jlummel

Sorry, but I'm not looking to get rid of it even if I do go with VR (which looks unlikely at this point, so I would want to use the TR5 myself in DCS). I'll keep that in mind as I test this out. I just read somewhere that DCS doesn't really use multithreading that well, which means CPU speed is still a major factor for performance!

And there's the question about where this influx of new subscribers will come from, in sufficient quantity to make the subscription model work? That's assuming they don't get a mass exodus of current players due to getting stabbed in the back by going subscription! And if there was this untapped resource of tens of thousands of new players, why not get them in on the current pay-for model which is free to start and swell the coffers so that cashflow wouldn't become an issue for a long time? It would seem the basic assumption is that people would be more willing to pay a smaller subscription fee for DCS World (buffet style), than to play for free (as they can now) and then spend their money (or not) in a targeted manner that fulfills their particular needs perfectly (à la carte). I don't see it... BTW- ever noticed that most restaurants are not buffets? But starting from the time when Black Shark 1 first came out, I added things to my stable of DCS products over the course of 10 or more years, mostly as I've wanted them, or as the sales happen where I can plan for the future by grabbing modules I'm interested in but not planning to play right away. Sometimes there are months or even years between purchases and when I can devote any extra play time for DCS. Unlike a MMORPG, at least with DCS I don't have to re-learn everything after a hiatus (all in the name of that ever illusive idea of "balance")! I would imagine that I'm average in this regard and, if true, it bodes ill for DCS as a high-fidelity simulation devoted to realism moving to a subscription service. The niche is too small to support such an economic model. Heck, it's likely the ONLY reason their current pay-for model is even viable is their worldwide reach! Without the Internet, their market would severely limit what they would be able to do, for example as a DVD-ROM product I don't think BS1 really did that well!

And how would you do that without cannibalizing one or the other income stream and inadvertently crashing the stream that currently exists? The subscription devalues the sales of modules in a dangerous way, but drives up the costs of development and maintenance over where it's at currently by needing to service the subscriptions, potentially draining resources from completing modules. Worse yet, subscribers who get into problems and can't keep the subscription up will start demanding free access anyways, they'd point to the module owners and say "Wahhh, they get to play for freeeee!!!, Why can't we too??? It's not fair!!". And they'll cry "Racism!!" or that they're being "ironized" or "poor shamed", because that's what whiners always do when they don't get their way, whether or not it actually makes any sense (which it wouldn't at all, just like it never does in pretty much every other case of virtue signaling)... It could get real ugly, real fast! And right now, you already have free play, no need to cry about it! You can get into DCS World for free and fly BOTH the Su-25T and the TF-51D to your heart's content in a wide and ever changing world of scenarios! And if you feel you want more of a challenge, then you add the modules that suit your interests and aptitude, and your time budget as well as your pocketbook (it can take months or even years to master any of these flight modules, $80 for the F-14 is a great deal for the hours of play it gives you, the VERY reason why this IS and always WILL BE a niche market). If this is merely, as I've speculated in the past, just about figuring out how to get access to modules you can't afford, well then try a savings account, or a piggy bank, or even an old soda can with a slit cut in the top, and save up for it like the rest of us do... Oh, I think I DO understand, only too well... Outside the box, sheezsh...

At $20 a month you could play everything for 4 months for $80, or I can buy the F-14 module for the same amount and play it for, how long?? Forever! If you can afford to pay $20 a month for 4 months, you could instead SAVE $20 a month for 4 months and then fly the F-14 for, how long?? Forever! Now what if, for whatever reason, you can't pay that $20 monthly fee after 4 months, say there's a worldwide pandemic and you've been laid off? Well you as a subscriber are stuck with a login screen, while I as a module owner can still fly... And $20 a month is too expensive for what a subscription can offer right now, and because this niche is so small would likely be not enough to make it work anyways as there'll be a bunch of extra work now to try and service the subscribers and adding extra content to justify the cost... You want the ED team and it's partners to have a stable income, sign them up on Patreon (or a similar service) and subscribe so you send them a few bucks every month to help out... I bet you'd get a LOT more subscribers that way, where they contribute what they can, when they can. PS- the "buffet" analogy I used previously was appropriate, while food IS a necessity, eating at a "buffet" isn't (though the point there was to teach how "buffet" economics work), it was my other example of "buffet" economics, Netflix, that was an apples to apples comparison to DCS World as a luxury...

You want balance in multiplayer PvP? Everyone flies the same plane with the same loadout, bam, problem solved all around! What does the term "balance" even mean in this context for a high-fidelity simulation intended to closely model the real world??

It's the fact it is a niche product which is why a subscription service would not work! And all I get from those in this thread pushing the idea, it seems to me, is that it's all about figuring out how to get the modules they want without being able to afford them... In order for a subscription service to work you need a LOT more people willing to part with money each month than who actually play the game. This is how "buffet" economics work, for food it relies on being able to feed the occasional customer who pigs out and eats twice what he paid in food by having 10 customers who only eat a small percent of the price they paid in food, as well as the economies of scale with a large number of customers and a limited menu of items that concentrate on lower cost at wholesale, spending less per person to have them walk away satiated. People love the buffet as they get a decent selection of items, and they KNOW that can eat until they are satisfied. A subscription service is like a buffet, it needs a large customer base to work. Netflix is a good example, though their costs are the licensing for content and for infrastructure to serve the streaming video rather than for food. But they succeed by servicing tons of different niche markets with their service - scifi nuts, anime fans, old movie buffs, sappy and crappy soaps, etc. Streaming services that pander to only one niche rarely survive unless it's VERY big niche or there's other things going on and it's a part of something bigger. DCS only services one niche (though there are a few sub-niches as well), and that's the "Military Aviation High-Fidelity Simulation" niche. This is a niche of people willing to climb that steep learning curve to get as close as they could ever hope for to flying some of the greatest aircraft to grace this Earth! As it's the ONLY game in town to offer a high-fidelity product, it's only because of the worldwide reach of Eagle Dynamics that allows them to service this niche at all and remain in business (though I think they also service militarys around the globe with simulation services and this civilian offshoot of DCS World is simply allows these military customers to cover some of the cost, I suspect that's what happened with the Eurofighter, they're recouping some of the cost for training software thru a civilian export Typhoon simulator model, they build a mil-spec simulator for training and gut it for us to have fun and we all share the cost). This niche simply is NOT big enough to support a reasonably priced subscription service as the average participant could not be classified in the "casual gamer" category that you find on things like World of Tanks or Elite Dangerous. The learning curve for DCS and it's modules are way too steep to be able to effectively create a large enough base to make a subscription service work. They COULD go with a subscription service with micro-transactions with Modern Air Combat if they were willing to create a persistent world and dumb it down to the level of some of their competitors. But it would be a completely different product from DCS World.

Thanks for the reply, all of you that responded! It really gives me some food for thought. While I might enjoy the occasional mash-up with other players live, I usually prefer the PvE play style (campaigns), so am not worried about cutting edge system performance. But still, one of the takeaways i'm seeing is that for VR, performance of my current system might be an issue, but that it's worth trying out anyways. What I found the most interesting was what I didn't hear, and that's anything about resolution issues with VR vs. flat screen, game killing blurriness, or problems with working with cockpit instrumentation. And complaints about glitches and bugs (while they may exist, they aren't the first thing you think of). That's heartening! Your analogy only works if the supermodel's husband lives there too, since in VR you can look all you want but never actually get to touch... :joystick:

I finally replaced my BS1 to BS2 upgrade key (purchased in 2012) this week too, so there's likely a few other stragglers as well! Of course since I hated needing BS1 installed (before they stopped doing this), I picked up BS2 full during a sale in 2014, and then just purchased the Heli Bundle when this current sale started, so now have 2 extra BS2 keys (and a Huey key) that I'm trying to figure out what to do with!

Actually as Qatar, Oman and Saudi Arabia are Typhoon customers and are also in the Persian Gulf area, we may possibly see a UAE version of the aircraft flying on the Persian Gulf map (bottom of the page at https://www.eurofighter.com/about-us, excellent website BTW)

I have Facebook and Twitter accounts too, but only to get tech support or to enter sweepstakes (I don't even accept friend requests from anyone, even family)! And I'd never put those crappy apps on my phone and let them data mine me... But these apps have become ubiquitous because of their convenience and the almost real-time connectedness, and for most people DCS World is one of many, many topics they are able to keep track of with little effort (though, without realizing it, they tend to get overwhelmed with the combined workload of all the topics they follow on social media). As mentioned previously, I think major news or announcements should be available first here on the "Official" forums (otherwise why have an "official" forum?), but that there should be no restrictions on accessing social media as it reaches many more people than these forums do, and that makes for stronger developers and better products. Maybe we already have the best and most workable compromise with people cross-posting to this forum the important communications originating on social media...

You guys are over-thinking this and blinding yourselves, locked into your own perspective and failing to see the bigger picture. To answer the original question about why social media sites are used more than these forums is pretty easy.... They are more accessible! Reddit, Facebook, etc., all have cellphone apps that allow you to participate in on-going discussions almost in realtime. Instead of having to chase down information like you have to on this forum, it's pushed to your phone as it becomes available. And you don't need to be in front of a computer all the time, so you can participate whether you're at home, on a bus, waiting in a line at the bank or grocery store, pretty much anywhere. It does have the downside where participation can become too casual or distracted that it can lower the quality of the contributions that people make. And in the worst cases, it can destroy an otherwise fine source of information and commentary - sometimes for good. But it's not about the people on social media, it's about the ease of access. For the developers it's also the easiest way to reach the largest number of people, and large numbers of people are KEY to success of the projects these development teams work on (10 of us can pay $1000 each, or 1000 of us can pay $10 each, sign me up for the $10 and 1000 people to fly with). I like the idea of have these forums being the first place news on these products being announced, but it would never do to try and interfere with a developers access to social media - not so much for some sense of fairness, but because their success makes a better product for all of us to enjoy!

If you used a Teflon lube instead of furniture polish you'd only have to apply it once or twice to fix the problem. Using a dry Teflon lube would work best, but a thin coat of a wet Teflon oil lube would also be OK (it'll dry out and leave just the Teflon for lubrication). I think I would avoid using a grease, though a light film might be OK too. But just like with the furniture polish, you don't want it dripping or sloppy!

I have a Samsung HMD Odyssey+ that I picked up on Black Friday last year and also own a TrackIR5 I bought years ago for ARMA2 that has been gathering dust. Before I invest the time and effort getting one or the other working and tuned in for DCS I thought I would ask what others think of both and where I should put my efforts. For context I have an older system I use for gaming, a refurb HP Z230 with an i7-4770 @3.30Ghz, 16GB RAM, Samsung EVO 860 1TB SSD, and a nVidia 1060 6GB video card and I play on a 1080p Samsung monitor. This seems to work fine for most of the VR games I've tried, I've not had anything to complain about using the default settings in most games with VR. Thanks!

Following up on the concept of “Epic Modules” and the Typhoon being one as mentioned in the FAQ, are there any current DCS modules that would also be considered “Epic Modules”? What makes a module an “Epic Module"? Also, would like to point out that "open access" is just another term for "open beta" and it would silly to think that a module as complex as the Typhoon wouldn't be released "early access" as soon as the basics are in place! It generates a revenue stream that benefits everyone from the player thru the module developer to the DCS world maintainers and is a sound business decision 99.9% of the time...

But it doesn't move the DCS simulation world forward! The red vs. blue aspect is wildly out of the balance for modern jets, and the F-15C only pushes it more out of balance and only gives you more of the same. The warbirds of WWII in DCS have a decent red vs. blue balance, as does the Korean War era golden age jets. Even the helicopters have some balance in the red vs. blue aspect! But for DCS modern era jets there is virtually zero red vs. blue balance. Yes there are several modern red jets from Flaming Cliffs, they are not the high fidelity models you see in the blue jets, and while better than nothing it's just not balance...

The aircraft I'd like to see is about nostalgia more than anything, but it's still a good choice. I first got into flight simulators with MS Flight Sim 2.0 on a Commodore 64 computer (it was brutal, but it worked given the time period), and then into fighter sims with Spectrum HoloByte's Falcon 3.0 in the early '90s. I loved the concept at the time of an interconnected "electronic battlefield" with the subsequent releases of the the MIG-29 and the F/A-18 jets in addition to the F-16 in Falcon 3.0. And it's where I learned to use a HOTAS setup (the early Thrustmaster stick and throttle, which I still own), and it simply doesn't feel right to fly a fighter without one even now (I have the X52 Pro currently). DCS is finally giving us that "electronic battlefield" concept from the early '90s with incredible results! The original three aircraft selected to inter-operate on Spectrum HoloByte's "Electronic Battlefield" were the F-16, the F/A-18 and the MIG-29. Now that DCS has both the F-16 and the F/A-18 as high-fidelity models, it would only be fitting for the MIG-29 to be released in high-fidelity as well and make the original concept from the 1990's a full reality 3 decades later with all three of these iconic aircraft. So, I would hope for a MIG-29, but I'd like to see the Typhoon or maybe the Dassault Rafale as a consolation prize, if it's not the MIG-29...