Guess it falls under a translation issue potentially, if we do get the pilot radio. Goes back to my earlier point on level of detail and translation problems with changelogs, which may be making some unnecessary stirs to the pot.
Ah… Not quite easter yet.
So all this is not about what I said, but how I said it…?
This is often the case in miscommunication…
This is acceptable, but suggesting that waiting until missing or broken features are fixed, isn’t?
Because this is the point I have been trying to make.
I don’t think I have ever opposed such thoughts other than questioning how realistic such a proposition would be, considering how hard developers in general, and ED in particular, have meeting deadlines they set for themselves… 
But having some sort of timeframe would be good, yes.
Someone said something similar, earlier… Not as eloquent, informative or in so many words, though
FTFY. 
You really did describe my view of the last decade of Apple pretty much to perfection.
Too bad ED isn’t the one with the $1 trillion market cap instead!
This is not at all hard. ED can develop nothing without funds. If funding had to wait for the years it now takes to build a mature model, ED would go broke before the first pass of artwork was done. So the EA F-16 pays for the refining of the Hornet. The EA Hind pays for the refining of the F-16, and so on. Get maps, modules and missions out the door so that enough cash can come in at a steady, predictable rate. There is no other way to do it in the environment we are now in. So long as they are honest about the feature list at release, I think this is a model we will all need to embrace. It’s a little like tipping. I hate tipping–at least at the level at which it is done in the US. But I am a very generous tipper because that’s the system we have in my country.
6 Likes
So my proposition is that they have a hard time wanting to publish timelines, or meet timelines they do publish, not because they are bad at estimating (it’s an industry problem for sure, and they are bad at it) but because they start to work on something else new instead. It’s not like they can’t say when the EA will be completed, they don’t want to because they know they will likely not return to previous work and finish it - they see no profit in it. It’s likely part of the plan.
This sort of ‘Open Ended EA’ business model is based around the customers either forgetting what the original post EA release feature list was or being complicit with it never being completed - they trade goodwill of people just happy to get anything for additional profit. They are pretty happy that anyone who points this out gets tarred with the ‘EA bad ED bad’ brush, as it just lets the cycle repeat ad infinitum. The complacency and fatalism of the purchaser is taken as just a fact of the market.
There is nothing malicious about this, it’s just a curious part of this little hobby niche. They are a company, not our buddies. Like as a hobby we take smart people and then lobotomize them into throwing away any good sense of consumerism just because a shiny thing turns up every 6 months. It’s interesting stuff to talk about. 
I don’t know. It’s like we all bought into the the narrative that ‘ED are going bust, do it for them…’ but we don’t really know at all. I’ve heard other angles like they make their money from non-consumer stuff. I’ve also heard that they are a tiny offshoot of TFC and more a play thing in terms of needing money. They are private so who knows.
It’s like this narrative fits the model though, which makes me suspicious.
That is a good analogy, and I guess I’m playing around with the fact that the waiter might actually not be that broke, or that the overall system just feels bad. It’s like where they add an automatic tip of 20% as part of the corporate billing system - I’m not sure if I’m being taken for a ride for ‘shareholder value’ or it’s genuinely helping anyone.
1 Like
About tipping in USA only remembers me the hilarious Curb Your Enthusiasm episodes (from Lary David) about the subject.
Here in my country tipping is really volunteer, if you do its nice and fine, if you not do, its fine also. The tipping system here only covers restaurants, all others business if you try to do tipping goes very bad or unconfortable.
Here in restaurants what is more important really is if you are kind to the employers there. Kind in terms of words and behavior, like not be a jackass thinking that they are your slaves, like sadly some people like to act thinking that because they pay, they can act as they want. So if you are kind its great, if you kind and give a tip even better (and not a percentage, usually is a +/- fixed value).
About ED behavior, as mentioned, i understand all their reason, but from a client/user prespective as we are, is annoying seeing year after year only have more and more incompleted addons and no prespective were it will be finished if it will… for example like the Yak, is a shame for a so simple aircraft that it lacks so many things after so much time released. Each product should be self financed, because if not, soon is backrupcy. If each product income is increasing lack of capacity to self financial support and they constantly require another one to pay the older and the new one continues to have the same problem, etc.
This enters into a vicious cycle that the end is never have a finished product or for each finished you will should have 10 incompleted suffering of the same problem
It remembers me the guys that have their financials screwed and use anothers further worst loans to cover old loans increasing even more and more their problems.
1 Like
Ever heard of Pareto Principle in computing? Quote from Wikipedia:
“It was also discovered that in general the 80% of a certain piece of software can be written in 20% of the total allocated time. Conversely, the hardest 20% of the code takes 80% of the time.”
Loosely applied here means that in the time ED 100% finishes one plane, they can develop five planes in EA with 80% completion. I take the latter any time.
2 Likes
Software isn’t magic or like some form of natural law. It takes scope, resources, time and quality as its bounds and can be planned around on which one you want to reduce or increase accordingly. They have a decent amount of experience in this, and it’s not new science.
If you’re saying ED can cut 20% of the scope of each thing sold to start something new then that’s fine (and I can see the appeal, I like new stuff), but it would be better if they just said that was the intention up-front then? If that’s the plan then I can get on-board, just as long as I know it’s the plan.
Was the Yak progress stopped because it was too hard and would take 80% more time, because it followed some pareto principle? I don’t think so, or rather I doubt it anyway.
It’s a bummer to think so, but this has to be the reason, right?
I think of the warthog as the last kind of ‘big box’ release of a modern flight sim, in the sense that when it was released you had everything you would expect, a set of training missions, quick missions, some single player missions, three campaigns, a mission builder for people to work on missions/campaigns after release, the whole enchilada.
If a few patches came out afterwards and that was the end of that until the next plane came along, with a similar early access period to the warthog, maybe with a different theater, I’d prefer it to what we have now for sure. I’ve always assumed they went with the “world” and early access business was because they came to the conclusion that they wouldn’t stay afloat by doing ‘traditional’ type releases.
I don’t know, sorry; I feel like when I started typing I had a more coherent point to make but now who knows what I’m trying to say. But I’m posting anyway! Mainly because I’ve been following this site for years and always think about posting but never do.
3 Likes
You’ve explained every post I’ve made…! Join the fray…! 
3 Likes
ha, thanks Beach I appreciate the support!
Guess it falls under a translation issue potentially, if we do get the pilot radio. Goes back to my earlier point on level of detail and translation problems with changelogs, which may be making some unnecessary stirs to the pot.
This.
Without intimate knowledge of the Mossie’s cockpit, the average user isn’t going to know there’s two communications radio sets. Even if you know to look for the good old A~D channel button box, it’s hidden by the pilot’s left calf and very difficult to spot in any of the development screenshots. This kind of ambiguity easily leads to “wait we’re not getting functional radios at initial EA release?”
My take on EA is just that it needs a standard of quality, not a binary “buy/no-buy.” I opted into Viper EA once it saw more development and fixes. The Warbird team seems to do a good job of high-quality EA (Jug), and now that I know more about the Mossie’s radios thanks to Chuck, I will probably pre-order the Mossie EA. But with ED’s track record on modern modules, the Hind and Apache I will not be opting into EA until there’s enough evidence to prove they are at a certain standard, just like I did with the Viper.
I agree. I think it is just that simple.
I just don’t share your view on this.
So why don’t they, in your opinion of course?
Good thinking!
2 Likes
Looking at
http://www.thebattlesim.com/about/
…page they seem to be doing great. TFC has some good things going on:
The organization has been active for more than 20 years and currently operates 15 WWII fighter aircraft worth $35 million with an additional nine aircraft worth $15 million currently under restoration to flying condition. TFC also manages a $2 million spare parts and components facility.
Other business interests include:
- Exclusive representation for Bombardier, the world’s largest manufacturer of corporate jet aircraft. Our exclusivity covers Russia the Commonwealth of Independent States, the Baltic States, Poland, Czech and Slovak Republics, Bulgaria, Hungary, Serbia, Montenegro and Greece. Annual sales of approximately $2 billion USD
- Newly appointed exclusive representation in Russia and CIS for Eurocopter, the world’s largest manufacturer of helicopters
ED is involved in a variety of software products and services which include air combat simulation for the DCS World commercial entertainment market. We have over 200,000 active users and over two million product downloads.
TFC and ED has been the developer of Desk Top Trainer (DTT) simulations for the United States military. Completed projects include:
- A-10C DTT. Conversion trainer and procedural trainer for the A-10C PE program. Developed for Suite 5.1, this DTT has been deployed to all active duty, reserve, and ANG A-10C squadrons.
- AC-130U DTT. Sensor and weapon operator procedures trainer for the USAF.
- UAV Operator Station. Sensor suite developed for the A-10C PE DTT has also been used at Randolph AFB for UAV sensor operators training.
Both projects were delivered on time and on budget.
Not sure they need our charity, but maybe things aren’t as good as they seem? I guess it’s possible.
Bombardier isn’t doing too great nowadays.
2 Likes
Yeah, that is true. I saw this list on that page as well, but sort of blanked the Hawk from my vision a bit, subconsciously:
Some partner aircraft projects for DCS World/TBS include:
- MiG-21Bis
- Mirage 2000C
- SA342 Gazelle
- BAE Hawk
- C-101
- UH-1H
- Mi-8MTV2
- F-5E
- New theaters in development: Syria, Crimea, and Afghanistan
What does “Exclusive representation for Bombardier” mean?
I’d like to think it means getting to fly around showing off those jets but it is probably a little more mundane.