Evoman

Here is a good video review that Gamer Nexus did that ran benchmarks against the PS5 2 years ago. Their conclusion was that the PS5 hardware was equivalent to that of a mid to high end gaming PC from 7 years ago now. And in case you have not seen the updated system requirements for DCS to play in VR here they are. OS 64-bit Windows 10; DirectX11; CPU: Core i5+ at 3+ GHz or AMD FX / Ryzen; RAM: 16 GB (32 GB for heavy missions); Free hard disk space: 120 GB on Solid State Drive (SSD); Discrete video card NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 / AMD Radeon RX VEGA 64 or better; Joystick; requires internet activation.

In my final opinion I think that the best bet to get to experience DCS through a PSVR 2 is going to be through a PC using a good driver that is preferably made by Sony.

My last console was PS3. I was going to get a PS4 but at the time I really needed a new PC for college work so I decided to build a gaming PC instead to at least have a 2 in 1 device. After discovering so many unique games and simulators on PC that were of more interest to me I lost interest in getting another console over time. However there is still one game that I still love that is only available on Playstation. And that is the Grand Turismo racing sim. I had looked into seeing if Sony had considered making a PC port of it but their response was basically "our games are better enjoyed on a Playstation" They even had a cow when some multi platform games started to allow cross play with different platforms. I could also make the argument that Sony is loosing out on making more profits by not porting over some of there unique titles to PC by not being opened minded.

The need for a free two seater is another big need that has come up here and in other past conversations for this very reason. And that is part of the reason why the AT-38B Talon has been coming up as a good candidate.

Uh, doesn't DCS already feature just that with the TF-51D. Which by the way is the only good free aircraft that does a good job representing WWII aircraft. And I doubt that affects P-51 sales negatively. And how is investing in something that would be considered a better marketing approach be cost prohibitive? That investment will pay for it's self for years to come with the increased interest and sales of more advanced modules. So according to you any company spending money on marketing is a misuse of resources? I highly recommend watching this interview with ED staff about this very subject @ 1:27:55min. Even they understand why that the current lineup of free aircraft are not the best at attracting new people. And that they have already been looking into how to better bring in new people.

That is why a AT-38B trainer variant would be the ideal free aircraft. It would be a good option because it would be based on an existing module that could be developed with a lot less work. The engines and some other systems might not be the same but it could still be tweaked to represent the Tallon as much as possible. Plus it would only increase sales of the F-5 as there would be more people trained to fly it right away. They would just need to learn to operate the radar and new weapons systems.

In conclusion I think we can all agree that the current free aircraft are not the most ideal in attracting new players and prepare them well to move up to an advanced paid module. We can also agree that developing an all new module just to use a free aircraft is not really that realistic. So that leaves using current aircraft that would be flashy enough to attract new players, be easy enough to learn to operate, be fun to fly and do a good job at training people to advance to the next advanced aircraft. Which narrows it down to the F-5 II and the A-10A. If the A-10A gets chosen it would be the ideal time to upgrade it to have a clickable cockpit.

Most times I personally have more than 3 days of free time available. But on that particular point in time I just happen to have too much going on at the wrong time. I am sure you have had many occasions like that in your like.

This is exactly why the free trail period does not work for most folks with a busy life. Even for myself as an experienced simmer I remember only having like 3 days out of 2 weeks to try out some aircraft I have been thinking of getting. That may have worked for me just to test drive the aircraft but for some one new with out much experience those 3 days might not be enough time to figure everything out and get flying in at least one aircraft.

I was actually going to mention the T-45 Goshawk earlier but didn't as to keep with existing modules. But I have often thought of the T-45 as the ideal free aircraft that should be included with DCS because it would be perfect for new pilots to learn all aspects of military aviation from flight, weapons training and carrier operations. New pilots that can master all of that in a T-45 would transition far easier to the more complex paid modules. It would defiantly we a worth while investment to develop the T-45 for use as their free gateway trainer.

"trainers don't sell that well. So, a free pre-glass cockpit T-38A, with a basic weapon load, would likely not make it as a paid module, but as "gateway" free module it certainly would be fun." That is the perfect description of what an ideal free module should be for.

Here is that link were you can find that topic at 1:27:55min. Yes there was a lightly armed variant of the Tallon called the AT-38B which were fitted with a gunsight and could carry a gun pod, rockets, or bombs on a centerline pylon. Perhaps that would be an ideal fit for DCS to get some targer practice. By the way I have seen a few former fighter jet pilots that train people in DCS using the F-5 because of its simplicity and similarity to the T-38.

A while ago I saw an interview with ED when this question came up relating to the free aircraft. The ED staff agreed that the current free aircraft are not well suited for DCS now. They did conclude that they are in the process of selecting better aircraft that are better suited to train new pilots just like they would be a progression in the military. In my opinion they need to include aircraft that are not only easy to learn but that will better prepare new pilots to move up to purchasing a new module. One such aircraft that ED already has is the F-5 Tiger. Its not too different than the T38 Talon that the Air Force has used for decades to train pilots. As for a helicopter trainer they could feature something like a TH-57 Sea Ranger variant out of the work that has already been done on the OH-58 Kiowa. I am sure Polychop would be happy to cooperate if it means selling more Kiowas as a result.

discouragement I feel like the free trial is better suited for experienced simmers to get a good enough feel for the aircraft to see if its for them or not. But for un-experienced new comers to DCS it might actually be more of a frustration and discouragement if they start off with the flashy and complex aircraft.

For the simple reason that new comers might not even be aware of the existence of the free community mods unless a friend that already plays DCS tells them about them.

While I like the idea of attracting more players to DCS I doubt that a console could provide the full features and processing power to run a full version of DCS. Plus the typical console player is not interested in a study sim. They are more about jumping right into action with a minimal learning curve. Even the majority of the MSFS player base that fly fighter jets on there prefer it over DCS because its far more easier to learn to fly. However I do think that the new MAC (Moden Air Combat) sim that ED is currently developing would be a more ideal fit for console hardware and its player base since it will feature simplified aircraft systems to make it easier to learn and enjoy. For more info about MAC - https://stormbirds.blog/2018/07/13/eagle-dynamics-announces-new-modern-air-combat-title/

You can find more info about the Kola map in this video. I highly recommend following this channel to keep up to date with DCS news.

I am with you on that one. The C-2 would be the most entertaining cargo aircraft to operate because of its carrier capabilities. And since it uses the same engines and wings as the E-2 Hawkeye a third of the work would already be done for when they can do the Hawkeye.

There is another AWACS aircraft your forgot to mention that the NAVY used in the cold war, the E-1 Tracer. It saw extensive service in Vietnam. I think it would be more feasible to develop into a module due to its simplicity. Plus it would be more useful and entertaining to operate in Naval carrier operations. Also note that there were other variants. S-2 Tracker - Was the first ASW Anti Submarine Warfare aircraft. It was used by several Navies around the world C-1 Trader - Was a passenger and supply Naval aircraft that served up to 1988 when the C-2 Greyhound took over.

While more modern modules may seem more capable and cool I have come to the conclusion that early cold war variants would be easier to learn, more useful in historic and other fictional scenarios against other cold war opponents because its more fleshed out.

Unfortunately ED is unable to do FD modules of Russian aircraft because of political restrictions. However 3rd parties are not bound by the same restrictions, but even they will struggle in acquiring all of the necessary data do make it possible. So the only ones that could possibly do a FF Russian models are the 3rd parties. One area that ED can focus on is on older eras such as the cold war and WWII to have a more balanced playing filed.

I totally understand your point for an early Hornet. But in the meantime the new A-7 Corsair that is currently in development could very well fill that void for a cold war naval attack aircraft.

I would also find it entertaining to dog fight WWI aircraft. Not too many people know that Peter Jackson the same director of the Lord of the Rings movies is an avid WWI aircraft connoisseur that has the largest private collection of replicas from the era he has reproduced all in house by his team. He is like the Jay Leno of WWI aircraft. Adam savage even got to out fit some of those aircraft with gear to have a laser tag dog fight with them. Peter Jacksons collections would be like a one stop shop to develop most of the WWI aircraft.

After watching this great depiction of how a Vietnam map could be in DCS I want more thing from this era and I am not even from this era. We will definitely need Vietnam era versions for the A-6 Intruder, Cobra and Phantom.. etc

I just saw this recent video that does an awesome job at depicting the Vietnam era in DCS. For some reason DCS is the only game or sim that I have not played online. But when ever a Vietnam map comes I know I would be driven to play it online often.