Dcs World Viper and Falcon BMS
-
Well the trends… to sum it up…
Bms side asks for gfx (vr among those) and different aircraft.
Dcs side asks core things and completion.this is what i get from reading on the subject over the years.
Years ago i thought dcs would go for a monthly fee kind of thing. I don’t see it coming in the near future but at the pace they release modules and the prices it’s almost about the same.
2-3 modules per year? 50-70 per module based on stock and early access pricing. So you get it.
They have an enormous amount of employees for such still users complain for completion and fixing or implementing core things over significant amount of time. This is not gonna happen in the near future verified by them, their ceo and coo and their released roadmap. Still the focus is on new modules as they clearly state.
So they have the money they have the time they have the team… looks like nothing is missing so what’s the hold up all those years?
Only one aircraft almost completed A-10, only one or two helo’s, only one good scripted campaign, only one coder hired for the DC, only one team for F-18 and F-16.
This just doesn’t make sense and i don’t think they are stupid.
What i come to think of lately, and maybe is already said elsewhere?, they have military contracts (one for sure)… for me yes it puts all the pieces in to place.
This is my money generator, this is my focus, don’t pay for quality and beta testing, let em pay, get their feedback and satisfy my main focus which is the military contract. We even save some more bucks from the whole deal for future development.
They see that they jeopardise their name and professionalism on retail, but why care? Their focus seems to be elsewhere. So you can bark as long and as loud as you want, i give you some bites to get satisfied and get off my back and continue working for me and paying me at the same time and let me do my main job.
Clever.Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T818A using Tapatalk
-
The probablem is that actually , people are paying
Why should they stop ???
People complains, but people feed them in the same time .
-
If I were them , I would raise the prices ! As long as it works, why not ??? If you are logical , if your goal is only to make money .
-
They chose a smart way : Modules . Like other sells DLC .
And people pay for this , and even for unfinished products !!! that’s crazy .
People have what they deserves .
-
20 or 30 years ago , NO ONE would ever have paid for an unfinished product . NO-ONE .
-
It’s only an indepht form of capitalism .
it’s just like Wall Street or, like to pay via credit , applied to simsoftwares . because it’s sells very well , not even talking about derivative products ….
You pay for smg you don’t fully possess .
It’s a bet . So 95 % times, If you pay blind, you’ll lose . It’s poker .
They only have to make their reputation on the 5% winners . And here come advertising and marketing !!!
Cheers,
-
20 or 30 years ago , NO ONE would ever have paid for an unfinished product . NO-ONE .
In this form this statement is 100% false. Every large investments have milestones. Because a power plant or factory is just as a product as a SW. Payments are linked to achieving milestones.
If you consider SW, yes, the level of EA and BS around it is far beyond the average considering today’s quite sh*t gaming industry with roadmap and micro transactions…
-
20 or 30 years ago , NO ONE would ever have paid for an unfinished product . NO-ONE .
Under normal circumstances I still don’t. The only reason I got the F-16 is to be able to fly with my brother online and some very personal circumstances. Don’t know how much time we have to fly together and with the F-16 the learning curve for me was minimal since I already know it from BMS. That’s the only reason I got it. Normally I never would’ve bought it. I think DCS has some nice features and you can still have fun with it, like I said earlier. But I really dislike the way they do things. Recently they presented the roadmap on the F-18 and F-16. Earlier they said they wanted to have both finished this year. Now they put the F-16 on the back burner and they plan to take the F-18 out of early access later this year, but that is with 27 items still missing. And they present it like they are doing the community a big favor. That’s what I don’t like about some of the software industry. Imagine people selling cars like that….
-
.
Every large investments have milestones
It’s different there because you are talking of investsments .
I’m talking about “finished” (omg !!! ) products .
Would you pay a for an unfinished spacerocket to go on a spacetrip with your family ?
But you could invest on the space firm to permit it to make better rockets .
-
Tomcatter , I’m not accusing anyone . I’m just saying what I think . Anyone has to justify . that’s our world .
-
Tomcatter , I’m not accusing anyone . I’m just saying what I think . Anyone has to justify . that’s our world .
No, don’t worry. I didn’t take your statement as an accusation. Just wanted to say that basically I agree with you and that I only got it because of special circumstances, that otherwise I would never have gotten it myself.
-
Do you know guys , about a sofware called -EDIT- Kerbal Space Program ? Space engineers is good too, , but KSP is like BMS , extremely well documented while being very very fun)
You pay for a full finished product .
-
They make you pay for DLCs
-
there’s a huge community of “amateurs” modders along that incredible software .
This exemple is a good deal : The real product is fully finished but you can pay for additionnal fun BUT you have a mass of free content, made by modders .
That’s balanced , imo .
I payed once , and now , the thing is perfectly modded with love, thanks to the KSP community, like with BMS .
I strongly recommand it, btw .
-
-
guys DCS is not lying. They are crystal clear on their statements.
They made the beta and early access products their mainstream and customers complain.
Why complain?
You know what you are buying, a not finished, bugged, early access product.
The community wants to use it on their own terms. Like bugs and early access just isn’t there cause the majority of the users use as a platform the DCS world beta.
The dcs customers that use the beta must eventually come to the comprehension of that they pay to be beta testers. The company is kind enough to provide more than this thus selling early access to the eager customers. What more do you want?The DCS customers focus should be on the stable version and the updates and implementations of it.
The DCS community focus should be on the beta and early access to prepare and contribute for the future features of the stable version.
They should comprehend this and understand the mess and confusion they are in. The company is clear, just takes advantage of the situation and confusion. They confuse customer and community cause the company put them in the same sack. Still the company is clear about it. User’s aren’t.You can’t demand to eat and enjoy a cake while its still in the oven at 180 degrees Celsius. You will get burned and boy not enjoy it at all. If you get it out and let it cold out, well it will be a half baked cake.
So you see there is no comparison at all. Also there is great confusion.
Well as they say the wolf is glad of the fuss.Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T818A using Tapatalk
-
No, they’re not really lying. But they are leading people on I guess. I’m not following DCS that closely, but from what I understand is they never make hard promises, so in that sense they are not lying. But from what I read with the F-18 for example in their roadmap thread…. Back when they started to sell it in early access they mentioned certain items, like ATFLIR and other features would be included once it got out of early access. Now they aim to get it out of early access later this year, but 27 items are still missing when it does go out of early access… including the ATFLIR and other items they said would be included. These items got moved to be finished after the F-18 comes out of early access. People expect a (mostly) complete jet when it goes out of early access, but now they are playing with words what out of early access means and what a complete and finished product is. I understand a sim is never really finished, but with DCS key items are still missing when they consider it complete. Look at BMS, that is always being developed more, but every release is basically a complete game that you can play.
To me there are 2 sides. I don’t think all the criticism towards DCS is fair. That’s why I joined this thread. I do think the sim has more to offer than just eye candy and you can do fun things with it. It has some cool features that you can’t do in BMS for example. And no sim is perfect, so other sims have their faults too. So some of the criticism towards DCS is a bit harsh I think… maybe some of my posts and criticism have been a bit harsh as well in this thread. Apologies for that. :tape:
But from a gameplay side I think DCS does have potential and some fun things to offer.The other side for me is the way they sell and develop it and keep delaying everything for whatever reason. Yes, you indeed know what you are getting into when you buy their early access stuff. But that doesn’t make it right. I’m not complaining, I only got the F-16 and knew what I got into when I bought it. I got it for different/personal reasons as mentioned above. But I do see how they keep delaying things and keep moving their goal posts and move onto the next module before finishing the previous one. I understand that that is their business model, but I don’t agree with that and normally I would not buy products like that. Take the F-18 for example. Who is to say they will ever finish work on it once they remove the out of early access label? In the past they said they were working on the F-16 and F-18 at the same time, so the F-18 would not get delayed when the F-16 was introduced. Then the F-18 team got moved to the F-16 and the F-18 got delayed. After that they said they could work on both again because much of the avionics could be carried over to both jets. Now the F-16 is on hold until at least 2021, because they are continuing on the F-18 again… so clearly what they said is not correct.
-
This is exactly why BMS team only promises things when they are 3-4 weeks away. Plans change, and something that looks good when you hashed it out during a staff meeting, sometimes stops looking so good when said staff actually sits down to code it. That’s how software development works. The promises you get at the start is what they want to do, under assumption that everything can be done with enough time and effort. In reality, available time and effort are limited by multiple factors, and so in the end, some things end up on the cutting floor. It’s not that they don’t want to do it, it’s that within the available time and effort constraints, they can’t.
It’s not limited to software, even, just look at “Elon time” in space exploration, in reference to SpaceX making optimistic promises, and then announcing delay after delay. This pretty much always happens when a company builds up hype too far in advance. The best way to keep all your promises is never to make any. I’ve made that mistake myself, as well, got into programming something that turned out way more complicated than I thought it would be.
-
Dear all,
Some people need to pay for things if they are to use it. Spending money builds a feeling that if you do not use what you bought then the money would get wasted. And with the other way round, this feeling those not work that something, which is free would make somebody’s work wasted. The best way to justify this kind of own approach is by saying “it must be bad because it is free”. I think it is not possible to change this approach in those who have it. Not worth bother.
Please remember that Falcon 4.0 was made by professionals at the very begining. I was given it as a birthday present from my girl in 1999. She is my wife now and we have two grown kids. Although F4 was made by professionals, it had a lot of bugs at that time. That is because when things are made this way, the professional manufacturer is looking for profit (just as said by others above). If working for somebody, you use your heart to create, then you can expect to be fired two weeks ahead of Christmas. We all know that for our community there will be not enough people keen to learn/read and make profit for a potential sim manufacturer if it is to be a sophisticated sim like F4.
Thanks to BMS it is even more sophisticated now. And the amount of documentation is made to a square. And I am far to use “amateur” word in the way it was meant at the begining of this thread. If any program is being on an ongoing development for such a long time, it would not be possible to make further development, if it was not made by such experienced team. We would have seen more and more recurring bugs and this is not the case with F4 BMS. That means there is a good documentation of changes, knowledge, good organisation of team work. That is very profesional although with heart and for free.
Back in the 1999-2000+s (when I was at high school) I used to wake up at 4:00 to meet the US guys. Obviously it was late in US. So most of the US collegues were a little bit more tired than myself. Taking advantage of that, I had fun in dogfight. Today I meet with my son (after school/work) and have fun in campaigns. Woww what a sim for so many years. I even practice IR skills for the RL training with F4 BMS. And obviously, all of this would not be possible without a good documentation. What makes this sim so huge and professional, is the documentation. Without it, without all of the millions of written letters, it would not be possible to get to all of the other professional stuff, written in bytes.
I can only be sorry that I was not able to read all of the documentation within F4 BMS yet. A huge job was made here. I am still reading it on and on, forth and back. And I cannot see the end of my reading and learning. I think it is also like this because the way it is written makes it very pleasant to read. So, I will keep on and for sure not waste time on a criminal books or DCS flying (that would be a waste having a sim like F4 BMS for free).
Anyhow, although still learning, and still being surprised by lots of little things put into F4 BMS, lately I have come to a point, where together with my son, we are able to deliver all of the weapons a block 50/52CM can take, including TGP to MAV handoff, buddy lasing and in all weather and time conditions. Doing that I must be careful (just as in RL) that the time on a simulator passes 2 times quicker, if compared to a true flight. So we need to watch out and make sure to land before my wife (his mother) gets crossed with us about the hour getting late. At least I have the chance to say that I was using the birthday gift from her.
BMS team made it live for more than one generation. Thank you BMS team.
The big light board near Nellis back in Falcon 3.0 should have a displayed moving FALCON LIVES instead (no offence meant here to the music professionals).
Let the health be with all of you!
-
I remember the original Falcon 4.0 well, MP was useless until 1.06 and I thought 1.08 was amazing back then…
-
The topic is clearly at an impasse. It became clear that many are trying to justify the DCS, although the DCS itself does not)) IThey are just fooling everyone with empty promises. And very often they do not promise anything, they are simply silent)) Good tactics
You yourself come up with a justification for him - ingenious.
Maybe you do not need to justify them? Let them do it themselves. -
There’s no reason to not want something nicer… Falcon BMS with the new Microsoft graphics and DCS VR? Watch me go drop a couple of months savings on hardware. I just tried the F-16 DCS on its free trial and my hardware can’t support it, and I had control inputs… still very pretty though.
I am incredibly grateful tour BMS team that kees F4 alive. Countless hours of fun flying!
- bruzzer
-
Well Ambrzyk and Tomcater31 still you are in the conflict - confusion of customer and community. Finished product and beta.
U can’t compare or discuss between early access windows version and last official update.
How more between a Linux distro and windows 10.
U can’t compare dcs stable and beta with early access modules.
Its just without common ground.
All are just estimations and belief.
The company says, this is my latest stable product, this is my beta, those are my early access. This is my roadmap.
In a logical situation the stable version should be the mainstream platform. But instead the unstable product is the mainstream. This goes for years and customers got tired waiting, but for the company this is a never ending story. But users on their own thinking want to force the use of a magic wand and all of the sudden heaven on earth.
Beta testers always find things that are bogus and even suggest new features cause they have a saying. But they know that this is for good and they are in comprehension and acceptance that they are testing a beta maybe for ever add the product always advances. When they want to enjoy the product with others they don’t use the beta they use the stable version.
When you say you will built a carrot cake you start the mixture of the ingredients, but while at it you say well i don’t like carrot that much so the recipe says 200gm I’ll just put 100gm afterall I’m doing it to test it for my self.
So yes DCS let down the users with f18 and f16, so what? For beta and early access? U didn’t buy a car and oh oh it doesn’t have a windshield… you bought the testdrive for the engine not the final test product.For me the clock is ticking, from 2018 for F-18 and F-16 from 2020. See i count by years lets see when i will press the stop on the chronograph for each when they will say well we are finished with it and this is the first stable release. But i have another one for the core thing but the chronograph stopped counting, it got bored or went out of battery.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T818A using Tapatalk