cfrag Posted January 23 Posted January 23 (edited) On 1/19/2025 at 12:18 PM, Coxy_99 said: I dont think its the fact theres an F-35 coming to DCS thats clearly not the issue, The issue is for years ED, wags and others state to make a module as close to its counter part as possible is the eagle dynamics standard for years, Possibly. And it likely was just a convenient way to say "no". Methinks that without a steady, secure income stream -- taking the path less well travelled will often bite you in business -- ED urgently need a hit product. The Mossie and Hook likely did not meet their income targets, and their last "hit" product (after Viper and Hornet) was the Apache (evidence: they receive the most attention and are arguably the only products still in active development). "Freebies" like ATC, Dynamic Campaign don't make money, and are 'forever WIP'. So (again arguably) ED have to switch to "lower-standard" products: cases in point: Afghanistan and Iraq map (IMHO sub-par products, too hastily pushed out to customers). We now see a somewhat obvious attempt at creating the next "crowd-pleaser", a cash-grab so to speak. Is that bad? Well, it'll be on a lot of 'fantasy tech'. To me, it helps shutting up those annoying "sim not game" rivet-counters. Overall, you, I, and all customers will be the judge. IMHO, if it helps ED to financially bridge the gap for the next 2 years, I don't mind so much. Then again, I'd be happy to pay a sub for 'DCS prime' (or similar) that secures an independent income stream for ED, and I will buy Fat Amy if that helps my favorite flight game moving along. I wish it were different, but that's what market reality can do to your production lineup. Edited January 23 by cfrag 3 1
d0ppler Posted January 24 Posted January 24 11 hours ago, cfrag said: .... "Freebies" like ATC, Dynamic Campaign don't make money, and are 'forever WIP'. ... Why does improved ATC and the dynamic campaign need to be free? I think it would make sense that they also were paid DLC's, just like the super carrier, combined arms, etc. I would gladly pay for both of them. 5 A-10C, AV-8B, Ka-50, F-14B, F-16C, F-5E, F/A-18C, L-39, Mi-8, MiG-21, MiG-29, SA34, Spitfire, Su-27, Su-33, UH-1H
MAXsenna Posted January 24 Posted January 24 9 hours ago, d0ppler said: Why does improved ATC and the dynamic campaign need to be free? I think it would make sense that they also were paid DLC's, just like the super carrier, combined arms, etc. I would gladly pay for both of them. I wouldn't mind myself one bit. They did promises though. DC would make sense as a DLC, while ATC should absolutely be part of the core. If they introduce speech recognition, that could be a paid DLC.
d0ppler Posted January 24 Posted January 24 Fair enough A-10C, AV-8B, Ka-50, F-14B, F-16C, F-5E, F/A-18C, L-39, Mi-8, MiG-21, MiG-29, SA34, Spitfire, Su-27, Su-33, UH-1H
norman99 Posted January 24 Posted January 24 (edited) 9 hours ago, d0ppler said: Why does improved ATC and the dynamic campaign need to be free? I think it would make sense that they also were paid DLC's, just like the super carrier, combined arms, etc. I would gladly pay for both of them. I couldn’t agree more. Package ATC into the DC, and if done well (optimistic I know..), it would probably become one of the most popular modules of all. I actually think releasing these as free core updates, somewhat reduces ED accountability. No timeline, no guaranteed feature list, they can just drip feed improvements without fully committing to anything. Edited January 24 by norman99 1
Ignition Posted January 25 Posted January 25 On 1/17/2025 at 6:09 PM, VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants said: If they can find the way to do F-35A, why not JA-37, JAS-39 and Rafael? Why not an F-22 instead of the F-15C
Tomas9970 Posted January 25 Posted January 25 (edited) 9 hours ago, Ignition said: Why not an F-22 instead of the F-15C Maybe because F-22 is probably still a lot more classified than an early F-35 (where all planes have been upgraded beyond the spec we will be getting). Also in DCS, more powerful doesn't mean better and the F-15C was highly requested for the past decade. Edited January 25 by Tomas9970 1
Ignition Posted January 25 Posted January 25 1 hour ago, Tomas9970 said: Maybe because F-22 is probably still a lot more classified than an early F-35 (where all planes have been upgraded beyond the spec we will be getting). Also in DCS, more powerful doesn't mean better and the F-15C was highly requested for the past decade. After the F-35 announcement classified is not a valid answer. It was something we all understood all these years, but now is not an answer. If more powerful doesn't mean better then WHY AN F-35? There're plenty of other aircrafts to do. If its money the answer, an F-22 would sell 10 times more than the F-15C, although I also wouldn't buy it. 1
Tomas9970 Posted January 25 Posted January 25 36 minutes ago, Ignition said: After the F-35 announcement classified is not a valid answer. It was something we all understood all these years, but now is not an answer. If more powerful doesn't mean better then WHY AN F-35? There're plenty of other aircrafts to do. If its money the answer, an F-22 would sell 10 times more than the F-15C, although I also wouldn't buy it. Read what I said. The F-35 had quite a few upgrades over the years, which may have allowed ED to get info on the early versions that are no longer in service. Present-day F-22s on the other hand are still very similar to the first versions, which would make it much harder to get any real info. Don't know why ED went for it specificly though. As for why an F-22 isn't better for DCS than an F-15C, I was more-less reacting to people who want newer planes solely for the sake of getting advantage on PvP servers and wouldn't be interested in anything that doesn't achieve that. I just don't like the attitude. 1
Weta43 Posted January 28 Posted January 28 On 1/25/2025 at 2:40 AM, norman99 said: I couldn’t agree more. Package ATC into the DC, and if done well (optimistic I know..), it would probably become one of the most popular modules of all. How? You need 1-2 people prepared to do ATC for every - 50? (100?) people that want to fly an aircraft, and of that 50 probably 5 will care (or will listen) if the ATC is realistic or not. A human ATC module is definitely a very niche product to my mind. Even a full realism AI ATC is still going to be a niche product. I imagine when it's sorted it's just integrated into the engine, not sold as a separate module 3 Cheers.
cfrag Posted January 30 Posted January 30 On 1/28/2025 at 11:02 PM, Weta43 said: and of that 50 probably 5 will care (or will listen) if the ATC is realistic or not. And of those 5 perhaps 2 are current in procedures. Definitely a niche product. There is a very interesting ATC/Tower application for DCS available (here) for people who want to become traffic controllers. 2
Convoy Posted January 30 Posted January 30 2 hours ago, cfrag said: And of those 5 perhaps 2 are current in procedures. Definitely a niche product. There is a very interesting ATC/Tower application for DCS available (here) for people who want to become traffic controllers. Being an LSO or AIR BOSS is a lot more niche than being an ATC or GCI. There should be modules for both. 2
cfrag Posted January 30 Posted January 30 1 minute ago, Convoy said: Being an LSO or AIR BOSS is a lot more niche than being an ATC or GCI I probably agree. I've never played LSO nor Air Boss, nor have I ever seen that position filled on my servers. The good thing is that we have the option. And yeah, I'd absolutely pay for a "DCS Tower" module. If that's AI only, I don't care as long as it's good. 1
Convoy Posted January 30 Posted January 30 5 minutes ago, cfrag said: I probably agree. I've never played LSO nor Air Boss, nor have I ever seen that position filled on my servers. The good thing is that we have the option. And yeah, I'd absolutely pay for a "DCS Tower" module. If that's AI only, I don't care as long as it's good. An ATC module could be awesome. Like the LSO station, you could see the aircraft in your airspace, and information about them. Operate lights on runways, open or close them, direct aircraft on the ground of course, another option could be to "activate" AI flights on the ramp. A GCI Module could occupy the same tower, or an AWACS station. Lots of possibilities. 2
Weta43 Posted January 31 Posted January 31 Wouldn't (human) GCI (WTC?) logically sit inside the Combined Arms module? 1 Cheers.
Flogger23m Posted January 31 Posted January 31 Very excited to see an improved Su-25 coming to DCS, and for free. ED must be applauded for this. My main concern of course is still the too accurate enemy ground fire from machine gunners in hummers and APCs. The tracking is far too quick and accurate, and I still have more problems evading BTRs and BMP-2s than I do Shilkas or Vulcans which is not really realistic. I feel like this makes the air to ground harder and less realistic than it should be, and hopefully this is addressed before the updated Su-25 rolls out. I also feel like this may mean a full fidelity Su-25 variant is coming in the future. The flight model is excellent, and the new 3D model and cockpit means a large part of the work is already done. Hopefully we see the new F-15C cockpit/3D model ported over to the Flaming Cliffs version to. 2
Recommended Posts