npole

I do not agree.. but even if I agree, you're telling anyone here then that basically they are wasting their time, because the plane will be very similar to what we have now? To not count the fact that those $19 are paied for what? Cmon'... The reality is that all this thing has been arranged in a amateur way. They should gives those modules to the FC3 owner for free and they should REMOVE the old models from the game.. (they should forget about FC3 and the whole thing) or better: they should forget about this AFM thing and dedicate to the proper "DCS level" aircraft (F18?) and leave this FC3 thing "as is". I already imagine the mission developers being forced to add two types of the same plane because you don't know which plane someone is going to use.. (!) .. this is ridiculous honestly.

E' proprio quello che ho chiesto oggi nel forum inglese.. ma e' una cosa che chiesi gia' qualche mese fa, e mi risposero che non sarebbe successo perche' ci sarebbe stata solo una versione... in tempi non sospetti quindi I miei dubbi erano piu' che leggittimi. Ho proposto comunque di appicciare un adesivo sulla coda degli aerei limitati... potrebbero usare tipo la "P" che si usa per I neopatentati.. ahahahahah (naturalmente e' una Battuta).

None, because apparently they have been banned from flight near to a storm during the tests. The ban will be lifted when the problem will be resolved. This same problem have caused embarrassment in the country where I live (Italy), coz they have ordered 35 of them. From DoD: Tests of the fuel tank inerting system in 2009 identified deficiencies in maintaining the required lower fuel tank oxygen levels to prevent fuel tank explosions. The system is not able to maintain fuel tank inerting through some critical portions of a simulated mission profile. The program is redesigning the On-Board Inert Gas Generating System (OBIGGS) to provide the required levels of protection from threat and from fuel tank explosions induced by lightning. http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2012/

...and on the practical aspect of all this. When flying you will have the same identical (from outside) aircraft, one comes from FC3, but the other comes from the module with the AFM ... so you're facing an "enemy" without knowing its capabilities (or any other related matter). Or they'll be market differently? Like the one with the basic flight model from FC3 with a logo showing a yello monkey on the back of the tail? And a text: "Warning: this plane is tuned down". ahahahha

Intanto e' stato confermato da Wags che chi possiede FC3 non avra' il nuovo modello di volo (quello applicator ai moduli) gratuitamente, ma dovra' pagare (forse con lo sconto) per avere l'AFM. Questi devono essere proprio con la canna al gas... ci faranno pagare pure EDGE domani?

So what they did previously wasn't true in the end? FC3 owners will NOT receive these improved (AFM) aircrafts, they have to pay for it (maybe at less price). Basically they are making money from an update... what's next? We will have to pay to have EDGE?

E' quello che intendo, di fatti nessuno va a dire a chi e' interessato a FC3 di non esserlo (!) .. del resto il divertimento e' cosa personale, c'e' gente che non ama lunghe procedure di avvio, dover imparare le sequenze di armamento, e quant'altro.. altri invece per cui il grosso del piacere e' proprio questo. Chiusa questa parentesi, a me lascia perplesso il fatto che ED non faccia proprio accenno ai moduli "seri", cioe' qui si parla di tutto ma non si cita nemmeno piu' l'F18 ..quando pareva essere l'unico modulo a livello dell'A10C rimasto. Quindi mi chiedo... ED ha proprio rinunciato alla rotta simulativa o cosa?

With a 780 I finally have stable 60fps at 1600p (they go up to 85 tho.. but almost never under 60) with mid-high settings (AA4x). What concerns me is not the optimization (whenever I recognize it is pretty bad), but the overall quality.. the aircrafts are amazing, but the whole rest (terrain and so) is like playing a 90's videogame.. even the first ArmA (OF) is better than this.. so I can't wait for the dx11 implementation or EDGE in general.

Isn't this what I said from the start? There's not a complete fighter in DCS, we have FC3 for who wants to fly "half-complete" jets, so I don't see why investing more time to develop more "half-complete" airplanes.. wouldn't be better to give us (finally) a single (i'm not asking zillions, but a single) fighter that is correctly reproduced? Apparently not.. they may not collect enough money from it.. so I try to stay away until a third party comes up with a 100% fighter, hoping it will happens during this decade.

Vedila in quest'ottica reaping: se non l'avessero data scontata a te non sarebbe cambiato assolutamente nulla (mica ti rientrano I soldi?), viceversa, questo sconto ha consentito a utenti (e io ne faccio parte) non propriamente convinti dell'UH-1 di poterlo provare, ed eventualmente tu avrai molti piu' "colleghi" da domani. Pure io ho pagato gli altri moduli.. e se domani dovessero REGALARLI io ne sarei assolutamente felice, perche' questo aprirebbe la strada a nuova utenza, visto che nell'ambito simulativo purtroppo scarseggia.

Non e' forse quello che ho scritto? Ho detto che non gli do I miei soldi per le vaccate semi-arcade tipo FC3, quanto mai ho parlato dei gusti degli altri utenti? C'e' pure gente che gioca a ace-combat .. mica gli vado a dire qualcosa, ci mancherebbe.. io sto criticando le scelte di chi produce questi moduli, non di chi li acquista (del proprio denaro ognuno puo' farci cio' che vuole). ;)

Ciao, sono Npole.. tu immagino sia scorpion80! Piacere di conoscerti... ma siamo OT. ;)

The A10A and the A10C are very different planes in the avionics.. I don't even understand how you could comparing the two, maybe you're fooled because of their name? We're talking about the fighters tho... I don't want something that is missing half of the aspect of a simulation, where the most important part of the "fun" is not even shoot at the enemy, but perform a mission (in its entirety) realistically (I want to simulate the real thing, not the top gun movie). And especially looking at the new technology (ie: oculus rift), a clickable cockpit is one of the most important aspects to look at for me (when you start to fly with the A10C you'll forget forever those idiotic key-combos for a more realistic visual feedback). I leave Flaming Cliff.. to the Flaming Cliffs boys... i'll remain with DCS. ;)

You will eventually learn.. it's not that you'll buy it and you'll be in the air after 10 seconds.. and I would say: FORTUNATELY! ..or it won't be a simulator. ;)

These are fighters.. I can imagine to have a realistic flight model for the civilian aircraft (where most time is spent flying and doing nothing but following routes) as the primary aspect of a simulator, but the whole rest? The avionics is almost completely missing, the takeoff procedures are a joke.. so what i'm going to have? A plane that fly realistical.. *but* i'll be in air by pressing a button, and i'll fight the other jets by a "point & click" like it is a star-wars fighter. No thanks, I understand the importance of the flight model, but this is nothing if the rest (that is important as .. if not more than the FM) is not here. I'll wait for a serious module, if there'll be one available in the future, i'm going to skip these simplified modules made for the "mass".

A se fanno un altro modulo a livello di DCS, non c'e' problema, glielo pago il prezzo pieno lo stesso giorno del lancio.. ma se devo spendere soldi in vacate alla FC3, allora possono pure tenerseli .. piuttosto glieli regalo quei soldi, ma mai comprero' quella roba, io sono qui perche' e' uno dei pochi simulatori rimasti, non ho intenzione di dare via soldi per aerei che si accendono premendo un tasto, senza avionica totalmente controllabile in cockpit, e che si proiettano in aria dopo 5 secondi che sei entrato in cockpit.. manco fosse guerre stellari!

Me too.. I was hoping in something at level of the A10C .. we may hope in the third party eventually. :(

You clearly don't understand how the computational power has improved in 10 years, and how this directly links to the simulators. I'm not here to teach it to you, there's plenty of books out there, and you missed 10 years of them. The technical barrier is gone? Where did you read it? It's not that inventing words and phrases would make your argument better. Again: bye bye. ;)

With the interface, do you mean the GUI? It's one of the worst thing in DCS, nor that intuitive, nor that well designed to be honest... but gfx apart, the worst thing is how the games runs behind the interface: you cannot even change the options without quitting the game! From many positive aspects of DCS, you probably kept the one that requires a decide improvement. :)

Can someone upload the zip of the cockpit somewhere else and pvt the link to me please? That lockon things requires the registration and it doesn't works for me. Thank you.

A LITTLE? ...no need to waste more forum space to reply to you, I've got what type of "user" you are. Bye bye. ;)

10 years ago we didn't had the current technology, so a accurate simulation wasn't really possible (not for a vdeogamer at least). Today the "problem" is no more a technical matter, but it's a commercial decision. No matter what you think: press a single button to turn on a jet engine and another for full throttle taking off 4 seconds later for me is arcade. I did not chosen to invest my time into this crap, I've chosen DCS to have a full simulation (where possible)... otherwise I would go play battlefield. Again: i'm not saying that arcades are fun.. they are (for the mass), but I want a simulator not a point and click shooter.

One word: money. Unfortunately this is the modernity of the players today... none is interested to the "simulations", there's zillions of ppl playing Cod, fifa, battlefield.. how you could blame the software house, they go where they smells more money. You have one option tho: do NOT pay for this products.. in example, do not buy semi-arcade things like FC3 and such.

DirectX has nothing to do with CPU usage, we have a big example here nowadays: arma3 is DX11 and it is not capable of using all the CPU cores properly, in fact the performance are pretty poor because of this bug: http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=716

Cosa c'e' da sistemare In FC3? Non sara' mai simulativo. Ironicamente sarebbe piu' conveniente buttare nel cesso tutto Flaming Cliffs e dedicarsi a moduli completamente simulativi (a livello di A10C per intenderci), se non fosse che c'e' il denaro in mezzo, e purtroppo non vivendo in paradise dobbiamo attendere che I developers accontentino la massa "arcade" (che vende di piu') prima di potersi dedicare a cose piu' serie (ma molto meno remunerative).