ishtmail

If it simulates something within 5%, that's not bad. It's only bad when it simulates within 40%, which is where the prop aircraft I mentioned come in. Honestly, I went into FSX only because I wanted to fly aerobatics, and at the time there were no decent aerobatic products for Xplane (since then, Alabeo for example released their aircraft for Xplane as well). Actually, from the aircraft I mentioned, only the Zlin is freeware, and the Extra is included with the original FSX. Alabeo and EAW planes are payware and are price wise not that cheap (20 USD) - considering you get a much better DCS P51D for 40 bucks, which has considerably more detail and systems simulated. I will admit that since I went into DCS, FSX only takes up space on my HDD, and I kind of lost the will to find a possible solution for those planes. There might be an all-around improvement mod for physics and flight model, that helps with the general FSX shortcomings, but I haven't ventured into discovering them. Now, when I want to fly the SU26, I hit my IL2 Cliffs Of Dover and take a joy ride over there, and for every other flight desires, the accuracy and realistic feel of DCS products is enough for me.

It's not a bad simulator. It's just meant for different purposes and caters to a different crowd than DCS. And if it were a bad simulator compared to DCS because of the worse flight dynamics, that car analogy would be completely off, as Impreza and Transit are still in the same quality range. A better analogy would be a wide spread 1980s Ford Escort versus the newest Ferrari :D

That's the jiff, innit? Simulating a Boeing 747 flight model is actually a lot simpler than simulating an accurate flight model for a small agile airplane (for example an aerobatic SU26/29). Why? Because as a Boeing pilot, you won't push the airplane to impossible turns, you won't go and do a knife edge, immelmann or cuban eight. To accurately simulate a large airliner, you can keep well within the normal flight envelopes, and don't have to bother with those extreme situations. In that respect, getting it within 5% of Boeing specs isn't a tough challenge. But take a small propeller aircraft, and all of a sudden you have to deal with propeller torque, you have to properly simulate extreme flight conditions and near stall situations. I've flown several aerobatic prop planes in FSX and none of them behave even remotely realistic. The Zlin Z50L flies like an RC aircraft, with the extreme envelopes so potentiated that it's completely off. The Alabeo Pitts and SU26, which look fantastic and fly great in level flight and basic maneuvering, until you get to that knife edge and fall from the sky like a brick (and they also boast in having an improved flight model). The stock Extra 300S behaves the same... EAW aerobatic planes suffer from the same problems. The 17 year old Flight Unlimited was immensely more accurate. And the Cliffs Of Dover SU26 easter egg is also very accurate, much more so than any FSX plane. So, something must be wrong in the core of FSX. Whether it's table based or not doesn't matter: DCS did it right, FSX didn't. Which isn't to say that I don't enjoy flying FSX. I just don't expect realism, is all.

Yeah, but those FSX pilots take off, gain the cruise altitude, hit the autopilot switch and go out for lunch, coffee, fitness sessions and whatnot, and return to their PCs 4 hours later, when it's time to descend and land the planes. Not exactly the same as flying a combat mission for 5 hours through enemy territory.

Keep in mind that basic FSX doesn't have that kind of scenery. What you see in that video is most likely an addon scenery that you have to pay extra for. That being said: Yes, most FSX cockpits are pretty poor compared to DCS A10C. But there are several addon FSX planes that really stand out in terms of cockpit modeling, avionics, systems etc. Of course, you have to pay extra to get them. And in the end, you are still limited with the FSX low quality flight model, that no amount of tweaking can remedy. X-plane is better when it comes to physics, but it has its own shortcomings.

Actually, a simple solution: A high-resolution zone with lots and lots of details that make low altitude flying look better, and a wider low-resolution area to allow for 5 hour high-altitude flights (and within that low resolution area, you can have high res combat zones, where ground targets can be placed etc.)

My opinion on FSX: I own it and have several addons in it (airplanes, scenery). All of those are civilian in their nature (I'm mainly interested in aerobatics, so I own the Airshow pilot addon, and the Alabeo Pitts and Alabeo SU29 addons). I enjoy flying the FSX, especially since it allows me to fly over Slovenia, which a group of enthousiasts modeled to perfection with their SLO4FSX addons. However, the flight model in FSX leaves much to be desired. For example, lift is calculated only from the wings surfaces, so knife edge flight is impossible (flying on the side of the plane, with lift coming from the fuselage and the tail surface, and you level your flight with the rudder). This maneuver is a standard one in any aerobatic flight, but FSX just doesn't allow it. DCS is a whole other beast. The DCS modules flight model is as close to perfection as possible at this point, not to mention that the cockpits, systems and avionics are top of the line. Also, it's a MILITARY simulation, which is a big difference - it focuses on missions for the military. FSX has its own missions of various difficulty, of course they don't include blowing things up as FSX is a civilian simulation in its core. There are so many basic differences between FSX and DCS that you can't really compare.

AFM for A10A was promised for FC3, and ED will NOT fail to fulfill this promise. It was said by Wags on February 15th that AFM for A10a will NOT be ready for 1.2.3 update, so the earliest they could deliver it was on April 30th when 1.2.4 was released. In the worst case scenario, AFM for A10a is now 12 days 'late'. 12 days, and we're already reading disgruntled comments about it. But the fact is, Wags did NOT promise AFM for 1.2.4 update, either! He only promised that it will come! The only thing we know is that AFM for A10a was promised for FC3, so when AFM for A10a is finished, it will be given to FC3 owners, because I don't see ED as liars. Any other speculation is irrelevant. If ED fulfills their promise to FC3 owners (and I haven't yet seen any info that contradicts this), it doesn't matter if they later offer A10A as a standalone module.

Hey, just give me that dead horse, I make a mean horsemeat goulash.

From 'Air' and 'Quake', I suspect that this is a reference to the 3D 1st person shooter that changed the 1st person experience (i.e. brought in a real online deathmatch experience), so Airquake would be someone who flies online the way Quake deathmatchers fight - quick and dirty. Also, there was an 'airquake' mod for quake, making it possible to deathmatch flying virtual airplanes in a Quake arena. Among other planes, A10 was also used (I was about to write 'simulated', but that's really not the right term :) ). I've yet to see a rocket jump with the DCS A10C, but I get the general idea :)

My assumptions are based on Matt's own statement that FC3 sales represent a major piece of the sales pie. But yeah, we're still just assuming here :) Some of my own purchases are made partly to support the company (CA and FC3, specifically), but I do tend to use those modules as well, every once in a while, because sometimes it's just fun flying a SU33 from the carrier, even if it's with a non-clickable outdated cockpit with poor graphics, no 6DOF, and with only SFM.

Makes sense. If there are 1000 really hardcore fans (that regularly post on this forum, voice their opinions, contribute to the development by posting bugs and wishes), and if a quarter of those buys modules 'just for support', that's a really small fraction of total sales that can't really impact the totals (and for example tip the scales). Or, for example: if FC3 sold 20.000 copies, while A10C sold 5.000, and if a quarter of A10C bought FC3 'just to support ED', that's not a large enough percentage. Sure, you sell 1250 copies of FC3 than you would otherwise, but that's barely 6 percent of the total.

Allright, I count over 50 people (without testers) for P51D. A10C had over 65 people working on it. I'll assume not all of those worked full time on those simulations, but spread out to other projects (including DCS World, Flaming Cliffs 3, Combined Arms etc), possibly also outside the 'gaming' portion of the ED production?

How many developers, 3D designers, programmers etc are actually working at ED (on DCS World products)? Or is that a state secret :)

Jebus, Dejjvid... Which AFM project has been announced, that has now been delayed with the announcement of SU27 and F15C AFMs? As far as I know, only these two AFMs are being developed, and only these two have been announced for sure, to be completed in the following months. So how can these two AFMs DELAY anything? If you're thinking about DCS:FA18, that's a project that's still in PLANNING, ergo the developer working on AFMs has his hands free to do SU27 and F15C AFMs. By the time ED goes into real FA18 development, the dev will already have finished SU27 and F15C AFMs and will be able to do his part for FA18 (which will need several other developers, 3D modelers and designers to complete). So, I just don't see any delays here.

A-10A does NOT have AFM yet. This was promised but is not yet implemented with the latest 1.2.4 update. Also, 6DOF cockpit and AFM alone does not make a DCS title. The promised SU27 and F15C will NOT be DCS aircraft, they will be standalone modules with systems and avionics from FC3, 3D models and 6DOF cockpits from FC3, and a new AFM flight model developed. All this will LATER be developed into a proper DCS module (on par with A10C and KA50). Airbuster, you bought FC3 and have already received MORE than was initially promised. You got several new 3D models and several new 6DOF cockpits, which are all features that were not promised initially for FC3 (it was initially sold with only a new model for F15 and a new F15 6DOF cockpit). What 'should have been' in the final release in the first place does not matter. You knew EXACTLY what you were buying when you purchased FC3. That means FC3 aircraft WITHOUT AFM. If ED decides to charge for the AFM upgrade, it is their right to do so. If they give us FC3 customers a discount, I'll be a happy camper.

Yup, you have to Invert the toe brakes on Saitek pedals. I have the Pro Combat Flight pedals and had the same thing. Quick fix inverting them in Controls settings.

There are about a gazillion DCS movies on youtube and there's no hype about them. Why would a new youtube channel change that? I mean, sure, you can make a pretty neat looking video, but we'd need a lot more glare, flare, shine and mammary glands if we were to attract a wider audience. That being said, I think people who are into flight simulations, will sooner or later find their way to DCS. The main flight sim hubs out there report on DCS goings on quite regularly. Other people who prefer CoD will... well... prefer CoD, and no amount of pretty youtube videos would change that. Except maybe if JJ Abrams were to direct it. EDIT: Maybe, MAYBE, there's one way... Get Psy to use DCS footage in one of his inane babble of stupid videos. That would surely generate a billion views from an audience worldwide. But would you like DCS to be in any way connected to Psy? Opa Sukhoi Style?

That's very funny. A moderate size developer like ED is actually considerably more likely to fulfil their promises, than a small one. ED as a company also generates a lot more trust with the possible pledgers. I'll give you a real life example of how this really works: Chris Roberts started a Kickstarter project for his upcoming Star Citizen space game. He raised over 9.500.000 dollars, all on a promise to deliver something. Behind Chris Roberts is a large group of developers that are now working on Star Citizen, thanks to the successful crowdfunding. 'Roberts Space Industries', as the company is called, is as big as ED, or even larger. On the other side of the coin, Michael Juliano made a Kickstarter project for Rogue System, a space sim not dissimilar to Star Citizen. Michael Juliano is, in contrast with Chris Roberts and his large company, a one-man-band, an 'indie' developer. He set a goal of 300.000, and only raised 50.000 dollars. As you can see from this example, a moderate size company with some past behind it (Chris Roberts, or ED in our case) is extremely more likely to generate trust with people who would donate/pledge/prepurchase, than an indie developer noone ever heard from. In that regard, ED would very likely have a successful Kickstarter fundraiser, and is at the same time very likely to fulfil their promises.

There is no need for a special account for crowdfunding. Apply the project through Kickstarter and everything is taken care of over there: people see what the total tally of the crowdfunding is (transparency), ED gets a complete database of people who purchased / pledged, and if the Kickstarter project reaches its funding goal, money gets released to ED, who is then obligated to finish the project and deliver the 'rewards' to the pledgers, in the time frame set for the project campaign (for example, ED could promise to deliver a beta DCS FA18 by early 2014). In the end, such crowdfunding isn't 'donation' per-se, it's more 'pre-purchase'. The idea that we should buy modules to support ED is a good one, but some people would rather pledge a proper amount of money for a specific project (not me, I buy everything :) ). Also, some of us have already bought every module in the DCS roster, leaving us with nothing more to buy to support ED further. Buying a second copy of A10C just seems redundant... I've made a suggestion of how the Kickstarter project could look like, and what pledge amounts would work (and what rewards might be interesting). Now, in that suggestion I mentioned giving Alpha testing to a limited number of pledgers (that donate more money), which someone from the team dismissed (ED wouldn't give access to Alpha testing). Even without Alpha testing, a nice pledge scheme might be drafted... I mean, there are so many options of what ED could offer as rewards... Existing modules for DCS World, upcoming lofi modules, special limited packages in cooperation with TrackIR and/or Thrustmaster... For example: Kickstarter project: DCS F/A 18, to be developed and released for beta testing in early 2014. Rewards: $15 - a low fidelity standalone module for DCS World of SU27 or F15C with AFM $30 - any of the existing standalone DCS modules developed by ED so far (choice of BS2, A10C, P51D) $60 - DCS FA18 plus access to beta testing $150 - DCS FA18 with beta access, physical box release with a printed manual $350 - DCS FA18 with beta access, physical release with printed manual plus ALL existing modules for DCS World by ED (FC3, DCS A10C, DCS BS2, DCS P51D, CA, SU27, F15C) $600 - limited package (5 pieces) that includes the latest TrackIR, plus everything from the $350 package $900 - limited package (5 pieces) that includes TM Warthog, plus everything from the $350 package $1200 - limited package, everything from the $350 package, plus a 3D model of FA18 $2000 - limited package, everything from the $350 package, plus a 3D model of FA18, plus a 1 hour video chat with Wags and the developers, plus a hand-signed (by the devs) B2 format poster of DCS F/A 18 $7000 - limited package (2 pieces): everything from the 2000 package, with a payed trip to ED's headquarters in Moscow $15000 - limited package (2 pieces): everything from the 2000 package, with a payed trip to Duxford UK, and a 1-hour flight in one of the 2-seater airplanes owned by The Fighter Collection $25.000 - limited package (2 pieces): everything from the 2000 package, with a payed trip to Moscow to visit ED's headquarters, and a flight in a real SU27 airplane, with in-cockpit video memorabilia of the flight (courtesy of http://www.flymig.com) ED in collaboration with Thrustmaster, TrackIR and Fighter Collection could really spice up these pledges.

Just for the fun of it, I tried doing a looping with the Huey the other day. Well, it doesn't look like a proper circle (the top is more like a cone ;) ), and you drop altitude like crazy (so start high enough), but the Huey does the flip. I won't speculate about the accuracy of the maneuver compared to real life, but it was fun to try anyway. Also, Immelman - not so much :D

Wow, that must be some pretty awesome looming credit card issues, if they're forcing you to buy games... :)

DCS:Tetris with AFM for falling bricks? I'd buy that.

I've always wondered, so now's as good a time as any to ask: any info on what the ratio is between mortar&brick&e-retailer stores sales versus those done here at http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com? I mean, if most of ED's sales is done at your website, catering the pricing for retailers would be a bit nonsensical. I can understand pushing FC3 and CA sales to physical stores to reach a wider audience, but study sims with its niche market should by logic appeal more to the serious simmer who doesn't buy a game in a store on a whim, but goes online to see what strikes his fancy (especially since simulations like A10C require considerable time investment and have a steep learning curve, not to mention peripherals, ergo not for the casual simmer).

Even better: Kickstarter projects for DCS:SU27 and DCS:F15C. Pledge of $15 will give you the finished low fidelity module with AFM (possible release date summer 2013). Pledge of $30 will give you the finished DCS module (possible release date in 2015). Pledge of $40 will give you the finished DCS module + beta testing. Pledge of $60 will give you the finished DCS module, beta testing, and a free AFM upgrade for FC3 (or a free standalone lo-fi module) Pledge of $200 will give you everything plus alpha testing. Pledge of $500 will give you everything above plus the boxed version plus colored resin model of the respective aircraft you're pledging for. Limited offer with Thrustmaster: $1000 will give you everything above plus TM Warthog (or, if TM decides to do a proper SU27 joystick, that would be pretty sweet too). I bet a lot of people would jump at a chance to do alpha testing. ED would have nothing to lose with the Kickstarter project, if they set their goal realistically. They get funding, we contribute and get our desired modules when released. Basically, WIN WIN WIN.