DCS: F-5E Remastered - First impressions

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

27 minutes ago, PawlaczGMD said:

the quirks of this jet

I personally think it has more to do with quirks of consumer sim hardware.

I never ripped the wings off when I had my Virpil base, and especially now with FFB the chances of something like that happening are basically nonexistent.

[MAXsenna]

I personally think it has more to do with quirks of consumer sim hardware.
I never ripped the wings off when I had my Virpil base, and especially now with FFB the chances of something like that happening are basically nonexistent.

Yup! I really had to work it to snap'em off. Have you selected the FFB option in the Special Settings too?

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

15 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

Have you selected the FFB option in the Special Settings too?
 

The new centre position? Yes obviously, that’s one of the best things about FFB!

[MAXsenna]

The new centre position? Yes obviously, that’s one of the best things about FFB!

Exactly! I just love how the stick is repositioned like "in the real thing". Wouldn't surprise me the list why FFB works better.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[=475FG= Dawger]

5 hours ago, Bucic said:

Why don't you record a modless track with the lowest possible stick jerk that still gives you wing snap and post it in the bugs and problems section? No harm in that. The wing tip fragility was corrected, including the unrealistic excessive twisting of the wing.

He will just be told to not do things that make the wing break.

If ED didn’t take the easy money by fixing the wing concurrent with the release of the remaster, they never will fix the wing  

They had to know they were leaving many thousands of dollars on the table by releasing a glass wing remaster. 

We will never know why they didn’t take the easy win  

 

[Bucic]

10 hours ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

He will just be told to not do things that make the wing break.

If ED didn’t take the easy money by fixing the wing concurrent with the release of the remaster, they never will fix the wing  

They had to know they were leaving many thousands of dollars on the table by releasing a glass wing remaster. 

We will never know why they didn’t take the easy win  

 

I'd nod to that just months ago. But there were changes to the dynamics of the wing and wingtip pylons. We're back at clean slate. So a short modless track in a recent build with nonabusive pitch command that STILL causes the wings to break is what we're after.

BTW, one of the Remaster critics at YouTube said that wings break can be triggered with Max pitch stick yank "at speeds as low as 450 kts IAS."

1. It's an example of a simpke unified metric to narrow down things.

2. It's an example of a person pretty much admitting he exceeded the limitations of the airframe.

Edited December 8, 2024 by Bucic

[=475FG= Dawger]

1 hour ago, Bucic said:

I'd nod to that just months ago. But there were changes to the dynamics of the wing and wingtip pylons. We're back at clean slate. So a short modless track in a recent build with nonabusive pitch command that STILL causes the wings to break is what we're after.

BTW, one of the Remaster critics at YouTube said that wings break can be triggered with Max pitch stick yank "at speeds as low as 450 kts IAS."

1. It's an example of a simpke unified metric to narrow down things.

2. It's an example of a person pretty much admitting he exceeded the limitations of the airframe.

Its not a clean slate. Over three years to acknowledge and fix a bug in the pylons contributing to the ability to snap the wings off is bad faith. 
 

The absence of any flight control artificial feel system modeling is still not acknowledged which means more years of waiting. 
 

And the roll limits are obviously misinterpreted but this is also ignored.  
 

Yes, it’s probably a bit harder to crack the wings off in the F-5 than it was two weeks ago. That doesn’t mean it’s modeled correctly now. They fixed one bug after three years. 
 

To be honest, it is far too late in any case. 
The F-5 PvP scene is history and unlikely to ever return. 
 

I understand the F-5 is your dream and you desperately want it to be something other than a hot mess. 
 

Sorry to rain on your parade but ED really made a mess of the F-5 and then drove a stake in the ground and refused to budge while their third party developers, Aerges and Heatblur demonstrated how to properly interpret limitations sections and model flight control systems. 

[PawlaczGMD]

10 hours ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

Its not a clean slate. Over three years to acknowledge and fix a bug in the pylons contributing to the ability to snap the wings off is bad faith. 
 

The absence of any flight control artificial feel system modeling is still not acknowledged which means more years of waiting. 
 

And the roll limits are obviously misinterpreted but this is also ignored.  
 

Yes, it’s probably a bit harder to crack the wings off in the F-5 than it was two weeks ago. That doesn’t mean it’s modeled correctly now. They fixed one bug after three years. 
 

To be honest, it is far too late in any case. 
The F-5 PvP scene is history and unlikely to ever return. 
 

I understand the F-5 is your dream and you desperately want it to be something other than a hot mess. 
 

Sorry to rain on your parade but ED really made a mess of the F-5 and then drove a stake in the ground and refused to budge while their third party developers, Aerges and Heatblur demonstrated how to properly interpret limitations sections and model flight control systems. 

Why is the F-5 PvP history? Because the F-4 is better under certain conditions? The F-5 is still a good match for cold war redfor planes, and people still fly it on the servers. 

[MiGCap1]

I really appreciate the update! Thank You very much! 

 

 

[coreyhkh]

This Update should have been free or given us more features! 

[Bucic]

19 hours ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

Its not a clean slate. Over three years to acknowledge and fix a bug in the pylons contributing to the ability to snap the wings off is bad faith. 
 

The absence of any flight control artificial feel system modeling is still not acknowledged which means more years of waiting. 
 

And the roll limits are obviously misinterpreted but this is also ignored.  
 

Yes, it’s probably a bit harder to crack the wings off in the F-5 than it was two weeks ago. That doesn’t mean it’s modeled correctly now. They fixed one bug after three years. 
 

To be honest, it is far too late in any case. 
The F-5 PvP scene is history and unlikely to ever return. 
 

I understand the F-5 is your dream and you desperately want it to be something other than a hot mess. 
 

Sorry to rain on your parade but ED really made a mess of the F-5 and then drove a stake in the ground and refused to budge while their third party developers, Aerges and Heatblur demonstrated how to properly interpret limitations sections and model flight control systems. 

By clean slate I meant the bug reporting ground. Tracks recorded just one patch back may be trash, not to mention tracks prior to changes to wing code.

As for the length of time the F-5E has been left in the pit, it's not up for debate it won't be the brightest bit in ED's history. And yet here we are. There are things to do.

I didn't say it's correctly modelled now. My usual conduct is to try to feed a bug report showing glaring inaccuracy as opposed to arguable inaccuracy.

I don't really care about PvP scene. PvP people are not husband material for the bride anyway. They tend to jump from flower to flower.

Yes, I want it improved, I see the flaws (I was not aware of the mil doc you posted - I will read it through and through!) but at the same time I can see the wind of change... <melodic whistling> Especially with the human component modeling in the control systems chain. I consider it repeating the 6DOF cockpits history. It used to be community's wishful thinking, then it became a minimum standard. By the example of some other otherwise realistic sim, tens of thousands of man hour work go out the window by the mere fact they disregarded the flight controls limitations.

 

 

[Cab]

5 hours ago, coreyhkh said:

This Update should have been free or given us more features! 

They were very clear about the update. Buying was optional 

[coreyhkh]

4 hours ago, Cab said:

They were very clear about the update. Buying was optional 

I don't care they didn't listen to the community at all

[Cab]

1 hour ago, coreyhkh said:

I don't care they didn't listen to the community at all

Ok, it wasn’t what you wanted, so just don’t buy it. It’s no different than any other product or service. 

[Rudel_chw]

12 hours ago, coreyhkh said:

This Update should have been free or given us more features! 

I’m so sick of people wanting freebies …. How in the hell can you afford a computer able to run dcs?

[MAXsenna]

I’m so sick of people wanting freebies …. How in the hell can you afford a computer able to run dcs?

With good paved intentions?

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[plott1964]

1 hour ago, Rudel_chw said:

I’m so sick of people wanting freebies …. How in the hell can you afford a computer able to run dcs?

Somebody gave it to them for free. LOL

[ThorBrasil]

3 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

I’m so sick of people wanting freebies …. How in the hell can you afford a computer able to run dcs?

The point is that the paid upgrade should have more features. The F5E is an aircraft that has a wide list of features that could be included. Look at the A10C v2 and the Ka-50 v3 that for 10 dollars delivered much more. I would have paid even more than 10 dollars for the F5E to have more love in the cockpit and its expanded features.

On 12/6/2024 at 11:57 AM, ThorBrasil said:

I purchased the F-5E remaster, but was disappointed that these items listed below were not included.
The A10C v2 and Ka50v3 upgrades had more features than the F-5E. I hope that all the skins that were on the old F-5E will be ported to the new one. I still can't believe that it took about 7,000 hours of work to make this F-5E remaster.

The list of items that should have been included in the remaster.
•Digital radio,
•Aerial refueling probe,
•A new radar in the same style as the F-4E,
•Being able to arm the aircraft with four AIM-9,
•External power (provided by ground cart) in the same style as the F-4E,
•External air (provided by ground cart) in the same style as the F-4E,
•Boarding ladder and boarding steps.
•They say that the dimensions of the F-5E cockpit are wrong and were not corrected in the remaster, but I can't prove it.

The F-5E could receive this in the future and the value of the aircraft could be adjusted to $70 or $80. This would be the best case scenario for it to receive all these resources.

And finally, I believe this update should be free. If everything I listed was included, I would have paid more than $10, maybe $15 to $20. I hope the next updates are rethought in their format for the Huey, Mi8, L39, F86 and MiG15. I wish the best for ED and I always support its development by purchasing its modules. Apart from the campaigns, I have practically all the modules. I wish the best to ED and thank you!

 

 

 

 

[BluePhantom]

On 12/4/2024 at 12:54 PM, NineLine said:

On liveries:

New liveries along with a new and more detailed texture template:
Standard neutral grey
Swiss Air Force, 2 tone grey
Austrian Air Force 2, Staffel
Norwegian Air Force 338 sqn 215
“MiG-28” Topgun black
Aggressor Navy blue camouflage VFC-13
Aggressor desert camouflage VFC-13

New liveries coming soon:
Vietnam 1970s
Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force
Imperial Iranian Air Force
Swiss Air Force demo team
Aggressor forest camouflage

The texture template for users to create their own should be available soon, and should be no later than the Christmas update.

As far as radar and sounds, we never stated these would change, but rather the 3D model of the interior, exterior and pilot and included textures were what the remaster was about. Thanks. 

This is what ED doesn't get: the modding community has been hundreds and hundreds of hours creating work to make DCS better -- in this case liveries for the F-5E. These all wiped out in one fell swoop. ED's attitude is "We have provided a template, no go out and spend hundreds more hours creating supplemental work (which of course we will wipe out in one fell swoop later again). No working with the community to create a sustainable, playable product.  Just slight of hand marketing. The effort that went into this upgrade could have been so much better directed toward other aspects of game play.

I am already sorry I purchased this update. That was my foolishness.

[Alba57]

4 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

I’m so sick of people wanting freebies …. How in the hell can you afford a computer able to run dcs?

I'm sick of fanboys that think that they are going to inherit the company. This update sucks. I would pay for it if it would include a new variant of the plane with better avionics, new weapons or better radar. But it's just cosmetics. A facelift for an outdated product. Yeah, it should be free. Since the development of ED's products take literally decades, they at least should maintain the products updated according to the visual standards of the sim.

[Cab]

57 minutes ago, ThorBrasil said:

The point is that the paid upgrade should have more features.

No, the point was that the upgrade as-is should have been free. 

Just now, Alba57 said:

I'm sick of fanboys that think that they are going to inherit the company. This update sucks. I would pay for it if it would include a new variant of the plane with better avionics, new weapons or better radar. But it's just cosmetics. A facelift for an outdated product. Yeah, it should be free. Since the development of ED's products take literally decades, they at least should maintain the products updated according to the visual standards of the sim.

Fanboys? More like free market thinkers. 

Unfortunately for you, your only role here is a purchase decision. You seem to think you’re untitled to something for free when you don’t think it’s worth paying for. 

[Bucic]

35 minutes ago, BluePhantom said:

This is what ED doesn't get: the modding community has been hundreds and hundreds of hours creating work to make DCS better -- in this case liveries for the F-5E. These all wiped out in one fell swoop. ED's attitude is "We have provided a template, no go out and spend hundreds more hours creating supplemental work (which of course we will wipe out in one fell swoop later again). No working with the community to create a sustainable, playable product.  Just slight of hand marketing. The effort that went into this upgrade could have been so much better directed toward other aspects of game play.

I am already sorry I purchased this update. That was my foolishness.

I don't even make liveries and even I know a new 3D mesh won't be compatible with old textures. And for good. They were made based on a poor resolution template. You can fly your old skins in Flaming Cliffs I suppose.

[Rudel_chw]

44 minutes ago, Alba57 said:

I'm sick of fanboys that think that they are going to inherit the company.

not a fanboy, just a normal person that wouldn’t work for free and so I don't expect others to do so either, but I really don’t want to argue with you so will add you to the ignore list and be done with this subject.

[Tom P]

8 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

I’m so sick of people wanting freebies …. How in the hell can you afford a computer able to run dcs?

I would be upset if I paid for a module and the company later on tried to get more money for a module I already own. My passion isn't my wallet.

[Cab]

31 minutes ago, Tom P said:

I would be upset if I paid for a module and the company later on tried to get more money for a module I already own. My passion isn't my wallet.

So, the company should either, 1. Not offer any upgrades to an existing module for any price, or 2. Provide all upgrades free of charge?

If they were depreciating the original module, forcing original owners to buy the upgrade, I'd see your point. But that's not happening here. ED has said players will be able to continue using the F-5 even without the upgrade.