So what's everyone's take on the future of DCS?

[Snoopy]

Then it's your problem!

 

Other games are coming with dozens of dashboards, cockpits and panels and it didn't take years of development just for *this*... Often these are not made with every detail, but they do their job to give you a feeling to be in a plane. (Janes USAF did this over 10 years ago and the pits do their job until today).

 

But DCS just gives you a feeling about nothing beacuse you can fly nearly nothing (fighterplane)! Would be so much better to release planes with a "standard cockpit" to give people something to play with and deliver the sophisticated versions and a better avionics simulation step by step with continuous patches. And not years without any worthy release!!! And then deliver *maybe* a perfect product someday, but all people lost their interest and were gone.

 

In X-Plane there are several planes which are still missing an high-fidelity-cockpit, but you can fly them at least with standard gauges and a low-detail-dashboard. And casual gamers don't give a thing about an 1000% correct flight model, it's okay for them when they just feel that the F-117 is much more sedate that a F-22... And the casual gamers bring the money, not the too little sim-enthusiasts...

 

Sounds like DCS isn't for you, you come across as wanting Ace Combat type of aircraft and luckily that isn't what DCS is and I hope it never becomes!

[NineLine]

If A-10C level planes really require that much time and money, why not make some new FC level planes as a way to acquire funds for more serious projects?

 

Wouldnt that be going backwards?

[Snoopy]

:smoke:

[leafer]

Is it possible to have forgotten about a thing while typing about the very thing one has already forgotten? Please help me out here.

[msalama]

whole of v1.2.6 f.ex. has been pretty stuttery to me

 

Just so you know:

 

:doh:

 

OK, gotta come clean on this, because the stutters were actually more my fault than ED's this time. I updated my BIOS a while ago and forgot to turn HPET off after the update, with the result of DCS stuttering where it didn't before! Just noticed this yesterday evening after having decided to dig deeper into what might've caused the sim to run so much worse than previously... and lo & behold, that was the culprit right there!

 

Now I'm aware of the problems some folks have with running DCS, and in no way want to belittle those woes. But still, this time it really was more of a case of PEBCAK than anything ED might or might not have done... whew :thumbup:

[tietze]

... updated my BIOS a while ago and forgot to turn HPET off after the update...

 

Did you also try enable/disable HPET in windows?

 

Enable HPET:
bcdedit /set useplatformclock true

Disable HPET
bcdedit /deletevalue useplatformclock

 

Nb. reboot needed afterwards!

[tarracta]

Sounds like DCS isn't for you, you come across as wanting Ace Combat type of aircraft and luckily that isn't what DCS is and I hope it never becomes!

 

Nonsense.

 

but before I've to walk, I'd rather take at first a car without any features (that just drives) than to wait for an luxus cruiser which comes maybe in 3 years.

 

I hate Ace Combat an all this console-shit. But between Ace Combat and DCS there's much room for funny "half"-simulations: Flaming Cliffs! And this is what I want for the waiting time until a new DCS aircraft arrives.

[NineLine]

Nonsense.

 

but before I've to walk, I'd rather take at first a car without any features (that just drives) than to wait for an luxus cruiser which comes maybe in 3 years.

 

I hate Ace Combat an all this console-shit. But between Ace Combat and DCS there's much room for funny "half"-simulations: Flaming Cliffs! And this is what I want for the waiting time until a new DCS aircraft arrives.

 

 

So they should develop those with all their free time between now and the release of the F/A-18C?

[tarracta]

So they should develop those with all their free time between now and the release of the F/A-18C?

 

They said themselves that the Flaming Cliffs series brings the money. So expanding this market can't be wrong.

 

In fact there is ABSOLUTELY NO other game out there which simulates halfway actual western fighter planes like DID, Jane's or Novalogic did in the 90ies, this is a huge potential. Not without any reason fan projects keep this titles alive with much devotion.

 

I can't believe that there's noone out there who can't stand this boring arcade-shooter-console-shit like Ace Combat or HAWX but loves simulations with at least rudimental simulation level like the mentioned above titels.

 

And DCSW has already so much systems integrated (game engine, models, ...), so that can't be too much effort to build a little project team which gives us Flaming Cliffs e.g. F-14, F-16, F/A-18, F-22 and F-117A. I think this market is much more reliable than the small community of hardcore-simmers.

But serving both markets and a little cross-subsidisation gives more manpower to build more DCS-level planes...

[NineLine]

But Flaming Cliffs aircraft were existing assets, not aircraft that needed creating from virtually scratch, and that is what it would be regardless if the aircraft is already in DCS World as AI. SO even creating the F/A-18 at a FC3 level would take some time. Just because the switches might not move doesnt mean what those switches do behind the panel isnt modelled and that is where a lot of the work is.

 

The bigger picture people seem to be missing is, sure it would be great to have this new aircraft or that new aircraft, but in order to keep this sim alive, the base of the game needs to be worked on, and some of it will be glamourous like EDGE, but a lot of it will be under the hood boring stuff, but its all equally important.

 

They said themselves that the Flaming Cliffs series brings the money. So expanding this market can't be wrong.

 

In fact there is ABSOLUTELY NO other game out there which simulates halfway actual western fighter planes like DID, Jane's or Novalogic did in the 90ies, this is a huge potential.

 

I can't believe that there's noone out there who can't stand this boring arcade-shooter-console-shit like Ace Combat or HAWX but loves simulations with at least rudimental simulation level like the mentioned above titels.

 

And DCSW has already so much systems integrated (game engine, models, ...), so that can't be too much effort to build a little project team which gives us Flaming Cliffs e.g. F-14, F-16, F/A-18, F-22 and F-117A. I think this market is much more reliable than the small community of hardcore-simmers.

But serving both markets and a little cross-subsidisation gives more manpower to build more DCS-level planes...

[outlawal2]

The bigger picture people seem to be missing is, sure it would be great to have this new aircraft or that new aircraft, but in order to keep this sim alive, the base of the game needs to be worked on, and some of it will be glamourous like EDGE, but a lot of it will be under the hood boring stuff, but its all equally important.

 

THIS!

Absolutely... And folks also need to keep in mind that many of the existing issues / complaints, whatever may still be out there because ED does not want to waste time fixing an issue that will not be here once EDGE arrives... (Why fix an issue that isn't relevant to the new version.) Time is MUCH better spent getting EDGE and the other WORLD updates completed and released... It is my opinion that much of the bug quashing is being passed over for just the reasoning and it is sound...

[Cornbread]

Is it possible to have forgotten about a thing while typing about the very thing one has already forgotten? Please help me out here.

 

I lawl'd

[SkateZilla]

The bigger picture people seem to be missing is, sure it would be great to have this new aircraft or that new aircraft, but in order to keep this sim alive, the base of the game needs to be worked on, and some of it will be glamourous like EDGE, but a lot of it will be under the hood boring stuff, but its all equally important.

 

Ditto.

[Netsk]

As a fan of this sim since Flanker 2.0, I kinda went out of the sim scene by FC1. I'm now returning to DCS World with my new computer. And I have to say I love this sim more and more as it is evolving.

 

I really hope that the quality of flyables in the game will stay on the current level, to be honest many of the 3rd party projects seem very poor quality. I don't want this to turn into a FSX with tons of variable quality aircraft available, I really hope they will keep a standard. I don't want to see 5th gen fighters and two seat combat aircraft, if you know what I mean...

 

And last..I have to keep wondering about the complaints about thew grahpics, I mean excuse me but tell me a single sim that has better graphics than DCS World? Certainly not that Seven-G sim.

 

Just my 2c

[NineLine]

to be honest many of the 3rd party projects seem very poor quality

 

I am not sure what you are looking at, but the big boys in the 3rd party world seem to be pumping out some quality stuff, so I am not sure I follow you there.... of course I havent had my hands on any of it, but from what I have seen has been pretty incredible...

[outlawal2]

Poor quality? Please explain that comment as I have purchased both of Belsimtek's helicopters and they are already excellent yet still in beta...

 

I have every module published and none ar of poor quality...

????

[kontiuka]

Poor quality? Please explain that comment as I have purchased both of Belsimtek's helicopters and they are already excellent yet still in beta...

 

I have every module published and none ar of poor quality...

????

Maybe he actually means community mods, not official 3rd party stuff.

[Netsk]

Maybe he actually means community mods, not official 3rd party stuff.

 

Exactly. Not refering to MiG-21 etc. There are very amazing looking 3rd party projects in process.

 

What I am saying is that I don't want to see poorly made addons for DCS World (of which there are tons of in FSX). Also I don't see how you can realisticly model 2 seat aircraft where both crewmembers have their own tasks in battle. Super modern fighters are also very hard to do, because of the lack of information bout them.

 

And I wish the graphics of the cockpit and model of the aircraft will be in line with current DCS products.

Edited December 4, 2013 by Netsk

[KillarZ]

Two problems with DCS IMO

 

1-outdated technology

2- long development time

 

IMO the problem with DCS is the outdated technology and the development time. These two create a never ending loop where ED is always going to try to play catch up to the next gen technology while still try to deliver content for the current platform. I understand that they are a very small company and these projects take an extensive amount of time and work but by the time it takes for the team to get one project out, the technology they used to create it is already years old. By the time we get a decent amount of modules into DCS, it will still be very outdated compared to what it could be. They keep us waiting and waiting for the next installments to come out but by the time they come out there will be something about them that needs to be updated or redone. DCS IMO was a reboot but it should have been a complete reboot to catch up to current gen technology. As in a complete new engine that will make the most use out of next gen technology. The only current engine that's up to date is the amazing physics engine the game provides but the graphic/terrain, sound engine are greatly outdated. (BF3 jets sound a whole lot better than DCS jets) It's 2013 and the game still isn't able to use multicore. I support DCS and I hope one day they succeed but first they have to find away to dig themselves out of this development hole they are in. Maybe start a kickstarter to fund a modern day flight sim that uses modern technology with a world generated terrain engine and exceptional physics and sound engine. People say it can't be done with todays technology, I'm no expert but I believe it can and that is what drives the world today. They would need to come up with innovative ideas and a foundation game engine to make something like this work. Or contact another company that may be able to work on the engine separately.

 

With that in mind here's what I believe what makes DCS good and what DCS needs to be great:

Pros:

-world class flight sim physics engine

-best net code in a flight sim

-good mission editor

-very modular

-very nice theater mode and camera angles

-fairly smooth gameplay (I'm not really referring to framerate but framerate is decent too)

-FC3 (because it creates a bridge between hardcore flight sims and casual flight sims)

 

Needs Improvement:

-better terrain engine (EDGE is coming but lets hope it won't be outdated tech) would be nice to see a world generated terrain engine

-Improve UI (DCS has a good UI but does have a lot of room for improvement. Example would be an online lobby system and more graphical optimization options)

-More aircraft and modules

-multicore support

-Sound Engine (surprised to see this not talked about as often as it should be)

-Multiplayer and single player multiple crew cockpit support (I know it's coming but just thought I'd add it to the list

 

This is just my take on it. As I said earlier, I completely respect ED and for all that they are trying to do for us, but sooner or later they are going to have to reboot to catch up with modern times. I get that ED is a small company but like I said, lay down a concept idea of what criteria they need to make the type of sim they want to create and how they will be able to create it. Then launch a kickstarter campaign and try to partner with another company that will create the game engine for ED while ED works on a couple of more modules to keep its customers happy.

[otto]

What i don't like about dcs:

Lack of dinamic campaigns

Multiplayer stability

Stupid ai for aa f15 Su27 jet planes

 

I love everything else and will buy every product related to dcs.

[docfu]

Not to be facetious but do they even speak English?

 

And just as a side note, this conversation is going nowhere and isn't being even remotely productive.

 

If you really want to do something useful, why don't you gather and assemble all of the current mods into one nice big "make DCS better" package so that way new DCS users can find it and download it easy.

 

Spend your time actually making something that will help people...

[NineLine]

:doh:

 

 

Not to be facetious but do they even speak English?

 

And just as a side note, this conversation is going nowhere and isn't being even remotely productive.

 

If you really want to do something useful, why don't you gather and assemble all of the current mods into one nice big "make DCS better" package so that way new DCS users can find it and download it easy.

 

Spend your time actually making something that will help people...

[Echo38]

Not to be facetious but do they even speak English?

 

Kinda a dumb question. Yo-Yo posts regularly (in English), and is very communicative and helpful to the community. He often explains in detail minute aspects of the physics, or gives us descriptions of what he's presently working on.

[NineLine]

Kinda a dumb question. Yo-Yo posts regularly (in English), and is very communicative and helpful to the community. He often explains in detail minute aspects of the physics, or gives us descriptions of what he's presently working on.

 

A number of them post on the English forums, but people usually chase them off with questions like "do they even speak English"

[Ranger79]

I do hope ED focuses on more hot fixes to keep the communities interest. I admit I get burn-out from fixing previous missions due to a patch breaking something here or there. Hopefully this will be resolved and a more robust QA process established before the release of patches. I do think they have a bright future if they keep the customer informed and set deadlines for completion of different phases of projects. The weekly updates were a good start, but that quickly stopped. Seems like activity and interest have slowed down, and only the hardcore simmers are remaining, which may not be a bad thing.