03 and 07 May 2013 Updates

[NRG-Vampire]

And you would be wrong. What sells more among people who like to fly attack/tank busting? FC3's A-10A or DCS: A-10C?

 

(Hint: FC is the correct answer).

 

no George, they bought for fast-movers: 3*MiG-29, 2*Su-27, Eagle and for other aircrafts (F-18C, F-16C, F-14A, MiG-31 etc.) with ability to mod to make these flyable with modded SFM but unfortunately with other cokpits

and not for tank busters

[IonicRipper]

If its anything like the radar in Falcon BMS, I'm fine with that.

[lefterul]

Leave ED alone...they are making quality games since 1995 and those who are dedicated fans still support them...i still continue after all these years to enjoy their releases and they are giving me many hours of fun...and for those who forget..

GO ED GO!!!YOU ARE THE BEST AND DON'T WORRY ABOUT THE REST!

[GGTharos]

Ok, cool, go tell ED that their market research is wrong and you know better.

 

they bought for fast-movers: 3*MiG-29, 2*Su-27, Eagle and for other aircrafts (F-18C, F-16C, F-14A, MiG-31 etc.) with ability to mod to make these flyable with modded SFM but unfortunately with other cokpits

and not for tank busters

[Witchking]

I don't think so. AFM will already set it apart, and those DCS modules will likely have their avionics upgraded. Their cockpits are ready for more complication, so to speak ... it just won't happen right now.

 

 

 

That is not exactly possible ... without going into it, I'll just say that to my understanding, there are contractual obligation issues.

 

 

 

I would (make a somewhat educated) guess at the latter, but I don't really know. Hints: FC is an 'unofficial' addon to LO.

 

Well...its no way that ubi can own the rights to the aircraft or that combination of aircraft. I would get their legal team to exactly iron out what it takes to get rid of ubi. I mean...the new Georgia terrain is not from lock on. The engine itself is updated beyond lock on...or else it would have to be ubi presents dcs a-10c. The old models can be relatively easily be updated. Throw out the sfm code and remodel the lock on aircraft with new afm code and assets...why can't they dislodge the lock on branding? Unless...they are deliberately keeping lock on name to bring back those old casual players who recognize and remember lock on. So in that case... They are doing this to hang on to an established brand that was marketed by a big name publisher. ED may have wanted to buy back lock on brand from ubi, but may be unable to make that move financially...so they may be stuck with it.

 

I agree...i think flaming cliffs is not ubi property..its probably 1c or ed themselves.

Edited May 7, 2013 by Witchking

[Silver_Dragon]

If casual = good for business

and Hardcore = bad for business

Then

Harcore Naval environment and ground environment (pilot able ships and vehicles)= bad for business :(

[GGTharos]

Well...its no way that ubi can own the rights to the aircraft or that combination of aircraft. I would get their legal team to exactly iron out what it takes to get rid of ubi. I mean...the new Georgia terrain is not from lock on. The engine itself is updated beyond lock on...or else it would have to be ubi presents dcs a-10c. The old models can be relatively easily be updated. Throw out the sfm code and remodel the lock on aircraft with new afm code and assets...why can't they dislodge the lock on branding? Unless...they are deliberately keeping lock on name to bring back those old casual players who recognize and remember lock on. So in that case... They are doing this to hang on to an established brand that was marketed by a big name publisher. ED may have wanted to buy back lock on brand from ubi, but may be unable to make that move financially...so they may be stuck with it.

 

There's nothing there that is easy to do :)

 

If Ubisoft owns the LO stable of aircraft, for example, then even recreating it in DCS (by ED) might be an invitation for litigation - in any case, this isn't really a subject for debate. I know for a fact that ED has looked at getting those rights back, so please such speculation to yourself. It doesn't help anyone with anything.

Edited May 7, 2013 by GGTharos

[GGTharos]

Hardcore is not bad for business. It's just not enough business.

 

Keep in mind that if you ignore the aircraft itself, some 'hard core' features like say, advanced missile modeling, naval environment modeling etc can be easily reused with medium fidelity aircraft.

 

If casual = good for business

and Hardcore = bad for business

Then

Harcore Naval environment and ground environment (pilot able ships and vehicles)= bad for business :(

[gregzagk]

Bring them on! :thumbup: Thanks for the update!

 

[ericoh]

Very nice, keep the updates coming, this is what i call being close to your community! VEry understandable you try to further market the FC3 aircraft, you need to feed your kids aswell.

 

Greetings

[SmokeyTheLung]

Indeed! I hope ED finds a way to make enough money with this entry level stuff to fund more "full fidelity" stuff

[NRG-Vampire]

Ok, cool, go tell ED that their market research is wrong and you know better.

 

yes, that's what i want to point out

 

have they ever asked us why we bought again FC3 ? (and FC2/FC1/LOMAC/Flanker2) ? ? ?

 

i have all the "ED" stuffs, all titles, all modules, except the 1st flanker

 

and i am fine with FC3, but...

 

of course i would like to see ALL FAMOUS F - aircrafts but i can understand a DCS branded aircraft needs 5-6 years ! ! ! YES, 5 years least as Yoyo wrote

 

plus that radar problem thing what you GG wrote (which had not needed to put into other DCS titles such as warthog, hokum, mustang, huey)

 

so i f ED appreciate customers then they will make more external models and cockpits for viper, tomcat, tornado, fulcrum etc.

 

i sure to make a new accurate external model and a cockpit for it, needs about quarter time with AFM to put under FC3 than making a DCS level but "although dumbed-down" sim (coz of u.s./russian defence ministry)

Edited May 7, 2013 by NRG-Vampire

[SkateZilla]

Bring them on! :thumbup: Thanks for the update!

 

 

The ultimate surrender move,.... instead of a small back of a target you present me with a perfect Top Down Shot...... by all means, please do that in front of me...

[SkateZilla]

Look on the Bright side guys..

 

it's not DCS: Angry Birds.

[howie87]

I have to admit that I am deeply disappointed with ED for knowingly building hype and releasing information that 'DCS' F15 and SU27 were being developed, knowing full well that long term fans of the series associate the DCS name with high fidelity study simulation.

 

As stated in the Black Shark manual:

 

"Rather than focus on several aircraft at a medium level of fidelity, we will release each DCS aircraft module individually and at a very high level of fidelity. Black Shark demonstrates the level of detail that will be the hallmark of the DCS series."

 

Rather than staying true to this vision, ED seems to be moving away from its core fan base towards more arcade style gaming that is more commercially viable.

 

I will not buy this.

[Dejjvid]

I smell a Hitler rant incoming. This is insane......

 

Number 1 priority for sales should be F-18C. ED need to release a HIGH FIDELITY FIGHTER. Not an FC3 aircraft with AFM... Hell, we even have the Su-25 with AFM (woah, huge sales on that one.....)

 

50% (at least) of the BMS users base will buy it.

80% of the DCS: Ka-50/A-10C users will buy it.

A lot of my friends are waiting to buy a high fidelity fighter. I know people with brand new HOTAS's in boxes waiting for a DCS fighter..

 

My estimates is as good as everyones until someone show proper statistics.

 

I've always supported ED/TFC but not focusing on F-18C make me regret buying FC2, FC3, P-51D and CA. The only thank is more lo fi aircrafts because "they sell more" when we buy them only for the support.

I cannot express with words how disappointed i am..

Edited May 7, 2013 by Dejjvid

[SkateZilla]

I got kinda worried as soon as wags said:

 

Work will also accelerate on development of the F-15C and Su-27 for DCS World.

 

a kin to all my whining, i see no mention of "DCS" in that quote, so they were never stated to be DCS.

 

So they could be released as just F-15C and SU-27C for DCSWorld.

 

 

 

So once the surprise factor wears off, I re-read the info from last week, and realize, I jumped ED's <bleep> for no reason....

 

Eagles with AFM.... YES!.

 

I feel sorry for the MODS, lol, Russian forum slips, Wags Clarifies, Forums blow up... MODS have to maintain order.

Edited May 7, 2013 by SkateZilla

[GGTharos]

It's a problem with any complex system. What did you know about the TGP in A-10C before presented to you in-sim? And even then, the A-10C's TGP is missing a lot of stuff that we don't know about compared to the real one.

 

So, specifically, aside from sensor sensitivity and reliability, you also need to understand the operating software which drives what is presented to the pilot: How the menus are organized, etc. So while in this case we're talking about radar, it applies to any such system, from sensor operation to other onboard systems (think CDU for example).

 

plus that radar problem think what GG wrote (which had not needed to put into other DCS titles such as warthog, hokum, mustang, huey)

[GGTharos]

Stick him with a sidewinder and quickly go after his wingnut! :D

 

The ultimate surrender move,.... instead of a small back of a target you present me with a perfect Top Down Shot...... by all means, please do that in front of me...

[howie87]

I smell a Hitler rant incoming. This is insane......

 

Number 1 priority for sales should be F-18C. ED need to release a HIGH FIDELITY FIGHTER. Not an FC3 aircraft with AFM... Hell, we even have the Su-25 with AFM (woah, huge sales on that one.....)

 

50% (at least) of the BMS users base will buy it.

80% of the DCS: Ka-50/A-10C users will buy it.

A lot of my friends are waiting to buy a high fidelity fighter. I know people with brand new HOTAS's in boxes waiting for a DCS fighter..

 

My estimates is as good as everyones until someone show proper statistics.

 

I've always supported ED/TFC but not focusing on F-18C make me regret buying FC2, FC3, P-51D and CA. The only thank is more lo fi aircrafts because "they sell more" when we buy them only for the support.

I cannot express with words how disappointed i am..

 

Here here! I absolutely 100% agree.

[ericoh]

Are you people serious? Why dont you pay ED's expenses if you want more DCS fidelity aircraft faster? Seriously you are like friggin kids whining for more icecream

[GGTharos]

Try an actual arcade flight combat game out, then come back here and say that again with a straight face ;)

 

Rather than staying true to this vision, ED seems to be moving away from its core fan base towards more arcade style gaming that is more commercially viable.

 

I will not buy this.

[lefterul]

The ultimate surrender move,.... instead of a small back of a target you present me with a perfect Top Down Shot...... by all means, please do that in front of me...

 

lol :megalol: man have you ever flew this game?

[fedor]

F15 and Su27 with FC level?....I can't believe this....again?...how many times you want sell those aircraft?. Today is a very sad day for a lot people...I know that.. Now just we will have the mig21....and maybe in 2 or 3 years the f18.

[SkateZilla]

*Flown, and yes.

 

I'd be smart enough to not rely on missiles and just blast you to oblivion with the cannon.