28/04 New Screens: Ka-27

[EvilBivol-1]

Lock On already tried that - to do multiple flyables at the same level of detail. The result is a mix of study and survey sim elements, in which neither crowd is fully satisfied. It's too difficult for some and not realistic enough for others. ED has made a choice to not go down that path again. From now on, one aircaft at a time, full realism. Such level of detail for every flyable is impossible in one product, unless you're willing to keep waiting into the next decade.

 

ED has always gone back to attempt to address user complaints. At this point, their ability to do so in regards to the older flyables depends heavily on their ability to first finish the new one. We'll see.

[Kuky]

From now on, one aircaft at a time, full realism.

 

I am not really into tens and tens of flyables in a sim as if you were a pilot in real life yuo wouldn't change aircraft like you change socks... so from my perspective I like the idea of having fewer highly detailed aircraft then lots of not so good ones. IL-2 series has overdone it in my opinion with all the flyables...especially with latest 1946 DVD which I didn't even bother getting. So my suport goes to ED for this one.

[hitman]

Not meant to be a sourpuss or a naysayer (purely realistic here) and ED is going at this one a/c at a time, then how come we're not getting another a/c with black shark? You dont have to answer that because I allready know the answer. Im not referring to the heli.

 

Its the small things that make the biggest difference. A working IFF for the F-15 and (A-10?), new a/c models that everyone looks at every 2-3 minutes, and a realistic payload for each of them is basically what everyone is screaming for. The realistic payload can be done by the community (very small thing), so whats the problem with adding an interrogator for the F-15? If ED has people donating models for submission into the next release candidate, how come they are all tanks and not some a/c? Theres at least 5 people making tanks for ED, and only 2, 3 people working here for the community on 3 different aircraft.

 

Don't get me wrong...Im thankful for new stuff to blow up, but like I said earlier...its esoteric.

[SuperKungFu]

3rd party A-10 project

 

We were working on that but i guess we just don't have enough modelers to continue with the project.

http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?t=19804

[EvilBivol-1]

Not meant to be a sourpuss or a naysayer (purely realistic here) and ED is going at this one a/c at a time, then how come we're not getting another a/c with black shark? You dont have to answer that because I allready know the answer. Im not referring to the heli.

Sorry, I don't understand.

Its the small things that make the biggest difference. A working IFF for the F-15 and (A-10?), new a/c models that everyone looks at every 2-3 minutes, and a realistic payload for each of them is basically what everyone is screaming for. The realistic payload can be done by the community (very small thing), so whats the problem with adding an interrogator for the F-15?

Typically, they aren't small in manhours of coding and testing. Remember the wait for the 1.12a patch, which was for just one "simple" fix to the RWR. These "small things" all chip away, or actually eat away, at ED's time to develop the next thing they plan on selling - the Ka-50-based release. They first need to make sure that product is worth the money asked for it.

If ED has people donating models for submission into the next release candidate, how come they are all tanks and not some a/c? Theres at least 5 people making tanks for ED, and only 2, 3 people working here for the community on 3 different aircraft.

Same explanation - ED's focus at the moment is on the Ka-50 and therefore everything related to it is a higher priority. In general though, third-party modelers are largely free to make whatever models they want. If they are up to ED's standards, they have no reason not to accept them.

[hitman]

Sorry, I don't understand.

Basically what Im saying is that if ED is just staying with said aircraft, then why are they working on a Ka-50 when theres 6 perfectly good aircraft that needs minor fixing and major updates? Id certainly pay for a 6dof clickable pit for the A-10 that has an extremely high poly count like the BS is going to have, and all the weapons available for it...or even the MiG-29. Su-27/33 is a perfect example of what Im talking about here. ED's pride and joy right here (So I gather) but they arent even close to being on-par with the Ka-50 in regards to technology.

 

Sorry Im just having a hard time understanding the logic in adding more tanks into a sim thats almost exclusively a2a online. Yeah I fly a2g most of the times, but even then I dont really care about new tanks. I push trigger, they go boom. I push too hard, I get shot at, I go boom. Thats about all the looking Im going to be doing at a tank. NOW....if the tanks happen to know how to do combat maneuvers instead of taking the path of least resistance....then I might be highly interested in new tanks. Somehow I dont think thats been worked out yet.

[Kuky]

I think once we get the Ka-50 most people will fly it online as well. I bet there will be servers just for this bird to do A2G missions... and I think that would be fun. And yeah, nicely detailed ground vehicles will be a "must" then :)

[hitman]

I wholeheartedly agree. I want the chopper, and all the new ground units are kickin'. But whatever happened to taking care of the needs before getting to the wants part?

[Kuky]

hm... I am just thinking the way Fighter OPS are doing... they are taking a veeeeeeeery long time to develop just the T-38 trainer as flyable... but looking from the screenshots every single structure, aircraft (AI or not) and ground vehicles are very nicely modeled and detailed. They too are going to release flyable aircraft one by one (I am guessing maybe one aircraft per year) just like ED is now going to do.

 

I personally hate to wait for things like this to get released but like all of us I have no option but to wait patiently.

[Andrew_McP]

I wholeheartedly agree. I want the chopper, and all the new ground units are kickin'. But whatever happened to taking care of the needs before getting to the wants part?

 

One man's need is another man's who-gives-a-damn, and it's unfortunately true that flight sim enthusiasts have no choice whatsoever but to be grateful for whatever we get these days. Gaming has moved well beyond the time when flight sims could command significant publishers' attention, and earn a place at the top of the marketing & development budget.

 

Given the rather strange economic world in Russia these days (it's the wild west frontier of capitalism) I'm always surprised ED still manage to exist at all. So while I'm not very excited by BS at the moment, whoever is sponsoring the development of the BS project is doing us all a favour and we have to be grateful for that. Because as long as ED are still working there's always the hope that we can all get what we wish for... eventually.

 

Mind you, I'd feel a lot happier saying that if I was 24 and not 44. Time's running out for some of us with dodgy genes. :-)

 

Andrew McP

[EvilBivol-1]

Basically what Im saying is that if ED is just staying with said aircraft, then why are they working on a Ka-50 when theres 6 perfectly good aircraft that needs minor fixing and major updates? Id certainly pay for a 6dof clickable pit for the A-10 that has an extremely high poly count like the BS is going to have, and all the weapons available for it...or even the MiG-29. Su-27/33 is a perfect example of what Im talking about here. ED's pride and joy right here (So I gather) but they arent even close to being on-par with the Ka-50 in regards to technology.

I see. I don't want to speculate as to why they chose the Ka-50 as the next flyable. Certainly, they've taken a lot of heat for it on the Western forums. But honestly, seeing as they are just about the only company that has managed to survive in this business over the last decade, I assume they can handle their business management decisions well enough. Perhaps 1C (the CIS publisher) wanted the Ka-50, or maybe this was a project already under way before Lock On was even created by Ubisoft, or maybe ED just wanted or needed a helicopter simulator for another project we don't know about. Who knows...

 

Sorry Im just having a hard time understanding the logic in adding more tanks into a sim thats almost exclusively a2a online. Yeah I fly a2g most of the times, but even then I dont really care about new tanks. I push trigger, they go boom. I push too hard, I get shot at, I go boom. Thats about all the looking Im going to be doing at a tank.

My personal opinion:

The reality is that Lock On was a Ubisoft product. Ubisoft decided it was not in their interest to continue developing it further. The direction ED has taken since is aimed at moving toward a more sophisticated and realistic simulation. Frankly speaking, the old flyables drag them down and hold them back. They need to move forward. Then, maybe and if there is time, they can come back and release another patch for the older a/c, as Wags mentioned in the "Just my $0.02 on ECM blinking" thread.

 

P.S. I think you will find ED's Black Shark model to be quite worthy of their pride and joy.

[nscode]

Shuush al ya plane-only freaks! It was about time for someone to make a realistic chopper fight sim.

[Trident]

Id certainly pay for a 6dof clickable pit for the A-10 that has an extremely high poly count like the BS is going to have, and all the weapons available for it...or even the MiG-29.

 

Oh, I'm sure most of us on this message board feel that way, I know I do! But, can you say the same about the majority of PC gamers in general? BS is an add-on and as such meant for people who already have the original sim - it is unfortunately likely that they'd be far too superficial to consider buying a product that did not include a new aircraft/helo, no matter how fundamentally the fixes and enhancements to the existing airframes would actually transform the gameplay. Then there are also those people who like to give ED grief for improving the existing features in LOMAC along with introducing a new aircraft, claiming a free patch should have been released, nevermind the fact that the scope of said improvements is way above and beyond a patch of any description... (I'm obviously not talking about you here, but these people would certainly have a field day if ED went down that road, count on it).

[-akyla-]

Shuush al ya plane-only freaks! It was about time for someone to make a realistic chopper fight sim.

YEA:thumbup:

[Laud]

I agree to many things said here! But for me it keeps a clear minus buying a half-finished jet-sim and ending with a high-end-helo-sim. Maybe this is why the a-a-pilots will be called arcade-pilots by the F4AF guys for a much longer time in future. Sure there are many people wanting a helo sim and I'm sure it's gonna be a great one, but be sure that I and I think many others also will leave this game/community in that moment when there will be a choice. Tragic is just that the only possible choice on the horizon is gonna be Fighter Ops which will surely take a few more "days" to come.

 

So my simple point(s) in short:

 

Loved the jets -> got a helo!

But aside of that: Full respect (technically) for all the work done by ED and their 3rd party progers/skinners/modelers!

 

I would really go crazy for a Su-27 simulated like the BS. I agree with people saying that it's a problem to have too many airframes to simulate in a propper way. But: Why coming out with "Tank-Killers" first instead of a East-West fighter-bomber Sim (F-16 or F-18 vs. Mig-29 or Su-30 <- we had this discussion!!!)??? We have the Su-25T, we're gonna have the chopper. In my eyes it would be time for the afterburner guys before making the third step onto mud-moving. Again just a question of balance...

[EvilBivol-1]

The short answer? You are more than welcome to sign a contract with ED and pay them to develop whatever flyable aircraft you wish. ;)

[159th_Viper]

The short answer? You are more than welcome to sign a contract with ED and pay them to develop whatever flyable aircraft you wish. ;)

 

How much for a MIG 29K? :)

[EvilBivol-1]

Anywhere between tens of thousands and a couple million, apparently. :D

 

http://www.forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?p=237579&highlight=%F0%E0%E7%F0%E0%E1%EE%F2%EA%E0#post237579

(In Russian)

[Wags]

Selection of what aircraft we do next is not an easy decision and is based on several factors. These include what aircraft we have the most data and images (cockpit generally) for, which aircraft we have SMEs (pilots generally) that we can work with, which aircraft publishers are willing to provide development funding for and which aircraft coincide with our defense industry projects and company growth into this sector. At this point in time, the Ka-50 makes the best sense for the company and the bulk of the work being done on Black Shark will be focused on improving the over-all combat environment for an attack helicopter (hence the focus on new ground vehicles and other helicopters). At a later date I'm very sure we'll return to other fixed-wing aircraft, but for the time being, the Ka-50 and its associated combat environment is the focus -- not improving the earlier Lock On aircraft.

[GGTharos]

And before people jump on what Wags said, 'not improving' does not mean there won't be a fix here and there (though conversely just because I say that, doesn't mean there will be any). Just don't expect wholesale replacement of radar, nav systems, etc.

[Laud]

I really understand all these factors! Just wanted to share my feelings in my low-end flanker-pit. ;)

 

Better doin anything than nothing...

[spugnut]

Warning - this post is completely speculative. :unsure:

 

<speculation>

If BS is the end of the Lock-On line, then it's just possible that some time post-release E.D. could decide to open the floodgates and release the tools and data required for interested third parties to edit the pits and flight dynamics for exisiting flyables - depends on how modular and pluggable the core is.. It's possible that FM's and pits are hard-coded, in which case what I've just said can't happen.

 

How does that help? Well... I would assume that unless E.D. have developed an entirely new way of defining the data structures for BS style pits and dynamics, then there will be some forward compatibility with the next project - although I imagine that if E.D. decided to include a 3rd party modded A/C in a new release they would want do the conversion themselves to keep the new data model in-house.

</speculation>

[Weta43]

What is it I'm missing here about people posting comments like

Loved the jets -> got a helo!

I realise there was probably some humour in the post, but really I bought LO from UBI - I got LO + a couple of patches.

I bought FC from ED & got the Su-25T, afm for the Su-25, some improvements & attempts at improvements in avionics & damage modelling for the planes that came with the game I bought from UBI, & a couple of patches.

If (or when, when they get round to releasing it) I buy BS I'll get a high fidelity chopper sim, WAFM (?) for the projectiles, new models for ground units, new models for some of the flyables, a bit more map & undoubtedly numerous other improvements to the legacy parts of the game I originally bought from UBI.

But at each stage I'll have chosen to pick up the releases that ED has put out. I could have decided to stick with 1.02 lo-mac.com. I'm not a desciple of "THE MARKET", but this realy is an example of it in action.

We can wish that ED had made other choices. We can buy or not buy the product, but we aren't in a position to say we've been mis-led or ripped off (unless you want to go right back to the original LO-MAC release).