Jump to content

Eagerly awaited aircraft for DCS World


phant

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, MBot said:

IF Heatblur indeed were to make the Phantom, then the naval variant would be a lot more likely because of its similarity with the F-14. RIO instead of WSO (no dual flight controls) for which they could simply copy Jester and an early analogue PD radar which they already did for the Tomcat.

 

You are absolutely right there. I just hope they try to do something new. I mean, with the Viggen and the F-14 there was absolutely no connection between them as well. Fingers crossed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, MBot said:

There you have it, Apache was obvious all along.

 

Apache was the obvious for helicopters, but as many expected it to be a Fixed Wing aircraft and not a Rotary Wing, it confused discussion more as it was said to be very sure that it is not Rotary as we already knew that AH-64 and AH-1 are coming, there was no question about DOES IT, but WHEN it comes and it has been teased so hard that it can be forgotten.

And majority are not "rotorheads" but "fighter jacks", so of course many doesn't want anything about helicopters but fast movers.

  • Like 1

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Buzzles said:

Where's the ground breaking surprise then?

 

Can't be the Apache, as that was known about for years.

 

ED might have stepped little ahead of themselves with the AH-64 ("Not If, but when") etc and so on they found that they have given too much already for the 2021 video so needed quickly to zip about it.

But lucky to us, we are getting more.

  • Like 2

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the time they announced a new, face melting module (back almost a year ago IIRC), there had been no teasing of the Apache aside from stuff that was 5+ years old.

 

After they announced a reveal was coming, in the months following was when they started the teasing (Wags’ Syria video, “if not when”, etc).  It started with the announcement, then the breadcrumbs started dropping.

 

In my mind they’ve done exactly what they said they would nearly a year ago, officially announced a new module in 2020.

Ryzen 7 5800X3D / Asus Crosshair VI Hero X370 / Corsair H110i / Sapphire Nitro+ 6800XT / 32Gb G.Skill TridentZ 3200 / Samsung 980 Pro M.2 / Virpil Warbrd base + VFX and TM grips / Virpil CM3 Throttle / Saitek Pro Combat pedals / Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Buzzles said:

Where's the ground breaking surprise then?

 

Can't be the Apache, as that was known about for years.

 

Yeah not sure how I feel about the Apache. On the one hand I love some of the Helis in DCS. The Huey and HiP are favorite modules. I'm also looking forward to the Hind. I imagine it will be very hands-on, fun to fly and challenging to fight in. On the other hand I really, dislike the KA-50.

I dislike every module where it's more important to know the "systems" than the aircraft itslef. Or to put it this way, I believe that the high-tech Longbow is going to be the wet dream for people who love it's standoff and target acquisition capabilities, and who enjoy learning the intricacies of each and every complicated weapon/sensor system.

I prefer modules where the design philosophy of flying and fighting in the aircraft is simple and intuitive, and I'm not sure the Longbow fits that category.

  • Like 1

Specs: Win10, i5-13600KF, 32GB DDR4 RAM 3200XMP, 1 TB M2 NVMe SSD, KFA2 RTX3090, VR G2 Headset, Warthog Throttle+Saitek Pedals+MSFFB2  Joystick. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Fri13 said:

 

Apache was the obvious for helicopters, but as many expected it to be a Fixed Wing aircraft and not a Rotary Wing, it confused discussion more as it was said to be very sure that it is not Rotary as we already knew that AH-64 and AH-1 are coming, there was no question about DOES IT, but WHEN it comes and it has been teased so hard that it can be forgotten.

And majority are not "rotorheads" but "fighter jacks", so of course many doesn't want anything about helicopters but fast movers.

 

 

AH-64 was hinted during the Syria map trailer. But we thought it was those fast movers and not helos. The thing is, as you said, not many of us are helo lovers, even when I do find the Hind and the Apache so very iconic...yes, the Blackshark too, all of which are intensely combat capable.

 

I PERSONALLY, find it VERY difficult to fly helos. I do not have any helo modules as I had refunded after trying the Blackshark and finding it too difficult to fly. I do own all the Fast movers except the A-10C latest which I might purchase this Christmas. So, I too thought it was something that was marketable on an OVERALL spectrum for both fast and slow mover users here.

 

Any future expectations of the Tornado series and the Red force Mig 27 has now been VERY effectively shut down. There are not many planes down the pipeline on project for most to venture for, other than going for the Peak cold war era jets from the 60s and so on.

 

The Iconic F-4 Phantom module itself remains on vague development note and appears to be push back to a much later unknown date...looks to me, its going take 2024 around for that to happen...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was also well and truly hoping to finally see the Phantom in DCS. Alas, we now know this was not to be. Instead, it is now seemingly looking grimmer than ever on that front.

 

One can only hope that we will someday finally see and hear the characteristic smoke trail and wail of the mighty J79.

 

Sadly, the cold war era seems to not have the same economic appeal in ED's eyes.

 

Maybe one day.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well ED better start working on that Ground units damage model and IA if its going the Helo way...And Modernizing a plethora of assets. It´s  not the same to see a 1990´s model 350 kts than going 80 kts or doing a hover...

 

On the positive side Sirya Map is Perfect for the Apache....

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Baco said:

Well ED better start working on that Ground units damage model and IA if its going the Helo way...And Modernizing a plethora of assets. It´s  not the same to see a 1990´s model 350 kts than going 80 kts or doing a hover...

 

Yeah, plus so much else (even for the newest vehicles) - though that'll probably have to wait until there's a fidelity overhaul.

 

9 hours ago, Baco said:

On the positive side Sirya Map is Perfect for the Apache....

 

Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AV-8B N/A, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, WWII Assets, CA, NS430, Hawk.

Terrains I own: South Atlantic, Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas.

System:

GIGABYTE B650 AORUS ELITE AX, AMD Ryzen 5 7600, Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 32 GB, Western Digital Black SN850X 1 TB (DCS dedicated) & 2 TB NVMe SSDs, Corsair RM850X 850 W, NZXT H7 Flow, MSI G274CV.

Peripherals: VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/19/2020 at 12:25 PM, Pilot Ike said:

 

Hmm, I would love HB to do the F-4, but even though the naval F-4 is quite cool, I desperately hope for an F-4E. It's the most-exported variant, so I guess there's more appeal in it for international DCS users (the F-4E was or still is used by Egypt, Australia, Germany [F-4E and F-4F], Greece, Iran, Israel, Japan, South Korea, Turkey), while the naval Phantoms were just used by the USA and (modified) by the UK.

This, exactly this ^

On 12/19/2020 at 12:33 PM, Badger1-1 said:

I´d imagine that ol Belsimtek would give what they had to the 3rd Party to start with maybe?

 

Ifirc they stated that it will be an F4E

I doubt it works that way TBH... may be it can be negotiated for a price, but I wouldn't count on it.

On 12/19/2020 at 12:47 PM, MBot said:

IF Heatblur indeed were to make the Phantom, then the naval variant would be a lot more likely because of its similarity with the F-14. RIO instead of WSO (no dual flight controls) for which they could simply copy Jester and an early analogue PD radar which they already did for the Tomcat.

Which would be damn ***** shame. If we don't get the F-4E that is relevant to a great bumber of airforces all over the world, with all te bells and whistles like leading edge slats, targeting pods, LGBs, TV guided bombs, Shrikes, Mavericks, and the actual gun, we may as well not get a Phantom as far as I'm concerned. Let's sacrifice the coolest and most fitting version, so that we can sightsee from a boat.

 

 

Edit: anyway, this thread was about "secret module", which is revealed to be the Apache. And that's cool. Apache is a good module alright. Guess we're kinda derailing it with F-4 discussion, but oh well... it IS a thing worth the discussion! Perhaps on another thread...


Edited by WinterH

Wishlist: F-4E Block 53 +, MiG-27K, Su-17M3 or M4, AH-1F or W circa 80s or early 90s, J35 Draken, Kfir C7, Mirage III/V

DCS-Dismounts Script

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve copied my post from the newsletter thread, as I think the same perception exists here that there aren’t many helo drivers around here:

 

12 hours ago, Sandman1330 said:

There are a lot more helo drivers than you guys may think. Indeed the Huey and Blackshark were some of the very first DCS World modules released.  Then helo development seemed to stagnate for a long time, until recently it picked up again with the Kiowa, Hind and now Apache.  Some of us who came for the helos ended up staying for the jets when nothing new came out for us for a long time.  Many will now be going back to being rotorheads!

 

DCS World has about the most realistic helicopter flight modelling possible on the PC (as it also does for fixed wing), nothing else really comes close, so I’m pumped to see the Helo stable getting larger!


I know many wanted the F4, Tornado, or a modern REDFOR (and I do hope you get what you want, though none of them personally interest me), but us rotorheads have been waiting for a western attack helicopter for 5+ years!


Edited by Sandman1330
  • Like 6

Ryzen 7 5800X3D / Asus Crosshair VI Hero X370 / Corsair H110i / Sapphire Nitro+ 6800XT / 32Gb G.Skill TridentZ 3200 / Samsung 980 Pro M.2 / Virpil Warbrd base + VFX and TM grips / Virpil CM3 Throttle / Saitek Pro Combat pedals / Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sandman1330 said:

know many wanted the F4, Tornado, or a modern REDFOR (and I do hope you get what you want, though none of them personally interest me), but us rotorheads have been waiting for a western attack helicopter for 5+ years!

 

Same here, sorry for the disappointed guys. I lamented the lack of a blufor attack helo ever since I started using Liberation (and it should be the same in EDs dynamic campaign). It is just so much fun to jump from plane to helo and back depending on the mission in a global campaign, start with sead and cap in an F-16, make a couple of strike missions in a Hornet or a Viggen, then support the troops on the ground with your Apache for a while as they advance on enemy airfields before jumping back to the Viper as the frontline progresses deeper into enemy territory. I cannot wait, and it will be a natural complement to the OH58 from Polychop.

 

I just hope the AI for the copilot will be easy to use, we will see in the Hind. But helos make the whole detailed terrain from Syria and new assets come to life. And they are awesome to fly in VR.


Edited by Qiou87
  • Like 4

AMD R7 5800X3D | 64GB DDR4 3200MHz | RTX 4080S 16GB | Varjo Aero | VKB Gunfighter Pro Mk3 + STECS + pedals

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/20/2020 at 2:18 AM, Baco said:

Well ED better start working on that Ground units damage model and IA if its going the Helo way...And Modernizing a plethora of assets. It´s  not the same to see a 1990´s model 350 kts than going 80 kts or doing a hover...

 

On the positive side Sirya Map is Perfect for the Apache....

 

It is on their to-do list, but we definitely need a lot better ground units logic, capabilities and effects even.

Helicopters requires very accurate ground units simulation, unlike fighters that barely see anything on ground.

  • Like 1

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Fri13 said:

 

It is on their to-do list, but we definitely need a lot better ground units logic, capabilities and effects even.

Helicopters requires very accurate ground units simulation, unlike fighters that barely see anything on ground.

 

My only worry is the workload, but I guess that depends on what improvements we're talking about.

 

My personal wishlist is massive, and is most likely unfeasible.

Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AV-8B N/A, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, WWII Assets, CA, NS430, Hawk.

Terrains I own: South Atlantic, Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas.

System:

GIGABYTE B650 AORUS ELITE AX, AMD Ryzen 5 7600, Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 32 GB, Western Digital Black SN850X 1 TB (DCS dedicated) & 2 TB NVMe SSDs, Corsair RM850X 850 W, NZXT H7 Flow, MSI G274CV.

Peripherals: VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To start on Ground Units DM, ED need build on other systems, as WW2 DM early.

Better Ground unit logic require a dedicated AI ground programmer and research ground tactics.

Capabilities has build new ground core funtionalities.

Effects has build by dedicated effect modelers.

 

ED not bad is can start to build a dedicated "ground" team as WW2 to improve that branch, expected the "sea" team can be improve the environment start with the "SuperCarrier".

 


Edited by Silver_Dragon
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

My only worry is the workload, but I guess that depends on what improvements we're talking about.

 

The workload doesn't really change, as damage modeling is not an active system like a LOS calculations are.

The damage system is stressing CPU only when hit is detected and then it is simply checked its effects on ground units capabilities.

 

But the system needs to be redone such a way that it actually can be avoided constantly checking status like LOS. As then you can have thousands of units on map and there is not much to require resources even in normal combat as likely one doesn't have a hundreds or thousands of units getting hit simultaneously. This as well means that the most demanding would be a tactical nuclear bomb explosion, but that can be simplified by just using an old school method that inside given distance all units just die. So either explode or crews dies. And then after that distance there is damage status given like blowing tires etc.

 

 

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Fri13 said:

The workload doesn't really change, as damage modeling is not an active system like a LOS calculations are.

The damage system is stressing CPU only when hit is detected and then it is simply checked its effects on ground units capabilities.

 

Oh yes, of course, for the actual hit and damage calculations, it's only doing them when one occurs. What I was getting at is isn't it still a fair bit of work to do the same X-Ray hitboxes, as well as modelling for instance, individual armour arrays for instance, that's more what I was getting at. It's not quite like aircraft as we have to determine penetration and post penetration effects, with single bullets through through sheet metals like with aircraft I wouldn't have thought as much (though I don't know what's going on with air-bursting rounds from larger AAA, presumably it's modelled as a sphere and anything within that sphere gets appropriately damaged. Presumably there's some function that reduces the damage as the radius increases).

 

Also, what about graphical damage? Things like holes and craters through vehicles or individual ERA tiles detonating? This would probably mandate a graphical overhaul to every vehicle in DCS, including the most recent additions if we were to go down that route (which in an ideal world, would be definitely something I'd love).

 

The other thing are things like the AI, and a whole host of other things which if I'm honest are probably a little out of scope, at least until we get something like a full-fidelity ground vehicle.

 

Just now, Fri13 said:

But the system needs to be redone such a way that it actually can be avoided constantly checking status like LOS. As then you can have thousands of units on map and there is not much to require resources even in normal combat as likely one doesn't have a hundreds or thousands of units getting hit simultaneously.

 

This as well means that the most demanding would be a tactical nuclear bomb explosion, but that can be simplified by just using an old school method that inside given distance all units just die. So either explode or crews dies. And then after that distance there is damage status given like blowing tires etc.

 

Absolutely agreed :thumbup:

 

Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AV-8B N/A, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, WWII Assets, CA, NS430, Hawk.

Terrains I own: South Atlantic, Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas.

System:

GIGABYTE B650 AORUS ELITE AX, AMD Ryzen 5 7600, Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 32 GB, Western Digital Black SN850X 1 TB (DCS dedicated) & 2 TB NVMe SSDs, Corsair RM850X 850 W, NZXT H7 Flow, MSI G274CV.

Peripherals: VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/19/2020 at 5:29 AM, jojyrocks said:

 

Its right now said to be the intended so called...secret aircraft to their understanding and they have teased the Apache at the 2021 and beyond video. And in the roadmap thread too it is mentioned as such.

 

The only bummer for us is that, we WON'T or WILL NOT be seeing the Tornado made, the manufacturer itself has denied info. Also, we won't be seeing Red force modules like the Mig-27 which is now told to be not even planned or in the works. We have to settle for the bare baseline Mig 29 - 9 -12 (A) model which is planned to be clickable.

 

The REAL MOST AWAITED module, the iconic F-4 Phantom has been set on indefinite hold and is given for development for SOME OTHER 3rd party developers who MIGHT be interested to work on it. For me, I wish to see the F-4E and the F-4J or B Phantoms. and these are the most iconic aircrafts. At least the E version has seen PLENTY of combat in the Middle east nations.

Honestly I don't think it too terrible about the F-4E because I honestly hope Heatblur picks it up. They seem to be the only ones that could do it right. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Dassault Rafale possible to do in DCS? I'm guessing since Eurofighter is in the works, why not Rafale, almost same year, both planes still in service, well maybe not those early versions we could get in DCS, etc etc...

 

did anyone try to get the license for Rafale?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Furiz said:

Is Dassault Rafale possible to do in DCS? I'm guessing since Eurofighter is in the works, why not Rafale, almost same year, both planes still in service, well maybe not those early versions we could get in DCS, etc etc...

 

did anyone try to get the license for Rafale?

 

IIRC Dassault are very stingy about this sort of thing (don't hold me to that though), AFAIK it's part of the reason why our Mirage 2000C is called the M2000C.

Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AV-8B N/A, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, WWII Assets, CA, NS430, Hawk.

Terrains I own: South Atlantic, Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas.

System:

GIGABYTE B650 AORUS ELITE AX, AMD Ryzen 5 7600, Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 32 GB, Western Digital Black SN850X 1 TB (DCS dedicated) & 2 TB NVMe SSDs, Corsair RM850X 850 W, NZXT H7 Flow, MSI G274CV.

Peripherals: VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, it's a real dream that becomes true! The Apache was always one of my most wanted modules and now it looks like we even get the Longbow version 😍.

 

Only thing I'm still really missing is the Mudhen. I hope Razbam will do it's best to resume the work on this bird and I'm totally happy with all the available modules in DCS for a long time.

 

For sure there are many other interesting aircraft, but with the upcoming Apache and the Strike Eagle my favorite "must have aircraft" are all in DCS. A few years ago I would never have thought that this would ever happen. I'm really happy now!

  • Like 1

CockpitPC1: R9 5950X|64GB DDR4|512GB M2SSD|2TB M2SSD|RTX3090|ReverbG2|Win11Pro - PC2: PhnIIX6 1100T|32GB DDR2|2x2TB HDD|2x GTX660 SLI|Win7Pro64
ComUnitPC1: R9 3900XT|32GB DDR4|2x2TB HDD|RTX2070|Win11Pro - PC2: PhnIIX6 1100T|16GB DDR2|2x2TB HDD|GTX660|Win7Pro64
ComUnitPC3: AthlnIIX2 250|2GB DDR2|2TB HDD|5950Ultra|2xVoodooII SLI|WinXPPro32&WinME - PC4: K6-2+|768MB SDR|640GB HDD|Geforce256DDR|VoodooI|Win98SE

DCS - Modules - 1.jpg

DCS - Modules - 2.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, my first guess was the AH-64, alternaties I thought possible were the MiG-29 and a collab with Heatblur on either a Tornado or F-111.

 

Then BN and 9L said it wasn't going to be anything that's been teased already so I thought the Apache was out as it had been teased at least since 2018 (Wags Interview in a video where he taught someone CnDing the Hornet, when he also mentioned Syria for the first time - he said the Boeing licence wasn't only for the Hornet), well even further back before the Shark was out there's been A model blk 49 cockpit shots on SimHQ (still there today). So TBH I'm kinda confused that this one, which had been ruled out, actually shall be the eagerly awaited brain melter.

 

Anyway, I'm totally happy with it being teased as a D model with the Westinghouse mm-wave radar. As to say an Apache was expected, now a Longbow is confirmed cheerilee.png

 

As for the Tornado being off the table now I'm rather sad... fluttershysad.png

But I won't give up hopes, for one reason. I usually watch the German channel of VoodooDE for VR news and game first impressions. As of recently, he's got another 50+€ patreon which is Adams Group Simulations - and as a flight simmer I naturally was curious about them. They turned out to be a company who create and maintain VR training flight sims for the Luftwaffe, both Eurofighter and Tornado. With Gero Finke involved and TrueGrit and Eagle Dynamics logos on their site. Since TG already stated they would look into making a Tornado module after finishing the EF, I would expect them to be the ones with the best chances to be allowed to do that twilightsmile.png

 

Then the F-4 statement with it being off as well with the option for a 3rd party to pick it up was a shock to me. But maybe there's already something yet to be announced around that, and I do want to get that from HB as many others there. And they'd really be the guys who literally could nail it, also making naval versions and not just the E model. They've done some great work already that can be used as base for the thing and we'll even get an appropriate carrier with the Forrestal from them. I'd really celebrate getting the Phantom from HB if it's not coming from ED ajmug.png

  • Like 1

dcsdashie-hb-ed.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t say any of this to throw shade at anyone in particular; just some difficult, but truthful observations that if thought about, can help bring clarity. 

 

1. The forum represents a tiny sliver of the player base - a very small percentage of us ever comment or even visit the forums. What is said here is often NOT what the overall player base is interested in. It’s hard to remember this because only the truly motivated ever get around to posting, versus lurking. So, what appears to be an obvious slam dunk to us may not be with the larger player base. Totally normal behaviors - but if we forget that facet, we’ll spend a lot of time frustrated.

 

2. Evangelizing about our most favored module doesn’t necessarily equate into good business sense, what the overall community wants, or more importantly - will pay for. I hate it too, but reality. 

 

3. It isn’t easy to produce these unbelievably complicated modules and deliver them to an insanely (that’s ok) demanding player base. The F-14b took more than five years and is still AWIP.  Remember, during that five hears HB saw exactly $0 in revenue. It was all pro Bono until we started buying the module. An insanely popular module in the forums equals about 100 sales @ $79. I love the forums too, but it’s a honey trap of good intentions for those who want what we hope for, but ultimately our wishes might not be what the game needs ATM. 

4. Compared to other markets, the hardcore simulation market is very small and very expensive. That’s ok too, it’s just reality. For example - interested in WWII stuff? You’ll need the asset pack ($15), a map ($30) , a plane ($40), basic joysticks ($70) and I’m assuming the hardware to run it all. That’s a high hurdle to cross for the average Joe to dive in. For example, the popularity of Minecraft is directly related to its insanely low system requirements. Anyone can play it. Many of us have spent thousands on rigs and equipment. Again, that’s fine but it isn’t anywhere near the average game player looking for something new. 

 

5. The study sim market is a fraction of the causal simulation market for all of the above reasons, amplified. We are a fraction of the whole interested in flight sims. My brothers are perfect examples - very interested in flight sims and this one in particular, but the equipment needed and amount of time needed don’t work for them. We are a rare breed of people, in terms of actual size within the gaming market. I don’t say this is put us down - only as a comment on the reality of just how big the market actually is. 


6. ED runs the risk of too many moving plates with third party developers. This isn’t a simple offloading of work to unnamed ‘others’ who magically produce what we want. There’s A LOT of work here. A LOT

7. ED runs the risk of too many modules. Yes, I know to all of us that seems insane. Many of us own quite a few - most don’t. Those of us that own multiple study modules simply aren’t a big enough part of the player base to make a module make economic sense. It’s everyone else who actually carries all the water, in terms of the game’s longevity and most importantly economic prosperity. Remember, profits motivate those modules into existence. 
 

I don’t say any of this to insult anyone, or throw salt in anyone’s wounds. I think we sometimes forget - know I do - just how many considerations are a part of what is ultimately a business decision. It’s always easier to troubleshoot and much harder to execute. 
 

ET - clarity, grammar and a legion of typos. 


Edited by Palmetto 1-1
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...