Open Map Tools

[NineLine]

Don't forget the SU-33 and the upcoming F-18.

 

Without a big map being carrier based is pretty much pointless.

 

Their goal is to keep pushing the map size as much as they can, but its a fine line between detail/size/performance/development time...

 

That said, aside from some lower quality stuff out there, DCS is going to be pumping out bigger and more detailed maps than most if not all of them, even the NTTR map, total flyable area has most combat sims/games beat.

 

As for offering up Open Map tools... I know what the tools look like, I have seen them, they are worth way more than just giving them away, and probably worth more than a module or two. ED is offering 3rd Party teams access, all you have to do is prove you can put together a team, and produce the results they expect.

[OnlyforDCS]

As for offering up Open Map tools... I know what the tools look like, I have seen them, they are worth way more than just giving them away, and probably worth more than a module or two.

 

This is actually the crux of the argument as to why the map tools will not be released for free to 'all and sundry'. Eagle Dynamics has built their business model based on modules/DLC, it is their choice that future maps are tied firmly to this business model.

 

This might seem shortsighted but I think it is the opposite, sure as a result we won't be getting free maps as mods, but at least we will be getting enterprising third party developers on board the DCS train, and a guarantee of quality from Eagle Dynamics for all future maps in development.

 

This hobby of ours is too niche to give away so much for free, Eagle Dynamics are a business that needs to not only survive but thrive and grow, and this is a correct decision. The pricing for all of their modules so far has been extremely fair and correct when you compare them to the other sims on the market, when you also consider the quality of the simulation that we are getting (it really is the best there is) there is no argument DCS wins hands down.

[Automan]

What I think is that ED should make a terrain covering full globe with basic LOD(level of detail). Then leave thirdy part developers make a detailed region map as DLC.

And yes, I think that ED should release an sdk to build terrain for the public, cause a lot of people are talented bere, but have fear to sign an agreement if they must become developers, respect scheduled times, mantain hi-quality standards. A lot of people are hobbist and don't want became workers...

This is what have mantained in life FSX for long time.

[Punisher74]

This is actually the crux of the argument as to why the map tools will not be released for free to 'all and sundry'. Eagle Dynamics has built their business model based on modules/DLC, it is their choice that future maps are tied firmly to this business model.

 

This might seem shortsighted but I think it is the opposite, sure as a result we won't be getting free maps as mods, but at least we will be getting enterprising third party developers on board the DCS train, and a guarantee of quality from Eagle Dynamics for all future maps in development.

 

This hobby of ours is too niche to give away so much for free, Eagle Dynamics are a business that needs to not only survive but thrive and grow, and this is a correct decision. The pricing for all of their modules so far has been extremely fair and correct when you compare them to the other sims on the market, when you also consider the quality of the simulation that we are getting (it really is the best there is) there is no argument DCS wins hands down.

 

No not really ED could allow map installs strictly thru their own installer, hence map designs can be submitted just like user files if approved that map could be added to the map download area and a price would be set and the portion or flat fee can be paid out to the creator. Everyone had the same argument with apple when apps were in the thought process, and apple designed a pay system for third party app developers. It's could work for DCS.

[Abburo]

I have a very mixed experience with Arma and their open modding system. It almost became a bother to decide which Mi8 helicopter to use... I mean what mod does have best modeled Mi8. And if I finally find a proper mod for this one it is almost sure that the M1A2 is missing... and so on.

 

What I am trying to say is that uncontrolled content production (no matter is a gun, a car, a map) can sooner or later throw the community in a very strange whirls of sheer knowledge about mods and modders. ED decision is a correct one that leads to a unified community.

[vicx]

Aburro I kind of agree with you here.

 

Arma has the most awesome content I have ever seen in a game/sim. The quality and vast amount and range of it is amazing. It does seem that with Arma right now the biggest problem is getting people to play the same game. Still maybe in the long term the Bohemia approach of creating an open market in content will get sorted out --- it is too early to say.

 

Content in Arma is like libertarian capitalism, a messy chaotic system for users, you have to embrace the madness of choice.

 

Content in DCS is more like a state controlled system. For the users it is more sedate but like in the Soviet system there is lot of waiting. We queue in the forum for glimpse of new module in shop window. Is there a new map comrade?

 

It is just like this. But I think it is OK to have two different systems like this. There is no color revolution required for DCS. Let DCS be the Soviet style.

 

You would agree? :thumbup:

[NineLine]

Let DCS be the Soviet style.

 

 

:doh:

[OnlyforDCS]

No not really ED could allow map installs strictly thru their own installer, hence map designs can be submitted just like user files if approved that map could be added to the map download area and a price would be set and the portion or flat fee can be paid out to the creator. Everyone had the same argument with apple when apps were in the thought process, and apple designed a pay system for third party app developers. It's could work for DCS.

 

What you just described is probably very close to what is already implemented with third party developers. Sure the actual process might be a little different, but in principle it is the same thing.

 

The only part that is missing is the third party status. To get that you need to talk with Eagle Dynamics first. It's a little bit more effort, for a much larger paycheck in the end. Everyone wins. With open tools Eagle Dynamics would lose a lot of control over their software and this they can ill afford. You mentioned Apple. But you can't expect a small developer (which designs and builds niche games, sims) to play by the same rules as a large one, and take the same risks. It's not realistic no matter how much we want it to be so...

[Gladman]

What doest that have to do with anything? Many games support mods and community created content. Why shouldn't map builder be open to people, so that they can maintain longevity of the sim via their own creative content? Look at il2 46 where you have tons of maps that were created by moders.

 

I guess at some point, I just get sick of all the bitchin and complaining.

 

DCS is an unbelievable sim. In my opinion, the absolute best on the market, bar none. We used to wait 5 years for something new, now, if we don't get an update per the individuals agenda every second week, the world ends.

As for making it open to public to create. Sure, but it would never be as good as ED can do and I know for a fact that I wouldn't use them.

 

Rant over.

 

Back to flying.