robmypro

Sent!

Not too interested in FC3 without AFM and ckickable cockpits sporting 6DOF. But we will see what ED delivers.

When I pre-ordered the A-10 I did so in part because of the bonus Nevada map. I have also waited a long time for that bonus.

Yeah, it's one of my favorites, too. Lol

I think this is a great problem to worry about. What happens if we have 2 of the same plane in DCS? I imagine the day when DCS aircraft are as plentiful as FSX. That would be amazing. I cannot wait to the day when I am trying to figure out which of the 3 F-16 versions I should buy! Not to mention terrain, sound, weather, and airport upgrades. Orbix DCS: Iraq! The wife is going to kill me.

I guess the point was having something that says the mod lives up to DCS standards, as reviewed by them. How will the community distinguish this?

Thanks dude! Love it.

I have complete faith in the boys from ED, but i am wondering how much thought they have put into a DCS Certification program. It could go something like this... 3rd party developer creates an F-16 Block 52. They would like to carry the DCS or DCS Certified label, which tells the community that ED has reviewed it using a comprehensive checklist of items. The 3rd party developer pays a fee for this service, with no guaratee that they are buying certification. ED publishes the criteria they will use for certification, and will provide details the 3rd party developer needs to address if certification tests fail. The 3rd party developer provides the data requested, and ED reviews the application, models, FM, code, etc. BTW, when setting up online matches, DCS Certified content could be made mandatory, if desired. From a marketing standpoint, 3rd party developers would have incentive to develop high fidelity content. The community would also have something from ED certifying quality. And ED would put in place incentives for the DCS brand to remain top quality. Maybe this has already been put in motion?

We have nails?

Good points, guys. The future is interesting! ED has been doing a great job, so we know they are well aware of this pitfall. And balance also means having a/c realistically modeled (aka the Mig 21 has no chance against an F-15). They need to make sure strange anomolies don't occur. At least some QA to verify the plane matches real world specs. Challenging...but also exciting.

With so many new aircraft in development, I am thinking about force on force / Cold War encounters. What mix of aircraft would we need on both sides to provide good balance, and avoid that one dominant aircraft that everyone is forced to fly to have a chance of survival. I am thinking real world situations. For example, if the U.S. has the F-15E, what would the Soviets need? Would the Mig 29 counter this threat? What about the Mig-21? If the admin wanted to limit aircraft choices to a fair fight, what would the U.S. need? Having plenty of choices is great, but I think attention needs to be given to reaching balance. I am sure ED is thinking about it, but will we get any sort of balance on the path we are on?

Holy crap.

Sounds good. Thanks Nate.

Just thinking about this. Maybe basic models are added to DCS World periodically by ED, given what they know about the 3rd party development pipeline. These are low fidelity versions, but they allow people without that plane to have a lower fidelity version rendered in DCS World. If they do have the aircraft installed, they see the high fidelity version in DCS World. So in this way updates to DCS World are minimized. I imagine many of the low fidelity aircraft can be ported over from FC. This leaves the issue of making aircraft player controlled when creating missions. Maybe every aircraft can be player controlled, so the logic determining what can be flown moves down to the client. In our ever expanding world of aircraft, it might not make sense to integrate that logic into DCS World. Just a couple of ideas.

It would be nice to have a better installation process. An updater would be really appreciated that does not require downloading the entire sim every time. Maybe this is already being addressed, but if not please consider something like ROF has.