ED's move into WWII simulation - a newcomer's perspective

[MACADEMIC]

Hi all,

 

I'm new to the DCS universe but have been glued to this forum since the P-51D announcement was made. Being more interested in WWII warbirds I only know DCS for it's reputation for producing very high quality modern day aircraft simulations, and have watched some instructional videos which seem to confirm the validity of that reputation for me.

 

Seeing such a divided response throughout this community on the announcement of the P-51 (really seems like it's 50/50), I'd like to offer an 'outsider's' point of view on ED's move and what this may mean.

 

I believe it's a very smart move on ED's part to develop the P-51D. It allows ED to put 'their toe in the water' of the large WWII simulations market without having to commit to more than faithfully producing this aircraft. The P-51 is such a legacy of an aircraft that a lot of people will want to fly it even outside of a WWII combat context. I've read a lot of messages from community members here saying that while they wish ED had not put resources into a non-modern day aircraft, they'd still get it just to fly it. There's people who presently fly on other platforms not so interested in the combat aspects (AoA, X-Plane) who'll want to fly it due to the high fidelity it promises and come to this platform. And then there's the WWII aviation enthusiasts like myself who likes his WWII combat flying but would definitely move to this platform just to experience 'the real deal' in terms of systems and flight model, even if it was just a one off airplane from that genre that ED had produced and no WWII combat scenarios would follow.

 

However, I do not see why (successfully) putting the toe in the water should not be followed by firmly putting a foot on the ground. All seems to be in place. A combat simulation platform. A highly qualified team. The resources of the Fighter Collection. And a market that is eager for something authentic, high quality and working.

 

There are many ways to heaven. In the future, the dividing lines between the various aviation game developers will not be so much the time periods they are focused on, but the level of depth and autenticity versus broadness they will offer. Excellent times for people who love flight simulations!

 

:yes:

 

MAC

[RobbySpike]

Well, I personally think a modern jet would add more to combat sims than yet another WW2 bird. I love WW2 warbirds, no question. I virtually enjoyed every WW2 sim from European Air War to IL2 series, but its also just a lot of them out there. I personally would love to see a jet modelled, that has not so often been modelled in flightsim history before. Maybe a european jet like the Rafale, Typhoon or Tornado - Two-seaters in general would offer a lot of interesting possibilities.

[primus_TR]

There is currently an unmet need in the sim community for a "quality" WW2 sim. I hope ED fills it.

[WarthogSmurf]

There is currently an unmet need in the sim community for a "quality" WW2 sim. I hope ED fills it.

 

Euh .... I want ?

 

When i started IL-2 i was like .. oh crap why dont all the buttons work ... i wish ED made something ... seriosly i thought that. besides in another pool the major of the community votes yes please so it cant be all bad

[SAM77]

Yes Yes Yes

 

Please ED fill that void and many IL2 guys will leave and run here. I use to play IL2 religously but once BS came out that soon stopped and I couldnt go back.

 

BS2 is here and I am loving it. I cant wait for the P51 and maybe somewhere down the line we get a late model german fighter and a couple of AI bombers (B17 n B24)

 

ED I truly believe that there is a big financial gain to this and as previous posters have mentioned the void needs to be filled

[leafer]

It allows ED to put 'their toe in the water' of the large WWII simulations...

MAC

I'd say much larger market. I just hope I can buy the beta soon. I'm actually more excited than if it were a jet.

Edited January 26, 2012 by leafer

[Alicatt]

I look towards this as a stepping stone to more desirable aircraft from yesteryear. Tho looking at the aircraft list in their collection only the Spit XXIV and the Beaufighter do anything for me, the Beaufighter was the first Airfix model kit I built with my father when I was around 8 years old.

Now let us have some other multi engined aircraft from this period... Lanc, B29, Wellington, Short Sunderland, Me262 or my personal favourite the Westland Whirlwind :)

[midju]

I think this not good.

I do understand ED/DCS needs new markets like the WW2.

 

Why don't they ask us the community what we like to pay for the next project? Sim on demand!

Personally I would like to see a sim in the spirit of FC2. A Battle of RUS and NATO fighters.

Fighers and "Bombers".

 

Maybe money talks and bullshit walks. I still think there is a customer arena that will pay for a new FC2/Flanker. I will.

 

Best regards.

[kra961]

For many it is not an issue with the Aircraft ED does such awesome work no matter what air frame they choose its going to be wicked cool.

 

The issue as most see it is very simple, taking a WWII aircraft and putting it into a modern day threat environment as I understand it there will be no modeling or adjustment made to the environment to better fit the Air frame to the correct time line and threat environment.

 

Its going to be wonderful having all these flying chaff clouds soaking up all the sam's make my job one heck of a lot easier getting into and staying in the aor.

Edited January 26, 2012 by kra961

[Alicatt]

For many it is not an issue with the Aircraft ED does such awesome work no matter what air frame they choose its going to be wicked cool.

 

The issue as most see it is very simple, taking a WWII aircraft and putting it into a modern day threat environment as I understand it there will be no modeling or adjustment made to the environment to better fit the Air frame to the correct time line and threat environment.

 

Its going to be wonderful having all these flying chaff clouds soaking up all the sam's make my job one heck of a lot easier getting into and staying in the aor.

Well they did have Chaff in WW2 only then it was called Window.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaff_(countermeasure)

[Slayer]

I just don't understand why people are getting upset when it was being developed in parallel. The engine is already in place they just had to make the model etc. If it didn't detract from development of other products there is no argument to be made...

 

Who knows if it's even the same team that is working on a modern fast mover?

 

I applaud the effort and wish them luck. If it is successful who knows maybe ED will have a WWII era aircraft development team working in tandem with the others using the same base engine. Who knows maybe they already do....

 

It's also funny that I've never heard complaints that they had WWII era aircraft or Biplanes in FSX. It could be just ED reaching out to the more general flight sim crowd.

Edited January 26, 2012 by Slayer

[EtherealN]

Why don't they ask us the community what we like to pay for the next project? Sim on demand!

 

Because the brutal truth is that this forum cannot be a big deal in ED's decision making. ED is active and does read a lot (even those that don't respond often more often respond with "I saw" than not when I link a post or thread to them), but as a portion of ED's customers those that use this forum are small, and ED has to take everyone - as well as possible new markets - into account. And of course also military ventures and so on.

 

Maybe money talks and bullshit walks. I still think there is a customer arena that will pay for a new FC2/Flanker. I will.

 

You are aware that FC3 is being worked on, right? ;)

And of course that the next DCS Jet is being worked on in parallel as well. :)

ED is branching out to new markets, not abandoning it's traditional market.

See this if you haven't already: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=81589

[MemphisBelle]

Actually we can be happy that ED decided to do that. Because that will get more customers to ED´s products...ergo more money for ED ergo more Modules for us...or do I get that wrong?

 

And by the way...it has been mentioned enough. The team is working on the next Jet in parallel...and also...the P-51 has not as much avionic stuff as a modern Jet does have. So the basic thing is the 3D Model and some scripting stuff here and there (very easy perspective).

I could actually think that ED will surprise us with a double open beta release with P-51 and DCS whatever...that would be cool. :pilotfly::joystick::thumbup:

[armrha]

Well, I think this was a good call for them. Unlike the A-10C, ED has a unique opportunity what with TFC having several mustangs sitting around. If they think they don't understand something, they can just go check it out right over in the affiliated collection. So that makes me excited to see the quality they come through with.

 

I'm guessing it started out as a tool for proving the fidelity of the engine. Now we all get to play with it! : )

[Yurgon]

... Excellent times for people who love flight simulations!

 

Thanks for the input. You have just become our official poster boy (or girl?) to tell the nay sayers that there are in fact people drawn to ED just for P-51D. :-)

 

Besides, I agree that these are indeed excellent times for flight sim enthusiasts.

[wolfstriked]

Many others like myself fly the A10 just to fly it.Give me a prop sim DCS style and what is wrong there???

[NineLine]

I just have to chuckle a little when I read anyone upset with any aircraft being released by this company... I mean come on, I will take anything with DCS touch applied to it. Especially a WWII fighter... there isnt as many switches, but I am sure the cockpit will still be a blast to jump into!

[mmaruda]

I mean come on, I will take anything with DCS touch applied to it. Especially a WWII fighter...

 

Nothing personal, but...

 

I'm losing confidence in what ED is doing lately. First BS2 - they left BS1 still with bugs, beacuse it was necessary to update the engine and all to make it compatible with A-10. What for? No idea. Flying the Shark and the Hog in coop makes no sense and neither does dog-fighting with the two.

 

The engine is badly optimized and some missions are unplayable even for top hardware that significantly exceeds recommended specs. A-10 on the runway is as stutter-fest even after the patches, same goes for too many contrails or overcast weather. BS2 has the new Medved campaign which is also unplayable unless you edit the weather (stutters + too strong wind at which the heli should even fly?). Noe there comes a 20$ Nevada map, which is only good for... dunno Red Flag maybe? Alien invasion?

 

Now they have the Mustang. Cool, it would be nice to have a proper WWII flight sim after CloD has failed and IL-2 is getting old. Only it's not a WII flight sim. And it's supposed to be online compatible with A-10 and BS2. For what? Apart from for-fun what-if scenarios it's useless.

 

A DCS: Su-25 would make sense in this and it's almost done in FC2 anyway, all it needs is a click-able pit.

 

So why do we get the P-51? Because ED made it to check if it's possible to make a prop plane with this engine. And since they have succeeded, someone thought: "Hey, let's sell it, our fans will buy anything with DCS touch applied to it". No matter if it's pointless or unpolished.

 

And I most definitely assure anyone thinking otherwise, that the IL-2 community will not switch to DCS because of it. No proper WII theater, no campaign, only one plane... and it's the Mustang... Whoever wanted the Mustand in study sim form just to fly around already has it from A2A. Without a proper theater and more WII planes to come, to make dog-fighting have a point, this is just a quick money grab from the fanboys' pockets. Sorry ED, but you really have to try harder than that to "fill the gap".

[NineLine]

Nothing personal, but...

 

I'm losing confidence in what ED is doing lately. First BS2 - they left BS1 still with bugs, beacuse it was necessary to update the engine and all to make it compatible with A-10. What for? No idea. Flying the Shark and the Hog in coop makes no sense and neither does dog-fighting with the two.

 

I think the goal is to have all their developed aircraft in the same environment, just because their first 2 dont make sense together doesnt mean that in the future with even more it will make sense, I mean really if the F-18 is next how will that fit by your example?

 

The engine is badly optimized and some missions are unplayable even for top hardware that significantly exceeds recommended specs. A-10 on the runway is as stutter-fest even after the patches, same goes for too many contrails or overcast weather. BS2 has the new Medved campaign which is also unplayable unless you edit the weather (stutters + too strong wind at which the heli should even fly?). Noe there comes a 20$ Nevada map, which is only good for... dunno Red Flag maybe? Alien invasion?

 

I know there is a new graphics engine coming, I cant speak for ED and say that the plan is that release will fix any issues we are currently having, but usually an updated graphics engine is partly for that reason.

 

Now they have the Mustang. Cool, it would be nice to have a proper WWII flight sim after CloD has failed and IL-2 is getting old. Only it's not a WII flight sim. And it's supposed to be online compatible with A-10 and BS2. For what? Apart from for-fun what-if scenarios it's useless.

 

A DCS: Su-25 would make sense in this and it's almost done in FC2 anyway, all it needs is a click-able pit.

 

So why do we get the P-51? Because ED made it to check if it's possible to make a prop plane with this engine. And since they have succeeded, someone thought: "Hey, let's sell it, our fans will buy anything with DCS touch applied to it". No matter if it's pointless or unpolished.

 

And I most definitely assure anyone thinking otherwise, that the IL-2 community will not switch to DCS because of it. No proper WII theater, no campaign, only one plane... and it's the Mustang... Whoever wanted the Mustand in study sim form just to fly around already has it from A2A. Without a proper theater and more WII planes to come, to make dog-fighting have a point, this is just a quick money grab from the fanboys' pockets. Sorry ED, but you really have to try harder than that to "fill the gap".

 

I dont think they ever said they were trying to go after the WWII market, more so that this was a side project by some of the team, and they decided it was good enough to release. I dont think we will see a 60 dollar release, if I was a betting man I would assume this will be more of a addon. Dont make it into something more than it is, yes if they would announce their next modern aircraft it might make people feel more at ease... well some maybe :)

[mmaruda]

I'm not sure about the F-18, my guess would still be the F-15, since that is what National Guard flies and as far as I understand the A-10 was made initially with them in mind (before they released it as a commercial product).

 

Nevertheless, modern jest somewhat fit in the Crimea conflict. The Mustang does not. My point is - it's WWII warbird, and warbids are meant for fighting not sightseeing and with the current setting, there is not much fighting to be done in the P-51.

 

As for taking over the WWII segment, I know that ED never made such claims, but some people mentioned it and my post was meant to address that. Still, one has to accept that the WWII setting has no new flight sim to compete with the 10-year old Sturmovik and this is great opportunity to anyone who makes combat flight sims, and with the DCS level of fidelity many people (me including) have their wishful thinking on. But with what is currently announced, this has no chance of happening. With the current state of the engine, the P-51 module is just not worth it. Personally I believe they should be doing all they can to optimise the engine, since the recommended specs now, are just a fairy tale - you can fly, right, but forget the campaign unless you have a 2000$ rig and even then it can fall below 30 fps, and the game does not even use half of the PC's power.

 

If the P-51 brings an engine upgrade that will make the game playable, I'll probably extend my trust to ED (and I really wish that would happen), but if it's just an addon that runs 15 fps on my 3,6Gh 6-core and high-end gfx card that can punch a hole through all the BF3s and Skyrims, than I'd rather buy myself a bottle of good scotch than go stutter-sight-seeing in the P-51.

[YakobeGrizzlyLepotyv]

personally i think that the coming of a WWII fighter is odd. I was hoping to have an SU-33/35 for the next aircraft as it would more effectily combat the ass ****ing that we recive from A-10C's when flying KA-50.

[EtherealN]

Personally I believe they should be doing all they can to optimise the engine, since the recommended specs now, are just a fairy tale - you can fly, right, but forget the campaign unless you have a 2000$ rig and even then it can fall below 30 fps, and the game does not even use half of the PC's power.

 

First of all, you are assuming that P-51 development precludes engine work. It doesn't. Just like you don't ask an hydraulics technician to to do electrical systems maintenance, ED has different staff with different qualifications for different jobs.

 

Regading 2000 dollar computers, mine costs about 1000 dollars* (excluding monitor) and not only maxes the game out - I've even applied some LUA hacks and mods to make it "higher than high". (And that is without the overclock, which hasn't been used for many months now.) Yes, it does place stringent demands on your hardware, but you are exhaggerating rather greatly. :)

 

*It costs more than that if we include my local taxes and the skewed currency conversion between my curency and dollars, but if you select the same components on for example newegg - that is, a retailer that sells in US dollars - roughly 1000 is where it lands.

[mmaruda]

Unfortunately, thanks to the exchange rate and hardware prices being generally higher in my country, you rig would cost me a fortune and shipping it from abroad would probably make it even more expensive.

 

Anyway, I don't think I'm exaggerating. If you are running Intel, it's a lot better, unfortunately I'm on AMD and simply cannot afford to buy a new PC every few month.

 

I used to be ok with the performance, but then 1.1.1.0 happened.

If they fix the engine in terms of smoothness, that is fine, but I somehow doubt it - it still runs on a single core and never even gets to 100% of utilisation. Same goes for graphic card - it's demanding, but it during play the temperatures on the cards are lower than while playing Unreal of something like that.

[EtherealN]

Actually, it runs on two cores, though one is more heavily tasked than the other. Not getting full utilization isn't really weird either - both CPU's and GPU's have different units for different types of jobs. For example, if you get a lot of floating point to do on the CPU threads, but relatively little integer work, the CPU will be saturated even though it's not using all available resources. (Think of it like this - if you have separate resources for addition, subtraction, multiplication etcetera, and for a while only crunch additions, those other resources will be idle. However, I don't know for sure how Windows reports situations like this.) Also, of course, there are more resources involved in a computer and you can have bottlenecks elsewhere.

 

Similarly, temperatures is an absolutely horrible way of judging performance. I've seen old shooters make my 560Ti run at a (relatively) hot 65 degrees, while gorgeous new stuff like a maxed Skyrim etcetera mostly stays around 55 degrees. It all depends on which components are getting a heavy load.

 

That said, there will always be optimizations left to do. The only way to ever get a fully optimized product is to never add any features.

[zaelu]

I don't understand why are you so angry in defending this P51 project? After all, some people on the forum presenting their "disapproval" on this move will not make ED change their mind. Is a set to go thingie and if they fail they will learn from it.

 

I find many of your (maybe not only yours) posts quite aggressive and I'd consider reporting you for... "aggressive stance" but since you are a mod yourself... better I open a beer.

 

But just so you no... aggressive means also defensive and reveals weakness. have a beer for yourself too.