Jump to content

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


Cintra

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

@Silver_Dragon Well, what I've learned the past few years, is that "NO" just means, "We'll not tell you yet", and only ED knows. 😉

That would be fine, if it weren't for the fact that a few days ago, we received the same response about making a hardcore vehicle module. Honestly, making an FPS in DCS World is much more difficult, and there are many changes to the engine currently to make something realistic possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, AndyJWest said:

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. 

 

 

 

I mean, you are making it sound like this isnt done in real life. 

11 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

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. 

Thanks for the response. Yes i saw the infantry models being worked on, another thing that sparked the idea for me. Im glad its something you'd also like. 

Let us hope for the future!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Making DCS an FPS is trivial. It's in the game right now: Eject, remain hanging on the parachute until you reach the ground and stand up. From that moment on, you are FPS-ing. Eject and then move through a city like that (say Senaki or Beirut), and you immediately note that the level of detail can't hold a candle against FPS games that were published a decade ago.

You'll immediately recognize the issue: DCS is made for fast movers. Eyes at ground level, moving slow is a terrible game experience in DCS. Flying low and slow with a helicopter is already a marginal (visual) experience. FPS game are almost entirely about visual experience - all FPS games are geared towards an overwhelming visual experience, focused around your immediate vicinity, with some physics thrown in for good measure. DCS isn't visual-first, it's sim fidelity first; we have a major conflict of goals. Walk though Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon, and your jaw drops. Fly (or drive) anything in it for a truly abysmal experience. For all its visual splendor, that game is sim trash.

Making DCS a good FPS is exceedingly difficult because of this, and it has to compete a many other games that simply do it better today. Worse, when you FPS in a future "Boots" DCS, integration of foot soldiers (beyond the occasional target spotting) with airborne players is next to nil - they may as well be playing their own game. Planes and Boots interact so rarely that either one can be better replaced with an AI bot (AI planes for Boot players, AI infantry for pilots). One of the reasons for that is that on foot you are slow. The entire Far Cry 3 map (an FPS I still enjoy) is 3.5 x 3.5 miles - roughly the area that is required for an F-16's landing pattern. The entire FC3 play area, with all its details, points of interest etc. Bringing that (FC3) level of detail to a single DCS map is likely to break any project's bank. Plus, it may outright kill performance for airborne units (although flying a helicopter through such an environment is a dream I hope will come true some day).

Another distinct obstacle is the game loop. Unlike in some (admittedly fun) FPS, players don't fly an F-15 over a city, eject, and then - on foot - lay waste to that city using a BFG-9000 analogue. There currently simply doesn't exist a good play loop that integrates ground-based players with fast movers; it's difficult enough to create good (interesting, fun) missions that integrates slow Helicopters and fast Jets. There are a few missions that (using CA) allow a ground-based player to illuminate a target. That my be fun for some players, but I doubt that the average FPS crowd would be interested in sitting around in a vehicle for 45 minutes on end, waiting for the Jets to call in. Flying some troop insertion missions may also be fun - just remember that during ingress the troops must be sitting tight, and during insertion, the pilots have nothing to do but wait alertly. The play styles FPS and Flight Sim simply don't mix well.

So, and this may be the reason for this bi-monthly installment of "FPS DCS", it's an idea that makes lots of sense on the surface, but falls apart quickly. I'm still hoping, though, that in the future we have systems that approach FPS visual splendor close to the ground: I fly helicopters in DCS 🙂

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What you want is Arma 🙂

Not so much the fast movers (although they are in there) but the integration with infantry and helos is really good and the shiny graphics are shiny enough for FPS use.  The sim level of the flight element isn't a patch on DCS with regards to the systems (I think the helo flight modelling is fairly decent), but it is an infantry simulator first and foremost; that said it does blow ghost recon out of the water in all aspects - it's not an arcadey game.

 

  • Like 1

Ryzen7 7800X3D / RTX3080ti / 64GB DDR5 4800 / Varjo Aero / Leap Motion / Kinect Headtracking
TM 28" Warthog Deltasim Hotas / DIY Pendular Rudders / DIY Cyclic Maglock Trimmer / DIY Abris / TM TX 599 evo wheel / TM T3PA pro / DIY 7+1+Sequential Shifter / DIY Handbrake / Cobra Clubman Seat
Shoehorned into a 43" x 43" cupboard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since the subject is raised every 2 weeks I'll make it short.

I'm all in for DCS FPS but a simplified one as part of CA module. Take the ejected pilot animation and movement as base, add running (depending on load), add one weapon (no crosshair!), add pointed weapon option FPS view for accurate shooting, add crouch and lie down moves, add embark/disembark option (but not into a tank!) interacting with landed heli or a truck/humvee/IFV/APC. That should be it. If you want other weapon or get into a tank just change unit/slot. That makes it a fun option for anybody that wants to try and stay within possibilities and quality of CA, without breaking the bank or long dev time. Some JTAC options would be nice too.

No Rambo style, please, where you run into a choppa and fly it by yourself or get into a tank and play as commander.

Full fidelity FPS does not make sense (either by ED or 3rd party) until the maps are super detailed at ground level, AI infantry is really smart, team aware and infantry have detailed "DM".

  • Like 2

🖥️ Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX3060   🥽 Rift S   🕹️ T16000M HOTAS   ✈️ FC3, F-14A/B, F-15E   ⚙️ CA   🚢 SC   🌐 NTTR, PG, Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats What I want in DCS, its not about FPS, there are Squad, ARMA ..  BUT the DCS needs Infantry, the supply and Heli supply, parachuters, Air assault, CAS and .. will be meaning full compare to the current state
I wish DCS Engine/Terrain get to that level by 2025 ~ 2030
Thats not just bring selling point to the Simers and Gamers but DCS become the most serious competitors to the game I just mentioned, I wish to load infantry to UH-1 or provide CAS for the player in AH-1 AH-64 A-10 ... 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, draconus said:

Since the subject is raised every 2 weeks I'll make it short.

I'm all in for DCS FPS but a simplified one as part of CA module. Take the ejected pilot animation and movement as base, add running (depending on load), add one weapon (no crosshair!), add pointed weapon option FPS view for accurate shooting, add crouch and lie down moves, add embark/disembark option (but not into a tank!) interacting with landed heli or a truck/humvee/IFV/APC. That should be it. If you want other weapon or get into a tank just change unit/slot. That makes it a fun option for anybody that wants to try and stay within possibilities and quality of CA, without breaking the bank or long dev time. Some JTAC options would be nice too.

No Rambo style, please, where you run into a choppa and fly it by yourself or get into a tank and play as commander.

Full fidelity FPS does not make sense (either by ED or 3rd party) until the maps are super detailed at ground level, AI infantry is really smart, team aware and infantry have detailed "DM".

Very well said, about 99% of the opinion i share too ! This from a realistic point of view seems to be the best option without forcing much more work.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really care about first person stuff too much, but I did make some fun and colourful missions driving a Hummer with a .50 into a defended airfield and going full Desert Rats on the parked airplanes. Da bullets dey was a' flyin' ever which way!

 

It was a fun departure from the usual DCS style of play. I would think a lot of people forget we can do stuff like that. 

  • Like 1

Some of the planes, but all of the maps!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Beirut said:

I don't really care about first person stuff too much, but I did make some fun and colourful missions driving a Hummer with a .50 into a defended airfield and going full Desert Rats on the parked airplanes. Da bullets dey was a' flyin' ever which way!

 

It was a fun departure from the usual DCS style of play. I would think a lot of people forget we can do stuff like that. 

I think a lot of people forget/don't realise how much fun can be had with Combined Arms simply, whether it be simple "fun" missions or full on Milsim combining Air assets. One of my biggest wishes in DCS would be to see way more interactions/cooperation between players using Combined Arms and FF modules, literally nothing more satisfying than linking coms with one or the other party and helping each other out in some form.

 

But the biggest drawback to this right now is how left behind/aside CA is, very little is made to put some light on it so mass people could actually realise its worthiness/potential.
The more people would use it, the more it would be talked about and shown around in videos or whatnot, and therefore the more people would jump in the boat and create actual reason for ED to spend ressources on it.

 

Edit : You also rarely see combined arms slots available in multiplayer servers, with units setup close to front lines ready to be used by someone willing to do some ground combat for a change, once again, if that mentality changed and things were setup to push/incentivise the usage of Combined arms in MP, it would probably have a snowball effect on the community to the realisation of what CA has in potential, and that would lead to ED maybe spending/allocating ressources on it.


Edited by SparxOne
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Beirut said:

I don't really care about first person stuff too much, but I did make some fun and colourful missions driving a Hummer with a .50 into a defended airfield and going full Desert Rats on the parked airplanes. Da bullets dey was a' flyin' ever which way!

 

It was a fun departure from the usual DCS style of play. I would think a lot of people forget we can do stuff like that. 

A lot of people do, this is the reason I keep saying ED needs to pay some attention to Commbined Arms. the bare minimum would be fixing VR. The maximum is an overhaul that would justify new CA modules. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, upyr1 said:

A lot of people do, this is the reason I keep saying ED needs to pay some attention to Commbined Arms. the bare minimum would be fixing VR. The maximum is an overhaul that would justify new CA modules. 

 

I wonder if any 3rd party dev would work on CA? Probably not, but you never know.

Some of the planes, but all of the maps!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Silver_Dragon said:

If ED open the CA funtionality to 3rd parties.

 

I would imagine they would if it was profitable.

 

1 hour ago, Silver_Dragon said:

The problem has, can 3rd parties make anything?.

 

I can't imagine why they couldn't.

  • Like 1

Some of the planes, but all of the maps!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just want to walk around the carrier in VR (i already do it of course with Object Camera View but lacks a "Walk" key).

  • Like 1

 - "Don't be John Wayne in the Break if you´re going to be Jerry Lewis on the Ball".

About carrier ops: "The younger pilots are still quite capable of holding their heads forward against the forces. The older ones have been doing this too long and know better; sore necks make for poor sleep.'

 

PC: I7 4790K 4.6ghz | 32GB RAM | Zotac GTX 1080Ti 11Gb DDR5x | Water cooler NZXT AIO Kraken x53 | 3.5TB (x4 SSD´s) | Valve Index| Andre´s JeatSeat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

All modules can be profitable. For me, it is more a problem of complexity than of opening the module.

 

I'm sorry, I'm not certain what kind of complexity you are referring of. Do you mean it's possibly more complex to make a ground vehicle inside CA than to make a plane?

  • Like 2

Some of the planes, but all of the maps!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Beirut said:

 

I wonder if any 3rd party dev would work on CA? Probably not, but you never know.

We actually had a third party (Wanted to become one at least) come towards ED and us the community beginning of last year, they were proposing to be fully focused on all the ground aspect of DCS and building proper asset packs and evolving into FF ground vehicles, the community was all for it if i'm not mistaken, but i believe they never made a deal with ED because no news from them ever since. Their profile also shows they've not logged in since April 2021...

Here is the link to the thread they had : 

 

Edit : Same could be said about the group that came proposing to build a SAM module of some sort, with IADS etc controlable by players, idea was very well recieved by the community, but once again, no news from them ever since.


Edited by SparxOne
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, SparxOne said:

We actually had a third party (Wanted to become one at least) come towards ED and us the community beginning of last year, they were proposing to be fully focused on all the ground aspect of DCS and building proper asset packs and evolving into FF ground vehicles, the community was all for it if i'm not mistaken, but i believe they never made a deal with ED because no news from them ever since. Their profile also shows they've not logged in since April 2021...

Here is the link to the thread they had : 

 

Edit : Same could be said about the group that came proposing to build a SAM module of some sort, with IADS etc controlable by players, idea was very well recieved by the community, but once again, no news from them ever since.

 

 

Neat!

 

Maybe going FF with air and ground is just too big a thing to handle comfortably. Might lead to massive headaches. I don't know.

  • Like 1

Some of the planes, but all of the maps!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Beirut said:

 

Neat!

 

Maybe going FF with air and ground is just too big a thing to handle comfortably. Might lead to massive headaches. I don't know.

Indeed, but even if they didn't end up going FF with ground units in the end, the fact that they were proposing to work on all the ground side of DCS and make CA better was to me an excellent idea, literally the ressources ED can't afford to spend on the ground aspect was presenting itself right there. Yet no one knows why it didn't work and they left with no words.

If you read through their comments in that thread, you'll see that they seemed to have excellent ideas to propose and work on. Things that i believe ED would never have the ressources to allocate on.


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

4 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

I was betting on them, and it is a pity that they have disappeared without a trace. Who knows, maybe they would have advanced the atmosphere of ground warfare.

I very much share the same feeling... Sad to think they were probably the only ones available to bring CA or at least the ground aspect of DCS a massive breath of fresh air.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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