Keeping the SFM alive

[GhostDog]

FC2, in all likelihood, has reached its last iteration, which is probably a good thing, considering the intellectual property and technical issues involved with its development. However, the enthusiasm for flying a wide diversity of aircraft in multiplayer has not diminished. If anything, it's stronger than ever. However, the development strategy of the DCS series is not geared toward meeting that demand. It revolves around military contracts. Whatever the military customer asks for, is what the civilian player gets. Moreover, the time between DCS modules is measured in years. Given that the stable of DCS aircraft is currently equal to exactly two, it's clear that the DCS series, by itself, cannot satisfy the demand for more flyables from both the red and blue sides, not within a reasonable time frame anyway.

 

Perhaps the strategic thing to do would be to build on the LOMAC experience and create multiplayer flyables specifically for the DCS environment. These flyables could use the SFM (AFM in the case of the T-toad) and 3DOF cockpit that FC players are familiar with, without involving the IP and technical issues associated with the legacy code from LOMAC. They could be packaged as part of a multiplayer add-on for the DCS series. You could call it something like "DCS: Combined Air Operations". In this way, ED could continue to earn a return on its investment in FC, while enhancing the multiplayer experience and improving its revenue between DCS releases. And perhaps ED could finally cut ties with a certain company which shall not be named.

 

Just thinking out loud. Thoughts? :pilotfly:

[Steel Jaw]

The cutting ties I like.

 

Other than that I have somewhat low regard for LOMAC/FC2 as a general rule so do not care about its long-term state anyhow.

 

The DCS A10C is going to occupy the hardcore simmers for years.

[GhostDog]

The cutting ties I like.

 

Other than that I have somewhat low regard for LOMAC/FC2 as a general rule so do not care about its long-term state anyhow.

 

The DCS A10C is going to occupy the hardcore simmers for years.

 

There's room for both the survey sim and "hardcore" experiences in the DCS multiplayer environment. They're not mutually exclusive. Meeting the demand for the survey sim aspect means more money to improve the study sim aspect in the long run.

[Steel Jaw]

There's room for both the survey sim and "hardcore" experiences in the DCS multiplayer environment.

 

No there is not. And here's why.

 

Having flown on the FC2 servers for a few months as Bramage, I see the Ka50 hardcore guys serious as a heart attack and the "gamers" cruising in with their survey jets and blasting everything in sight.

 

Takes, what, 10-15 minutes to get your Shark in the air and a while to fly the hardcore beast to the combat area, now comes some clown in a survey F15 or Su27 who took 1 minute to start his jet and go air quaking, gettiing shot himself inside 15 minutes, rinse and repeat. Makes me sick.

 

The dude in the hardcore mount has a vested interest in flying real world survival tactics when it takes so long to get into the action. The survey joker couldnt care less if he gets spanked cause heknows his turnaround is measured in minutes.

[GhostDog]

No there is not. And here's why.

 

Having flown on the FC2 servers for a few months as Bramage, I see the Ka50 hardcore guys serious as a heart attack and the "gamers" cruising in with their survey jets and blasting everything in sight.

 

Takes, what, 10-15 minutes to get your Shark in the air and a while to fly the hardcore beast to the combat area, now comes some clown in a survey F15 or Su27 who took 1 minute to start his jet and go air quaking, gettiing shot himself inside 15 minutes, rinse and repeat. Makes me sick.

 

That's a server management issue, not an aircraft issue. Reduced complexity isn't a cause of bad behavior in servers. Conversely, increased complexity doesn't in and of itself improve flying discipline.

[Steel Jaw]

That's a server management issue

 

Perhaps, but I have yet to see any server enforce say a 15 minute respawn delay to make up for the air quakers.

[GhostDog]

That brings up the related issue of the difficulty of server management in general, something that an increased focus on multiplayer could perhaps help to address.

[robmlufc]

10 minutes to get our sharks in the air? Maybe if you keep forgetting to turn the apu fuel on like I keep doing! :) 'why wont it start???'

 

I find it quite rewarding hedge hopping under some Quakers to take out a convoy. I was rubbish at it at first, could almost have called me a Quaker too just charging in flat out. Now I like to sneak around the hills and valleys picking your air defenses off one by one. I wish I had a runway cratering missile to really spoil your day :)

 

I think when dcs a10c is released choices will be limited, i think BS and A10c will only be playable with each other leaving the frag fest purely on the lomac servers. I don't think we will see a game with so many flyable aircraft again for a while which is a shame. Without the fighters it wont be as rewarding getting in and out of a target area.

[Boberro]

It would be cool to get DCS Su-25T, Su-25A ect planes even in current state. However as I understand correctly UBISoft has rights to the title... OK title will be another, but there are as same planes as in UBI Soft's LO so it is not allowed - it can be said it is plagiarism of UBI Soft's LO.

Maybe there is something solution to avoid UBI and get planes from LO in DCS without troubles. I'd hope so.

 

DCS as standalone products evolves quite slowly - with respect to ED work so far no doubt it needs faster progress than it is now!

[aaron886]

ED doesn't need to do anything faster or different. Let em get A-10C out and do what they do... if you really want to continue flying the SFM's, keep using FC2. It's a bummer for those of us who aren't going to just drop what we do with LO like Mower is happy to do, because as much as I'm going to be getting into A-10C, most of my time is spent with VBA and for that we need something more like an F/A-18 than an A-10.

 

Gawd Mower, you're such an elitist. ;)

[Exorcet]

I too like the idea of multiple aircraft, but honestly, it pales in comparison to a super detailed sim. If I could afford it, I'd buy every DCS there is. It would be worth the 5+ year wait to get a collection equal to Lock On in numbers, but far better in quality.

[Steel Jaw]

Gawd Mower, you're such an elitist. ;)

 

 

Nah, I 'm a loud mouthed a$$ hole. ;)

[GGTharos]

There's no point in keeping the SFM alive.

 

If ED was to do a survey sim again, I'm thinking it would be a bit more complex than what you have in FC. Not as deep as DCS, much deeper than FC.

[RIPTIDE]

 

Takes, what, 10-15 minutes to get your Shark in the air

LMFAO. Have you actually flown the DCS: Ka-50?

 

The only reason I bought DCS: Ka-50 was when it was inter operable with FC 2.0. Still on the fence about DCS: A-10C. I'm a A2A guy at first, and A2G when demanded. Looks like I'll be sticking with FC 2.0 until DCS Fighter. Maybe they'll be something else out from someone else in the meantime.

Edited September 22, 2010 by RIPTIDE

[GGTharos]

Don't pick on Mower, he's old :D

[RIPTIDE]

Don't pick on Mower, he's old :D

He needs to get spooled up faster than 10 f**ing minutes in the chopper. ;) I don't discriminate, I dislike everyone.

[GhostDog]

It would be cool to get DCS Su-25T, Su-25A ect planes even in current state. However as I understand correctly UBISoft has rights to the title... OK title will be another, but there are as same planes as in UBI Soft's LO so it is not allowed - it can be said it is plagiarism of UBI Soft's LO.

Maybe there is something solution to avoid UBI and get planes from LO in DCS without troubles. I'd hope so.

 

DCS as standalone products evolves quite slowly - with respect to ED work so far no doubt it needs faster progress than it is now!

 

AFAIK, Ubi owns the publishing rights to LOMAC and derivative products, but not the aircraft models or the code. All of the planes that are in FC2 are in DCS.

 

I too like the idea of multiple aircraft, but honestly, it pales in comparison to a super detailed sim. If I could afford it, I'd buy every DCS there is. It would be worth the 5+ year wait to get a collection equal to Lock On in numbers, but far better in quality.

 

To get a collection equal to the FC numbers is going to take a lot longer than 5 years. And there's no guarantee about the diversity of those aircraft. If the USG contracts with ED for five U.S. helo sims, you'll get five U.S. helo sims. That's fine for standalone play, but not so much for multiplayer.

 

There's no point in keeping the SFM alive.

 

If ED was to do a survey sim again, I'm thinking it would be a bit more complex than what you have in FC. Not as deep as DCS, much deeper than FC.

 

Okay, so some other form of flyable with reduced complexity. It doesn't need to be a standalone product. It's just a matter of making some of the AI aircraft in DCS flyable in multiplayer.

Edited September 22, 2010 by GhostDog
clarifying my statement about FC2 and DCS aircraft

[GGTharos]

DCS is a high fidelity simulator ... 'it's just a matter of' is not likely to happen.

 

Okay, so some other form of flyable with reduced complexity. It doesn't need to be a standalone product. It's just a matter of making some of the AI aircraft in DCS flyable in multiplayer.

[Boberro]

AFAIK, Ubi owns the publishing rights to LOMAC and derivative products, but not the aircraft models or the code. All of the AI and flyable planes that are in FC2 are in DCS.

 

In DCS you don't have any flyable planes so far.

I heard LO planes can't be in DCS in state we have now due to rights. Maybe it is not true... only lawyers do know.

[GhostDog]

DCS is a high fidelity simulator ... 'it's just a matter of' is not likely to happen.

 

It already exists. What good reason is there for not perpetuating it in a different form?

[GGTharos]

As I implied, it is the philosophy. DCS is a hi-fi sim, and that is the reason for not perpetuating this, at least this point.

 

As far as FC2 itself goes, there's good reason to just dump that part of the code.

[104th_Crunch]

IMHO, even 1 minute spent on SFM aircraft is better spent on DCS:Fighter.

[Steel Jaw]

LMFAO. Have you actually flown the DCS: Ka-50?

 

For going on 2 years, off and on, mostly off.

[59th_Buncsi]

ED should make the existing planes for realistic with AFM like the A-10C.

[GhostDog]

As I implied, it is the philosophy. DCS is a hi-fi sim

 

Adding simplified flyables for multiplayer doesn't change that in the least.