IL2 need to keep up

[AndyJWest]

So, unlikely_spider, are you expecting the IL-2 GB developers to be able to provide DCS-level complex systems modelling, and DCS-style cockpits, at lower than DCS prices, and in less than DCS-level extended timescales? 

[unlikely_spider]

2 minutes ago, AndyJWest said:

So, unlikely_spider, are you expecting the IL-2 GB developers to be able to provide DCS-level complex systems modelling, and DCS-style cockpits, at lower than DCS prices, and in less than DCS-level extended timescales? 

No

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, unlikely_spider said:

Maybe if it's modeled in an ultra-simplified state? But that was in response to my comment where I stated that in DCS I use the clickable cockpit functions in flight ALL the time. Each plane acts differently and there couldn't be a great solution to having key bindings for each function. For example, the procedure for turning off and getting rid of drop tanks in a FW involves a selector switch as well as turning off a circuit breaker, then pulling the release. And the P-51 has, what, five possible tanks to select from at any given time?

 

(And that's just talking about fuel. There's also radios, engine management, weapons selectors etc, that are different in each plane)

 

If those systems are modeled, it's soooo much better to be able to look down and physically interact with them then remembering which key bind on my horas is assigned to some esoteric function that only exists in one plane. For all the talk of the importance of immersion, there's no better addition to immersion than performing the procedures just like the actual pilots did 80 years ago. DCS is keeping that component alive much more than GB is.

Sure that’s all cool. And I like that about DCS. But it’s a completely different type of sim. 
I’ll just point out the obvious again, it took ED 9 years to make the 6 WWII aircraft they have. There are 50 aircraft here in GB

A single DCS aircraft costs $50 and a DLC map costs $40 That same money in GB will buy 8 aircraft plus a map. If those 8 aircraft were done to the DCS level of fidelity then Battle of Rhineland would cost $440 and it would take 12 years to make. What you’re asking for is basically impossible. 

2 hours ago, Enceladus said:

I would say the same about Flying Circus Vol. 1

Last time I checked FC didn’t put 1CGC out of business. The same can’t be said of CloD. 

[unlikely_spider]

1 minute ago, SharpeXB said:

Sure that’s all cool. And I like that about DCS. But it’s a completely different type of sim. 
I’ll just point out the obvious again, it took ED 9 years to make the 6 WWII aircraft they have. There are 50 aircraft here in GB

A single DCS aircraft costs $50 and a DLC map costs $40 That same money in GB will buy 8 aircraft plus a map. If those 8 aircraft were done to the DCS level of fidelity then Battle of Rhineland would cost $440 and it would take 12 years to make. What you’re asking for is basically impossible. 

Which is all true. I've stayed that the cost and time argument is completely valid. What I am responding to is people saying that clickable cockpits are useless or horrible, which is contrary to my experience.

[AndyJWest]

1 minute ago, unlikely_spider said:

No

 

So meanwhile, regardless of what the IL-2 GB developers may do in the future, we currently have the choice to fly WW2 stuff in IL-2 GB (lots of it) or in DCS (not so much). Choice is good. And the reason we have the choice between lots-of-non-clickpit-stuff and not-so-much-DCS-stuff is because the developers went down different paths. If they'd both gone the same way, we wouldn't have much choice at all.

[unlikely_spider]

3 minutes ago, AndyJWest said:

 

So meanwhile, regardless of what the IL-2 GB developers may do in the future, we currently have the choice to fly WW2 stuff in IL-2 GB (lots of it) or in DCS (not so much). Choice is good. And the reason we have the choice between lots-of-non-clickpit-stuff and not-so-much-DCS-stuff is because the developers went down different paths. If they'd both gone the same way, we wouldn't have much choice at all.

I agree with all of these.

[AndyJWest]

Just now, unlikely_spider said:

Which is all true. I've stayed that the cost and time argument is completely valid. What I am responding to is people saying that clickable cockpits are useless or horrible, which is contrary to my experience.

 

Clickpits are neither 'useless or horrible', as far as I'm concerned. Despite the issues with ergonomics, there really aren't any practical alternatives for something as complex as say the DCS Hornet. They aren't however necessary to get a meaningful simulation of almost all the in-combat functionality of a WW2 aircraft. Which is why the IL-2 GB decision not to include them (and include the added cost in the price) makes sense.

[FTC_ChilliBalls]

One thing I would be absolutely willing for to pay on a plane to plane basis would be a PBR-ish cockpit overhaul.

Some of them really show their age and I´ve trended to only fly the BoBP Premium planes as a result. 

[SharpeXB]

9 minutes ago, unlikely_spider said:

Which is all true. I've stayed that the cost and time argument is completely valid. What I am responding to is people saying that clickable cockpits are useless or horrible, which is contrary to my experience.

Clickable cockpits are fine and necessary for full fidelity simulation. But they’re infeasible for a game like this which needs a dozen flyable aircraft in each theater/module in order to simulate an air battle

DCS is a simulation of equipment. GB is a simulation of an event. They’re not the same sort of game. 

[unlikely_spider]

14 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Clickable cockpits are fine and necessary for full fidelity simulation. But they’re infeasible for a game like this which needs a dozen flyable aircraft in each theater/module in order to simulate an air battle

DCS is a simulation of equipment. GB is a simulation of an event. They’re not the same sort of game. 

I'm not sure all the modules need to be flyable, at least for my purposes. I'm single player only, which may demand a different set of assets. Yes, GB has a greater number of those. Nobody will argue that.

 

But as far as "equipment" vs "events"? Not so sure about that one. Campaigns are my main focus in sims. I can't say I feel any more part of an event in GB than DCS. Ice Ring campaign was great, and I felt like a part of a battle around Stalingrad. Campaigns like Big Show and others that take place in DCS during the Battle of Britian certainly made me feel like I was part of an event. Maybe even moreso than GB campaigns since they have voice acting. But yes there is less diversity in the planes that you'll encounter. Some are AI only.

 

Edit - if you are multiplayer then your opinion on this may be completely different; I lack that experience

Edited May 14, 2021 by unlikely_spider

[SharpeXB]

3 minutes ago, unlikely_spider said:

I'm not sure all the modules need to be flyable

For the purpose of a DCS style study sim, the game could feature a single aircraft. But for the simulation of an entire air battle it’s necessary to feature a good selection of the aircraft in that battle. Or it’s not really a battle. Plus the scenario needs a compatible authentic map. You’re missing the distinction between these games. And that distinction is driven by the reality and cost of making and selling the product. 

11 minutes ago, unlikely_spider said:

But as far as "equipment" vs "events"? Not so sure about that one.

IL-2 Battle of Kuban is a simulation of that battle, in the air. It’s not a simulation of how to operate and fly a Yak-7b

[unlikely_spider]

6 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

For the purpose of a DCS style study sim, the game could feature a single aircraft. But for the simulation of an entire air battle it’s necessary to feature a good selection of the aircraft in that battle. Or it’s not really a battle. Plus the scenario needs a compatible authentic map. You’re missing the distinction between these games. And that distinction is driven by the reality and cost of making and selling the product. 

IL-2 Battle of Kuban is a simulation of that battle, in the air. It’s not a simulation of how to operate and fly a Yak-7b

What I'm saying is that I'm pretty sure I've experienced the simulation of a battle above England and France in DCS. From a single player perspective it's not inferior to the GB experience.

[SharpeXB]

1 minute ago, unlikely_spider said:

What I'm saying is that I'm pretty sure I've experienced the simulation of a battle above England and France in DCS. From a single player perspective it's not inferior to the GB experience.

Sure. In a single aircraft module that took 2 years to make and cost $49

I think that plane and campaign in DCS is great too. But the same level of detail can’t be achieved in a game with 50 different aircraft and five theaters. 

[unlikely_spider]

2 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Sure. In a single aircraft module that took 2 years to make and cost $49

I think that plane and campaign in DCS is great too. But the same level of detail can’t be achieved in a game with 50 different aircraft and five theaters. 

 

[SharpeXB]

3 minutes ago, unlikely_spider said:

 

What’s your point then? Because it does indeed seem that you’re asking for DCS-style fidelity at IL-2 prices and timelines. 

[unlikely_spider]

1 minute ago, SharpeXB said:

What’s your point then? Because it does indeed seem that you’re asking for DCS-style fidelity at IL-2 prices and timelines. 

I never asked for that

[LColony_Kong]

On 5/13/2021 at 5:09 AM, GOZR said:

4-Clickable cockpits ( VR and Gloves ) for fine tunings and really appreciate the sim

Hell no. The last thing we need is a gimmick that adds nothing to realism and gameplay except to make aircraft development harder due to a need to actually map the switch functions and their interactions. This is a feature for people who like to follow a recipe and think it was some great accomplishment that they can push buttons in the correct order. Additionally instead of being able to hop on multiplayer with my friends and get in the air, I will to spend a bunch of time fiddling with the airplane to start it, spend more time memorizing a stupid checklist, all so I cant get to actually fun part of flying the damn plane.

 

One of il2s best features is that it has a high level of realism and aircraft fidelity without BS stuff like a click pit.

[BraveSirRobin]

1 hour ago, unlikely_spider said:

 

? Convincing argument!

I’m not trying to convince you of anything.  I think clickpits add nothing to the game and are a waste of time and money.  You like them.  The developer of this game agrees with me.  End of argument.

 

1 hour ago, unlikely_spider said:

Quick and honest question - have you learned to operate one of the full-fidelity WW2 planes in DCS?

 

I own the P-51, 109, and 190.  I’ve barely flown any of them.  But I didn’t see anything about that game that was any more complex than GB other than the startup process and fuel management.  GB is eventually adding fuel management. If I wanted a WW2 aircraft startup simulation, DCS is where I would go.  That isn’t what I want.

[Jason_Williams]

We will do whatever we see fit based on many factors, wishes and resources. This suggestion thread is not a place to troll us. This area of the forum exists to offer helpful and practical suggestions, not for trolling disguised as a wishlist or dreams. Our IL-2 Great Battles series has never been more popular and we fill a need in the genre just as other sims fill others.

 

Jason