DCS

[simfan2015]

Historical plausibele context is of course where il-2 fills the gaps. 

DCS is all about selling modules and coherence seems of little importance. 

That is what I like about il-2 so much ... this sim does have purpose and direction as well as historically accurate theaters. 

[Art-J]

6 hours ago, Eisenfaustus said:

Would they be less detailed/worse done if they existed in a historical plausible context? They at least would be more interesting for me. 

 

Not interesting for the 3rd party developer, though. This Octopus guy is Russian, he clearly likes strictly  Russian planes, with emphasis on warbirds (although he's been unofficially working on Su-17 as well) and he just uses DCS as a cool platform to implement them, fly around and make a few bucks (I seem to recall he also has some FSX modding background, hence the approach). If that tickles his fancy, so be it. You can't force someone to make an addon he's not interested in. For him, it's either Russian radial-powered warbirds or no warbirds.

 

I haven't bought his I-16 and I'm not going to buy his La-7, but that's because I just don't fly Russian warbirds at all, no matter which sim they're in, GB included. But that's my choice, while his development choice is his and it's not going to affect me in any way.

 

Not everyone uses combat flight sims for combat. Some of you guys are often way too bent on historical and functional context of stuff being released for this or other platforms.

 

@SeaSerpent has summed it up perfectly.

 

 

[Lusekofte]

25 minutes ago, Art-J said:

his I-16

Is hands down a masterpiece. But other than instant fun has no use at all . Like this LA 7.

If it git a good campaign with it, I personally would buy it, GB is not my cup of tea in SP

[Trooper117]

I'm having a great time flying the DCS Spit Mk IX in the campaigns made for it on the channel map and on the Normandy map... Superb stuff!

[DBFlyguy]

DCS direction is MONEY.  They sale what makes them more of it. If making "all in one" packages made them more money, they'd do it, it doesn't,  so they don't.  Same with MSFS.

 

Meanwhile, our beloved devs won't even risk a making a static aircraft carrier cause it's "too risky" financially. Ask yourself honestly, If you were a business owner, which position would you rather be in financially? ED's or 1C's....  This isn't that hard folks ?

 

I love GB's like everyone else here but some of these odd "must always swear allegiance" stances are just....odd.  We can love all of these games/sims and still acknowledge what some devs do better than others and vice versa. None of these people (developers) are family/friends, you don't owe them you undying loyalty. Enjoy what you enjoy.

[Cloyd]

34 minutes ago, Art-J said:

Not everyone uses combat flight sims for combat.

 

 

 

For under a $100 I can "simulate" being Kermit Weeks, a rich guy who can spend hundreds of thousands to indulge his interest in WWII warbirds.

[Lusekofte]

1 hour ago, Trooper117 said:

I'm having a great time flying the DCS Spit Mk IX in the campaigns made for it on the channel map and on the Normandy map... Superb stuff!

Getting that thing on the air, make you my hero. But I have not flown it since I bought it.

Thank you for this idea. I need some good SP campaign

2 hours ago, Art-J said:

Not everyone uses combat flight sims for combat

I use it mainly for civilian task. Mostly chopperbased. 

[Bremspropeller]

 

 

 

Who needs a La-7, when you already have a Murage?

 

All kidding aside, the La-7 looks gorgeous and I might get it at some time in some sale.

[DD_fruitbat]

Hey @Brems, now I'm about to get my life back after a busy summer,  might treat myself to the twatwagon!

 

I will be tapping you up for tips?

 

La7 looks very cool will be interesting to see how difficult it is to fly well, remember reading way back how irl was a lot of workload on the pilot, unlike its online heyday in il2? The urber plane pre 25lbs Spit!!!!!!

 

Just chuckle these days at comments regarding the sneering of new modules being announced and complaints. 

 

If a third party wants to make something its up to them after all. Don't want it, don't buy it, its a very simple situation....

 

I'm just happy that more and more third parties are getting involved, there seems to be a lot more getting on board recently,  and means more shiny things for me.

 

The thing I'm really excited for though is the weather stuff.  Ever since I've played flight sims, been dreaming of proper moving weather,  could add so much to missions,  really looking forward to seeing how it works. 

[Bremspropeller]

In the pattern at Paphos.

[Jade_Monkey]

10 hours ago, DBFlyguy said:

I love GB's like everyone else here but some of these odd "must always swear allegiance" stances are just....odd.  We can love all of these games/sims and still acknowledge what some devs do better than others and vice versa. None of these people (developers) are family/friends, you don't owe them you undying loyalty. Enjoy what you enjoy.

 

I dont see any post here "swearing any allegiances". Some people are expressing they disappointment in the increasing lack of cohesion in DCS. It is a combat simulator after all, but it's starting to look more like Jay Leno's car collection.

 

11 hours ago, Art-J said:

Not everyone uses combat flight sims for combat. Some of you guys are often way too bent on historical and functional context of stuff being released for this or other platforms.

 

That is like saying not everyone buys cucumbers to eat them. It's cool that some people get to enjoy them in their own way, but it would be nice if they were edible too!

[Guest deleted@83466]

What else do people do with Cucumbers, Jade??  I don’t quite follow where you’re going with this analogy…

[Jade_Monkey]

7 minutes ago, SeaSerpent said:

What else do people do with Cucumbers, Jade??  I don’t quite follow where you’re going with this analogy…

 

Some people use them to play DCS! 

[Cynic_Al]

50 minutes ago, SeaSerpent said:

What else do people do with Cucumbers, Jade??

 

Reminded me of that ancient joke.  I suppose if any nuns play DCS, they may relish the idea of landing in a cucumber field.

[Guest deleted@83466]

Quote

That is like saying not everyone buys cucumbers to eat them. It's cool that some people get to enjoy them in their own way, but it would be nice if they were edible too!

 

Yes, understood: I was gonna eat that, but now it’s going to taste like cucumber….

 

Edit: Jade, you kind of defeated your argument by admitting people have fun as it suits them, not everybody else.  They don’t care if someone else is more rigid in their taste.  Also, like I said, it’s a study sim.  What aircraft in DCS do you think you have truly “mastered” in a virtual pilot sense?  Some people just want to hit ‘E’, and ‘B’ and say they’re  a virtual airplane guru, and that’s cool too…

 

 

Edited October 16, 2022 by SeaSerpent

[Jade_Monkey]

Sounds like you did not understand my argument if that is your conclusion. I'm not asking anyone to fly historical missions if all they want is to mess around and study a particular plane. I'm asking DCS to also cater to people who actually want to simulate combat in a particular setting (which is what their maps are).

[Guest deleted@83466]

35 minutes ago, Jade_Monkey said:

Sounds like you did not understand my argument if that is your conclusion. I'm not asking anyone to fly historical missions if all they want is to mess around and study a particular plane. I'm asking DCS to also cater to people who actually want to simulate combat in a particular setting (which is what their maps are).

 

Well, Jade, tough s*&t if they don’t, right?

 

p.s.  I saw a bunch of screenshot earlier of Brems in a Mirage over Syria.  He could be going up against a Mig19 or 21 for all I know.  How out of place is that?

 

 

Edited October 16, 2022 by SeaSerpent

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, SeaSerpent said:

Well, Jade, tough s*&t if they don’t, right?

 

Yeah, they'll go somewhere else where they can have a map of a particular area and a full stable of aircraft that they can fly on said map that fits the time period. ?

[Bremspropeller]

5 hours ago, SeaSerpent said:

p.s.  I saw a bunch of screenshot earlier of Brems in a Mirage over Syria.  He could be going up against a Mig19 or 21 for all I know.  How out of place is that?

 

I was pretending to be flying above Chad. There was supposed to be two Farmers coming forus, but the infinitely wise AI decided going for the E-2 a million miles away was abetter idea. Of course, one Farmer crashed after expending all it's fuel, while the other elected to land on a helicopter-runway in Noman's land. Must have had relation in town or something...

 

Would I have preferred to have a Central Africa map for that? Sure, but I realize there's probably not enough money in that to justify the hours spent into making one, when you could have spent the same time on a more financially viable project. (*cough* Vietnam! */cough*)

But then again, the Mirage F1 and C-101 were made by people who wanted to fly a certain in aircraft in DCS, so they just made them.

The same thing could work out for maps. The OZ-map seems to be going into that direction.

 

I DO enjoyflying the Murage in an operational background quite a lot. I'm certainly not one of those people grinding around on some competitive servers to determine who's best at hiding in the mountains and shooting somebody else in the face when hopping across a ridge.

[DD_Arthur]

6 minutes ago, Bremspropeller said:

The OZ-map seems to be going into that direction.

 

They're making an Oz map?

[BOO]

5 minutes ago, DD_Arthur said:

 

They're making an Oz map?

Flying Monkeys, big castle, yellow brick roads, the lot!

 

Apparently they would have done it earlier but needed the dynamic weather engine for some reason. 

[Lusekofte]

4 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

Yeah, they'll go somewhere else where they can have a map of a particular area and a full stable of aircraft that they can fly on said map that fits the time period. ?

True, still DCS fit the shoes better for all other things. 

In GB 5 minutes I quite enough sometimes.

DCS two hours are cutting it short.

They simply are too different to compare.

Personally I need both in order to maintain interest, but if I had to choose one, DCS is my pick. 

But that do not mean I am defending all happening there. 

GB is to me , and always have been more a boy what a game this could have been.

While DCS is more a it is what it is

[DD_Arthur]

39 minutes ago, BOO said:

Flying Monkeys, big castle, yellow brick roads, the lot!

 

Apparently they would have done it earlier but needed the dynamic weather engine for some reason. 

I get it. Jason has had the push from 1CGS and Liz Truss is running DCS.

[Bremspropeller]

1 hour ago, DD_Arthur said:

They're making an Oz map?

 

Sure! Emerald City, warts and all. For all the strawmen, you'll have to got to the DCS forum, though. ?

[BOO]

8 minutes ago, DD_Arthur said:

I get it. Jason has had the push from 1CGS and Liz Truss is running DCS.

Technicaly some bloke called Jeremy is running it. Liz is just gonna do the christmas video voiceovers (although thats also under discussion apparently)

[Jade_Monkey]

6 hours ago, SeaSerpent said:

Well, Jade, tough s*&t if they don’t, right?

 

p.s.  I saw a bunch of screenshot earlier of Brems in a Mirage over Syria.  He could be going up against a Mig19 or 21 for all I know.  How out of place is that?

 

He was flying over CHAD!!!! ??Summarized DCS in a sentence.

 

no tough s*&t, just no more dollars their way, how is that for coherence?

Edited October 16, 2022 by Jade_Monkey
phone glitching

[Bremspropeller]

[Trooper117]

Whether I'm flying over Normandy in DCS, or whether I'm flying over Normandy in GB, I don't really care that much if the map is supposed to be historically accurate down to the last hedgerow, or if the trees are the wrong type for this or that area, or if a vehicle I see on the road shouldn't be there because that version wasn't introduced until a couple of months later... who the hell cares... really?

None of it is real, it's a flight sim 'game'. I couldn't give a rats arse if it wasn't even set on the 'proper' map... what's important here is in your own head, you are in 1944 over the Normandy area hunting for enemy columns to shoot up, keeping eyes in the back of your head because you just might be bounced while you are at it... you feel the tension and you are fully immersed in what you are doing... this is what is more important than giving a hoot about, 'the sea is the wrong colour for this time of year, and I'm not even on the correct map' ... of course you aren't, it's all pixels FGS!

[BOO]

Just now, Trooper117 said:

, 'the sea is the wrong colour for this time of year,..."

I agree with most of this but I did find the crystal blue tropical waters of the Thames Estuary a bit much on release - never been back there so dunno if that ever got attended to.

EDIT - ooo   Eastchurch is now a thing.....

[Guest deleted@83466]

 

2 hours ago, Jade_Monkey said:

 

He was flying over CHAD!!!! ??Summarized DCS in a sentence.

 

no tough s*&t, just no more dollars their way, how is that for coherence?

No, he was pretending to be over Chad, in his mind.  He was really in a Mirage on the Syria map.
 

What you perceive as a lack of coherence, I perceive as a certain flexible modularity.  Meanwhile, in a different game engine, the developers have said No Can Do when it comes to certain areas of obvious consumer interest.   Can’t do carriers, for example. Regarding DCS, what is being said here, loud and clear, is that independent 3rd parties can come in and flesh out whatever theater they want, past, present and future, ostensibly driven by consumer demand. 2 or 3 years from now,  I might be flying a Corsair off an Essex class carrier to go fight Tonys in DCS.  Even now,  Its already close to where one could simulate Bekaa valley, or some “real” conflict.  Some people are more armchair historians than they are flight simmers.  One could be both, if they opened their mind, but if they don’ then, yeah tough $41t.

[Trooper117]

Just to add to my previous post... many of us here will remember the old IL2. If you do, do you remember how excited you were when they brought out the 'pretend' Normandy map?

How great was it to be skimming across the waves, heading into 'France' then gaining height and wait for JG/26 and the like to show up... (I was in EAF 19 Sqn at the time), flying Spits instead of some dreary Russian kite, shooting up V1 sites, across the Channel, having a right ding dong of a scrap with the Jerries, then getting back, sometimes damaged and nursing the old girl across that 'pretend' channel, hoping the chaps all made it.

How great was all that?... no proper map of France or the Channel, yet we were there alright!

 

How simple it all was then, and such great fun...

[BladeMeister]

9 hours ago, SeaSerpent said:

 

Well, Jade, tough s*&t if they don’t, right?

 

p.s.  I saw a bunch of screenshot earlier of Brems in a Mirage over Syria.  He could be going up against a Mig19 or 21 for all I know.  How out of place is that?

 

 

Not sure why you try to come off as the end all of DCS experts, whose opinions are the only ones that matter and the Truth set in stone, but that is Bull ? $#!+. I am an ED customer since the Flanker 2.0 or 2.5 days, and while I love the study sim, clickable cockpits and gorgeous rendering that ED has pretty much always produced, I disdain ED's lack of vision for a fleshed out scenario for the Modern, WWII, Korea or Vietnam theaters, even simply using the limited plane sets that we currently have for either of these theaters. The lack of a Career or a Dynamic Campaign with some sort of recorded statistics is simply inconceivable after 30 years in the Combat flight sim business. I put my money on the thought that while there are many that only want to master the study sim aspect of DCS and fly around in a non combat environment, there are many many more that want to have a chance to use that expertise and actually engage in combat and participate in a Career or Dynamic Campaign. If you want to purchase the cucumber ? and marvel at how beautifully green and phallic shaped it is, go ahead, you can already do that in DCS, but don't shun the ones that want to cut up that cucumber and enjoy it on a dynamic salad.

I am sure ED is making money or they wouldn't still be in business, but damn, how can they not see the increased revenue from adding a Career, a Dynamic Campaign or both would bring to DCS. I mean DCS does stand for Digital Combat Simulator, does it not? Hopefully one day it will stand for Dynamic Combat Simulator. I have never tried it, but isn't MSFS a wonderfully non combat study sim environment already?

 

S!Blade<><

[Guest deleted@83466]

At the risk of being overly cliché, haters gonna hate.

[Eisenfaustus]

20 minutes ago, SeaSerpent said:

At the risk of being overly cliché, haters gonna hate.

It‘s not hate but regret that DCS does not try to fill both needs - studying a plane and flying it in a meaningful combat environment.

[Lusekofte]

52 minutes ago, Eisenfaustus said:

It‘s not hate but regret that DCS does not try to fill both needs - studying a plane and flying it in a meaningful combat environment.

For those of us enjoying the game, we have left that hope. It will be in my time on this earth "is what it is" and we do what we do to enjoy it. I am sorry, but only the mind set the limits in DCS, while GB set the limit in their sim. But I admit ,I still find pleasure within those limits

Edited October 16, 2022 by 216th_Lusekofte

[BOO]

35 minutes ago, 216th_Lusekofte said:

. I am sorry, but only the mind set the limits in DCS

er...my bank balance is a pretty limiting factor too...

[AndyJWest]

Personally, I'm finding 'memory' the limiting factor as far as DCS is concerned. Not PC RAM, my own. I own too many modules now to remember how they all work, and seem to end up spending more time looking at Chucks' Guides than actually flying the things...

[Bremspropeller]

[FlyinCoffin]

after 2 years of being into flightsims first clod and then gb I go on to dcs. But will stay with gb. I think.

 

searching for a authentic 2ww flightsim. Clod was one. Tobruk too. GB too. Iam curious for dcs. And its 2ww cababilities.

Fascinated by one certain aircraft that dcs has to offer. 

Edited October 16, 2022 by FlyinCoffin

[Boogdud]

All this talk about wanting to fly and fight in period accurate theaters in DCS? Against AI that functions realistically, in some kind of dynamic campaign of all things?? Guys, it's called DCS: Digital Cockpit Simulator. It's a study sim, for the hand curated modules that have been produced. If you want "Combat" you've come to the wrong... wait a minute.