If that is indeed correct, then I wonder if Razbam timebombed the radar code.
3 Likes
I love to be an optimist- but yeah- got that same feeling tooā¦ 
This can only be done when the code base has reached a certain amount of features and reliability.
The inherent differences between a civilian and a military simulations make for a difficult comparison. Plus itās obvious that DCS is still carrying around code from the longest time- I would probably agree that at DCS 3.0 it could do that.
But without proper Ai, ATC, and a wealth of other critical feature partially implemented or outright missing- freezing the code base is literally pointless if not damaging.
Thereās just no visibility to us of all the features being worked on right now.
3 Likes
Third parties sign an agreement that says they have to provide the source code of their modules to an escrow agency, which will pass it to ED if/when the third party stops developing/maintaining.
This was done to prevent anothet Hawk T.1A like situation.
This of course does not mean it is easy to work on code written by a different company (reading code I wrote myself years ago can even be tough), but it should be possible to update it for breaking API changes in DCS core, and keep it working, as-is.
And we have seen EDās commitment in upholding promises that other companies made to EDās customers, in DCS:WWII
The F-15E is the only Razbam module which is unfinished and rumored to not be provided in escrow.
So donāt worry about the Harrier, Mirage 2000, and MiG-19 ( @Victork2 ).
6 Likes
It certainly would help the devs in the wider ecosystem (third party and mods), but as @komemiute explained, this is not ideal for customers. We have seen this when we had stable and open beta branches. No matter how often it was explained that OpenBeta was unstable, could (and did) have game-breaking bugs and would occasionally wipe your logbook or campaign progress, almost everyone (in MP) flew exclusively on OpenBeta.
There is a strong desire to have the newest fixes and features among customers.
But even if customers wouldnāt care, the stable release model would still be a massive burden on ED. Just read any book or watch any talk on DevOps or Software Deployment to see why making few big releases is bad for the organization.
And theyād still have to backport fixes to stable while working on the next big thing. Maintaining multiple live branches of the code (DCS 1.5 & 2.0) was not a great experience it seems.
2 Likes
I would argue DCS is plenty feature rich and stable enough to freeze. Is it where we would like it? Heck no, but it has far more features, better AI, and even includes a mission editor with scripting. Did any of the golden age sims we all view so fondly from 30 years ago have all that? DCS right now, if they stopped having any new code release would be a very stable playable game. Because thatās what it is, an entertainment product. Having worked in the gaming industry when patching wasnāt really a thing, and specifically on the console side where you couldnāt patch at all, it is absolutely a viable strategy. Even today. Yes there are plenty of quality of life improvements that can be made, but it ultimately does exactly what they say it does.
I referring to literally stop updating the core current engine of DCS. Whatever ED pushed out the door next is a new product. Similar to ARMA 1, to 2, to 3, and now weāre all waiting on 4. At some point theyāve got to stop trying to improve DCS 2.0, as mentioned it probably has legacy code from LOMAC in there somewhere. Iād love for it to be an upgrade situation, but honestly Iāve still got games running in dosbox that I bought in the mid 90ās whatās one more legacy install?
So, Iām a tremendous critic of Razbam, Iām thinking Iāll take a long pause before buying anything from them, going forward if I ever do consider it.
BUT.
I believe that to be highly unlikely. Simply put, it would be hilariously self-destructive. Itād also tip the scales of negotiation entirely towards ED. If RB wants to get paid, they canāt afford such pettiness, basically. It would give ED an absolute win in any legal proceedings that may come of it. Why would ED want to stay in the commercial realm when RB is going to hand them the keys to the kingdom, basically?
And thatās just the impact on them in regards to DCS World. Were this to get out, which it would, theyād have their professional reputation ruined. Who is going to contract or hire a developer that treats the code they create in the same way Kevin McCallister treats his home?
I suspect itās something like an SSL certificate expiring and little more than that. I have a clear bias, but I want to give the fairest shake as I possibly can and I think this isnāt at all a malicious measure by RB. If they really wanted to sabotage it, weād know it. Itād be a lot more whacky than this.
3 Likes
I thought about that too, but why would the module library need something like that? Furthermore, why would such a specific part of the module stop working and not the entire module?
Sure, but then why take this entire fiasco public in the first place? A lot of the statements of Razbam employees and officials were beyond thinking rationally about the implications.
5 Likes
No clue, but again, were it sabotage? Why wouldnāt the whole module be unusable? Why leave everything else accessible?
As for taking it public, that was quite unprofessional, but I hardly see it as a smoking gun. Thereās irrational thought and then thereās outright stupidity. The fact that ED hasnāt outright said āRazbam is no longer going to be working in DCSā is, at least to me, pretty clear indication this was not intentional. If anyone knows, itād be them. If this were intentional sabotage, weād see Eagle Dynamics disavowing any willingness to work with Razbam ever again.
2 Likes
How would ED know? Unless the timebomb prints to the log output or stdout, thereās no way youāre going to find out what is happening unless you can debug, and for that you need the source code.
I mean, it could even have been an act of sabotage against Razbam since they hadnāt (still havenāt I presume?) paid their devs. Your guess is as good as mine.
2 Likes
Disclaimer: I donāt think itās sabotage.
But if it were, itās probably easier to disable a standalone DLL like the radar to send the message rather than taking down the whole module which might have impacts across the sim (if the FM goes down, thatās well hooked into the sim and could cause mega problems. Same with the 3D and textures - and Iām not even sure how youād timebomb those?).
Were it sabotage, avionics seems the most likely target. But in the absence of evidence lets put it down to stupidity instead of malice, no?
3 Likes
Certainly. The reason why I brought it up in the first place is that I have a hard time thinking about any code in the DLL failing in a way that depends on the system time, apart from a timebomb. If someone can think of anything, that would definitely be interesting.
3 Likes
I would recommend to RB the same ways HB took, go release the Strike Eagle in MSFS, or Mirage, ā¦
I wasnāt even aware they did that.
who, HB ?
1 Like
Did RB not have an RB store like HB did? If I had known that ED wasnāt paying RB or HB (the latter recently leaked) for the last 1+ year(s), I would have bought everything off their sites rather than from the ED store.
At this point Iām fairly turned off on ED. Continuing to sell a product thatās broken with no definitive date for rectification, them not paying two 3rd party developersāprobably moreāI wonāt be buying anything for DCS until things get sorted.
This started off as ājust dramaā but now itās clear thereās illegal and nefarious business practices going on.
3 Likes
I hadnāt heard anything about HB. If itās permitted would you mind posting a link reference that.
There were rumblings about it earlier but nothing confirmed until now. And I should say nothing confirmed about HB facing the same issue now, however in 2019 HB was in RBās current shoes.
Image removed by admin.
Admin comment:
Please add link to Cobras comment.
https://www.reddit.com/r/hoggit/comments/1dm8eyz/comment/l9ubs5a/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
Comment from Cobra:
We regret the disclosure of a confidential and private communication that has been applied to a separate dispute between two parties, about whom we remain steadfast in our support for a mutually beneficial resolution that is positive for DCS, ED, and our fellow third-party developers.
We hope for a rising tide that raises all boats. We cannot emphasize this enough- nothing would make us happier.
While heās right to mention this being a separate dispute, they are functionally the same: ED breaching contract by withholding funds from 3rd Parties, assuming there isnāt something RB did in breach of their contract. Which, judging by their rather narcisstic blow-ups on social media in the past few years, I wouldnāt put that past them either.
3 Likes
Iād need to see a lot more than that to conclude nefarious things are going on.
Nick is speaking from frustration, which who could blame him, but we donāt know what the reason ED was giving them for withholding.
Weāre out of the loop, at the end of the day.
At this point even the excuses are changing.
You are in gross violation and breach of agreement, are illegally selling and profiting off of our productā¦
It literally canāt be any clearer in regards to the situation HB was in.
Where youāre correct in us being out of the loop is with the RB situation, as there was some shade thrown at RB for breaching contract as well.
Iām just looking at patterns of behavior and using logic to make conclusions.
1 Like
Is it clearer though? Thatās just expressions of frustration which, again, are to be expected. The work they put into the F-14 was stellar and to not be compensated would be ridiculous. Iād even feel right to threaten legal, as Nick did, since thereās something wrong.
But, it doesnāt necessarily mean malicious intent.
We know the situation they were in, but we donāt know why. Thatās my point. We donāt know the excuses that ED provided and what not. The why is very much important.