opinion Afghanistan user feedback

[draconus]

On 7/19/2024 at 5:14 PM, Blackhawk163 said:

Too bad that there's no trial on that yet.

Yes, there is: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/shop/terrains/filter/location-is-central_asia/apply/

[BIGNEWY]

Threads merged. 

Thank you for all the comments so far we continue to look at the feedback good and bad, and we will be tweaking Afghanistan during early access. 

 

[Nightstalker]

4 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

Threads merged. 

Thank you for all the comments so far we continue to look at the feedback good and bad, and we will be tweaking Afghanistan during early access. 

 

You see, this is the type of comment that worries me.  The word "tweaking" is not what is needed here.  There is a "huge" amount of work needed on this 'S/E portion" of the map that was stated to be "for all intents and purposes, feature complete".  I've been switching back and forth between Afghanistan and other maps and I see none of the issues present on this map on others like Syria or even the new Kola map.  It will take a huge amount of work to make Afghanistan look as good as Syria, which in my opinion is the bar that has been set for a quality map.  The only other place I've seen this type of postage stamp, jigsaw puzzle piece imaging is in the upper northern part of Sinai which is the overlapping area to the Syria map.

The other two sections of Afghanistan are supposed to release over the next 6 months which worries me that if those two portions have to be completed in the next 6 months how is this first unfinished portion going to get proper attention?  We keep hearing that ED is in a good financial situation, so why rush products like this to market in this state.  Why announce the Chinook is releasing and then yank it for weeks to further work on it instead of just waiting to announce release when it's actually ready?  It didn't get held up for a "bug", it got held up for further development.  This is all just very bizarre.

I'm quite tired of the nauseating remarks from people that just jump onto a forum thread and start whining about the so-called whiners.  We are paying customers.  I've been around since before this sim was even called DCS and I've spent a ridiculous amount of dollars on it, so yes, I feel entitled to complain if a product doesn't seem up to acceptable standards.  I obviously support ED or I wouldn't have been around so long and spent so much money on it.  That doesn't mean I won't speak up when it's warranted.  The F16 was a very bad release and I feel like we are close to that level of release again with this map and we almost had it with the Chinook.  We also have an Iraq map and another plane announced to be released in 2024.  I'm not sure how that is possible.  Maybe they have hired a whole new team of developers? 

[pjbunnyru]

mistakes are possible, they are almost inevitable. but there are a lot of not mistakes on  map, but frankly unmade/ poorly made areas. there is no need to cover everything with early access. If marketed, it must be an acceptable product for consumption. add city, village, airfield,this is what should have been added to maps later, and not the reworking of half  map with addition of many areas of supposedly high detail (exaggerating).

Edited July 23, 2024 by pjbunnyru

[BIGNEWY]

1 minute ago, Nightstalker said:

You see, this is the type of comment that worries me.  The word "tweaking" is not what is needed here.  There is a "huge" amount of work needed on this 'S/E portion" of the map that was stated to be "for all intents and purposes, feature complete".  I've been switching back and forth between Afghanistan and other maps and I see none of the issues present on this map on others like Syria or even the new Kola map.  It will take a huge amount of work to make Afghanistan look as good as Syria, which in my opinion is the bar that has been set for a quality map.  The only other place I've seen this type of postage stamp, jigsaw puzzle piece imaging is in the upper northern part of Sinai which is the overlapping area to the Syria map.

The other two sections of Afghanistan are supposed to release over the next 6 months which worries me that if those two portions have to be completed in the next 6 months how is this first unfinished portion going to get proper attention?  We keep hearing that ED is in a good financial situation, so why rush products like this to market in this state.  Why announce the Chinook is releasing and then yank it for weeks to further work on it instead of just waiting to announce release when it's actually ready?  It didn't get held up for a "bug", it got held up for further development.  This is all just very bizarre.

I'm quite tired of the nauseating remarks from people that just jump onto a forum thread and start whining about the so-called whiners.  We are paying customers.  I've been around since before this sim was even called DCS and I've spent a ridiculous amount of dollars on it, so yes, I feel entitled to complain if a product doesn't seem up to acceptable standards.  I obviously support ED or I wouldn't have been around so long and spent so much money on it.  That doesn't mean I won't speak up when it's warranted.  The F16 was a very bad release and I feel like we are close to that level of release again with this map and we almost had it with the Chinook.  We also have an Iraq map and another plane announced to be released in 2024.  I'm not sure how that is possible.  Maybe they have hired a whole new team of developers? 

Thank you for sharing your thoughts and concerns. We understand that everyone has high expectations, and we're committed to delivering the best possible experience. Allow me to address your points in detail:

1. Ongoing Improvements:

   • When I mentioned "tweaking Afghanistan during early access," I intend to convey that continuous improvements are being made during this phase. We recognize that interpretations can vary, and while it's challenging to satisfy everyone, we are actively monitoring feedback and working on necessary enhancements.

2. Development Plans:

   • We have laid out a comprehensive plans in our FAQ, and newsletters for Afghanistan delivery, and we aim to adhere to it as closely as possible. Our progress and testing outcomes will guide us, and we'll keep the community updated on any developments.

3. Taking Time When Needed:

   • If we do require more time we will let you all know, we do have to be flexible and that is why we share our plans with you all. If plans change we will of course let you all know.  

4. Resource Management and Recruitment:

   • Recruiting skilled talent is indeed a challenge, but we are constantly on the lookout for capable individuals. Those working on the project are fully dedicated, though we must manage resources wisely. Summer holidays also affect our timelines, which is a factor we have to account for.

We appreciate your passion and commitment to our projects over the years, and we value your feedback as it helps us improve. 

Best regards
Bignewy

[Hiob]

6 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

Thank you for all the comments so far we continue to look at the feedback good and bad, and we will be tweaking Afghanistan during early access. 

Please, from the bottom of my heart - re-evaluate the use of satellite imagery. 

Handcrafted maps are what makes DCS stand out for me. Don't go down the other road - I beg you.

Edited July 23, 2024 by Hiob

[Hiob]

...or at least switch to old-fashsioned textures below a certain altitude/LoD.... (admittedly from high altitude it's a lesser problem, except for the baked in shadows)

[Vakarian]

Another voice against the satellite imagery. With all the amazing helos we now have available, it's really bad feeling to be flying low and looking at that.

[NAM]

I am on the fence for this one.

Beautiful small labor intensive handcrafted map vs huge satellite map.

Hopefully one day AI can help to generate 2 million square handcrafted map.

[Ironhand]

Just now, NAM said:

…Hopefully one day AI can help to generate 2 million square handcrafted map…

That my computer can handle…

[Hiob]

4 minutes ago, NAM said:

I am on the fence for this one.

Beautiful small labor intensive handcrafted map vs huge satellite map.

Hopefully one day AI can help to generate 2 million square handcrafted map.

The wasteland between POIs can be procedural generated satellite sludge if necessary (but please, ED, find away to at least make them sharp). But a reasonable perimeter around cities, airfields, main roads and rivers, should be free of immersion destroying "stamps".

Edited July 23, 2024 by Hiob

[Ala12Rv-Tundra]

1 hour ago, Hiob said:

Please, from the bottom of my heart - re-evaluate the use of satellite imagery. 

Handcrafted maps are what makes DCS stand out for me. Don't go down the other road - I beg you.

 

What are the maps with that technology?
South Atlantic and Afganistan?

[Hiob]

10 minutes ago, Ala12Rv-Tundra said:

What are the maps with that technology?
South Atlantic and Afganistan?

Kola too, I think. But they did a better job to make it not as intrusive around the POIs (which are few in Kola anyway). The forest also helps to cover up some.

SA also does look a lot better than Afghanistan right now.

The main problem isn't the satellite imagery I think (even though I don't like it at all), but how they implemented it. It is just too random and the transitions are poor to non-existent. (and the "stamps")

Neither SA nor Kola will ever be my most beloved maps (that place is firmly secured by Syria for now), but Afghanistan is last place by far - for now.

Keep in mind though - that all this critique comes from the POV of a rotor head. I can see, why fixed wing pilots may come to a different conclusion.

Edited July 23, 2024 by Hiob

[Ala12Rv-Tundra]

1 hour ago, Hiob said:

Kola too, I think. But they did a better job to make it not as intrusive around the POIs (which are few in Kola anyway). The forest also helps to cover up some.

SA also does look a lot better than Afghanistan right now.

The main problem isn't the satellite imagery I think (even though I don't like it at all), but how they implemented it. It is just too random and the transitions are poor to non-existent. (and the "stamps")

Neither SA nor Kola will ever be my most beloved maps (that place is firmly secured by Syria for now), but Afghanistan is last place by far - for now.

Keep in mind though - that all this critique comes from the POV of a rotor head. I can see, why fixed wing pilots may come to a different conclusion.

 

I don´t own Kola, couldn´t compare with them.
I fly both jets and helis, so Thanks for the info

[Gunfreak]

4 hours ago, Hiob said:

Please, from the bottom of my heart - re-evaluate the use of satellite imagery. 

Handcrafted maps are what makes DCS stand out for me. Don't go down the other road - I beg you.

 

Either go back to hand crafted or massively improve the satellite imaging resolution. (Which according to Orbx needs to be an ED core update) 

 

Edited July 23, 2024 by Gunfreak

[Gunfreak]

50 minutes ago, Schlingel mit Kringel said:

                                  

The issue with these satellite imagery is that, even in 8k resolution, a photo of a three-dimensional object glued to a flat surface looks like a photo of a three-dimensional object glued to a flat surface. Nothing is going to change that. If you stand still at the exact location the photo was taken from, with the correct lighting that it was taken with and everything, it might look good and convincing. But once environmental values change or you start moving, this illusion starts to look ugly instantly.

When you fly in a circle around this,

even in 8k it will not change perspective and by this, destroy any illusion of this having any depth. It is and stays a photograph you rotate around.

These "hills" will never ever look like actual hills. Maybe if you stand still and squint your eyes hard. But moving over or around this, it just looks like an unrestful mishmash of different colors and is very uneasy to the eye imho. It reminds me of games from the early to mid 90s when this terrible technology was used first. I was happy when it went away.

Same "hills" from further up: still looks pretty flat to me. You need to get REALLY high up to not notice that anymore.

I too hope ED goes back to handcrafted textures - for Afghanistan and also any future projects. I can not look at things like this for an extended period of time, my brain starts to feel insulted by this really, really quick.

                                  

Obviously you're gonna make the imagines 3d. Neither Kola or SA are flat. Nor is that other sim flat. So high resolution satellite imagines are of course not gonna be flat.

Why ED decided to just add flat textures, you'll have to take up with them.

[TFS]

6 hours ago, Ala12Rv-Tundra said:

What are the maps with that technology?
South Atlantic and Afganistan?

Look at Caucasus, so much clutter and what looks like actual garbage piles picked up in satellite images in the suburbs. It's everywhere really.

[inexus]

@NineLine provided some details earlier for how they approach the map. As I understood it, ED intend to build out all three parts of the map and based on its performance go back and add further details as long they believe it doesn’t impact performance too badly. Also it looks like they are experimenting with procedural generated maps + handcrafted on top to speed up the process of map generation. 

Anybody who can confirm this is correctly understood? This may address the immediate concerns/questions for low texture as well as the expectations for how ED will address it? 

[Romandv]

Great map, I really like it - realistic, nice color palette, very well done small details in the airports. It's just a pleasure to be on it.

But there is only one thing - this map is for airplanes, not helicopters. On a helicopter, the nice part is next to a muddy spot of photo grid overlay or a square of green grass. I did not enjoy flying Kola on the helicopter and believe this map is made for Cold War aircraft, Afghanistan seemed to me well suited for the US military conflict 2001-2021, although I thought I would use Hip/Hind on it.

Overall I am happy with the purchase, I think it is a good result for EA.

[DD_Friar]

@Romandv

I think the opposite. It looks great for helicopters! perhaps you have not tried the right areas? I think this map will serve both types well.

From a post I made earlier in the thread...

Myself and a squad mate DD_Fruitbat flew a couple of quick recon missions I knocked up last night and I have to say flying from Tarinkot and Chaghcharan we both found the scenery stunning with fantastic detail. We first flew north from Tarinkot escorting a small convoy until it was spotted an insurgent mortar team waiting to ambush them. The compound I could put them in seemed exactly like those described in the book "Apache Dawn".

Then as we continued on our patrol the mountain ranges rose and fell with great detail in the towns and villages. We found ourselves at one point pushing 11,000 feet, defiantly not a happy place for the Kiowa and Apache!

We were enjoying our flight so much the Kiowa ran out of fuel on the way home and the Apache got just got to the landing area before both engines died with no fuel.

Its a big thumbs up from us.

[Romandv]

48 minutes ago, DD_Friar said:

@Romandv

I think the opposite. It looks great for helicopters! perhaps you have not tried the right areas? I think this map will serve both types well.

From a post I made earlier in the thread...

Myself and a squad mate DD_Fruitbat flew a couple of quick recon missions I knocked up last night and I have to say flying from Tarinkot and Chaghcharan we both found the scenery stunning with fantastic detail. We first flew north from Tarinkot escorting a small convoy until it was spotted an insurgent mortar team waiting to ambush them. The compound I could put them in seemed exactly like those described in the book "Apache Dawn".

Then as we continued on our patrol the mountain ranges rose and fell with great detail in the towns and villages. We found ourselves at one point pushing 11,000 feet, defiantly not a happy place for the Kiowa and Apache!

We were enjoying our flight so much the Kiowa ran out of fuel on the way home and the Apache got just got to the landing area before both engines died with no fuel.

Its a big thumbs up from us.

I think I will try flying your route, maybe need to give this map another chance ) I looked on the map - for KW a little over an hour flight, I think I can definitely draw conclusions. 

[Hiob]

1 hour ago, DD_Friar said:

@Romandv

I think the opposite. It looks great for helicopters! perhaps you have not tried the right areas? I think this map will serve both types well.

From a post I made earlier in the thread...

Myself and a squad mate DD_Fruitbat flew a couple of quick recon missions I knocked up last night and I have to say flying from Tarinkot and Chaghcharan we both found the scenery stunning with fantastic detail. We first flew north from Tarinkot escorting a small convoy until it was spotted an insurgent mortar team waiting to ambush them. The compound I could put them in seemed exactly like those described in the book "Apache Dawn".

Then as we continued on our patrol the mountain ranges rose and fell with great detail in the towns and villages. We found ourselves at one point pushing 11,000 feet, defiantly not a happy place for the Kiowa and Apache!

We were enjoying our flight so much the Kiowa ran out of fuel on the way home and the Apache got just got to the landing area before both engines died with no fuel.

Its a big thumbs up from us.

You shouldn't have to search for and find "the right areas" for enjoying Helicopters (which I'm sure is possible), or in other words avoid the awful patchwork immersion killing spots, when in almost every other map you can just go without a second though from any airfield in the map and at least not be instantly put off.

And on the topic of Afghanistan being a Helicopter map.... Apart from (a non-existent) Vietnam Map for the Huey, Afghanistan is (or should be) THE ultimative map for the Helicopters we have in DCS. It should have been crafted with especially Helicopters in mind - and that means everything* has to look good from close proximity, but sadly it doesn't.

(*around POIs, including rivers and main streets)

[Romandv]

1 hour ago, Hiob said:

You shouldn't have to search for and find "the right areas" for enjoying Helicopters (which I'm sure is possible), or in other words avoid the awful patchwork immersion killing spots, when in almost every other map you can just go without a second though from any airfield in the map and at least not be instantly put off.

And on the topic of Afghanistan being a Helicopter map.... Apart from (a non-existent) Vietnam Map for the Huey, Afghanistan is (or should be) THE ultimative map for the Helicopters we have in DCS. It should have been crafted with especially Helicopters in mind - and that means everything* has to look good from close proximity, but sadly it doesn't.

(*around POIs, including rivers and main streets)

To some extent I agree, after all Afghanistan did have a lot of helicopters operetions under both Soviets and USA and it's a bit odd to get something worse than Sinai which has excellent detail apart from some minor things, but in the case of the former and latter it's EA and I knew what I was getting into. I have no complaints, based on my short flight time, since I bought the map just yesterday, I would have liked a little more detail, but am willing to wait and the main thing is to let this map evolve.

[Hiob]

12 minutes ago, Romandv said:

To some extent I agree, after all Afghanistan did have a lot of helicopters operetions under both Soviets and USA and it's a bit odd to get something worse than Sinai which has excellent detail apart from some minor things, but in the case of the former and latter it's EA and I knew what I was getting into. I have no complaints, based on my short flight time, since I bought the map just yesterday, I would have liked a little more detail, but am willing to wait and the main thing is to let this map evolve.

Obviously it is a matter of anecdotal experience - either way. And giving the benefit of doubt - of course ED has plenty of possibilities to improve the map over time. None has been perfect from the get go. My concern - from what I've seen - is, that the "strategy" for creating future maps is following a path that I'm not particular fond of.

We will see. This is only my current verdict. Others may disagree and that's fine. We will see how the overall reception turns out and what kind of conclusions ED will draw.  

[skywalker22]

On 7/23/2024 at 3:46 PM, Hiob said:

Please, from the bottom of my heart - re-evaluate the use of satellite imagery. 

Handcrafted maps are what makes DCS stand out for me. Don't go down the other road - I beg you.

 

I also think the opposite, lets go with satellite images. But those images also have to be carefully re-edited before putting into place.

Personally I really don't like textures like Caucasus map has, it all repeats too much, and it looks, not bad, but rather odd. And there is simply no comparison with real life terrain.

ED, just keep on doing like you did with this map here, this is the future and best possible way.

Edited July 24, 2024 by skywalker22