I don't want WW2 aircraft in DCS

[Chappie]

Many years ago, a small development team released a 640X480 VGA flight simulator titled Su-27 Flanker. I was in graduate school at the time and happened across this title while browsing the shelf of a local software vendor.

 

As a young boy and now an adult, I have a passion for flight, for military and civilian aircraft. From the Atari 2600, to the Commodore 64, to the SEGA Master System, and my first PC, flight simulation is my passion, my hobby, and what I enjoy. It led to my pilots license (SEL) and to the fateful encounter with The Fighter Collection (TFC) / Eagle Dynamics (ED) Su-27 Flanker.

 

This was a fresh product from an obscure development group simulating an aircraft I have never heard of before but I could not stop flying. In a world dominated by NATO ... yuck so much NATO, it was refreshing to have such a perspective. This was a stick and keyboard simulation that shaped how I play Digital Combat Simulation today - no HOTAS just a good ole Logitech Extreme Pro 3D and a backlit (gotta be modern) keyboard.

 

As the years passed, Su-27 Flanker evolved into version 1.5, the Commander's Edition featuring the MiG-29K, Flanker 2.0 with improved graphics and the Su-33, Lock-On (A-10A and F-15), Flaming Cliffs (FC)introducing the Su-25 and Su-25T, and presently Digital Combat Simulator (DCS) continuing the legacy and passion of military flight simulation.

 

However, I have been unable to shake a feeling that somewhere, somehow, the direction ED is taking DCS appears wrong. While learning the A-10C which is a beautiful work of art, I became troubled that an Oort cloud of options would eventually lead DCS into an unfortunate but all too familiar world of conglomeration that dilutes and possibly pollutes DCS and causes irrevocable and ugly change.

 

Beginning with Su-27 Flanker, ED / TFC morphed that product into Lock-On - Modern Air Combat. DCS changed the genre with pluggable modules and subsequently Third Party Development (TPD) to bolster and assist the already overwhelmed development group. This is wonderful and, quite frankly, this is awesome.

 

But, I am unable to turn my thoughts from an approaching cross-road in which DCS may become something malignant, loosing purpose and becoming befuddled by poor progression. At Lock-On, the focus was modern air combat and the introduction of FC made that mantra all the more apparent. I thought DCS would continue this approach toward module development. Even Combined Arms (CA), although not everyone's favorite, was a novel and modern approach to achieve a Digital Combat Frontier.

 

It is my opinion ED has lost its' focus and, with time devoted to what I consider diversionary activities such as the aggregation of the WWII project, TPD (more on this), and offset interests that ED presently has, DCS may fall prey to a comeuppance that leads to its eventual decline in favor of other products. In other words, I see DCS becoming the proverbial "Jack of all trades" and "master of none".

 

There are already WWII simulations that exist and in far greater depth and purpose than DCS ever will achieve. The market is saturated from Maddox to other developers; clearly these aircraft have been touched upon and it brought almost dismay to my heart when considering how this will negatively impact DCS. The introduction of the WWII theatre in both ground and air assets is, in my opinion, time that could be devoted to completing other tasks and delivering combat with a modern approach. Certainly, excluding the free P-51 module, DCS out of the box spans the cold war through modern time in the air and on the ground.

 

TPD - quite frankly a blessing and a curse ... the nail driven deep into the coffin of DCS development one at a time or causes the product to shine. Let's write about my favorites; Well done products, baked at the right temperature and with exotic seasonings for just the right touch: Leatherneck MiG-21bis (fantastic) or the Belsimtek Mi-8 (talk about big, heavy, and challenging but I love it) and even the Belsimtek F-86 Sabre (not owned but I read a MiG-15bis is on its way to challenge the newcomer). Thank you ED for TPD but, without measure and constraint, sufficient scrutiny and focus, it becomes the dagger in the back of DCS that bloats and transfigures the simulation into something it may never have been intended for.

 

My biggest pet peeve at the moment is a lack of apparent focus by ED on DCS to deliver top notch quality development modules; it almost appears that ED is maintaining DCS while TPD grows it. I believe ED has to consider the impact of broadening their development scope to include practically everything, the amount of time they spend outside of key areas like EDGE on projects that do not add value, and their need to continue to make DCS what Su-27 Flanker promised; what is that? In my mind a focus on Russian military armed service equipment and a modern approach to it. I understand NATO has a place and would like to see it present as well but this can't happen until a refocus occurs.

 

Fortunately there are some great TPDs present and ready to fill the gap but only if they can deliver and, at this point, it appears they are. However, what is becoming unacceptable is a growing trend of Beta release and explosion of TPD modules that needs to be addressed. TPDs are doing a good job but this fire-and-forget mentality has to stop or DCS is forever relegated to unfinished products and lost clarity of focus.

 

Aside, there is some equipment I would like to see in DCS and here is my plug: Mi-24 Hind, MiG-25 or MiG-31, the Su-38, and the Su-35. The F/A-18A ... although NATO is a desire of mine including the F-14D but only if done properly, i.e. no junk! and quit sending Beta hounds. I think this is my greatest consternation with ED and DCS/TPD and I remain hopeful an Overlord or Overseer has a watchful eye out because I am just a n00b who likes to go mach 1 with my hair on fire! :joystick: :pilotfly: :book: :helpsmilie:

[159th_Viper]

There are already WWII simulations that exist and in far greater depth and purpose than DCS ever will achieve.

 

There are none whatsoever that match the Flight Model Fidelity that DCS has to offer and that right there is what is important as far as I am concerned.

[Flagrum]

tl;dr LOL!

 

(summary in 2 sentences please - leave out the story of your life, perhaps? Maybe something like "WW II a/c= meh!"?)

[Exorcet]

Beta releases aren't going to leave. Digital downloads allow us to access software before it's finishes and allows devs to fix software after it is released. If you want to go back to the old days where you get what you get, then it's on you. Don't buy until something is out of beta, and don't patch it if you don't want to deal with changes.

 

I'm not sure that I understand the rest of the post. You say that ED lacks focus. They seem very focused. They've raised the quality of aircraft simulation considerably and invited third parties to come in and keep production of modules up while they focus on expanding the core of the simulation. The alternatives to that would have probably been FC3 level modules forever, one DCS launch per 3 years, or a stale core sim environment. I think that the DCS really needs the dedicated focus of ED. It's old and you can feel this when playing the sim at times. EDGE will address graphics and PC performance. I'm hoping ED doesn't stop there and continues work on physics, systems modeling, AI, and battlefield modeling.

 

Every time one of these threads come up people seem to think what they want is being pushed aside, but DCS as is probably does the opposite. It makes it more like that you will see what you want. Had ED not done this, you'd barely be getting anything at all.

[gavagai]

tl;dr LOL!

 

(summary in 2 sentences please - leave out the story of your life, perhaps? Maybe something like "WW II a/c= meh!"?)

 

That about sums it up. Thanks.:book:

[kripzoo]

I'd like to see that ED should focus more from cold war era to modern day jet aircrafts / choppers and seperate or better leave the ww2 stuff ( as much i like it too, but).

Don't like the mixing stuff. when there's not yet even a ww2 map (soon there is Normandy) but developing takes too long and takes the focus from modern day things..

I'm afraid that ED has no more the passion and only $ in their eyes and maybe too much different projects at the same time:music_whistling:

Edited September 27, 2014 by kripzoo

[Shaman]

I'm afraid that ED has no more the passion and only $ in their eyes and maybe too much different projects at the same time:music_whistling:

 

If that was in fact true, there would be no discounts, promotions and they'd be selling every DCS World patch as new game as CapCom does with Street Fighter series.

 

Niche product, what DCS is, and they still out of this passion need to feed themselves and their families.

 

As Chappie I also begun with Flanker 1.0, and road was bumby to DCS World but worth the wait.

Edited September 27, 2014 by Shaman

[Buzzles]

tl;dr LOL!

 

(summary in 2 sentences please - leave out the story of your life, perhaps? Maybe something like "WW II a/c= meh!"?)

 

the TL;DR is basically:

"Waaahh, I'm unhappy with DCS at the moment as ED haven't released anything in a while and seem to be working on stuff I don't care for. I want to see more Russian equipment."

 

Considering this is from an account with 1 post, I'd say it's someone who has been banned recently and has an axe to grind, or someone too cowardly to post with their main forum account.

And for anyone paying attention to the bits of information ED keep dropping, it's pretty obvious 2.0 is not just EDGE but a lot of stuff being reworked, and the recent news emails shows there's lots of big things on the horizon in the near future.

Edited September 27, 2014 by Buzzles

[Cibit]

Well I like ED,s direction.

New graphics engine and new maps. That quite frankly will make it more appealing for a first time buyer.

Lots of great quality aircraft available and planned, ok so a lot are third party developers but the standards required to be allowed license are quite high enough to ensure top quality additions.

 

I have all the modules released with the exception of the Dora and await the release of the Hawk with impatience because I have flown it in early Beta and it is superb.

 

Lots to look forward too without loosing focus on quality IMHO:thumbup:

[Scooternutz]

Dribble! ED is amazing!

[Abburo]

It took me a while to understand that TPD = 3rd Party Developers... or 3PPs :)

 

On the other side, keep faith in what ED have started this year. EDGE will be a turning point and I am sure more 3rd parties will join this community after that SDK will be available.

 

Any era plane will fit perfectly and will have their market share. Stop spitting on others thoughts/tastes having your owns as the highest life principles. I am a fan of WW2 at DCS level... does anybody have a problem with that? Also I want a DCS level Extra 300 or even better a Sukhoi 31 with Svetlana Kapanina modeled inside!

[Cibit]

I am a fan of Svetlana Kapanina !

 

Me too now that I googled her

:love:

[Nooch]

Well I completely disagree with you Chappie."Jack of all trades" and "master of none" certainly not. DCS now encompasses many different aircrafts of different eras but this has never been done at the compromise of realism, immersion and overall quality, which have increased by a ton since the lomac days. I have always dreamt of a simulation that would offer to fly pretty much any kind of military aircraft in different combat environment and with top notch realism. I am a fan of both modern and old airplanes. So the route taken by ED is exactly what I've always wanted and I fully support them. So to me what you said should be corrected in "Jack of all trades", "master of all".

[Chappie]

the TL;DR is basically:

"Waaahh, I'm unhappy with DCS at the moment as ED haven't released anything in a while and seem to be working on stuff I don't care for. I want to see more Russian equipment."

 

Considering this is from an account with 1 post, I'd say it's someone who has been banned recently and has an axe to grind, or someone too cowardly to post with their main forum account.

And for anyone paying attention to the bits of information ED keep dropping, it's pretty obvious 2.0 is not just EDGE but a lot of stuff being reworked, and the recent news emails shows there's lots of big things on the horizon in the near future.

 

Nope! I once had a forum account on here but it is long gone .. last time I used ED forums was like ten years ago although I have a collective experience in flight simulation products offered by ED that gives me the perspective I have.

[Abburo]

So, after skeleton will be implemented then we can expect DCS: Kapanina ! :D .

 

Skeleton dynamics is a must have to have a proper female walk :P... you know, aerodynamics, hydrodynamics, woman PFM.

Edited September 27, 2014 by Abburo

[Python]

Disagree on most of what you said personally. Yes there are plenty of other WW2 sims about, but none at all that match the feeling I get every time I jump into DCS: P51D. That sim makes me feel like I am as close to flying the pony as I possibly can be (without a very big lottory win) I have loads of other sims, none offer anything even close to that feeling.

 

As for your main theme, focus. Well DCS World is still very young, we are at the point where more and more aircraft are starting to appear, it may be a bit of a miss match at the moment but that will become less of a problem soon enough. I'm sure we will get much more theming also so that the various generations of aircraft will fit in with each other. This stuff takes time so we just need to be patient.

 

Third party developers are a blessing IMO and have opened up a whole new potential for DCS, a simple glance at veao's road map should excite any flight sim fan, and with developers like Belsimtek and Leatherneck beside them they are off to a very good start. Long may it continue.

 

I love DCS even as it is, with EDGE just around the corner, and the huge range of aircraft in development, it can only get better.

[GGTharos]

Was your perspective informed that the team doing the WW2 stuff was always going to do the WW2 stuff, pretty much period, end of story? They won't be doing any modern stuff in the near future, and AFAIK they were never going to. The guys who do the modern stuff are still doing the modern stuff.

 

ED has plenty of focus, they know exactly where they want to go.

 

Nope! I once had a forum account on here but it is long gone .. last time I used ED forums was like ten years ago although I have a collective experience in flight simulation products offered by ED that gives me the perspective I have.

[Lizzard]

ehr..every few days a therad like this creeps out of a dark hole.. So ED has the wrong focus..I think the wide variety of aircraft provided is awesome..and there is way more to come. And finally..there is absolutly no other Game develloper who keeps so close contact with the customers..I mean ED really listens to the community..

[Archer7]

Dribble... ED are still making modules and not merely "maintaining" DCS, the WWII modules won't make DCS easy prey for any other simulator and your worries about TPD are obviously unfounded since every TPD module so far has had ED-quality.

[cichlidfan]

I think there was something that I agreed with, in the OPs post, but I lost track of it.

[Cibit]

Hardly surprising Chiclids only have a 2 second attention span.

Look a castle........................whats a castle...................look a castle;)

[Chappie]

I appreciate the feedback, both positive and negative. No-one knows the future but I am gathering an indication this community believes it is bright.

[WinterH]

Well fair enough. @OP, here's my editorial, in response to yours :)

 

http://whmilsimflyer.blogspot.com.tr/2014/08/personal-opinions-vision-of-dcs-world.html

 

For TL;DR; a good portion of the community including myself believe, that what you take as lack of focus, is the very focus which make DCS special for them.

[outlawal2]

Once again a customer has forgotten that ED is running a business and is not there to be at the OP's beck and call and to provide each and every whim he may want. The reality is that a business has to make money to stay a business.. One way of doing this is to diversify.. (Just like the stock market.) I personally am glad that ED has decided to do things this way...

 

They are diversifiying by adding WW2 and bringing in the die hard WW2 fans. (and once they are hooked on WW2 how many of them will look at the other offereings available? Had they not been lured in with WW2 they wouldn't even care about the other airframes so win-win for ED.

 

They are also adding WW2 with an entire SEPARATE TEAM of devs so it will not get in the way of the other things ED are doing.. (EDGE, Hornet etc..) Good move on ED's part..

 

And finally, who in their right mind can say the 3rd party dev system has been anything other than a success in relation to ED and customers getting quality modules? (And for the naysayers, ALL of the 3rd party issues have been issues within the 3rd party companies... Some companies have issues and some are better than others... That is life..)

 

The business MODEL works and we have received more products this year than ever before and all of them at a very high DCS level...

And one further issue I see are the customers themselves.. Many of the folks on this forum want to see absolutely every possible decision and every move that is made and then can't handle it when things are done differently or when something goes wrong and causes a delay. Then the infinite "Is it ready yet?" threads

Take a long look at yourselves and ask yourself if you are REALLY up to handling that kind of constant communication? In the past a dev would make the program and then release it to stores and it wasn't until AFTER release that folks even knew about it. I think many folks here are not able to handle the constant ups and downs that goes with the reality of codewriting.. (Or just standard business concerns.)

 

Those folks should check in once a month or so and walk away.. If for nothing more than their OWN sanity..

 

To the OP.. I am not a fan of WW2 either, but the ONLY bearing WW2 in DCS has for us is that ED will have more revenue coming in to develop those projects that DO interest us..

 

I have been around long enough to know that not every decision made will be the exact decision I want, but looking at ED I can say that for the most part I am with them all the way... Stop looking at things from an "I want" perspective and look at it as if it was YOUR business and then ask yourself "How would you solve the following issues?"

 

1) Very long timeframe to develop ED quality modern planes (You offer easier planes to develop in between the release of the more advanced planes.)

2) Very small niche customer base (You provide the best simulation possible. PERIOD. And while taking the time necessary to do it right.. You provide easier planes to develop in between releases.)

3) Very small customer base. (You lure in WW2 fans to get them HOOKED on DCS and then they may look at the other offerings as well) Besides, there is a very LARGE customer fan base for WW2 modules. Why not tap that?

4) Very long development times for advanced airframes. (Add 3rd party devs so that multiple teams are working on multiple projects at once... Eventually we will have airframes being released every few months or so ranging from WW2 thru to modern planes and helicopters of today.)

 

All this Doom and Gloom is ridiculous..

ED is making good decisions to combat some of the large issues that affect their business and their customers..

 

Like I said stop looking at it from an "I want this" basis and look at things from a business standpoint and you will see that the decisions make perfect sense.. Even if we don't necessarily LIKE every one of them..

Edited September 27, 2014 by outlawal2

[Rangi]

If you take a close look at all the qircraft that are anouncced to be released it is because the developers (ED or Third party) have enough specific info on the chosen airframe to do it to DCS quality. If they were popping out lots of FC3 level aircraft you (the OP) may have a point, but these are the aircraft they can get enough data on to do proprely. If they are not your favorite aircaft the best thing to do would be start researchig and when you have all the detail and permissions for your personal favorite, i am sure a third party would love to help you out and bring it to DCS.