First person in DCS - Let's discuss the idea and feasibilty.

[Cintra]

Hey all and Devs. 

So my TOP desire for DCS would be a First person module/standard feature. (I love jets but a full theatre of war would be awesome)

Before some people come here and say that its a flight sim and not another Call of Duty, let me explain why.

1. First person module is not 'difficult' to make in comparison to an entire flight physics model for a heli or jet. I have no idea what would be technically involved in getting the DCS world engine to work with first person, human physics and animation but for now I would assume that it is possible at least. 

2. First person (shooter) is more popular than an extremely detailed flight sim. Its easy to get into without needing to study an entire manual. This alone would generate much more revenue for ED (very quickly) and allow them to make even more jets/maps/modules and expand the company. Heck, you could charge $10 (Super cheap) for a first person module and you'd see player numbers rise incredibly. That alone would get more people interested in the other jets and things. 

3. Imagine how cool it would be to play on the ground, knowing about the crazy jets and helis above. Coolness factor would be unbelievable. 

4. The big thing about first person is animation and modelling of weapons (Yes I know there is more to it but these are the major things). Now, I'd say that both the models and animations can be bought from other studios and touched up to DCS standard. The amount of time and money spent on developing in-house assets for this wouldnt be worth it in comparion to just buying it. There are hundreds of games and studios who have made these assets, no need to reinvent every wheel. So time investment wouldn't be a major concern and monetary investment could be recovered very quickly.

5. Combined arms already exists.... So, let me hit E on that tank and hop in. 

6. It's called Digital combat simulator. Not Digital Flight Simulator.     Its mean to simulate ALL combat, so why not add the easiest form of combat?

 

I'm sure I can sit and think of more reasons but Im sure you get what Im saying. If a dev could give a comment on this, that would be great!

Also, understand that Im not saying "DO IT NOW! GIMMIE FPS!!!"  Things dont happen instantly... so please ED, do consider this idea.

Let me know what you all think?

 

[Rudel_chw]

23 minutes ago, Cintra said:

Let me know what you all think?

I understand the appeal, but for me FPS is not what I play DCS for, so I wouldn’t be purchasing such a DLC … I will stick to studying my aircrafts

 

[Cintra]

1 hour ago, Rudel_chw said:

I understand the appeal, but for me FPS is not what I play DCS for, so I wouldn’t be purchasing such a DLC … I will stick to studying my aircrafts

 

And no one will complain about that. Having dedicated pilots in DCS is good, just as having dedicated FPS/Ships/Tanks players will be great too.

[razo+r]

1 hour ago, Cintra said:

3. Imagine how cool it would be to play on the ground, knowing about the crazy jets and helis above. Coolness factor would be unbelievable. 

You don't need to imagine that, you can already do it since years in DCS.

 

But for the other part, just think about all the things that need to be redone, improved and added before DCS would be anywhere near a fun and solid FPS platform. And if we were to see all these improvements and changes, I hope the hardware has come to a point where it is possible to run this software with a reasonable amount of frames.

 

 

Edited September 25, 2022 by razo+r

[sirrah]

2 hours ago, razo+r said:

You don't need to imagine that, you can already do it since years in DCS.

 

But for the other part, just think about all the things that need to be redone, improved and added before DCS would be anywhere near a fun and solid FPS platform. And if we were to see all these improvements and changes, I hope the hardware has come to a point where it is possible to run this software with a reasonable amount of frames.

 

 

 

Imho, ED should stick at what they're good (and at the moment, unique) at. To be more precise, if it were up to me they'd stick at playable airborne unit's and let CA go.. I mean, there's already plenty on their plate. 

 

Being a study level sim, implementation of a fps, while keeping up with DCS' high level of realism, would be an immense task, that probably even the biggest developers (EA, Microsoft, etc.) wouldn't be able to accomplish. ARMA is trying it for what, two decades? 

Doing anything less than what ARMA did for a "realistic" infantry sim, will only result in a half baked fps with poor gfx, poor performance, poor realism and most probably just poor overall gameplay.

Don't get me wrong, your good right to wish for this, it's the wishlist subforum after all. But, what you are looking for is already available and, as you probably know, goes by the name of the "Battlefield" series (where you can enter any vehicle with E ). 

Edited September 25, 2022 by sirrah

[Cintra]

21 minutes ago, sirrah said:

Imho, ED should stick at what they're good (and at the moment, unique) at. To be more precise, if it were up to me they'd stick at playable airborne unit's and let CA go.. I mean, there's already plenty on their plate. 

 

Being a study level sim, implementation of a fps, while keeping up with DCS' high level of realism, would be an immense task, that probably even the biggest developers (EA, Microsoft, etc.) wouldn't be able to accomplish. ARMA is trying it for what, two decades? 

Doing anything less than what ARMA did for a "realistic" infantry sim, will only result in a half baked fps with poor gfx, poor performance, poor realism and most probably just poor overall gameplay.

Don't get me wrong, your good right to wish for this, it's the wishlist subforum after all. But, what you are looking for is already available and, as you probably know, is know as the "Battlefield" serie (where you can enter any vehicle with E ). 

Ye I feel you 100%. I suppose it is all dreams and wishes at the end .  

[AndyJWest]

Discuss the idea and feasibility? OK.

Idea: Bad. There are lots of first-person shooters already. Created by developers who know how to make them, and want to. DCS makes its money doing what it already knows. Why chose to compete, in a saturated market, with people who've been doing it for years?

Feasibility: Low. No game engine trying to combine a first-person shooter with study-level air combat simulation is ever going to be able to perform as well as engines designed expressly for either. Too different, with contradictory requirements in core areas. 

And at the end of the day, even if someone were to come up with something that worked, you'd rapidly run into 'gameplay' issues with the very different scales at which combat takes place. The first-person shooters will be fighting each other over a frontline that the pilots will fly over in seconds. They'll be lucky if they even notice they are there. 

 

 

 

[Jayhawk1971]

I believe the long-term goal with DCS (Digital Combat Simulator) has always been to fully realize the decades-old dream of a "digital battlefield". A digital battlefield includes infantry. I don't see why in the future, when technology will be more advanced, Combined Arms couldn't evolve into an ARMA-type module (on a much larger scale).

It will just take a while (a loooong, looooooooong while ). Think "continental drift" as a yardstick.  

What I do see as feasible near-term would be "pilot legs" and enhanced player-JTAC integration. ED could do that with the current engine.

It would be highly immersive to be able to walk/ drive to or from the jet, do a walkaround, climb in and out of the  pit. Or be able to move around on a hilltop to call in CAS in multiplayer.

My near-term ultimate dream scenario would be to be able to attend a briefing in the (upcoming?) Supercarrier's Ready Room, suit up, walk onto the flight deck and get into the jet. In VR! 

All of this could be done with the current engine and custom movement controls for the avatar; creating the necessary Carrier interiors would be the most complex issue, I suppose. 

Edited September 27, 2022 by Jayhawk1971

[Exorcet]

4 hours ago, Cintra said:

 Its mean to simulate ALL combat, so why not add the easiest form of combat?

You're underestimating the challenges involved. DCS being DCS, we should not just aim to slap CoD on as a module. The infantry side of things should be realistic. That is a full game in itself (see ARMA).

More realistic is having some kind of ground troop control through Combined Arms, but that has some obvious limitations. I think this would still be worth it to have, but it would fall behind real infantry simulations by quite a margin.

[Beirut]

All the 1st person I want is to be able to bail out of my Mustang over occupied France and score some local beauties with my swag bag full of gifts of chocolates and silk underthingies.

 

Live out the war by a quiet river with Giselle, Marise, and Suzanne. 

[bies]

4 hours ago, Cintra said:

So my TOP desire for DCS would be a First person module/standard feature. (I love jets but a full theatre of war would be awesome)

You would like to have additional controls for single soldier, like FPS, inside DCS, to walk armound, shoot personal gun etc., something like Call of Duty? Do i understand correctly?

Well it would be nice, an ultimate experience, but i guess it's absolutely impossible from technical standpoint, it's not a matter of intention.

Imagine DCS map is 450,000km² when Call of Duty map is like 25km², 18 thousand times(!) smaller. There is a reason for that. Theoretically you could add a few commands to lie down, shoot a gun etc., but compared to typical FPS graphics quality, number of details inside 18 thousand times bigger map, detailed animations, weapon parameters, infantry AI, physics of every single infantryman bullet, gun, recoil, gunsight. Now add reasonable number of infantryman, like what means even 100-200 soldiers inside 450,000km² map - total emptyness, then armored vehicles, artillery, tanks, support weapon, all reasonably detailed to have reasonable experienced. Technically impossible. It would overhelm NASA supercomputers.

Operation Flashpoint / ArmA serie tries to take the best from both worlds compromising both of them as well. But it is not even close to DCS when it comes to aircraft enviroment, you are circling around crossing the whole map in 20-40 seconds of straight flight and it has significantly smaller level of detail than typical "small", "staged", linear FPS at the same time.

Even balancing DCS scale to accomodate both jets and helicopters offering attractive experience stretches the engine to the limits. Let alone reasonable experience around single infantryman.

[MAXsenna]

Does anyone know if anybody has ever tried to make an FPS mod for CA?
We have drivable vehicles from various modders, wouldn't it be possible to make a vehicle "go slow" and "shoot" something from a first person perspective?

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[razo+r]

There used to be a mod around that made infantry playable.

[Silver_Dragon]

10 minutes ago, razo+r said:

There used to be a mod around that made infantry playable.

On DCS World none has build a mode with made infantry playable. The only "near" has CA, with can be firing MANPADS, but that funtionality has been hardcoded and no avaiable to moding. The "pilot" view has the same problem.

 

[razo+r]

Just now, Silver_Dragon said:

On DCS World none has build a mode with made infantry playable. The only "near" has CA, with can be firing MANPADS, but that funtionality has been hardcoded and no avaiable to moding. The "pilot" view has the same problem.

 

No, as I said. There were mods around that made infantry playable.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

Realistically, the most we can expect would be a full fidelity AFV of some kind. We're not getting player infantry. If you want that, ArmA's great and Squad also exists. 

I'd contend your first point vehemently. Just because it seems simple doesn't mean it actually is. Sure, it'd be easy to just copy code from CA and bam, now you have some janky infantry. With one weapon. 

Is that something anyone wants to part with their money for? I doubt it. We'd need better movement, endurance, weight impacting the prior two, injury simulation, recoil modeling, and that's all before you get into squad roles, platoon roles, interoperability with armor and airborne assets, there's a lot in there that would go into the development of infantry. You're going to need more than rifles and squad weapons, you'll need platoon level weapons, company assets, you need a lot. You need them to function in the manner they're meant to. 

That is *a lot* of work.

Edited September 25, 2022 by MiG21bisFishbedL

[Silver_Dragon]

8 hours ago, Cintra said:

Hey all and Devs. 

So my TOP desire for DCS would be a First person module/standard feature. (I love jets but a full theatre of war would be awesome)

Before some people come here and say that its a flight sim and not another Call of Duty, let me explain why.

1. First person module is not 'difficult' to make in comparison to an entire flight physics model for a heli or jet. I have no idea what would be technically involved in getting the DCS world engine to work with first person, human physics and animation but for now I would assume that it is possible at least. 

2. First person (shooter) is more popular than an extremely detailed flight sim. Its easy to get into without needing to study an entire manual. This alone would generate much more revenue for ED (very quickly) and allow them to make even more jets/maps/modules and expand the company. Heck, you could charge $10 (Super cheap) for a first person module and you'd see player numbers rise incredibly. That alone would get more people interested in the other jets and things. 

3. Imagine how cool it would be to play on the ground, knowing about the crazy jets and helis above. Coolness factor would be unbelievable. 

4. The big thing about first person is animation and modelling of weapons (Yes I know there is more to it but these are the major things). Now, I'd say that both the models and animations can be bought from other studios and touched up to DCS standard. The amount of time and money spent on developing in-house assets for this wouldnt be worth it in comparion to just buying it. There are hundreds of games and studios who have made these assets, no need to reinvent every wheel. So time investment wouldn't be a major concern and monetary investment could be recovered very quickly.

5. Combined arms already exists.... So, let me hit E on that tank and hop in. 

6. It's called Digital combat simulator. Not Digital Flight Simulator.     Its mean to simulate ALL combat, so why not add the easiest form of combat?

 

I'm sure I can sit and think of more reasons but Im sure you get what Im saying. If a dev could give a comment on this, that would be great!

Also, understand that Im not saying "DO IT NOW! GIMMIE FPS!!!"  Things dont happen instantly... so please ED, do consider this idea.

Let me know what you all think?

 

ED has none plans to build a FPS "only" if a Military client will be interest to require a FPS profesional module, and them get the necesary know to make them into DCS World Core. Other option if a 3rd Party put over the table making a FPS module, but that require a team, money and time to build from the scratch.

2 minutes ago, razo+r said:

No, as I said. There were mods around that made infantry playable.

What mod please?

[razo+r]

6 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

 

What mod please?

Here's one as an example: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/1459397/

[Silver_Dragon]

8 minutes ago, razo+r said:

Here's one as an example: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/1459397/

That is only a Placebo, you required CA to work, and you cant build your own DCS pilotable infantry into the core. Very Strangle with none 3rd party has build any infantry to DCS.

[razo+r]

19 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

That is only a Placebo, you required CA to work,

It's not a placebo, it's literally a mod (Note, a mod is not a module).

 

19 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

and you cant build your own DCS pilotable infantry into the core.

Technically it would be possible to create usable infantry.

Edited September 25, 2022 by razo+r

[BIGNEWY]

Better infantry is a great idea and you know we have been working on models, first person is something I would like to see personally, but we have no news to share currently. 

[Silver_Dragon]

6 minutes ago, razo+r said:

It's not a placebo, it's literally a mod (Note, a mod is not a module).

 

Technically it would be possible to create usable infantry.

 

"usable" infantry... ED and 3rd parties has not build anything about them outside CA. I thinking that has not been "aproval" to use them as a module without broken the EULA. 

[MAXsenna]

2 hours ago, Silver_Dragon said:

"usable" infantry... ED and 3rd parties has not build anything about them outside CA. I thinking that has not been "aproval" to use them as a module without broken the EULA. 

Doesn't matter. @razo+r (Thanks for the reply btw.) replied to a specific question by me. Why you claim is wrong I don't know, but read my question and you will see the context.

Mod = modification NOT module.

 

3 hours ago, Silver_Dragon said:

ED has none plans to build a FPS "only" if a Military client will be interest to require a FPS profesional module, and them get the necesary know to make them into DCS World Core.

This you don't know, and @Cintra can wish for anything. This is the wish list section after all.

I'm pretty sure it's safe to say that an FPS module will see the light of day eventually, just "no news to share currently".

[SharpeXB]

I think the map size and level of detail suitable for a flight sim isn’t compatable with a first person shooter. 

[Silver_Dragon]

26 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

Doesn't matter. @razo+r (Thanks for the reply btw.) replied to a specific question by me. Why you claim is wrong I don't know, but read my question and you will see the context.

Mod = modification NOT module.

 

This you don't know, and @Cintra can wish for anything. This is the wish list section after all.

I'm pretty sure it's safe to say that an FPS module will see the light of day eventually, just "no news to share currently".

Remember the Wags interview and your answer some years ago about that question. I only put your aswer here.

Quote

- Combined Arms with more vehicles, but not FPS (First Person Shooter) unless armies talk about them.

No money, no personal, no available time as a vehicle module. We can talk about how building a FPS into DCS?, of course... but the topic has none new on the DCS forum.

Edited September 25, 2022 by Silver_Dragon