ishtmail

Abraham Lincoln put it best: If it's on the internet, it must be true. The same goes for this forum: people post stuff that they assume must be true (for example: ED did not write anything in a while, so it's assumed they're working on DCS modules). Other people read these assumptions and suddenly those false assumptions become fact. This is especially true if people want something really bad and read everything through those desires. Which is why we shouldn't assume anything and should only accept official updates (from Wags) as fact.

I assumed you read the May 7 update, since that's what we're discussing in this thread. But we've established that assumptions don't lead to anywhere good, so here goes: So: SU27 and F15C, as they are in FC3, will get AFM and will get released as standalone modules. They will then be further developed into proper DCS modules. Meaning that the work done on AFM will be in the end done for the DCS modules, ergo no time will be 'wasted'. Good enough? EDIT: and again, you've misunderstood what I wrote. I didn't write that AFM will be released FOR FC3 models, but that it will be integrated INTO those existing models and offered as a standalone product.

I am just as eager to get a DCS:fast_mover as the next guy. But Wags' latest updates left absolutely no room for speculation regarding DCS modules and their stage of development: NO DCS modules have any significant development stage at this point, and although there were hints of DCS FA18, F15 and SU27 in march and april newsletters, that is only a month ago, which means nothing serious could have been developed since those newsletters. DCS:FA18 is being PLANNED, meaning they're probably still gathering the necessary info and documentation (here I am, making assumptions). DCS:SU27 and DCS:F15C have not begun yet, and there was never any information that could lead anyone to assume they were already being developed. However, they WILL start with DCS F15 and SU27 development, by first doing the AFM. AFM will be integrated into existing FC3 models and released as standalone lo-fi versions. This is all the official word, and everything else are false assumptions, misconceptions and misinterpretations of the known facts. That these false assumtions were leading into disappointment is obvious, but you'll have to deal with this: the false assumptions were yours alone and ED is not to blame, meaning that such bickering online is inappropriate.

I've read and re-read this entire thread. All I see is a misunderstanding and a thorough misconception of how fast a DCS module can be developed (months?), and the resulting false expectation of when such a DCS module can be expected (this year?), and a vast misunderstanding of what lo-fi module release means for the DCS module (delay?). All these misconceptions should be addressed and cast away. A DCS module takes YEARS to develop. There was no announcement for a DCS module to be released soon (as in this year). Lo-fi module will not delay development of DCS modules. I understand that people WISH for a DCS module by ED to be released soon (even this year). But some of you EXPECTED it? This I don't understand. My questions remain unanswered, and I am not trying to pick a fight, I am trying to make you realize you're being unrealistic in your expectations.

Hold on: Why would we have to wait much longer than we had expected for DCS modules? We all knew that work has not yet begun on DCS F15C and DCS SU27. We all know that developing DCS titles can take a hardened team like ED a year or more. There was never any doubt about the time it will take, never has anyone mentioned months for a DCS module. In best case scenario, we would get DCS F15C and DCS SU27 in late 2014 or early 2015. Questions for you: - At what point did you expect these two DCS modules sooner? - What exactly gave you the idea that these DCS modules would/might be released any time soon? - Where did you get the information or notion that it would take 'months' to develop DCS F15C and DCS SU27? And what exactly has changed with the announcement of lo-fidelity modules? Nothing. These two DCS modules will be developed in exactly the same time frame as they would be without lo-fidelity modules. Why? Because releasing lo-fi modules will not take any time from DCS development - this bonus is only going to harvest AFM which is being developed for DCS modules anyway, and integrate it into existing FC3 airplanes. In fact, there is only one thing that will delay DCS F15C and DCS SU27: and that's DCS FA18. which, as I understand, will come out first, before any other DCS modules developed by ED.

You DON'T get it. There is no change in the overall plan. There would be no DCS level airplane right up front no matter what, because developing a DCS level airplane takes time. This process lasts over a year. So, it will be a long way off until a DCS aircraft arrives IN ANY CASE. Do you think that if ED didn't decide for lo-fi versions initially, that DCS versions would be ready to fly next year? Now, I suppose you'd rather read this sort of update from Wags: "We're developing a DCS SU27 and DCS F15C. They will be ready in two years. See you in 2015. There will be no further updates until then. Bye bye." I think this sounds better: ""We're developing a DCS SU27 and DCS F15C. They will be ready in two years. In the mean time, AFM developed for these two DCS titles will be added to low fidelity modules, which will be released later this year." There is no change of plans. Low fidelity modules WILL NOT delay DCS modules. Releasing lo-fi modules does not mean 'they will stop developing DCS modules until lofi modules are released'. Quite the opposite: AFM, developed for DCS modules, will be added to lofi modules. Just an added bonus! I just don't understand your mode of thinking here...

statrekmike: Where did you get the idea that ED changed their plans on DCS F15C and DCS SU27? From everything that was written, it's obvious that both proper DCS modules are in fact going to happen. But, being DCS modules, their development will take TIME (as in YEARS). During the development of DCS modules, AFM will be developed for these two planes. This AFM will be applied to standalone lo-fidelity modules of F15C and SU27. So, again, what exactly has changed concerning DCS F15C and DCS SU27? Where did anyone write that those two WILL NOT happen? Quite the opposite, Wags specifically stated that THEY WILL happen. Help us, Jebus...

I love the prospect of flying new DCS aircraft, and I fully understand that development of the top-of-the-line simulated airplanes will take considerable amount of time. I also love that we'll be getting an upgraded version of existing lo-fi aircraft from FC3 during the development process of the hi-fi stuff. ED has showered us with yummy goodness for the past years, and with several 3rd party projects happening (and coming to a close), I doubt we'll run out of lots and lots of fun to have, flying the highly detailed beasts. Belsimtek proved that a 3rd party dev can deliver a DCS quality aircraft on par with ED's own creations, so future looks brighter than ever. I've got 4 DCS quality aircraft in my stable, and those alone will keep me busy and well entertained for years.

I believe it was said that the A10C AFM model would be (was) applied to A10A. EDIT: From what I can see, A10A AFM was announced, but was not included in either 1.2.3 or 1.2.4, so we don't have it yet.

neroroxxx: Let's make a tally for the past year and a half, shall we? - Announcement, development and release of DCS World, a platform for all DCS titles, which included a free SU25T airplane - Integration of DCS Black Shark and DCS A10C into the DCS World platform - Announcement, development and release of DCS P51D Mustang - Announcement, development and release of Combined Arms - Announcement, development and release of Flaming Cliffs 3, which includes several new external models, several new 6DOF pit models and several new AFM models. - Release of Belsimtek developed DCS UH1H Huey - Announcement of DCS FA18, DCS SU27 and DCS F15C, with lofi modules with AFM coming soon All this in one year. But of course, kids these days with their 3-second attention span (goldfish syndrome), they want their toys NOW, or they want to break something (or at least bicker online).

Well, that's sort of how it works, innit? More funds = More staff = Faster development Of course, another possibility is that ED just saw a business opportunity to make money faster and fill their pockets. However, my bet would be on the third scenario: ED has low revenues = ED evaluates sales of DCS modules vs FC3 = ED discovers FC3 sells considerably better = ED decides to save the financial troubles by releasing lo-fi modules = ED does that, survives the financial turmoils and continues developing DCS modules, which they couldn't if they went under.

Tru dat. Also: High end product = Internet forum support = Regular publishing of news online = Internet bickering for no reason whatsoever

Is this debate still going on? We've already established that: 1. There WILL be F15C and SU27 as DCS titles, some time in the future. 2. During the development of those two DCS titles (full hi-fidelity), AFM will be developed, and F15C and SU27 will be offered as lo-fi standalone modules, the same as FC3 versions, but with AFM added. 3. The release of standalone lo-fi SU27 and F15C cannot hamper the development of proper DCS hi-fi versions, it can only make that process faster as ED will get some funds already during development. 4. This basically means that Su27 and F15C DCS versions will be done WHEN THEY'LL BE DONE, and lo-fi versions cannot delay them. 5. In addition, hints have been given that versions with AFM will be made available to existing FC3 customers, possibly for free, even though FC3 has already been released officially and ED has no obligation to upgrade it. 6. Along with AFM for SU27 and F15C, a proper DCS FA18 will be developed, but will be released later than AFM SU27/F15C, NOT because of a shift of resources, but because a DCS title takes considerably longer to develop (2 years minimum). All in all, those who feel the need to complain should climb into their respective DCS airplanes and repeatedly crash until they realize they're being silly. And if that doesn't help, I would recommend a set of treatments utilizing your TM Warthog joysticks (multiple cranial application will be needed).

I'd pledge for sure. Take a look at Chris Robert's project, Star Citizen: he's raised almost 10 million dollars already, based solely on a PROMISE that he'll make the game, which will come out in 2014 probably (with beta testing this winter). Goshdarnit, if a space shooter can raise 10 million, a DCS jet can raise 500.000.

This post by Kuky gives me hope that ED is doing the right thing: Thanks for this one, Kuky. I know you're just speculating and don't have this info 100% confirmed, but it's a bright ray of light in this depressing thread :)

Like I said before: If AFM will be the only difference between FC3 SU27 and the new standalone SU27, and if the standalone module will cost, say, $15, I would hope ED would be kind enough to offer existing FC3 customers (such as myself) to purchase an AFM upgrade for a reduced price. This would result in two things: existing FC3 customers would also throw in a few bucks into the new standalone modules (which I doubt they would do, if they would be forced to pay full price for the new standalones), AND the stables of existing FC3 customers would remain the same, meaning you wouldn't have TWO Flankers in your roster (one SFM and one AFM). Of course, collectors such as myself, that buy everything on the horizon to support the developers and have a wider variety in our DCS Worlds, will buy the new standalones regardless (albeit a bit disgruntled if we'll be forced to pay full price). But since ED knows that FC3 is the majority of their sales, it would be wise of them to recognize that new standalones with AFM wouldn't only be appealing to new customers, but to existing FC3 owners as well.

Most FC3 airplanes have simplified flight model (for example SU27, F15), which means they don't behave as they should. Advanced flight model is applied to DCS titles, including A10C, meaning they behave in the simulation as they should behave in real life. The DCS version would mean simulating everything, from weapons, sensors, radars, including a fully clickable cockpit. So: they can add AFM so airplanes behave better (more realistically), but they will still be simplified when it comes to systems (for example, in FC3 you start engines with one button, in DCS A10C it's a 10 minute procedure).

I enjoy the FC3 fidelity every once in a while, if nothing else, for the speed. But this should be on ED's mind: people will be angry if they've bought FC3, and will have to buy SU27 and F15 again just for AFM. So any SU27 and F15 modules with AFM that ED intends to produce should be available to FC3 owners, either for free or for a small upgrade price.

This is something I'd like to know, too. Will FC3 owners get their SU27s and F15s upgraded to AFM, or will this be exclusive to the standalone modules?

Since we already have F15C and SU-27 in FC3 fidelity, why would they plan on releasing these two as separate modules, if they wouldn't improve on them and make them DCS quality? Makes no sense to me, frankly. But let's wait for Matt's explanation that he promised for this week.

Zilla, I thought I wrote those down in the first post? It would be new info if you told me how to change those controls. :music_whistling:

Fine, 'kay, it may be just eyecandy and easter egg. But ED has done it, innit? They threw us a bone and they can't expect us not to pick it. They gave me a pilot that I could control walking around, now I wish that easter egg finished so it makes sense :) This is the wishlist, after all...

Avast didn't set any alarms off. Nice document, thanks!

Please note that for P51D, there are two different 3d pilot animations for exiting the plane: one on the ground and the other while flying. The 'bailout' during flight looks like the pilot leans over the edge and slides face first and down, while on the ground he climbs up and over with his legs. OK, I will leave a possibility that the original intent of a different animation on the ground might be for a pilot to 'bail out' from a survivable wreck of a plane on the ground. But if that's 'game over' anyway, why animate it at all?

You should try 'ejecting' from your P51 while on the ground. Over there, your 'ejecting' (by pressing LCTRL+E three times) looks suspiciously similar to a 3D pilot climbing out of the cockpit and standing on the wing of the airplane. The animation for this is quite well done (the climbing part), and doesn't look like a mere easter egg. Really, try it yourself, load up P51 on the ground, open the canopy, and go into 3rd person view before you hit the key combo for exiting. You'll see what I mean.