Would you buy fictional maps?

[Baco]

Yes if this was an idealk world and we could get lets say 4 to 5 more maps before 2020, I would agree that generic maps are not needed. But the truth is that we have 1 theater of operations, since well i flew Flanker 1.5 so yes since 1995. The reason I stopped flying LOMAC was that i got BORED of the monotony. Out came Il2 with a plethora of theaters, planes, vehicles, posibilities... DCS has been a WIP since 2010. And for me sicne LOMAC 2.0 Yes i have been a loyal folower, die hard ED fan.. but you know what Its been over 20 years.. i am tired of waiting for hormuz, f 18, tomcat.. and now one, ONE lousy new tehater?, I believe that DCS needs variety or its going to die out...Yes there is no other combat flightsim that can match it, but guess what, how many people still fly Falcon? one theater one plane... only the really diehard a niche, a very very small amount of "players".... The new generation has ADD in its genes jajaja, you think they are going to settle for a two or three theater fligth sim? with what a plane or two a year... see where Rise of Flight got with tha policy... As ussual the realism freaks killing the golden egg goose...cant see that a flight sim need folowers to subsist, to grow. No the 2000 die hard flight jockeys in the world just don´t cut it any more... As for me, yes I am an old die hard, getting bored, I allready lernt the sistems and nunces fo my fav rides.. did fly a copupel of MP camapings.. ok whats next? My squad had four wings, over a hundred members.. now only a hand full still fly DCS...2 or 3 maybe ocasionaly Falcon 4.... You tell me how many strong (10 + constant flying every week pilots) DSC squads are still out there...make your own math.... Yaeh, thre will be no more real life places maps or planes or nothing..

Edited March 15, 2018 by Baco

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

If they're well made, absolutely.

[VFA15-Juliet]

No. I would rather support better / improved textures and details on the current terrains.

[ac5]

No. I would rather support better / improved textures and details on the current terrains.

 

Same here.

[Boris]

Would you buy a fictional aircraft?

[Shadoga]

I voted Yes, for all the reasons already given in this thread plus:

- I liked the scenarios & missions in the fictional central-european & desert sceneries in Digital Integration's Tornado.

- I like the way fictional nations / islands are used for the Op. Flashpoint / ARMA series.

- I like flying multiplayer missions / events / ladders with balanced chances for red & blue. Balanced geographics (terrain, bases, resources, distances) would support such scenarios.

[BoNidle]

one word: KOREA

 

I'll definitely second that. I'd love to see a 1950's Korea map. I'd pay for it no problem.

With the world situation they could also release a modern Korea version and give everyone a new place to play.

Releases like the F-86F and the MiG-15 complemented each other with the oportunity for a period specific theatre map to be developed rather than just suspend disbelief over the Caucasus.

With the recent WW2 assets and the P-51D (even though it was the lesser known variant, with two aerials, for reasons I'll never understand) the scope for a proper campaign is huge. It could be the new "Mig Alley" (if you remember the original "Mig Alley" sim then you're officially old:D).

But I've always felt that DCS has tended to lack a certain sense of direction in terms of the aircraft it releases and especially with the terrains...or lack thereof.

I understand that its origins are rooted in LOMAC that had a storyline based around the Caucasus region and the aircraft were appropriate to that campaign.

But as it expanded DCS has tended to be rather haphazard in its aircraft choices. e.g. The Viggen and Aviojet C-101, :huh: when the community was screaming for an F-16.:doh:

And with regards to terrains it has become not so much haphazard as slow off the mark.

[ouPhrontis]

No.

 

I'm not interested in fictional content, for me the draw to DCS (and indeed its main strength) is simulation, albeit with some fictional scenarios.

[uboats]

no interest in any fictional map

[Kaned Dragon]

I used to play a flight sim on the Mac which had an asteroid level. I've forgotten which sim it was. I keep thinking it was A10 attack and Cuba, but i could be wrong. It was that vintage of Flight sim. But Anyway.

There was a special zone, which was on an asteroid out in space. There was a smaller landing strip in a floating asteroid in the middle or something like that. Anyway, I must have flown there more than in the real terrains.

 

I'm fine with fake terrain and theaters of operation as long as they are made very well. I really really want some variety. Plus its not like there will be political issues with a fake land mass. Or fake countries.

 

How about some Islands around a big island. Or somewhere based loosly on a real place.

 

I'm really hoping the DCS dev's do an Xplane and make a default genereic world. and then add terrain mods over time.

 

I've been flying around the Caucasus for so long. Even in Xplane I ended up in the Caucasus just because I know the area.

 

Then there's eras / time. Normandy instead of 2000 on wards. The Caucasus map is an older era right?

Novorossiysk doesn't exist in real life. Gelendzhik isn't right. I actually took the time to create it for Xplane.

https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/files/file/39211-gelendzhik-airport/

So now i always try and takeoff from Gelendzhik. I noticed while researching Gelendzhik that you can still see where the older airport was located. Funily it's where the current one in 2.5 is located. And then there's Mestia Airport up in the mountains. I was so let down when i found out about that little airport. It would be such a sweet location for some action. Again I made it for Xplane.

https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/files/file/40069-ugms-mestia-airport-queen-tamara-airport/

But then again. the version of the Caucasus in DCS is older then now, and it's missing things that are they now.

 

I'll always want both. Give me the world and then more. How about terrains from history, legend and myth, then there's places from Films. Alternative History's.

 

So back to the point. Yes I'm fine with fake terrains. As long as the terrains are done well.

Flying the plane well is my top priority, where I fly it, and what against, well that's up for interpretation. The Planes and helicopters are the stars of this show. Not as concerned which theater i see them in :)

[Kaned Dragon]

Space Hog's. In A10 Cuba. Appears in this vid around 6:35

[Mad_Max2]

I think the right way to go about this, if done at all, is make ambiguous maps... A map that could be a real place but isn't given a title, thus allowing different possibilities... Islands in the middle of the ocean, swaths of land that don't have identifiable landmarks... really the only difference between the maps we have and fictional maps is identifiable landmarks... things we expect to be there to make it said location... For example what keeps Nevada from being a decent middle east stand-in is the fact that we all know that is Vegas poking out of the desert...

 

With all this said, I don't see ED making true to life modules to fly in made up places. From a mission making standpoint I see why you would want one, I just don't think that's how they roll

[Stratos]

I think the right way to go about this, if done at all, is make ambiguous maps... A map that could be a real place but isn't given a title, thus allowing different possibilities... Islands in the middle of the ocean, swaths of land that don't have identifiable landmarks... really the only difference between the maps we have and fictional maps is identifiable landmarks... things we expect to be there to make it said location... For example what keeps Nevada from being a decent middle east stand-in is the fact that we all know that is Vegas poking out of the desert...

 

With all this said, I don't see ED making true to life modules to fly in made up places. From a mission making standpoint I see why you would want one, I just don't think that's how they roll

 

Generic maps. Have been explained before. Jungles with coasts can be anywhere, from Africa to the Pacific, Deserts, polar caps...

[Beltza]

What about Bering Strait?

[Magic Zach]

What about Bering Strait?

+1 to this...but only because I live in Alaska.

[sadjad-vosoul]

Why Fictional

 

I want The Korean war 1950- 1953

[Transit]

Nope. This is DCS World not DCS Fictional World.

[Quadg]

Nope. This is DCS World not DCS Fictional World.

 

DCS world has a president Tromb, not president Trump.

if you go by the NTTR map...

 

that isn't "fiction" is it?

 

oh the horror...

[Kazansky222]

As soon as we get fleshed out with more aircraft, IE Mig-19, F-4, maybe F-105, F-100, give me vietnam map!!!

[Mig Fulcrum]

The only fictional map i would buy is a Belka-Ustio theatre.

[Bacab]

The only fictional map i would buy is a Belka-Ustio theatre.

+1

[Panzerfan]

The only fictional map i would buy is a Belka-Ustio theatre.

+1 a Belkan war setting would be cool

Valais AF base, Castle Stier, Directus, B7R. It would be very varied

[River]

No

[lazduc]

How many people could tell the difference between real and fictional map of an area that has

no identifying labels? Half of this simulator is make-believe, fill in the gaps with your imagination and has never been completely accurate.

 

Laz

[upyr1]

There a lot of real world maps I'd like to see. So I would rather not have a fictional map. IMHO if you are going to have fictional maps it would better license the engine for a fictional franchise.