comparison with Bf 109 and Dw 190 in DCS World

[Bearcat]

Sorry but that's simply not true... Ace High, IL-2 1946 w/ HSFX (and even without), DCS, and even War Thunder... FW-190s are pearls in all those i have cited. At the moment i'm writing, the only 190 that is literally [Edited] and almost the absolute opposite of what this plane was IRL is the BOS one.

 

That is not quite true.. I can't speak for AH.. but in IL2 the 190 was always a bone of contention in some way.. either it was the bar .. or the climb.. or the dive.. the only thing that was never a problem as far as I remember in any sim was the firepower. 

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

the only thing that was never a problem as far as I remember in any sim was the firepower.

Don't give them ideas!

[fighter1976]

One more question: how come on Amazon same game (with 10 aircrafts) costs 13 pounds and on their site is 80 dollars?

[DD_Arthur]

One more question: how come on Amazon same game (with 10 aircrafts) costs 13 pounds and on their site is 80 dollars?

 

Hmmm.....I'd be very cautious of these deals.  There is a cheap version of the game intended for the russian market only that has eight planes - the standard edition - six of which can only be obtained by flying the campaign and unlocking them.

 

Codes for this version seem to be available in the west but it's not immediately apparent what you're buying. A couple of friends of mine have been caught out by this.  Best to buy through this website or Steam.

[Sokol1]

This DVD version is legitimate, is the STANDART, dont include Fw 190 and La-5 (Premium planes) - and off course "free unlocks".

 

https://www.amazon.co.uk/IL-2-Sturmovik-Battle-Stalingrad-DVD/dp/B00O9VUXVM/ref=sr_1_1?s=videogames&ie=UTF8&qid=1462377567

 

La-5 don't make difference (IMO) and Fw 190 is not the "Fw 190" - as the people say above. 

Edited May 4, 2016 by Sokol1

[Guest deleted@50488]

FWIW, I used both DCS World and IL2 BoS /  BoM for many months.

 

I always found the "sensation of being there", including the ambient around me, and the feel of flight, the response from the aircraft, damage models, even weather modeling, better done in il2-BoS / BoM than in DCS World.

 

I still kept DCS for a while because of the helicopters.

 

I left both behind and am now fully dedicated, again, to civil simming - X-plane 10 does my siimer days, and even found a great G-2 to fly in it :-)

[Guest deleted@30725]

DCS is cool to touch all the controls and start it up, but mp is currently rubbish in DCS. Servers often crash and baked in lag causes ridiculous crashes when formation flying. Plane makers don't stick to similar years for each ww2 plane so good luck with that.

 

The outer damage modelling looks naff in DCS and the AI often flies when a player would crash, such as having no blades on their prop. Spotting is a real issue in mp. Finding your enemy is one thing, watching them disappear in front of your eyes is infuriating even with your nose pressed to the screen and because the trees have no collision model you can often hide from your enemy in them.

 

Flying the 109 and 190 (oooh that beautiful D9!) feel similar to BOS, feel similar to clod, is 100 times better than war thunder, is better than janes ww2. Landing procedure is roughly similar in DCS, CLOD & BOS & war thunder. You end up flying by feel rather than instruments most of the time in ww2 planes so if the speed for landing is different it's compensated by looking out the virtual glass at the environment and how the model wants to respond. Is either as real as each other I can only guess since I will never fly either and will probably never see a real flying D9 - saaaaaaaaaaaaaad panda. What 'feels' like it should. DCS and BOS fly fairly similar. I have not tested the 190 in BOS. 

 

Neither game would feel 'real' since no feeling of movement behind screen, no fuel and engine smells. No shaking of the plane or the bump as the wheels meet the ground. No feeling of life importance and a varied experience between joysticks. Interpeting the virtual world is different depending on how good your pc is and the screen you use. I find it easier to see enemies in BOS.

 

While elements of real and 'I want the ww2 experience' is factor there is compromise for game. BOM. I could talk so much of this game. It's not a really realistic game, there are many flaws. The world is an interpretation of real for you and me to play in. For real pilots this was was no fun, no silly little game.

 

DCS is very much like being given a restored version of each plane and having freedom to fly it where you want and to see what it's like. You feel like an airshow pilot at times.

 

BOS is very much an interpretation of a real battle. There are some gimmicks intended to help the player feel like they are there. An atmosphere has been crafted to simulate a real environment. There is an image that you could almost be there, like slipping into a world by reading words in a book. The fact that you can't physically play with the controls in BOS is almost meaningless since in a real battle the plane was often started by a mechanic and ready for the pilot. 

 

I think the goal of each is different. BOS focuses on the atmosphere and the game element. DCS is equally as flawed with an emphasis on modelling each component.

 

I preferred flying the 109 and 190 in DCS, but the underling game issues force me off. I needed a game to be a game as well. I wanted realistic, fun multiplayer and I wanted to play the game to be a interactive version of a section of real war.

 

What we all want from our free time is different and it's why we're able to have this conversation.

 

In the end I can land the 109 the same in BOS as DCS

 

DCS is let down by the inconsistent year dev of the ww2 planes. other bugs (as before) and the limited multiplayer and mission types for online.

 

BOS is let down by some of the graphical choices such as stupid grass bubble and having to use higher AA setting from windows graphics settings.

 

Financially I would currently (if money is bad) CLOD with the tf mod as the photo realistic pits look so awesome! 

 

For me it's bos / bom since my time is limited and I get all the relisitic ish 109s I can take plus a load of russian stuff that's equally as cool. MP is pretty fun and there are what feels like loads of maps after DCS.

 

DCS is simply too much of a cash drain regardless of whether it flies better and I don't have the thousand dollar equipment and dedicated room to devote to it. My favourite thing to fly was Huey. It felt just like the movies. I put fortunate son on had a blast. The thing was modeled to perfection and kicked your ass for not flying well, but there is no vietnam map, troop transport is scripted and you transport invisible troops that magically spawn when you unload them. Your gunners seem to do nothing either and as fun as it is the novelty eventually wore off. One server I found did missions for the huey and I would obtain sporadic evenings of fun with other players if people were actually on the server. This is why I sold all my DCS modules since I'd got what I wanted from it and then got bored of it flying for fun only in the aerobatic servers. There is only so much you can fly the D9 and take off and land before you want to fly mp against real people. 

 

DCS could have the most realistic virtual potato ever made, but till the pan you put it in is fixed there is no point in eating the potato so I suffer the bom campaign and I miss re-arming at the air field and stating up with a click pit, but I smile as fly online and I feel my free time was not wasted in bom.

 

I can still listen to fortunate son and I can also play it for real

 

Your results may vary - probably 20 mins in boiling water for a potato

 

But I also like to go to air shows and see the real planes flying in the real world :D This is as much fun as an realistic game

Edited May 9, 2016 by deleted@30725

[Guest deleted@50488]

DCS is cool to touch all the controls and start it up, but mp is currently rubbish in DCS. Servers often crash and baked in lag causes ridiculous crashes when formation flying. Plane makers don't stick to similar years for each ww2 plane so good luck with that.

 

The outer damage modelling looks naff in DCS and the AI often flies when a player would crash, such as having no blades on their prop. Spotting is a real issue in mp. Finding your enemy is one thing, watching them disappear in front of your eyes is infuriating even with your nose pressed to the screen and because the trees have no collision model you can often hide from your enemy in them.

 

Flying the 109 and 190 (oooh that beautiful D9!) feel similar to BOS, feel similar to clod, is 100 times better than war thunder, is better than janes ww2. Landing procedure is roughly similar in DCS, CLOD & BOS & war thunder. You end up flying by feel rather than instruments most of the time in ww2 planes so if the speed for landing is different it's compensated by looking out the virtual glass at the environment and how the model wants to respond. Is either as real as each other I can only guess since I will never fly either and will probably never see a real flying D9 - saaaaaaaaaaaaaad panda. What 'feels' like it should. DCS and BOS fly fairly similar. I have not tested the 190 in BOS. 

 

Neither game would feel 'real' since no feeling of movement behind screen, no fuel and engine smells. No shaking of the plane or the bump as the wheels meet the ground. No feeling of life importance and a varied experience between joysticks. Interpeting the virtual world is different depending on how good your pc is and the screen you use. I find it easier to see enemies in BOS.

 

While elements of real and 'I want the ww2 experience' is factor there is compromise for game. BOM. I could talk so much of this game. It's not a really realistic game, there are many flaws. The world is an interpretation of real for you and me to play in. For real pilots this was was no fun, no silly little game.

 

DCS is very much like being given a restored version of each plane and having freedom to fly it where you want and to see what it's like. You feel like an airshow pilot at times.

 

BOS is very much an interpretation of a real battle. There are some gimmicks intended to help the player feel like they are there. An atmosphere has been crafted to simulate a real environment. There is an image that you could almost be there, like slipping into a world by reading words in a book. The fact that you can't physically play with the controls in BOS is almost meaningless since in a real battle the plane was often started by a mechanic and ready for the pilot. 

 

I think the goal of each is different. BOS focuses on the atmosphere and the game element. DCS is equally as flawed with an emphasis on modelling each component.

 

I preferred flying the 109 and 190 in DCS, but the underling game issues force me off. I needed a game to be a game as well. I wanted realistic, fun multiplayer and I wanted to play the game to be a interactive version of a section of real war.

 

What we all want from our free time is different and it's why we're able to have this conversation.

 

In the end I can land the 109 the same in BOS as DCS

 

DCS is let down by the inconsistent year dev of the ww2 planes. other bugs (as before) and the limited multiplayer and mission types for online.

 

CLOD is let down by some of the graphical choices such as stupid grass bubble and having to use higher AA setting from windows graphics settings.

 

Financially I would currently (if money is bad) CLOD with the tf mod as the photo realistic pits look so awesome! 

 

For me it's bos / bom since my time is limited and I get all the relisitic ish 109s I can take plus a load of russian stuff that's equally as cool. MP is pretty fun and there are what feels like loads of maps after DCS.

 

DCS is simply too much of a cash drain regardless of whether it flies better and I don't have the thousand dollar equipment and dedicated room to devote to it. My favourite thing to fly was Huey. It felt just like the movies. I put fortunate son on had a blast. The thing was modeled to perfection and kicked your ass for not flying well, but there is no vietnam map, troop transport is scripted and you transport invisible troops that magically spawn when you unload them. Your gunners seem to do nothing either and as fun as it is the novelty eventually wore off. One server I found did missions for the huey and I would obtain sporadic evenings of fun with other players if people were actually on the server. This is why I sold all my DCS modules since I'd got what I wanted from it and then got bored of it flying for fun only in the aerobatic servers. There is only so much you can fly the D9 and take off and land before you want to fly mp against real people. 

 

DCS could have the most realistic virtual potato ever made, but till the pan you put it in is fixed there is no point in eating the potato so I suffer the bom campaign and I miss re-arming at the air field and stating up with a click pit, but I smile as fly online and I feel my free time was not wasted in bom.

 

I can still listen to fortunate son and I can also play it for real

 

Your results may vary - probably 20 mins in boiling water for a potato

 

But I also like to go to air shows and see the real planes flying in the real world :D This is as much fun as an realistic game

 

SUPERB!

[Monostripezebra]

both are good, DCS and BoS/BoM..

 

I´d say the main difference is the scope. DCS is like the FS of combatsims, you get everything airplane systems and instruments really awesome... while the focus of BoS is more the fight dynamics and interaction of various planes and is better in that regard.

 

oh, and here is one for the "DCS is more realistic!11!" crowd:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2akYKhyF6X0

 

just as one can find weaknesses and glitches in BoS, one can find the same in DCS, wind and athmosphere dynamics for instance in DCS have a lot of funny stuff in DCS. In the end each program has it´s good sides and it´s downsides, that will never change as long as there are flightsims on finite state machines (computers). If you want my advice: get both. They have very different scopes and dynamics and I don´t see DCS and BoS as competing at all. DCS is awesome for leaning one plane at a time with all it´s dials while fighting in a team online is where it´s at in BoS. I would never like to chose "either or".. as long as I can have both.

[Sokol1]

DCS is like the FS of combatsims, you get everything airplane systems and instruments really awesome... 

 

I wold say: "...you get ALMOST everything airplane systems and instruments really awesome... " as when you discover things the Mig-21 rudder, trigger (as in Fw 190D-9).... dumb down in favor of "friendlly gameplay", mehhh.    

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Fortunate Son + IL2 + Vietnam....not mine but it's one of the coolest flight sim videos made

 

[Crump]

DCS is fantastic,  

 

Anybody want to buy my keys?  Got a P-51 and an FW-190D9 for sale.  Best thing going...you will love it!

 

Pm me!

[ACG_pezman]

I flew some DCS MP the other day in a P-51. Found a WWII server (for what that's worth in DCS) and was immediately disappointed with the experience. It's just WW2 aircraft in a low-res map with the most basic game elements; go here to dogfight, go there to attack a convoy. Spotting was different too. I felt like I could see an enemy aircraft from far away, but trying to get to it took forever then when I started to get closer it vanished all together.

 

it seems to me that DCS only offers click pits in contrast to BOS/BOM, while BOS/BOM has everything else better. There isn't even a contest in the FM/DM area, BOS/BOM wins by miles. And let's not talk about how badly the Mustang is modeled over there, it's just awful. If you want to fly jets then DCS is your game, but WW2 is owned by BOS/BOM franchise at the moment.

[t4trouble]

Yeah P51 sucks ballz...

 

[Trooper117]

It still amazes me how some people continue to state how one sim is always better than another... It's all subjective to taste of course, but I have owned all the WWII sims out there more or less, been doing this flight sim gaming for many years.

I can honestly say that I have immense fun with them all, but 'all' of them have some serious flaws in one way or another.

Does that mean that they are somehow rubbish, no, of course not.

 

I don't know... it doesn't matter what forum you go on, but there are always some who go down the road of my games better than your game for some reason.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Absolutely agreed. The more good sims the merrier

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

yes but that divides an already small community, its a double edge sword, when there was just il246 you could finf thousand online at any moment

 

Raaaid made a completely valid point? 

Edited May 19, 2016 by Space_Ghost

[Original_Uwe]

No worries there.

The "we must all dumb ourselves down equally so we can all play games that we don't care for together" argument is as invalid here as it is everywhere else it is used. Mods, servers, games etc. In every case it is the argument of a person who wants everyone to play their game with them regardless of how those individuals feel.

Same guys that tell us 109 junkies that we are "hurting the community" by refusing to fly Russian planes.

Individual freedom of choice isn't just one of the foundation stones of western civilization but is in general good policy in all things.

Though I wouldn't expect raid to understand that.

Edited May 20, 2016 by II./JG53_Uwe