Leading DCS out of a niche market

[TBarina]

I think it is important to broaden the DCS user base by trying to attract pilots from Flight Simulator. This would certainly help to increase the company's cash flow and allow investments to cover the missing parts ( in particular: ATC, new scenarios, new airports).
Do you think it is possible to enter into agreements with third parties to introduce the possibility of flying AWACS, aerial refueling aircraft, commercial aircraft flying routes in dangerous areas or training areas (thinking about Nellis and the near Las Vegas airport)?

Over time the new arrivals may become interested in military flying too.

[sirrah]

Well, one can always wish, but this one will be a long shot, especially as ED apparently (and unfortunately) doesn't see priority in developing proper ATC:

 

[Jackjack171]

Please don't take offense to this but I think that we should let the big dogs worry about their business model and cash flow. As a consumer, it's not my bag to worry about how they proceed, which currently is fine IMHO. And given the latest rough waters going on with ED and another dev that I won't mention, (as it's none of my business) I can see the legalities involved with such a monumental venture. In a perfect world, it sounds like a great idea, but reality says otherwise. The DCS user base gets bigger all the time. Let's face it; DCS is the big dog in town right now for aerial combat. DCS and ED are a very well-known company thanks to YouTube content creators and such. They have no problem getting new players here. There has always been a gulf between civil flight simulators and Milsim. I do not see that changing anytime soon! The likes of civil simulators (which I also have) have always been hesitant about Military operations. The stuff that's allowed in such as fighters for example, only allow you to barrel roll and fly under bridges and such. The stuff that they have now, will not allow weapons. This is a complex problem that is not an easy fix. Combat sims will for the foreseeable future always be niche. Though I doubt at this point you can really call it niche. 

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

Also, how is this leading it out of a niche?

The niche is detailed flight simming, not features that are absent.

[cfrag]

23 hours ago, TBarina said:

I think it is important to broaden the DCS user base

I believe this to be universally true: more players, more business for ED, better for ED. Whether that's better for the current user base will likely be an eternal point of debate, as a broader user base usually comes with some tangible changes, and people hate change. 

23 hours ago, TBarina said:

the possibility of flying AWACS, aerial refueling aircraft,

Well, adding a super-tiny sliver of specialty flying to DCS's current niche IMHO will not broaden it perceptibly. 

23 hours ago, TBarina said:

commercial aircraft flying routes in dangerous areas

Please be advised that in conflicted zones, airspace is closed to civil aviation, for obvious reasons - no one wants a repeat of IA Flight 655. Driving heavies for mil purposes is fine, and hopefully the Herc and perhaps some other cargo planes will make it to DCS. Seeing flying heavy tin is already possible in other FS I do not fully understand how this could much broaden DCS's pull, especially looking at DCS's currently lamentable state of APR/TWR/GND procedures. Better not to put a lantern on that.

On 12/25/2024 at 11:44 AM, TBarina said:

Over time the new arrivals may become interested in military flying too.

Until then, what would those new arrivals do in a mil sim with no procedural support nor weapons? Start and shut down their A300? Fly racetrack over Elbrus? Be target practice for SAM and/or other players? That might get old fast. 

23 hours ago, Jackjack171 said:

DCS is the big dog in town right now for aerial combat.

Say, what is the color of the sky in your world? DCS is the big dog in study-level, military, non-certified, multiplayer capable, 1940-2020 era flight gaming that excludes most radio procedures, and encompasses less than 50 airframes. It's a highly specific niche, and other (more gaming-oriented) aerial combat sims' daily on-line slice can eat DCS's entire player base for lunch (the game that rhymes with "War Blunder" has some 160'00-250'000 concurrent online players. DCS has somewhere around 500-1000 players concurrently online (remember to subtract 1 player per server to get at the real number of players). DCS isn't an online-primary game, but the number differential is still staggering. So yes, DCS has a lot of room for improvement, and I would love for DCS to become more competitive in the online arena. So please, please, please make DCS a better online experience.

23 hours ago, Jackjack171 said:

DCS and ED are a very well-known company thanks to YouTube content creators and such.

What does that even mean? Some YT like DCS because if outputs cool imagery that drivers their income. So some kid watches a YouTube or tiktok or whatever, marvels at the cool graphics, and then...? Ten minutes and a download later, they sit in the free Su-25T at Batumi. Twelve minutes later, the engines still not running, the game gets wiped, and kiddo goes to look for an air combat game that rhymes with "Plunder". DCS has a long road to become more accessible ahead of it. It's King Of the Hill in VR -- but that, too, is unfortunately very niche (man, how much do I wish VR would become more mainstream. DCS helicopters absolutely kill in VR).

23 hours ago, Jackjack171 said:

Combat sims will for the foreseeable future always be niche.

Perhaps you could take another, closer look at the gaming world. Combat games outnumber civil by 100 to 1 and more, including air. DCS is niche because of it's focus on avionics and (to a limited amount) procedures and mixes in a decent flight model [please don't anybody fall into the 'DCS is a sim, not game' fallacy. We are all too mature for that, right?]

So yes, DCS is niche, and I hope that ED manage to broaden its appeal. There's a lot of uncovered ground there, so here's hoping. I'm not convinced that civil aviation could be the ticket right now, but it could serve to deepen the experience for some players. Once DCS better supports cargo and infrastructure to give those flights some meaning.

[Nikwax74]

On 12/25/2024 at 11:44 AM, TBarina said:

commercial aircraft flying routes in dangerous areas

No

[Jackjack171]

4 hours ago, cfrag said:

 

Say, what is the color of the sky in your world? DCS is the big dog in study-level, military, non-certified, multiplayer capable, 1940-2020 era flight gaming that excludes most radio procedures, and encompasses less than 50 airframes. It's a highly specific niche, and other (more gaming-oriented) aerial combat sims' daily on-line slice can eat DCS's entire player base for lunch (the game that rhymes with "War Blunder" has some 160'00-250'000 concurrent online players. DCS has somewhere around 500-1000 players concurrently online (remember to subtract 1 player per server to get at the real number of players). DCS isn't an online-primary game, but the number differential is still staggering. So yes, DCS has a lot of room for improvement, and I would love for DCS to become more competitive in the online arena. So please, please, please make DCS a better online experience.

 

Really?! I'll try and respond to you in kind but with some of the same respect that I gave the OP. Be aware that the same could be asked about your world view! Anyone including a 5-year-old can play that other sim. So, I might ask, what would be your idea to make it a better online experience and make it more appealing? As far as I can see, that's your biggest gripe. Everyone doesn't use VR! Online play has nothing to do with being genuine or as close as it gets. Quantity over quality is never a good look! I'd rather have the low numbers in airframes than 50 that have some sort of arcade or gamey feel to them. Ok, some radio procedures and airfield, ATC comms suck in DCS, I get it! But if one wants true-to-real, as close as it gets to real, study level aircraft, DCS is where they come. Even the Ace Wombat folks are over here with the made-up countries and liveries to quench that thirst. The way that you use accessible sounds like "inclusive" which is to dumb down or water down a product so that everyone can get in. Again, I'm not seeing how much more appealing DCS can get without changing what made it great in the first place. I'm sure that other sim is loads of fun for online for the run and gun types, but c'mon its cinematic, theatrical value is what draws 'em in. Everyone just has to pick their lane. 

 Here's the kick, DCS is already accessible to everyone, they just have to put the work in! You know just as I do that YT is advertisement. When I found ED, it wasn't through YT, it was from forums of folks yapping about how realistic it was. These days, I can't open YT without seeing a new vid of someone using it. If some kid can't figure out how to start the default aircraft, then whose fault is that? Sounds like some instant gratification, low impulse, self-control issues to me! Be careful when using the word "mature" when the argument is mostly based on a better online experience and "the user couldn't or wouldn't figure it out, so they went elsewhere looking for their jollies." Some have a short attention span so yes; there will always be War blunder and many others, and folks will go there to rack up points and shoot indefinite missiles because starting up a Frogfoot is so difficult!  

 
When the CH-47 was released, I remember the himming and hawing from those that said, "what are we gonna do with it/no one asked for or wants this."  And then there was that maybe small minority that welcomed it. Sure, there is room for AWACS and such. Shouldn't be so quick to discount those that want to drive an aerial refueler. Who says that it wouldn't broaden DCS? With the addition of more helicopters, I think DCS is being broadened as we speak! Please try and remember that, not everyone wants to play online! Yes, the AI bandits could use a lot of work and that makes one yearn for going peer to peer. I've watched online play; even partook in it! Some not all get on, sling a butt load of missiles or guns and that's it. Alot of the times, they don't even know how to land the airplane or the proper way to enter an airport traffic pattern. Strangely enough, your argument reminds me of ask for cheats like AAR and such. We already have cheats, why make more? To be gamey? I mean, that would really make it gamey. Wanting DCS to be War blunder and vice-versa or any other combat sim is just that! IMHO, ED should never lower the bar or water down its product just to appease those that aren't willing to try or to bring in a few extra dollars. Quality over quantity! After a while, DCS would cease to be DCS (only in name) if they were to go down that path. With all of that said, ED already offers something for everyone! That's why it's the sandbox. The user chooses how to play it. I love the fact that ED won't produce an aircraft without having all or most of the pertinent information to make the product as close to real as possible. Can't say that about others. And I haven't heard ED screaming for money so...

What would really be cool IMHO, is having those civil points the OP mentioned. Checking in with the proper ATC agencies for entering a MOA. Altitude restrictions, speed restrictions and such. Those are important details for military flying. But I won't hold my breath as that is such an incredible task for developers to make it all work. I get it, there is nothing like jumping online for an aerial WWE smackdown session! It really gratifies the soul and makes one want a cigarette afterwards. Going through a checklist, hitting those important wickets is too much of a task for a missile thrower and just too boring for anyone with the attention span of a gnat (all of which, can be done currently, anyway). I guess that's why we do have those other sims or games for those that yearn for a more gamey experience...a healthy, competitive market!   

We can agree to disagree, that's healthy. I get what the OP was getting at; a combination of a Civil sim with a Military sim and there's nothing wrong with that! In a perfect world, that would be great. I also get some of what you are saying. In a perfect world, we could have the online, theatrical and cinematic fanfare that the other sim has, or combine the 2, but we are not there yet. ED can't please everyone, nor should they try! I rest in the comfort that ED will do what ED needs to do for ED and that they know their lane. Give ED time to evolve, just look at where we have come from in this market. While I'm at it, calling something Niche just seems to be more of an opinion, and we all know what opinions are akin to. If everything is niche, then nothing is. Pick your poison.

Yes, DCS has a lot of room for improvement. Dumbing it down aint an improvement! 

Cheers!

[Mr_sukebe]

We do currently have the Hercules mod.  I’ve flown it, it’s pretty cool.

As it’s free, why not present that to the FS community to see their interest?

My personal assumption is that a large element of the FS community want to just see the scenery, which is not the best advert for DCS with its map/theatre limitations.

For all that, flying an S3b tanker might appeal to some.

[cfrag]

17 hours ago, Jackjack171 said:

Really?!

This thread (subject "niche", as pertaining to market segment size) talks about popularity. If you state as fact something wildly inaccurate ("big dog in town"), expect to get called on it. If you had cached that in "I feel that" or "IMHO best in xyz", I wouldn't have objected. DCS is a tiny niche product, and I would love if - and invest myself to help - if that changed. 

17 hours ago, Jackjack171 said:

Anyone including a 5-year-old can play that other sim

Ah. Please be advised that on his 5th birthday, I took my godson with me in a Cherokee and handed him the controls. Yes, 5-years old can fly planes. Just not land. Flying aircraft is not difficult. Being good, precise and predictable is. Flying an exact 2 minute turn without losing or gaining more than 10 ft of alt is. Any kid can fly a plane, so what is your point?

17 hours ago, Jackjack171 said:

So, I might ask, what would be your idea to make it a better online experience and make it more appealing?

Goodness, where to start? How about

• being able to see when your friends are online in a miz and join them so we don't have to use Discord
• Invite friends to your server should you host a miz
• when both players own the same plane, allow one to assume controls and the other to watch and switch at will. This would allow incredible instructor/student sessions
• being able to pre-brief with your friends in-game using a common, annotatable map and later (during mission) have that map available in cockpit or F10 map view
• Arrange your and your friend's waypoints during briefing and have them download automatically into your aircraft's nav computer (if it has one), and have them displayed on the F10 map
• being able to choose your aircraft, position and loadout yourself instead of having only pre-arranged slots (this is slowly changing with the new dynamic spawn, so good!)
• being able to discover missions (i.e. browse them, and instantly download and play them) from ED's user files, including MP.
• automatically keep discovered content current (update them automatically should an update to a miz, livery or mod become available on ED's user files)
• be able to use any livery - and if not installed, have them download (even temporarily) to your computer for the duration of the game
• when a mission requires mods that you don't use (e.g. CAM), have them installed (and removed thereafter) for the mission on-the fly. This is also a great business-opportunity for ED to sell more packs like WWII (I'd love to see an "Insurgent asset pack" and "rescue asset pack" as well as "airfield asset pack"
• be able to randomly change missions on your server every n hours (I had to write a 350 line server script for this basic function)
• Change mission start time and weather on the fly for the server 
• Have weather (and fog) be local -- so we can have light rain and 1000m vis fog in Haifa where we depart, while weather is CAVOK in Amman where the targets are (single and MP)
• Save a co-op mission and continue it later
• Look at a MP re-play of a mission, and jump in at any time (yes, multiplayer! Take over any plane that you own, and have the rest behave 'from file'). 
• Have some real ATC (APR, TWR, GND). I want airfields to be active with AI planes, and then to be able to declare an emergency while inbound and have ATC clear a path for me, while deploying rescue vehicles on the ground. 
• For the love of god, invest some resources into the "Communications" atrocity (number-driven menu) that was old in 1990's, and please, please, harmonize the way you talk to your AI (currently each aircraft does their own: Tomcat, Phantom, Apache, Hind, Kiowa - nothing is standardized) and integrate this with MP. 
• When you are at an unfamiliar airfield, be able to request a progressive from GND/TWR, and (icing on the cake) superimpose symbols on the taxiways (maybe like it's now done in supercarrier) so you know where to go.
• Be able to use helper gates in MP, turn them on and off at will
• Look at the Hook's cargo UX and try not to cry.

And on, and on. This isn't difficult to see. DCS's online experience is IMHO rock bottom. And it's much worse in single-player (note that I did not rag on ME). My point is that DCS's user experience (everything BUT the actual flying) needs a serious touch-up. To keep neophyte players interested so they stay and become long-time players.

17 hours ago, Jackjack171 said:

Here's the kick, DCS is already accessible to everyone, they just have to put the work in!

My word, please add an "IMHO" here and there to indicate that you are not asserting facts. DCS can be downloaded by anyone, and if that is accessible to you, fine. Else I strongly urge you to peruse a book on Human Interface Guidelines. DCS is one of the least accessible software titles from an UX perspective that I know. When I mean "accessible" I mean the amount of work and learning required to discover and do things that are elementary and have been standardized long ago. DCS's is terrible in this regard. For an extra frosting of frustration, enter Mission editor, place a couple of blue scenery objects, and then band-select them to change their affiliation to red. UX? Nowhere to be seen.

17 hours ago, Jackjack171 said:

These days, I can't open YT without seeing a new vid of someone using it.

That's YT's user engagement algorithm for you. You watch videos with DCS content, so you get served up more of the same, because the algorithm thinks that you like them, and YT monetizes that way. It does not mean that DCS content is spiking. It just means that YT knows you like DCS content and sells ads with it. My YT page is filled with vids on vintage car repairs. That doesn't mean the Jag E-Type is making a comeback.

17 hours ago, Jackjack171 said:

If some kid can't figure out how to start the default aircraft, then whose fault is that?

The interface designer's, clear and simple. ED want to sell aircraft, so they must make the experience good. You seem to mistake complex/complicated for sophistication. DCS is complex, yes. A good interface designer makes it accessible. A new customer in DCS (of any age) should be led through multiple, elegant stages: first set up your joystick/gear (oh, another godawful UX catastrophe - why can't I have good default settings or import them from one plane to another - inside the interface?), then ask or explain that the plane can be optionally hot-started, and then guide a new player through the first steps. DCS's way is near acrimonious. It should be fun.

17 hours ago, Jackjack171 said:

Sounds like some instant gratification, low impulse, self-control issues to me!

My apologies for being so unclear. To me it's all about good interface design. DCS's UX IMHO is terrible and should be improved to make your time in the game less a fight, and more of a friendly expedition. Taking off and landing a plane is difficult enough. Why make everything else around it unnecessarily difficult?

17 hours ago, Jackjack171 said:

your argument reminds me of ask for cheats like AAR and such

And that, my friend, ends this exchange of ideas for us. You and I come from very, very different viewpoints, and I won't engage in this discussion over "teaching vs. the hard and manly school of knocks" because everything there has been said.

I thank you for your input, and I do see that I will need to improve my communication skills. My point is not to make DCS an arcade, I want the game to become more accessible. There is a big difference, and I seem to be unable to convey this.

All the best,

-ch

Edited December 27, 2024 by cfrag

[SharpeXB]

DCS will always be a niche due to its complexity. Popularizing the game by reducing that would mean sort of abandoning what makes it unique. I think there is room for more FC4 style aircraft though but this would still be a niche product regardless. Making the aircraft even simpler was already tried in the form of Game Mode and that didn’t prove to be worth the effort. 
CFS game multiplayer will always be a niche of a niche simply because it involves staying connected online for so long. Yes it’s certainly possible to create air spawn instant action severs here but this demographic just doesn’t find that appealing and it’s rather counter to the nature of the sim. 
The addition of any aircraft to the roster of the game increase its appeal. They just need to be profitable really. 

Edited December 27, 2024 by SharpeXB

[Ramius007]

On 12/27/2024 at 3:15 PM, SharpeXB said:

DCS will always be a niche due to its complexity. Popularizing the game by reducing that would mean sort of abandoning what makes it unique. I think there is room for more FC4 style aircraft though but this would still be a niche product regardless. Making the aircraft even simpler was already tried in the form of Game Mode and that didn’t prove to be worth the effort. 
CFS game multiplayer will always be a niche of a niche simply because it involves staying connected online for so long. Yes it’s certainly possible to create air spawn instant action severs here but this demographic just doesn’t find that appealing and it’s rather counter to the nature of the sim. 
The addition of any aircraft to the roster of the game increase its appeal. They just need to be profitable really. 

I would rather like to see opposite process, that would be ceasing sales of current FC3 and improvment of current FC modules to higher fidelity ones with common FF standard, like working radio, cold start, IFF. FC and a lot of things related to them, especially in MP make DCS look like arcade game, not real milsim