Flaming Cliffs 3

[Grimes]

Personally, I'd be very enthusiastic about a MiG-29K in an Indian subcontinent setting.

 

Huh-oh, this is starting to turn into a wishlist thread, which is something we obviously need more of. :smilewink:

 

Personally, I'm just thinking about FC3 in Ivan Drago terms of complexity. "If there is FC3, there is FC3"

[Viper101]

"If there is FC3, there is FC3"

 

LOL

 

Well after years of b*tching and complaining for an upgrade, we eventually got FC2. I guess maybe we could keep doing it for an FC3.:megalol:

[EtherealN]

Huh-oh, this is starting to turn into a wishlist thread, which is something we obviously need more of. :smilewink:

 

To be fair, in my opinion this thread quite simply has no purpose. ;)

[Grimes]

To be fair, in my opinion this thread quite simply has no purpose. ;)

 

Sure it does. It started off as a reactionary thread discussing a russian thread. It has since turned into, "well that idea ain't so bad" mixed with a few bits of Mowerism toward FC2 and 'games' in general. But I would say for the most part we are doing alright. At least its a discussion in the FC section which has been kinda empty as of late.

[DarkFire]

FC3 FTW!!!!!

 

Seriously, this is EXACTLY what I've wanted since A-10C was released. Imagine being able to fly all those great planes with the enhanced graphics engine, dynamic weather, new AI system etc. etc. Imagine the possibilities!

 

If this is true, then it's GREAT news. Thanks ED, you've made my day!

[LawnDart]

+1

 

Where do I buy?

[rattler]

Well if we talk about Military contracts coming any time soon from the U.S., it's going to be a long wait. So my guess is a Russian or European plane/helo for DCS,unless they stumble across information that is easily obtainable. We got what we got with FC2. FC3, cough cough.;)

[Panzertard]

FC3 FTW!!!!!

 

Seriously, this is EXACTLY what I've wanted since A-10C was released. Imagine being able to fly all those great planes with the enhanced graphics engine, dynamic weather, new AI system etc. etc. Imagine the possibilities!

 

If this is true, then it's GREAT news. Thanks ED, you've made my day!

 

No sorry, you're celebrating a bit too early. Read back a couple of pages, read Wags announcment as well (there's a link in post#1)

Still, keep the suggestions reagrding a future FC3 coming - some devs might pick up your ideas. ;)

[PatriotCFS]

....

Still, keep the suggestions reagrding a future FC3 coming - some devs might pick up your ideas. ;)

 

Your such a tease!

[VBARhino]

Rewind button on the tracks. PLEASE!!!

[Viper101]

Still, keep the suggestions regarding a future FC3 coming - some devs might pick up your ideas.

 

Skip compatibility with A-10C and go straight to compatibility with the next DCS. Assuming after release of the next DCS, both A-10C and Ka-50 will probably be receiving patches to the next DCS as well, why waste time patching to a product already released when you can set FC3 up for future compatibility.:smartass:

 

Also, add another vote to a track rewind ability. PLEASE!

[Pyroflash]

+1 to track rewind.

[sobek]

Skip compatibility with A-10C and go straight to compatibility with the next DCS.

 

That would be acausal, read, impossible. ;)

[combatace]

Skip compatibility with A-10C and go straight to compatibility with the next DCS. Assuming after release of the next DCS, both A-10C and Ka-50 will probably be receiving patches to the next DCS as well, why waste time patching to a product already released when you can set FC3 up for future compatibility.:smartass:

 

Also, add another vote to a track rewind ability. PLEASE!

 

As I said before, make DCS-A-10C of so high quality and so much advance systems that it can last for atleast 5-10years more, I know it could be a tough but then it has lots of advantages. they don't have to patch the older sim with new sim saving time for further development and in business time is always money. Because its just 1 sim now(Ka-50) the time taken for its patching will be less but think when releasing 5 module, calculate the number of patches they will have make by then for 4 older modules. So at that time Ka-50 will be getting patched 4th time, A-10C 3rd, DCS-third module 2nd time and DCs- forth module 1st time, in all 10 patches and this will be cumulative as the number of modules increases. Such a big waste of time and money..

 

What I suggest is make a master module and sell it for a bit lover rate and then make charged addons for each new plane they want to release at the same rather they want to sell then now.. Although the users might have to pay a bit more for the master module but will help both side as sellers have to issue small files, users have to download small files and when installing user don't have to install large 6-7GB sims over and over again.. Profit on both the sides..

[GGTharos]

^^^^

 

Already considered and rejected a long time ago ... which is exactly why the current development model is what it is. DCS is not upgreadable if they do it the way you suggest.

[digitaljjd]

I guess I'm one of the few people who is not in favor of this. I'd rather have another innovative DCS module then a fourth incarnation of the same simulation.

[Steel Jaw]

I guess I'm one of the few people who is not in favor of this. I'd rather have another innovative DCS module then a fourth incarnation of the same simulation.

 

Agreed.

[GGTharos]

One of the few is right. FC has been very nice glue for the community so far.

 

I guess I'm one of the few people who is not in favor of this. I'd rather have another innovative DCS module then a fourth incarnation of the same simulation.

[amalahama]

^^^^

 

Already considered and rejected a long time ago ... which is exactly why the current development model is what it is. DCS is not upgreadable if they do it the way you suggest.

 

I read some time ago in the russian forum (supported by google translator) that they are thinking again to move back to the original idea of master trunk + aircrafts as addons.

 

I think it's the only way to go forward retaining all the previous work.

 

But TBH, I'm more excited with the future DLC for DCS:A-10 than FC3. I still embrace the hope that someday we will see a online compatible battlefield command mode which can make ground war much more interesting.

 

Regards

[GGTharos]

It isn't the only way, it's just the way that makes maintaining forward compatibility easier.

 

But it isn't that simple; you can't 'make it happen' until you have all the pieces. You wouldn't want the DCS engine to be left as is now. Sure it's alright, but there's always more you can do, and there WILL be more things to be done.

 

I read some time ago in the russian forum (supported by google translator) that they are thinking again to move back to the original idea of master trunk + aircrafts as addons.

 

I think it's the only way to go forward retaining all the previous work.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

I guess I'm one of the few people who is not in favor of this. I'd rather have another innovative DCS module then a fourth incarnation of the same simulation.

And, when are we going to get a Russian aircraft to fly? Five years from now? FC at least has few Russian airplanes, including Frogfoot with AFM.

 

Having FC compatible with DCS makes a lots of sense. It works really well with BS. You can have several different level sims in one, and you can choose to fly what you want according to your level of training.

[element1108]

^^

 

Fc isn't going anywhere last I checked. Asking when a Russian bird will be available is rhetorical at this point. There are strong cases for both sides of the fence, but "fairness" and nationalism don't add much to either argument.

 

Fc2 currently has 8 airfames to fly, air air, air to ground and a helicopter. That's pretty impressive by all means as no other modern day sim allows that level of online dynamic.

 

Adding the black shark to fc was a good call, helicopters in a fixed wing arena has a noticable enhancement to gameplay. I don't personally see how adding a infinitely more advanced a10C to a simplified arena will do much for the online community. I guess my stance on it is....if it happens great, if not...no big deal. I leave the choice and decision to ED.

 

Love the russian birds by the way, the 25/T is my fav airfame in fc so my stance has nothin to do with airframe nationality. I'm more interested in co op mp anyway, be it f16's air cover/sead for a10's or Russian 27's air cover toad ops.

 

Euro birds are sexy as well...much love ;)

[combatace]

It isn't the only way, it's just the way that makes maintaining forward compatibility easier.

 

But it isn't that simple; you can't 'make it happen' until you have all the pieces. You wouldn't want the DCS engine to be left as is now. Sure it's alright, but there's always more you can do, and there WILL be more things to be done.

 

Well than you didn't read the first para I guess, take time make it as good as possible, using DX11, max2011 and whatever new. In that way if people still play FC2 with dx8 or 9 8 years old thing dx11 will maintains its hunch atleast 5 years from now..

 

And yes it not just the easy way its also the cheaper way to make more profit, considering less man hrs on ever new patch for the older modules.. And if you want to update the game engine just patch the master module. So the addons only has to contain flight dynamics, textures and models of whatever new is in the way. This also means less data in the package resulting in less error probability and even less testing man hrs.

[GGTharos]

And if you want to update the game engine just patch the master module.

 

You can't.

[Laud]

One of the few is right. FC has been very nice glue for the community so far.

 

But once we got a DCS-(Multirole)Fighter we won't need too much glue anymore I'd guess. ;)

 

Except for those, who deny flying anything else than a russian aircraft... :doh: