The close future of WWII combat flight sims for PC

[343KKT_Kintaro]

When it comes to talk about WWII combat flight sims for PC, we all are, right now, living a very odd period in the history of PC flight sims, at least in the domain of air combat and, especially, dealing with the sims that are set during WWII. Civilian flight sim fans have their fantastic Microsoft Flight Simulator, you know... that one released three years ago in 2020, and even a few other civilian sims too. But we fans of WWII aviation reenactment by means of a PC flight sim are eager to obtain finally a simulator worthy of the name that allows us to:

 

- Really enjoy the modelling (with full interaction for the player) of any system that might be working on board a flying machine of the 1930s and 1940s (drop tanks! fuel pumps! fuel transfer between tanks! ammo belts management!... etc...).

 

- Really escort (for example) a hord of 300 B-17s en route to Schweinfurt. Both online and offline.

 

- Really have at our disposal the best flight models and damage models, emulated physics, etc.

 

- Really have at our disposal the best weather engine and 3D clouds one may find in a WWII combat flight sim

 

- (Why not?) A working "air marshall" system...

 

- Etc.

 

So... here we are, what do you think will be the future for our niche in the next... let's say... ten years? DCS doesn't seem to evolve into a "survey type", I mean, I can't imagine that DCS creates modules with ten flyables and a map so that you find yourself in a complete reenacted environment that focuses on various elements: landscape and variety of types at the cost of a larger number of buttons and systems on your cockpit. DCS is the contrary in fact. TFS seems to keep betting for its favorite horse which is "Cliffs of Dover", with a very tantalizing visual update that can be seen in the distance (at this point we have plenty of already available screenshots and videos showing the WIP). "Great Battles" seems to have reached its limits (no droptanks, no fuel systems management, no air marshall, no customisable ammo belts, no large formations of big four-engine bombers...) and 1CGS seems to prepare a different game, their "masterpiece" if we believe one the videos the devs shared recently in Russian (I'll try to find it back). But no confirmation yet from the 1CGS devs that it is a new game.

 

Also, there are the MicroProse guys with their B-17/B-24/Lancaster games (two new games mainly)... but Jason Williams joined them recently and we don't know if whether or not he'll be sooner or later involved in the development of a completely new "survey type" game (like the IL-2 games for example).

 

There's also "Wings Over the Reich", but it is 100% focused on single-player and no VR is planned, apparently, at the moment ("Great Battles" and "DCS" offer satisfactory VR compatibility and, if everything goes well, "Cliffs of Dover" should include this feature soon).

 

As I said, we whitness at present a very odd period in the history of WWII combat flight sims for PC: question marks everywhere... answers nowhere!

 

What do you think?

 

 

Edited January 22, 2023 by 343KKT_Kintaro
typo

[Jaws2002]

I think that since the abandoning CLOD engine, the WW2 flight sim genre lost about ten years of evolution. I said that ten years ago, when it was dumped, and I'm of the same opinion now.

 I agree that CLOD was a bit too ambitious project and it was a mess at release, but it had the right foundation to build a future on. It was abandoned and later taken by a new team, but they didn't really have the financial power to make it what could have been.

    I don't know what the Il-2 GB team plans to bring, but their history is that of a team that wants to get things done on the cheap, so I don't have high hopes for their next project. 

 DCS team bring single planes to the game, without the content needed to make it part of an immersing environment. However, lately, they do have a lot of stuff coming in and looks like there are a lot of third party teams willing to make new content.

   I can see DCS becoming a much more usable WW2 flight sim in the future.

About others I don't know. 

The upcoming iar-80/81 will keep me busy and happy for quite a while, but I have no idea what the future has in store.

[Trooper117]

For me, whoever comes up with the best SP environment will be the one that gets my complete attention.

At this moment in time for the WWI skies it is WoFF/BH&H2... hands down 'the' best feeling of being in a WWI Squadron, with a wealth of aircraft and options that puts other games to shame. The AI is by far the best in any other flight sim I've played.

Yes, it is an older game, but top notch graphics do not make any sim 'the best'.

 

For WWII, will GB steal the show and finally make that genre of combat flight simulation the 'Gold Star' standard for the future?... I'd love to say yes, but presently my doubts grow with every passing week, but I'd be happy for them to prove me wrong.

 

DCS?... I've been a fan of theirs for quite some time, and I'm enjoying their limited amount of WWII content more and more... I think they are the 'Dark Horse' that will win the WWII race for my affections. They have some good stuff in the pipeline.

 

And then there is Jason Williams... it will be very interesting to see what he will bring to the table shortly. With his background in combat sims it can only be a good thing.

 

Interesting times for us flight simmers it has to be said... I'm sure something will turn up before long to have us raving with positivity once again.

[Gambit21]

11 minutes ago, Trooper117 said:

 

 

DCS?... I've been a fan of theirs for quite some time, and I'm enjoying their limited amount of WWII content more and more... I think they are the 'Dark Horse' that will win the WWII race for my affections. They have some good stuff in the pipeline.

 

 

There are good things coming to DCS WWII.

 

 

 

[choctaw111]

Cliffs of Dover was amazing!  Oleg was working on all that stuff you mentioned, including the weather engine.  I've actually stayed in touch with Oleg and we've had some good talks.  He even makes sure to wish me a happy birthday every year.  What he did with the original Il2 was incredible and CloD was another big step in the right direction.  If only it had been developed further under his supervision

[Gambit21]

CloD was a mess at release, and wasn't fixed for a long time.

I installed, and uninstalled within 15 minutes, and it sat in my desk drawer for 10 years before I finally tossed it.

 

Edit: Tell Oleg he still owes me $45.

Edited January 22, 2023 by Gambit21

[Barn-Owl]

Sims that have good VR compatibility with similar views to track IR will get my money.  The idea is not just content and online presence, it is compatibility with future incoming technology (VR) and with ever more immersion.  Content is important (some players seek bombers, fighters, different arenas, etc....), but I am after immersion as the first "need."  I do not like to fly desktop anymore.  A game with more immersion includes the following for me: HOTAS requirement, VR views with same "potential" as in track IR views, cockpit interaction, flight model that is based on real physics (not magic), force feedback, easy access to servers that allow for more than 90 players per server and, finally, a developer team that at least listens to its user players about possible future game developments.  Give me those options and you can have my money.  For now, I do not think that there is a perfect sim out there.  What is encouraging, though, is that the hardware technology keeps moving forward and that is a good sign.  Hopefully the software can keep pace and come up with something better.

[Trooper117]

There never has been a 'perfect' sim and I doubt there ever will be... All my flight sims have aspects that are really good, some more than others, but they all have flaws as well... it all comes down to what you are prepared to put up with.

If I could take all the good things in all those games and put them in just one flight sim then yes, that would be close to the perfect sim... unfortunately I can't do that, lol!

[choctaw111]

20 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

CloD was a mess at release, and wasn't fixed for a long time.

I installed, and uninstalled within 15 minutes, and it sat in my desk drawer for 10 years before I finally tossed it.

 

Edit: Tell Oleg he still owes me $45.

The release definitely should have been delayed but Oleg was gone by that time anyway.  Had he stayed on it would have been amazing

[343KKT_Kintaro]

 

Just now, choctaw111 said:

If only it had been developed further under his supervision

 

 

Let's trust the new developers: Team Fusion Simulations. Otherwise, do not hesitate to join their bunch of beta testers, you'll sign an NDA (non disclosure agreement) and will be allowed to test their VR closed beta version of the game (I dunno if they still allow NDAs, do it quickly if such is your will). At this point, if you want, you can explore screenshots and videos of the work in progress. MP me and I'll give you some links, all of them publicly available with permission by TFS. I suggest we MP in order not to pollute the present thread with too much "Cliffs of Dover" material, the thread deals with all potential WWII PC flight sims finally.

 

 

7 minutes ago, choctaw111 said:

The ability to manually aim each gun would be a huge step in immersion and historical correctness!  I have photos of both allies and axis adjusting the gun aim points at the range

 

 

Well, it is the case in "Cliffs of Dover", you may know that, do you?

 

 

1 minute ago, Gambit21 said:

CloD was a mess at release, and wasn't fixed for a long time.

I installed, and uninstalled within 15 minutes, and it sat in my desk drawer for 10 years before I finally tossed it.

 

 

This thread deals with the close future of one niche only, the WWII combat flight sims for PC. I hope TFS will manage to fix the parts in the game that you didn't like. If they don't... well, so be it! But we need a WWII flight sim worthy of the first quarter of the 21st Century! We know quite well now, how good or bad has been the period 2000-2025. I'm curious, dealing with WWII flight sims, how good will be the period 2025-2050! (that's not the close future, I know, I know... off topic...).

 

 

10 minutes ago, Friction said:

Sims that have good VR compatibility with similar views to track IR will get my money.  The idea is not just content and online presence, it is compatibility with future incoming technology (VR) and with ever more immersion.  Content is important (some players seek bombers, fighters, different arenas, etc....), but I am after immersion as the first "need."  I do not like to fly desktop anymore.  A game with more immersion includes the following for me: HOTAS requirement, VR views with same "potential" as in track IR views, cockpit interaction, flight model that is based on real physics (not magic), force feedback, easy access to servers that allow for more than 90 players per server and, finally, a developer team that at least listens to its user players about possible future game developments.  Give me those options and you can have my money.  For now, I do not think that there is a perfect sim out there.  What is encouraging, though, is that the hardware technology keeps moving forward and that is a good sign.  Hopefully the software can keep pace and come up with something better.

 

 

Thank you, your answer may be arguable, it's your answer finally, not others', but you straight-forwardly treated the subject by summarising it quite well. By the way, you mentioned 90 players per server, please know that "Cliffs of Dover" allows up to 128 players per server.

 

 

  

9 minutes ago, Trooper117 said:

There never has been a 'perfect' sim and I doubt there ever will be... All my flight sims have aspects that are really good, some more than others, but they all have flaws as well... it all comes down to what you are prepared to put up with.

If I could take all the good things in all those games and put them in just one flight sim then yes, that would be close to the perfect sim... unfortunately I can't do that, lol!

 

 

Well, "the perfect WWII flight sim", as a concept, this is too much theoretical obviousely. If we go back to a discussion about "doable things in the 2020s", we could ask if whether or not the following is doable: a sim with enough planes and a map big enough so that 300 B-17s take off from England and fly towards Germany, bomb a target and go back to land on England. A few of additional planes (German interceptors and Allied escort fighters) should be managed by the game as well. All of this online, with the best 3D graphics, 4k textures and VR... Is this doable in the present day for the average player and his average rig?

 

 

5 minutes ago, choctaw111 said:

The release definitely should have been delayed but Oleg was gone by that time anyway.  Had he stayed on it would have been amazing

 

 

My opinion is that, more than money, more than Oleg Maddox himself... what TFS needs is the support of the flight sim community. Honoring my OP (thus not falling off topic), we must admit that all the flight sims mentioned in my OP are more and more being seen as competitors to each other. So, what's the future of combat flight sims?

 

 

[choctaw111]

13 minutes ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

 

 

 

Let's trust the new developers: Team Fusion Simulations. Otherwise, do not hesitate to join their bunch of beta testers, you'll sign an NDA (non disclosure agreement) and will be allowed to test their VR closed beta version of the game (I dunno if they still allow NDAs, do it quickly if such is your will). At this point, if you want, you can explore screenshots and videos of the work in progress. MP me and I'll give you some links, all of them publicly available with permission by TFS. I suggest we MP in order not to pollute the present thread with too much "Cliffs of Dover" material, the thread deals with all potential WWII PC flight sims finally.

 

 

 

 

Well, it is the case in "Cliffs of Dover", you may know that, do you?

 

 

 

 

This thread deals with the close future of one niche only, the WWII combat flight sims for PC. I hope TFS will manage to fix the parts in the game that you didn't like. If they don't... well, so be it! But we need a WWII flight sim worthy of the first quarter of the 21st Century! We know quite well now, how good or bad has been the period 2000-2025. I'm curious, dealing with WWII flight sims, how good will be the period 2025-2050! (that's not the close future, I know, I know... off topic...).

 

 

 

 

Thank you, your answer may be arguable, it's your answer finally, not others', but you straight-forwardly treated the subject by summarising it quite well. By the way, you mentioned 90 players per server, please know that "Cliffs of Dover" allows up to 128 players per server.

 

 

  

 

 

Well, "the perfect WWII flight sim", as a concept, this is too much theoretical obviousely. If we go back to a discussion about "doable things in the 2020s", we could ask if whether or not the following is doable: a sim with enough planes and a map big enough so that 300 B-17s take off from England and fly towards Germany, bomb a target and go back to land on England. A few of additional planes (German interceptors and Allied escort fighters) should be managed by the game as well. All of this online, with the best 3D graphics, 4k textures and VR... Is this doable in the present day for the average player and his average rig?

 

 

 

 

My opinion is that, more than money, more than Oleg Maddox himself... what TFS needs is the support of the flight sim community. Honoring my OP (thus not falling off topic), we must admit that all the flight sims mentioned in my OP are more and more being seen as competitors to each other. So, what's the future of combat flight sims?

 

 

Yes, I'm VERY aware of CloD!   I was really excited when it was first announced so many years ago.  It had many feature that were way ahead of its time, including the realistic visuals of slow motion!  Seeing the propeller blades turning slowly in super slo mo was a cinematic masterpiece!  The tracers were also the best I had seen in any game or sim.  Now that "Blitz" has made so many changes, those things are now gone

[IckyATLAS]

1 hour ago, Gambit21 said:

CloD was a mess at release, and wasn't fixed for a long time.

I installed, and uninstalled within 15 minutes, and it sat in my desk drawer for 10 years before I finally tossed it.

 

Edit: Tell Oleg he still owes me $45.

He owes me even more because I have the special limited series Collector Box. By the way were is it? I lost track after so many years. I hope after so many years it is still somewhere ? 

Edited January 22, 2023 by IckyATLAS

[343KKT_Kintaro]

1 minute ago, choctaw111 said:

Yes, I'm VERY aware of CloD!   I was really excited when it was first announced so many years ago.  It had many feature that were way ahead of its time, including the realistic visuals of slow motion!  Seeing the propeller blades turning slowly in super slo mo was a cinematic masterpiece!  The tracers were also the best I had seen in any game or sim.  Now that "Blitz" has made so many changes, those things are now gone

 

 

I preordered my premium boxed set a looooong time ago, back in January or February 2011... so, trust me, you can count me as one more in your bunch.

 

Realistic bullets and realistic tracers were a correction added by Team Fusion. In 2011/2012, until 2013 or even a more recent year, there were Star Wars lasers in the game, like TIE fighters lasers, not joking. I love Star Wars, really, and as a naturalist amateur, I feel a keen interest in insects, but this is not a good reason so that I have to accept a fly flies directly into my soup. Star Wars is Star Wars and WWII flight sims are WWII flight sims. No laser beams in IL2CoD, thank you very much (and thank you to you, Team Fusion, sure).

 

The slomo effect and the Sukhoi Su-26 were nothing but a waste of time and energy. Had the Maddox Games devs invested more time in a good GUI and in a good single-player career mode... maybe the game wouldn't had been a failure at release.

 

PS: hey, guys, Oleg owes you nothing, if all had depended on him, the game wouldn't have been released, I'm almost sure of that. The guy you look for seems to be one whose name is spelt "I"... "l"... "y"... "a"...

 

 

[Bonnot]

3 hours ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

Really enjoy the modelling (with full interaction for the player) of any system that might be working on board a flying machine of the 1930s and 1940s (drop tanks! fuel pumps! fuel transfer between tanks! ammo belts management!... etc...).

 

- Really escort (for example) a hord of 300 B-17s en route to Schweinfurt. Both online and offline.

 

- Really have at our disposal the best flight models and damage models, emulated physics, etc.

 

- Really have at our disposal the best weather engine and 3D clouds one may find in a WWII combat flight sim

 

- (Why not?) A working "air marshall" system...

 

- Etc.

That looks fine,  but about the computer/screen/joys/VR etc... with enough power and stocking space :  What could be the final price for such machine ( with the decreasing prices known since 2000 _but the increase coming now with the crisis......?

I can survive without Fuel Pumps and 50 more push/pull colored buttons and lights, but I'll not spend the price of a second hand car ( as I did on APPLE xxx in the 80's ), and watching the previsions and trend in economy and employment today I doubt enough people can buy enough hard/software to save our niche ?

But at last, dreams are free....for how long    ???

[343KKT_Kintaro]

2 minutes ago, Bonnot said:

That looks fine,  but about the computer/screen/joys/VR etc... with enough power and stocking space :  What could be the final price for such machine ( with the decreasing prices known since 2000 _but the increase coming now with the crisis......?

I can survive without Fuel Pumps and 50 more push/pull colored buttons and lights, but I'll not spend the price of a second hand car ( as I did on APPLE xxx in the 80's ), and watching the previsions and trend in economy and employment today I doubt enough people can buy enough hard/software to save our niche ?

But at last, dreams are free....for how long    ???

 

 

Yes, obviously, all of this has to be taken into account as well. But, if you think about it, if there's an economical regression and rigs, CPUs and video cards stay as they are, then we'll be forced to keep the games we already have... that's all. Improving them wouldn't be a serious expend for the developers (for Daidalos Team, Team Fusion Simulations and 1C Game Studios if we take as an example the three existing IL-2 games).

 

 

[Bonnot]

3 minutes ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

we'll be forced to keep the games we already have... that's all. Improving them

YES,  IMPROVING  is probably not the best but -unfortunately-  the lone solution ...as long as CPU, video cards and the "other side of the world"  produces and deliver them .

[choctaw111]

13 hours ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

 

 

I preordered my premium boxed set a looooong time ago, back in January or February 2011... so, trust me, you can count me as one more in your bunch.

 

Realistic bullets and realistic tracers were a correction added by Team Fusion. In 2011/2012, until 2013 or even a more recent year, there were Star Wars lasers in the game, like TIE fighters lasers, not joking. I love Star Wars, really, and as a naturalist amateur, I feel a keen interest in insects, but this is not a good reason so that I have to accept a fly flies directly into my soup. Star Wars is Star Wars and WWII flight sims are WWII flight sims. No laser beams in IL2CoD, thank you very much (and thank you to you, Team Fusion, sure).

 

The slomo effect and the Sukhoi Su-26 were nothing but a waste of time and energy. Had the Maddox Games devs invested more time in a good GUI and in a good single-player career mode... maybe the game wouldn't had been a failure at release.

 

PS: hey, guys, Oleg owes you nothing, if all had depended on him, the game wouldn't have been released, I'm almost sure of that. The guy you look for seems to be one whose name is spelt "I"... "l"... "y"... "a"...

 

 

The original "Star Wars" tracers are true to life.  Those who've seen tracers for real know how they look and the original CloD got them right, better than any other sim that I've seen!  The way tracers should look is how the human eye sees them.  I've done a lot of studies and made a LOT of posts about it on other forums over the years.  According to ophthalmologists, the human eyes "sees" about 30-60 frames per second.  Add the fact that bright objects moving at high speed appear longer than they actually are.  In reality, a tracer is little more than a small flare at the back of a bullet but when it's moving FAST, like when it flies past you, it's a long streak.  I've seen plenty, both friendly and enemy fire.  At night, the streak effect appears even greater because of the limitations of our eyes at night to adjust from bright back to dark.  How far does an average bullet travel in 1/30 of second?  At 2,700FPS is about 90 feet.  At 60FPS, the average PC screen, is 45 feet.  So a "dot" traveling at 2,700 feet per second would appear to look 45 feet long, not a dot or a ball.  We already have "blurring" of ground terrain as it passes by the same should be applied to all objects moving past, especially tracers and projectiles!

Edited January 23, 2023 by choctaw111

[LukeFF]

22 minutes ago, choctaw111 said:

The original "Star Wars" tracers are true to life.  Those who've seen tracers for real know how they look and the original CloD got them right, better than any other sim that I've seen!

 

Exactly, and to go even further, the lasers in Star Wars were modeled after said real-world tracers. If real tracers wobbled like they look in the old '40s camera footage, no one would have ever hit anything but the sky. ?

[choctaw111]

3 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

Exactly, and to go even further, the lasers in Star Wars were modeled after said real-world tracers. If real tracers wobbled like they look in the old '40s camera footage, no one would have ever hit anything but the sky. ?

As has been discussed so many times in the past, the "wobbling" is a camera shake effect that human eyes don't see.  It's kind of like trying to capture a time exposure photograph of the stars and you bump the camera.  What's left on the film is the same thing.  The Star Wars lasers do a pretty good job depicting what tracers actually look like, especially at night or against dark background.  I have an excellent video showing the wobbles while the camera is shaking and when the camera is still, the wobbles are straight streaks. 

[343KKT_Kintaro]

I think Choctaw111 talks about one seeing real tracers in real life, not tracers caught on film, especially old footage of the 1940s. Must be different in my opinion... do you confirm that, Choctaw?

 

"According to ophthalmologists, the human eyes "sees" about 90 frames per second"

 

Read Aristote... Azimov... Newton... Because decomposing human vision into fps is a philosophical choice.

[Guest deleted@83466]

I have so many flight sim planes that I become almost paralyzed determining which one I want to either learn or relearn.  (“I haven’t flown the JF$17 in 2 years, and I forgot how it works”) So then I go play Kerbal Space Program and make my own planes and rockets, and fly em first person.  Flight Sim has never been better for me.  Got “serious” (bought the hardware) about Flight Sim around the time of FS2004.

[choctaw111]

1 hour ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

I think Choctaw111 talks about one seeing real tracers in real life, not tracers caught on film, especially old footage of the 1940s. Must be different in my opinion... do you confirm that, Choctaw?

 

"According to ophthalmologists, the human eyes "sees" about 90 frames per second"

 

Read Aristote... Azimov... Newton... Because decomposing human vision into fps is a philosophical choice.

I did a little more research after posting this.  Now the doctors agree that the human eye sees between 30-60 frames per second, not 90.

1 hour ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

I think Choctaw111 talks about one seeing real tracers in real life, not tracers caught on film, especially old footage of the 1940s. Must be different in my opinion... do you confirm that, Choctaw?

 

"According to ophthalmologists, the human eyes "sees" about 90 frames per second"

 

Read Aristote... Azimov... Newton... Because decomposing human vision into fps is a philosophical choice.

Tracers do appear as long streaks in real life, yes, like Star Wars.  At a great distance they're like glowing dots, but up close as they're flying past you, like long streaks.  I even modified Il2 46 with these tracers and they look spot on!  

[choctaw111]

The best way to see tracers, as far as video is concerned compared to real life, is from a stationary camera, not affected by vibration or movement.  Again, doctors are agreeing that the human eye detects between 30 and 60 frames per second, so the tracers should appear as they travel in that 1/30th or 1/60th of a second to recreate them on a screen.  I would say that 60FPS is good compromise since most PC displays are designed for that and games should be running at 60fps regardless.  I have my vsync set up at 60fps so then tracers travelling at 2,700 feet per second should appear to be 45 feet long

[Gambit21]

Is it weird that I don't need Copernicus, Aristotle, Homer or Hawking to understand this?

 

 

[Rei-sen]

7 hours ago, Jaws2002 said:

I think that since the abandoning CLOD engine, the WW2 flight sim genre lost about ten years of evolution. I said that ten years ago, when it was dumped, and I'm of the same opinion now.

 I agree that CLOD was a bit too ambitious project and it was a mess at release, but it had the right foundation to build a future on.

100% this.

[choctaw111]

28 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

Is it weird that I don't need Copernicus, Aristotle, Homer or Hawking to understand this?

 

 

Nope, not at all.  This is a topic that I've tried many times to discuss over the last 2 decades and I must not have been finding a good way to explain it but I can't make it any simpler 

[Gambit21]

8 minutes ago, choctaw111 said:

Nope, not at all.  This is a topic that I've tried many times to discuss over the last 2 decades and I must not have been finding a good way to explain it but I can't make it any simpler 

 

I was being a bit facetious (Azimov/Newton remarks above)

 

There's a reason I don't spend money on high refresh rate monitors that in effect give me "super" vision.

60 fps at 4K does me just fine.

 

 

[choctaw111]

40 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

 

I was being a bit facetious (Azimov/Newton remarks above)

 

There's a reason I don't spend money on high refresh rate monitors that in effect give me "super" vision.

60 fps at 4K does me just fine.

 

 

haha!  Sarcasm is tough to interpret in text.  A LOT of people don't seem to understand what it very simple.  Imagine a PC and display that was capable of 100,000 FPS!  Then blurring and other effects wouldn't need to be rendered.  At those speeds, even a separate disc to simulate a spinning propeller wouldn't need to be modeled.  Just spin the prop at 3,000 RPM and leave tracers as dots.  They'll be streaks and the prop will be a disc when they're moving that fast 

[Lusekofte]

My only hope for not selling sim hard ware in near future is clod. And a lot more campaigns in DCS. GB won’t get me to start the pc anymore. I will for sure support TF as long as they can keep it going. It is the only game I go mp in. 

[LukeFF]

3 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

Is it weird that I don't need Copernicus, Aristotle, Homer or Hawking to understand this?

 

Yeah, I Kant be bothered with any of those guys, either.

[343KKT_Kintaro]

4 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

Is it weird that I don't need Copernicus, Aristotle, Homer or Hawking to understand this?

 

 

For Aristotle time is infinitely decomposable, so fps in the real world makes no sense if the aristotelian model of reality is correct. On the other hand I remember a science fiction tale written by Azimov, a scientist invents a time machine based on the premise that time is composed of time atoms. In this model of time, fps applied to the human view makes sense. I couldn't find much more examples, I'm not cultured enough (or pedantic enough perhaps, because that's your point, your only point sadly), but that's the idea. My point is that we cannot be sure of either of the two models. Maybe reality is like a video game... or maybe not. We know FPS make sens in video games and film, but we don't know how the reality is done. Reality doesn't produce fps before our eyes, unless Choctaw and his doctors refer to still images that the brain would be permanently producing during the biological process of vision.

 

Fascinating gentlemen, fascinating and... off topic.

 

 

[Bonnot]

3 hours ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

fascinating and... off topic.

Not at all, that Forum is rich and fascinating by all of these " OFF "......

So, when tired of flying over an empty world, a bit of philosophy, a poem, quibbles between theorists, are welcome pause -with some good ideas, sometime ;

 

I found this one in You Tube, Zeno  was one of my favorite to explain -or cut- everything :

[Trooper117]

And I thought this was all about the future of combat flight sims...

[343KKT_Kintaro]

1 hour ago, Trooper117 said:

And I thought this was all about the future of combat flight sims...

 

 

At present my interest focuses on various combat flight simulators, including both IL2-46 and BMS, but those two latter shouldn't be taken into account when we talk about the "future" of combat flight sims (furthermore, BMS is not even set during WWII). Not that '46 and BMS are obsolete, they meet their own community of players, that's for sure, but they cannot satisfy the requirements of modern standards in the domain of flight simulation, at least dealing with the graphics. A list of games that would meet the modern standards not only of 2023 but of the next ten years, could be the following (I'll include the MicroProse games, still in development):

 

- "Wings Over the Reich" (OBD Software)

- "DCS" (Eagle Dynamics)

- "IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover - Blitz" (Maddox Games/Team Fusion Simulations)

- "IL-2 Sturmovik: Great Battles" (1C Game Studios)

- "B-17 Flying Fortress: The Bloody 100th" (MicroProse)

- "The Mighty Eighth: VR" (MicroProse)

 

So... do you think the games on the above list will last ten more years? Will they be considered as non-obsolete serious WWII aviation games still in the next ten years? Anyone, suggest other games to be added to the list, even games in development if you want.

 

 

[Bonnot]

55 minutes ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

do you think the games on the above list will last ten more years?

...and do you think the computers of the 2010/2020's will last ten + more years too  ???

I'm quite OFF now of technology,  but it seems that our computers will be as obsolete than radio lamps to transistors : I know nothing about "Quantics" or "bubbles" tech. but they  are so often seriously mentioned -and receive public funds- that there is probably something to come....When ???

Flight sims will have no choice but to follow the Hardware - so, Flight sims of the 30's will probably be as far as ILxxx than 1946 was to MS flight sim 1 on Apple monochrom....That's really fascinating and maybe your dream of " 300 B17 escorted on a Schweinfurt raid " will not be impossible !

[Skelthos]

Would be nice to have a crystal ball. 

 

DCS's plans to do a dynamic campaign engine looks promising. Unless someone else pulls out a curve ball I think this is likely the future at least for now.

 

If IL2 is still in the game is hard to guess right now, I certainly hope they have something good coming. 

 

I do think sims in general are at a popularity point where a new combat sim if done and marketed correctly could be financially viable, just not sure who would do it.

 

1 hour ago, Bonnot said:

...and do you think the computers of the 2010/2020's will last ten + more years too  ???

The ATX form factor that our current computers are based on was introduced in 1995 I do think that in 7-10 years our computers will still be largely the same, just like the last 28 years we will continue to see  evolution of CPU sockets, PCIE standards and Storage standards but no drastic changes are likely in the near future.  Very open to being wrong about that, just my personal opinion on it. 

[Bonnot]

1 hour ago, Skelthos said:

we will continue to see  evolution of CPU sockets, PCIE standards and Storage standards but no drastic changes are likely in the near future.

No crystal ball and no tech knowledge, just memory : in my own life I'd seen : Radio to Transistor, deskboard telephon to mobil+antenna ( 5 kgs ) then no antenna , then ???, disk 78 rpm, then 45, then cd, then dvd,  cumbersome B&W  TV  to Color TV,  to flat screen, Betamax to VHS, VHS  to numeric, Monochrome screen to color, VGA to Svga, etc.....so, I'll never bet again on changes, tech progress,  Evolution or Revolution  ?

It was often good...but everytime all the ancient tech was soon obsolete, discarded with no value and replaced by more expansive......until prices lower and new tech was in sight !

Edited January 23, 2023 by Bonnot

[Guest deleted@83466]

I really don’t understand the “concern” for the future of WW2 flight sims.  Right now, you have two sims that do a really good job with WW2 airplanes.  Nobody knows what is happening with the future of IL-2 or possible successors, but then there is DCS which seems to be forging right along.  Is the concern that DCS is not a “survey” sim like IL-2, so therefore a certain group of combat flight simmers feel like they are screwed if IL-2 falters?  There are clearly some here that demand a complete bundle of airplanes + a theater map, with simplified systems and generic controls.  I’m guessing that future releases from the IL-2 team will attempt to appeal to the same demographic that formed the bulk of GB customers, who wants a middle ground between War Thunder and DCS.   If not, and there is only “study” sim, then maybe some in the IL-2 Forever crowd will have to get used to the idea that they actually might have to -learn- something about the aircraft they are flying.   Good news is the these WW2 planes are pretty simple in the grand scheme of things.  These are not 747’s or A-10’s.  What’s ironic on this forum is how many people are demanding more and more system complexity from IL-2 (fuel systems, DM, FM, Coms, etc), but if you mention that they might check out DCS, they come up with all kinds of reasons why they won’t.

[343KKT_Kintaro]

@Bonnot, I got your point, but if you purchase a computer now, let's say a hyper modern rig, there's no reason why you wouldn't manage to make it lasts ten years more, this in order to play Great Battles, Cliffs of Dover, DCS or whatever other currently existing WWII sim. Then, in the future, if new technologies come, you can keep your by-then "old" computer for the IL-2 games and DCS, and, in addition, purchase a "quantical" computer for those 300 four-engine bombers you want to escort for a return trip to Germany. Right now you can find simmers who still run both older and newer sims in the same computer, but if in the meanwhile the hardware had changed they simply would have cumulated two different PCs.

 

@Skelthos, I agree, most likely, the ten next years will be similar to what we have now. At any rate, as I said above, there will be a period of transition in case of arrival of new technologies making our games are obsolete.

 

@SeaSerpent, there's no "concern" with the future if not that, as the OP reads, there are too many question marks for too few responses. When will we be able to fly all the historical missions in the period 1939-1945, with the right number of aircraft involved, a nice array of historical on-board systems, nice flight and damage models, etc? You say "What’s ironic on this forum is how many people are demanding more and more system complexity from IL-2 (fuel systems, DM, FM, Coms, etc), but if you mention that they might check out DCS, they come up with all kinds of reasons why they won’t"... Well, SeaSerpent, if you think about it, such fellow virtual pilots feel they have the right to be lazy simmers: they want those systems for the moment when they are in the sky, but what they want too is the symple key on their keyboard, ye know, that one that launches the engine start-up and spares them all the DCS process of engine management from start-up to take-off. And it's ok, why not? War Thunder fans get what they want, Great Battles fans will get what they want too... or not. That's one of the question marks without response, at least by the time being.

 

 

[Guest deleted@83466]

I guess I’m not entirely understanding where you are going with this.  I assume that to stay current one will have to upgrade their computer every 3 to 5 years to keep up with gaming tech.  I also don’t perceive any lack of content in the combat Flight sim world, WW2 or otherwise.  Just tonight in my flight sims I practiced landings in a Mig-15, flew a UH-1 through a very dense urban area (rotor hit a traffic light, oops), and practiced being a Jabo in a Bf-109k.  In other words, I feel pretty good about flight sim options right now, and I see no barrier to future hardware, with continuously evolving game engines delivering things like 300 plane formations in AI not too long from now.