Feuerfalke

Not when it's released. But think about me 3 months later. When you flew a few hours in a Korean-Era plane against late 80s AI enemies or a Stang.

They could just realize that PvE binds nobody to a product for a longer term. 10 years ago, yes, but not today. CA really doesn't change that.

Another lost plane without a proper competitor

Games like Prison Architect and FTL are great examples that your idea in general works. Both are quite retro, from the looks, but especially Prison Architect has a top notch simulation under the simple looking game. But then, both games are gametypes that have no real modern competition. Flightsims have. Plus: eyecandy is a vital part in flightsims and spacesims. If Falcon had on par graphics in all aspects, I bet it was an even bigger challenge for DCS.

Oh yes - loved that game. Wargame is getting pretty close, IMHO - but not a real substitute. I also enjoyed World in Conflict a lot.

Dynamic campaign (even as superficial and uncomplete as that in Falcon) and a multirole DCS-level plane (or better 2) for flying hardcore dogfights and a large variety of missions would probably be a gamechanger. It will be a long time, until we get one of those. And I doubt even EDGE will be able to bring back enough longtime-motivation.

You cannot disable UAC in 8.1 The closest thing to it is the silenced-mode. It's still active, though. I had some troubles myself and I hate that power-safeing BS that disables my Cougar MFDs, because there is no input coming from them and what sends no input is switched off. Nice thinking. At least there should be an option to disable it other than hacking your registry. Anyway, most problem are negated by activation the option to run the program as admin. That solved 9 of 10 issues for me.

Who knows - it's not been released, yet :P

Sad news. :(

You probably don't know the UH-1 us fitted with this:

Wow, GGTharos, you put a LOT of energy to misunderstand him and turn every word against him. :blink: All he says is: There is a bunch of people who have collected tons of data, original plans and manuals and first hand pilot information. That's a fact. And it is exactly, where ED would start, when working on DCS: F-16. Of course you don't copy code from game X to game Y and poof - done! But that's not, what he said either. And just because it's Falcon, it isn't a bad simulation either. Christ, DCS is no religion, not good vs evil. Both have their pros and cons. And nobody has to start a fight because the thinks one sim could learn a little from the other...

Understood. Thank you, for your statement, Wags. Keeping fingers crossed.

Not having to let customers know and not letting customers know are 2 seperate things. Besides, while the company is private owned, they still need to represent themselves on an open market. A market which lives from communication and content delivered.

Absolutely. Integrated VOIP and multicrewed aircraft would be vital steps in the evolution of DCS. Yes, I've mapped that frame to a key: Multiplayer should be top priority for ED.

No? But what if I do MP and take a flight in a BlackShark and then do a tour in the A-10C followed by a dogfight in the F-15. I'd say, that opens a lot more usage for adjustments than a simple SP-mission.

OMG - an incredible piece of art! Fantastic level of detail!

Surprise: The world is not black and white. To make something more accessible doesn't mean to make it unreal. But ok, lets make it in your world and keep it hardcore-simulated - full realistic: So tell me, in what airforce, cadets are locked alone in a cockpit with a 800 page book and are expected to fly straight away into combat? Are you not tought to fly by an instructor? Mostly on a prop-plane or at least a two-seater? And then you take over bit by bit, get training after training for months and month until you get to finally sit in the real.... simulator? If you want it realistic, that is where you should point your fingers at. If DCS had something like a trainer, be it AI or player-controlled, that would make a difference for a whole lot of people out there already. And it would SUPPORT your precious realism, not diminish it. Aren't these 2 points sort of contradicting in a way? ;) Anyways, this is an EXCELLENT support for my point: Improving gameplay, stability and accessability would be tremendously important to keep new players flying. Again without lowering realism in any possible way. So our differences are smaller than you think. Just because we have accepted DCS inabilities, digged through the rough surface to see its shining neither makes us nor this simulation any better - other than from our own perspective. For newcomers, we all once were, it's still a dirty piece of rock. Not because it's a flightsim, or no AAA-title, but because it takes time and effort to see the inner beauty. Too much time and effort, if you ask me. I hope a modern multi-role-fighter, EDGE, multipayer-stability, overall performance, multi-crewed planes and trainers, skinning or personalization of your plane and stuff like that will at some point at least fix some of these points and make the game more accessible and attractive. I have bound this to a key: Multiplayer should be a top priority.

That's really great - hopefully they can implement this in MP as well!

Same here. Some people have a way of an elitist look on everybody new. Maybe they don't understand, that every single customer for DCS makes this simulation stronger. I agree that DCS has a very steep learning curve and it is frustrating in the beginning. The tutorials have MUCH improved, but they are still to packed and pretty unintuitive. So, if you just stick to the game, you have an overwhelming number of buttons and features and a manual that printed out weights a ton or so. But as impossible as this seems, what really counts is learned in a matter of minutes. Skip the startup, concentrate on the really interesting things. Use the Instant Missions and Active Pause to blow up a few trucks and stuff. So it's not booring at all. The best way to learn DCS, however, is to play it online. There are more servers online with training-missions than actual combat-situations. So hop on to one of those and you are very likely to find some nice people who are always willing to talk you through the most basic stuff and get you airborne in a matter of minutes. Once you understand how the A-10C works, it's pretty easy to manage 95% of what you need to know for a basic mission. In fact, I have 2 friends who never had any previous contact with a flightsim whatsoever. It took me 30 minutes to get them through the basics including some guntraining. Apparently that wasn't enough, so 10 minutes later, both had figured out, how to lock and fire mavericks and drop bombs with CCIP all by themselves. And boy, where they proud :D Just don't let yourself get tempted to learn all about creating flightplans, complex navigation, IFR and non-critical stuff in the first place.

Well, except for the form this question was posted in, this IS a problem for all of us: Steamgames are recognized by the number of people who buy it and by the time people play the game. DCS fails both, because a) most people buy the game here and merely activate it on steam and b) the time is not correctly logged. Much potential lost here. And every customer makes this game stronger.

I feel sort of bad. I left my wingman using the low-quality fuel. Now he has a giant smoketrail and my engines just put out cleaned and purified air. Any way to activate enginesmoke for player-A10C?

Now that is an interesting perspective: It's not DCS having a problem with ATi, but ATi having an issue with DCS. :megalol:

Have a ding-dong Christmas everybody!

This guy is certainly not payed by the hour.