LN maps

[Gladman]

Once again however, I believe that ED has stated that only a small minority of DCS customers ever play online. So take that as you will.

 

 

Thats kinda funny to me, I rarely play offline. It's all about the guys you fly with.

[Silver_Dragon]

(IIRC Wiki states Nevada is 600x610km, and Straits of Hormuz is only 390x390)

 

The wiki has "outdated". The actual NTTR size maps has 850x850 km aprox and ED has make new updates, new additions in progress (Tonopah AFB) and "hope to" areas in the future. The final size of Hormuz Theater has unkonow, but surely can be "extended" with the release has near.

[Hiromachi]

You need to appreciate the work that goes into these maps, they can be as demanding as full blown DCS modules.

 

That is true. Nobody denies the amount of work put into the maps. But they are still only maps. Unlike the modules, there is nothing you can do with them. On the other hand modules work alone and can be run on default areas, they often contain tutorials and missions.

And as much as I can appreciate and admire someones work, from a customer perspective utility of the maps is hardly comparable to the modules -> hence why I do not consider them worth same price as module and dont buy them. Of course that is only my opinion.

[Silver_Dragon]

That is true. Nobody denies the amount of work put into the maps. But they are still only maps. Unlike the modules, there is nothing you can do with them. On the other hand modules work alone and can be run on default areas, they often contain tutorials and missions.

And as much as I can appreciate and admire someones work, from a customer perspective utility of the maps is hardly comparable to the modules -> hence why I do not consider them worth same price as module and dont buy them. Of course that is only my opinion.

 

WW2 will coming with AI units appropriate to the propel era.

[Farlander]

It's not that i don't want to pay for maps, and i think the price for nevada is fine for now. However, some of us will not be able to buy all new maps in the future if they are all going to be 50$.

 

Untill now i have bought almost everything there is, but with more aircraft and terrain coming i think i will have to decide between what i really want, and what to skip.

[TwoLate]

Wow this is interesting. First we were saying that one map is limiting. Now a great map like NTTR comes along and blows away any other map in the industry comes along and now mentioning other maps and now were are discussing the negatives. The Fickle Finger of Fate award goes to.

[Silver_Dragon]

consequences? No really. That is similar to DCS: W modules (aircraft, helos and expected vehicles or ships in the future). All can select with product purchase, and meanwhile ED and actual (and future) 3rd parties make more and variate products, the market go to diversification, the clans can select the modules and theatres with purchase to future campaigns and operations. Has similar to FSX/P3D/X-Plane environment. You only select with type of environment go to combat under the grow offer of products, nothing more.

 

NTTR has actually a incomplete product, expect the final version to judge them.

[TwoLate]

I can remember when more maps was a welcome thing I did not hear anything like oh no more maps would be terrible.

[Kayos]

I think more maps is a good thing. Especially Straits of Hormuz and whatever the F-14 comes with. I'm hoping that a lot of the Multiplayer Servers will host maps compatible with carrier ops as soon as we get the F-18 & F-14. I think it will be great. I will probably end up buying all the maps, just as I do the planes now to support the development of DCS.

[grunf]

Even though the Caucasus is a very good map, does anyone really want to be stuck there forever? I don't, and I'm very much looking forward to more maps.

[NineLine]

That is true. Nobody denies the amount of work put into the maps. But they are still only maps. Unlike the modules, there is nothing you can do with them. On the other hand modules work alone and can be run on default areas, they often contain tutorials and missions.

And as much as I can appreciate and admire someones work, from a customer perspective utility of the maps is hardly comparable to the modules -> hence why I do not consider them worth same price as module and dont buy them. Of course that is only my opinion.

 

Maps add to the immersion in a huge way, NTTR is way more immersive than the current free Georgia map, I'm sorry but That is bigger than you are giving it credit...

 

I mean take the latest FPS, take the characters from it, now place that in an version of that FPS from 10 years ago.... how are you enjoying that game?

 

Honestly, for me personally, places to fly in my favorite module(s) become way more interesting to me than a new plane might, I personally have limited time, so I fly my favorites, aside from testing, all the time.

[Kayos]

Maps add to the immersion in a huge way, NTTR is way more immersive than the current free Georgia map, I'm sorry but That is bigger than you are giving it credit...

 

I mean take the latest FPS, take the characters from it, now place that in an version of that FPS from 10 years ago.... how are you enjoying that game?

 

Honestly, for me personally, places to fly in my favorite module(s) become way more interesting to me than a new plane might, I personally have limited time, so I fly my favorites, aside from testing, all the time.

 

I haven't left NTTR since we got it. I love that map.

[Phantom88]

More Choices

More Variety

More Immersion

More of my $$ Money Going to DCS Battle Ground:thumbup:

[Farlander]

I do not think anyone here has been complaining about the maps?

 

What is being discussed however, is what kind of split we might see in the community.

 

It will only get harder to bring new people to the game when they hear that they'll need x amounts of maps to play with their buddies on missions.

 

The troublesome part is that normally if somebody im flying with does not have an aircraft, then he gets something else to fly with us and still enjoy the mission. With maps everyone needs tho have the same.

 

And honestly, i really do like NTTR, but for combat i just feel the georgia map is so much better. Im still unsure if the x-plane mesh im using is better or not, but i do hope for better terrain towards the outer bits of nevada.. Future looks interesting indeed.

[Cunctator]

In FSX a very basic auto generated global scenery was available to everyone, that could be expanded with high detail add ons. But even 10 years ago MS had to charge 60 $ every two years to finance it.

 

I don't think that there will be perfect solution for DCS, that pleases all groups, anytime soon. It will all depend on the development cost of future maps. I can imagine that workload per map could decrease drastically if they can auto generate large portions from geodata and once they have 3D object libraries for various time periods and regions.

Also DCS customer base could expand together with more varied content becoming available. Thus more sales per module could allow for lower prices or subsidized maps.

 

I will almost certainly buy many more maps than aircraft in future. With study sim level F4U, F/A-18 and Harrier coming I will get almost everything at that level I always hoped for.

Already in FSX, without any combat, I enjoyed it much more to simply explore the world from the air than learning to master new planes all the time.

[OnlyforDCS]

I haven't left NTTR since we got it. I love that map.

 

Same here. Even with the limited missions available at the moment, and the missing features (WIP clouds, ATC, hill shadows etc.) I can't tear myself away from the map. It's just a pleasure to fly over that terrain.

[NeilWillis]

Our solution to the whole maps/multiplayer issue is to run our server on a rolling basis. 1 week, we fly our mission on 2.0 the first night, and 1.5 the second, and the second week we rotate it. We also run both versions side by side on our public server in between mission nights.

 

Those with both maps get to fly any mission, and those with just one still get a look in. It isn't ideal, but it means we get to serve a wider community, and don't lose members due to a lack of resources.

 

The other method is to just specialise, and that already happens with specific aircraft, so why can't it be just as straightforward with extra maps?

 

Frankly, the wider the choice becomes, the more people attracted to DCS World. It will become more niche oriented as eras and maps multiply, but where is the problem with that? You just pick your speciality, and go with it. Very simple, and absolutely not a disadvantage.

 

Bring on the maps, and if I have to pay a measly $50 for each, so what? It is my hobby, and I am happy to spend on it. It could be far worse, I could still be into motor sport - now THAT is an expensive hobby!!!

[Silver_Dragon]

Meanwhile ED dont make a whole world engine (DCS: W 3 or 4 or .....) or put maps on a sphere, fill with procedural maps, in terms of all terrain, the discussion is a bit useless. Actually the engine limitations get only capability of flat maps, build with 3D Max.

 

Other point has the "actual" engine limitations and the ED roadmap, actually ED work in a great quantity of features to improve them in the future (no dates) with improve inmersion of DCS: W Maps.

 

I think that post has out or discussion of anything of Leatherneck, can moderators move them to chit chat section and change your name?

[Farlander]

Bring on the maps, and if I have to pay a measly $50 for each, so what? It is my hobby, and I am happy to spend on it. It could be far worse, I could still be into motor sport - now THAT is an expensive hobby!!!

 

Yes, bring on the maps indeed. I'd easily pay that money for some of them and pick up some others on sale.

 

But i sure do not hope that we loose new players becuase of the bigger "leap" you need to do. I have already seen that happen in other games, and i'd not like to se dcs go that way.

 

About motorsport, have you ever played iRacing? Well that game is an example of a very good sim, but fails to effectively get new costumers to stay because of the money that you need to spend to get started. (outside of mazda cup)

 

 

What server do you run btw? you guys do combat?

 

 

Maybe this is going offtopic?

 

I believe it started becuase we were happy about how LN might bundle them with the planes or something..

Edited January 5, 2016 by Farlander

[Slipp]

Fingers crossed that LN breaks the ice and includes proper maps, units and campaigns with their modules, FOR FREE.

 

I don't mind paying $60 dollars for a module that offers a full experience.

[RabidRider]

Good things most often don't come for free. So what if a nice map costs 50 dollars. The time we spend flying in it makes it cheap. Go out drinking one night and see how much you spend. Supporting developers with our money is the only way they can stay in business, research and develop great products. It's a great time to be a flightsim fan!

[NineLine]

FOR FREE.

 

Dont hold your breath, their work is worth something...

[WinterH]

Personally I am not too interested in maps, will probably get one or two. But I appreciate others may have great interest in them and I'm glad more are being added to sim even if I'm not too much into them.

 

That said, even if I'm not interested in maps, I think they take a lot of modeling / texturing and even some development effort, and they should cost at least 40$ or 50.

 

Asking maps for free sound a bit one sided to me.

[Slipp]

Dont hold your breath, their work is worth something...

 

That's why I'd be paying money for their modules.

[Farlander]

That's why I'd be paying money for their modules.

 

Yes, im all for the idea of everything being bundled with their modules.