Jump to content
Wolf8312

IL-2 and DCS comparison

Recommended Posts

The flight dynamics, characteristics and modeling in BoX is incredibly realistic and pretty spot on. While not being able to push all the buttons and flip all the switches in the VC certainly detracts from the immersion factor somewhat, it's completely and absolutely made up for in the incredible and well-rounded experience the BoX titles provide. From MP to SP, you couldn't ask for anything more than what the developers have provided and continue to provide in their titles, free updates, and mod support.

 

2 hours ago, Monostripezebra said:

A friendly jetline driver once said to me, after running into simmer questioning him with vigor: "you know, those flightsim guys know amazingly well how to flip switches, but they have absolutely no idea, what really matters in what flightphase".  In the end we all like to imagine we "could fly the real thing" but there is a really steep gap between regularly moving a plane safely and playing a game on a computer. Flightsim games can transport some knowledge and they can be used to train some procedures, but "as real as the real deal" is a promise yet unfulfilled by any sim, and it would probably be boring.. so without respawn and all.

 

I can perform the entire startup procedure for an A320. I can follow a real checklist, I can program the MCDU completely, manipulate the systems, properly utilize the FBW AP systems, account for and run emergency procedures and a myriad technical aspects of that aircraft. Hell, if you were to put me in the flight deck of a real A319-A321 (neg NEO) I could run the systems from top to bottom.

 

What I could not do is actually fly it. I'm under no illusion there and that's something you don't always see in the this genre, especially on the civilian (FSX, P3D, XP) side of the house. You wouldn't believe the statements of armchair pilots out there that know in their heart of hearts that just because they own the PMDG 777 they could fly the real thing. It's utterly ridiculous.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Try having a word with Requiem who does The Air Combat Tutorial Library on YouTube. He does both, BOX and the real thing and MAY even do DCS. Worth speaking to, he knows his stuff AND has probably got a pretty good handle on all the points in this (sometimes heated) debate! ;)

http://www.youtube.com/requiembos for those who haven't visited....

Edited by Raptorattacker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Monostripezebra said:

This whole "sim vs game" debate is something, that can be pretty silly. In the end, both are games and both are sims. I recently played a lot of DCS and got a good chuckle out of my first MP tries: There where some very self-assured DCS-players, absolutely convinced that they are the true "sim pilots" and "IL2 is just an arcady game", while flying on maps with all plane types for all sides and consequently identifying them enemies via map-magic (the precise location of your plane and friendlies showing) while beeing totally lost without map icons.

Thats just selective realism. Wannabe aces complaining about this or that not working, throwing around manuals and datasheets of which they have no actual knowledge, thinking that because they can do cobra in their Su-27 or score bunch of victories every now and then, they are as good if not better than real guys. Oh boy, I recall old 1946 discussions and folks thinking that because they fly in their 109s every day, every week and learn from their mistakes they are better than real pilots who could not learn from mistakes because they were dead. 

Personally I think closest to real flying are guys from aerobatic groups like Virtual Horsemen who really take time to familiarize with flight model and plane characteristics. You can see that in their very tight and coordinated formations and flight technique. 

 

But rest just picks their plane and throws it into least realistic environment, while at the same time demanding more and more realism from an aircraft. Take what suits them, drop what stops them and pretend you are a real fighter pilot. As I said, a selective realism.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many people forget that simulation software isn't defined by some arbitrary amount of detail that must be included. Simulation just requires modelling some subset of real phenomena. 

 

No piece of software can do everything. For example, finite element analysis packages may be used to simulate complicated airflows around a body. Can DCS do that? Of course not. However, that doesn't mean DCS is somehow a lesser simulation. 

 

Similarly, Il-2 and DCS are both simulations; they merely focus on different things.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, DetCord12B said:

The flight dynamics, characteristics and modeling in BoX is incredibly realistic and pretty spot on. While not being able to push all the buttons and flip all the switches in the VC certainly detracts from the immersion factor somewhat, it's completely and absolutely made up for in the incredible and well-rounded experience the BoX titles provide. From MP to SP, you couldn't ask for anything more than what the developers have provided and continue to provide in their titles, free updates, and mod support.

 

 

I can perform the entire startup procedure for an A320. I can follow a real checklist, I can program the MCDU completely, manipulate the systems, properly utilize the FBW AP systems, account for and run emergency procedures and a myriad technical aspects of that aircraft. Hell, if you were to put me in the flight deck of a real A319-A321 (neg NEO) I could run the systems from top to bottom.

 

What I could not do is actually fly it. I'm under no illusion there and that's something you don't always see in the this genre, especially on the civilian (FSX, P3D, XP) side of the house. You wouldn't believe the statements of armchair pilots out there that know in their heart of hearts that just because they own the PMDG 777 they could fly the real thing. It's utterly ridiculous.  

 

You are indeed very critical about yourself. But a healthy respect for professionals is certainly preferable to the alternative.

 

As quoted, the comfy armchair pilot lives in a world of

14 minutes ago, =362nd_FS=Hiromachi said:

selective realism

, well put.

 

In the sim, we have two main differences from real life, one is the lack of feel for the plane (the plane is more limited in the way it is „talking“ to us) and the ability to hit a pause button. Especially the later makes a lot more people suitable to „fly“ sim aircraft than real aircraft. Being able to work under timed pressure like that is not for everyone. My experience with piloting airliners is not beyond class D motion sims, but after a short introduction, I felt they were as straight forward to operate than I was used from sims. These are great aircraft and they fly wery well.

 

Where the differences between real and sim (pilots) become painfully evident is in the handling of „unforseen circumstances“. Certainly, you can learn procedures on a sim, but reacting correctly in an emergeny hardly any sim pit pilot will be able to do. I was rather impressed when I „dropped“ (there‘s a nice touch screen panel for all kind of emergencies) an engine of the A320 while my instructor was showing me the approach. After being baffled for a second by the red lights, he just turned around and gave me this look while going through the hoops and saflely landed the aircraft. I can add that he was the head of the flight school...

 

Regarding „flying“ itself, the feel for a real aircraft different from real aircraft. It takes a lot of practise to develop an intrinsic feel for them. Once you have that, it is so much easier to do all other workloads. Without this feel for the real aircraft, flying is a real strain. You‘d be possibly able to fly it and bring it down safely under favorable circumstances. But also for myself I wouldn‘t count on more. Knowing the procedures beforehand, I absolutely needed some time with the instructor to then make a flight and some circuits in the pattern.

 

This intrinsic feel I think is best learned as early as possible. Teenagers are usually very relaxed about taking aircraft to their limit. Or at least so was I and my friends when we started flying at the age of 16. Things like short field take off, where you lift the plane of the runway in ground effect and then acellerate until it really flys, is something that does generally not mix well with pilots who learned to fly after retirement. Same with horseback riding. You better learn how to properly sit in the saddle. (Falling of a couple of times hurts less when you are young and fit than when you are old and fat.)

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion this post is useless. You can't compare two different approaches, there is just something that is going to be better or worse by nature. Just go for the one you like.

But since we are here I am going to say something:

It is an unfair comparission, I will compare Il-2 to DCS when DCS it's completed 😁

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just pick two out of three, or choose one you can live without.

 

63589289_Untitleddrawing.jpg.541462b694566fa5959428fcffe59531.jpg

Edited by LsV_Trupobaw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, LsV_Trupobaw said:

Just pick two out of three, or choose one you can live without.

 

63589289_Untitleddrawing.jpg.541462b694566fa5959428fcffe59531.jpg

 

Does Clod not have good physics? Was kinda looking forward to it getting VR! Scratch kinda, was really looking forward to it!

 

Edited by Wolf8312

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think DCS got good environment outside cockpit, and I do not think clickable pits are a necessity in life when it comes to WW2 era. But I like conrolinterface in DCS much better, the fact that you can have setup for each plane in DCS and COD is a very good thing. To me BOX series is pretty bad in this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, LuseKofte said:

I think DCS got good environment outside cockpit, and I do not think clickable pits are a necessity in life when it comes to WW2 era. But I like conrolinterface in DCS much better, the fact that you can have setup for each plane in DCS and COD is a very good thing. To me BOX series is pretty bad in this. 

 

You mean how the graphics look outside the cockpit? The graphics are stunning to be honest (especially from altitude) but you have got to get the gamma and time of day right especially in VR. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, LuseKofte said:

I think DCS got good environment outside cockpit, and I do not think clickable pits are a necessity in life when it comes to WW2 era. But I like conrolinterface in DCS much better, the fact that you can have setup for each plane in DCS and COD is a very good thing. To me BOX series is pretty bad in this. 

 

This for sure.

Along with the ability to set a button as a modifier.

Edited by dburne
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LsV_Trupobaw said:

 

CloD has only partially clickable cockpits, far away from DCS standards. The only thing really need click is open fuel cock, is moot consider their 'clickability' as differential feature.

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Updated the OP...

 

+Spotting in Il-2 is far easier than with DCS, I never had any problems finding a potential enemy in BOX, but in DCS it's a real drag and I play with 0 pixel density (VR).

+Ground targets in DCS are also too small and difficult to see in DCS though actually pretty big and easy to see in IL-2.

+DCS has the most beautiful and realistic looking terrain I have ever seen in a flight sim, especially in VR it is breathtaking. Make a WW2 mission in the mountain ranges of the persian Gulf, at the right time of day, and be prepared to be utterly blown away!

+DCS AA is much more lethal and accurate

 

Edited by Wolf8312

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎6‎/‎20‎/‎2018 at 7:59 AM, ZachariasX said:

 

 

 

Very much spot-on.

The most important difference between real life and sim-flying is that you are actually going places (moving around; the sensation of movement totally lacks in sims), which is a little intimidating at first. Especially when you first fly an aiplane yohave flown thousands of time in the sim.

 

What also is totally different is the way the controls FEEL. They're a good deal harder to move, but mostly they're rather responsive (depends a lot on the airplane, though).

A Pa 28 Warrior will have a brickton-heavy (but very direct) Elevator. A Cessna 210 will have you sit at the runway with your legs aching, because that goddam Thing is so heavy on the rudder (sucks butt to taxi) and the other controls aren't any lighter. But once in the air, she responds at the slightest movement of the yoke. Oh and she's Pretty powerfol - 300hp don't seem like much, but this thing is fun (well, sadly not for your wallet).

 

The *flying* part is actually pretty straightforward - it's the shell around it that gets you behind the aircraft. When I did my IR, I didn't have much fun FLYING, but I sure as hell enjoyed being challenged by the mental task of knowing where you are and where you're supposed to go and the relation between those two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Box, for me, wins it.

 

ww2,ww1,tanks.

 

it also seems to perform better for me in VR.

 

I love DCS but it feels a little sterile for me SP wise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, I absolutely love the attention to systems detail that each DCS aircraft module has.  Unfortunately, that is as far as I go with DCS.  I really want to use it but find it is much too time consuming to use as a single player.

 

Plus, my interest in combat aviation does not extend past the Sabre/Mig 15bis, and DCS focuses more on more modern jets.

So, until DCS produces more WWII stuff, my time is better spent in IL2 GB

(aside-I don't care about clickable cockpits, I don't use them.  However, I DO like that hovering the mouse over the thing tells you what it is; that is helpful)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand the apples and oranges comments. They're basically the only two combat flight sims out there, especially with good VR. Flying warbirds and modern jets are obviously way different, but there definitely is overlap in the two games, and when you step back and think of the broader picture (combat flight sims) there is a whole lot to compare. It's really helpful for people getting into this genre to have discussions where more experienced players can share the pros, cons, and differences of each without the drama. Knowing the differences in AI, campaigns, map details, graphics, control configuration, optimization, available planes, VR functionality, mission editing capabilities, etc. is far from useless. Not only does it show you where you might want to put your efforts, but it also gives you a good picture of what is available.

Edited by Boomotang
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Click pits in ww2 planes are cool but they are super cool in modern jets, playing with the displays and dropping jdams on lasered targets at 25k is always fun.

 

I don't think it's necessary to have fun in a ww2 sim. I like both games and don't really care to compare them. Ones a study sim the others a combat sim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×