Bad news about the Hawk

[scotth6]

This is a shame. I really like the DCS World Hawk:



DCS: BAE Hawk Update

We regret to inform you that VEAO is no longer a developer for DCS World. As such, they have also ceased support of their Hawk. Although we offered to support their product, they declined making the files available to do so.
Given this unfortunate situation, we will fully refund all Hawk customers that purchased the module starting from 1 October 2018. If you wish a full refund, please enter a support request here.
For those that purchased the Hawk prior to 1 October 2018, will continue to make DCS World 2.5.3 available, such that you can still fly the Hawk.
To avoid such issues in the future, all future 3rd party agreements are now required to make the game files available in case they are no longer able to support their product.

[IanHenry]

Seriously disappointed by this, as I'm not one of the people who qualify for a refund and frankly I can't imagine many people are going to have two separate versions of DCS on their computers. I would have thought DCS would have policed their developers better than this.
The whole Hawk fiasco has been one of excuses and broken promises, and has been going on for four years. It will certainly make me think twice about early access products in the future


Ian

[JohnC]

Seriously disappointed by this, as I'm not one of the people who qualify for a refund and frankly I can't imagine many people are going to have two separate versions of DCS on their computers. I would have thought DCS would have policed their developers better than this.
The whole Hawk fiasco has been one of excuses and broken promises, and has been going on for four years. It will certainly make me think twice about early access products in the future


Ian

That is a pretty lofty expectation. We certainly don't see anywhere near DCS level of accountability for add-on developers in any other simulator. It appears as though DCS has learned from the experience, and are taking appropriate measures in the future (i.e. requiring developers to supply source files). After nearly 20 flight sim projects in the MSFS/P3D world, I can tell you that is an unprecedented step. Source files contain actual Intellectual Property that goes far beyond piracy, because it actually identifies how to simulate complex physical systems. It takes absolute trust between two parties to share, and I can promise that new developers will be hesitant to join DCS as a result. If DCS is willing to potentially hurt their own business to protect their customers, that is quite admirable.

Also, this may not be the most popular perspective, but I view 'early-access' as synonymous with 'make an investment' where one typically trades cost of final purchase with risk of receiving final product. As with all investments, there is a chance of failure that can either be total/abandonware (i.e. Hawk) or partial (e.g. product does not live up to promised quality).

Flight simulation lives in a very precarious world. With the increasing interest in 'accuracy' (i.e. system depth), there is an increased demand for high quality code writing. However, the pay is no where near satisfactory for the code developer. On a good project, I made 25% of my real world (professional) consulting rate. This means good code writers take one of three forms; (a) they are students with extra time who are looking to polish their skills, (b) they are professionals who have a passion for flight and are willing to sacrifice personal and family time, or (c) they are a talented professional from a city or country with a lower cost of living and can think about flight sim as a day job. For case (c) to be successful, there has to be a grace period of 1-3 years to develop the needed code and for the product to hit the market. So it takes talent, luck, and preparation for success. Time and again in cases (a) and (b), individuals are worn out by the flight sim industry and eventually punch out either in good or bad standing (depending on personal code of ethics and real world demands). Not just hoping, but expecting a different outcome is like expecting all new developers to successfully ice skate uphill.

[IanHenry]

That is a pretty lofty expectation. We certainly don't see anywhere near DCS level of accountability for add-on developers in any other simulator. It appears as though DCS has learned from the experience, and are taking appropriate measures in the future (i.e. requiring developers to supply source files). After nearly 20 flight sim projects in the MSFS/P3D world, I can tell you that is an unprecedented step. Source files contain actual Intellectual Property that goes far beyond piracy, because it actually identifies how to simulate complex physical systems. It takes absolute trust between two parties to share, and I can promise that new developers will be hesitant to join DCS as a result. If DCS is willing to potentially hurt their own business to protect their customers, that is quite admirable.

Also, this may not be the most popular perspective, but I view 'early-access' as synonymous with 'make an investment' where one typically trades cost of final purchase with risk of receiving final product. As with all investments, there is a chance of failure that can either be total/abandonware (i.e. Hawk) or partial (e.g. product does not live up to promised quality).

Flight simulation lives in a very precarious world. With the increasing interest in 'accuracy' (i.e. system depth), there is an increased demand for high quality code writing. However, the pay is no where near satisfactory for the code developer. On a good project, I made 25% of my real world (professional) consulting rate. This means good code writers take one of three forms; (a) they are students with extra time who are looking to polish their skills, (b) they are professionals who have a passion for flight and are willing to sacrifice personal and family time, or (c) they are a talented professional from a city or country with a lower cost of living and can think about flight sim as a day job. For case (c) to be successful, there has to be a grace period of 1-3 years to develop the needed code and for the product to hit the market. So it takes talent, luck, and preparation for success. Time and again in cases (a) and (b), individuals are worn out by the flight sim industry and eventually punch out either in good or bad standing (depending on personal code of ethics and real world demands). Not just hoping, but expecting a different outcome is like expecting all new developers to successfully ice skate uphill.

Oh, that makes it alright then!
I'm so glad that you cleared up the difference between an investor and a retail customer who purchases a product in good faith. I'm also grateful for you explaining to me that flight sim developers aren't a business at all but a charity.
I feel so much more enlightened now.


Regards,
Ian


Ian

[Stickshaker]

However unfortunate the fate of the Hawk – I bought it too - I agree with JohnC. Given the risks and perils of sim development as he describes them, and I have no doubt they are real, buying early access software is indeed an investment to which risk is attached. I made a few bad investments myself, but accept the risks, although I had never contemplated the possibility of actually not being able to use software anymore after the developer goes out of business. But ED found probably the best way to deal with this: keeping an older version of DCS available.
I don’t think anyone would describe YEAO’s behavior as ‘all right’, quitting with the Hawk after so many years and not even bringing the P-40 to life. But to me the risks of buying early access software instead of waiting for the release version are clear and acceptable.

[scotth6]

I actually have 3 versions of DCS World active right now, 1.5, 2.5 Beta and 2.5 release. I have had 3 versions running for quite a while now. I had 1.5 beta and release along with 2.0 Alpha for quite a while. When I set up my new PC in the coming weeks I will most likely download 1.5 which is still available and 2.5 release.

As with other flight sims (FSX, P3D) there are advantages to having different versions installed.