Can this br true?

[leafer]

If it's been posted before then sorry, I can't afford to come online too much anymore so I may have missed it.

 

But check out this link

 

http://www.simhq.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=109;t=000021

 

and read Trident's post about what ED has up their sleeves!

 

COOL!

[diveplane]

lockon should stick to 1 theme, and thats flight simulation

not another operation flashpoint ....

[Starlight]

leave that to FPS/kids games.

 

I don't see an application for that except as an Easter egg :)

 

lockon is a flight sim and should stay so. it's still not complete (if you look at the original aims of the project, for example lacks the dynamic campaign, which in fact is still indicated as present in some ubisoft descriptions). so I would first complete it.

 

There have been various projects to build an all-in-one sim for air-sea-land, but they all failed due to their complexity. People at ED already failed to build a sim like it was scheduled to be, I don't see the reason why they should try a project which would be ten times harder (given that they are always talking about lack of funds so that they cannot even add a couple of AI aircraft).

 

BTW, a step closer to the "ace combat" degree of realism and I will bury the game into my garden.

[Skywall23]

Calm down Starlight. I must agree that this sim still needs many updates, and upgrades, etc and that starting driving tanks, trucks, well you know the drill, play an all out war, is too much for ED.

 

But one thing that I would like to see, is the ability to use the pilot. You get to the ground, drop your parachute, and you would have to get to allied territory, only armed with a pistol.

 

Of course this feature would be better for a Dynamic Campaign.

[leafer]

You're right. Modeling a tank and whatnot would take too much resources. So they can start with a villager armed with a realistically modeled shoulder launch missile so I can shot down that pesky Su25T that keeps blowing the tin roof off my hut. :lol:

 

Really, a digital battle field would be a lot more fun than a dynamic campaign, imo.

[Starlight]

Calm down Starlight. I must agree that this sim still needs many updates, and upgrades, etc and that starting driving tanks, trucks, well you know the drill, play an all out war, is too much for ED.

But one thing that I would like to see, is the ability to use the pilot. You get to the ground, drop your parachute, and you would have to get to allied territory, only armed with a pistol.

Of course this feature would be better for a Dynamic Campaign.

 

I'm not upset, but the current situation around this game is a bit strange.

LockOn was released with many months of delay, and without some of its intended features (mainly the dynamic campaign). If you also own Flanker 2.0 it won't be hard to notice that LockOn in certain parts has been made with cut-and-paste objects from that other sim (3D models, scenario, textures and so on). The game itself is a good game, with many bugs, but also with some unique features (the graphics imho are still astonishing).

The first two patches addressed to minor issues, and solved some of the bugs. The AI, which is one of the weak points of the game, is quite untouched. The dynamic campaign is not even mentioned.

 

After patch 1.02 Ubisoft dropped ED, because the game was felt to be ok. ED says now it's out of funds and resources to build new large addons. They plan an addon which will add a brand new aircraft, the Su-25T, with its full array of weapons and avionics. With thousands of aircraft available in the world they go for an aircraft that has been built in a dozen units, it has never seen real action, and most of the people don't even know that it exists. The addon will be only in CIS stores, and for the western market can be downloaded from the Internet. To the polling about the distribution there have been only 178 votes. I hope they will sell more than this in the western market. I'm no marketing expert but I'd bet that a more banal F-16 (or any western multirole) addon would have had at least 10 times that votes, but that's just imho; maybe it would have sold less on the CIS soil... who knows...

 

Then the next patch is announced that will feature a helicopter, the KA-50, which again, is beautiful, but it went just a little further than the prototype phase (actually some of the prototypes were sent in Chechnya). Again, no word of AI improvements, dynamic campaigns, or new aircraft (at least the AI ones, which are not so difficult to implement)

 

Then comes out that one of the next ideas can be that of building a ground sim, while the original LockOn is still fitted with an ugly AI, some 3D models and textures of the Flanker era and is still without a dynamic campaign.

 

This is why I'm a bit disappointed.... I don't think I'm crazy :lol:

[Skywall23]

Again I agree with you. I think the renovation of 3D models and the addition of more 3D models, is really in need. But for what I've seen since I joined this comunity over 1 year a ago, is that the avionics, bug fixes and graphic optimisations are the priorities right now.

 

As for new flyables, I dont think there should ANY, I repeat ANY, new flyables in the next generation sim of Eagle Dynamics. People are asking for a multi-role, which means multipiple work to do. The avionics would take 1 year to be done, and it was over, there would still be bugs.

 

Now, I also want dynamic campaigns , more AI aircraft and objects, graphic optimisations and bug fixes (mainly the third wish) etc, etc and I hope we dont turn this into an operation flashpoint game, but if Eagle Dynamics really wishes so, I would recommend them to join Bistudios and work on Operation Flashpoint 2 lol.... :wink: :twisted: :P

[SUBS17]

It is very easy to add the ability to control ground vehicles compared to an aircraft and it adds alot to the game having people on the ground. In essence its a proof of concept for something else is my view, perhaps something much bigger on the horizon. If v1.2 adds this then it makes Lockon a whole different approach to flight sims. Your comments Starlight seem to miss whats happening after v1.2! Rumour has it, its western and its multirole(fully modeled with AFM, clickable pit) so that should keep ya happy if it should happen. I wouldn't crititsies v1.1 having the Su25T because yet again everything is going up a whole new level with AFM for a start. This revolutionises flight sims if its anywhere as good as the movies I've so far seen. I guess we'll have to wait and see but I see ground vehicles as a very good idea for gameplay. Of course along with a Ka50.

cheers

Subs

[bflagg]

think maybe they are trying for a Online Battlefield type of thing?

kinda what fighter ops is alluding to....

[Dusty Rhodes]

I think they are expanding the gaming experience and also trying to expand their customer base. Like it or not, flight simming is not a huge money making machine. If they can integrate some of these things and maintain the integrity and fidelity of the flight sim part, I say Git-r-dun and make a bazillion!

[Starlight]

It is very easy to add the ability to control ground vehicles compared to an aircraft

depends what you're simualting... a truck is simple, an APC and a tank are another matter... if you wanna make them accurate you need to model stabilization systems, you must model the wind/weather effect on anti-armor ammo, thermal sights, laser ranging. Anyway you probably have to reskin most of the terrain because it will look uglier from "flightlevel 0". And you will probably have to add infantry to the sim...

 

and it adds alot to the game having people on the ground. In essence its a proof of concept for something else is my view, perhaps something much bigger on the horizon.

 

LockOn has not reached a very large community yet. Maybe with the support of ground units it could reach a larger "audience", but it may also not be the case. There are a lot of armor/helo sim which didn't make it. Take "Gunship!" for example. A wonderful sim imho, just with a poor wingmen AI, but it hasn't sold a lot. It shared the basic engine with M1TankPlatoon 2 (AFAIK) but they both weren't "best sellers"

 

If v1.2 adds this then it makes Lockon a whole different approach to flight sims. Your comments Starlight seem to miss whats happening after v1.2! Rumour has it, its western and its multirole(fully modeled with AFM, clickable pit) so that should keep ya happy if it should happen. I wouldn't crititsies v1.1 having the Su25T because yet again everything is going up a whole new level with AFM for a start. This revolutionises flight sims if its anywhere as good as the movies I've so far seen. I guess we'll have to wait and see but I see ground vehicles as a very good idea for gameplay. Of course along with a Ka50.

cheers

Subs

 

I may be happy for that 1.2 sequel, but given the time it took to make 1.1, I'm afraid we'd have to wait more than one year just to see if those rumors were true.

The point of my first reply is that IMHO ED should have focussed since the beginning to "complete" LockOn with a better AI and and a DC. I really don't care about adding new A/C if the sim engine has some flaws/lacks that limit gameplay. When I had a stable sim platform I would have begun to add new aircraft and/or to explore ground/naval simulation.

 

I've heard that people won't buy sims just beacuse they have better AI. Well, I don't think this is really true, because the sim community is different from the "racing" or "shooting" communities. We do care a lot about details and we usually want it real!

If there was a sim on the market with the graphics of LockOn and the engine of Falcon4, I would buy it immediately.

[SimFan]

AI, DC and other stuff won't sell !

 

- Making LO/FC into a ground sim won't sell (there is enough of that around)

- New AI, DC alone won't do it either (no new customers)

- New planes, helo's (will not create a new customer base)

- Debugging, optimizations: necessary, but again no new boxes

- Selling over the internet. Good idea. If only more people knew this great sim existed.

- In the end, the only rational thing to do after FC and/or 1.2, IMHO, is making a NEW title, boxed.

- A couple of years from now I believe simming/gaming on the PC will become an even smaller niche.

- ED needs to make money, as we all do. They unfortunately can't live on charity and will adapt to the the new (market) situation.

I hope ED 'lives long and prospers' though.

Thx for FC !

[Shepski]

Guys,

 

From day one.... ie, Su-27 Flanker v1.0, the prominent men behind the scenes have wanted to create an electronic battlefield with high fidelity player flyable airplanes, player flyable helos, and player drivable ground vehicles.

 

That dream is still a goal and with the KA-50 it is starting to be realized.

 

Give them time!

[SimFan]

Loyal

 

Skipski,

All I was doing is guessing.

Whatever ED is up to, I want to be a part (i.e. loyal customer) of.

Gotta go. Duty calls.

[Dusty Rhodes]

- Making LO/FC into a ground sim won't sell (there is enough of that around)

 

And each one is wildly popular with several thousand playing on line at any one time. And the addition of flyables made them even more popular. ED is starting with flight and adding ground and I think will be the same result. So saying there is enough of that around, I counter with, follow the money, and those are money makers.

 

- Making LO/FC into a ground sim won't sell (there is enough of that around)

- New AI, DC alone won't do it either (no new customers)

- New planes, helo's (will not create a new customer base)

- Debugging, optimizations: necessary, but again no new boxes

 

Put all of that together and you have an amazing sim that appeals to all gamers and simmers, which equals lots of money and a better product. You make the argument for doing it, with a totality of circumstances that you laid out, yet you say won't do anything for Lock On or the series.

[Greenies]

Guys,

 

From day one.... ie, Su-27 Flanker v1.0, the prominent men behind the scenes have wanted to create an electronic battlefield with high fidelity player flyable airplanes, player flyable helos, and player drivable ground vehicles.

 

That dream is still a goal and with the KA-50 it is starting to be realized.

 

Give them time!

 

I heard Stormin mention this some while ago, don't know where, but I think it was posted on the Ubi forum (or was it in the foreword of Nic's printed manual?). I love the idea of an electronic battlefield, as long as every aspect seems realistic to the player. I always wanted to be able to climb out of the cockpit after taxing and parking my aircraft, and walk over to the briefing room.

 

I't obvious, based on what has been said of the engine's shortcomings (that every object in Lomac adds to the decreasing of FPS), that we won't see this dream come true in the near future, but it's exciting to hear that this is what the developers want to achieve. Good luck in that respect :)

 

Someone mentioned an interesting scenario. That after bailing out over enemy territory, you would have to try to get back into a friendly area where you could join your own troops again. Interesting, but for this to be an exciting part of the game, the danger of meeting infantry and tanks etc. would have to exist. Nobody wants to run on the ground for half an hour unless there is some excitement involved, right? I'm just saying, there are a lot of new and unexplored aspects related to such a battlefield. But as I said before, I think this is an interesting way to go.

[Stormin]

Guys,

 

From day one.... ie, Su-27 Flanker v1.0, the prominent men behind the scenes have wanted to create an electronic battlefield with high fidelity player flyable airplanes, player flyable helos, and player drivable ground vehicles.

 

That dream is still a goal and with the KA-50 it is starting to be realized.

 

Give them time!

 

Shepski speaks the truth.

[SimFan]

New title

 

Dusty, you are 100% right.

But adding all things I mentioned above, isn't that in fact creating a game

that goes far beyond the original title ?

[zzzspace]

I'd very much like the option to directly command and control the network of SAMs in real time, in order to defeat SEAD, DEAD and A-G interdiction aircraft, use their mobility, drive to tactical locations, and switch between active-passive at any node in the network in-real time, as well as the ability to actually engage SEAD and DEAD weapons.

[SUBS17]

Yeah I can imagine that SEAD will be a dam sight harder with a human manning the SAMs. They're likely to turn the radar off and set up ambushes etc while using teamspeak to bring in Air cover. The AI for the vehicles would have to be very much improved though to make full use of other units. A C&C style interface could do the job. What sort of level of control will the players have? Individual vehicle, platoon level, company or Battalion. You'd also want ai crewmen, eg if I'm driving a tank I expect the gunner and loaders to automatically carry out their jobs. This sounds very good for MP.

cheers

Subs

[britgliderpilot]

I wouldn't want to be able to drive a tank in Lomac - for one very simple reason.

 

 

I would get pwned.

 

 

T80 or M1, versus Ka50, Su25T, and A10 . . . . . it just isn't fair!

[GGTharos]

You mean ... you wouldn't wanna drive a tank without air cover or sam cover...

[britgliderpilot]

You mean ... you wouldn't wanna drive a tank without air cover or sam cover...

 

Partly, yes . . . . but the idea of not being able to complete a mission despite being skilled and doing your absolute best, doesn't often make for an enjoyable sim.

 

At least in A2A combat there's things you can do to try and escape - whereas in a tank, if one of the CAS aircraft starts coming at you then there really isn't much you can do.

[GGTharos]

Yes there is. IR Smke, back up, MOVE! ;D

 

And call frantically for anti-air support.

[Skywall23]

Someone mentioned an interesting scenario. That after bailing out over enemy territory, you would have to try to get back into a friendly area where you could join your own troops again. Interesting, but for this to be an exciting part of the game, the danger of meeting infantry and tanks etc. would have to exist. Nobody wants to run on the ground for half an hour unless there is some excitement involved, right? I'm just saying, there are a lot of new and unexplored aspects related to such a battlefield. But as I said before, I think this is an interesting way to go.

 

I did. And yes you are right, it would be better to have someone after us. But that depends on the matter. Ill explain:

 

In a single missions scenario:

If you are playing a single mission game obviously you would have to script the game in order to get some troops after you if you were shot down. That kind of scripting can be a bit complicated though. But even if there was some people after you...your mission was already failed, and the best to do, would be to hit the "ESC" and quit the game.

 

In a dynamic campaign scenario:

But in a dynamic campaign or semi-dynamic campaign*, you would like to get your pilot to safe territory, otherwise you would have to restart the mission. (Due to pilot capture or death) We could have a bar of "Resistence" of the pilot. That bar would decrease while the pilot didnt arrive to allied territory. If the bar goes empty, the pilot dies due to the lack of food or exaustion.

 

*this is the one we have right now , on LOMAC, in which the mission completion doesnt depend only on the pilot, but on its survival and the completion of the goals even if not by the player.