a content creator, I can't say I enjoy reading these boards anymore. Discussing ED's business practices is pretty much the only single topic of conversation around here. It gets old really fast once you've read the very same rants over and over again... in multiple threads... by the same users. This place has been stuck in an endless "while loop" of victimization for months now, where people end up making everything personal for whatever reason.

What is progressively (but surely) driving me away is the fact that some forum users just can't write without being needlessly condescending. In my opinion, this tone has become the norm. Mods let it happen for the sake of freedom of speech. I just find it mind-boggling and deplorable that such freedom is being used by many to settle personal grudges instead of trying to achieve anything meaningful with it.

You're not wrong.

But it seems you want ED's business practices and treatment of their customers to not be able to be discussed...and that's your solution?

Not to sound like a broken record...but why is the same passionate flight sim crowd are able to get along so well here at the WOFF forum? Way more activity and active threads there and they are positive with not much negativity.

Honestly...every time this "SimHQ" is evil subject comes up and I mention the WOFF section for comparison...there is never an answer. That's because the answer is clear...ED's business practices and customer relations have set them up to be heavily criticized. The mood here at SimHQ's DCS section is completely ED's own creation with their practices.

Care to comment?

The WOFF section moderators probably don't have an axe to grind with the developers.

I'm sorry for having to be so frank, but the discussion culture instantly improved by a landslide during the time that CyBerkut moderated here. All he had to do was chime in at times and be proactive without taking sides. It made the world of a difference.

Force10 is a moderator - his role is to moderate topics started by members and allow them to develop in an orderly way, which is what he does, and very well.

disclosure: I don't take part in discussions about ED flight sims content as I have nothing to contribute - making skins does not mean that I buy or fly DCS products, I don't anymore. But I sometimes read the threads, and yes, they can be sort of repetitive.

that said, being repetitive, is not something that a moderator should stop, since that is censoring not moderating.

that that those who are linked to ED complain, is valid - from their point of view.

thankfully, we have a forum ( by coincidence run by some of those most concerned ) where those that object to this forum attitude can go and find different content from that found here : the official forum.

people who enjoy this forum, its forum moderation, itsthreads and the content, can come here.

personally, I believe SimHQ greatest asset is its moderation.

Force10 is such a good moderator that he even endures personal attacks without going ballistic.

Cyberkut is an excellent moderator...one of the best. He is a much better moderator than myself. But there was still the same amount of criticism of ED going on while he was on duty.

Your comment about the WOFF moderators just shows your biased opinion. It's impossible for you to admit that there is a flight sim developer that does a much better job at customer relations than ED and that the attitude here is a direct result of their own actions.

Noodle said it best in a response to you here (former longtime ED supporter)



Pretty much spells it out...no?

Why, in every thread that in any way criticizes ED, do the usual 3 or 4 vocal minority turn up and start complaining about simhq, it's moderators and the community? This was a humorous thread poking fun at ED. Some folk have no sense of humour.
Back on topic
"Our moderators haven't banned anyone from our forums this week"

"the Spitfire release will be delayed and there are no plans to release a template for it"

+1 for Force 10 quoting noodle

"I think I will unban that guy because it was wrong of me to do so, maybe he was just trying to help us make our product better"

I think that's probably because we hear more about ED's business practices than we do about the release and updates of modules that we've already paid for.....a few recent announcements off the top of my head;

• DCS 2.5 delayed (again)
• F18 delayed
• Modules reprioritised (where 2.5 was the focus it is now the Spit and the Normandy map)
• Threads deleted on ED message boards whereby community discussed issues that ED didn't want people to talk about
• No longer able to gift serial codes (the EULA was changed and customers who had 'agreed' to the old one didn't even know about this)
• MI-8 payware campaign
• Mi-8 released (with obvious bugs - and how many years has this been in alpha/beta with next to no updates?)

I'd suggest there is more to talk about regarding ED's business practices than there are about actual content.

Back on-topic: "We welcome positive and negative discussion on the ED message boards"

this shocking video is, in my opinion, pursuant to the discussion, it reveals something I suspected for a long time:

Fixed

lol...+1000

Regarding my stint as a substitute moderator in here... my style is a little different than Force10's. "Better" is in the eye of the beholder, however. I managed to annoy more than one member, too... just different ones.

To expand on Force10's example of the WOFF sub-forum... I'll offer up the IL2:BoS sub-forum as another case study of sorts. It used to be very contentious in there. As of late, it has been much more serene. Something changed. It's still pretty much the same people reading it, etc., so that isn't it. What did change however, is the product, and (almost certainly more important)... the dev team's course. AFAIK, Jason took the project over and brought things more into line with what the community appears to desire. When the intended course of action was announced, many of the folks who historically had plenty of criticism before, welcomed the news. Some were of the "sounds good... I'll be watching" category, and some were of a more optimistic view.

Online discussion forums that are not controlled by developers / marketers are going to have criticisms leveled at products / developers / marketing when community members are dissatisfied. Dev teams and/or their marketing folks can choose to pay attention to that feedback, ignore it, or even attempt to suppress it.

There is an old business bromide that goes, "The customer is always right!". It's not actually true, of course, because some things are just not feasible. However, when a number of customers are raising the same red flags... a company fails to heed that at their own peril. Sometimes that means the software development choices need to be re-examined... other times it may simply be a matter of sharing a convincing explanation of why it needs to be the way it is. Chances are though, for that explanation to be convincing, it will need some back and forth dialog before more people are won over.

What rarely works well for companies, (or for politicians) is to denigrate, or even just merely ignore, the people who are leveling criticisms. PGI went that route for awhile with MechWarrior Online, but then they wised up and changed course, and apparently that has worked out much better for them. 1CGS, as mentioned above, appears to have altered course with IL2:Bo* to good effect, too. I'm sure there are all sorts of other examples out there.

E.D. has accomplished developing some impressive software. Yet it is still clear that they have some unhappy customers. If anybody thinks it is just 3 or 4 people hanging out at SimHQ's DCS sub-forum... I submit that there is some multiple of that who just aren't bothering to write their displeasure, or who aren't even members here, but that have the same concerns/complaints.

Insightful and accurate.

This thread is a sarcastic insight as to comments that you would not hear ED say.......

Another one: "We appreciate the members of other forums highlighting some areas that we could improve........."

You'd have to keep going. BeachAV8R left because of DCS sub-forum negativity? Really? Or was it something else? I don't know who Eric Pierce is. Still, two (or three) people don't seem like the "a lot of SimHQs most active long time supporters and content creators" you claim. At least not "a lot" compared to what the other "more reputable" sites have lost due to their "positivity."



Please stop using words inappropriately. Look up "irony" and learn how to use it.

You may not have directly said that we should not criticize ED, but your defence of them (and saying SimHQ members should do self-reflection) is pretty much saying the same thing. Your first post in this thread alone is saying this.



Maybe it's best for you to stay away for longer then. Like I said before, nobody's forcing you to be here, or read this thread, or reply to it. If this forum is a place you no longer like being in, then don't be in it. Don't be forcing everyone else to make it the place you want it to be. We don't owe you anything.



Nice try in taking this out of context.



Interesting how you're NOT pointing out how ED forums is driving away long time supporters, actual people who work with military hardware, content creators, and even simple forum members! One-sided much?

The only reason the official ED forums are "cleaner" than the SimHQ forums is because they nuke that place every now and again whereas ideas are free and kept visible here. The fact that there's so much dirt and mud to be slung about is not SimHQ's fault, it's ED's own doing that gives us the dirt we use as "ammunition."



Pffft! Yeah. Maybe if you'd like to start some positive, productive threads with some purpose then, rather than just jumping into one and acting so self-righteous?



I hope CyBerkut's reply here has opened your eyes to your delusion. Also, members and moderators won't really have an "axe to grind" with a developer that knows how to listen to it's customers. Like Steel Beasts.... one of it's customers recently came here and started a smear campaign which really didn't stick. Was it due to members and moderator bias? Or was it because of the good reputation earned and strong support shown by the developers?



This forum would be better if people who decide to pick up the "torch" of being ED's spokespersons actually knew how to read and keep discussions; instead, they seem to specialize in baseless accusations. Remind me again how ED's moderation is unbiased? Good luck with that.



It is unfortunate that you're here at this time during ED's "lifetime." I used to be a "content creator" and was an active member of the DCS community and I've even ran a good number of training sessions for DCS A-10C. I've taken a few pilots from "brand-spanking new" to "able to fight" in the Warthog. The community was very, very different then, but so was ED.

I would have to put the blame on ED's shoulders with regards to the change in tone. As has been pointed out multiple times, the level of scrutiny and criticisms levelled at ED will never last long over in the official forums, so these ideas and feelings have to find a place to be let out. SimHQ is that place. If and when ED gets their act together and proves us naysayers wrong, and SimHQ is still the negative place it is, then I will agree with you that something wrong has happened. I doubt it though; I fully expect the tone to change should the general atmosphere surrounding ED change.



I don't mind if someone makes a counter-point to the issues we raise regarding ED, making reasonable, educated guesses about why things are done the way they are. I find it pathetic that instead of doing so, they instead resort to talking about the forum, moderators, and the posters, not the topic or issues being discussed. Maybe it's because there's nothing else in their arsenal?



Now for my daily contribution to this thread:
"We have fired certain members of staff that have been identified as the source of our issues and problems. We hope you'll give us another chance and we'll do better this time."

"Ding Hao !"

"We are working to improve our reputation because we care"

"We've scrapped the 'bonus points' from the e-store because there is no actual bonus given that we cherry pick when and and what you can actually spend them on"

"P3D is the way to go"

What ED never would say:

"You are right, we did it the wrong way and will fix it. THANK YOU for your support."


PS: the funny part is Sobek. He acts in a way we all and all of our families would have been banned for lifetime and a little more in "his" forums.
But hey… ED MODs are something “special”…… indeed!

"Thank you for pointing out the F-35 Kickstarter was a fraud."

"lets not take all this too far, this is only a game"

Well I was wrong. Sorry ED

The funny thing is the more "wrong" we are, the better it is for all of us!

"DCS World is now Gold"

"as any developer will tell you, a noisy community is always better than a passive one"

The word "Dynamic" the word "Campaign" in the same sentence"

here is the answer why :

"our current terrain engine does not allow for a dynamic campaign"

The Russian Mafia have more transparency than ED, I wouldn't sweat it

"Our erratic development roadmap unites our community"

I live to please.



My forums?



That's old news, dollface. I haven't been a mod in well over a year.

Not even after my recommendation for you as community manager??

Seriously, with the amount of sunshine I sent the community manager regarding the way you defend DCS on these forums, I thought you would have been approved 12 months ago.


"You're so vain, I bet you think this post is about you."

"i've listened to the hoards over at simHQ and am relieving myself of command with DCS, I wish you well into the future under the strong leadership of Paradaz, sincerely.......Wags"

You're misrepresenting my point of view if you think all I do is defend DCS. If criticism weren't so rudely conveyed in these parts, you'd find me agreeing with it more than not so.

"hordes"

Good news, he certainly couldn't do any worse.

If people with criticism weren't treated in such rude, unfair and slimey ways over at the ED forums, maybe they wouldn't convey criticism over here in such rude ways. Well, probably they wouldn't convey criticism here at all!

"as promised, together with your purchase : here is our own General Tso recipe, pre-alpha release"

Here's something they would really NEVER say:

"A-A Missile performance is not realistic"

They hired an engineer this summer to specifically address missile performance issues after sort of admitting it was a problem. Statement was that he was working on A2G missiles and would next tackle the A2A performance issues. Not sure what benchmark they've reached at this time because they haven't said anything but I suspect that we'll see some improvement in 2.5. They said that was the goal anyhow. I can't find the thread.

As with anything posted in that forum:

I was just trying to be matter of fact and passing on information without trying to color it in any way. You can be as cynical as you want IMO. Whether you chose to take in that information or dismiss it makes no difference to me.

There's no point trying to correct any part of this thread. Even the guy who apologised for inaccurate stab earlier went straight back to it. Nothing to be learned in this, it was opened purely for whining.

If that is true, then great! We all know how ED keeps denying issues then silently fixing them later on. Unfortunately, even if the DID announce they were working on it, it won't really be fixed until it's actually fixed, and that could take ages. I'll believe it (and appreciate it) when it's done, not before.



Thank you for not contributing anything to the thread and focusing on the posters instead of the issues discussed. Let me call you a waaahmbulance to help you get out of here as you seem to be always missing the point and even this tongue-in-cheek thread goes over your head.

As for us taking a stab at ED, it's not our fault they make it so easy for us to poke them.

It was intended as tongue in cheek, "humour", something you clearly missed, mind you coming from someone who deems "whining" as anything that's not fanatical ED butt kissing or praise that doesn't come as any surprise.

"All the devs are working on The Battle Simulator for the next few months, so your just going to have to wait."

Yeah because for once ED actually managed to hit a "release" date. I was flabbergasted. The apology was more of a congratulation to them. Because they got that right, doesn't excuse or make all their other blunders less humorous.
Edit
I wonder if ED will go straight back to missing release dates?

Then point of the thread is being missed, so I'll put it back on track. Things you wouldn't hear...
"We've decided that sixty dollars is too much to pay for a flight sim airplane. From now on, nothing will be more than twenty bucks."

"We're keeping the price as it is, but we'll be including two campaigns and a full tutorial campaign per aircraft. Thank you for your loyalty and continued support."

"Moderators wanted, must be diplomatic, fair and unbiased, previous employees need not apply."

"This whole unified product thing isn't working the way we and our customers had hoped, instead we're going to go back to selling complete sims with theater(s), planes, campaigns, and appropriate ground units for one standard $60 price."



The Jedi Master

"fixed".

"we don't take ourselves too seriously"

Things you **WILL** hear...
"fixed.... oops, that wasn't supposed to happen"

Another thing you won't hear;

"We're struggling with sales and we have run out of imagination.....so the next sale will be a combination of Nevada with any other module - at a discount price. I hope you're not bored of a different 'sale' with cherry-picked options every other week"

Yea, true sorry that's correct, I thought I posted to "Things You Won't See" thread.

We have decided to remove the useless multiplayer login function (it will only do it if you access
your modules tab)

"2.5 is no longer Beta."

"We're releasing this earlier than expected!"

"That one -Ice dude in some sim forum agrees to everything what ED says."

Fixed that for ya!