So lets rate Black Shark 1-100

[brewber19]

Feuerfalke's review hit the numbers for me but in my own words...

 

 

Simulation 85% (Lack of collidable/"transparent to enemy" Trees, improved textures but still looking dated, Trees, same old water, excellent frame rates though...did I mention Trees?)

 

Cockpit 95% (6DOF is excellent and smooth - can't think of an improvement other than some buttons without a function)

 

Weapons 95% (targeting and ballistics for AP rounds impressive compared to previous 'laser beam' cannons)

 

Editor 75% (Removing the satellite view was poor show, adding triggers was useful except someone forgot the 'Or' logic or at least a way of making 'Or' easier, templates good but not excellent due to lack of ability to template statics, still time consuming and tedious to add multiple player aircraft in MP - why oh why do we still need to add each player unit one at a time?)

 

Multiplayer 95% (Most solid MP code out of the box I've ever seen! This value of this can't be underestimated. -5% due to occasional crash/stutter but this migtht be Vista/multicore hack)

 

Singleplayer 90% (Campaign missions I feel are really well put together)

 

Overall average score 89%

A very reliable and polished product for an initial release. For the complexity level I'm very impressed it is so "finished" a product.

 

Overall FEELING is that I am very glad that at least one developer still has the desire and ability to produce a simulation of this standard, sometimes in spite of its online community's "contributions" (this thread being an exception), so kudos to ED staff and its testers - looking forward to future modules.

 

For what its worth, things that would improve this score for me in Black Shark are clearly around graphics, collidable and "non-transparent" trees that we can hide behind, functionality of the mission editor around unit placement, adding MP aircraft as groups rather than individuals, did I mention collidable and "non-transparent" trees?

 

For other DCS modules like A-10 then collidable trees not an issue, but transparent trees for enemy still would be...but by then of course I am sure I'd be moaning about flight models or lack of HDR or whatever ;)

 

I've already said it but will say it again - well done ED, keep up the good work!

[Maj.Ballz]

It's about time that a designer has released an exceptional simulation with the level of detail that DCS has. A definite 98% in every aspect. Love the 6DOF cockpit !

 

As previously mentioned I would like to see some serious AI reaction to being attacked, instead of staying in place and getting pounded in the open with no defensive maneuvering or dynamic terrain masking whatsoever.

[Steel Jaw]

Does Janes flight model equal DCS:BS? Does it simulate rather than guesstimate the performance of the aircraft? Likewise with avionics and weapons systems?

 

Can you fully interact with the cockpit to the extent of this game.

TrackIR support?

 

Just a few questions as this is my first helo sim, which has piqued my interest in others.

 

Weaponeering is spot on.

 

The answer to the rest is no.

 

But then it's the weaponeering that is the most important issue when simming a combat helo. The Longbow has FLIR and mm wave A2G/A2A radar, allowing for true fire and forget eapons employment. You can raise only the mast above a hill line, map all the ground targets down below, sink back down, enage with all 8 or 16 radar hellfires in one wave.

[Dusty Rhodes]

We aren't critiquing or arguing or answering for your opinion. Just post your review and give it a score and people can agree or disagree. Let's keep this thread on target. ED is watching, lets keep it constructive as hell.

[DragonRR]

90%.

 

Against:

No dynamic campaign (although existing campaign seems good)

Dated graphics engine (although graphics are still damned good)

AI lacking in some areas.

Trees are decoration only.

 

For:

It's bloody brilliant.

Massive potential

Very few bugs in first release

It's bloody brilliant!

 

I have no real desire to fly the A-10 module but will buy it if for no other reason than to support the devs.

 

Generally speaking I agree with Airway's and brewber19's comments.

[tusler]

Great Sim

 

I give this a 100% simply as a Helicopter simulator, once the fighters and other helicopters are released and incorporated into this sim I don't think it's been fully realized yet that this will be a better flying for fun sim the MSFS. Hook into teamspeak for live ATC and you've got a total winner here without blowing anything up or shooting anything down, those are just freebies:thumbup:

[CAT_101st]

87 has a few bugs and needs some improvment in the ME and AI. the sim it self is great.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

95%

 

DCS BS has everything but the YUGO car in it! :)

 

Seriously, there is nothing on earth that comes even close to a helicopter simulation, yet, it lacks Dynamic Campaign and I would like better ATC around the air bases.

[Kuky]

I'd give it a 9/10

 

Simulation of the Ka-50: 10/10

*The flight model, avionics, weapon deployment and damage model are excellent. I am very impressed with level of detail on the Ka-50. 6DoF is just great and all of this should be set as standard in any future sim from now on.

 

Graphics/Software/Coding: 8/10

*For me terrain is not as I would like it to be but still it's best looking in flight sim, smoke is not very realistic but it is much improved over LockOn, there are still see through clouds (but not so important since you'll be low pretty much always) and trees are not colidable which is kind of requirement for this kind of sim but I understand it was not very doable to implement this due to high usage of the CPU. Overall graphics are still very pleasing to the eye (same as LockOn) and still best looking flight sim (but to be released Battle of Britain - Storm of war will definitely be lot better. Many 3D models are of excellent and exceptional quality. It runs well on current systems and is highly customisable so you can chose how hard to push your system.

 

I don't know what else I could rate as I haven't used MB yet at all (doubt I will as so far I've just joined other server's online or used already suplied MP missions). I am happy with what's been done and look forward to DCS A-10. I am eagerly awaiting for fighters of this level of simulation... hopefully by then DCS will have evolved into new graphics engine and suport multi-core CPU's.

Edited February 23, 2009 by Kuky

[Focha]

I would give it 100% without any question, bugs can be solved an it's just fantastic what BS achieved even with an older engine. For me it's the refresh of study sims and as BS is all about helicopters it's even more marvelous! Of course there are some things to improve but I am sure that they will get done with some patches.

 

So for me is 100/100!

 

I am just really curious about A-10A/C and AH-64A. The last more significant.

 

Regards and continue the great work ED I hope your work pays off for you guys because you deserve it all the way.

[spyda]

i rate 99/100

i believe this has set the new bench mark in Sim's

[Nayles]

I'm finding it impossible to score DCS:Black Shark without caveats. The principle reason being that ED have produced what I can only describe as an evolutionary leap forward in the combat flight sim genre.

 

In comparison to what has gone before, DCS:BS merits a score between 95-100%. However this would suggest that DCS:BS is perfect 'as is' when it clearly isn't for reasons any regular visitor to these forums will probably be very familiar.

 

So to summarise DCS:BS is the best I've ever seen but hopefully just a taste of things to come.

 

I'd like to add that the Black Shark was an inspired choice and I look forward eagerly to flying more exotic eastern bloc kit as opposed to the same old sterile western kit that have largely dominated the combat flight sim world to date. But I imagine I am now straying into controversial territory ha!

 

ED have made a rock for their own back I reckon. By raising the bar so high ED have unwittingly similarly raised our expectations - very nearly the ultimate in compliments! :D

[Dusty Rhodes]

"By raising the bar so high ED have unwittingly similarly raised our expectations - very nearly the ultimate in compliments!"

 

Interesting quote. I like it.

[-sulan-]

I give it a 100 just for the intention of modeling a russian attack helicopter so thuroughly :)

(Played "Apache Longbow" and "Hind", forgot what the company making them were.. But I've been missing a good heli-sim since then (10 yrs ago or something))

 

edit: And 500 for actually doing it so nicely :D

[MadTommy]

90/100

 

Looses 8 points for the lack of I in the AI

 

And another 2 points for inadequacies in the ME, which with luck will be addressed in a patch

 

Sim part is 100/100.

[jctrnacty]

Well I give 90/100

 

100 simulation

 

100 optimization

 

90 graphics

 

85 AI

 

I must admit that I havent seen so well optimized out of box sim yet. I Love the physics smoothness and all the details present in this sim. I Can't wait for A-10. I hope we will get WAFM - weapons advanced flight modeling.

 

Good luck to ED

[LoyalNine]

This is a tough one for me. Considering its a new release and has not even been released in a box version in the west yet its amazing. Sure there are bugs and issues but it dioes seem to be the most polished of any sim out of the gates. For a new sim with potential I give it a 95%.

 

But when comparing it to other sims that have had years to work out the kinks I give it an 80%. The lack of server scripting to rotate maps, the lack of tree damage, Turkey is unfished... arrghh this is annoying but I take it in stride at this point as its still new.

 

This sim is a blast but it does not immerse me in like other sims do (i.e. Falcon) BUT its new and I am certain things will improve and I will stand by and support DCS in their future endeavors as I believe they will work on these issues.

[HansRoaming]

Ok here is what I think

 

DCS as a concept

 

For me the virtual battlefield idea where a common engine with bolt on experiences including fighters, CAS etc is a great sell. Personally I can see that as the stable of vehicles expand I'll be purchasing more of the DCS releases.

 

Commercially this is a great idea as the potential for cross sell is increased. One product brings in a consumer to the range and they buy more. It also cuts down the cost of ownership of the previous releases as the engine and so on is shared, patching adds value across the range rather than a narrow previous sim. Future add ons could include terrain modules and so on so people can fight in common battlefields. The fact this development cost is spread over multiple types of simmer maximises sales potential.

 

The sim market is not a huge one but I feel DCS will maximise the potential customer base. Since I flew a helicpter for real a year ago have been looking for a great helicopter experience and have found it in Blackshark. From this introduction I know I will buy the A10, Apache and Hind release for sure and depending what is offered with the others might buy them too. Singular releases would have a limited appeal for me whereas a new aircraft, new terrain, better AI and so on that improves my previous purchases would be compelling. A pointy nose fighter add on in itself wouldn't excite me but one that improved my DCS installation would.

 

DCS Blackshark

 

Engine

 

I don't have an uber powerful rig but what I do have runs BS reasonably well. The big problem for me is collision detection on trees and the fact that the software is not making use of my multi core capability. Saying that the feel of the helicopter is good and the control options are great. This is the first game that is getting me to upgrade my kit in a while.

 

7/10

 

Gameplay

 

So far am in the learning mode and am loving this, because of the immersion factor just being able to fly the helicopter well is rewarding and the sim is providing me with more entertainment the more I put into it. Haven't had a chance to sample the AI in depth but maybe something similar to Weta's Massive engine could be a solution for the AI.

 

As a side note, sometimes you wonder what the Human machine interface designer for the helicopter was thinking with the stated goal of reducing workload. :)

 

9/10

 

Documentation

 

This is difficult to answer as there is extensive and exhaustive documentation but and it is a big but, I cant read it offline. A printed manual to be available for purchase would be a godsend.

 

The second point is that although the manual has secotions on how to deploy weopen systems etc there could be something on CAS helicopter tactics. The manual for M1 tank platoon I still remember as being awesome all these years on for its depth and value it added to the game.

 

7/10

 

In game training

 

The training and demo files show some good things and have reallly helped. Gets a solid thumbs up from me. Use more varied greetings in future though please :)

 

Something showing different tactics in different situations would be good.

 

8/10

 

Simulation quality

 

This is the best modeled sim I have ever had experience with. The detail and feel of the chopper is awesome and the immersion factor for me is high. Loving it, more of the same!

 

For a version 1.0 this is amazingly polished, much respect to the QA teams. Am very impressed.

 

9.5/10

 

Laser :)

 

Somebody buy this down the market or something, cmon Kamov, sort it out!

 

1/10

 

To sum up, I love this sim and hope the ED stick with the DCS concept as they've announced the next release (Flanker->Lock On->Black Shark) would add onto the previous one before and it didn't happen. If the follow ons are as good as this they've got my money.

[Steel Jaw]

Love the sim, hate the helicopter.

 

Skitzo.

[Dusty Rhodes]

Lets go people. I know there are a lot more opinionated people in our community. Lurkers, this is your chance to weigh in. ED is watching this thread and listening to their customer base. Us big mouths can't be the only ones weighing in, we need to hear from first time posters or those who play and never post.

[glottis]

Dusty, I like what you've started here, and enjoyed reading the reviews. I think you'll get more responses in time, but I for one feel like I'm only scratching the surface of the game, and wouldn't want to pass judgement until I've had more time with it.

 

I've got my HOTAS mapped, bought and configured TrackIR, and learnt the startup procedure and basic flight, but I've not even touched the campaign yet, let alone the mission or campaign editors.

 

But I will say this:

I like BS a lot!

I think the community, forums, producers notes etc add a lot to the experience. It feels more like joining a club than buying a product.

 

Review and score when I've got further :)

[AlphaInfinity]

I think this is an excellent simulation overall. The only thing that I disagree with is this:

 

Multiplayer: 90%

+ very stable and reliable code

+ inbuilt server-browser (big plus!)

+ Link adding great to MP-experience

- jumpy behaviour still occurs with ping >150

- no debriefing

- no end-mission

- no preflight loadout-screen, to change skin or settings

- no possibility to use the great ABRIS and PVI800-options to add zones, lines and routes before sitting in the cockpit (especially the option to share these with othes would add to teamplay and squad-based missions)

- problems when spawning blue side on FARPs

 

I think the multiplayer aspect of the game needs some work, especially on the dedicated server front. This is a glaring weakness in the game and in order for a game to have long term sustainability, a rich multiplayer world needs to develop.

 

Hope they add a dedicated server in the patch! Otherwise, awesome sim!

[Dusty Rhodes]

Lets not quote what you disagree with. Rather just do your own review on multiplay. We don't want any agree or disagree on this, we want a review in your own words, kinda like what you did after you quoted what you disagreed with :) I hope you understand I am not having a go at you, just saying what I was looking for when I started this thread. We don't want any pissing contests in this thread.

[Rhino4]

@ Dusty: Perhaps you should add a poll for scores (100-91%, 81-90%, ect.) so that those of us who have reviewed the sim can enter our scores above and get an overall average of what everyone thinks of the sim...

[Dusty Rhodes]

That was a good ideer but I can't edit it in now unfortunately. I like the ideer of them putting a number to it and then justifying the number in some short way also instead of just doing a poll. The poll give the numbers but I like to have them justified because I don't think these magazine people can actually justify their numbers.