Is there an increase of pilots lately???

[ShamrockOneFive]

There does seem to be a change and I'm seeing more new players too.

 

For everyone who is new to the community - welcome! Hope to see you around here often!

 

I'm also wondering if there's a side effect going on with PC games getting a little more popular again and something like Star Citizen making it possible for joystick makers to sell some new equipment.

[scram77]

Had a fly about on ROF last night and was great to see a good number of people on one of the servers.  At one point there were 3 of us taking off in Camels and a 4th in an N 28 taking off at the same time and flying in a loose formation without even being on chat.

[CIA_Yankee_]

For a long time, I have wondered what caused the general decline of flight simulation ~10 years ago.

 

I remember that the joystick was once a standard item carried by every electronics store where I lived. At some point, they just disappeared.

 

Was it the increasingly complicated software development and countless broken promises?

 

Perhaps the rise of mobile and the decline of the desktop?

 

Or just a few instances of bad luck in a small market?

 

Fortunately it seems things are accelerating again.

 

This decline started in the late 90s, at least in the states. You can look at the fall of Jane's Combat Simulations as a great indicator of when the downtrend happened in the "mainstream". IL-2 definitely created a big bump, but sims in the west were definitely declining before that (and before the rise of mobile and decline of desktop). 

 

My thinking is that sims were always a niche market, and as gaming entered the mainstream and development costs increased it just no longer made sense for the big studios and publishers to focus on the sim market (they'd just get far more bang for their buck by focusing on FPSes and so on). This is why sims gradually became "dominated" by smaller studios, and moved to different markets (particularly eastern europe) where focusing on that niche remained a viable option.

 

That being said, I'm quite happy with the progress of sim these days, and it's good that we have the option to support our niche as directly as we can now.

[dburne]

This decline started in the late 90s, at least in the states. You can look at the fall of Jane's Combat Simulations as a great indicator of when the downtrend happened in the "mainstream". IL-2 definitely created a big bump, but sims in the west were definitely declining before that (and before the rise of mobile and decline of desktop). 

 

 

 

Ah yes, the glory days.

Janes, Enemy Engaged, MS combat, etc.

 

I so remember going into the stores and browsing all the games on the shelves, getting those games with the large manuals included. 

 

And then the decline began, and folks were wondering if even flight simming on the PC would survive.

 

Of course it is pretty nice now, buy a game , download and off you go. And luckily we still have some quality developers contributing to our cause.

[FuriousMeow]

Those large manuals were because there was so very little going into the development of the actual flight "sim" during that era so they could easily divert man power to create those and still make a profit. Now, it's increasingly more difficult to make a profit just for coding the sim itself.

[VeryOldMan]

Those large manuals were because there was so very little going into the development of the actual flight "sim" during that era so they could easily divert man power to create those and still make a profit. Now, it's increasingly more difficult to make a profit just for coding the sim itself.

There was  in fact more coding involved (at least timewise), but art resources were  less than half percent of what a modern game demands. Quality control is also much more complex nowadays.

[CIA_Yankee_]

Those large manuals were because there was so very little going into the development of the actual flight "sim" during that era so they could easily divert man power to create those and still make a profit. Now, it's increasingly more difficult to make a profit just for coding the sim itself.

 

I dunno, manuals in sims are still very much appropriately large... it just depends on the plane. We get huge manuals in our sims today too, just take a look at the DCS manuals. The A-10C and black shark manuals are gleefully beefy. The difference is they're mostly digital these days. Can't wait for DCS F-18 to be out so I can have another doorstop to read and absorb.

 

That said, it's true that there's been a major shift in how publishers/studios care about packaging and physical products over the actual digital products. In the 90s, games often came with tons of material, with publishers practically competing with each other for the most eye popping box design and goodies. Can anyone remember titles like Wing Commander, with "in character" journals? Or the Space Quest games?

 

I imagine part of the reason this went away is due to the soaring cost of making games, and needing to reduce expenses, but a lot of it is also because people generally don't RTFM. Game design moved towards in-game tutorials and intuitive design that took away the need for manuals, which is likely a good thing. And for those of us who are nostalgic for physical goodies, well, that's why they make collector's editions.

[1_Robert_]

I used to love all the Spectrum Holobyte boxes. I never seemed to have a powerful enough computer to run the darn things but boy would I study those boxes on the shelves in the store

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

I bought the game in May, and joined/started in June because of VR.

 

Since then I have bought every expansion and aircraft as well

Edited November 30, 2017 by 2./JG51_Fenris_Wolf

[BubiHUN]

Its good to have more and more pilots on this sim, but it has no use if we dont have competent server to fly on. TAW and Random Expert is very seasonally servers. WoL is seem to be always up(when its not offilne). It would be the best to have at least 2 official servers. 

[19//Moach]

It is not true that the simulation market is not as large as it used to be, more the contrary if anything.

 

It's a common misconception, sadly often among investors and developers, but the "mobile boom" has not reduced or replaced the PC as a platform in any way as far as demand is concerned.

 

Alas, since investors and decision makers are commonly not enough involved with the things they put their money onto, the amount of bad decisions made around the sim industry these last few years is one that baffles even the most cynical of minds.  The siren call of 'casual gaming' has doomed many an enterprise, and survivorship bias is really the only reason why those tales of hard gained wisdom continue to go unheeded by developers hell bent into driving casually off a cliff.

 

Endeavours like 777, DCS and Team Fusion are shining beacons for all the others. Understanding that there is no such thing as a "casual gamer force" affecting the hobbyist simulator crowd.  The main error is the thinking that Sim'ers are the same as gamers.  There's no need of me telling you that they are not.  But while this is obvious for us, companies such as Ubi$soft have shown their wholesale ignorance of that fact with poor decisions such the ones that affected the first release of CLoD.

 

Heroics like the efforts of TF are there to show the truth.  Flight sims are a starving market, where demand vastly outcries the dismal thin supply provided by a misunderstanding industry.  The result is players become scattered.  The user friendliness of well-honed full-feature releases (which can only be done with a hefty initial investment) a vague memory of "better days".   

 

This is but a symptom however,  of the sad way those who once could afford publicity to get their userbase together, no longer have access to such funds.  The few remaining good developers run skeletal crews with bare-minimum resources.   Their users end up scattered, misinformed, contributing to a smaller multiplayer attendance among several other similar reasons for it.

 

Still, unlike it may seem at first, there are more of us now than there have ever been in the past.  No longer the "geek" is a target of scorn and insult.  Yet the rich niches of geekdom have yet to be accepted by a decision-making elite that is one generation too old.  

 

Those who once would have been investors in the games desired by this ever larger audience, as would have allowed the resources to better support such communities (official servers, for instance), are now stolen away in a modern Gold Rush.

They trend-chase after "Casual Nuggets" in the "Mobile Yukon". Never knowing of, for each one to find it, the ten who got eaten by an iBear.

 

Yet they continue seeking riches by running after ghosts, Hard on the heels of the mirage of a growingly elusive, almost mythical "mainstream".  Yet such a concept only exists as the result of millions spent in mass media, a derelict of the days of television and mass culture, inexorably eroded by a far more individual oriented era of Internet.

 

 

Abominations such as WT are not "successful" because players have become "casually minded and desiring of such".

This perception is a fallacy that has cost many grievously, including myself personally as a game developer (not related to any sim titles, that is).

 

The reality is that gamers are only as casual as developers treat them.   There is no casual mainstream. Anyone who believes so has better be prepared to spend top dollar convincing users to play that part.

 

Just so, WT devs have put millions to advertise their "free to play" racket. (A practice which must be outlawed as the sale of ingame currencies creates local monopolies in which the profiteer controls both supply and demand, fundamentally breaking capitalism itself) Alas, the apparent success attained by even an unworthy product with a heavy press for publicity creates the illusion of demand. 

 

Players however, even when "casual", if such a thing really exists, almost invariantly detest the microtransaction model.

They see through its thinly disguised charade, with well over 90% of such audiences contributing with zero income for those titles.  The minority that does "pay to win", does so in no small part due to having become victims of deliberately applied methods of behavioral addiction. 

These are perverted uses of studies meant to help gambling addicts, here employed backwards in ways much familiar to drug dealers everywhere. A free taste, the occasional "fix" now and then, and addiction eventually sets in. 

This weakened minority then pays in bulk for the vast number of their peers who steadfastly (and rightfully) refuse to offer but a single penny.   

 

And game design itself as an art form suffers for it.  For developers become antagonistic to their users, now developing mechanics not for the goal of a game as entertaining as can be had, but for the purposes of better accommodating opportunities for players to succumb to the temptation of spending a few dollars (at first), and thus overcome a well planned moment of frustratingly near unreached gratification.

 

 

 

Of course, we Sim'ers are not particularly well suited for such methods of abuse.  Those work better in children, trusted with (or heedlessly in power of) their parents credit card.  Mobile platforms being especially vulnerable.  Consoles follow close behind.   PC is the safest from it.

 

But alas, while the gaming industry threatens destroy itself over such arguably lawful exploits, an ever growing number of players are left to wonder what ever happened to the good games they used to play.  

 

 

These players are still there.  Are we not here?  We are them.  We have grown, many of us have spawned new players (had children).  There are more of us every day. 

 

Few are those who see it clearly enough to invest in development of the games we many want to play, and would gladly pay upfront for. 

 

 

Praise the few.

Edited December 1, 2017 by 19//Moach

[VeryOldMan]

Sorry but them  sim market is indeed smaller. Specially when  you look it in relative numbers of total  eletronic games.

 

 

The original Falcon 3 for example  sold 400K copies back  in between 1991 and 1994. That back then meant it was among the  most sold computer games of that age.  While all other  types of games grew drastically  since  that time.. flight sims did not. I somehow doubt modern flight sims sell   more than Falcon 3 did.. 

[19//Moach]

Sorry but them  sim market is indeed smaller. Specially when  you look it in relative numbers of total  eletronic games.

 

 

The original Falcon 3 for example  sold 400K copies back  in between 1991 and 1994. That back then meant it was among the  most sold computer games of that age.  While all other  types of games grew drastically  since  that time.. flight sims did not. I somehow doubt modern flight sims sell   more than Falcon 3 did.. 

 

Untrue, a simple query of Steam sales database shows the very complex simulator title Kerbal Space Program has nigh-on two million sales. (through steam alone, keep in mind)

 

Obviously enough, players cannot have become less desiring of complex simulations.   KSP has fared better in word-of-mouth publicity, however.  IL2 has not done well in this regard.  Quite possibly due to the "obscure" nature of the eastern theatre in western culture.  The announcement of BoBP seems to have infused the game with a stream of new players lately.  I expect this trend to continue.

 

 

But again, this illustrates my point:  Sim Players are not less in number, only less well concentrated.   Back in the day of Falcon 3.0, one could spend in publicity through magazines. This is what was done in that particular case. It worked. 

 

 

Nowadays, even though there are more, better options than magazines, you have to convince investors which would allow that sort of publicity budget against the lure of a seemingly overriding "casual market".  These fallacious pitfalls siphon off the funds which would have worked to consolidate a much larger audience. 

 

Sadly then, those players are left starved of their preferred genre.  Scattered here and there, often still playing their old time favorites, wishing they looked as good as the newer games, which fail to meet their expectations.

 

 

You are correct that  there are relatively less simulation players, compared to players of all other genres of gaming combined.  But this is not to say there are less sim players now that there have been at any point in the past.  There are simply more players in every genre.   

 

Unfortunately, the impression that "relatively less players" indicates an absolute reduction in numbers, is one that although wholly unfounded, is indeed very pervasive.  Perhaps this is why it is so difficult to acquire the financial backing necessary to prove it wrong in practice. 

 

 

This sad misinterpretation of facts is fundamentally due to the assumption that simulators and games are one and the same.  In reality they are very different beasts, with a large section of their audiences not sharing much in the way of their interests.

 

Therefore, we must reason that Sim'ers and Gamers are not fundamentally linked. For it is quite possibly the case, that simulators are a wholly separate market which does not often overlap the general gaming scene as commonly thought. So any relative comparisons between simulations and gaming are really, quite pointless.

 

  If this were better understood, perhaps the situation would be very different.

Edited December 1, 2017 by 19//Moach

[ElPerk]

(A practice which must be outlawed as the sale of ingame currencies creates local monopolies in which the profiteer controls both supply and demand, fundamentally breaking capitalism itself)

i don't see a problem

Edited December 1, 2017 by ElPerk

[VeryOldMan]

kErbal tipical player is NOT a simmer. Kerbal tipical player was someone that  foung funny  the videos of space midgets.  THey have a gazillion sells from steam 80%  sale events where  hundreds of thousands of players that do not care at all for simmulation got the game.

[[APAF]VR_Spartan85]

19//Moach and VeryOldman, you two bring up quite the duscussion.

I'm not as well versed nor as knowledgeable but in my own personal experience finding us "sim'ers" is quite rare.

Anytime I get into conversation with a single or group of pc gamers show them some footage of IL2 on YouTube or my instagram trying to promote the brand, they instantly say "oh, is this warthunder?? Awesome!"

And I kindly correct them, they'll tell me they've either never heard of it or they saw it on steam... (queue broken heart noise)

I'm 32, this lot I'm talking about is in the 19-24 range. There was one that I got into RoF from DCS only because they fly 172s in real life. Next step is the IL2 series.. their only issue with the sim is lack of clickable cockpit but love the feel of focusing on actual flight, talking stick-and-rudder-flying-by-the-seat-of-your-pants here.

 

Evryone these days just wants that quick fix.

Snapchat... good God. Instant humour, giggles and fun. Then on to the next fix.

 

All people want these days is to be dropped into a fast paced speed shoot'em'up, get an awesome k/d ratio and then on to the next 5 min round.

 

I guess I'm venting that I don't have a lot of friends that share my passion of aviation, and it seems to me that I'm looking at those fast paced gamers as inferior to our patience as simmers (lol)

 

I suppose I'm really glad of where this sim is heading and evolving into. I can't afford to fly in real life anymore and can barely keep up with the gaming technology on 20fps if I'm lucky these days. Lucky enough, through this community I've been able to survive.

Shared knowledge, formation flights, lol's on landings, donated hardware (graphics card Toxin1) and donation of aircraft(CanadaOne)...

Damn, staring to make typos, my phone us getting tears on it...

 

I know I've gone off on a tangent, the point I'm trying to make has been lost but I just want to thank everyone and the devs for keeping the dream alive.

 

Without those here that like to have the casual "what's next" discussion or get into a heated and almost banning FlightModel/historically-correct/marketing/whatever else people argue about constantly, oh and don't forget the amazing shut-down from dev team now and then.. "if you guys don't stop this we will.."

I don't think this sim would be where it is today and where it will be tomorrow...

 

*inhale*

 

OK, now back to our scheduled programming ......

 

 

~ Spartan85

 

P.s. I just got off my night rotation and have been awake for over 36 hours.... phhh aircraft maintenance right??

Edited December 1, 2017 by spartan85

[DakkaDakkaDakka]

Flight sims were some of the original "First Person Shooters" and offered cool gameplay experiences while requiring "only" a simple joystick to play (talking 1980s / early 1990s flight sims).

 

Two things happened at the same time: actual FPSes such as Quake, Team Fortress and Counter-Strike became avialable in the mid to late 90s, followed immediately thereafter by "hardcore study sims" like the original IL-2.

 

The FPSes required absolutely no specialized hardware, just a mouse and keyboard, while the study flight sim required a good joystick, possibly a throttle quadrant, and ideally rudder pedals. On top of having a great computer, and requiring somewhat complex key mapping, engine management, etc.

 

These divergent paths continued through the early 2000s. Flight sims got more and more sophisticated, requiring greater and greater hardware / expense / effort to engage with, whereas FPSes got easier and easier to participate in.

 

I believe the desire for extreme accuracy of flight model, engine management, etc. is just way beyond what the mainstream market demands. They want fun games, character development, etc., as opposed to a "hardcore" simulation experience that may have almost zero "story" content.

 

These hardcore simmers have then fragemented further into civilian vs military, WWI vs WWII vs jets vs helicopters, etc.

 

All of which leads to the state of affairs we see today. Not necessarily a bad thing - people who are here, really want to be here. But a space with a high barrier to entry, to be sure.

Edited December 2, 2017 by DakkaDakkaDakka

[AstroCat]

I've owned IL2 BoS since release but never much got into it. The last time I got the sim itch a few years ago I actually tried War Thunder and it was a lot of fun, not sim, but fun and multiplayer.

 

For full on sim I am more of a single player RP/immersion guy, so with the new announcements, and the desire to fly with TrackIr/Hotas again i've jumped back into IL2, learning how to fly sim ww2 all over again. I used to play the original IL2 way back as well, and many sims going back before that (way back like chuck yeager's air combat/European Air War/SWOTL/Jane's Combat Simulations,etc !), but almost exclusively single player. I still play War Thunder in realistic mode (planes/tanks/ships?) here and there for multiplayer quick action.

 

I think single player for sims is a big draw as well, that's something the original IL2 did very well, so I have high hopes for this career mode coming up. Also the space sim renaissance happening (I played and still have installed Elite) I think has made people more comfortable with joysticks/hotas plus the boom in PC gaming in general, is a good mix for the sim market to catch some action on the periphery. Again,up the rp/immersion factor and you'll draw even more sim curious people in.

Edited December 2, 2017 by AstroCat

[Dakpilot]

Just look at popularity of Car games VS sims, most people have heard of Gran Turismo and Forza (and I think it is fair to call these games or sim light) whereas few people who are not into the genre are familiar with any of the more hard-core sim titles.. And sales reflect this.

 

Back in the day the more hard-core racing titles were the bigger sellers/more popular (at least that is how I remember it)

 

Quite simply all aspects of life have changed along with the generations.

 

Perhaps the amount of simmers is the same, but the ease of access to a much vaster market and cheaper/easier tech has changed the volume of the potential audience

 

Sims have just become more of a niche in a much larger comparable market

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Barra74]

I've had this sim for some time but only sort of dabbled with it. Recently I've started to practice cold starts and take offs and I'm really enjoying it (LaGG-3 of all planes!). I suppose the reason for my new found interest is in the expansions coming to the tittle and the ridiculous pricing structures of another high fidelity sim which shall remain nameless. Its a very immersive atmosphere the devs have created.

[69th_chuter]

I'm not sure if Plunkbat is a sim or not, who knows.  It's ridiculously simple in concept, jaw-droppingly difficult to master.  It has the numbers, though, between two and three million concurrent.  A round takes 25-35 mins.   It seems there should be some way to tap into some of those players.

[Royal_Flight]

I'm not sure if Plunkbat is a sim or not, who knows. It's ridiculously simple in concept, jaw-droppingly difficult to master. It has the numbers, though, between two and three million concurrent. A round takes 25-35 mins. It seems there should be some way to tap into some of those players.

It grew out of ARMA 3, which is a borderline 'first person shooter simulator' in terms of depth, complexity, tactics and the community and culture that has grown up around it.

That's the sort of crowd that it would be worth appealing to as well as they already have that mindset.

 

I love ARMA and spent many hours playing through missions, slowly and methodically, making plans and getting on comms with other players to pull off objectives, which is very similar to how BoX works at its best.

 

If the ground forces module in BoX works well in any sort of combined arms fashion then that might draw in some of them.