Amazing game

[sammyj]

Ive had this game for 2 weeks now and im still going through the training.... i LOVE THIS!

 

Just wanted to say thank you for producing such a master piece. Now to convince the financial controller that i must have the Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS!

[hassata]

And don't forget a TrackIr :thumbup:

[Bulletstop]

I have to say I have had this beta for a fair bit, ok the first day it was released and I am still amazed by it. A big thank you to ED , I hope you have many more releases.

If you do not have Trackir, well Christmas is coming so lets hope one is waiting under the tree.

 

 

Bullet

 

 

Bullet

[Sticky]

"game"???? :P ;)

[Lindbergh]

I hope ED guys have a huge succes. They deserve it

[Georgio]

Agreed, a masterpiece that reminds me of loading up DI's Tornado many years ago. :D

[Pacoche]

I think this awesome stuff is pretty far from the word game

[Snoopy]

And don't forget a TrackIr :thumbup:

 

Ordered mine yesterday....this game is becoming very expensive and a huge addiction but I wouldn't have it any other way :-)

[Para_Bellum]

I hope ED guys have a huge succes. They deserve it

 

Indeed.

[Crazyowl]

Tuche!!!

[Steel Jaw]

GAME ???

[jerda]

of course its a great game.

[159th_Viper]

GAME ???

 

:megalol:

 

Hence the two options via GUI:

 

# Game

 

and

 

# Simulation

 

Some decide to click the former, others the latter.

 

 

I'm with you Mower - latter it is :D

[MTFDarkEagle]

well, obviously :D

[Fish]

...Now to convince the financial controller that i must have the Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS!

 

Your going to have to clock up some brownie points to convince her.

[Atomic978]

tell me about it. I have just got mine convinced that I need new video card or cards. No way am I going to get a TM Warthog anytime soon. LOL..

[jerda]

Ok its a 'simulation' in the form of a 'game'. It has the option to be 'played' as a 'game'.

 

This topic always makes me laugh.

Edited December 11, 2010 by jerda

[galagamo]

It's a "Game-ulation":smartass: If this phrase becomes popular, remember who coined it!:smilewink:

[Raz_Specter]

i am also enjoying this sim, bought a warthog and sold my cougar on ebay :) best thing i have ever done, the precision with the warthog is second to none imho.

 

Just need to upgrade from TIR4 to TIR5 :)

 

Mithandra

[wickedfastball]

This is a game. Very good and highly detailed, yes, but still a game. If you are simulating something for training the implication is you will be employing the simulated device for real at some point. Now, while I would go to great lengths to be able to fly a real A-10 and fire that magnificent GAU-8, I don't think that is ever going to happen. Besides, it is a war machine and, while I hope I would have the mettle to perform in combat, that is an untested situation and will hopefully remain so.

 

Now excuse me while I go log some more game time.

[EtherealN]

"Game" and "Simulation" are not mutually exclusive, you know.

 

Wickedfastball, your definition would end up meaning that the exact same piece of equipment can change depending on who uses it. For example, is Condor a game or a flight simulator? For most people it's a "game", but it is actually used in pilot training, so then it's a "simulator"? X-Plane - a competitor to FSX and a "game" for most, but when Boeing or a flight school uses it (for quick-n-dirty evaluation of aerofoil shapes or training)? Or, for that matter, DCS:A-10C, derived from the military training product that TFC/ED has made for the american military. Is it a "simulator" when a future pilot uses it, but a "game" when you use it?

 

In general, my preferred view is that it is both, in all cases. Then it can be discussed what it is being used as at any one specific time. If you are sitting there learning the CDU with a teacher up front, your DTS:A-10C is being used as a "simulator", but when class is over and you and your mates decide to stay in the room to do some tank-busting for giggles, it's being used as a "game".

 

And of course, even if you aren't on track to become a pilot of the real thing, you can still use it as a simulator: say you are an aviation enthusiast (which is common here, I suspect) and want to learn how the real thing works. You can't learn that in HAWX, but you can learn that with this simulator. (Note I said "how the real thing works", not "learn to fly it". Flying skill and switchology/technology are different things. :P )

[dane48]

"Game" and "Simulation" are not mutually exclusive, you know.

 

Wickedfastball, your definition would end up meaning that the exact same piece of equipment can change depending on who uses it. For example, is Condor a game or a flight simulator? For most people it's a "game", but it is actually used in pilot training, so then it's a "simulator"? X-Plane - a competitor to FSX and a "game" for most, but when Boeing or a flight school uses it (for quick-n-dirty evaluation of aerofoil shapes or training)? Or, for that matter, DCS:A-10C, derived from the military training product that TFC/ED has made for the american military. Is it a "simulator" when a future pilot uses it, but a "game" when you use it?

 

In general, my preferred view is that it is both, in all cases. Then it can be discussed what it is being used as at any one specific time. If you are sitting there learning the CDU with a teacher up front, your DTS:A-10C is being used as a "simulator", but when class is over and you and your mates decide to stay in the room to do some tank-busting for giggles, it's being used as a "game".

 

And of course, even if you aren't on track to become a pilot of the real thing, you can still use it as a simulator: say you are an aviation enthusiast (which is common here, I suspect) and want to learn how the real thing works. You can't learn that in HAWX, but you can learn that with this simulator. (Note I said "how the real thing works", not "learn to fly it". Flying skill and switchology/technology are different things. :P )

 

+1, would give you +10 if I could. Now this my friends is the best and most concise description of the "Game" and "Simulation" I've seen.

[blaster454]

I've been "playing" simulation for a number of years and see this discussion come up on a cyclic basis--almost exclusively on forums which cover "high-fidelity or study simulations." This is actually a pretty easy problem to solve.

 

Webster's first definition for the word game is: an activity engaged in for diversity or amusement. That is certainly true for most computer or console games like the DCS series, Lock-On, The Witcher, Halo, and many more. To those who like the genre (Action, Adventure, RPG, Simulation, Shooter, Racer, ...), they are fun and provide some sort of escape from the drudgery of real life.

 

Simulations sold to the general public for amusement seem to me to be a subset of games in general--this is not about military or civilian simulators that are used to train real-life pilots. There are a number of simulations like Tiger Woods Golf or train simulations for wanabee engineers or sports sims on the WII or Formula F-1 racing where people play at doing something that is like a real-world activity that they might not be able to participate in. There is a further breakdown of genre within the simulations field that includes flight simulations. Contenders here include the Falcon series, LO-MAC, the DCS series, FSX, X-Plane and others. And these are further genre-divided into military or civilian and also into "study flight sims" and "regular flight sims." Presumably, study sims are those that require a certain amount of study to master ... maybe there can be a further break down into regular study sims and hard study sims for those of us who are still trying to fly the Shark? :megalol:

 

So it should be clear that DCS:A-10C and DCS:BS are games. And they are simulations. And they are study simulations (assuming page number in manual > 100 or so pages means you gotta study). And they might even be classified as hard study flight simulations (because it takes practice and study to fly and fight as they were intended to be used :)).

 

And it should be further clear that we all (or at least most of us) fly the A-10 or Ka-50 because it provides some sense of accomplishment, some amusement at pretending (or simulating) destruction, some means of easing the pressures of a hard day at the office, or even some period of laughter and pleasantness. Which clearly meets the requirements to be called a game.

 

So, I propose that we clearly label our favorite toys as accurately as possible. From now on, maybe we should call DCS:A-10C an Accurate Simulating and Gaming Environment (A-SAGE).

 

And maybe it's OK for some people to say game when they get enjoyment and others to say simulation when they experience satisfaction. :thumbup:

[wickedfastball]

Now, I could just say "what blaster said" and be done. But where's the fun in that? :)

 

Game and simulation are not mutually exclusive. This game is simulating an aircraft. Is there not a score kept? The equipment does not change depending on who is using it, but rather on how it is used or at least the intent for which it is to be used. Take the Space Shuttle simulator that is used to train astronauts or a 767 sim at an airline. Those are simulators. The purpose is to go do something with the real-life device. If I sit down in the simulator cockpit or Sully Sullenberger does it's still a simulator. If I sit down in front of DCS or <insert famous A-10 pilot here> does it's still a game. Again, a very good game with an amazing amount of detail and is a ton of fun, but still a game.

 

I think we are all saying the same thing and generally agree with each other but are just using different semantics. Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I do write software for simulators so I'll admit my position might be a bit biased.

 

Now, let's muddy the waters of this discussion, but since Black Shark was brought up I guess it's ok. Does anyone else feel much more productive with the A-10 versus the Ka-50? In just the two months or so of beta-level software I feel I can do more and fly a mission so much better in the A-10 versus the year+ (has it been two?) I have in the Ka-50. Yes, fixed versus rotary wing is a bunch of that but I really don't have an issue just flying the Black Shark. The problem is employing it in an operational environment. Is there something there regarding design philosophy/culture? The Ka-50 is Russian and the A-10 is American. I'm American. Now I know physics doesn't care where you were born and F = ma the world over, but is there something to the origins of the aircraft? Just curious what other folks have experienced.

[Dusty Rhodes]

"eye twitching uncontrollably" Is the word game being used in here? Please let it go so my eye can return to normal. Repeat after me. Sim-u-la-tion. Whew I am tired.