I just reread the latest statements about Warthog 2 and BS3. Are those poorly worded or are they now saying that Warthog 2 and BS3 will replace their predecessors, meaning that if you want to continue to use, say, BS2, you are locked into the last version before release of BS3?
Brings up an interesting question…
For how long can and should we expect a module to be maintained?
I for one really dont mind incrementing the version number once every few years and rebuying the thing. Black shark 3 and warthog2 have my money as I have more than gotten my dimes’ worth out of 'em.
If re buying a new version means the people who maintain it get paid, I’m all for that.
10 years from substantial completion to be defined as:
- All listed features implemented
- All major (game breaking, CTD) bugs resolved, and these types bugs introduced at time of completion due to new hardware/drivers beyond ED’s control may be excluded for this purpose.
- All relevant documentation and training content completed such that any new users can use those materials solely, without the need to check a forum or other media for an update/patch (ie, JSOW/JDAM video problem).
…ya I just made that all up.
But, it’s a start!
Sort of not my point, though.
Up until now i understood their statements to mean that the paid DLC would be the stuff that expands the functionality, not completely replaces it - IMHO that would have been a good monetization plan to explore, much in the style of what Bohemia Interactive are doing with ARMA. I mean, what’s the point of calling the updated cockpits free, only to bring out a paid upgrade a little later that you need to continue to use it?
Just to make things clear once and for all, I don’t have an issue with paying for prolonged support of modules. I’m a software dev myself and i don’t work for free either. But ED sure have a hard time making things not utterly confusing up front.
Perhaps because they too are making it up as they go along.
Yes, I agree that this is about as clear as mud…
And as you say, other developers drops the last version and starts over, even if the new version is a continuation of the former.
Would it be possible to keep the old modules and have them co-exist in DCS? I’m not sure that’s such a great idea either.
The way this looks is that the owners of the A-10C and BS get a preview and then have to buy the new modules or stop updating DCS. I’m expecting the usual upheaval over this, but I don’t see any other solution.
So far, and with the logical exclusion of the BAe Hawk, ED never locked out a product.
I think it’s dramatically unlikely they’d treat their original and beloved modules like “pay us or throw it away”.
I think it’s logical to assume that in case someone doesn’t want to upgrade them, they’ll simply fork the development.
Essentially stopping the work on the previous models (even though they still upgraded oth cockpits for free!) and using them as a step to begin the next module.
This way whatever a player does they can still use both modules.
BS1? Bit different eco system back then but the point stands.
That was waaaay before DCS became World.
Do we count Flaming Cliffs One too then?
BS2 was exactly when DCS became DCS world.
BS1 to BS2 was to allow Ka50 in DCS.
ED had to either leave it out of it or work substantially on it to include it.
And that’s a very feeble point as BS1 was a stand alone product which honestly had quite some content.
ED went through the hassle to include FC2 in DCS, which many considered impossible and/or too complicated.
To be fair I think they handled most of their stuff really well.
And the merge of A10C and BS in a wholesale package called DCS world came quite later.
Before that, each module was supposed to have its own launcher.
I’m not disagreeing with you except for one point, namely that locking out a product by ED is unprecedented. The fact that we have a completely different application right now is what led me to believe that the old modules would continue to exist. Looking exactly at what was said in the update though, i don’t think that that’s the plan:
I got a free Nevada with my A10 C I don’t mind forking out a few quid for a substantial upgrade. Maybe the 4 versions BS2 and 3 and the A10s with different suites will all be available together in DCS
I know what you mean and I’m positive this is an interesting discussion!
Never think I’m upset or anything.
Just typing on my phone is a bit of a mess and my subtext might come off as impatient.
I must have misunderstood that reference… What did they do with ARMA?
For example, they had a sniper DLC that introduced new weapons for everybody, with a mission pack that was exclusive to people that bought the DLC.
In hindsight it’s a less than perfect comparison given the respective sizes of communities and the complexity of EDs aircraft modules.
Looking at how many people have expressed interest in an upgraded Ka-50 or A-10C, I think that it might be the smarter choice to make it a voluntary upgrade for people that actually want it. Doing one of those without setting the path for the second they could simply test the waters and see how it works out, then decide how they want to do the second update. Also i don’t think that creating 2 separate A-10Cs would be that much of a problem, certainly not technically. They haven’t invested a lot of work into stringing the A-10C and the BS along lately - previous to these upgrades.
Anyway, it seems the question popped up on EDs forums as well and the few posts i could find didn’t fully clear this up, so i guess we’ll have to wait.
I can see BS2 and BS3 coexistence in DCSW. Not a big deal imo.
My guess is that it’ll be something like A-10C Tape 1 and a A-10C Tape 8 (or whatever), giving the mission creator the option to use either/or. Alternatively, it could be a checkbox in the A-10C placement “Use Tape 8,” otherwise it defaults to the older version.
The Ka-50 would probably be similar, like we have now with the UH-1H having options for the exhaust deflector and external hardpoints.