britgliderpilot Posted August 23, 2005 Author Posted August 23, 2005 FighterOps is the only competition I see ED having. Unless Lead Persuit decide to pull a trump card and revamp the entire Falcon 4 engine to todays technology. Well steady on . . . . . while both will have staggering modelling of the F16, the ED version will look Oh-My-God-Staggeringly-Pant-Wettingly-Good, and the FighterOps version will probably have the wondrous campaign . . . . . A military training tool doesn't need a dynamic campaign - so it's just possible that project might not include one. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v121/britgliderpilot/BS2Britgliderpilot-1.jpg
Trident Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 Who knows, ED may be getting some serious money from a contract like that. Here's hoping they have unprecedented resources (financial and technological) at their disposal for that project :) Anyway, the Indian MiG-29K should be sweet! EDIT: But military training tools need dynamic weather :D
EvilBivol-1 Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 So much excitement around here these days... :) Beware of * s p e c u l a t i o n *. - EB [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Nothing is easy. Everything takes much longer. The Parable of Jane's A-10 Forum Rules
Jester_159th Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 This sounds brilliant. Excellent news for the flight sim community! I wonder if I'll be able to afford a PC good enough to run it??
EvilBivol-1 Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 I'd also like to make the minor clarification that what was quoted above ("pitiful arcade" and all that) was simply the writer's opinion, even if based on his impressions from the interview. Be safe guys, the sim community has been known to burst before... Just to add some substance to my previous cautionary note, here are a few blips as per Chizh on the Russian side of the fence... "You have to understand, plans in the game development industry are not the same thing as the 5-year plans in the USSR. There, everything was solid, but with us everything changes dynamically. :) If we suddenly have reasons to create a different plane or a different project, all these plans will go down the tube. So I don't want you to take all this literally. Let's just say that this is a certain outlook on the future as of August 2005, but nobody can guarantee that any of these plans will remain as of August 2006. The only thing I can say for sure is that right now we are working on and plan on releasing the Ka-50. That's it." - EB [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Nothing is easy. Everything takes much longer. The Parable of Jane's A-10 Forum Rules
Guest EVIL-SCOTSMAN Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 Sounds magic. but we all gonna have to upgrade to CRAY sooopa computers if LOCKON is anything to go by......
S77th-GOYA Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 Chizh: ...but with us everything changes dynamically. Except the campaign. PA-DUM-PSSHHHHH!
EvilBivol-1 Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 lol - EB [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Nothing is easy. Everything takes much longer. The Parable of Jane's A-10 Forum Rules
ThirdELTPoznan Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 Well two years is a lot of time... Again I wish I could fast forward time :D GROM- Grupa Reagowania Operacyjno Manewrowego
Witchking Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 man! I wanna see the day that finally WESTERN game sites gives ED the respect and the red carpet welcomes that they deserve. TOO LONG has lomac been un-applauded....too long has it been crtitisised.....too long have ppl said...""'graphics don't matter....a DC with 2d graphic engine is enough in F4."""" "" FALCONS BEWARE!!!!! A NEW BIRD OF PREY IS ON YOUR TAIL """" Head on to bang the gauntlet ED....Don't bother if all of us cry that the new project will run at 1 fps on our dual core processors with 7800 GTX SLI.. :p WHISPR | Intel I7 5930K | Nvidia GTX980 4GB GDDR5 | 16GB DDR4 | Intel 730 series 512GB SSD | Thrustmaster WARTHOG | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR4 pro | |A-10C|BS2 |CA|P-51 MUSTANG|UH-1H HUEY|MI-8 MTV2 |FC3|F5E|M2000C|AJS-37|FW190|BF 109K|Mig21|A-10:SSC,EWC|L-39|NEVADA|
SUBS17 Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 Man that is great news for the flight sim community, I'm quite surprised at the direction as it parallels FO. LP is doing Falcon 5 from what I've heard. [sIGPIC] [/sIGPIC]
Guest EVIL-SCOTSMAN Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 Except the campaign. PA-DUM-PSSHHHHH! LOL, nice :p
33rd_bratpfanne. Posted August 23, 2005 Posted August 23, 2005 @ EvilBivol:Only to get it right: ED guaranteed us to have the LockON FC successor in the shelfs within 2 Years, distributed all around the world, completely bugfree, all known Planes as flyable with AFM, Photorealistic 3D Grafiks for both Objects and terrain, with every Dogshak destroyable from London to HongKong. ;) Well, thats great news! Lets spread it to the World and Hail our Creator! S! Brati "Helicopters can't fly; they're just so ugly the earth repels them." (THX Rich :thumbup: )
KILSEK Posted August 24, 2005 Posted August 24, 2005 Hi all. OHHH YEAHHH!!! Now this is some serious communications. Did I ever mention how much I like you ED? You folks just keep doing what your doing. It's all good. I can tell you that I have all the patience in the world. Take your time with the 1.1 patch. Take your time with 1.2 Black Shark. Take your time with "Tank Killers" Keep up the good hard work. -KILSEK
Sealpup Posted August 24, 2005 Posted August 24, 2005 You guys know, for a new sim or LOMAC expansion, they would not need upgrade the exsisting graphics engine. It already brings an FX-51 to its knees, and in 2 years the state of the art might be able to run this thing at max settings :D
kdittyr Posted August 24, 2005 Posted August 24, 2005 Wow, that is pretty awsome. I have to ask, though, 2 years from what point? I thought they had a small developement team. Are they saying 2 years from the point that 1.2 is released? Now, if they got a military commission to create this (as I understand it) as a full on simulator for the Spanish(?) Air Force, then that is really great news. I imagine that they got a pretty penny to set up new shops and hire new people. Go ED, hopefully it breaths fresh air into the Russian programmers economy. Those guys are pretty smart and deserve recognition for all of their hard work. __________________ kdittyr
SUBS17 Posted August 24, 2005 Posted August 24, 2005 Well steady on . . . . . while both will have staggering modelling of the F16, the ED version will look Oh-My-God-Staggeringly-Pant-Wettingly-Good, and the FighterOps version will probably have the wondrous campaign . . . . . A military training tool doesn't need a dynamic campaign - so it's just possible that project might not include one. Yes they do, DC would fit right in with an F-16. [sIGPIC] [/sIGPIC]
gustav Posted August 24, 2005 Posted August 24, 2005 Is the Su-27 (my precious) planned for the "next project"?
Prophet_169th Posted August 24, 2005 Posted August 24, 2005 They said I believe that they would like to carry over all aircraft from LOMAC.
hassata Posted August 24, 2005 Posted August 24, 2005 I'm assuming this is the Spanish Firm, which means starting putting money in some sort of fund now : ): http://www.realsimulator.com [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Starlight Posted August 24, 2005 Posted August 24, 2005 This is an ambitous project. A very very very very ambitious project! ;) Yet there are some things that leave me a bit puzzled. - First the expected release date. Even 2 years seem a too short time to develop such a project. ED took many years to develop LockOn, which is basically a Flanker 2 with a very upgraded graphics and game engine. Many things like some models, CLSID-structures, skins and other things are simple copy&paste from that sim. ED also took many months to develop game patches and about one year to develop FC, which is LockOn with some patches and with a new aircraft modelled. A brand new project in 2 years seem exaggerated if they continue to work at the current pace. - Second, a "Falcon4 killer" as far as realism.... Today LockOn is surely light-years ahead with graphics, cockpits and so on, but F4 has a clickable cockpit and a dynamic campaign, which are two features that are not so easy to implement. And we all know that the dynamic campaign is what killed the F4 project, which made the costs rise and so on.... LockOn is already a detailed sim, maybe a bit less than F4, but is more than enough for most people. Build a more detailed sim but without a dynamic campaign would be a huge waste of resources, IMHO. Falcon 4 was (and for many still "is") great not just because of aircraft detail, but because there are campaigns and clever AI. - Third, again, it amazes me the attention payed by ED to details (grass moved by helos, 3D-trees and so on) and the total blindness towards more serious issues when speaking about military sims. I mean, today the AI in lockon is ludicrous when talking about strategy&tactics. AI aircraft are mostly unable to fulfill any of the assigned tasks (SEAD, escort, attack), so the game itself after a while becomes a wonderful scripted 3D demo, or an excellent movie engine. Again, Falcon4 (even without SP, RP5, or AF) was years beyond Lomac as far as immersion. In LockOn 1.02 AI aircraft sometimes were even unable to taxi or land carefully, crashing one into the other.... BTW I don't want to launch yet another super-boring F4 vs Lomac thread, but IMHO ED should move to solve issues like Dynamic Campaign and AI. Even if we had 1,000 aircraft implemented each with 1,000 skins and all detailed cockpits but with today's dumb AI and scripted mission system, mission immersion won't get any benefit at all! just IMHO. cheers! Matt
Trident Posted August 24, 2005 Posted August 24, 2005 Well, the clickable cockpit technology will come with v1.2 and will be readily available for the next project. Better AI and better comms would be a precondition for a successful dynamic campaign though, correct.
britgliderpilot Posted August 24, 2005 Author Posted August 24, 2005 This is an ambitous project. A very very very very ambitious project! ;) Yet there are some things that leave me a bit puzzled. - First the expected release date. Even 2 years seem a too short time to develop such a project. Agreed. That seems optimistic in the extreme, and I'd discount it as a realistic date almost out of hand. The only possible lightening of the load is that they know which aircraft they're doing, there's only one of it, and they already have all the information. Still sounds too optimistic. - Second, a "Falcon4 killer" as far as realism.... If it's being funded by a big company or somebody's armed forces, then realism in terms of modelling the aircraft is the only thing you REALLY need - and the trend ED are following looks like they'll be able to simulate the aircraft very well indeed when it's done. If it is ONLY intended for these purposes, you don't need a dynamic campaign. Designing scenarios by hand for RL military training purposes is better than trying to create a dynamic campaign. Seriously - the military aren't there for the fun of playing the campaign, they're there to try and teach pilots to fly and fight in the Falcon. I'd certainly hope the AI became improved and unpredictable for consumer use, though. - Third, again, it amazes me the attention payed by ED to details (grass moved by helos, 3D-trees and so on) and the total blindness towards more serious issues when speaking about military sims. Weeelll . . . . . see above, I think. Flanker and Lomac were always pretty good at simulating specific combat scenarios. It's a pity they can't link them together and deal with the more mundane aspects, and I absolutely hope that they'll be able to do that in these future projects. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v121/britgliderpilot/BS2Britgliderpilot-1.jpg
112th_Rossi Posted August 24, 2005 Posted August 24, 2005 People don't want a simulation of a simulation, having single missions accurate to the nTh degree is all well and good, but if people want to simulate a war campaign scenario then the Dynamic campaign option is the best option imo. Only in a DC are there real consequences for a players actions, which makes it more fun, plus that little bit of unknown adversity mixed into the equation. We have to remember that this is a game and its meant to be fun. Fidelity is great, but if it detracts from fun then theres no point. On the other hand, a lot of people want realism right down to the smell of the cockpit after the pilot has farted so there needs to be some scalabilty built in too.
Guest ruggbutt Posted August 24, 2005 Posted August 24, 2005 To get a DC that works correctly will be an almost insurmountable task. As good as Lead Pursuit has fixed F4's DC, it's still bug ridden.
Recommended Posts