zipdigital

Between some fuss over the BS2 release and some minor nagging from 1.1.1.0, I think some appreciation for ED's hard work is due. What are you enjoying most from 1.1.1.0? For me, the new tree shadows are really adding to the effect of low-level flight, but the new cluster bomb changes are phenomenal as well. :) Perhaps it is just me, but I also feel that frame-rate has increased also, which is always appreciated. Screen shots preferred. Whining is discouraged. Question to the testers/Devs: I notice tree shadows don't exist for trees in the cities/villages. (see 3rd screenshot) Not so much of a problem, just a curiosity. I assume the trees in the cities are separate models/shadow-casters than the forest canopies? (Are the forests a type of localized particle effect?) Either way, the effect is quite spectacular and helps immerse the arm chair pilot of the A-10's and Black Sharks. Can't wait for Nellis!

Not quite true. Multiplayer with the same module is still possible. A-10C is a different retail product than FC2 or BS1 and now even BS2. To retain network compatibility coordinated patching must happen to both products separately. Again, time and effort are required which equates to money in the business world. As you say, this will aid ED in creating that as of yet unannounced fixed-wing aircraft Wags spoke of in an interview. :) I agree here. While I don't think plans have changed per se, the product's complexities have, have made it tougher to keep on track. Perhaps more frequent use of the Dev journal could alleviate this ED. Perhaps take a note from CCP and Eve-Online, they have a regularly updated dev blog and while new features are often showcased, they also commonly outline hurdles and challenges and the approach being taken. My 2 cents.

I am surprised there is still debate over price after 57 pages. ED, may I ask when the project to start BS2 began? That may shed some light on the subject for those that are unhappy with the price point. Updates like this don't happen over night, and I am willing to bet it was a long process. Perhaps the sudden, stealthy release is causing the misconception that this was a simple undertaking. To those who are complaining: Patch, update, expansion, call it what you will but ED had to dedicate work-hours and personnel to get the product to market. If YOU were part of the team who has been working on this update since who knows how long, how would you feel if you didn't get paid? Edit: Another option for those who are unhappy, BS1 is still the same great product it always was. Just because BS2 was released does not subtract anything from BS1.

Modularity My thoughts as a new A-10C player, Flanker 2.0 "veteran": I think DCS is on the right path. I feel a single "environment" is key to expanding the DCS product line. But I think the reliance upon the old assets, such as terrain, models, and textures dating back to the Flanker days is a secondary hurdle. These "old" objects, even today, have higher fidelity than many new products I've seen. Time will help with each, Nellis/Nevada is already in production. I see it only as a matter of time before objects get a stream of updates too. (I am inclined to help with this as I used to do 3d modeling from blueprints...for fun. Does ED evaluate player-made models for consideration in patches? What kind of poly counts are we looking at per LOD level?) ED seems to be much of the way there, in regards to creating a "world" for objects to exist in, but in a sim like this, that is a daunting task for programmers and asset creation alike. A "sim environment" consists of boatloads of math in regards to physics and math I can't even start to begin comprehend. (Isn't Yo-Yo the genius behind the physics and math? I am still learning who does what). I don't include flight models because every vehicle, be it a tank, boat or plane will have its own dynamics since land water and air are quite different mediums to travel, but those dynamics must still interact with the rest of the world. Prop planes, helicopters and jets all fly via different means, but are all effected by lift, inertia, gravity and a myriad of other factors within the same "environment." Props pull the plane through the air while jets push, ...so to speak. Specific modeling for specific vehicles is still necessary. This is where I see specific vehicles getting their own modules within the DCS universe. KA-50 is a module, A-10C is a module, but both exist within a DCS environment. (And will hopefully one day be compatible for joint multiplayer ops.) If/when ED succeeds in creating an environment in which physics and effecting factors like weather, pressures, atmospheric variances and who-knows-what-else are there for other modules to use, I suspect the creation of flight/dynamics models of specific vehicles can be easier to implement within the same environment. I think this is ED's long term goal, a grand simulation in which smaller simulations will live. (And hopefully coordinate) So as far as longevity goes, I suspect we are only at the beginning. And with this diatribe, I end my first post. lol ED, godspeed and thank you.