homepage Forums Air Combat & Civil Aviation DCS World ED/Modding conversation

Let me back up here, i can see where that post might have been misleading.



By saying that, you completely disregard the circumstances of how this situation came to be.

Personally i find it pretty decent that ED allowed Starway to collect revenue when they saw that they couldn't follow through on the agreement because of technicalities. ED and Barthek never had an agreement in the first place whatsoever.

ED didn't sabotage their own copy protection just to screw Barthek over. Had they succeeded, he too could have entered an agreement. It didn't come to be and ED had to try to coup the expenses of the people involved, which turns out to be Starway. It was an unfortunate chain of events. As hard as i try, i simply can't see the double standard in this.

I don't know if there was any correspondence that preceded the ban, but technically that's what it says in the rules. Advertising without EDs consent -> bam, zoom, straight to the Moon.

I'm not sure "greedy" is the term. Have you noticed how often sales are happening? "Desperate" seems more like it.




So what if they're hard at work scrubbing toilets? All of that "hard work" won't matter if the ceiling is the one that's broken and needs attention. No focus, no plan.




Bwahahaha!! This again? Yeah, they have no serious competitors because the other guy in this niche market has a better product for much, much less money and their forums are awesomesauce. You are correct, there is no competition because ED fails to be a competitor. Except if the competition is for the "beautiful screenshot" category.




This is what the community assumes due to ED's reputation. The evidence is ED's reputation. YOU are making it like there's another choice.... please do present this to us and also YOUR evidence for this. If you have none, then maybe it's best to [edited]




Ah... you don't know what preceded the ban? Then maybe you should not comment about it.

Advertising without ED's consent? Or having a "donate" button without ED's consent? Still, a perma-ban? Like I said, many ways to skin a cat, but it's no good to cut off your nose to spite your face.


A little harsh Ice

Circumstances or not, that is -in no way shape or form- fair for everyone...which is something you seem to fail to grasp here.

Just so everyone is on the same page here, I am not bashing Starway's or Barthek's work. I have tried both, I have enjoyed them both. When I get the chance, I will also support Barthek's work simply because he also did outstanding work on his mod. I will admit that Starway took the best route and worked together with ED to come up with a solution: I am not against that at all. What I am against that when the developer finally decided that they couldnt protect it in any feasible manner, that everyone was not going to bother to follow suit like Starway since ED has already given him approval to do just that. Believe me, I was just as surprised as everyone else here when someone finally decided to try to make terrain textures a donationware/payware mod, and like everyone else did I paid attention to the final answer.

There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to believe that others who wished to make their mods donationware would not get the same answer as Starway did. Why ask permission when you already know the answer? Then you slap the hand that feeds you? Your values are pretty f**ked up and you should change your attitude before you lose your customer base.

There is no need for a response to let the ED MODs look like that.
Really... NO NEED!
Your response would be some "points" and a ban... if you could.... without ANY reason why but pointing at your EULA.
If you ED guys can't understand how rude you guys mostly act, it will become a big problem for you.
We are humans and no electronic people you can point to the EULA the whole time.
I can go to the ED forum an pick some posting from some mods where even you have to ask, why are those mods not banned since years!?
It's one side to say "that are our rules" but another side if you guys "the MODERATORS" show the whole time that your own rules are not made for yourself.
I have never seen a Forum before where so many people got an unlimited ban after a few postings and if you look at those round about 60 posting of those guys, you can clearly see two things:

1. English isn't their native language
2. Because of that many things can sound ruder as they perhaps wanted
3. The mods troll the people and provoke reactions which those people would never give without those provokes

If a mod calling the postings of a new guy "what XYZ said was PURE BS", this mod is in my eyes at the wrong place and act in such a way that the other guy must think that it is ok to speak so rude.
A forum is a place where people can discuss even so they have different meanings and they could be wrong. Stay cool and respect the other person. That�s a rule but not for the ED mods.
The ED forum has a big problem with different meanings EVEN SO the members can PROOFE with original documents, that ED did something wrong or not so well. If you do the mistake and ask ED for a attest why they think the original documents are wrong, they came with "believe us, we have spoken with a �secret guy� who knows it better", or they will show a single paper of a book from an enemy pilot which flew a captured and repaired aircraft, and we all know that those guys always knew which kind of AC they have flown and were always well trained with such an AC (sarcasm off). Original announcements from the ACES of those AC were completely ignored even so ED themselves showed a vid where an old ACE pilot was very unsatisfied with the FM "... no, such buffeting was never there and also that rolling over the wing if you was stalling was not there...". ED never translated this little but important announcements of this German PILOT ACE.
And even so many people told you that this guy was telling you that this and that was wrong, the reaction of the ED mods was to ban all the guys during a single day.
You asked them for proofs and as soon they showed them you banned them.
The ED team themselves gave not one single point to show that those guys were wrong.
At the end the "Dark jedi" trolled those with things like "Have you flown such a warbird yourself? So what do you want?"
That was the biggest a..hole behavior from some Mods I have ever noticed in my whole life in a Simulation forum.

No, you guys gave us enough responses to show us your true face... no need for more.. that�s for sure!

Haha... really? I thought it was par-for-the-course... but I will defer to your wisdom

I just got banned from the forums as well, because of what I've said on r/hoggit.

FFS.

I wouldn't worry too much about that. What real news from DCS will still be sent to your inbox, that's if you subscribe to the newsletter. Everything else on those forums is just mentions of delays, back slapping and wishful thinking.

And that would change what? "Hey, here is content that isn't offensive or in any way controversial, doesn't break law etc.. we just don't like it here, BAN!" How would that make look ED better?
In the same way, I just can't understand people argumenting with EULA, as if that should make EDs move look better. Imagine a scenario in which ED has forbidden, by EULA, any derivative work/stream/etc.. and would run around DMCA mod creators, youtubers..etc, would "well, they clearly broke the EULA statement" make ED look good. No. Why? Because it's a stupid policy and that's what people are fed up with. Banning modders for accepting donations is stupid policy.

Donations are the standard in the industry how modders are able to recuperate some of their investment and a way for the mod users to show support for the mod creators. The regular mod user, who doesn't want to pay, isn't hurt in any way. NO other company has problem with donations, NO other company has problem with such content being advertised on their official forums. i.e. Pat Wilson's Campaign Generator has it's own section on the official RoF and IL2 BoS forums. And I don't understand why they should have problem. They usually make their niche game more enjoyable for more people, making the playerbase bigger.

ED can be lucky that no-one from the general public is interested in this, or they would have one hell of a PR storm on their hands.

in all this 10-11 years nothing has changed in the way the community has been handled, it has always been "either you STFU or else" , their forum pretended to a community forum but really is a heavily censored consumer support forum, their moderation has always been rude and unfair to its core supporters and dismissive of any complains.

by the way, your complain has to fit a nebulous "constructive" category to be valid, that is to up to someone connected to the developer to judge, if that day he is in a good mood, it is constructive, if not ...

And they have this bad habit of patrolling other forums for negative opinions, then banning the person that posted it if he or she has an account in their forum, which shows very clearly their attitude towards their consumers.

What is changing as they are banning ( read as offending ) more and more people, is that we are openly talking about it and there is hardly anyone outside the developer defending them.

People like me who were the "core supporters" moved on to other sims, driven away by them - because we did not STFU.

Now we talk about what is going on as part of our flight sim chit chat not because it is central to our hobby.

And the "4 or 5 usual suspects that are always complaining" seems to be a growing number. I see more and more every week. If ED really want to grow this game they need to change their attitude towards their customers and reign in their "moderators". One simply cannot treat ones customers with contempt while expecting them to continually purchase unfinished products. I'm no business man but even I can see that is no way to grow a business.

yes - the "usual troublemakers"

it is hard to believe that we cared so much about the direction that this sim was taking to make a big issue about it, with hindsight, we should have simply deleted it from our HD and moved to something else, which eventually we all end up doing.

by the way, you would be hard pressed to find one criticism of the flight sim made by me in these past 5 years - here or at LockOnFiles, the only complain I make is the lack of templates and delay in DCSWWII release.

You got banned from the official ED forums for something you said on a different forum (r/hoggit)?




They probably could, but they have to provide a really kick-ass cool beans product that blows everyone out of the water. ED/DCS does not have this product.

Correct (r/hoggit is on reddit).

The amusing part is this is the EULA.
It was created by ED. It's not like it's the 11th Commandment and all ED can do is shrug their shoulders and say "sorry, that's how it is, we have no choice but to follow this."
They can change it just as easily as they made it.

If they CAN'T, that says a lot right there. If they can but WON'T, that says a lot as well.




The Jedi Master

Wow... how did they attempt to justify banning you on the ED forums then?

I guess the fact that they put it there, and are actively enforcing it, says a lot right now.

They've banned my username on the ED forums based on posting here on SimHQ, the same applies for a number of people. This goes back to one of their silly made up rules where they state they can do this and use the ED moderators who use the various forums to report back and tell them when someone is posting negatively. I'm sure for most people it's water off a ducks back...I personally have no need to visit or view their message boards and no need to create another username. It's dead in the water as far as I'm concerned.

The funny thing as I've mentioned before is that whilst they ban a username on the forums in an attempt to try and silence any negative discussion about their products, they're still more than happy to let the same account login to the digital store and still buy/download their products though lol.

From their forum rules:

Point is, it was neither damaging nor false. They actually called it "trolling". But whatever, I'll wait my month.