opinion Afghanistan user feedback

[stburr91]

I agree with those saying they aren't impressed by this map, that's why I'm passing on it for now, and waiting to see how it develops. 

 

I also agree with the op, that maybe the map would have been better if it was smaller, and more detailed (and a smaller file size). The map is super repetitive, flat, or mountainous. frankly making it all the more logical to have it be much smaller, we don't need this much of the same thing over, and over again. 

 

I think ED spent so much time wondering if you could, they never stopped to think if you should. 

[Weta43]

Been away, had a bit of a fly, stopped for lunch.

So... On the one hand here we have someone here suggesting that the map is just too big and should have been smaller, and on the other  hand there's an entire thread devoted to complaining that it should have been extended all the way down to the PG to allow carrier operations.

 ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

What do you do

The more I fly around the more I think it's a very geologically varied map well suited to a wide variety of engagements & scenarios, the more bits I find that could do with more work / are plainly not finished, and the more bits I find that I really like.

I imagine when it's finished I'll just have this and the Caucuses map installed (Georgia and Afghanistan being the only two maps that really have the possibility of ongoing 'wars' that don't become world war III within a couple of days of starting).

[stburr91]

Well, if the map is going to be some giant monster, then I get the logic of wanting it to include open water for carrier ops. As the map is now, it's a monster, but doesn't have much in the way of gameplay variety. Heck, Wags acknowledged the map's limitations in gameplay during his interview with CasmoTV.  

My logic is to go the other way, since it's so limited on gameplay variety, smaller, and more detailed would have been the better option. Since this is a counterinsurgency map, much of the action is going to be down low, so the map needs to look good. 

As things stand now, I'm not sure that this map is going to be all that popular. I'm sure some will love it, but it isn't going to be replacing Syria as the go to map, that's for sure.  

[Glide]

This map is very large, and I would say too large for a comfortable 1 hr mission.  However, as long as there are interesting reasons to build missions in all the various quadrants of the map, then the map becomes a hit.  I am working on some ground action around Kandahar, but the rest of the map is pretty blank right now.  So far, I'm liking the color map for the built up areas.  Has great potential.

[Weta43]

Jack Spratt would eat no fat

His wife would eat no lean

between them both

every night

they licked the platter clean  

I took one look around this & uninstalled Syria...

(I found nicely made, but surprisingly uninspiring for mission making.)

[markturner1960]

9 hours ago, Weta43 said:

I tried to find lots of ways to phrase this that were more polite, but it boils down to - why the F*** do people keep buying early access products - that are clearly labelled as unfinished - then go into emotional meltdowns and paroxysms of forum post rage when they discover the unfinished product they bought is ... unfinished?

All the maps were of poorer quality when released than they are now - ALL OF THEM.

Frame rates on the Mariannas map were so poor when it was released that after trying the day I downloaded I didn't even bother looking at it again for months & until it had been patched a few times. It's a nice map now, but wasn't when released. 

Afghanistan is in its first day of Early Access & people are complaining that it's not as polished as maps that have been being patched and de-bugged for years - in some cases a decade or more.

After the tsunami of whingeing that appeared on the map's release, I downloaded & started it with a heavy heart, but I'm pleasantly surprised.

There are some rough bits but on the whole - it looks an interesting map & geographically varied (even the north-east part of the initial release is far from being 'another desert map'), the frame rates are good, bits of the map are beautiful, and at 0m to 50m altitude, and from a couple of thousand m AGL it looks very nice. In between there are a few things to work on - but that's why they repeatedly, all over the forum, all over the download page and all over every social media channel and internet site it's mentioned on, say 'IT'S NOT FINISHED"

If, when they say it's 'finished', you think its's not up to scratch - complain then.

If it takes too long to get to 'finished' complain about that (but please wait at least a week from today)

But for God's sake please stop complaining that the product you consciously bought in the full knowledge that it is unfinished, is unfinished, & do the rest of us a favour by not buying any more early access products.

Please.

We'll all be happier

You are missing the point - the underlying problems that detract so much are NOT going to changed with updates…such as slab sided polygon mountains, rough textures. NONE of the other maps I own have ever had these issues addressed. All I can say is that you must be very easily pleased and if one of your plus points is that “its geographically varied” then your struggling for positives my friend……

It does however, look pretty nice from high up, I think in its current stae, its more suited to jet operations than helos....

 

Edited July 13, 2024 by markturner1960

[T.Power]

18 hours ago, TFS said:

I'm fairly new to DCS but from my understanding this is early access of what, 25% of the overall map? All I see is potential for great battlefields. Guess I am wrong and everyone is correct and it all looks broken and like dog <profanity>.

I was flying with some people earlier and we all thought it felt amazing and looked great. Such nice features and terrain, being early access feels that much more impressive. 

Maybe it's VR but DCS as a whole is impressive as hell to me. Plus uploaded videos are like 40% quality of in game visuals. 

Welp if many don't like it, good thing it's not a forced purchase. I will for sure get my monies worth, specially in time with updates for years to come. Beauty of it is, to each their own. Sorry some of you are so disappointed. Hope updates fulfill expectations.

Totally agree, it's EA so it's bound to be flawed, seems daft putting money down for EA and expecting a finished product, but ya know, some people were born to whinge.

[Vee.A]

In places where the procedural textures are consistent it looks really quite good down low, while still remaining quite good up high . I think there's a lot of potential to be the best looking map. They just need to sort some of the texture jank down low, which I hope will just come with time.

[Lace]

8 hours ago, Weta43 said:

 the old maxim "the customer is always right"  is a crock 

It's also only half the maxim.  The full quote is "the customer is always right in matters of taste".  It doesn't mean they are infallible or are entitled to act like spoiled children, and it doesn't mean they have the right to abuse those serving them. 

[LuseKofte]

3 hours ago, T.Power said:

Totally agree, it's EA so it's bound to be flawed, seems daft putting money down for EA and expecting a finished product, but ya know, some people were born to whinge.

And some to be patronising 

[TFS]

Woah, I just gotta say, I thought this forum would be filled with like minded people excited to see a fun future for this game. I feel this thread has become pointless, unproductive. Let bygones be bygones. Some enjoy the map, others upset. Wish y'all some peace and enjoyment.

[LuseKofte]

13 hours ago, Gunfreak said:

It seems DCS has decided that they to want to only be 10 000 feet and up simulator

That is kind of weird when Wags himself say it is an air to ground diorama. 
I am not impressed by this map, not at all. But there are some nice areas I gonna enjoy. 
Due to space shortage on my pc and the total impression of this map, if not improved while seeing more of it. I will not upgrade my pc for more of this stuff. I met a hardware bottle neck not only the cost of the software. Because I can afford some stupid purchases. 

[Pumba298]

Well, I tried it yesterday, and it actually looks and feels like Afghanistan. I think they did a great job. I have been to Afghanistan 4 times flying Dutch Chinooks and flying in VR instantly made me check that I drink enough water  

[LuseKofte]

2 minutes ago, Pumba298 said:

Well, I tried it yesterday, and it actually looks and feels like Afghanistan. I think they did a great job. I have been to Afghanistan 4 times flying Dutch Chinooks and flying in VR instantly made me check that I drink enough water  

Good to hear. But I did not like the mountains up close like chopper flying ridges and stuff. 
once landing the styrofoam effect ended and it looked real again. 
much of settlements and small villages is like put on like stickers. 
I am talking non urban wilderness now. 
And this is not a review. It is just my impression of it after two hours. I hope it improves. 

[Pumba298]

I do think/hope they will update the villages. I tried it in the A-10 so did not see much of the smaller villages

 

[markturner1960]

Good points are: (SW Afghansistan only being talked about here) 

Areas such as the bases at Kandahar, Bastion etc are pretty nice.

The houses and buildings are not bad, however, most lack the traditional compound walls that are ubiquitous throughout the region

It does look good from 10,000 ft or so up

Bad points:

Polygonal mountains and flat sides to hills with no detail - I took a comparison flight in SA & Kola this morning, both of which are rocking much better mountains

Very little variety in the desert textures & these are pretty low resolution

The colours are quite washed out and very light looking compared to the reality: 

[Slippa]

6 hours ago, Lace said:

It's also only half the maxim.  The full quote is "the customer is always right in matters of taste".  

Where are you getting that quote from? Norris Mcwerters book of maxims? 

It’s twaddle anyway, obviously. The customer, after how much? Most definitely has every right to complain if he feels he’s been sold a lemon though. I would.

If this is EA then fair enough, everyone enjoy the good bits, cross your fingers for the bad to get better. From what I’ve seen I’m not tempted to pay a tenner for it as it is. I’d like a new map, just don’t think this warrants the money quite yet. 

Too much of DCS seems put together in a panic and rushed out on sale before it’s ready. Some of that never is ‘ready’ either. This last patch caused all kinds of trouble all over the place. I’ll be sure to remember it next time one pops up again. Call me old fashioned but if I’m paying good money I expect a good product for it. Not a half-arsed mess with potential. I s’pose that’s EA for ya, or not if you don’t want it.

I’ll wait and see for now though. Syria’s meant to be decent and I’ve barely looked at it. I’m not stuck for maps for a while so there’s time for Afghan to improve and tempt me in.

Glad some are enjoying it anyhow. 
edit: It’s in EA so there’s hope yet.

Edited July 13, 2024 by Slippa
Because muppets keep chopping posts

[Pumba298]

I use the technicolor-3 color grading (in DCS settings). I think that looks a bit nicer in my HP V2 headset, give it a try.  

[T.Power]

7 hours ago, markturner1960 said:

but it boils down to - why the F*** do people keep buying early access products

 

ED should ban whingers from purchasing EA.  It's the equivalent of being allergic to peanuts, eating peanuts and then blaming the manufacturer for making you sick.

Edited July 13, 2024 by T.Power

[LuseKofte]

What it boils down to is. I payed 12 $ for this + some miles. And it is well worth that money. I find some areas very interesting and will have a lot of chopper fun

[Nightstalker]

I fully understand only 1/3 of the map is completed.  I'm only flying in the S/W portion of the map, but even this area seems to be dotted with full detail and non full detail.  I have no idea which series of mountains are supposed to be detailed and which are not because lots of mountains in the S/W look like they have no detail and very angular edges.

The hand crafted area looks fantastic.  I've flown this same area of the map in MSFS2020 which is the present benchmark in "flight sim graphics" and I can tell you that the DCS map looks WAY better.  The only thing that looks better in MSFS is the mountains.

 

Edited July 15, 2024 by Nightstalker

[Slippa]

It’ll get better. It’s in EA so should get better, hopefully sooner rather than later so I can have it too. 

edit: The thread’s ghostposting. Mods are chopping away posts so who knows what’ll make sense later. Hard to get into a thread as I can tap away far too much at times and it could all be in vain.

I didn’t have any complaints to make either and none of my posts were chopped (so far, maybe this one ) but it’s frustrating to put it mildly.

codewords and hot-phrases seem to be ‘boils down to’ so no bubbling waters and steam sessions and we should be ok?

Everything’s marvellous, superb and fantastic. So that’s nice.

good weekend all .

Edited July 13, 2024 by Slippa
ghostposting

[Beirut]

It's kind of meh!, but I am optimistic and I think it will see good updates. And I figure ED has to make this map look good, otherwise it will be a bad omen for the Iraq map.

 

[Spankinvicar]

Definatly not a helo map as it stands.  just took the Hip up to Kajaki Dam from Bastion and its awful.  All the way up (as soon as you get outside the obviously hand built areas just looks like 2d stickers stuck onto the mesh).  All straight lines and triangles etc.  Even something as important as the dam itself looks half painted on.  You can see where the painted on areas are supposed to be changes in elevation in the ground but when you land on them there flat.  I'm presuming they have plastered satellite images over the mesh but its so immersion breaking under 1000 ft that its just awful for Helo pilots.  I understand that its early access but theyve also said that this section is close to completion.  I would suggest it's nowhere near and if this is any indication of the new standard for maps then I wont be buying anymore of them. 

[Beirut]

1 hour ago, Spankinvicar said:

 . . .  if this is any indication of the new standard for maps then I wont be buying anymore of them. 

 

The state of the map now is certainly not any kind of standard. It will see improvements. I think we'll see much better textures coming along.