Built-In Voice Comms

[howie87]

While I'd love to see TARS integrated into DCS world, as of 1.2.6 the A-10C radios are borked as it is already.

 

We got the TACAN and ILS morse code sounds back and got screwy radios instead.

 

Honestly, I'd just like to see everything just work as it was intended to before adding more features.

[ApoNOOB]

Honestly, I'd just like to see everything just work as it was intended to before adding more features.

 

Stop dreaming! ;D

 

Sorry I couldn't resist. <3

[HiJack]

+1 for DCS World integrated comms for all aircrafts, wehicles, ground units, Air Traffic Controller and Ground Force Commanders.

[Vivoune]

Com is key. Properly simulated integrated communication system is a must in my opinion. Installing several 3rd party softs and configure them properly are some steps that I'd very gladly get rid of. Not to mention the ppl who don't bother with it at all.

 

I'd actually gladly pay like 10 dollars for a DCS: Com module that would properly integrate TARS-like system in-game for DCS modules.

[sobek]

Reading through this thread it feels like half of you guys don't even know what TARS is, might be worth checking out.

[Irregular programming]

Tars is great, I am completely unable to get aeries to work at all.

 

The IVC in BMS only works because of a donated teamspeak server, I doubt ED wants to pay for that.

[Hot_LZ]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't TARS that plugin that's instable as hell and doesn't work with all players on TS3 at once 99% of the time?

[sobek]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't TARS that plugin that's instable as hell and doesn't work with all players on TS3 at once 99% of the time?

 

Never had any stability problems, actually.

[Hot_LZ]

Well, I fly with an online squadron and since the last couple of DCS and TS3 updates, it has been impossible to get all people with a working TARS. Problems everywhere.

[Hot_LZ]

DCS just seriously needs ingame comms... It's outrageous they make crap like contrails, while it doesn't even have proper ingame comms.

[sorcer3r]

Well, I fly with an online squadron and since the last couple of DCS and TS3 updates, it has been impossible to get all people with a working TARS. Problems everywhere.

 

Don't know how it works with 1.2.6 but we had some tars flights on 1.2.4.

For most of us it worked well but some had also issues.

It's a great tool but it should be standalone product and not a plugin for ts.

 

TARS installation via module manager would be nice. I think people would pay for it. :smartass:

 

The IVC in BMS only works because of a donated teamspeak server, I doubt ED wants to pay for that.

 

You can host IVC also on your own PC.

[Eddie]

Well, I fly with an online squadron and since the last couple of DCS and TS3 updates, it has been impossible to get all people with a working TARS. Problems everywhere.

 

Well, we in the 476th use TARS for 100% of flights, and have done since the beginning. And it works fine for us. More than fine in fact.

 

The only problems we ever see are with people new to MP and/or less computer literate people having setup issues, but they are very quickly solved. Most issues are down to people never having flown MP in an environment where realistic comms procedures are applied struggling to keep track of which radio they should be using.

 

As far as ED developing their own comms system, I do see arguments in favour, but in the grand scheme of things, it's a long way down the list.

 

I'd much, much rather see the missing aspect of aerial warfare such as the electronic battlefield, more realistic weapon modelling, FLIR that is more than a basic texture filter, a realistic weather and atmospheric model, realistic ATC & AWACS, the list goes on. Also things such as the dedicated server are far more important.

 

And of course the fundamental fact is that as the vast majority of people who play the game (and therefore the bills) do not play online and therefore have no interest in features such an online comms. So all the things I mention above, and many more besides would be a much more effective use of developer time and resources.

[EtherealN]

DCS just seriously needs ingame comms... It's outrageous they make crap like contrails, while it doesn't even have proper ingame comms.

 

Yeah, because you REALLY want to put graphics artists and graphics programmers to work on audio and net-code.

 

Be VERY careful what you wish for. Don't ask the plumber to build your house alarm.

 

Yes, having something ingame that syncs to in-game assets automatically would be awesome. But also yes; asking for graphics programmers to do that means you don't understand software development basics, so please be a little humble in your statements. (Protip: there are many specializations within the title "programmer", same way there are many specializations within the title "surgeon", and there are reasons why thorax surgeons don't open your skull to dig at your brains.) Thanks. :)

 

That said, imo, contrails aren't exactly a small thing either. Well-working contrail systems are massive for A2A combat.

Edited September 25, 2013 by EtherealN

[mmaruda]

Here is a suggestion - maybe ED could outsource an integrated comms project to 3rd party?

 

What I would personally wish for is something of a synthesis between IVC from BMS and ACRE from Arma. IVC is great and all, but it works flawlessly in all situations and you can still talk simultaneously on a single channel (there is beeping noise, but you can still listen and talk). If we had something that would only allow one person to use a channel at a time (I think that is how it should work, correct me if I am wrong) and proper radio simulation (noises, distortion or signal blocked by hills etc.), that would be something I would be willing to pay a couple of bucks for, even though I almost never play DCS online.

[Eddie]

Here is a suggestion - maybe ED could outsource an integrated comms project to 3rd party?

 

What I would personally wish for is something of a synthesis between IVC from BMS and ACRE from Arma. IVC is great and all, but it works flawlessly in all situations and you can still talk simultaneously on a single channel (there is beeping noise, but you can still listen and talk). If we had something that would only allow one person to use a channel at a time (I think that is how it should work, correct me if I am wrong) and proper radio simulation (noises, distortion or signal blocked by hills etc.), that would be something I would be willing to pay a couple of bucks for, even though I almost never play DCS online.

 

You mean like, TARS. Because all that stuff is in Headspace's plan. But unless he starts charging for TARS (honestly I think he should if it brings faster development) and it formally becomes a 3rd party plugin, it's going to take time.

[Joyride]

I feel lucky that we have TARS at all, and can't imagine DCS MP life without it. Of course, would love to see it integrated someday - even better.

[ShuRugal]

Reading through this thread it feels like half of you guys don't even know what TARS is, might be worth checking out.

 

TARS, noun.

A complicated bit of software that is a complete PITA to set up and get working properly which is unused by the majority of the online community, and thus useful only when flying with a group of like-minded technically-inclined individuals.

[EtherealN]

As an aside, I remember when the Battlefield series implemented this, and me and my friends quickly retreated back to Ventrilo and disabled it just to get away from all the idiots that kept shouting irrelevant (and often offensive) stuff over the line, making communication between those of us that cared to play "seriously" even more complicated.

 

In my own opinion, you will always need a group of like-minded individuals to get quality communication in games. That's just how it is.

 

And given the existence of freeware remote tools, you don't need everyone to be tech-savvy. Get your mates to install Teamviewer, and you can help them as long as you have a single techie.

[Nealius]

As an aside, I remember when the Battlefield series implemented this, and me and my friends quickly retreated back to Ventrilo and disabled it just to get away from all the idiots that kept shouting irrelevant (and often offensive) stuff over the line, making communication between those of us that cared to play "seriously" even more complicated.

 

In my own opinion, you will always need a group of like-minded individuals to get quality communication in games. That's just how it is.

 

And given the existence of freeware remote tools, you don't need everyone to be tech-savvy. Get your mates to install Teamviewer, and you can help them as long as you have a single techie.

 

That's the beauty of High Fidelity Sims. Most of those comm-spamming idiots are too stupid and/or not interested in this genre and are thus not a problem. And if you want to feel completely safe, just lock your server with a password to keep them out. Problem solved.

[sorcer3r]

Shouldn't be a problem. If your frequency gets jammed change the frequency.

[ShuRugal]

As an aside, I remember when the Battlefield series implemented this, and me and my friends quickly retreated back to Ventrilo and disabled it just to get away from all the idiots that kept shouting irrelevant (and often offensive) stuff over the line, making communication between those of us that cared to play "seriously" even more complicated.

.

 

as nealius pointed out, this genre does not attract the same kind of loudmouthed idiot that Battlefield, COD, and other mass-market shooters are targeted to attract. Anyone who has the patience to learn a real flight simulator, much less one as intricate and unforgiving as DCS, knows better than to act an ass in public comms.

 

Of course voice-comms in games like BF and COD are unbearable, the -text- chat is unbearable in those games. Last i checked, DCS did not have a problem with that either.

[Hot_LZ]

Yeah, because you REALLY want to put graphics artists and graphics programmers to work on audio and net-code.

 

Be VERY careful what you wish for. Don't ask the plumber to build your house alarm.

 

Yes, having something ingame that syncs to in-game assets automatically would be awesome. But also yes; asking for graphics programmers to do that means you don't understand software development basics, so please be a little humble in your statements. (Protip: there are many specializations within the title "programmer", same way there are many specializations within the title "surgeon", and there are reasons why thorax surgeons don't open your skull to dig at your brains.) Thanks. :)

 

That said, imo, contrails aren't exactly a small thing either. Well-working contrail systems are massive for A2A combat.

 

I never said graphics designers should create ingame comms. So I'll just disregard your whole post.

[Irregular programming]

You can host IVC also on your own PC.

 

Yes exactly I think IVC uses donated teamspeak server code, this would cost ED money.

 

 

I never said graphics designers should create ingame comms. So I'll just disregard your whole post.

 

Yes you did, most of us know how to read.

[EtherealN]

Anyone who has the patience to learn a real flight simulator, much less one as intricate and unforgiving as DCS, knows better than to act an ass in public comms.

 

This is the popular wisdom, and it's false.

 

Yes, it's less of a problem than in, for example, BF. But the better things go with stuff like DCS World now being on Steam, the more of an issue it is going to be.

 

But really, no: there is no direct causal link between being able to understand aircraft operation and being able to behave. If there was, we wouldn't need moderators on this forum either! :D

[EtherealN]

I never said graphics designers should create ingame comms. So I'll just disregard your whole post.

 

What you said was:

 

DCS just seriously needs ingame comms... It's outrageous they make crap like contrails, while it doesn't even have proper ingame comms.

 

This means that you consider "crap like contrails" and "proper ingame comms" to be in competition for development time. The only way they could be in competition for development time is if the same programmers were to have worked on the features. The contrails are, mainly, a graphics thing.

 

Thus, since you feel the contrails are an erroneous prioritization and ingame comms should have had priority over it (there is no other way to interpret your statement); yes, you actually are saying that the graphics guys should create ingame comms. ;)

 

If that is not what you meant, you can rephrace.