homepage Forums Air Combat & Civil Aviation DCS World Campaign after Campaign - ED's new focus

I've been saying this about NTTR since before it's release. No one listens and keeps thinking they're the only customer.

DCS is a byproduct of mil simulation contracts.

Sure I agree......now we're getting to the crux of the issue here. No business should even entertain a project unless they can see it through and make a profit at the end. If ED are starting projects with only enough funds/resources to reach the half way point then they're even more incompetent than I first thought. Their early access mechanism is like an uncontrolled kickstarter......at least with Kickstarters a target has to be reached before it is 'allowed' to continue.

It does seem like they are biting off more than they can chew and rely on early access to generate funds - probably for other areas of work......and this would also help explain why they are so far behind on everything and why they are prepared to undertake so many concurrent projects.

On a positive note for once, the latest newsletter is great.......some news on actual progress for once - the first newsletter in about 5 weeks that actually includes some detail.

No, I definitely have it right.

If you spend all of your time complaining about whats not, you cannot appreciate what is already available. I am as excited about carrier ops and the F-14 as anyone could be, but I am thoroughly enjoying the MiG-21Bis, Mi-8MTV2, MiG-15Bis, F-86F, etc. I love these modules and they offer far beyond what I ever expected out of a flight sim (especially since I stopped playing them in 2002 and heard that the genre was dead). Nothing is ever going to be perfect, but why suffer and not enjoy what we have? I don't readily accept things, but I am very happy with their work (compared to say Aerosoft P3D add-ons, which I was not happy with, save for their F-14). Better to enjoy life than spend so much time complaining about how something could be better - especially since it is getting better so soon. You saw the Normandy map screen-shots? How about the uber-sophisticated engine modelling for the F-5E!

Also, you definitely don't forward the genre or improve ED's work (or 3rd parties) by saying the things that you do - you simply become background noise.
I'll give you a direct example: One of my practice partners has a much lower threshold for complaining than the rest of us. Everytime he does a case, he complains and complains about the same issues. I listened to him the first time (as did others), but now - no one pays any attention. He gets things fixed far slower and less often than anyone else in the department. The rest of us get our problems fixed in a timely basis and administration listens, but not to him. Because a complaint from him carries no weight - every time he talks he complains. So a complaint is effectively baseline - everything must be fine right?

If you want people to listen and effect change, then you must be respectful and generally nice. If you rarely complain, people will listen when you do.

I tend to be nice on forums, but on several occasions I have posted or PM'd a 3rd party (or ED) about a problem or idea. I have always received a response and on several occasions, changes have actually been made to address the issue.

When you say things like your brewery comment, you immediately relegate yourself to the ignore category.

So please help instead of impede and please enjoy your time instead of languishing in disappointment. Life is too short and this is a hobby.

-Nick

^ this times a thousand

Once they have gotten your money .... where is the drive / impetus to "finish" ?

Say for example you wanted to work done to your house ... erm painting for example

Do you pay the painter all the money up front and hope it completes the job ?

I have been purchasing software for 35 years , in ye olde days you bought a physical product that was finished

Now because of digital distribution very early alpha / beta software is being paid for up front with no real guarantee of completion

Now if ED / 3rd parties were to stand by their product .....
eg we release a beta now , but we will have it feature compelete in x months ........ or your money BACK
That would be a great thing to behold, it shows honesty , proper planning and commitment to their customers

So keep shrugging and move right along, nothing for you to see here



#oldline You earn 1 green rep square, borrow this one from Sobek?



You have missed the point completely, where did I state I am having a go at textures? Campaign after Campaign is the new focus as the thread states. Yet now ED are taking on user made mods and selling it as DLC. If you want to speak solely regarding textures, then ok, i'll take this challenge.

The person releasing these textures started way back long before 1.5 and 2.0. He changed the ground textures of the map to suit the 4 seasons. Nevada wasn't even in testing stages when the desert scheme he released was available. Even with new colour textures, it's still the same old boring map.

ED could employ this guy full time to design and build textures and get SoH map out faster, or any other map out rather than waste time working on textures for a near 20 year old map. What about buildings? Lots of work done with ground texture, no work on buildings.....waste of time and energy spent on the Caucus IMO

but since you only raised 1 mod with out looking at the bigger picture regarding DLC.....


More than welcome!

Now down to business....
5-6 months working on a campaign for 2 aircraft that don't fit in with the 4 gen fighters nor the ground units they will be shooting?

Mod DLC being also part of the new focus, your time would have been better spent petitioning old mate with the textures to build a Korean theatre, Because DCS Vietnam is simply not Vietnam. 5 months of adding units, you could have spent 1 of those months looking for someone in the mods section who is good with units to re-texture what is already in the encyclopedia and create Timeline specific units rather than search for voice overs.

A rather pointless campaign, yet being a study sim, i'm sure some user is looking forward to seeing how their sabre goes against a few T-90's or T-72's, then make 20 threads about "if" it would happen in real life whilst posting 30 or so youtube video's. That or wonder how it handles a few IR missiles etc it is a study sim after all (feel free to add to this paragraph in your reply) So until the airframe fits the theatre and units no i won't be buying your campaign. Don't stress though, a few others will no doubt, even if it is shelved like the hawk and 101, argument campaign etc etc

A campaign is played once then put on the back burner.....Build a dynamic campaign and maybe, just maybe you will have my attention.

It seems ED are more than happy to endorse into their study sim user made mods which most (or all) came about because ED were too slow to develop and release their EDGE engine. Many requests have been made for new units to be added to the enclopedia yet have fallen on deaf ears for years.....and now it looks set in stone consumers will now need to pay for these. Just another feeble excuse to make money when it is the developers responsibility to listen to the consumers and read the forum requests. So in a campaign scenario (in the not to distant future), a user makes a campaign with the Sabre or 15, adds in units that are timeline based which will be DLC, consumers will then need to purchase both the campaign, and the unit mods to play the campaign?? this is where it is heading.

There are only so many times I can play a campaign set in caucus regardless of airframe, the same radio channels, the same routes, the same mountains, it becomes more than obvious where the enemy units will be placed.

I see, so no business ever makes a venture unless they have all the funds in place before hand. Is that your conjecture?

Nate

That's the normal practice. If ED is operating on thin margins, speculation, shell games, and similar voodoo they have my sympathy and suspicion in equal measure. I think we can all agree that flight simulation isn't an easy money broad market business.

Maybe I missed something important, but it was said that the new textures will be payware?

I don't think so.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2735909&postcount=1

Do you have a crush on me?

But the question still stands. Do you love working your ass off and getting nothing in return?

I am sure I have seen you use that line a few times,

Mods were always a "contribution" to the community.

I have contributed my share to mods over the years and have asked nothing in return. None of my work however has been released for DCS world (other than missions hosted on private servers), you will find my most recent works in Arma3.

Yes I work long hours both for the man as well as in my spare time working on projects that are community based and free for people to enjoy them. So yes I work long hours and get nothing in return, nor do I expect anything in return. I do like feedback both constructive and trolling for a bite feedback, keeps me keen and up to date with the latest and greatest 1 liners and ones that remind me of 20 years ago like "Do you have a crush on me?"

Working for the man pays my way, seeing people share and use mods I have made and "free" multiplayer missions I design for general use is enough for me.

Good for you.

Still, if somebody invested so much time into a project that he deems it worth somenone else's money, why should he not be allowed to charge for it? You guys are the first to scream "IP rights!" when Tango comes here to bang his drum, what's different in this case?

I'm not so sure, if it were, things like business loans wouldn't exist.

Nate

There is a huge difference, In Tango's case the "man" was Aviodev, it was never a "free" module, Tango was working for "the man" not for recognition of free work

ED must be the first developer to put forward community made mods and sell them off as DLC. I can't think of any other developer who has taken user made mods and sell them as DLC.

Arma3 actually held a contest called Make Arma Not War where community based mods were put forward and voted on and place holders got cash payments.

BMS haven't asked a cent for their years of hard work with Falcon 4.0

Even community made mods on this very site people haven't asked for money. If ED want to endorse DLC, put these people on the payrole and get them updating the Encyclopedia with better units, give them the tools to create or contribute to other maps for the community. Arma3 released all their tools to the community at no charge, they even have an official wiki and dedicated teams to help users use the tools. It is pretty much open source with Arma3 and good things have come out of it....being free mods and maps with better gameplay.

The more mod makers developing, the more people buying. Although, this is not about Arma3 this is about having ED ask certain members of the community to update units and work on new maps rather than release half baked mods with no official support from the developer.

Like the campaign Apache600 is releasing, wrong theatre, wrong ground units, wrong era. It could well be a decent effort if it was released on a Korean Theatre with ground units from the same era. It would be possible if ED actually had members updating the Encyclopedia with more units etc and old mate with the textures helping to work on new Theatres.

I'm sure if ED put the call out asking for people to contribute their time for free and in return get SoH etc etc for free for their troubles, many will put their hands up and offer the time. That is what a gaming, sim whatever you want to call it community does.

If ED did that there would be uproar, here especially, about ED profiting from other peoples work.

Nate

there is scarcely any incentive to continue releasing mods for free - in future I will be releasing all my skins for DCS as payware, using Eagle Dynamics own file hosting service, payware is the way to go.

Not really, dcs world is "free" the modules aren't. ground units etc are "free" however to use them with any functionality one needs to purchase the CA module. The more ground units added....the more people purchasing CA

it's a win win.

Putting modders on the payrole means they are essentially employees for ED. Like in Tango's case as mentioned earlier. Then again, putting the call out for people to submit work for free in return of free modules may raise some eyebrows as you say, however if the modder is getting something back from ED in return such as free module map etc, I don't see the a problem.

Asking the consumer to pay for textures in the caucus map or buying campaigns that don't have ground units or decent theatre to support the modules raises more eyebrows.

Does paying for a texture DLC mean we're headed in a new file structure direction? It's not hard to change ground textures and once they're in the public domain it's not that hard to distribute them to whoever wants them for free. I'm not advocating piracy but I can't see anyway of stopping it with the current file structure.
I'm all for folk selling their stuff and I've been following starways mods. I do hope ED gives that guy the SDK as he has shown an I interest in the Vietnam theatre which I have been wanting for a very long time. A change of textures for the old map seems kind of a waste of money right now with the advancement in terrain technology brought with EDGE. I don't see any incentive for folk to purchase a texture for the old map when sooner or later one will be able to download them for free.

Also what happens to ones purchase of an aircraft skin when the 3D model is changed as happened with the sabre. Does the modder have an obligation to distribute updated textures to those that purchased in the past? Are the modders, who charge for their products, kept in the loop of what is happening behind the scenes of development? It all seems rather risky for the customer and leaves the modder at the mercy of the community.

A company that makes a module will have a contract with ED and would, I imagine, have knowledge of EDs development plans. A modder charging for a skin would have no contractual agreement with ED or whoever's module they are skinning. They would not be privy to the development of the module or DCS world as a whole. It is a concern and it would require a lot of information, that is only available to those with an NDA, before I decided to buy a skin for what is essentially a work in progress. That goes for all user made pay for DLC