in development Dynamic Campaign Discussion

[C3PO]

This DC is going to be amazing. I cannot wait as I enjoy SP stuff.

[fagulha]

Hi everyone,

 

Will be possible to edit/populate our AFB´s with statics with the Dynamic Campaign like we do with SP? (i have my AFB´s and Aircraft carriers populated with statics, random traffic, etc).

 

Thank you.

F.

[sirrah]

6 hours ago, fagulha said:

Hi everyone,

 

Will be possible to edit/populate our AFB´s with statics with the Dynamic Campaign like we do with SP? (i have my AFB´s and Aircraft carriers populated with statics, random traffic, etc).

 

Thank you.

F.

Apart from ED, nobody knows any details about the DC, so you won't get anything but guesstimates from the community at this time.

 

My guess/expectation is, that we'll be able to edit individual DC missions, similarly like we can with Liberation Campaign. But this guess is based on nothing at all..

[fagulha]

55 minutes ago, sirrah said:

Apart from ED, nobody knows any details about the DC, so you won't get anything but guesstimates from the community at this time.

 

My guess/expectation is, that we'll be able to edit individual DC missions, similarly like we can with Liberation Campaign. But this guess is based on nothing at all..

I wasn´t expecting a reply from the users because we know so little about the DC, just trying my luck to see if someone of ED read this and reply.

Either the way, thank you for taking your time to reply. My expectaction are the same than yours.

[MVS-Viper]

If DCS is really in financial trouble (IDK).  Releasing the Dynamic Campaign should make them some good cash. If the module is priced somewhere between $50 - $70 this will bring in some positive cash flow. Unlike the planes or terrain mods, the Dynamic Campaign is something every DCS user will benefit from adding to their collection.  It will also extend the life of the sim IMO.  I hope they keep working on it and release it sooner rather then later. 

Edited April 15, 2024 by MVS-Viper

[Dangerzone]

ED haven't released the DCE because it's not ready yet. ED's financial state doesn't make a function or module more releasable, and I'm sure they're currently working at it.

From my perspective, the benefit of the DCE being introduced isn't just the income they get from current customers who may upgrade to it - it's the potential attraction to a lot of other yet-to-be customers that may be attracted to DCS once it's released. But again, you can't release a product until it's actually ready for release so financial benefit or not - it will be released when they have it at a releasable stage. There is something very attractive about 'advancing' through a dynamic scenario than just playing individual skirmish missions. 

IDK - but I suspect they may be both finding it far more difficult to develop than they first anticipated, and also the possible rapid enhancement of certain technology such as AI and the potential it could bring for dynamic campaigns may also be pushing some things back as they may be considering implementing this ever-changing technology as well. Given that another flight sim that's currently 'back in development' that already has a DCE that people admire from years ago is being worked on again - ED have competition, so I figure they're not just working on 'another DCE' to give similar features, but they're probably exploring a far more advanced DCE to stand out. 

Another factor I suspect they could also be hitting are the same issues that us large mission designers / server admins face as well, which is performance issues with lots of units. If this is an issue for their DCE, then this would need to be addressed first before their DCE comes out. If these guesses are true, DCS may need Vulkan to be out, and multi-threading to be complete for AI, physics and server coding, before DCE can be finalized. 

As much as I hate to say it - I'm not expecting the DCE for another 4-5 years, and am planning my expectations accordingly. I do hope I'm wrong though, but in some ways when I consider what may need to be done first, I also do hope I'm right (and it's not later than 5 years). 

Edited April 16, 2024 by Dangerzone

[MVS-Viper]

Good points.  Maybe the devs can talk to this guy.  He designed the Falcon 4 Dynamic Campaign engine. 
 

 

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

16 hours ago, MVS-Viper said:

Good points.  Maybe the devs can talk to this guy.  He designed the Falcon 4 Dynamic Campaign engine. 

ED have stated from the start they want to do something different, more unique to DCS - and as far as I understand also more in-depth, which is why it's taking this long.

[MVS-Viper]

2 hours ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

ED have stated from the start they want to do something different, more unique to DCS - and as far as I understand also more in-depth, which is why it's taking this long.

Which is awesome and I wish them nothing but success.   However, it wouldn’t hurt to talk to the guy who set the standard. From his comments in the video it seems like he would be willing to share some of his expertise

[Raven68]

55 minutes ago, MVS-Viper said:

Which is awesome and I wish them nothing but success.   However, it wouldn’t hurt to talk to the guy who set the standard. From his comments in the video it seems like he would be willing to share some of his expertise

ED will be setting their own standard. When you look at the complexity of the sim already it will require a new standard.

[MAXsenna]

If DCS is really in financial trouble (IDK).  Releasing the Dynamic Campaign should make them some good cash. If the module is priced somewhere between $50 - $70 this will bring in some positive cash flow. Unlike the planes or terrain mods, the Dynamic Campaign is something every DCS user will benefit from adding to their collection.  It will also extend the life of the sim IMO.  I hope they keep working on it and release it sooner rather then later. 

Have they changed their stand and will sell the DCE as a module? I might have missed that.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

1 hour ago, MAXsenna said:

 

 

Have they changed their stand and will sell the DCE as a module? I might have missed that.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk
 

 

I doubt it: they always said it will be a part of the DCS core and I haven't seen anything to suggest otherwise.
It would be quite silly to offer it as a paid module when the DCE is meant to attract new people into the sim 

[MVS-Viper]

@Raven68 ED will be setting their own standard. When you look at the complexity of the sim already it will require a new standard.

We may have to agree to disagree on this one as I believe the Falcon 4 Campaign engine was as complex if not more so than DCS. Btw as of this writing no one has developed anything close to Falcon 4’s Dynamic Campaign engine.
 

DCS does have superior graphics and multiplayer capabilities.  In addition the level of detail in radar and avionics in DCS aircraft also seem to be superior to anything else currently available IMO. 
 

[mattag08]

Whelp, it's been 13 YEARS since I posted in this thread: 

Interesting how we have made zero progress in that time. Someone could've programmed 2-3 full new flight simulators in that period. Will Nick and co. ever see the value in a Dynamic Campaign and invest the resources or will they just limp along and pump out half-baked modules to stay afloat? It would be fascinating to hear from someone at Eagle Dynamics why dozens or even hundreds of professional developers could not achieve what a single Microprose intern could over 26 years ago.

[Ala13_ManOWar]

On 5/18/2024 at 5:10 AM, mattag08 said:

Whelp, it's been 13 YEARS since I posted in this thread: 

Interesting how we have made zero progress in that time. Someone could've programmed 2-3 full new flight simulators in that period. Will Nick and co. ever see the value in a Dynamic Campaign and invest the resources or will they just limp along and pump out half-baked modules to stay afloat? It would be fascinating to hear from someone at Eagle Dynamics why dozens or even hundreds of professional developers could not achieve what a single Microprose intern could over 26 years ago.

 So, it seems you aren't very acquainted to scientific method and all that stuff. What it actually means is that wishlists and hype from users can be unfathomable. Development on the actual Dynamic Campaign only started a few years ago, with multi threading and Vulkan as conditions needed, IIRC. Hardly your post from 2010 when DCS still didn't even exist means the start of the development process but one of the endless people's wishes mate.

Edited May 19, 2024 by Ala13_ManOWar

[mattag08]

On 5/19/2024 at 11:36 AM, Ala13_ManOWar said:

 So, it seems you aren't very acquainted to scientific method and all that stuff. What it actually means is that wishlists and hype from users can be unfathomable. Development on the actual Dynamic Campaign only started a few years ago, with multi threading and Vulkan as conditions needed, IIRC. Hardly your post from 2010 when DCS still didn't even exist means the start of the development process but one of the endless people's wishes mate.

 

Sorry, but you can't bully me by using terms you learned in middle school science class. Unlike yourself, I know better than to give ED even a single ounce of credit. I've been a paying customer of theirs for over 20 years and I've observed the glacial pace of development first hand playing each new iteration of this simulator since LOMAC. If they wanted us to have a DC, we'd already have it.

[Ala13_ManOWar]

Hahaha, bully you? you don't know what bullying is mate. I'm just telling you what you're obviously missing here.

Yes, we all have wanted and wished that to be a reality and all, but remember back then (it's not only you who goes well back to the 80ish-90's since started flight simming ) the sim was quite a different thing. Original Flanker 2.0 and 2.5 (the real starting point of it all), Lock On, LOMAC, the FC 1 and 2 addons, were all quite a different thing, a really humble try to make something really good but still small and with few resources, trying to, compete? not sure they really competed at all, with FC4 . BS1 (2009) still as a standalone product, and later on A-10C (2010) standalone as well, only became "modules" inside a wider platform that they ended up calling DCSW (because at first that wasn't the name, if you recall) in 2011. Those DLCs were just a starting point for the actual DCSW, but that was only from 2011 onwards mate, your whishlist post is from the LOMAC times in the old forum!!

What I'm telling you is you cannot asume your post, a whishlist as there has always been whishlists on these forums (and your actual post from 2010 is a proof itself for that ), cannot be taken as ED's starting point for their Dynamic Campaign work just because it's your post. It's only a proof that we all (remember, we all, not only you mate) have been longing for a DC since many time ago. But the product that ED had back then wasn't even close to the standards ED has set for the current DCSW, which back when it started to be DCSW (in 2011) was no more than a wish for what they (ED) wanted it to be one day. Now, and only since recent years, the huge and really ambitious idea they had in mind of a whole simulator, in times when simulators weren't that appealing as back in the 90's, let's face it, is starting to get closer to what they could have in mind.  And now yes, DC campaign is a must for the platform they have now and what they have achieved in this time. But lucky you (and we all, yes) they know it's a must and it's something they've also wanted to have since many time ago, 4-5 years ago they started working in a DC and now it's really close, only lacking MT and Vulkan for it to be completed. One of those is now also running, not still used as only option though but working, the other isn't far away. I don't know when the DC will happen, but to me it looks like after many years something big is about to happen.

The only difference between you and me is I recall where I come from and realize where we're now. Would you call having memory to bully someone?

[BIGNEWY]

please stick to DCS here and treat each other with respect. 

Dynamic campaign is a huge project and worth sending the time to get it right. We will share more news when we are ready to. 

thank you 

[Fisu_MAD]

Hello, we have progress to share regarding this feature?

It's something that was announced in one of the "beyond" videos, but not much is known.

thx

[MVS-Viper]

On 7/23/2024 at 11:03 PM, Fisu_MAD said:

Hello, we have progress to share regarding this feature?

It's something that was announced in one of the "beyond" videos, but not much is known.

thx

https://forum.dcs.world/topic/354711-screenshot-competition-dynamic-campaign-progress-uh-1h-peacekeeper-lebanon-campaign/

[Silver_Dragon]

Detail show on the develop pics. Has appears "industrial / production" (factory icon).

Other point has been "political / command" targets (show as a flag), and small dot (Land Convoys?). On other point, show comand echelons (Platton / Company / Battalions / Regiments).

Edited July 30, 2024 by Silver_Dragon

[MrWolf]

It's sad getting hyped by learning new aircraft procedures and tactics, etc. with new planes like the f-4. But after hours and hours with your new aircraft and procedures you come to a stale Simulated World. Where ATC, GCI or any radio communications do not exist. Where you are your own general. Where the closest interactive person is the crew chief by Heatblur.

 

And you eventually fell like you learned stuff just for nothing.

If this was just a trainer then we wouldn't need dynamic campaigns or AI radio comms. Because we would we training for real life. The objective would be just training procedures with respect to the aircraft, not the other humans around us when we fly.

 

In a sense DCS needs to be more than a simulator. If you just want to simulate an aircraft, then DCS is already the sim.

 

Humans need objectives in order to incentivate the learning of something. We need objectives, games are just that. Challenges in order to fulfill an objective.

The objective in a trainer is training for real life.

 

What should DCS be? A trainer? Or something else?

 

It looks that DCS aims to be something else, no? Why would they want to create more maps for a trainer? If DCS wants to be that something else, we need a simulated environment.

 

With a simulated environment a user no longer interacts with DCS as a trainer but as a real life virtual simulation. In order to simulate a virtual life environment we need a virtualization of what we have in life:

 

 - Objectives, goals, tasks, desires, sensation of uncontrolled events around yourself. That it's achieved with a dynamic campaign.

 

- Sensation of existence, reciprocal interaction with the environment, environmental communication, individuality between other individuals. That is achieved with a set of radio comms and or other means of interacting with virtual thinking entities.

 

For now we can fake with cardboard and rollers that indeed we have that kind of interactions in DCS world, by creating very complex scripted ( and well made) campaings. But once the campaigns are done or when we replay them, we start to notice the tape that is holding the cardboard together. We are then left again with the trainer.

 

So many years have passed and a few more will pass until we get (if we ever get them) this features. Until then, DCS will be a trainer. A very good one. The thing is that I don't fly f-4 in real life. Once I train all that can be trained then I would be left again with the desires of more objectives which probably new cardboard temporary substitutes will satisfy. But until when?

Edited July 31, 2024 by MrWolf

[Dangerzone]

SP for me is exactly what you mention - mostly a trainer. A good online multiplayer campaign help give me that objective for DCS. Being involved with a bunch of guys, and choosing objectives on a dynamic map for the night. Might be to clear out an area, or capture a base, etc. A map that has serious threats, and will be a challenge - not just a normal routine.

However, being involved in developing and hosting these, I know just how much effort, sweat, tears and frusturations go into them. I know that the admins/dev's of such can get burned out by the constant fault finding as to why things aren't working, or the amount of work just to get something scripted and working as expected. A dynamic campaign for both SP and MP will bring a lot more to DCS, and make what's already available now in limited ways with much effort, available to all with hopefully little effort. 

[KenaiPhoenix]

A Dynamic campaign would be awesome and I hope is high in priority because it would add so much content to the game.

Like others have pointed out here, sometimes you spent hours learning the module and then there is not too much to do. Unless you want to spent hours creating and testing scenarios

[Gierasimov]

So far I understand DCE as a battle in progress where each time I join, the front would have changed based on each AI group tasking and outocmes, which I, as a player can influence further by receiving part of that tasking, for example here is a supply convoy, go kill it, and if I succeed, the convoy won't replenish another group that might loose it's next encounter with opposing force as a result. 

Given the state of AI, and all other parts of DCS dysfunctional attitude towards helping the user I doubt DCE will revolutionize DCS as such. 

For sure it will bring nice things, which will enable us to enjoy constant 'something to do' in otherwise empty DCS World. 

I guess I will stick to my missions and narrated campaigns, unless DCE is actually a revolution in AI, communication, and cooperation between player and friendly forces... THAT is almost unimaginable amount of (re)work in DCS needed. 

Edited October 14, 2024 by Gierasimov