The Dynamic Campaign... WHEN?!?!?

[Burning Bridges]

May the estemeed developers live forever, for if someone dies it could set the project back by years.

[cfrag]

11 hours ago, Burning Bridges said:

if someone dies it could set the project back by years.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves... For a set-back there has to be progress first. I think it would be good to remember that no-one outside ED has seen any progress for a decade or so. All we had were some pretty pictures that allegedly show something-something-mumble campaign, and some breathless commentary form internal sources on how well the developers were progressing... 3-4 years ago. 

Then again, I heard some positive rumors: ED allegedly managed to hire G. R. R. Martin to write the narrative for the first dynamic campaign, and he'll get to it right after he finishes his current engagement writing that "Thrones" thing. 

Edited December 8, 2024 by cfrag

[Bob_Petuss]

Guys, do you have any information on what format the dynamic company will be in? Will this be part of the sequential generated missions? Or one session, as it is now on many online servers, with free flight?

[MadKreator]

1 hour ago, Bob_Petuss said:

Guys, do you have any information on what format the dynamic company will be in? Will this be part of the sequential generated missions? Or one session, as it is now on many online servers, with free flight?

So far the only thing anyone has ever seen, is some f-10 map screenshots ( which don’t look much different from each other a year or two apart) of various frontlines and some new icons. Which tells us….nothing really. Thats the total of the information anyone has regarding the DC.

I don’t like to be a pessimist, but at the current pace, I wouldn’t expect anything concrete for the next couple/ few years. A part of me hopes the new announced “Instant Action Generator” will have some of this dynamic logic intertwined. A video a couple years back that Wags did had a new option that said “Dynamic Mission”, that people found instantly but I haven’t seen it in any video since, and I look for that all the time, or anything that indicates some “dynamic” function… Sadly,  I have to take the seat with @cfrag on this  and have the realistic expectation that while there may be  some progression, it is not making leaps and bounds and the end is NOT in sight. Again I would love to be incorrect in my assumptions,  but anything DC related is  almost best to not be concerned with at the moment . Until an actual  demo video that showcases some real functions comes out, I don’t think anyone will get a single answer on any details. ED, please prove me wrong

[falcon_120]

Some nights i dream i wake up and my youtube feed have a Mr wags video named "Dynamic Campaign basics" waiting to be played... then i wake up and its just a normal day

Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

[Dangerzone]

10 hours ago, MadKreator said:

I don’t like to be a pessimist, but at the current pace, I wouldn’t expect anything concrete for the next couple/ few years. 

I don't think that's necessarily being pessimistic - just managing expectations. One thing I've mentioned here that has helped my frustration levels is that I've had to lower my expectations of DCS in order to maintain a healthy mindset, and decide if I want to use DCS for what it currently is now. In my minds eye I know what DCS could be... but it's not... so I need to live in reality of the here and now.  There's a youtube video going around at the moment that I think shares this concept - of DCS being a digital museum, but it's been used for more than intended which creates problems. I think there's some merit to that mindset.

We also need to consider that we no longer have a stable release (just a continued Open Beta). Playing semantics may word the other way around, but I think it's pretty obvious that the community is being used for beta testing now with DCS, and as such I think DCE is a long way off. It's getting harder to maintain existing missions as being workable as more things are bugged out (especially for scripting with events, etc) that are not being addressed. Seeing Enigma wear out, RJ give up, the change in CFRAG's enthusiasm here (as well as the change in enthusiasm with other dev's and mission designers I converse with) to name a few, I can only imagine what ED Dev's are going through behind the scenes trying to develop a far more complicated DCE system on the platform in it's current state.

My guess (hope) is that the dual development between DirectX11 and Vulkan is creating a lot of these bugs, and that with Vulkan we will see these bugs resolved. If correct, then I don't expect to see the DCE until well after these scripting bugs have been fixed, and Vulkan is released.  (IIRC - it was mentioned that Vulkan needs to come first anyway, so that gives that thought some possibility)? If so - I think you are managing your expectations, as opposed to being pessimistic, as we could well be talking another 4-5 years away at a guess, as Vulkan needs to be released first, and then the bugs ironed out. 

6 hours ago, falcon_120 said:

Some nights i dream i wake up and my youtube feed have a Mr wags video named "Dynamic Campaign basics" waiting to be played... then i wake up and its just a normal day

As above, I suggest manage your expectations.  Even if it was released now - there's no guarantee that it will be usable outside open beta testing for some time. Expectations of ED as to what a DCE should entail could be completely different to ours. It could also be released in Early Access, and contain numerous bugs that make it unworkable for what you're looking for. As an example - consider the supercarrier. The Airboss (which half a year on still isn't usable in VR). Or the recent release of the plane directors and the complications that various bugs are causing that may take quite some time to get reseolved. Or take Dynamic Spawns for an example. My expectations were that this would allow us to have a more dynamic experience where we could setup FOB/FARP's as new spawn points in game at realtime, and that the game would be more dynamic according to how the players did things. Reality was that ED have decided not to include that as an option (I can only assume intentional given that I found a very easy way to 'hack' this with a couple of variables in a .lua file but it's denied and hasn't been addressed since) - so our expectations and ED's plans can and often are very different at times.

The general pattern seems to be to release something to the public in an Open Beta state - and then take a long time to work and iron out the kinks. And while I don't like this approach - I have to acknowledge that I've purchased numerous modules in "Early Access" - so I can either get frusturated, or change my expectations. I'm not expecting a smooth day one experience with the DCE, but rather it being released to the public for open beta testing, and like other modules and functions not containing all the functionality we're expecting, and also taking no small time to get those bugs resolved. 

This isn't to say that the DCE won't be good. Just to say that like the waiting for release, we need to keep our expectations in check by observing ED's current development cycle and maintain our expectations accordingly to avoid disappointment. DCS is a game best played focusing on enjoying what we have now - not looking forward to something that may be many years away. There's an old proverb "Hope deferred makes the heart sick". The best thing I believe is to enjoy what we have in front of us, and allow ourselves to be pleasantly surprised if we see releases of things we long for - without holding and waiting on to them so tightly that it causes us to start resenting DCS. After all, DCS is an incredible game, and unique - nothing comes close to it. It can be easy to take for granted what we have (which is pretty incredible), due to our disappointments with our own level of expectations.

Edited December 9, 2024 by Dangerzone

[MadKreator]

4 hours ago, Dangerzone said:

I don't think that's necessarily being pessimistic - just managing expectations. One thing I've mentioned here that has helped my frustration levels is that I've had to lower my expectations of DCS in order to maintain a healthy mindset, and decide if I want to use DCS for what it currently is now. In my minds eye I know what DCS could be... but it's not... so I need to live in reality of the here and now.  There's a youtube video going around at the moment that I think shares this concept - of DCS being a digital museum, but it's been used for more than intended which creates problems. I think there's some merit to that mindset.

We also need to consider that we no longer have a stable release (just a continued Open Beta). Playing semantics may word the other way around, but I think it's pretty obvious that the community is being used for beta testing now with DCS, and as such I think DCE is a long way off. It's getting harder to maintain existing missions as being workable as more things are bugged out (especially for scripting with events, etc) that are not being addressed. Seeing Enigma wear out, RJ give up, the change in CFRAG's enthusiasm here (as well as the change in enthusiasm with other dev's and mission designers I converse with) to name a few, I can only imagine what ED Dev's are going through behind the scenes trying to develop a far more complicated DCE system on the platform in it's current state.

My guess (hope) is that the dual development between DirectX11 and Vulkan is creating a lot of these bugs, and that with Vulkan we will see these bugs resolved. If correct, then I don't expect to see the DCE until well after these scripting bugs have been fixed, and Vulkan is released.  (IIRC - it was mentioned that Vulkan needs to come first anyway, so that gives that thought some possibility)? If so - I think you are managing your expectations, as opposed to being pessimistic, as we could well be talking another 4-5 years away at a guess, as Vulkan needs to be released first, and then the bugs ironed out. 

As above, I suggest manage your expectations.  Even if it was released now - there's no guarantee that it will be usable outside open beta testing for some time. Expectations of ED as to what a DCE should entail could be completely different to ours. It could also be released in Early Access, and contain numerous bugs that make it unworkable for what you're looking for. As an example - consider the supercarrier. The Airboss (which half a year on still isn't usable in VR). Or the recent release of the plane directors and the complications that various bugs are causing that may take quite some time to get reseolved. Or take Dynamic Spawns for an example. My expectations were that this would allow us to have a more dynamic experience where we could setup FOB/FARP's as new spawn points and that the game would be more dynamic according to how the players did things. Reality was that ED have decided not to include that as an option (I can only assume intentional given that I found a very easy way to 'hack' this with a couple of variables in a .lua file but it's denied and hasn't been addressed since) - so our expectations and ED's plans can and often are very different at times.

The general pattern seems to be to release something to the public in an Open Beta state - and then take a long time to work and iron out the kinks. And while I don't like this approach - I have to acknowledge that I've purchased numerous modules in "Early Access" - so I can either get frusturated, or change my expectations. I'm not expecting a smooth day one experience with the DCE, but rather it being released to the public for open beta testing, and like other modules and functions not containing all the functionality we're expecting, and also taking no small time to get those bugs resolved. 

This isn't to say that the DCE won't be good. Just to say that like the waiting for release, we need to keep our expectations in check by observing ED's current development cycle and maintain our expectations accordingly to avoid disappointment. DCS is a game best played focusing on enjoying what we have now - not looking forward to something that may be many years away. There's an old proverb "Hope deferred makes the heart sick". The best thing I believe is to enjoy what we have in front of us, and allow ourselves to be pleasantly surprised if we see releases of things we long for - without holding and waiting on to them so tightly that it causes us to start resenting DCS. After all, DCS is an incredible game, and unique - nothing comes close to it. It can be easy to take for granted what we have (which is pretty incredible), due to our disappointments with our own level of expectations.

I will take that rationale Precisely the mindset I have with DCS. I do yearn  for the things to come, but I have long since held my breath in excitement. Instead, as you said, I do try to  focus on and enjoy what we have now, even when it gets frustrating with something bugged or a simple thing that takes minutes to fix in a lua, but has been largely ignored for a lengthy amount of time. All the  better when something comes that surprises me. The new fog for instance. I kind of brushed it off through the various announcements thinking “that’s the most un-interesting thing they’ve come up with”… Boy was I wrong!  IMO it adds an amount of depth and detail ( in combination with the volumetric lighting) that I never imagined. Yes it needs some work on the density/ locale across maps, and more variation in height ( so it doesn’t look like a flat plane pancake from just above it) but overall I am pleasantly surprised at the outcome and truly believe it was well worth the effort.  I try to look at it like Christmas ( for those that celebrate). My wife always try’s to give me hints and ask me specific things about gifts she would get me, and I tell her no, I would rather be fully surprised on the day, than even get the slightest hint of what’s in the box. While my wishlist for what I would like DCS to be is lengthy like most people’s,  I do find satisfaction in things that come with every update. Some more so than others. And while I would really, really love the DC to come sooner than later, even if it’s just the foundation to build from, I would rather it be evolved enough to present a challenge, push the need to be strategic and think critically and fulfill that “purpose” that DCS is missing. I’d hate to see just an automatic mission generator like Briefing Room or Liberation… we already have those. 

[cfrag]

8 hours ago, Dangerzone said:

we need to keep our expectations in check by observing ED's current development cycle and maintain our expectations accordingly to avoid disappointment.

IMHO astutely put.

In episode "Birnham Wood" of "West Wing", President Bartlet is trying to broker peace in the Middle East. When negotiations break down over how to handle Jerusalem, Bartlet and his team try a different approach: try and resolve all other, smaller, issues first, and see what happens. He is warned that the issue of Jerusalem must be resolved, or no tangible progress can be achieved, no matter what other successes they may have. Everything else is irrelevant.

When it comes to Dynamic Campaigns, a real "Save Game" feature (more precisely: "continue from save") is ED's "Jerusalem", the elephant in the room. Unless ED manage to implement a real save/continue game (not a kinda-sorta save game that could be called that name if you squint real hard, and it semantically puts bytes to storage), anything else in relation to a dynamic campaign is irrelevant. 
Why? Because without a real save/continue feature (that saves and continues units mid-tasks, with damage and some expended stores, can set time of day, weather, and allows scripts to continue where they left off), no real dynamic campaign is possible. We already have a precursor DC without a real save game that creates new missions based on the results of the current one. That may technically be a dynamic mission, yes, but it is not what the majority expect, and it's not what server owners need to host real, developing dynamic missions. Servers must restart every 8-10 hours to account for DCS's many memory leaks, so not being able to save and continue-from-save a mission would be worthless.
 
And that is how I view the status of dynamic campaigns: DCS's ability to deliver "continue from save". Since this feature can (and should) be delivered independently from a dynamic campaign, we know where on the road to DC we are. Currently we are nowhere. Once we have continue-from-save, I believe ED is in a position to deliver DC within 5 years. 

Until then, I feel that ED is needlessly embarrassing themselves when they talk about DC without addressing the elephant in the room. 

Let's be hopeful - "next year in Jerusalem"?

Edited December 9, 2024 by cfrag

[draconus]

8 hours ago, Dangerzone said:

IIRC - it was mentioned that Vulkan needs to come first

Where and why would that have anything to do with DCE?

[norman99]

2 hours ago, cfrag said:

When it comes to Dynamic Campaigns, a real "Save Game" feature (more precisely: "continue from save") is ED's "Jerusalem", the elephant in the room.

Honestly, I think the overall abysmal state of the AI in DCS is the “elephant in the room”.

The dynamic campaign in the ‘other’ sim works because the AI works. The player can just sit on the ramp, and all the other units, ground, sea and air, go about their tasks, making logical decisions along the way. Compare that to DCS, where at times it seems nothing works. We’ve all seen AI aircraft burning fuel like it’s unlimited only to eject over the target, or low on fuel yet passing a tanker whilst diverting to an airfield 200nm away. If a dynamic campaign has to rely on the current AI, then it’ll be broken before it’s even started.

With that said, there are signs that substantial, continuing improvements to the AI are becoming more of a priority for ED.

Edited December 9, 2024 by norman99

[falcon_120]

Honestly, I think the overall abysmal state of the AI in DCS is the “elephant in the room”.
The dynamic campaign in the ‘other’ sim works because the AI works. The player can just sit on the ramp, and all the other units, ground, sea and air, go about their tasks, making logical decisions along the way. Compare that to DCS, where at times it seems nothing works. We’ve all seen AI aircraft burning fuel like it’s unlimited only to eject over the target, or low on fuel yet passing a tanker whilst diverting to an airfield 200nm away. If a dynamic campaign has to rely on the current AI, then it’ll be broken before it’s even started.
With that said, there are signs that substantial, continuing improvements to the AI are becoming more of a priority for ED.

Couldn't agree more with this. AI is gonna be a problem if not tackled appropriately, which ED is trying to, however IT FEELS to me not with enough priority.

Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

[metzger]

If ED fix the AI and implement a proper SAVE. The DC is already possible kinda.

But with the abysmal state of the AI, and the willingness of ED to admit and start fixing it, I highly doubt we will see a playable version of a dynamic campaign any time soon. Maybe for our children or grandchildren..

Even the current scripted scenarios based gameplay, which is 'supported' for decades, half the time most of the content is broken and doesn't work.

 

[HILOK]

i wonder, if better AI -the way ED envisions- would currently even be feasible performance-wise. in that case the roadmap could go:
better performance (vulcan or whatever) -> better AI / ATC (i wish) -> dynamic campaign

[draconus]

16 minutes ago, HILOK said:

I wonder, if better AI -the way ED envisions- would currently even be feasible performance-wise.

No, that's not the problem. We're talking about really basic stuff: AI doing what they were programmed to, not ignoring ROE, triggers or waypoint tasks/commands, not using AB recklessly, not crashing onto nearest mountain, actually using the bingo fuel to go back alive, attack primary target first, defend against most important threat... stuff like that.

[Hog_driver]

AI you say... that's funny, because I just tested that Mossie mission in which you strafe the Abbeville airfield. Just as you start the mission, there are two FW190s taking off right at your 12 o'clock. A perfect opportunity to get two kills, one might think. I set my wingman's AI to Ace and told him to "engage the bandits". We are at their 6 o'clock, they're taking off, it's easy, right? A minute later, the wingman radioed "I'm hit, bailing out" and that was that. I played this mission 3 years ago and nothing's changed since then, I'm afraid. I'm really fed up with this and won't buy any plane soon 'cause it's pointless.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

Yeah, ED really needs to prioritize further AI developments. They've made progress, but there's still work to be done. Especially if we're getting a DCE. We can't have the magical MiG-21 AI that has a better T:W than a Su-27 or F-15. We need better damage modeling on a number of things, like ships. Otherwise, we're essentially soft-locked on progress.

That's probably why the DCE has been delayed for so longer. But, I'm told the project managers have the best perspective and point of view on how to handle this.

That remains to be seen and I am extremely skeptical.

[Hog_driver]

I checked again twice and it seems there may be, in fact, some improvement!

1. Wigman just blasted one FW190 off the sky, almost collided with me, but all ended well (not for the FWs though).

2. Wingman almost blasted one FW190 off the sky, but collided with me, so this time it ended well for the FWs.

Still not perfect!

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

12 minutes ago, Hog_driver said:

I checked again twice and it seems there may be, in fact, some improvement!

1. Wigman just blasted one FW190 off the sky, almost collided with me, but all ended well (not for the FWs though).

2. Wingman almost blasted one FW190 off the sky, but collided with me, so this time it ended well for the FWs.

Still not perfect!

As I understand it, the AI improvements are really only for the post WWII offerings. The WWII AI are still waiting for work. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, of course.

Edited December 9, 2024 by MiG21bisFishbedL

[Hog_driver]

1 hour ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

As I understand it, the AI improvements are really only for the post WWII offerings. 

I don't know, but what should I do? Wait another 3 years? And we're talking some basic stuff here, like formation flying, "thou shalt not ram your leader"!

Fun fact: this time my wingman didn't kill me, but there were some hair raising moments...

Edited December 9, 2024 by Hog_driver

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

40 minutes ago, Hog_driver said:

I don't know, but what should I do? Wait another 3 years? And we're talking some basic stuff here, like formation flying, "thou shalt not ram your leader"!

Fun fact: this time my wingman didn't kill me, but there were some hair raising moments...

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to defend. It's pretty much unacceptable and I have no answers.

[AndrewDCS2005]

Dear fellows, if ED would be given money for next 5 years and work exclusively on Dynamic Campaign and nothing, absolutely nothing else, it still might not land. As was shared in earlier comments and videos by ED staff, they have highly fragmented skillsets and single-digit number of employees per topic, and tough challenges to hire professionals in the niche field of flight simulation. 1-2 folks specialized in missiles. 1-2 persons specialized in PFMs. Few people visual modeling. Few people in AI.

DCE would need 10 times ED to work out, with all the deep and complex dependencies in AI units behavior, precise state persistence down to milliseconds of entire mission and every single unit and their actions.

And heck, lets imagine Santa is real and DCE lands. How much money it will bring to ED? In today's pricing model, near zero - very unlikely net new users will show up and start buying paid modules just because of DCE. This is the very ugly elephant in the room. In current model, DCE is net negative - taking time and money from the business already stretched thin.

Created separate thread to discuss and vote on alternative pricing proposal, and keep this thread to DCE dreaming and venting

 

[Hog_driver]

8 minutes ago, AndrewDCS2005 said:

Dear fellows, if ED would be given money for next 5 years and work exclusively on Dynamic Campaign and nothing, absolutely nothing else, it still might not land. 

 

So could we at least get... intelligent wingmen?

[MAXsenna]

10 hours ago, Hog_driver said:

I checked again twice and it seems there may be, in fact, some improvement!
1. Wigman just blasted one FW190 off the sky, almost collided with me, but all ended well (not for the FWs though).
2. Wingman almost blasted one FW190 off the sky, but collided with me, so this time it ended well for the FWs.
Still not perfect!

 

I literally had to read that twice! 

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk
 

Edited December 10, 2024 by MAXsenna
Grammar spelling

[Steel Jaw]

2 weeks.

[lee1hy]

msfs career mode has already proven

msfs career mode has proven that it is a tool that can make even those who do not know much about airplanes enjoy the game for a long time

dcs dynamics is  pve server now(which is a lot lagging), but dynamic battlefields should come out as soon as possible.

It would be nice if DCS would call their new maps as "theater" someday like bms
not just tour map 

Edited December 14, 2024 by lee1hy