DCS Newsletter discussion 21st October 2022 - Black Shark 3 Development | Black Shark bundles

[BIGNEWY]

Black Shark 3 Development news | Black Shark bundles 
 

 

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

Good, no pricing , no date, no update path, can keep the focus on waiting for MB-339 and version 2.8

[BIGNEWY]

1 minute ago, VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants said:

Good, no pricing , no date, no update path, can keep the focus on waiting for MB-339 and version 2.8

When we are ready to share prices and dates we will let you all know. 

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

No rush, sir, no rush sir, one module at a time.  I like the Ka-50 and glad it is getting a new life.

Edited October 21, 2022 by VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants

[Germane]

Looks and sounds very good. Respect ED! I hope for a very soon release

[ThorBrasil]

@BIGNEWY Will the Ka-50 v3's ABRIS receive any changes or will it remain the same as the Ka-50 v2? Thanks!

[SparxOne]

I've got to say that the pricing on the 2 bundles feels very generous ! 2 modules literally for the price of one ! Thanks ED for all the ones that will profit from such a good deal !

One more thing i'm gonna add, i am actually really happy to see Combined Arms being put forward in one of the bundles, a module that has its shortcomings but still so worth it in many ways ! 
A module that deserves to be shown to the public more often and this bundle is clearly doing so, which is excellent !

 

[Avimimus]

Any word on whether we'll have an option like on the AH-64 to only partially load missile racks?

Footage of Ka-50/Ka-52 in both training and combat shows that they often carry two or four Vikhrs per rack... considering that the AH-64 allows something similar (and htat 12xVikhr is overkill for a lot of missions) it'd be a great feature to have.

It'd be great to have confirmation on this.

P.S. We also see six total, but all on one rack when loaded asymmetrically in the Ka-52 (and I'm curious if the weapon control system will allow this - given that we are getting the Ka-52's six hardpoint wing configuration as an option).

[Lace]

The Ka-50 looks amazing, but one has to beg the question, why?  Apart from some very niche content creators, who exactly benefits from the beautifully rendered equipment hidden behind maintenance panels?  Is there any gameplay value there?  I mean, I get the whole 'different departments assigned to different tasks' argument, but there must have been thousands of hours invested in the 3d artwork that likely nobody will see, whereas we have some AI assets which look like they belong in MSFS 2002.

I hate to be critical of what is genuinely impressive work, but I just wish they'd address some of the terrible legacy units first.

[Eldur]

2 hours ago, ThorBrasil said:

@BIGNEWY Will the Ka-50 v3's ABRIS receive any changes or will it remain the same as the Ka-50 v2? Thanks!

I just hope it will finally get the Tetris easteregg on the SYST page it deserves

[Retnek]

2 hours ago, ThorBrasil said:

@BIGNEWY Will the Ka-50 v3's ABRIS receive any changes or will it remain the same as the Ka-50 v2? Thanks!

The Ka-50-III would profit very much by realizing the Ka-50N- and Ka-50Sh-projects. Add the badly missing night-capabilities, please, that would be an obvious customers stimulation. 

[Art-J]

@Lace Might be somewhat useful for battle damage, I guess? Just like in warbirds, when for example engine cover gets blown off, the engine can be seen.

[Ikaros]

Can we open up the panels in game and look at the internal compartments?

Edited October 21, 2022 by Ikaros

[Hotdognz]

Black Shark 3 is a day 1 buy for me as its my most flown helicopter in DCS over its life and my 10 years with the brand and don't mind these upgrade paths.

But I do agree with Lace here , why bother spending thousands of hours 3D modeling internal parts of the KA50 that no one will look at or maybe will once or twice.

I would rather the ED 3D modelers work go into the low poly assets DCS has in the game that I can see everyday as I play in this virtual battle field, there are plenty of them that are still needing a major update, I could understand if it was in FS2020 as they are a different target audience, but in DCS I don't see any value in having this detail.

Still it looks great and im looking forward to getting it.

[5ephir0th]

Makes no sense they spent time modelling internal panels while the LODs of so many assets on DCS are non existent, cmon, we have some BTR with 200k polygons without any LODs, it's ridiculous...

At least i expect, if they have time to make those detailed internals, BS3 would be release with a compleat set of LODs but looking at the facts i have my doubts

[Avimimus]

Honestly, I don't mind DCS having a few lower poly AI objects (admittedly some of the Flanker era models do need a rework)... but the focus on modelling a specific year of a specific country's subvariant of an aircraft - but not modelling the opponents it would face bothers me a little. It'd be nice if there was a focus on building out a comprehensive set of AI assets for specific theatres (time-periods/places) like Il-2 Great Battles does.

[Hotdognz]

What they choose to model confuses me now more that ever with ED and what they do with the recourses,  BS3 with loads of details yet low polygon ground assets we have had for years, I really believe that the PM's for ED have no idea on where to focus the 3D artist teams with what the user base would like, I bet if they ran some sort of polls about this stuff no one would care if 3d models behind panels that we never see would be important to most of the DCS players, we all hear how limited the ED resources are but are they being used in the right place, I dont belive so to give me the best game experience.

But granted the BS3 model looks exceptional from the pics and small video of it shown.

[corbu1]

I‘ll update for BS3 for sure on release…the model looks really awesome.

As for the panels, they could be included in an optional process of doing an preflight outside check on cold/ dark startup‘s …a bonus feature for the hardcore simmers, but probably the majority wouldn‘t be interested. So it should be optional by enabling in the AC‘s option menu.

[tigayot228]

Ottima iniziativa per rivisitare i vecchi moduli. Anche se non sono interessato a Blackshark, spero che anche le combined arms ricevano un aggiornamento.

Great initiative to revisit old modules. While I'm not interested in Blackshark, I hope the combined arms get an update as well.

Edited October 22, 2022 by tigayot228

[schurem]

F-5, MiG-15 and F-86 might do with a bit of an update too. Oh and Mi-8 and UH-1!

[Shrimp]

I like the detailed interiors.

In the future, when ground crews also come to airbases and they’ll have to open panels to refuel, rearm and maintain aircraft in various operational states (also with the proper support vehicles included and with towing capability chosen by the player) the details are already there.

As for outdated models, they are being updated, never at customer speed, but at ED’s.

One thing doesn’t imped the other.

As a side note, I prefer non Frankenstein aircraft, not that it has no be a specific serial number at a specific date, but an important and widespread version with (or not) an upgrade package (ex: European F-16A MLU with a major Tape, or the American F-16C CCIP program) that operated at a relevant time period. In the case of the future Typhoon, it would be good to have at least a significant GE version and a significant UK version and not a breed of the two.…. ah, and also an F-4F…

Cheers

[Jester986]

9 hours ago, schurem said:

F-5, MiG-15 and F-86 might do with a bit of an update too. Oh and Mi-8 and UH-1!

This. While I’ll get the BS3. It’s a bit of an annoyance that these mentioned modules are in much greater need of a refresh than BS2. 

[Gunfreak]

1 hour ago, Jester986 said:

This. While I’ll get the BS3. It’s a bit of an annoyance that these mentioned modules are in much greater need of a refresh than BS2. 

Like most things when we ask about these kinda stuff ED says show me the money.

That said F5 at least will get some type of update.

[Avimimus]

18 hours ago, schurem said:

F-5, MiG-15 and F-86 might do with a bit of an update too. Oh and Mi-8 and UH-1!

It'd be neat to get more variants (e.g. Mi-8 with SACLOS ATGMs or more UH-1 armament options - maybe even a modern ODS - e.g. CFDI Helicopter Weapon Systems (cfdintl.com)).

Although I'd personally prefer an Mi-2URP. An export version of the Mi-24P (with UPK-23-250 pods, PKT door gunners etc.) would also be nice - or even an Mi-24V.

[Mogster]

23 hours ago, Hotdognz said:

What they choose to model confuses me now more that ever with ED and what they do with the recourses,  BS3 with loads of details yet low polygon ground assets we have had for years, I really believe that the PM's for ED have no idea on where to focus the 3D artist teams with what the user base would like, I bet if they ran some sort of polls about this stuff no one would care if 3d models behind panels that we never see would be important to most of the DCS players, we all hear how limited the ED resources are but are they being used in the right place, I dont belive so to give me the best game experience.

But granted the BS3 model looks exceptional from the pics and small video of it shown.

Are the panels part of the damage model? Could hits or object contact remove them exposing the internals?

Unless that’s the case I don’t really understand why they’d model so much of the internal structure.