Now that ED apparently is releasing FC3 tier modules again, will we ever see FC3 WW2? I think it is desperately needed.

[Tree_Beard]

Last time I saw discussion of this topic, it was all but shut down with people basically saying "bro ED will never release anything less than full fidelity from now on." Turns out that is wrong, per the latest newsletter. 

I think a pack of 3-4 FC3 WW2 aircraft for western Europe would be a welcome, dare I say even vital addition to the WW2 side of the game. A PTO FC3 pack down the line would also be really great. 

I think what probably happened here is that ED is just releasing work they did for their abandoned MAC game, but what this proves is that ED is in fact willing to release less than FF modules. 

[Hiob]

What systems do you want to simplify further in a Warbird? I‘m kind of lost here! 

Not meaning to shoot down your wish. I‘m all for options. I just don’t see how what WW2 FC would be like……

Edited April 26, 2024 by Hiob

[Tree_Beard]

2 minutes ago, Hiob said:

What systems do you want to simplify further in a Warbird? I‘m kind of lost here! 

Not meaning to shoot down your wish. I‘m all for options. I just don’t see how what WW2 FC would be like……

 

I would envision FC3 WW2 to be like IL2 modules but with better flight models. 

[Art-J]

27 minutes ago, Tree_Beard said:

Last time I saw discussion of this topic, it was all but shut down with people basically saying "bro ED will never release anything less than full fidelity from now on." Turns out that is wrong, per the latest newsletter. 

They've been already working on these non-FF jets for many years, though, way before FC3 WWII concept started popping up in wishlists. 

They just planned to get them out as part of MAC, the concept of which has been recently shelved and replaced with FC4 as per Wag's post on hoggit today. Nothing has changed as far as fidelity is concerned then.

On the other hand, apart from community survey for non-FF Mosquito years ago, I've never seen ED considering a non-FF warbird.

[motoadve]

Please NO, warbirds are super simple, it would make them boring,  IL2 has a ton of simple WWII planes, if that is what you would like.

[Gunfreak]

The 3 new FC3 aircraft used the FF as a base. So probably relatively easy to do. New FC3 style ww2 aircraft. Needs  completely new 3d model and texture. Every animation will be new. Completely new cockpit. Completely new flight model.

So it's like 85% of the work of a FF module. So that's not gonna help much in getting more warbirds in the air.  We don't even get new AI ww2 aircraft.

It's not about the time and complexity that stops us from getting more warbirds. It's EDs priorities. 

WW2 is low priority, and asking them to make slightly less complex aircraft for WW2 isn't gonna change that.

[Doughguy]

Im with moto...

you dont buy  a ferari and then have it downgraded to a hondo civic or trabant...

[Tree_Beard]

4 hours ago, Doughguy said:

Im with moto...

you dont buy  a ferari and then have it downgraded to a hondo civic or trabant...

I'm talking about new FC3 planes, not downgrading the existing ones. Like how about some early war stuff for BoB? I would imagine 70%+ of the flight model work is already done to create an earlier version of a BF109 and a Spitfire. Throw in a Stuka too and you have a great FC3 BoB pack and an actual reason for the Channel Map to exist. 

[Tree_Beard]

5 hours ago, motoadve said:

Please NO, warbirds are super simple, it would make them boring,  IL2 has a ton of simple WWII planes, if that is what you would like.

Well you know whats also pretty boring? An empty battle environment with extremely limited mission making options. 

[Hobel]

How could it be any simpler? 

  And since il2 was mentioned here, there is actually no difference after the start up and this can also be carried out automatically in dcs. 

DCS even has the advantage that you can click on certain systems without having to remember which key you have assigned to them.

[Mr_sukebe]

One question, what would be the selling point?

Il2 already offers that, and can also easily be found on sale regularly.

The old marketing adage was to provide something that is one of the following;

- First to market

- cheaper

- better

 

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

I absolutely fail to see value in a simplified Warbird. I think that feels more like a commentary on, perhaps, warbird offerings might be overpriced in some individuals eyes? It's, at least, an argument that should be entertained. But, what's stopping anyone from just using autostart and take off assistance? Bind what few keys you need to your HOTAS and off you go.

Edited April 27, 2024 by MiG21bisFishbedL

[Gunfreak]

1 hour ago, Mr_sukebe said:

One question, what would be the selling point?

Il2 already offers that, and can also easily be found on sale regularly.

The old marketing adage was to provide something that is one of the following;

- First to market

- cheaper

- better

 

While I don't want FC3 warbirds.

The selling point would be that IL2 looks crap. While the aircraft themselves look fine. The maps just look horrifically bad. The graphic effects of bombs, rockets and explosions look just terrible. The sounds are terrible.

I almost never fly IL2 except for WW1 and that's only because it's the only vr ww1 thing that exists. Doing ground attack in IL2 is disheartening because of how bad it looks and sounds.  It has better damage modeling on both aircraft and ground units. But that doesn't help when buildings look like monopoly pieces. And explosions look like something from Duke Nukem from 1994.

[Keith Briscoe]

I'm guessing main part/reason for the ask is to have more toys to play with,  not the need for extra simplicity.  And this is hard to argue with. Guess we just need to wait.

Edited April 27, 2024 by Keith Briscoe

[Lixma 06]

The Su-25/T, F-15C, Su-27/33, Mig-29, A-10A have all existed in, and helped sustain, the DCS ecosystem for over a decade. And while everyone would prefer they were full-fidelity it's not like they're 'poisoning the water' by being there. 

VAC (Vintage Air Combat) would sell, I think. A package of aircraft, a map, plus the assets in one purchasable bundle sounds feasible. Provided the aircraft are realistically modelled I wouldn't object to them. They would offer variety, fill some very obvious gaps, and offer a simpler, and more cost effective entry for those wanting to give DCS WW2 a try.

I would prefer all DCS WW2 aircraft to be full-fidelity, most of us would. But at the current rate we'll all be dead before we see even a fraction of the variety on offer from current and past WW2 sims.

[Gunfreak]

28 minutes ago, Lixma 06 said:

The Su-25/T, F-15C, Su-27/33, Mig-29, A-10A have all existed in, and helped sustain, the DCS ecosystem for over a decade. And while everyone would prefer they were full-fidelity it's not like they're 'poisoning the water' by being there. 

VAC (Vintage Air Combat) would sell, I think. A package of aircraft, a map, plus the assets in one purchasable bundle sounds feasible. Provided the aircraft are realistically modelled I wouldn't object to them. They would offer variety, fill some very obvious gaps, and offer a simpler, and more cost effective entry for those wanting to give DCS WW2 a try.

I would prefer all DCS WW2 aircraft to be full-fidelity, most of us would. But at the current rate we'll all be dead before we see even a fraction of the variety on offer from current and past WW2 sims.

Again. The problem isn't how long it takes to make a ww2 aircraft. But how much recourses E allocates to WW2.

If ED wanted/thought it was profitable. They could churn out ww2 aircraft relatively quickly. But WW2 isn't profitable enough for ED to do that.

Even an FC3 style ww2 aircraft. Would be just as detailed in the cockpit. The animation, 3d model and flight modeling as well as sounds.

There really isn't that much time/resources saved by making FC3 warbirds vs FF warbirds.

For every 8 FF warbird, you'd get 9 FC3 warbirds. It just isn't that much of a time saver as people think.

It took 3 years for ED to release 3 updated AI modern assets. And that doesn't even have cockpit modeling. Just 3d outside modeling, animation etc. And probably no flight modeling work at all.

[Slippa]

^ Stark reality.

if they turned up I don’t think I’d use them. FF for me please.

[Lixma 06]

2 hours ago, Gunfreak said:

Again. The problem isn't how long it takes to make a ww2 aircraft. But how much recourses E allocates to WW2.

If ED wanted/thought it was profitable. They could churn out ww2 aircraft relatively quickly. But WW2 isn't profitable enough for ED to do that.

Even an FC3 style ww2 aircraft. Would be just as detailed in the cockpit. The animation, 3d model and flight modeling as well as sounds.

There really isn't that much time/resources saved by making FC3 warbirds vs FF warbirds.

For every 8 FF warbird, you'd get 9 FC3 warbirds. It just isn't that much of a time saver as people think.

It took 3 years for ED to release 3 updated AI modern assets. And that doesn't even have cockpit modeling. Just 3d outside modeling, animation etc. And probably no flight modeling work at all.

Can't argue with any of that.

I just want MORE dammit!

[Ala13_ManOWar]

On 4/26/2024 at 9:20 PM, Tree_Beard said:

I would envision FC3 WW2 to be like IL2 modules but with better flight models. 

For that you already have the competence we don't mention (and you mention), not to mention the other Chinese competence we don't mention. Why on Earth would anyone want to kill the sheer beauty and greatness of DCS WWII, which can brag about being the only sim around to model so beautifully and realistically those warbirds?? Do you know if you want to star-up the engine with a single key stroke you can via the cheat key? provided it's made available at your online server of choice, though if it isn't available there you have your "many people also want that...", you know.

 

BTW, yeah, ED took back their word about not again a FC module, I don't blame them since MAC (which is product I couldn't care less about, TBH) is apparently on hold or getting delayed so here we have some "new" FC4 modules for those interested in a shallower learning curve, which is fine. But don't blame the rest of the community for wanting realism and gorgeously detailed modules, including WWII stuff never, ever seen before on a PC. If you can't learn how to star-up a warbird, which can't be simpler, maybe you're looking for a different kind of game than DCS is.

Edited April 28, 2024 by Ala13_ManOWar

[Tree_Beard]

9 hours ago, Ala13_ManOWar said:

Why on Earth would anyone want to kill the sheer beauty and greatness of DCS WWII

Does having a low fidelity F15C and Su27 "kill the greatness and beauty" of DCS? No, it doesn't, and in fact I think having those lower fidelity modules included actually adds quite a lot to the game. Same would be the case for WW2. 

[Gunfreak]

5 hours ago, Tree_Beard said:

Does having a low fidelity F15C and Su27 "kill the greatness and beauty" of DCS? No, it doesn't, and in fact I think having those lower fidelity modules included actually adds quite a lot to the game. Same would be the case for WW2. 

But having FC3 ww2 aircraft doesn't help anything. It would still take years and years to get a new FC3 ww2 aircraft. A totally new fc3 ww2 aircraft would still need a totally new external 3d model, completely new animation, completely new flight modeling, new cockpit, new sounds. 

So it's still like 85% of the work of FF ww2 aircraft. So not gonna make getting more ww2 aircraft into the game much easier.

[Ala13_ManOWar]

On 4/29/2024 at 4:14 AM, Tree_Beard said:

Does having a low fidelity F15C and Su27 "kill the greatness and beauty" of DCS? No, it doesn't, and in fact I think having those lower fidelity modules included actually adds quite a lot to the game. Same would be the case for WW2. 

Yes, it does, but we cope with it because we have no alternative for those aircraft .

Edited April 30, 2024 by Ala13_ManOWar

[Skewgear]

Flaming Cliffs simplifies complex aircraft systems so time-poor players can use them without having to go through a virtual type rating course, in effect.

What about our warbirds is so complex that it needs a simplified version? Once you've mastered engine start and ground handling, you've got about 90% of it.

[jungleboy123]

15 minutes ago, Skewgear said:

Flaming Cliffs simplifies complex aircraft systems so time-poor players can use them without having to go through a virtual type rating course, in effect.

What about our warbirds is so complex that it needs a simplified version? Once you've mastered engine start and ground handling, you've got about 90% of it.

Literally that. Takes me around 3 weeks to learn basics after that its just about improving BVR/dogfighting and muscle memory.

I really really really enjoy touching buttons and things in the cockpit. I tried FC3 when i started DCS and got bored in 30 mins. I find the same with other combat sims e.g. IL2 and even MSFS2020 (when most buttons are INOP).

[PawlaczGMD]

1 hour ago, Skewgear said:

Flaming Cliffs simplifies complex aircraft systems so time-poor players can use them without having to go through a virtual type rating course, in effect.

What about our warbirds is so complex that it needs a simplified version? Once you've mastered engine start and ground handling, you've got about 90% of it.

This, the concept doesn't make much sense for warbirds. FC3 flight models are on par with full fidelity, as they should be in DCS, it is just the cockpit instruments/functions that are simplified, and buttons not clickable. There is almost nothing to simplify with the warbirds. 

I'm all for more warbirds, but if they develop them FC-style, it would be pretty much the same amount of work as full fidelity, so why not just do that? Because of such reasons, I also suspect that developing low fidelity modules at the price point of FC3 is not financially viable for ED.