tsumikae

They are still way more advanced in developing content for DCS than any of us, since they actually started to do so. So I'd rather trust them. Besides, I don't want them to fail. Third party modules are not exactly legions.

Their online shop has quite a few modules available for FSX. Which kind of invalidate that statement. They never were supposed to develop a sim platform, but modules. And that, they do. I'd rather support them. I can't wait to play their modules, especially the Mirage.

Just in case you didn't know, the F15C flight model has been upgraded to "professional flight model", or PFM. Prior to that it was AFM (Advanced flight model). The rest of the FC3 planes are still AFM or less. The su27 is next on the upgrade list. This thread explains the hows and whys: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=122801 Now, as for your question (how good is the flight model), DCS PFM is seemingly unmatched right now, but that's only what I read, and I'm certainly not a F15 pilot.

Haha I think almost everyone who played that game ended up messing with FRED and/or mods at some point. Both of you were on the original VBB too?

...Aphex twin?

I knew someone had to do that :D Congrats on your own new forum section, guys! Hope to read news of your C-101 very soon.

Ditto. Steam is nice for stand-alones, but DCS world and its module manager is somehow a specialized download platform. It makes more sense to get and launch modules from here. Steam is only a additional (and IMHO unconvenient) layer.

If you really feel that uncomfortable about emails, video games activation codes should be the least of your problems :D

With FSO native, you can boost the native res up to today standards, and you can even use high res maps and effects. As for the warthog, I would say "overkill!", but considering the amount of functions to map, you may have choices to make :D

http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=78710.0 This link is a complete, easy to follow and precise guide on how to have FS2 work on actual systems. It implies the use of FS open, but that's for the best. I must say, I just started the first missions for the sake of it, and I'm completely hooked -again. Despite the dated graphics. What happened in 15 years? How come we still don't have a space sim as engrossing, satisfying and epic as FS2?

http://store.steampowered.com/app/273620/ For the veterans, enough said ;) For the young or the ermits, it's simply the best space "simulation" that ever graced the PC. It is 15 years old, so don't expect anything brillant in the graphic department. It is still unmatched in every other aspects, IMHO.

The stand-alone F15c is exactly the same as the one included in FC3. There is no difference at all. What you get with the stand-alone is what you get with FC3. With 1.2.8 the plane has been upgraded to PFM, which means that the flight model is now on par with the A10C, KA50, P51, Huey and Mi8. The cockpit, however, is not clickable.

That's really cool. The result in-flight is jaw dropping. Do you find the that system reactive enough, overall?

Rudder inputs in a helo is a fundamental. You could fly the shark with 1/0 input in that regard, but you'll miss a lot. Also, no one mentionned Track IR, or something equivalent. Personnaly, I would go for that even before the pedals. But you may have one already :)

First, maybe there is no problem at all in the first place, in that departement. I was curious, and it was just a question based on a wild speculation. Second, you are right, I think: enough money in those matters should solve any problem. However, if a company such as Dassault refuse to let go some datas in the first place, "enough money" is probably not within the reach of many game developing studio ;)

Hey, don't feel sad. The same could be said for KAs, and we don't even have IFF, or RWR to begin with. I can't count the amount of time I had to recognise enemy from friendly by the paint scheme of the 10x10 pixels KA displayed on my black and white shkval tv. Reading you complaining that you can't recognise an enemy plane in your RWR, IFF-capable shiny aircraft makes me feel like a hungry beggar listening a rich man bitching about the mediocre quality of his daily caviar :D

Quite. Not to mention the absolute badassery of going straight into the fray, spitting missiles along the way. What's not to love :D (Note that a cautious scan of the area prior to that will ensure that you look badass until the end. As in, not cut in half by a canon)

All three are great. Quality wise, this is DCS level stuff. The difference obviously lies in their purposes and style. Looking for a pure helo experience, with the noise, the shakes and the bumpy rides? Go for the Huey. Looking for a smooth war machine that you can use in MP combat? Shark. Also, the SP has more content. I would go for the Mi8 only if you can afford the three modules. It's a personnal opinion here, but it does not stand out much. Keep in mind that if you are already learning the A10C, you'll have you hands full, and the KA may not be the best choice for chilling out of your daily hardcore lessons. It is not as difficult as the A10, but it's still the second most complex DCS module. The Shark has been updated with BS2, which was released after the A10C module. So no, nothing bad at all. Fun, completely. But you'll find it hard to use it in MP. Here it is, simple as can be: everything in DCS is worth the extra cost, as long as you can afford it. If you cannot, buy the one you want, you won't go wrong anyway. ED and their partners are not joking around with quality. -Appart from the mustang(s), none. -Xplane may be a match in termes of complexity, but focused on civil traffic. Also, I don't think it features the level of flight models that DCS provides. If your box is delivered by truck and two people are required to carry the package to your living room, then yes, the physical flight manual is in there :D

Yeah. And I'm not sure they are currently joking about that. Anyway: DERP LEVEL: OVER 9000

Some games have strange and powerful properties. This, err, simulation, for instance, has the power to change your brain into a muddy goo that will pour out of your ears, while your mouth remains open, moaning a zombily "whhhyyyyyyyyyyy", drooling in the process. http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=205658089 Do not miss the description.

Yes, it's a sim pit. Here is an actual F16 pit: http://www.stclairphoto-imaging.com/360/aircraft/F16-Cockpit/F16_swf.html Besides, to answer the OP question, it is not a TM stick. The TM one has a screw hole on the bottom-left part of the handle. Neither the original F16, nor the stick in the first pic have such a feat. So even if it's a mock-up, it's not TM.

Here's the wiki page for that plane: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDC_F-CK-1_Ching-kuo It has quite a bunch of US contractors. The cockpit layout is very similar to the F16:

Well, technically it was a one-wing-and-a-half landing :P Congrats, though.

So that issue is actually a glitch? I thought it was somehow a limitation of the litening pod gimbal. Especially since it seems to happen within certain angles only. It is annoying, but I got used to it too.