LN maps

[QuiGon]

Pretty sure LNS said all aircraft will come with any necessary maps included.

 

Are you sure about that? Where did he said that?

 

I would be suprised if they would just include an entire map in an aircraft module "for free". I only recall, that he talked about bundles, meaning that you will get a discount if you buy an aircraft together with the corresponding map, but I doubt you will get maps "for free". A new map requires a lot of work and that work has to be paid for somehow.

[WinterH]

We'll see when the time comes but, the way I foresee is that the maps and aircraft will be available seperately, each along the lines of regular prices, but they will also be offered as a bundle which would be somewhat cheaper than getting both seperately, but not drastically cheaper and certainly not for free. At least that's how I predict it would be.

[QuiGon]

We'll see when the time comes but, the way I foresee is that the maps and aircraft will be available seperately, each along the lines of regular prices, but they will also be offered as a bundle which would be somewhat cheaper than getting both seperately, but not drastically cheaper and certainly not for free. At least that's how I predict it would be.

 

That's my impression too and I would be totally fine with it.

[Solty]

Are you sure about that? Where did he said that?

 

I would be suprised if they would just include an entire map in an aircraft module "for free". I only recall, that he talked about bundles, meaning that you will get a discount if you buy an aircraft together with the corresponding map, but I doubt you will get maps "for free". A new map requires a lot of work and that work has to be paid for somehow.

 

May be they are customer friendly? CD Project Red gave 16 DLCs for free.

[QuiGon]

May be they are customer friendly? CD Project Red gave 16 DLCs for free.

 

I have no doubt that LNS is customer friendly, but the question is "can they afford it?".

Well, we'll see how it works out when we get closer to the release.

[WinterH]

That's my impression too and I would be totally fine with it.

 

Yup, I'd go so far as stating that's the way which make sense in my opinion. If, for example, module is 50-60 $, map is 40-50, but with a bundle, map adding 15-20 $ to aircraft price I'd get it directly with map. If map adds 30 $, I'd get it if it's extremely interesting to me, since I'm not much of a map person myself. In the end though, people would get added value and some discount for getting aircraft and theater as a bundle, and map development effort would not be an entirely a lost effort for development studios. I really don't expect maps to be freebies, not fair to developers, in the same vein, if aircraft modules are only sold with maps with significantly increased pricing that would also be pretty bad in my opinion.

 

Anyway, we'll just have to wait and see what LN decides when the time comes :).

[Bisch]

Im not afraid of buying maps but Im afraid of empty servers. Every commercial map should also be released as a low resolution free version for multiplayer use

 

 

Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

[il_corleone]

Im not afraid of buying maps but Im afraid of empty servers. Every commercial map should also be released as a low resolution free version for multiplayer use

 

 

Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

 

This can be the life saver of DCS and the split community

[Bisch]

Plus additional sales for the devs because people get in contact with those maps and develop a desire to upgrade

 

 

Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

[Home Fries]

Im not afraid of buying maps but Im afraid of empty servers. Every commercial map should also be released as a low resolution free version for multiplayer use

That's actually a very good idea! :thumbup:

 

I also like the bundling of maps. I figure most people will get the "package deal", so you would be (for example) fairly safe in making F4U missions on the Iwo map.

[Drag0nWIng]

I think the studio should give us an option to no download the terrain, just like the airfield module of FSX. And I still remember when I downloaded xplane X from steam, it asked me to prepare 64gb to download 10 terrain dlc, however it's free, but not cool. You know the ssd is still fxxing expensive. It's better be a separate dlc of airplane module.

 

It's my personal opinion, if you guys don't like it, plz ignore it.

 

DCS w

||

||-Caucasus (Freeee! )

||-NTTR dlc (do not have to install)

||-A-10c, FC3 & other module, etc

|

|-DCS fishbed dlc (already own)

|-DCS tomcat module dlc (must buy)

| |

| |-terrain dlc of tomcat (do not have to install, required tomcat dlc)

|

Edited January 13, 2016 by Drag0nWIng

[zaelu]

Im not afraid of buying maps but Im afraid of empty servers. Every commercial map should also be released as a low resolution free version for multiplayer use

 

 

Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

 

This! :thumbup:

[Golo]

I dont think that will help, well maybe somewhat, but I wouldnt be interested in flying in Nevada even if it was free so comunity will still be split.

And more maps more split in the comunity you will see, because everybody will have their preferences.

I fear the quick production of many maps may not exactly be good thing for DCS.

Edited January 14, 2016 by Golo

[NeilWillis]

On the other hand, more choice is a good thing, regardless of how many people choose to join particular servers.

 

Going on that logic, there ought to be just one server for everyone - in case the community becomes fragmented by people using 2 or more different servers!

 

I just don't accept your argument at all Golo. More choice = more people happy. I have never heard any other flight sim community complaining that there are too many maps!

[Toten]

Maybe we should have just one large spherical map?

[greco.bernardi]

On the other hand, more choice is a good thing, regardless of how many people choose to join particular servers.

 

Going on that logic, there ought to be just one server for everyone - in case the community becomes fragmented by people using 2 or more different servers!

 

I just don't accept your argument at all Golo. More choice = more people happy. I have never heard any other flight sim community complaining that there are too many maps!

 

Yeah...More maps more fun!

If you like ww2 pacific war you join to a server with this. If you like another map go to the server with this module and maps.

Will be a dream when modules planes can fill ww2 european, pacific and north african theaters and modern conflicts areas like korean war, arabic/israel war (mirageIII vs migs), vietnam war (some planes), iran vs iraq, gulf war 1 and 2, malvinas.

[Akatsuki]

Look at the "weight" of the NTTR map, it's 24gb, and there's no seasonal textures... The Iwo Jima map should be very light but if the map that will come with the Viggen is located in northern Europe (which would make sense) it must contains seasonal textures, that will be a hefty one. :)

[VincentLaw]

I just don't accept your argument at all Golo. More choice = more people happy. I have never heard any other flight sim community complaining that there are too many maps!

Hopefully you don't mind me discussing another game now for a point of reference. Nothing exists in a vacuum after all, so this is relevant to DCS by analogy. I don't really play Battlefield games anymore, but back when Battlefield 2 was popular it had several expansions that included new maps. This introduced two problems with the game:

 

1. Map rotation: Of course a flight simulator server probably won't rotate maps as frequently as a FPS server, but if you joined a Battlefield 2 server that included both base game maps and expansion maps in the rotation, you would be booted from the server if it switched to a map you didn't own.

 

2: Map exclusivity: My favorite expansion map was probably the Great Wall map. The problem? it was an expansion map. That means most players didn't own it, and that means it was very difficult to find a server running this map, or certain other maps. When I quit playing Battlefield, there was not a single server running the Great Wall map. the vast majority of servers ran base game maps, with a very small fraction running expansion maps.

 

These are not problems for the average DCS player because most people play DCS in single player, but I think we will find that multiplayer servers running free maps in DCS will be the most populated servers in the long term, and as there are more and more maps, many maps will have no multiplayer server at all.

 

I'm not against payware maps. They are a great way to add content to single player, but they are not as good for multiplayer.

Edited January 14, 2016 by VincentLaw

[-Flo-]

Look at the "weight" of the NTTR map, it's 24gb, and there's no seasonal textures... The Iwo Jima map should be very light but if the map that will come with the Viggen is located in northern Europe (which would make sense) it must contains seasonal textures, that will be a hefty one. :)

 

The NTTR map entirely consists of photoreal ground textures, that's what makes it so heavy on the hard drive. I guess photoreal textures are an exeption. I assume the LN maps will use generic texture tiles that don't use that much space.

[BravoYankee4]

Hopefully you don't mind me discussing another game now for a point of reference. Nothing exists in a vacuum after all, so this is relevant to DCS by analogy. I don't really play Battlefield games anymore, but back when Battlefield 2 was popular it had several expansions that included new maps. This introduced two problems with the game:

 

1. Map rotation: Of course a flight simulator server probably won't rotate maps as frequently as a FPS server, but if you joined a Battlefield 2 server that included both base game maps and expansion maps in the rotation, you would be booted from the server if it switched to a map you didn't own.

 

2: Map exclusivity: My favorite expansion map was probably the Great Wall map. The problem? it was an expansion map. That means most players didn't own it, and that means it was very difficult to find a server running this map, or certain other maps. When I quit playing Battlefield, there was not a single server running the Great Wall map. the vast majority of servers ran base game maps, with a very small fraction running expansion maps.

 

These are not problems for the average DCS player because most people play DCS in single player, but I think we will find that multiplayer servers running free maps in DCS will be the most populated servers in the long term, and as there are more and more maps, many maps will have no multiplayer server at all.

 

I'm not against payware maps. They are a great way to add content to single player, but they are not as good for multiplayer.

 

I was just about to do a BF2 comparison my self since I remember it well with all expansions and extra maps.

In that particular case however the extra cost needed for some maps filtered out many of the grenade throwing bunny teens... so payware isn't purely a bad thing ;)

Eventually I found the Project Reality mod that was even more narrow but I never looked back even for a second.

 

Perhaps there should be some free multiplayer specific maps hosted by some ED servers, and then there could be more niche scenarios for those who are really interested.

It is gonna be a diversity regardless of maps. Some people is only gonna play "Top gun" as soon as the F-14 is released and keep pushing comments about Swedish fighters that never been in real combat. Some people (like myself) will spend most of the time surface skimming over the Baltic sea in a Viggen and couldn't care less about the Las Vegas map and so on :music_whistling:

[ESAc_matador]

Maybe we should have just one large spherical map?

 

the easiest solution is usually the best.:D:D:D

[BravoYankee4]

Maybe we should have just one large spherical map?

 

Say what? A simulator mimic the real world!!

[Toten]

Thinking about the Tomcat map. With the recent pictures of a Soviet/ Russian Carrier and we know a US carrier in the works. I'm wondering if we could see something in the GIUK gap (North Atlantic). Certainly lots of action happened there in the age of the Tomcat, and if you include Iceland, and the edges of Greenland and Norway, you have land bases for other aircraft (think F-15s out of Iceland, Viggens out of Norway (Iknow wrong country) or possibly Soviet aircraft out of Norway) it would be a large but great cold war setup. File size, most of the resources would be in Iceland and coastlines of other countries, but ocean is just ocean. Probably just a dream, but if true, who is building the Bear and the Backfire?

[Darkman]

Thinking about the Tomcat map. With the recent pictures of a Soviet/ Russian Carrier and we know a US carrier in the works. I'm wondering if we could see something in the GIUK gap (North Atlantic). Certainly lots of action happened there in the age of the Tomcat, and if you include Iceland, and the edges of Greenland and Norway, you have land bases for other aircraft (think F-15s out of Iceland, Viggens out of Norway (Iknow wrong country) or possibly Soviet aircraft out of Norway) it would be a large but great cold war setup. File size, most of the resources would be in Iceland and coastlines of other countries, but ocean is just ocean. Probably just a dream, but if true, who is building the Bear and the Backfire?

 

Just like this novel. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Storm_Rising

Edited February 3, 2016 by Darkman

[Donut]

It has been stated by LNS that the Tomcat map will be "Very oceany. Very cold." That doesn't leave too many possibilities. My guess would be either the Northern Atlantic or Northern Pacific around the Bering Sea. Both are cold and oceany and involve the Russians. The Pacific can also open up scenarios including North Korea and China. Since the Viggen is coming out, I would think a Northern Atlantic map is more likely.