General Thoughts

[Howzzat]

Before I get bashed let me say this, overall impression this map has huge potential. (Secondly have been working on the dev team for a leading flight sim for around 10 years)

Good points:

1. Finally a map big enough for opposing naval forces without being too close together great map for Naval Ops.
2. from medium to  High Altitude looks pretty good.
3. Loads of potential for a wide spectrum of missions and campaigns due to the amount of playable area.

Not so good points and yeah I know its in Early access. (Hope these get fixed)

1. The use of satellite imagery as a texture base.Down low satellite imagery loses all fidelity it's too low res and requires massive amounts of work to get right, for example flying over the Falkland islands you see clouds on ground textures still,

shadows in valleys that are "Baked" into the scenery from the satallite imagery so give a false sense of time of day, sun direction etc clash with shadows from DCS itself. 

Valleys etc that are in the satellite imagery dont match up with the terrain in places due to the resolution of the terrain mesh so can be decieving when dropping down from a high altitude.

2. Grass an awesome  Idea but in place looks way out of scale compared to some static objects. or buries things like helipads, take a look at FOB San Carlos for example.

3. Some textures of Structures etc very low detail, kind of a pitty as this map offers a great opportunity for Combined Arms as well.

4. The waterline round lakes and the coasts (even the falkland islands) needs a lot of work at the moment there is no real transition (Example the free Mariana's Islands coast line is the best out there at this.)

5. Currently Cant get seasons to change textures snow in winter, change of colour of ground etc.

Overall impression.

Love the Potential this map has, with a "But"  Finish wise it's lower quality than some of the new free / paid Sceneries Like Syria and Marianas. Would love to see some kind of roadmap as to when realistically we can see what is being updated and when.

Bang for Buck?
For Mission and Campaign creation well worth the money. 10/10
Visually 6/10

Do I regret buying it no, but feel its a bit overpriced for the current state it's in. When compared to Syria on release.

One final question to Razbam What settings did you use for the promo video for example. time, date and weather settings?

Finally thanks Razbam for what I hope will be a kick ass playground down the road.

 

 

[Steel Jaw]

Agree on overpriced.

[Beirut]

I'm okay with the price given there is a reasonable expectation of updates. I don't expect every square kilometer to get the hi-res treatment, but I'm sure the map will get some love. Also, I paid as much for this map as I did for the AH-64 and a chunk less than I paid for the A-10CII. So there is a price cost/worth analogy in there somewhere.

 

I think this map is ground breaking is several ways; it's yuuuge and it's completely out of the box. New continent, new hemisphere, and new landscape. it's nice to see some adventurism in the sim. The sandbox just got a lot bigger and I think it opens the door to other possibilities of developer adventurism in the sim. I'm loving the great big open feel of this map, where you can be over land and look across the water and see mountains on the horizon. This is a great map for flying. 

 

All in all, I'm very happy with my purchase. There are (several) modules the price of this map I bought and don't use much or at all. This map, on the other hand, will get a ton of use from all my favourite planes and choppers. I'm a day one big fan.

[Lace]

Agree broadly with the OP.  

My main take away from my initial flights is that it doesn't 'feel' like other DCS maps.  The satellite imagery gives it a MSFS or XP11-ortho vibe.  I had to keep reminding myself that I was flying DCS.

Certainly lots of potential for mission building and a huge variety of terrain will allow some very unique scenarios.  There are very few fixed-wing basing options, but that is as IRL, so not much can be done there, but for heli or carrier ops this is not an issue.  I would love to see the Harrier FOB as a placeable item.

Price seems appropriate to me.

 

[1987kess]

I'm afraid I could not share the enthusiasm I've read in some places.

Although obviously opens lots of new possibilities to the sim and that's totally welcome, I don't think it should be released at this status at this price point.

I took some long flights yesterday with the Yak to explore the map and discover the details on the different environments, and while the Falklands look totally great, I feel that the textures are really poor at the moment, for a moment I felt like if I was in FSX 15 years ago. As well as some terrible polygonal mesh in the mountains as well. Later I took the Tomcat to make some high altitude flights and there the situation improves but still not what I've expected seeing some early impressions.

I'm sure there is still a lot of work to do and that would get better eventually, however seeing the status of PG and Syria when they where released, this is really far from that, at a higher price point.

 

 

Edited June 10, 2022 by 1987kess

[sirrah]

I tend to be so exited when seeing new "bling" in DCS, that I fail to see any downsides. Same here with the new SA map. Just so thrilled to see yet another new map. Imo we can't have enough of them  

That said, the OP has some very valid points that I do agree with.

I don't believe the price is too high, but it is fair to say that Ugra delivered a more complete map on release, for the same amount of money. Razbam's price for the SA map just puts a little more pressure on them to get on par with Syria's release version soonish. It's very obvious that there's still a lot of work to be done, especially in terms of ground details and missing scenery (mostly small villages and industrial sites). In general, what struck me most:

From high altitude:

• Ground (satelliet) textures look extremely pretty and realistic
• Cities look quite poor, in terms of too obvious repeating scenery (like looking at tiles)

 

From low altitude:

• Ground textures look poor (as we all know is WIP), but also in many places it lacks proper terrain slopes (satellite texture showing a bank near a river, yet the terrain is flat)
• City scenery look quite good an diverse, both in colors and shapes

 

Not at my pc now, but I'll try and post some screenshots later, to show what I mean

 

Anyways, I'm glad I purchased, having fun with the new map and until proven differently, I'm having all the confidence that Razbam will further improve this map (within a reasonable timeframe).  

Edited June 10, 2022 by sirrah

[YoYo]

Yes, it would be useful any official comment from the authors about roadmap and next points and when it will be done (approximately of course), confirmed bugs (after one week from release), optimalizations (!!!) and how they want to solve it. The map certainly has a lot of potential and I dont regret buoght it (despite optimization problems) and its a kind of support for this part of Razbam Team but I hope they will solve issues soon too. Fingers crossed. 

[DixonSky]

Its definitely overpriced. I'm hoping high res images are available for low altitude oos. Currently, it looks terrible.

I almost want a refund.

Edited June 10, 2022 by DixonSky

[Cowboy10uk]

Ok first impressions, but bear in mind I’ve only flown around MPA and Mare Harbour.

 

Road layout is correct.   Buildings on the other hand are fairly inaccurate. 
 

missing buildings near 12 and 38 facility, no corridors that connect everything together, fuel tanker park in wrong location. Yes that is the fuel depot, BUT the tankers are parked on other side of airfield on the wide aircraft pan that you have 3 park slots on. 
 

building in MT section in wrong location and facing the wrong way.  Hangars where the med centre and station headquarters are, buses literally everywhere on map, where in reality there are only a half dozen or so parked at MT section.    Articulated lorry’s everywhere. Ummm nope. Only had a few apart from twin rig tankers. 
 

Petrol station on Mare Harbour road.   Sorry but nope doesn’t exist, refuelling point is on the base.yacht club on Mare Harbour road.  words just fail me. Ummmm no. 
 

oh and most of all.    NO PENGUINS on Berthas Beach.    That colony is blooming huge. 

While I wasn’t expecting complete accuracy, these maps never are, I was at least expecting the buildings to be roughy accurate, I mean there’s enough images of MPA around.

 

honestly not holding up much hope for any more accuracy elsewhere either.    The map has potential sure, but it’s a long way off the standard of previous map releases.

[Northstar98]

12 hours ago, Howzzat said:

Before I get bashed let me say this, overall impression this map has huge potential. (Secondly have been working on the dev team for a leading flight sim for around 10 years)

Good points:

1. Finally a map big enough for opposing naval forces without being too close together great map for Naval Ops.
2. from medium to  High Altitude looks pretty good.
3. Loads of potential for a wide spectrum of missions and campaigns due to the amount of playable area.

Agreed on all counts. The fact that the map is so barren is kind of a good thing, in that it's more or less a blank canvas for you to do whatever you want with. The potential for this map is enormous.

12 hours ago, Howzzat said:

Not so good points and yeah I know its in Early access. (Hope these get fixed)

1. The use of satellite imagery as a texture base.Down low satellite imagery loses all fidelity it's too low res and requires massive amounts of work to get right, for example flying over the Falkland islands you see clouds on ground textures still, shadows in valleys that are "Baked" into the scenery from the satallite imagery so give a false sense of time of day, sun direction etc clash with shadows from DCS itself. 

Personally, I'm glad RAZBAM went with satellite textures on this one, as compared to other maps this to me looks more like the real place and makes it all the more immersive.

Of course the downside is very large size and poor resolution. You can also see how numerous rivers are misaligned (both on the Islands and the mainland).

Personally though (and this is coming from someone who does a lot of NOE flights), I'm not that bothered by low-resolution textures, I'm bothered way more by the terrain mesh as I feel that textures only really impact eye-candy, whereas terrain mesh (for both accuracy and resolution) impacts actual usability as well as eye-candy.

12 hours ago, Howzzat said:

Valleys etc that are in the satellite imagery dont match up with the terrain in places due to the resolution of the terrain mesh so can be decieving when dropping down from a high altitude.

While I haven't noticed these myself, I hope RAZBAM delivers on a higher resolution terrain mesh.

12 hours ago, Howzzat said:

2. Grass an awesome  Idea but in place looks way out of scale compared to some static objects. or buries things like helipads, take a look at FOB San Carlos for example.

Agreed. Especially around the numerous grass strips on the islands themselves - it's not bad from far away, but when you're actually on them they can overwhelm it.

There's also grass where there shouldn't be (on snow/ice, dirt and rock).

12 hours ago, Howzzat said:

3. Some textures of Structures etc very low detail, kind of a pitty as this map offers a great opportunity for Combined Arms as well.

While most I find perfectly adequate, there are things like water tanks and some structures where they're fairly low resolution.

12 hours ago, Howzzat said:

4. The waterline round lakes and the coasts (even the falkland islands) needs a lot of work at the moment there is no real transition (Example the free Mariana's Islands coast line is the best out there at this.)

100% agreed (and I've reported this one), around the vast majority of areas there's this sharp 75-80° incline into the water. If you set the wind to something expected for the place (which can get quite windy) the waves make it look pretty poor and very unnatural. It also makes it impossible for player driven vehicles to climb up them (which is pretty important given what took place on the map historically). AI vehicles can climb up them, but it's very jarring to watch.

With you on the Marianas, though personally, they could just make the incline blend more naturally with the surface of the water.

12 hours ago, Howzzat said:

5. Currently Cant get seasons to change textures snow in winter, change of colour of ground etc.

True, though I imagine seasons will be difficult on storage space if they stick with orthographic textures.

Perhaps they can use the tiled system used on other maps, where there's smaller texture tiles that repeat.

 

There are a coupe of things I'd add.

Firstly, the performance - pretty disappointing given just how barren the place is and how much smaller the built-up areas are compared to other maps (which isn't too bad, even on my system). It's kinda similar between Syria and the Channel for me.

Secondly, objects on the water (boats, lateral marks etc) don't interact with it at all, meaning they look like they're getting swamped if the wind matches what's expected in the area.

Edited June 10, 2022 by Northstar98

[Beirut]

40 minutes ago, DixonSky said:

Its definitely overpriced.

 

 

Is it though?

 

it's the same price as a "second tier" plane, and a chunk less than the Hornet and Viper. I'm okay with the price. That said, I have no problem with the map getting some updates, but that seems to be in the works. 

[Northstar98]

5 hours ago, Lace said:

Agree broadly with the OP.  

My main take away from my initial flights is that it doesn't 'feel' like other DCS maps.  The satellite imagery gives it a MSFS or XP11-ortho vibe.  I had to keep reminding myself that I was flying DCS.

Personally though, I think this is a good thing. Other maps to me at least seem a bit cartoony and really lack colour accuracy (just compare the Caucasus with real life and you'll see what I mean), which even extends to the Marianas.

5 hours ago, Lace said:

I would love to see the Harrier FOB as a placeable item.

Yeah, personally I'd rather see the San Carlos FOB depicted how it actually is IRL (a grass strip), with the objects as static objects so we can convert it.

5 hours ago, Lace said:

Price seems appropriate to me.

I mean, it's pricey, but it is also the largest map with the largest usable land area by considerable margin, so I'm okay with it.

[Mr_sukebe]

I'm liking it a lot.

In addition to the 82' conflict, I've also been working on;

• WW2 version, using the Falklands as an allied air base, to conduct strategic bombing against the "mainland".  I'm trying to figure out how best to use the west coast to represent fjords, I'll get there
• A more modern version, set around 2012 with the option to:
  • Use it for general aviation missions, e.g. chopper flights to oil rigs off the eastern Chilean coast.  From a net search, I found some details of drilling in that area.  I also fancy the idea of search and rescue around the west coast
  • Place a US carrier take group in the Pacific and a more modern UK setup at and around the Falklands, using an Illustrious mod (it was decommissioned a little while later)

I was looking for details on the current Argentinian air force, but it appears to have nearly ceased to exist, as the UK has vetoed so many aircraft purchases.  Hence going back a few years.  Might also give them some JF17s.

[Gunfreak]

19 minutes ago, Mr_sukebe said:

I'm liking it a lot.

In addition to the 82' conflict, I've also been working on;

• WW2 version, using the Falklands as an allied air base, to conduct strategic bombing against the "mainland".  I'm trying to figure out how best to use the west coast to represent fjords, I'll get there
• A more modern version, set around 2012 with the option to:
  • Use it for general aviation missions, e.g. chopper flights to oil rigs off the eastern Chilean coast.  From a net search, I found some details of drilling in that area.  I also fancy the idea of search and rescue around the west coast
  • Place a US carrier take group in the Pacific and a more modern UK setup at and around the Falklands, using an Illustrious mod (it was decommissioned a little while later)

I was looking for details on the current Argentinian air force, but it appears to have nearly ceased to exist, as the UK has vetoed so many aircraft purchases.  Hence going back a few years.  Might also give them some JF17s.

Listening to a falklands book, there was a decent chance a hot war between Argentina and Chile in early 80s. And that would have been fought were the SA map is. So using the A4 skyhawk mod for Argentina and F5 for Chile  one could make some Senarioes about that.

[Steel Jaw]

From what I gather, VR performance is horrible...?

[clanitho]

What a disappointment, it's like being back in the FSX era!
The textures are ugly, the satellite images have not been cleaned and the objects are repetitive.

It will take years before razbam fixes it. 

Considering the price I won't buy it 

[bell_rj]

50 minutes ago, Mr_sukebe said:

I was looking for details on the current Argentinian air force, but it appears to have nearly ceased to exist, as the UK has vetoed so many aircraft purchases.  Hence going back a few years.  Might also give them some JF17s.

Well I've just skimmed through my collection of Airforces Monthly since Oct 2020 and all I found was:
June 2021 - purchase of second hand 737-700
Sept 2021 - their only airworthy S-2T retired. Another being refurbished.
Oct 2021 - C-12B Huron delivered- first of 10
Nov 2021 - $664m designated for fighter purchase - 12 CAC JF-17 (10 single seat and 2 dual) (although no decision made at that time)

I may have missed some articles but compared to the Brazilian Air Force about which there was a lot of news, there was very little to find.

Edited June 10, 2022 by bell_rj

[Steel Jaw]

10 minutes ago, clanitho said:

What a disappointment, it's like being back in the FSX era!
The textures are ugly, the satellite images have not been cleaned and the objects are repetitive.

It will take years before razbam fixes it. 

Considering the price I won't buy it 

I will have to concur.  Still plenty of other maps, half of which also blow for VR.

[Mr_sukebe]

28 minutes ago, clanitho said:

What a disappointment, it's like being back in the FSX era!
The textures are ugly, the satellite images have not been cleaned and the objects are repetitive.

It will take years before razbam fixes it. 

Considering the price I won't buy it 

??

Doesn't sound like you've had the opportunity to try it first hand.  Commenting on textures and similar seems a little unfair if that's the case.

33 minutes ago, Steel Jaw said:

From what I gather, VR performance is horrible...?

I fly pretty solely in VR.  Fine here.

Edited June 10, 2022 by Mr_sukebe

[YoYo]

4 minutes ago, Mr_sukebe said:

I fly pretty solely in VR.  Fine here.

 

Perhaps you never checed Ushuaia Heliport and you wasnt below 1000ft on urban area  so all before you.

[ST0RM]

Glad you folks, that are ok with the effort you paid for, are hopeful the map will get updates. 
I dont share that sentiment. Based on the multiple videos from previewers and the comments here and elsewhere, I'll hold onto my money for a long while. 
 

[RogueRunner]

Pretty disappointed here, fell for the hype. Would have refunded it if was possible. 

It's not a $70 terrain for sure, it's more like $30 IMO

[sirrah]

30 minutes ago, RogueRunner said:

Pretty disappointed here, fell for the hype. Would have refunded it if was possible. 

It's not a $70 terrain for sure, it's more like $30 IMO

Well, I ( and I think most of us here) agree with you that in its current state it's not worth $70 (at the moment it does not cost $70 btw) and indeed it might not even be worth the current ~$50 asking price. But also, I think most of us here have faith that the end product will be worth $50,- or even $70,-

 

Early Access is not for everyone

[Gunfreak]

2 hours ago, clanitho said:

What a disappointment, it's like being back in the FSX era!
The textures are ugly, the satellite images have not been cleaned and the objects are repetitive.

It will take years before razbam fixes it. 

Considering the price I won't buy it 

They started quite clearly that almost nothing has been done with the mainland. Only falklands can be said to be close to complete. But even that will probably some more work.

I haven't flown in any towns. But the performance is perfectly OK in VR over goose green and in the fjords. 

[bandit648]

Agree with everything being said here. It's certainly not worth $55 in its current state. I was hoping for higher resolution terrain mesh and textures then what we got. Whats up with the area around Ushuaia? You'd think that'd be a place to really focus on by the developers at release since its one of the most scenic locations but the mountain textures and mesh is very low quality. 

I hope they aren't holding back the higher res imagery due to people whining about disk space. I don't care if its 500 GB I'll find the space for it. This region is gorgeous and deserves better. Hopefully my money was well spent and Raz is hard at work making improvements.