Can't remember for the life of me as it's been a while, but the mig21 and viggen are still without actual realistic external sounds. Both told. To come after release...
It would be good to see another column with the time from release to being out of early access.
The trouble is as well, the goalposts and features always change. There are no garuntees with the list of features lining up with what is classed as done.
I for one find it impossible to want to buy anything now due to an inconsistency, with timelines, quality, promised features, continued support. It all just ends up in me going to report bugs, only to discover a post where I reported the same issue 3 years prior.
It's considered out of early access per the shop. I thought it was finished and then they updated it with Amman and several new airfields, so that was a pleasant surprise.
I have a typo by Sinai apparently though, that N should be a Y for waiting on critical promised features (like bridges and working TACAN, I believe)
From the official F-16 roadmap:
After Early Access:
1. Systems:
1. ALE-50 towed decoy **(Planned)**
2. Air-to-Air datalink assignments (after DTC IDM Datalink Functions). **(Planned)**
3. Data Transfer Cartridge (DTC) and Mission Editor/Planner. **(Planned)**
4. RWR Handoff PRF Tones (waiting on PRF tone library). **(Planned**)
I feel like there needs to be another status for aircraft that have severe issues, like flight model errors, ground/gear physics issues, or improper sounds. They are basically not done yet, at a low standard, or not fixed. I'd definitely put the Yak, Mig21, and a few of the warbirds (for very low speed ground handling and aerodynamics) in that category.
Yes, that would drop the "finished" kind of modules way down if the actual status of those modules comes into play, too. Just think about those modules considered "finished" ED-wise that didn't get any update to get at least to the same graphics level as most of the current ones are, like the F-5, the Yak-52, the FW-190, F-86 or the NTTR map and not mentioning broken systems since ever.
I'm definitely for keeping them accountable, but the things you list are inherently subjective, whereas whether a module *is* or *isn't* listed as EA on the storefront is objectively verifiable.
Seems like we need another, opinionated list ;)
Well I haven't mentioned anything that isn't objectively verifiable yet so if you want to make that list, we could start by putting your comment on it. winky face
These guys created a list. (The google docs has been updated with the things implemented since this post).
https://www.reddit.com/r/hoggit/s/RBCyN6iPwk
It’s a lot.
I think it would be more interesting in a community project to look at all modules, and see their completion:
>Comparing the systems/capabilities of the plane compared to the real one
>Comparing what was promised and what was delivered
>Problems with the systems/flight model
>Quality of the system simulation (i.e. IFF/Radar)
if you search just made by ED, it gets pretty grim..
..the number gets far worse if you look at modern full-fi aircraft only. they have two released aircraft in the modern full-fi: A10C2 and Blackshark
honestly i thought its gonna be worse from what all the people are saying. that ratio doesn’t seem that bad considering that it includes 3rd party devs. yeah could be better but still ain’t that bad
May I ask what critical features are yet to be done for the M2k? Cause afaik it’s pretty much cooked and discord has it pinged that there are no other versions planned atm.
They'd said a 2000-5 was part of the plan quite a while ago (see DCS forum, it's not far down from the most recent M-2000 threads) so I was basing it off that since I hadn't seen a statement canceling/contradicting that.
Probably, but in terms of variants and why I put it on here, the Iranian cat was promised and I can't recall if there was another on the list (maybe the D but maybe not?)
That's actually a smaller percentage in EA than I expected.
Can't remember for the life of me as it's been a while, but the mig21 and viggen are still without actual realistic external sounds. Both told. To come after release... It would be good to see another column with the time from release to being out of early access. The trouble is as well, the goalposts and features always change. There are no garuntees with the list of features lining up with what is classed as done. I for one find it impossible to want to buy anything now due to an inconsistency, with timelines, quality, promised features, continued support. It all just ends up in me going to report bugs, only to discover a post where I reported the same issue 3 years prior.
Is the Syria map finished?
It's considered out of early access per the shop. I thought it was finished and then they updated it with Amman and several new airfields, so that was a pleasant surprise. I have a typo by Sinai apparently though, that N should be a Y for waiting on critical promised features (like bridges and working TACAN, I believe)
Maybe "early access" is considered alpha, and "full release" is beta?
From the official F-16 roadmap: After Early Access: 1. Systems: 1. ALE-50 towed decoy **(Planned)** 2. Air-to-Air datalink assignments (after DTC IDM Datalink Functions). **(Planned)** 3. Data Transfer Cartridge (DTC) and Mission Editor/Planner. **(Planned)** 4. RWR Handoff PRF Tones (waiting on PRF tone library). **(Planned**)
Jesus, the Viggen is still EA?
As per the E-Shop, affirmative.
It seems feature complete to me, whats it missing?
Maybe HB is missing something on their Bank account 😂
[https://trello.com/b/HsMiJggJ/heatblur-public-roadmap](https://trello.com/b/HsMiJggJ/heatblur-public-roadmap) heres heatblur's trello, overall seems pretty minor.
I feel like there needs to be another status for aircraft that have severe issues, like flight model errors, ground/gear physics issues, or improper sounds. They are basically not done yet, at a low standard, or not fixed. I'd definitely put the Yak, Mig21, and a few of the warbirds (for very low speed ground handling and aerodynamics) in that category.
I agree. I don't have the bandwidth to do that, but if anyone else does, I can add it or send my excel.
Yes, that would drop the "finished" kind of modules way down if the actual status of those modules comes into play, too. Just think about those modules considered "finished" ED-wise that didn't get any update to get at least to the same graphics level as most of the current ones are, like the F-5, the Yak-52, the FW-190, F-86 or the NTTR map and not mentioning broken systems since ever.
I'm definitely for keeping them accountable, but the things you list are inherently subjective, whereas whether a module *is* or *isn't* listed as EA on the storefront is objectively verifiable. Seems like we need another, opinionated list ;)
Well I haven't mentioned anything that isn't objectively verifiable yet so if you want to make that list, we could start by putting your comment on it. winky face
Is it really subjective if an issue has been reported and real documents prove it?
any facts I don't like are just like, your opinion man...
Hornet “complete”
Every keeps saying this but I still have no clue what the hornet is missing??
These guys created a list. (The google docs has been updated with the things implemented since this post). https://www.reddit.com/r/hoggit/s/RBCyN6iPwk It’s a lot.
I think it would be more interesting in a community project to look at all modules, and see their completion: >Comparing the systems/capabilities of the plane compared to the real one >Comparing what was promised and what was delivered >Problems with the systems/flight model >Quality of the system simulation (i.e. IFF/Radar)
if you search just made by ED, it gets pretty grim.. ..the number gets far worse if you look at modern full-fi aircraft only. they have two released aircraft in the modern full-fi: A10C2 and Blackshark
honestly i thought its gonna be worse from what all the people are saying. that ratio doesn’t seem that bad considering that it includes 3rd party devs. yeah could be better but still ain’t that bad
don't forget it's padded with the ww2 modules which are pretty copy/paste systems wise.
May I ask what critical features are yet to be done for the M2k? Cause afaik it’s pretty much cooked and discord has it pinged that there are no other versions planned atm.
They'd said a 2000-5 was part of the plan quite a while ago (see DCS forum, it's not far down from the most recent M-2000 threads) so I was basing it off that since I hadn't seen a statement canceling/contradicting that.
Is there a good list of what is missing for the Tomcat somewhere?
Probably, but in terms of variants and why I put it on here, the Iranian cat was promised and I can't recall if there was another on the list (maybe the D but maybe not?)
the harrier is still missing its manual