Is MAC still alive?

[Lace]

4 minutes ago, Gierasimov said:

Fantastic planes? Did you mean fictional planes? 

I am in the right forum. Flaming Cliffs used 'docs'? I'm m sure you remember when LOMAC converted to Flaming Cliffs...

'Fantastic' comes from the same etymology as 'fantasy', but is often mistakenly used to describe something as 'really good'.  Essentially he is right here and fantastic aircraft would be produced through imagination, rather than hard data.

[draconus]

18 minutes ago, Gierasimov said:

Flaming Cliffs used 'docs'? I'm m sure you remember when LOMAC converted to Flaming Cliffs...

Yes, and then they added PFM and the weapons FM and guidance also got many improvements since.

Edited October 3, 2024 by draconus

[cfrag]

Is MAC still alive? No. Like this thread, it died peacefully a long time ago.

After MAC failed to launch in 2018 (you do remember ED's launch announcement video, right?), any lingering IP that was still marketable got packaged into the "FC2024 sausage" (fine with me, I own FC2024 and the FF planes) and is now done.

Now can we please let this zombie thread rest in peace?

[=Mac=]

Wait a minute: I'm Mac! I'm not dead... yet.

[Gierasimov]

16 minutes ago, draconus said:

Yes, and then they added PFM and the weapons FM and guidance also got many improvements since.

 

Flaming Cliffs did not use 'docs' improvements that you mention that were past the initial FC, I am not sure, coz if it did, there would be nothing stopping ED from developing FF Su-25T

[Gunfreak]

15 minutes ago, =Mac= said:

Wait a minute: I'm Mac! I'm not dead... yet.

I know a guy that knows a guy, that can remedy that.

[MAXsenna]

Wait a minute: I'm Mac! I'm not dead... yet.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[Gierasimov]

35 minutes ago, Lace said:

'Fantastic' comes from the same etymology as 'fantasy', but is often mistakenly used to describe something as 'really good'.  Essentially he is right here and fantastic aircraft would be produced through imagination, rather than hard data.

That's why I asked if he meant fictional planes. To make sure. I know what the words in English mean. Thank you.

22 minutes ago, cfrag said:

Is MAC still alive? No. Like this thread, it died peacefully a long time ago.

After MAC failed to launch in 2018 (you do remember ED's launch announcement video, right?), any lingering IP that was still marketable got packaged into the "FC2024 sausage" (fine with me, I own FC2024 and the FF planes) and is now done.

Now can we please let this zombie thread rest in peace?

Yep we could but why would we? 

It's always the same people (mostly) exchanging their opinions here. I guess we like it, we are very small bunch of folks talking here, small compared to the number of people who are registered on this forum. 

[cfrag]

10 minutes ago, Gierasimov said:

Yep we could but why would we?

Because, as you so astutely observed, there is nothing new to see here. Just re-runs of the same old topics, by the same, now older, people. In other words: Quite Pointless. Then again, I'm on my fifth re-run of the entire 'Game of thrones' series, and still derive entertainment -- so yeah, you do you.

[MAXsenna]

Yep we could but why would we? 
It's always the same people (mostly) exchanging their opinions here. I guess we like it, we are very small bunch of folks talking here, small compared to the number of people who are registered on this forum. 

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

Because, as you so astutely observed, there is nothing new to see here. Just re-runs of the same old topics, by the same, now older, people. In other words: Quite Pointless. Then again, I'm on my fifth re-run of the entire 'Game of thrones' series, and still derive entertainment -- so yeah, you do you.

Books are waaaaaay better. Even the one that will never come.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[draconus]

28 minutes ago, Gierasimov said:

Flaming Cliffs did not use 'docs' improvements that you mention that were past the initial FC, I am not sure, coz if it did, there would be nothing stopping ED from developing FF Su-25T

Ask devs and they'll tell you they used "docs". Doesn't mean they want or can do FF Su-25T with it.

And yes, I meant fantastic as fictional, but I bet you just waited for this word to appear so you can point out some already existing modules in DCS

15 minutes ago, cfrag said:

I'm on my fifth re-run of the entire 'Game of thrones' series

A few more and you'll know who's who

[cfrag]

7 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

Books are waaaaaay better

Yes they are. On the other hand: Peter Dinklage. 

[MAXsenna]

Yes they are. On the other hand: Peter Dinklage. 

Very true!

@draconus I'm having a break on my 3rd read through of the books. Not sure I'll ever get to know "who is who" completely! And now we have all those dragons too. Never got completely through that one.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[SharpeXB]

4 hours ago, Gierasimov said:

look at the mods by others such as Su-35, Su-57, F-22...

These are all fantasy nonsense!

4 hours ago, Gierasimov said:

People need to be entertained.

Sure. And sim players are entertained by realistic modules not a fantasy game. 

[Gierasimov]

1 minute ago, SharpeXB said:

These are all fantasy nonsense!

Sure. And sim players are entertained by realistic modules not a fantasy game. 

Correct, that's why we fly DCS . 

This thread is about MAC. MAC meant to compete with highly popular online game about aircraft, which is also called simulation by more players than this forum has seen together at once. 

Then, you have another simulation, the civilian one, again with massive players base, far more than DCS (estimated, as EDSA never was keen on releasing numbers).

Interestingly, if you look at the forums of both of those, you will find that respective player bases view those products as simulation games with highly realistic modules. 

I fly DCS for its drive to be the top tier highest level of realism, which in Digital Cockpit Simulation it surely is.

[draconus]

5 minutes ago, Gierasimov said:

MAC meant to compete with highly popular online game about aircraft, which is also called simulation by more players than this forum has seen together at once.

Yes, simulations can be at different levels. I got a feeling they wanted to squeeze somewhere inbetween DCS and WT - more like DCS quality world and physics but smaller maps, FC level aircraft, quick starts, shorter missions - that kind of play. If they throw in some DC and more gameplay content then it can be enjoyable for many players who are not into full hardcore simulation.

[SharpeXB]

5 hours ago, Gierasimov said:

This thread is about MAC

Well MAC is no more. And I think even as it was or as the next iteration of mid-fidelity modules go, this game is more about authenticity even with the simplified systems.