DCS 2.0 Conundrum

Sure you can. But I’m not sure you should be. To be critical of every critical post is implying that some criticisms don’t have merit, which clearly they do. I’m more of a “choose my battles” kind of person.

In my opinion, that is a mistake. There are great ideas for theaters, campaigns, storylines, missions, platforms. I’m sure the developers for all games and sims have their own ideas, but sometimes inspiration can be found by looking to the fans.

3 Likes

Well I was more talking about things like business model, how they handle their internal testing and releases… the boring stuff you know, of course they should listen to their fans when it comes to content, to a degree anyways :slight_smile: Forums are only a small part of the input.

And if I was critical of every critical post, well I would be doing nothing but replying to critical posts :slight_smile: Whose on first? :smiley:

Here is a novel idea… f111. :f111:

2 Likes

:tired_face::tired_face::sob::cold_sweat:

Ah, apologies then. I wasn’t aware you were talking about the more internal factors of developing and publishing. Sorry, I’ve been monitoring the forums in one pane, and writing that Tornado article in another. Division of labor. Yeah, most people have no idea of how intricate and difficult the process of testing, revising, testing is. Given the complexity of DCS World and the complexity of all the modules, it is no easy task for sure.

I’m starting to think you are a fan of the 'Vark…

1 Like

No, my bad beach, I should have been more specific…

Funny you posted this and Avialogs just shared some new docs on it :smiley:

TBH, i don’t get why that should be sacrosanct. Nobody is trying to tell ED how to run their business, but if some part of their process is perceived as to fall short, why should we not discuss it? You disregard the fact that the community contains some very capable people in the field of software development who can share their experience on how to tackle a specific problem (i’m not talking about myself, btw.). Displaying a “We must not talk about things that must not be” attitude is, in my professional experience, a hindrance of progress. Scrutiny is not a form of disrespect, as long as all parties stay tactful.

2 Likes

Indeed. sobek. Just because something appears set in stone that doesn’t meant we cannot discuss it, despite us not having a direct influence on the process.

I never said you must not, I simply suggested it was a waste of time, but by all means, knock yourself out. I’ll bow out of this discussion as it is desired to be one sided.

Same as I said in the Normandy discussion:

Can we just agree that none of us have all of the information to make broad determinations about certain aspects of this sim and leave it at that? We don’t need to downgrade this discussion into arguments and counter arguments about things we can not resolve?

1 Like