Interview with Matt "Wags" Wagner

[Hiob]

I'm not sure if it was posted already.

Anyway. The more people see it, the better:

 

[Eugel]

I watched that yesterday and it was much more fun and entertaining than I thougt it would be. Those 2 hours flew right by.

Absolutely recommend to watch. 

[Hiob]

1 hour ago, Eugel said:

I watched that yesterday and it was much more fun and entertaining than I thougt it would be. Those 2 hours flew right by.

Absolutely recommend to watch. 

Yeah, same. Quite informative as well.

[MAXsenna]

I'm not sure if it was posted already.
Anyway. The more people see it, the better:
 

Some did. But in another context, so no worries.
Forgot to watch it, will now, so thanks for the reminder.

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[DishDoggie]

Thank you very much. I watched this and I loved it. Good POST 

[TheFreshPrince]

It's a great interview, I didn't know Wags was such a likable guy.

What I don't get is the SU27/Mig-29 explanation, because it's already on DCS and that has to be based on some available data. Simply adding a functional cockpit shouldn't be the problem?

[MAXsenna]

16 minutes ago, TheFreshPrince said:

It's a great interview, I didn't know Wags was such a likable guy.

What I don't get is the SU27/Mig-29 explanation, because it's already on DCS and that has to be based on some available data. Simply adding a functional cockpit shouldn't be the problem?

It's not about a clickable cockpit. It's about the level of fidelity. 

Cheers! 

[Silver_Dragon]

I think some are misinterpreting Wags' words a bit, saying that the CH-47F, F-6F Hellcat and Kola are confirmed.

Remember that since January, and the "2023 and Beyond" video, ED had already confirmed these two modules as the next on their list, and that the F-6F had already been discussed at length by Nick Grey about the interest in making that module and the Battle of Britain ones years ago.

About Kola, it is normal that it is the "next" on the list thanks to the work of ORBX, when there is currently no other 3rd Party that has so advanced the hand... and yes, Check Six Simulation and the map of Australia, it does not seem so advanced, unless we get a surprise.

On Vietnam and Korea, let us also remember Wags' words "they will come after other maps" .... and we also have to bear in mind that the Afghanistan map, which Wags had commented on in January, was not asked about.

I was intrigued by Wags' response on "the big issue on DCS has on ground" (outside CA).

 

[TheFreshPrince]

vor 51 Minuten schrieb MAXsenna:

It's not about a clickable cockpit. It's about the level of fidelity. 

Cheers! 

That's true. But many people would still love something close to a full fidelity model, that would do the current level of DCS justice and not feel like a 10 year old game. I know it's a long discussion, so I'll leave it at that.

[MAXsenna]

That's true. But many people would still love something close to a full fidelity model, that would do the current level of DCS justice and not feel like a 10 year old game. I know it's a long discussion, so I'll leave it at that.

No problem. I don't actually disagree with you either!

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[Silver_Dragon]

I intent translate all log over DCS data here (sorry if not acurated).

 

[tacts.zeagle]

For heaven's sake there is a Mig29 they could use to make a module. This one

Here's Who Bought Paul Allen's Pristine MiG-29 Fulcrum Fighter (thedrive.com)

 

[Snappy]

7 hours ago, tacts.zeagle said:

For heaven's sake there is a Mig29 they could use to make a module. This one

Here's Who Bought Paul Allen's Pristine MiG-29 Fulcrum Fighter (thedrive.com)

 

And how exactly would that help them in not getting in trouble with Russia for reproducing their military hardware in great detail and system fidelity?

Just because that specific aircraft is on American soil?

I donˋt think the problem is actual access to aircraft data or systems, the problem is having access and being able to use the data while still clearing Russian laws. 
For a company which probably still has significant assets and workforce in Russia this might be a different matter than for a purely US or EU or independent country based-company ..

Edited August 10, 2023 by Snappy

[kotor633]

Hi,

Mig-29 version will be available -> What does this statement mean exactly?

 

 

[Hiob]

7 hours ago, tacts.zeagle said:

For heaven's sake there is a Mig29 they could use to make a module. This one

Here's Who Bought Paul Allen's Pristine MiG-29 Fulcrum Fighter (thedrive.com)

 

 

18 minutes ago, Snappy said:

And how exactly would that help them in not getting in trouble with Russia for reproducing their military hardware in great detail and system fidelity?

Just because that specific aircraft is on American soil?

I donˋt think the problem is actual access to aircraft data or systems, the problem is having access and being able to use the data while still clearing Russian laws. 
For a company which probably still has significant assets and workforce in Russia this might be a different matter than for a purely US or EU or independent country based-company ..

 

Guys, it is completely pointless to bang heads about those issues. ED made an informed decision, and even went so far to give us a little inside in the troubles around that matter. Wether we like it or not doesn't make a difference. I would bet big money, that they no exactly which modules would be topsellers and thoroughly checked the pros and cons.

I would recommend to take Wags statements at face value and not worry about things we cannot change anyway. Just my 2C.

[MAXsenna]

Just now, draconus said:

Can you save us from watching it for 2 hours and just point to the time stamp?

I watched, well listen to it, and I didn't catch it, so I rather not listen to the whole thing again. Even if I liked it. 

[Silver_Dragon]

2 hours ago, Snappy said:

And how exactly would that help them in not getting in trouble with Russia for reproducing their military hardware in great detail and system fidelity?
Just because that specific aircraft is on American soil?
I donˋt think the problem is actual access to aircraft data or systems, the problem is having access and being able to use the data while still clearing Russian laws. 
For a company which probably still has significant assets and workforce in Russia this might be a different matter than for a purely US or EU or independent country based-company ..

Your main force has out Russian. ED close your studios on Moscow and Minsk on early 2022, and move to working on online.

Enviado desde mi CPH2197 mediante Tapatalk
 

Edited August 10, 2023 by Silver_Dragon

[Eugel]

They talked about it in the video, those privately owned jets of course don´t have any of the weapon systems, but also stuff like radar, radio equipment and possibly other systems are removed. So they probably would get the flight model mostly right, but they wouldn´t have enough to simulate the rest to make it a viable full fidelity module.

[MAXsenna]

They talked about it in the video, those privately owned jets of course don´t have any of the weapon systems, but also stuff like radar, radio equipment and possibly other systems are removed. So they probably would get the flight model mostly right, but they wouldn´t have enough to simulate the rest to make it a viable full fidelity module.

Yup! My take on it too.

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[FoxAlfa]

Time stamped... you are welcome!

[draconus]

1 hour ago, Silver_Dragon said:

Your main force has out Russian. ED close your studios on Moscow and Minsk and move to working on online.

Is this info also from the interview?

[MAXsenna]

3 minutes ago, draconus said:

Is this info also from the interview?

Don't think so. Then it slipped by me.  

Edited August 10, 2023 by MAXsenna

[draconus]

12 hours ago, TheFreshPrince said:

But many people would still love something close to a full fidelity model, that would do the current level of DCS justice and not feel like a 10 year old game.

Yeah, just ignore all the PFM, 6-dof cockpit, new 3D models and DCS core, map and gfx engine changes.

[Silver_Dragon]

9 minutes ago, draconus said:

Is this info also from the interview?

That info has offical, from Kate, on early 2022... not necesary repeat them on any interview.

[BIGNEWY]

The Mig-29 is something we would like to do for sure, but we have to comply with rules and laws in many countries regarding information about aircraft and their avionics. To create the high fidelity aircraft you would expect from us we need to use public unclassified information only. Regarding the teams, no matter where they are in the world their safety comes first. 

thank you