DCS and DCS WWII

[Sea Serpent]

What is this “Strike Eagle” I keep reading about, lol?  ED and many of their 3rd parties seem to be having a Golden Age.  My flight simming is also becoming very alive again after much ambivalence.

 

Edited June 6 by Sea Serpent

[Dauntless]

F-15E 2 seater attack aircraft 😎

Edited June 6 by Dauntless

[Sea Serpent]

1 hour ago, Dauntless said:

F-15E 2 seater attack aircraft 😎

What I meant is that with all the releases coming out these days, and all the aircraft to learn and enjoy,  I’ve almost forgotten all about the Razbam F-15 and its uncertain future.  I look forward to reading what people think of the Kiowa, although right now my interests are in the F-4 and will probably be there for a while.

Edited June 6 by Sea Serpent

[Boo]

4 hours ago, Sea Serpent said:

 the Razbam F-15 and its uncertain future.  

I've already taken note of the patch number where stuff Razbam began to stop working. I can forsee a worst case scenario where I'll hve two installs once more just to be able to use the Harrier and M2000 (both of which I rate highly). Thankfully Im above the F15 angst as Id already started to doubt RB had a long term happy ending in DCS.

Seems the Kiowa has has a bit of a muted response for various reasons. Personally, its something I think that will replace the Huey in my use but I've resisted the urge to buy it stright away as I cant currently fly it anyhow. 

Casmo seems to rate it. Thats good enough for me. 

 

[ZachariasX]

3 hours ago, Boo said:

I've already taken note of the patch number where stuff Razbam began to stop working.

I don‘t really see DCS having a business if any $70 module is just one petty grievance away of being depreciated.

[Boo]

10 minutes ago, ZachariasX said:

I don‘t really see DCS having a business if any $70 module is just one petty grievance away of being depreciated.

I dont think 3 months of silence and key people at RB leaving the company is that petty. ED not putting warnings on those products also leaves a bad taste.  But ED will always have a business as long as modules continue to excite people and there is no competition. 

[Sea Serpent]

I look at it on a case by case basis.  Heatblur, Aviodev/Aerges, or even ED itself could go tits up tomorrow, but I’m willing to bet early access money that they won’t.  With some other third parties, maybe I’d be more inclined to wait before going in early.  I can’t envision myself being a future Razbam customer at this point, although my guess is there won’t be any future products anyway.  I consider the Strike Eagle a $70 loss, but I must put the actual $ amount into perspective.  This household can easily go through a Strike Eagle’s worth of booze, alone, in a week (although that is worth every penny).   Maybe ED will hand out refunds or store credits at some point.  Honestly, I don’t think they should be selling the F-15E without a disclaimer, but that’s just my 2 cents.

[ZachariasX]

8 hours ago, Boo said:

ED not putting warnings on those products also leaves a bad taste.

You are very much on point here.

Also for me, it really doesn’t matter in my life whether I spent those 70 bucks for nothing. But I do remember getting cheated on. If ED features a very tightly controlled „in-app“ store where I am at risk of being cheated on, then the buck stopps with Nick. RB not getting business anymore goes without saying.

[Boo]

8 hours ago, Sea Serpent said:

I look at it on a case by case basis.  Heatblur, Aviodev/Aerges, or even ED itself could go tits up tomorrow, but I’m willing to bet early access money that they won’t.  With some other third parties, maybe I’d be more inclined to wait before going in early.  I can’t envision myself being a future Razbam customer at this point, although my guess is there won’t be any future products anyway.  I consider the Strike Eagle a $70 loss, but I must put the actual $ amount into perspective.  This household can easily go through a Strike Eagle’s worth of booze, alone, in a week (although that is worth every penny).   Maybe ED will hand out refunds or store credits at some point.  Honestly, I don’t think they should be selling the F-15E without a disclaimer, but that’s just my 2 cents.

Spot on. Though if the MiG23 dropped, Id be the first off my high horse waving my wallet. 🙂

[Sea Serpent]

Just a heads up for those (most) not following the 60 page rant thread on ED forum, but they are granting refunds for the Strike Eagle.  

[golani79]

Be aware though that refunds will be granted as store credit.

 

[Boo]

Just now, golani79 said:

Be aware though that refunds will be granted as store credit.

 

Perfect for investing in the next EA!

[DD_Arthur]

13 hours ago, Sea Serpent said:

Just a heads up for those (most) not following the 60 page rant thread on ED forum, but they are granting refunds for the Strike Eagle.  

Have you got a link to this for the curious but lazy….?

[javelina]

I was so close to pulling the trigger on the Eagle, but waved off.  Figuring with getting the Rhino, I'd be spending all my time on her.  (which I have as of now).   😀

Most unfortunate regarding the whole situation, but at least folks can get a credit for their troubles.  I still have four modules via Razbam... 🙁

 

Edited June 9 by javelina

[Trooper117]

I've only got the MiG-19, so if all of their stuff goes west it's not much of a problem.

[javelina]

53 minutes ago, Trooper117 said:

I've only got the MiG-19, so if all of their stuff goes west it's not much of a problem.

for me, the Harrier, MiG-19, South Atlantic, and the M-2000...  but I've got the Rhino now, so I could give a ****.... 😁

[Boo]

6 hours ago, DD_Arthur said:

Have you got a link to this for the curious but lazy….?

https://forum.dcs.world/topic/348848-razbam-situation-what-is-the-status/page/63/#comment-5455879

Read any random page and call it done - it goes around and around. Long and short is ED seem to be happy to let it run as its mostly venting at RB, noone in a position to comment has commented other than the CMs usual "when we have news etc etc" and F15 buyers can get a credit but might have to wait in line. Owners of older RB modules have no option of a refund unless the purchase is very recent. 

[Sea Serpent]

I’m actually in the tub, with a good smoke, pondering that what makes the F-4 special (in an addition to damn good simulation, of course) is that it has a lot of 4th Gen weapons, but it makes you work for it, a bit more.  I just did the Maverick tutorial today.  Not quite like locking your target 10 miles out on your ground-stabilized ATFLIR, and then with the press of a thumb handing it over to the Mav seeker head, like you would in a Hornet, lol.  But really fun…just challenging enough to be rewarding, but not so hard one is flummoxed, because this plane can really slam targets even for a new guy.  I just set up a practice mission with me, and some fan song and fire can radars, and some triple A, and some SA-2s.  God rest their virtual souls.

I highly recommend the F-4, it is fu^^^^g outstanding.

 

Edited June 10 by Sea Serpent

[ZachariasX]

I shall miss my Twatwagen… The Mig-19 less so. I wanted to like it, but it feels like a Reliant Robin that requires you to flip 50 switches just to make it go. And then it is still only a Robin.

It is still surreal to me somehow that when I finally took the effort learning a module, once I am proficient, they just depreciate it. I mean, that risk puts their asking prices in a new perspective. Refunds for recent purchases should be self-evident, but the idea of „buying a module for a year“ is something. And it is Nicks problem.

[Boo]

3 hours ago, ZachariasX said:

I shall miss my Twatwagen… The Mig-19 less so. I wanted to like it, but it feels like a Reliant Robin that requires you to flip 50 switches just to make it go. And then it is still only a Robin.

It is still surreal to me somehow that when I finally took the effort learning a module, once I am proficient, they just depreciate it. I mean, that risk puts their asking prices in a new perspective. Refunds for recent purchases should be self-evident, but the idea of „buying a module for a year“ is something. And it is Nicks problem.

I've enough fun in the Harrier and M2000, both which I bought at a 50% discount not to get triggered by any depreciation threat so im lucky not to really have a dog in the fight. The RB thing throws up some questions as to the concept of DCS model though. EA is perhaps acceptable with the basic guanantees, though not set in stone, that an ED module brings.

When it comes to the world of the 3rd party though, I think that there has to be a certain degree of completeness that is beyond the bar currently set or at least a more graduated EA pricing structure to reflect the risk. The only problem with that of course is that EA provides funds, so, prolonged denial of finanical returns could likely impact on a) the will enter into the fray b) the timescale of development. That said HB have done it with their F4 and so have Polychop so its not impossible (though the OH58 has taken an age to get here). There is also now some expectation, post VEAO, that ED would undetake to patch modules should thier creators go bump. 

ED will ultimately guage if their response needs be anything more than a shrug of the shoulders and we will need to guage just of much $70 is worth gambling. I suspect, even in a worst case, that for the vast majority of the player base this will change very little once the dust has settled and new shiney things arrive.  

[ZachariasX]

14 minutes ago, Boo said:

The RB thing throws up some questions as to the concept of DCS model though.

The principle of not knowing when an in-app purchase gets revoked - which obviously can happen at any given moment - does put ED's busines model into perspective. There's lot of old stuff for FSX that I can still use, even though the publisher doesn't exist anymore. ED may be saying it's not their fault, well they made it such.

This has nothing to do with the risk of buying EA. Flight sims have LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG life cycles. They are measured in decades. Depreciating stuff like it was candy crush is not a good idea here.

In ED's busines model, if they take 3rd party, they become responsible for it the moment they have it in the store. If they opt for not honoring that responisibility (for "reasons"), well that is a datapoint then. And it - again - puts the asking price of their offerings in a new light.

[Boo]

37 minutes ago, ZachariasX said:

The principle of not knowing when an in-app purchase gets revoked - which obviously can happen at any given moment - does put ED's busines model into perspective. There's lot of old stuff for FSX that I can still use, even though the publisher doesn't exist anymore. ED may be saying it's not their fault, well they made it such.

This has nothing to do with the risk of buying EA. Flight sims have LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG life cycles. They are measured in decades. Depreciating stuff like it was candy crush is not a good idea here.

In ED's busines model, if they take 3rd party, they become responsible for it the moment they have it in the store. If they opt for not honoring that responisibility (for "reasons"), well that is a datapoint then. And it - again - puts the asking price of their offerings in a new light.

I'll ever so slightly and respectfully disagree. I think it is very much about EA in that ED can (supposedly) better patch smething that is complete to keep it working in the absence of its maker prvided they have the (post VAEO SC) but will not guarantee to add features previously promised if that maker goes AWOL.

The F15E is far from feature complete as I understand it. Should HB goes off into the sunset the  F14 and F4 and Viggen all have a least the basis of the avionics and weapons systems to remain viable within their roles. Even he MiG21 to a degree.  Stuff like the Hip, Huey and original A10 also remain useable some 10 years later albeit they are ED.

My point is thet the more complete something is the greater the chance of it continuing to be viable with minimal effort. And the more complete it is at lauch, the less is the risk of it being left with no doors.  

 

 

[Sea Serpent]

The Mirage 2000 might actually be maintainable by ED.  Something broke concerning the G-limiter, and though there were no mentions in the change log, ED says a fix was made in the last patch.

[ZachariasX]

If ED can maintain modules that were originally coded by 3rd party, or at least maintain them in a way to keep them reasonably functional within their playpen, that would be great and it certainly would mitigate to biggest issue.

That EA modules that are not fully funtional or feature complete can be a bit of a gamble I find at least somewhat acceptable, especially when there are partial refunds. This makes sense then and is not really action in bad faith.

My main gripe is more about the very real possibility of "buying things" that one fine day are just not in your library anymore, because it suits other people more that way. I'm a bit insistent on that, because they try to make it the new normal. And just because Adobe is even worse, doesn't make it ok either.

[Sea Serpent]

Kerbal Space Program 2 was a bad gamble.  Building on what, imo, was one of the best games I’ve ever played (and to which I shall return one of these days) the sequel struck me as not even pre-Alpha, and the last I checked, it was going nowhere fast.  The “new normal”, has indeed become normalized, but in fairness, I bought many games from brick and mortar stores in the day for $60 that sucked, or were buggy, and ultimately got uninstalled after a few hours of wasted time.