Jump to content

DannyH73

Members
  • Content Count

    170
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

16 Neutral

About DannyH73

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    London/Sydney

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    Other
  • Virtual Airlines
    Yes

Recent Profile Visitors

711 profile views
  1. Really nice work! Almost felt as if I was there, and the music was chilled at just the right temperature
  2. Hmmm ... The original budget was for a significantly reduced scope of game. Amazes me that some people will say "look at the feature creep, that's why it will never get completed", and then we have others saying it should have been finished because they "have made 100x what they asked for". Just demonstrates that everyone is interpreting "facts" in different ways. My version of reality says that we're seeing gradual pieces of the pre-beta (okay, maybe even call it pre-alpha) that will serve as the key pieces to build the Worlds and star systems they're envisaging. That takes time. I really believe a big mistake they did is to issue estimated timeframes, which slip as the quality requirements increase, and that has led to doubt, and fear that people's money won't see any return, and the more negative folk out there (who always seem to be the most vocal) stressing that the sky is falling. They had a small scope with a limited budget in mind, it got popular to a point that more money than they ever thought started flowing to them through ship sales that were demonstrating progress, and so the scope grew and so did the team. As different modules are completed you let people go, and that's why you use contractors as much as possible - it's far easier to scale - and people will come and go as needed. They're developing new technologies, working toward AAA+ quality and most definitely making some mistakes as they go along - everyone does on a project of this type of scale. It also demonstrates that people forget what crowd funding is - it's not buying a share of a company, it's supporting and placing trust in a team to deliver a concept or an idea. Unfortunately a lot of people who have invested have had that trust diminished by a large part of the fear that a lot of people are saying "game over! It's game over man" and therefore loosing that money without seeing the concept delivered. Am I annoyed I can't play the kick butt game that's been promised right now - yeah. But I'm also fairly confident something will be delivered ... eventually. The hype has done some real good though in ensuring the space game genre has received new attention, but I also think it may have damaged software developers to attempt to be so transparent for future projects ... And I think not seeing behind the curtain of other projects will be a real shame.
  3. Not sure if "that chick" (Sandy Gardner) is his wife, but she has been there from the start and managed to market the most successful crowd funded game to date - they're about to pass £90million. Her background seems to have been in fashion, and that kind of makes sense in terms of making things desirable. I'm a backer, and keep an eye on the development cycle regularly, but glad Erin, his brother, is involved. He started up the UK office and has been around for awhile. As for the other staff leaving, disappointed to hear Pugh is departing, but understand change happens. As he was focused on the community it could simply be a fallout of the negativity that's being generated (rightly or wrongly). Development continues though, the scope has been locked down for over a year and I think the idea of open development and involving the community is actually their biggest problem now. People don't understand the development process - just look at some of the responses heard when P3d v3 was announced, and people making assumptions before it could even be tested by those naysayers. The shame of the matter is the entire Star Citizen crowd funding effort was built on not having to answer to a developer, who demanded drop dead dates even if the game wasn't ready .... And it seems vocal components of the community (whether backers or not) are even more demanding when it comes to releasing things NOW whether it's ready or not - damned if they do, and damned if they don't.
  4. Just received an Email update for the DCS storefront advertising 70% off. Runs from Friday September 4th at 15:00 UTC to Monday September 7th at 09:00 UTC. This FLASH sale is for world USD prices only and does not apply to special prices of Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) countries. http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/shop/ DCS: Flaming Cliffs 3: $39.99 to $11.99 (70% off) DCS: A-10C Warthog: $39.99 to $11.99 (70% off) DCS: Black Shark 2: $39.99 to $11.99 (70% off) DCS: P-51D Mustang: $29.99 to $8.99 (70% off) DCS: Fw 190 D-9 Dora: $49.99 to $14.99 (70% off) DCS: Bf 109 K-4 Kurfürst: $49.99 to $14.99 (70% off) DCS: Combined Arms: $19.99 to $5.99 (70% off) F-15C for DCS World: $9.99 to $2.99 (70% off) Su-27 for DCS World: $9.99 to $2.99 (70% off) Su-27 The Ultimate Argument Campaign: $9.99 to $2.99 (70% off) A-10A for DCS World: $9.99 to $2.99 (70% off) Su-25 for DCS World: $9.99 to $2.99 (70% off) DCS: MiG-15bis: $49.99 to $14.99 (70% off) DCS: F-86F Sabre: $49.99 to $14.99 (70% off) DCS: UH-1H Huey: $49.99 to $14.99 (70% off) DCS: Mi-8MTV2 Magnificent Eight: 49.99 to $14.99 (70% off) DCS: C-101 Aviojet: $59.99 to $17.99 (70% off)
  5. Outstanding shots - x-plane looking spectacular
  6. Anyone know if this issue is better/worse for DX10 vs DX9?
  7. This looks awesome! Well done guys. Very much looking forward to release.
×
×
  • Create New...