Quite a bit of DCS news to cover this week. The latest DCS World Weekend News has been a bit of a firecracker with a lengthy statement on the RAZBAM situation (plus a bit more context from me as best I can offer). There’s a summary of recent core updates, and a new midweek sale. Also, Heatblur have made a lengthy statement of their own on a recent lack of updates. Let’s review!

Eagle Dynamics comments on RAZBAM situation and more

Back in April of 2024, we learned through public statements that Eagle Dynamics and third party developer RAZBAM were engaged in a significant dispute between the two companies. RAZBAM at that point made it known that they were halting support and development on their modules while they awaited a resolution of the dispute.

Various comments and statements have since come out from both sides since then. Official statements have been few and far between but that hasn’t stopped some third party contractors (particularly for RAZBAM who have tended to operate with a looser mesh of employees and contractors) from weighing in on the situation with their own perspectives and thoughts on the issue.

That has lead to a variety of narratives being shared around the community on various Reddit groups and Discords. The most recent, purporting to be a leak of a WhatsApp discussion between Eagle Dynamics CEO Nick Grey and RAZBAM CEO from 2023 with regards to payments and on work with the FAE (Ecuadorian Air Force). The later project, the work with the FAE on a professional Super Tucano project, seems to be part of the dispute between the two companies and an alleged breech of contract.

The comments appear to have prompted the following response from Eagle Dynamics in this DCS World Weekend News update.

In response to recent comments and questions made by Razbam Simulations, its proxies and/or external developers, Eagle Dynamics confirms that it signed a settlement agreement with Razbam at the end of 2024 to put an end to the existing disputes and that such agreement also provides for a strict confidentiality requirement that prevents Eagle Dynamics from disclosing further information.

Eagle Dynamics can, however, confirm that Razbam instructed Eagle Dynamics to cease selling the modules developed by Razbam and its independent developers. All modules continue to function ‘as is’ and despite not receiving any access to source codes or cooperation from Razbam and its external developers, Eagle Dynamics will do its best to ensure that these modules continue to function in 2.9.X.

We are still hoping to be able to implement the settlement agreement and to find a satisfactory outcome to the current situation, in the best interests of our valued community.

As the statement suggests, the full contents of the settlement agreement aren’t known, however, we’ve known since April 7 that RAZBAM modules had been asked to be removed from the store. It’s unclear what the status of the settlement agreement is right now with contractors and former contractors from The RAZBAM team suggesting via Discord that the settlement has not been adhered to.

Meanwhile, and perhaps more pressing for DCS World users directly, great concern for the status of modules post 2.9.X has prompted a flurry of questions. According to NineLine, Eagle Dynamics Community Manager, on the company’s Discord server, there is an expectation that the modules may not continue to function beyond 2.9.x. Responding to a question, the following statement was given:

You are not reading it right, it was about the current and up until 2.9 ends. That is the future. If nothing changes, the modules will stop working beyond 2.9. Has NOTHING to do with the agreement beyond the agreement not being implenented right now, but we still hope it will be making this all moot.

NineLine on the Eagle Dynamics Discord

This is certainly unwelcome news for owners of one or more RAZBAM modules (I own all four personally!). Initially I was prepared to read it as there being uncertainty going into the future but this sounds more like the modules will be deprecated in a future version of the sim. Similar to the way that the VEAO Hawk module was deprecated and is no longer a part of modern DCS World. This loss, however, hurts significantly more with four modules making up a significant percentage of the DCS module total.

A small shred of hope remains with intent to implement the settlement agreement. That may be worth hanging on to, however, nothing seems to have gone well during the last year and a half of dispute and the realist position may now be that we’re going to have to accept the end of RABAM modules in future iterations of DCS. I expect that the news is not going to be taken well and that this will hurt quite a bit more than the prior situation.

Midweek sale

Eagle Dynamics have once again extended their summer sale or perhaps restarted their summer sale with a new “Midweek Sale” which will end on the 28th of July at 15:00 GMT. This continues the discounts that have been available through a good chunk of the month with plenty of modules at 50% off their regular price.

Latest DCS World update

Meanwhile, on Wednesday DCS World 2.9.18.12722 was released with fixes and new core features added across much of the sim. Some of those updates include the addition of the Sniper XR pod for DCS: F-16C, new terrain radar for DCS: F/A-18, a significant George AI update for DCS: AH-64D, and various other core feature updates that include some new loadout options for the B-52 and B-1B.

All of the changes are listed in the latest DCS World change log.

Heatblur addresses no recent updates

Some fans of Heatblur’s DCS products will no doubt also have noticed that Heatblur hasn’t issued any module updates in the last two patches that have gone out. Addressing the issue, Cobra847 from the Heatblur team posted a lengthy update on the developer’s Discord on July 16 talking about what their plans are and the things that are coming along.

Hope everyone’s having a fantastic summer! We’re having a busy one here at Heatblur; but it may not look like it just yet. Sadly, we had very lofty goals for various releases in these summer months, but the ambition of our roadmap has made it sensitive to forks in the road and delays; and subsequently the next DCS patch will again be empty and devoid of Heatblur changes.

We’ve got a simply put, comprehensive list of new additions, changes and updates to essentially every product coming! Some of these include another large Viggen update, the early -A for the Tomcat, the A-6E AI, and a slew of new stuff for the F-4 such as Jester Pave Spike, Combat Tree, a novel EFB feature, and persistent aircraft; a feature that will be especially interesting for mission makers, campaign creators and the player him or herself- who may now have to manage how they treat the aircraft. For this we also improved the wear and tear systems, added various new failures and more. The complexity and size of some of these additions have made it necessary for us to avoid the monthly update cadence, and we’ve run into some delays on finalizing/testing some of these features.

We’re also growing – and are excited to talk about the A-6E and F-14BU being in active development and the imminent release of the F-4E Phantom II for Microsoft Flight Simulator! This is in parallel with, of course, the continued quest to scale the colossus that is the Eurofighter.

We’ll be writing much more about many of these additions and changes in an upcoming development update; but in the meantime we’re working hard to start delivering features throughout August and September. Apologies for another empty changelog from Heatblur for now, but no matter how diligent our branching would be, all products are in such a state of flux that it would be difficult to ship smaller fixes without sacrificing the testing process.

Thank you for your patience and support, we hope it’ll be worth it once many of the elements above drop and we’re excited to share more ASAP!

Sincerely, Team Heatblur

Heatblur had intended to release a series of updates through the early part of the summer, however, as it often goes in flight simulation development (and software development in general), the actual practice of putting everything together sometimes takes much longer than anticipated.

It does sound like a lot of interesting stuff is in the works from Heatblur and the imminent release of their F-4 Phantom on Microsoft Flight Simulator is sure to be a boon to simmers on that platform (not to mention opening Heatblur up to a rather large sim market once again).

Stay tuned for more.


52 responses to “DCS news: Core updates, RAZBAM situation, Heatblur update and another sale”

  1. That’s too bad about RAZBAM as they made really good modules. I think that the outcome was decided though when Eagle Dynamics announced their F-15C. I just hope Eagle Dynamics can remake the planes RAZBAM made originally:

    • AV-8B
    • F-15E
    • MiG-19P
    • Mirage 2000C

    We also need a MiG-23 in the game because they were very prevalent in the Cold War on most (if not all) fronts. What do you think about all of this?

    Like

    1. That wasnt always the case. For the majority of their time, there were nick named “Razscam”. They released the MiG-19, M2000 and AV-8 in poor states and never really supported them. It was only after like 2018/19 they really spend efforts polishing their modules.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
        ShamrockOneFive

        They did have quite a chequered reputation earlier on. I remember taking a deep breath before getting the AV-8B because I knew it had some issues, though, as it turned out it was a pretty fun purchase and RAZBAM did quite a bit of work on it. Their F-15E really seemed special, they had turned a corner on their development, and was really committed to doing a top level experience. And then all of this happened.

        Liked by 1 person

    2. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
      ShamrockOneFive

      Hrmm I’m not sure about how that might go. Its possible that they may fill in the gaps eventually though we’re talking about a decade or more of work to do to get there.

      There is potential that maintenance could be done with some sort of agreement in place and a takeover of the code. If it doesn’t happen and those aircraft are gone, they would be new products and while based on the same aircraft they wouldn’t be the same thing as we all purchased.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Whatever happens, I hope we get the MiG-23 one day. That is very much a needed aircraft for DCS.

        Like

  2. I am really thrilled about what they have to say about their Eurofighter and A-6E. I hope they get some WIP screenshots in their upcoming news report.

    Like

  3. Well, sadly, wallet is now closed with DCS. I cannot risk another dispute causing modules to go down the drain. How can I trust anyone? This is unacceptable.

    ED must amicably resolve this, however, if is true they signed a settlement, then Razbam holds a huge portion of this responsibility. I will not ever buy one of their products, anywhere, again, if they do not hold true to their commitment to their previously produced products.

    Period.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
      ShamrockOneFive

      I don’t blame you. I think the VEAO situation didn’t affect enough people to really make that saga a huge issue but this one is going to hurt a lot more. DCS modules are very much valued pieces of the flight simmer experience and losing four like this… that stings.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Yep, and I have all four…

        Liked by 2 people

      2. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
        ShamrockOneFive

        Same! I’m going to miss them all.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. I too have all Razbam modules. I found their choices in planes to be modelled bold and fun.

        Ever since this whole saga started I have refunded a pre-purchase I had with ED and I am never ever going to buy anything from ED anymore unless this situation gets resolved. Then I will get at least 2 more ED planes and a scenery I am looking forward too. (-29, -15C, Iraq ).

        And this is from someone who has spend at least $1300 on ED products over the years since 1995 ( Flanker 1.0 DOS).

        Like

  4. Bummer of a ****show with all this RB stuff.

    At least the Sniper pod is cool. 🙂

    Liked by 2 people

    1. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
      ShamrockOneFive

      It’s a huge bummer. I’ve spent a lot of time with these modules.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. I think for the long term good of DCS ED is going to have to take the L on this I will be warry of any further purchases for DCS I just don’t trust ED at all anymore

      Liked by 1 person

  5. This is a tough one. There are so many aspects to the Razbam situation, but the bottom line is that ED needs to be able to protect their customers in the event of a 3rd party dev unwilling or unable to support their module. That could be through vetting 3rd parties, owning the source code and taking over support, or offering some form of refund or at minimum store credit.

    It feels right now like ED has failed to protect their customers and probably won’t bail them out. I don’t own any Razbam modules so I’m not hurt as badly as most here, but ED’s behavior is making me feel a lot less confident in investing in more DCS content.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
      ShamrockOneFive

      You’re right that ultimately it is us as the customers that are really going to hurt from this, though RAZBAM and ED will no doubt suffer hits from this too.

      You’re right too that there’s a potential loss of confidence. Unclear what the long term impacts will be.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. There’s no way to guarantee that third party modules won’t go stale for whatever reason. Think about it. The reason third party modules exist in the first place, is because ED don’t have the recourses/time/will to create them, let alone maintain them in all foreseeable future and versions of DCS.

      If you don’t like it, then don’t purchase third party modules. There’s a risk involved that doesn’t exist for “native” DCS modules.

      I think most of us are happy to accept that risk for good modules. When the risk suddenly materializes and becomes real, it’s very irritating of course, but it’s not like we didn’t know it was a real possibility. I mean, X-Plane and MSFS are packed with old ghosts.

      I don’t know what the situation with Razbam really is all about. But, from a business perspective, it makes no sense at all for Razbam to pull all these modules off the market. Perhaps there’s an internal split inside Razbam. Some want out, some want to continue, and the situation has turned really bad when they are sorting out the monetary aspects ? Razbam (or some voices there) won’t comment on internal matters, so they make insinuations towards ED instead ?

      To blame ED for this is not right IMO. There’s only so much they can do when a third party, for whatever reason, literally stops behaving in a business like fashion and turns self destructive instead.

      Like

      1. Yes, there’s only so much ED can do if they’re going to allow 3rd party modules on their platform. One of the things they can do is offer a refund or store credit when suddenly their users find potentially several hundred dollars worth of content vanishing in front of their eyes, including a module that has only been out 2 years. My thinking is that if they don’t offer some relief to customers in this crisis, confidence in the platform will erode. I am already feeling less confident making future purchases.

        Like

  6. Last update created quite an issue. If you have any missions not working with script errors, this thread might interest you.

    https://forum.dcs.world/topic/376636-changes-to-the-behaviour-of-netdostring_in/

    Liked by 1 person

    1. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
      ShamrockOneFive

      I had heard some rumblings about some issues with older missions.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Looks like that didn’t go over too well. Latest update changelog entry…

        “Scripting API. dostring_in default behaviour has been returned to the state before last patch, after initial feedback and issues with single player campaigns. We are evaluating feedback for future change.”

        Liked by 1 person

      2. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
        ShamrockOneFive

        I’m not as tuned in with that specific part of DCS but it seems to me that deprecating a trigger that is well used would be a bad idea. Especially if it’s not been communicated well in advance.

        Like

      3. Especially when the solution they provided was to add an autoexec.cfg file which completely opens your system up to locally run malicious scripts. Bad move, glad they changed it back.

        Like

      4. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
        ShamrockOneFive

        That doesn’t sound like a good solution at all. Glad there’s been a change in course.

        Like

  7. So Ed kept selling modules they must have known there was a risk they would be unable to support and they would break?

    and another sale …

    Liked by 1 person

    1. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
      ShamrockOneFive

      It does look like that’s what happened. Playing devil’s advocate (so to speak), there may have been more optimism previously that the situation would be resolved. That optimism appears to have drained away even in official statements.

      Liked by 1 person

  8. Just an idea, but what if a third party, a rich individual or a collective would pay razbam the sum that would entice them to part with sourcecode, rights, docs, etc? And then either recoup some of that by the sales of said modules and/or crowdfunding?

    /

    I wouldn’t mind at all plonking down a little cash to ensure the continued existence of the AV-8B, Mirage, Farmer and F-15E

    Like

    1. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
      ShamrockOneFive

      While I’d never say never, it’s a tall order both from a legal standpoint and then there’s the code. Just having the code is helpful but it’d probably take a while to understand what is happening with each module.

      Liked by 1 person

  9. ED lied about supporting modules and lied about the hawk situation not happening again. They’ve burned bridges and I’ll be uninstalling the sink to focus on BMS. Enough is enough

    Liked by 1 person

    1. BMS 4.38 is pretty awesome. The Israeli Theater, ITO, is excellent.

      ED should think carefully how they proceed, since Microprose is back in the game…

      Liked by 1 person

    2. I feel the same. The constant drama, half-truths, and misleading reassurances from both sides have been exhausting. ED kept stringing the user base along with lines like “everything is good,” only to announce that modules will be non-functional after 2.9. I’ve invested heavily in these modules, and the lack of meaningful updates — or worse, updates that break things — has pushed me to walk away.

      Liked by 1 person

  10. Well there goes My trust. No more modules for me.

    Like

    1. You’ve got to remember, we always took a gamble when we bought third party modules. It’s unfair, yes, but that’s how betting or investing your money into anything goes, I am sorry to tell you.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I paid for a Product(s), A Digital product so i have every right to expect that product to work as advertised . Purchasing Modules for a game is Nothing like Gambling.
        We have rights,
        What is the Consumer Rights Act for digital content?
        The CRA 2015 gives consumers a clear right to repair or replacement of faulty digital content (such as downloadable apps, films, computer games, music downloads, e-books and computer software). Specifically, the supply of digital content is regulated when it is supplied: for a price. I respect your opinion and thank you for the discourse i just have a bad taste left in my mouth over this and also the Mirage is by far my Favorite Module. It’s what i learned BVR in. Anyway Best of luck.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Except buying modules is not an “investment,” but a purchase.

        One who invests in something receives equity, aka shares of ownership, in return. Anyone purchasing a module receives zero ownership shares in ED.

        So never mistake a purchase for an investment, again. These are not investments.

        As such, we are owed the products we purchased, and ED to uphold their commitment to support third party modules. This includes paying Razbam what they are owed, if they do indeed owe them a sum of money.

        We the player do not care, we want our stuff to work. This significantly damages the ED brand, no matter who is at fault.

        Liked by 2 people

    2. Fair enough. I would have a bad taste in my mouth too if a plane I loved and paid for was no longer being worked on and upgraded. Maybe one day Eagle Dynamics will make their own Mirage 2000. There’s a gap now in the DCS module market and I think they or a third party dev team will take the opportunity to fill that void that RAZBAM left in the simulator.

      Best of luck to you as well mate.

      Liked by 1 person

  11. solution? Buy ed modules only. After razbam flop, i dont play dcs anymore. They should pay them all their money.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Kevin Uittenhove Avatar
    Kevin Uittenhove

    This whole saga has personally put me off DCS.
    I’m not risking spending another dime on that game if things like this can just happen.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. Just my two cents worth as a South African DCS fan: the whole RAZBAM/ED dispute does seem a bit “if I can’t have you, no one will”. It is really sad to say the least, as I have the F15E which I really adore. I in a certain do support a “buy-out” of module source code, but in all honesty, we as the paying customers shouldnt have to go to that lengths and suggestions to keep modules going we already paid for. Its more or less the same story currently going on with the “Stop Killing Games” debacle.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. I really liked their F-15E as well. Such a beautiful piece of software artwork. And I was looking forwards to their MiG-23MLA and probable Mirage III. Personally I think we need both the MiG-23 and Mirage III increasingly as time goes on. For some reason I believe that Aerges will likely do the Mirage III project when they are finished with their F-104 Star Fighter (and maybe they might even include the Atlas Cheetah as part of it).

      Liked by 1 person

  14. Leaving the politics aside, I think part of the issue is ED and 3rd parties selling ‘early access’ aka unfinished and buggy modules. There are no guarantees with these things and when / if it goes wrong the consumer is left holding the bag.

    I for one will stick with DCS, but I won’t be in a rush to fill my hangar with every module, and I won’t be buying EA products again.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. You aren’t “guaranteed” anything forever, especially digital.

    Unless ED gets access to the modules themselves (maybe a straight buy-out lump sum), I don’t see them “recreating” most of those modules. They’d have to pay full cost to make them and then people would bitch they cost money to “rebuy the same modules”… even though they aren’t.

    The only possibility would be MAYBE an F-15C inspired F-15E version (for a fee) or a later version of the Mirage 2000, different enough to justify a “new aircraft.” Same with a different Mig-19 maybe. I don’t see any way to justify a different AV-8B.

    They won’t sink all that money into “remaking” something that people will refuse to buy out of spite anyway, expecting them to be “free.”

    The only hope to see them again would be for Razbam to sell off the code entirely. It’s a possibility if ED can afford it since Razbam seems to need the money and can’t really use much of it for new projects. The stickler would be if ED either didn’t have the money or insisted on a lot of legal provisions (like you can’t build an F-15E is any other aircraft game that might compete with us” or “can’t use any of the code again” (for landing gears operation or something) etc.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
      ShamrockOneFive

      It’s possible that they could get the code and do some maintaining on these projects – I wouldn’t necessarily expect them to progress but maintaining would be better than nothing. That seems like the most optimistic outcome possible at this point.

      I was thinking about the concept of plugging the gaps lost by these modules. There’s no easy answers of course. Could their F-15C project morph into a follow-up F-15E? Possible. IMHO I was thinking that one of the biggest losses is the AV-8B which is just such a unique experience. That I *could* see maybe offered in the future with an AV-8B Harrier II Plus with the APG-65 radar and the ability to fire BVR missiles. That would be different enough that it might work.

      This is, of course, ignoring all of the other extraneous factors and purely thinking about modules.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I think DCS needs a replacement AV-8B module. That and at least one variant of the Harrier that flew sorties during the Falklands War, as it would help raise the popularity of the Falkland’s map among single and multiplayers.

        Like

  16. Well, it’s a sorry state of affairs to be sure, I won’t be hit that badly as I only have the MiG-19… however, as others have stated, buying third party assets are a risk as we have seen. I’ll have to think very carefully before buying in future… if at all!

    Liked by 1 person

  17. Unfortunately, this has all put me off from even using DCS lately as well. Latest updates have put rendering and VR into a somehow worse state, although I have switched from Nvidia to AMD for graphics so that may be partly at fault.

    Overall, I’m just not as enthused after around 6 years of trying, learning, mission editing, multiplayer sagas that haven’t added up to very much. DCS comes across still as very disjointed with a couple of exceptional mission mods, but a lot of “meh” in-between. Sad part is, the passion is gone for me at least, so if they want to kill the Razbam effort at this point, so be it. It sucks for a lot of us, but it’s ultimately out of our control.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
      ShamrockOneFive

      You’re certainly not alone in that feeling. Curious to know what you might be filling your sim time with instead of DCS? I see people going in many different directions.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I remeber you saying that there is another game like DCS in the works. I forgot what it is called though.

        Like

      2. Mostly using X-Plane 12 instead to be honest – it can do combat emulation as well as GA, biz jets, airliners etc. as well. A bit of a trade off though since it’s not a dedicated combat sim, and for the moment IL-2 is still functioning just fine also, albeit showing some age. Falcon BMS 4.37 (and after) is a good challenge too, but just need a lot more seat time to get comfortable.

        The other factor with DCS was Vulkan drivers being announced years ago hasn’t really gone anywhere, not sure what happened there. Stagnated maybe, WIP?

        In any case, Combat Pilot does look interesting as well, would be willing to give that a try once it matures more, if they have an open demo or beta.

        Like

      3. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
        ShamrockOneFive

        All good options out there! My X-Plane 12 install has been giving me grief recently but I intend to get to flying that (I’ve been meaning to try the Map Enhancement system for streamed ortho). IL-2 is still trucking along!

        Vulkan has been quite a long effort. I do suspect that it will come with DCS 3.0 and that it will be a big change.

        Combat Pilot also coming along! Sounds like we’ll have something for everyone to try out by early next year. Long road ahead for them too.

        Like

  18. RB products are not going to stop working after 2.9 , they will keep woring in 2.9 . one can run 2 versions of DCS on the same machine np .

    they wont be updated going forward , true , but they will at least still work .

    eg even though MSFS24 and XP12 are out , I regularly fly MSFS20 and XP11 . despite no new fancy updates . the sims and the available modules for the sims just works .

    Like

    1. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
      ShamrockOneFive

      This is a point worth considering. If they do stop functioning altogether in a future DCS 3.0 release, it is still possible to run them and the sim on older versions. Eagle Dynamics isn’t stopping anyone from doing that certainly.

      There are a few problems or tradeoffs to consider as well. First, storage is an issue for many and maintaining two DCS installs may be prohibitive. Second, many folks play multiplayer and servers would have to continue to run on the older version. That may happen in the shot term but its unlikely to happen over the long run. The multiplayer aspect, in particular, is something that civil aviation sims don’t have to worry about or really consider all that much but it is a significant piece of the DCS community.

      Like

Leave a reply to Mr_Blastman Cancel reply

Trending