NOTAM: Polychop Devs Departing - Major Crisis at Polychop
Good Evening DCS!
The title isn’t clickbaiting, but understating, because unfortunately, I got a bad news update with another storm warning for you all tonight. There’s a severe crisis going an at Polychop Simulations and all users with interest in their modules are advised to exercise caution and stay alert. We’ll tune right in without wasting our time on introductions.
…
I find it interesting that in DCS there is an expectation that ED and the devs must keep the modules running. Specifically, after the original 3rd party dev goes away/out of business/breaks off work with ED. I don’t recall ever seeing that for MSFS or FSX ever, even for thing that were broken on release and never fixed. MS certainly has the money to actually update someone else’s modules perpetually, but they have never seemed to run into that issue. I’m curious why there is a feeling ED and their dev’s owe the players in that regard, while very few other pieces of software run into that issue.
Also I hope PC continues to update/maintain their mods. I’m a big fan of little helos with guns.
From what I have read over the last couple of days it seems this is an internal polychop issue, nothing to do with ED …and on the PC site they are advertising for a new 3d modeller
maybeee it was ED original plan, to have the 3party devs develop the modules and then wait till they quit so they acquire the modules without much work
Because ED integrates the 3rd party module into their marketing to such a degree that separating the two is hard. On the relatively rare occasions where I bought a 3rd party flying machine for X-Plane, Laminar flow had nothing to do with the sale. Austin wasn’t producing slick videos providing me with a sneak preview of the machine in action. It is very easy to not even be aware that the shiny new module you you just purchased from the DCS storefront isn’t actually an ED product.
In addition to what Eric said the only time I have paid a 3rd party directly rather than purchasing a module from (through?) ED is when I bought the Phantom from Heatblur.
So, reading the first reddit post, I’m left wondering where are his citations? References? Actual proof? I see comments from one developer who left, or rather purported to be them, and that’s really it.
And, also, referencing Casmo. Now, I like Casmo. He’s one of the few DCS youtube heads that I can stand. I like how he even approaches DCS as a player. But, he’s only human and he’s not connected to Polychop outside of being an SME for the OH-58, a status he most certainly deserves and should be taken seriously for. I don’t see this individual posting the proof that Casmo provided so we can take a look at it. Just the assertion that Casmo said this. Well, I’d rather hear from Casmo, himself, than a random redditor. What would be so egregious about posting screenshots of what he had to say?
To me, that’s a red flag. Why didn’t he post that? That would be something I’d want to provide, immediately. More so than the one aggrieved developer. So far, we can confirm one developer left and that’s it.
And as for Sven’s post not providing ‘information?’ It provides enough. They’re maintaining commitments. Their website also has, as stated here, a wanted ad for a 3D modeler. The ONE screenshot with a purported developer that left talks of making something. Could he be the modeler?
I’m left to conclude two things:
Someone or someones have or has, indeed, left Polychop. Is it concerning? Yeah. But, so far? It doesn’t appear to be critical. That will take time to develop, of course. It could become critical, but at this point? We don’t know nor do we have any input on it, realistically.
Bonzo is just another internet nerd playing pretend investigative journalist since social media has turned ALL of us into just that, apparently. And, he’s doing a poor job of it.
So, basically ‘DCSExposed’ is, once again, a silly place for muck-raking and hand wringing by people who are greatly upset about DCS but not so upset as to move on to something else less vexing.