DCS scenery?

[Conure]

Hey guys,

 

Sorry for the question which may well be answered elsewhere (I'm on a smartphone and searching is a nightmare with a poor connection)...But now that DCS is "kind of" (I say kind of because I am not sure of the correct terminology) open development, is this for aircraft only or will it allow developers to add terrain?

 

I ask because I read an interesting statement from PMDG (who spoke very favorably of DCS)

 

 

Tabs, on 29 September 2012 - 05:48 PM, said:

 

 

If DCS actually modeled the whole earth ala what FSX has I'm certain we'd look into it - several of us here play DCS A-10C and Black Shark 2 and I for one would absolutely love to have that kind of graphics and simulation engine for us to work with... My guess is that this will not be happening any time soon though considering it's been the one small map for years, still no release of the Las Vegas/Nellis area etc. Doing the whole world's scenery would take forever at the current rate there.

 

 

For me, performing heavy ops in the world of DCS would be like dying and going to heaven.

[Weta43]

There are scenery creation tools available for the existing graphics engine, and a number of community projects were started after their release (The Nevada map started this way, and got quite a long way along in its pre-EDGE form - before ED picked it up, Afghanistan didn't get quite as far, but there were some nice WIP shotsfor both floating around).

ED has however announced that they are developing a new graphics engine (EDGE) that will be able to use a new advanced terrain type, and that though (presumably) DCS will be able to utilse both new and legacy terrain, community terrain development stopped in anticipation of the new graphics engine.

It's the graphic engine, not the map itself that is the principal hold up on the release of the Nevada map (or at least that's how I read DEV announcements here).

Given the historic release of tools for terrain creation & the SDK for aircraft under the existing system, and given the current business model, I'd expect once EDGE is released and bedded in, you'll see both freeware and payware theatres appear relatively quickly.

Edited December 22, 2012 by Weta43

[Conure]

At the same time you gave to be careful about making the virtual sandbox too big, otherwise multiplayer is dead.

 

Maybe but then, would that apply? I mean wouldn't servers just center around a specific area? I mean, for the Shark the scenery we have now is pretty huge but it's not really an issue!

[TurboHog]

I think it is important for a combat simulator to have a very detailed (conflict) theatre. It is better to have a very accurate Afghanistan map than a large and less detailed map of an entire continent.

 

The maps in combat sims must be an accurate representation of a real or potential conflict zone.

 

my 2cts...

[Conure]

I think it is important for a combat simulator to have a very detailed (conflict) theatre. It is better to have a very accurate Afghanistan map than a large and less detailed map of an entire continent.

 

The maps in combat sims must be an accurate representation of a real or potential conflict zone.

 

my 2cts...

 

I completely agree - I very much hope a number of addon developers start producing extremely detailed high quality scenery soon, though I guess first of all there would need to be a lower quality "global mesh" in order for it it to be seamless rather than "map based".

 

then again I might be making that up, because I know absolutely nothing about software development!

[ENO]

There was some work going on one particular mod that comes to mind but it stopped being developed (or at least updated) a few months ago. Popular opinion is that by the time the mod is polished enough for release, EDGE will have been brought out and nullified the improvement.

 

This limbo state has resulted in the cessation of a number of projects from skin mods to mission creation to- as the thread suggests- scenery improvement.

[Grimes]

This limbo state has resulted in the cessation of a number of projects from skin mods to mission creation to- as the thread suggests- scenery improvement.

 

I don't see how the lack of new missions and skins is related to EDGE. Yes EDGE (really Nevada or any 3rd party aircraft for that matter) would cause a spike in user created content to make use of whatever was added. The stagnation of new missions/skins is quite normal between content releases. It happened with Ka-50, FC2, and A-10C. Its simply happening now for P-51D, CA, and FC3 for a few different reasons. 1. P-51D doesn't entirely "fit in" without other WW2 assets. 2. CA has evolved quite a lot since it was first introduced and it was SUPER easy to add CA slots into existing missions. 3. FC2 missions are compatible with FC3, so there is already a sizable pool of missions/skins to choose from. 4. The transition into World has had its ups and downs. Once something like the Mig-21 gets released I'm sure you'll see another sizable spike in new content, but as time passes eventually fewer and fewer people will make content for it just like everything else in the sim.

 

For me, my lack of releasing missions has been a combination of me wanting to make overly complex missions the triggers can't really do and nothing amazing and new was added to the editor to make me want to experiment with it. Now we have the scripting engine so both of those problems don't really exist anymore.

[ENO]

My point was more at the fact that little things keep changing that disables aspects of more creative missions- which I've been told by a few has killed their enthusiasm for development. Each patch seems to break something that a mission designer needs to go fix- which increases their workload especially when we get 3-4 in a month.

 

As for the relationship between edge and skins... There isn't one except that the realization a major renovation of scenery is upon us reduces the effort others put in scenery mods the same way that patches seem to interfere with many other manners of mod development.

[Conure]

I just had this response from PMDG regarding the DCS engine:

 

"Gents-

 

I'm an avid DCS A10C flier...

 

I'd LOVE to have an engine that beautiful and functional to work with... but we will have to wait and see where they take it.

 

In my opinion, the DCS simulation provides the best flight control feel of any simulation yet made. As some of you know, I am a lover of the taildragger, which means having a realy good feel for the rudder and aileron relationship. DCS provides a very realistic feel in that regard. "

 

Great compliment from a top quality developer. The future may well be very exciting for those of us that enjoy heavies/non combat based roles in the DCS environment.

 

Link to thread here: http://forum.avsim.net/topic/394783-dcs-world-offers-third-party-sdk-now/#entry2551353

[BHawthorne]

This isn't flying Los Angeles to Tokyo with a widebody passenger jet, this is theater operations. I see little advantage to huge maps and many downsides. I'd rather have quality over quantity when it comes to map detail. Something large map flight sims have never gotten right is terrain scaling. Photoreal scenery still can look like crap at 30cm in FSX with pop-ins and tile loading lag. It's horrid for world sized scenery engines.

Edited December 23, 2012 by BHawthorne

[Conure]

This isn't flying Los Angeles to Tokyo with a widebody passenger jet, this is theater operations. I see little advantage to huge maps and many downsides. I'd rather have quality over quantity when it comes to map detail. Something large map flight sims have never gotten right is terrain scaling. Photoreal scenery still can look like crap at 30cm in FSX with pop-ins and tile loading lag. It's horrid for world sized scenery engines.

 

Theater operations also includes logistics - you don't transport things in an F16 - and how about awacs too. If further maps were created I would presume they would be done by third parties and, therefore, generally of high quality. OrbX quality scenery in the DCS world - I wouldn't turn that down.

 

I don't think anybody is realistically expecting a whole world mod, but I have no doubt we'll start to see expanded locales turning up.

[sorcer3r]

This isn't flying Los Angeles to Tokyo with a widebody passenger jet, this is theater operations. ....

 

Maybe not LA to Tokoyo but perhabs from Aviano airbase to Belgrade or Kuwait to Afghanistan.

 

Current DCS theater is for a chopper sim big enough but I guess for a fixed wing aircraft we need larger theaters.

[Gecko6]

I have flown my B-52 from North Dakota to Alaska and back for a mission on VATSIM with the VUSAF. I loved the fact that I can fly missions that reflect real world duration. In the current DCS World I would get to my alt and be almost on top of the other side of the map. Not really fun for a heavy bomber pilot. I agree we do not need the whole Earth but something like the UK to Libya would be awesome.

[Cali]

I have flown my B-52 from North Dakota to Alaska and back for a mission on VATSIM with the VUSAF. I loved the fact that I can fly missions that reflect real world duration. In the current DCS World I would get to my alt and be almost on top of the other side of the map. Not really fun for a heavy bomber pilot. I agree we do not need the whole Earth but something like the UK to Libya would be awesome.

 

There are no bombers in DCS, the aircraft we have now can get up to alt pretty fast. I would love to see a new or bigger map. However, there are a few things they should work on first....like trees that will kill you if you fly threw them, better contrail system, not the standard they start at 26,000 feet and end at 40,000 feet. Fix mp AAR, but that's not that big of a deal since people don't fly long enough to AAR. Fix the models for flyable aircraft! Don't spend time on making a super nice Mig-31 or F-18 model if it's not flyable....that's a waste of resources if you ask me.

[Anatoli-Kagari9]

To the OP, thank you for making available those citations from PMDG. It's great to know their team includes DCS players, and it doesn't surprise me because, after years using msfs and x-plane I simply can't start any of those sims anymore.

 

My other two simulators are still, ELITE (for IFR proficiency trainning) and Silent Wings (the best soaring simulator available, and I believe weather modelling will not grow towards making soaring flight a good option for DCS, but one never knows....).

 

Otrher than that I simply can't think of any other reason not to invest solely on DCS, the p51d which was my original aircraft, and bs2, which I still have to go through the rather steep learning sillabus...

 

Starting either FSX or X-Plane with their rather inferior flight/systems/engines/etc... models simply nakes no sense... So, I really would like to find even more good things happening to the DCS platform in the future, including additional scenery areas and aircraft.

 

The UH1 is not far from being released, and can't avoid that one :-). I already find the scenery engine very good, and didn't know about a new graphics platform being under dev.

 

Looking fwd for other developers formerly concentrating on the FSX franchise or even now X-Plane, turning their attention to this great simulator, and, I do not even like air combat!!!

[Gecko6]

There are no bombers in DCS, the aircraft we have now can get up to alt pretty fast.

 

Understood but till we get a bigger Theater of operations, there is no justification to build a player flyable heavy. Which is sad. So much can be done! I have never seen a good sim that has full combat capable systems including the B-52, B-1, B-2, TU-95, Tu-160. or even a Tu-22.

 

All I can do is hope that EDGE is capable of an increased (TO)

[SkateZilla]

There are no bombers in DCS,

 

*Yet

[danilop]

If we ever get B-2, TU-160 and such, and if the weapons carried by those beasts are modeled correctly, we would have nuclear holocaust in every online mission!

 

Imagine your average online dude, flying B-2, plinking tanks with nukes .... :fear::megalol:

Edited December 24, 2012 by danilop

[Eihort]

I can't remember what show I saw it on, but a B-2 can drop a load of JDAMs over an airfield and pop every building. No nukes required.

[Cali]

Understood but till we get a bigger Theater of operations, there is no justification to build a player flyable heavy. Which is sad. So much can be done! I have never seen a good sim that has full combat capable systems including the B-52, B-1, B-2, TU-95, Tu-160. or even a Tu-22.

 

All I can do is hope that EDGE is capable of an increased (TO)

 

There is a reason for that, how much info is out on those aircraft? I know a good amount of info on the B-52 because I work on them and talk to people that work on the different system, plus have a few friends that are E-Dubs or Electronic Warfare Officer. And another friend that got a pilot slot at the beginning of 2012. haven't talked to him in a while so I don't know if he got his aircraft that he is flying yet. Italked to a B-1 pilot last year at the air show and he told me some pretty cool things about the B-1. These aircraft go through upgrades all the time. I didn't get to see the cockpit, but I hope it's in better shape then the B-52. It's like being in a 1970's car...compared to something in the 2000's.

 

Here is a little info on the BUFF and it's mission, a squadmate posted this in our forums.

 

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/09/1168141/-Flying-the-B-52-Part-1

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/13/1169386/-Flying-the-B-52-Part-2

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/15/1169715/-Flying-the-B-52-Part-3

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/18/1171510/-Flying-the-B-52-Part-4

 

I can't remember what show I saw it on, but a B-2 can drop a load of JDAMs over an airfield and pop every building. No nukes required.

 

It's amazing what GPS and other smart guided bombs can do.

[jmod]

PMDG announced:

DCS: 737 NGX

 

I don't know why we haven't had this announcement yet!

Maybe they wait for whole earth WGS-84 model.

I hope the EDGE technology uses more advanced coordinate system, rather than flat coordinate system!

[Conure]

PMDG announced:

DCS: 737 NGX

 

I don't know why we haven't had this announcement yet!

Maybe they wait for whole earth WGS-84 model.

I hope the EDGE technology uses more advanced coordinate system, rather than flat coordinate system!

 

Haha imagine DCS NGX...

 

"I'M LANDING AND...MY APPROACH IS ABOVE 25FPS? EVERYTHING IS TOO FLUID, I DON'T KNOW WHAT I AM DOING, I NEED THE MANUAL!!!":D

[SilentEagle]

I just had this response from PMDG regarding the DCS engine:

 

"Gents-

 

I'm an avid DCS A10C flier...

 

I'd LOVE to have an engine that beautiful and functional to work with... but we will have to wait and see where they take it.

 

In my opinion, the DCS simulation provides the best flight control feel of any simulation yet made. As some of you know, I am a lover of the taildragger, which means having a realy good feel for the rudder and aileron relationship. DCS provides a very realistic feel in that regard. "

 

Great compliment from a top quality developer. The future may well be very exciting for those of us that enjoy heavies/non combat based roles in the DCS environment.

 

Link to thread here: http://forum.avsim.net/topic/394783-dcs-world-offers-third-party-sdk-now/#entry2551353

 

I completely agree with him and would love to see larger operations where heavies would be needed and developed, but I have had my own day dreams about developing a little tail dragger and painting it as a WW2 or Vietnam era observation aircraft, just because I can. We have already seen the flight dynamics and fluid feeling to flight that DCS can produce over every other sim, so there is no limit to what kinds of aircraft could be faithfully produced. It only comes down to what people will buy given their interest and its need in the simulator world.

[Exorcet]

There are no bombers in DCS

There are, they're just AI only. Same for AWACS, tankers, and transports.

 

The map right now is on the small side for most aircraft. A complete world map would be great, but is not strictly necessary. I do think that expanded maps should be given a good bit of priority though.

[Cali]

There are, they're just AI only. Same for AWACS, tankers, and transports.

 

The map right now is on the small side for most aircraft. A complete world map would be great, but is not strictly necessary. I do think that expanded maps should be given a good bit of priority though.

 

Guess I should have said there are no flyable bombers. I already knew there were AI ones.