The close future of WWII combat flight sims for PC

[IckyATLAS]

3 hours ago, SeaSerpent said:

evolving game engines delivering things like 300 plane formations in AI not too long from now.

 

I may add a precision: 300 quad bomber AI plane formations

I would be a little pessimistic about that. WWII war theaters and propeller planes, may slowly fade as the "fan" population for it will slowly disappear. I felt this in Reno during the air races, mainly the gold unlimited. Only 6 participants, and all the past stars were not anymore there. The winner pilot of this race was well into his sixties. Discussing with the teams it seems that regulations, paperwork, funding (money in short) is slowly eroding the last combatants. The Reno airfield itself will probably disappear, as there are projects of urban development, and the politics will end up killing all this. But new categories and modern planes (entirely made of composite materials) appeared that were able to go as fast as those monsters of the past, but to a fraction of the cost. The may save the races, but the taste is completely different. Myself I am in the sixties born 1959 and as a boy my passion for planes were the WWII fighters and it stayed. But WWII is now 80 years in the past and for the last generations that is not any reference any more. There will always be some aficionados but probably too little to justify investing in game development.

 

[Bonnot]

Lucky Ones,

I never managed to keep new games on old computers/ and Vice Versa, from DOS xx, Vista, XP, WIN xxx there sims to be always compatibility problems - not game only but printers, scanners, screens....kept two compi/keyboards/screens = problems x 2 .......

How i'd like to be able to keep win 7 or XP  with improved quality but full compatibility !

 

[343KKT_Kintaro]

5 hours ago, SeaSerpent said:

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 didn't bring that point up, not on this thread. I may have responded to others on that, but I, personnally, am strictly talking about how our currently existing games will evolve, what new  WWII aviation games will we have in the next years and what will they be able to do.

 

 

5 hours ago, SeaSerpent said:

I also don’t perceive any lack of content in the combat Flight sim world, WW2 or otherwise.

 

In 1943 and 1944, in one day, 300 B-17 could take off from England, escorted by, let's say, 25 P-51s... and, once over the Netherlands, be attacked by, let's say, 25 German intercepting fighter aircraft. 10 men a B-17, this makes, including all the fighter pilots, 3050 men at an altitude of thousands of feet over a huge portion of lands and seas. Now SeaSerpent please show me the server and software which allow to 3050 PLAYERS to reenact such a historical mission over a map of such a size with accurate ly historical systems on board every aircraft, VR compatibility, 8k, etc. Thus, my point is that, if serious & ambitious simulation still is limited, how far can we go in the next 10 years? How is that the latest sim that reenacts the Pacific War has a core engine older than 20 years? why our more modern core engines don't represent the Pacific War? Why our modern core engines don't allow that 10 players take off on board one B-17 and, with a few tens of AI B-17s fly in a bombing mission over Germany while 10 other players fly German fighters trying to intercept them and having some fun? You may don't perceive a lack but I do perceive it. It's not I'm not happy with what we have, it's only that I'm wondering what else can be done to go a little further in terms of simulation capabilities. Forget the 3050 players palying simultaneously in the same server, that was an exageration on purpose, this talk, this thread is, when will we go... a little further?

 

 

1 hour ago, IckyATLAS said:

But WWII is now 80 years in the past and for the last generations that is not any reference any more. There will always be some aficionados but probably too little to justify investing in game development.

 

 

Your point about the air races was very insteresting but I don't think we should mix up the air races with the player base that supports the fungibility of PC simulators. I was 17 in 1992 when I started this combat flight sims thing and I did it because I loved aircraft (and films) related to WWI and WWII. I never whitnessed an air race in my life and wasn't really interested in air races nor in air meetings, not at the time. At the time, the early 1990s, these two conflicts, WWI and WWII, were closer than what they are now, but, in my opinion, that's not the reason of the regression of WWI and WWII flight sims. Times have changed and now the younger public is clearly influenced by tens of years of blockbusters and superhero films. I'm pretty sure that you'll find more players in games being set in fictional universes like those we find in "The Lord of The Rings", "Star Wars", "Harry Potter", "Jurassic Park", "Marvel", etc., than the number players you'll find among our community. Not I dislike such fictional settings, I really love some of them, but in the Western World, the average young male no longer has a "classical" culture and he's no longer interested in Achilles, nor in Ulysses, not in King Arthur, nor in the exploits of the aviation combatants during the first half of the 20th Century.

 

 

1 minute ago, Bonnot said:

Lucky Ones,

I never managed to keep new games on old computers/ and Vice Versa, from DOS xx, Vista, XP, WIN xxx there sims to be always compatibility problems - not game only but printers, scanners, screens....kept two compi/keyboards/screens = problems x 2 .......

How i'd like to be able to keep win 7 or XP  with improved quality but full compatibility !

 

 

 

Again, transition periods will happen as they always happened in the past. I played "Chuck Years Air Combat" (released 1990) until 2005 (really). In the meanwhile, until 2005, I discovered plenty of other games that have been released in the early 2000s. In the future, simmers will possess two rigs so that they play the classics (IL-2, DCS, etc.) and the new games. I see no point in what you insist to say.

 

 

[Amiral_Crapaud]

4 hours ago, IckyATLAS said:

 

I may add a precision: 300 quad bomber AI plane formations

I would be a little pessimistic about that. WWII war theaters and propeller planes, may slowly fade as the "fan" population for it will slowly disappear. I felt this in Reno during the air races, mainly the gold unlimited. Only 6 participants, and all the past stars were not anymore there. The winner pilot of this race was well into his sixties. Discussing with the teams it seems that regulations, paperwork, funding (money in short) is slowly eroding the last combatants. The Reno airfield itself will probably disappear, as there are projects of urban development, and the politics will end up killing all this. But new categories and modern planes (entirely made of composite materials) appeared that were able to go as fast as those monsters of the past, but to a fraction of the cost. The may save the races, but the taste is completely different. Myself I am in the sixties born 1959 and as a boy my passion for planes were the WWII fighters and it stayed. But WWII is now 80 years in the past and for the last generations that is not any reference any more. There will always be some aficionados but probably too little to justify investing in game development.

 

That. My feeling is that Cold War as a topic for instance is fast gaining on WW2 in the heart of the new generations. To the point I see people claiming they're tired of WW2... Even in domains where there has not been a recent WW2 product in years. Obviously the "meme" potential of WW2 will keep it afloat in collective conscience well enough to prevent it from experiencing the fate of WW1, but if Battlefield for instance is to be taken as an example, clearly gameplay has become more important than the era it covers. As for CoD as a very proper thermometer of the times, need I remember that it got its larger mass breakthrough with... Modern Warfare back in the day.

It really is fading away in all regards, IMHO.

 

1 hour ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

In 1943 and 1944, in one day, 300 B-17 could take off from England, escorted by, let's say, 25 P-51s... and, once over the Netherlands, be attacked by, let's say, 25 German intercepting fighter aircraft. 10 men a B-17, this makes, including all the fighter pilots, 3050 men at an altitude of thousands of feet over a huge portion of lands and seas. Now SeaSerpent please show me the server and software which allow to 3050 PLAYERS to reenact such a historical mission over a map of such a size with accurate ly historical systems on board every aircraft, VR compatibility, 8k, etc. Thus, my point is that, if serious & ambitious simulation still is limited, how far can we go in the next 10 years? How is that the latest sim that reenacts the Pacific War has a core engine older than 20 years? why our more modern core engines don't represent the Pacific War? Why our modern core engines don't allow that 10 players take off on board one B-17 and, with a few tens of AI B-17s fly in a bombing mission over Germany while 10 other players fly German fighters trying to intercept them and having some fun? You may don't perceive a lack but I do perceive it. It's not I'm not happy with what we have, it's only that I'm wondering what else can be done to go a little further in terms of simulation capabilities. Forget the 3050 players palying simultaneously in the same server, that was an exageration on purpose, this talk, this thread is, when will we go... a little further?

 

 

 

I agree that scale is one of these areas where tech has not quite caught up with the reality, and it leaves a WW2 title some room to breathe to impress. That is what got Medal of Honor its first minute of fame (the Omaha beach scene), that is what got people interested in Call of Duty (that Stalingrad scene), that is what keeps people around Hell let loose (the grit, the mud, the hardcore feeling to it - and by hardcore, I mean the blood & guts). Numbers & immersion still have some space to grow & to keep these WW2 simulations relevant in the PoV of the masses.
But then, you have the entry bar, and for all simulations, I don't know to which extent somebody feels like flying a spitfire or a mustang is as dope as in the 1990s - by that I mean, learning everything it takes to fly them outside of War Thunder. In an environment where entertainment competition is leagues above what it used to be 30 years ago, it really isn't a given. You need the above-mentioned killer features to keep the more casual crowd interested, for sure.

Edited January 24, 2023 by Amiral_Crapaud

[Bonnot]

4 hours ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

In the future, simmers will possess two rigs so that they play the classics (IL-2, DCS, etc.) and the new games. I see no point in what you insist to say.

I usually agree on most part of what you say, but here again you seems very optimistic : 1st / many people  have no computer at all now , more have just basic ones unable to play even an IL2 sim....so how much will have two   ???

2/ If you have the means to possess two, does it means you have enough space, time and mind to manage both ?  I tried and I give up ( I'm older than you !)  space management, memorizing different systems and controls, free/fresh mind ....are as necessary as money ( even if money solves material problems ).

Simmers (true ones) are still a minority, historically minded are even less and probably decreasing number, adding financial and material ( like lodging ) difficulties will narrow this number to Happy Few .....fine but will is it financially rewarding for producers to invest .....?

[343KKT_Kintaro]

7 minutes ago, Bonnot said:

many people  have no computer at all now

 

 

Then they are not simmers. I'm not talking about such a category of people.

 

 

7 minutes ago, Bonnot said:

more have just basic ones unable to play even an IL2 sim....so how much will have two   ???

 

 

This thread deals with the close future of that niche which is WWII aviation as represented by serious and ambitious simulation. Again, I'm not talking about these people you mention.

 

 

7 minutes ago, Bonnot said:

so how much will have two   ???

 

 

"Chuck Years Air Combat", a 1990 combat flight sim, has been installed in my uncle's computer from 1997 to 2011 and I don't know for how many years it could had last if I hadn't reformatted that PC before I give it to somebody else. From 1997 I have possessed three computers: one purchased in 1997, one purchased in 2005 and one purchased in 2011. There's not need to be a millionaire for that. And, in the case a revolution happens in the computer science domain, you sourself are saying that people will be forced to purchase new computers for running a completely new generation of games. And I'm telling you that those still loving the currently existing generation of games, knowing that their old games won't fit in the new systems, simply will keep their old computer at no extra cost. Furthermore, retrogaming will fill the gap of "old school" simulators in your alleged and hypothetical new generation of computers. What is so difficult to understand? There's no problem at all with technology, the problem is the difficulty of coding 300 bloody B-17s with full 3000 players at every battle station on board every plane in the formation. That's our problem right now, not the hardware itself. Would the hardware evolve so that it allows a source-coding capable of the perfect depiction of absolutely all air battles of the period 1939-1945, again, the problem would be the coding, not the technology. Because potential coding thank to efficient and existing hardware technology... this is not enough, you need real humain brains who will positively code the game. And that's the problem, hardware is not the problem.

 

  

21 minutes ago, Bonnot said:

If you have the means to possess two, does it means you have enough space, time and mind to manage both ?

 

 

The average video game player enjoys different video games same as the average simmer enjoys different flight simulators. At this point I cannot run my computer because it's broken, it needs to be fixed, but in my PC there really are different sims installed: Rise of Flight, DCS, Great Battles and Cliffs of Dover. When my computer was in good working condition, I had no problem with passing from one simulator to another. How many sims do you have in your computer? only one?

 

 

[Bonnot]

1 hour ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

...computer was in good working condition, I had no problem with passing from one simulator to another. How many sims do you have in your computer? only one

You got it !

RoF, Arma, (WWII/Indo/Nam) + various wargames....but I have a ( psycho ? ) problem of moving from gorgeous sky GB to RoF, and much more of memorizing functions, keys, short cuts, orders...from one to the other : brain and neurones have limits too and aging doesn't help !

1 hour ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

knowing that their old games won't fit in the new systems, simply will keep their old computer at no extra cost.

Did you tried to play an old game you loved on a computer you set aside -correctly- for about 2 years ?  I did it -on different HW/SW..........?

 

1 hour ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

Then they are not simmers. I'm not talking about such a category of people.

"....beware of the wrath of the crowd "  said... ? , sorry I forgot _  but to find 10000 simmers you need to fish large and not to scrupulous ...

[Skelthos]

15 minutes ago, Bonnot said:

but to find 10000 simmers you need to fish large and not to scrupulous ...

Over 10 million people who have played the new MSFS,  War Thunder although not a sim to the same standard as most here want has over 22 million registered users.  Some of the DCS tutorials for specific aircraft on youtube have over 125,000 views. Clearly their are a large number of people who are interesting in flight sims. 

 

Combat sims like IL2 and DCS are alive and well, if they where not funding would dry up and development would cease. Companies are putting new peripherals out right now. Clearly the marketing people think flight sims are profitable, otherwise we would not see these trends. 

 

The real question is what features and what level of simulation would draw those kinds of numbers to a current or new sim that focuses on WWII air combat. I certainly do not know but I believe over all the future of combat sims is bright. 

 

2 hours ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

 those still loving the currently existing generation of games, knowing that their old games won't fit in the new systems, simply will keep their old computer at no extra cost. Furthermore, retrogaming will fill the gap of "old school" simulators in your alleged and hypothetical new generation of computers.

This is the absolute truth, retro gaming in general is very much alive and well. People who want to play those games will, I personally run several emulators and virtual machines on my main computer to relive some of these old games. No new generation of computers is going to come out of nowhere and cut these completely off. 

 

 

16 minutes ago, Bonnot said:

Did you tried to play an old game you loved on a computer you set aside -correctly- for about 2 years ?  I did it -on different HW/SW.

This may or may not be an issue depending how tech savvy each person is.  As an alternative you can always use Emulators such as DosBox or Virtual Machines on your main system.  This is what I do and am able to easily play games dating as far back as I care to go, I love replaying games I played in middle school in the mid 80's.

[343KKT_Kintaro]

@Skelthos, Bonnot was talking about a more radical change in the future (well, potential future) of computer science, something like "Quantics" or "bubbles" tech (etc.). But even if there was an insurmountable barrier between those alleged future computers and our present-day PCs, as I said, retrogaming, once applied to these hypothetical upcoming computers, will fill the gap created between the older technologies and the newer technologies.

 

If you think about it, all of this is a bit off topic... I didn't open that thread asking how will evolve the computer science technologies, I opened the thread because I was wondering about the current situation of the flight sims themselves, and mainly because of the discontent of the community about the stagnation or limitations of the currently existing WWII combat flight simulators. Hence the question I was asking myself about the years to come: will the years to come bring what the community of simmers expects from the world-wide community of developers? It's a real challenge for the latter!

 

By the way, I don't know if whether or not this thread treats an important question but I think it does treat it, so I hope that one or more flight sims developers are reading our posts here.

 

 

[Bonnot]

15 minutes ago, Skelthos said:

Over 10 million people who have played the new MSFS,  War Thunder although not a sim to the same standard as most here want has over 22 million registered users.  Some of the DCS tutorials for specific aircraft on youtube have over 125,000 views. Clearly their are a large number of people who are interesting in flight sims

Thanks Skelthos,  I'd no idea of such numbers existed...but are they really existing -as paying and playing persons- or datas given by advertising  managers   ?

On 22 million could be really active in time or floating from one game to another when In IL /RoF so many are 20 years partners  ?

 

28 minutes ago, Skelthos said:

This may or may not be an issue depending how tech savvy each person is.  As an alternative you can always use Emulators such as DosBox or Virtual Machines on your main system.  This is what I do and am able to easily play games dating as far back as I care to go, I love replaying games I played in middle school in the mid 80's.

That interests me...but I'd been unable to use it - at exception of Steam/ Transport Tycoon !  I'm not really up to programming  !

[Bonnot]

8 minutes ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

By the way, I don't know if whether or not this thread treats an important question but I think it does treat it, so I hope that one or more flight sims developers are reading our posts here.

It is important for those who care to read it , it enlarge our field of thinking and ( I ) take opportunity to pause and try to find solutions.........not on Quantics and bubbles but concrete action like managing my table or watching more closely the emulators .

So, thanks for this  ?

 

[343KKT_Kintaro]

 

1 minute ago, Bonnot said:

Thanks Skelthos,  I'd no idea of such numbers existed...but are they really existing -as paying and playing persons- or datas given by advertising  managers   ?

On 22 million could be really active in time or floating from one game to another when In IL /RoF so many are 20 years partners  ?

 

 

There are 70,539 players playing "War Thunder" right now, all around the world, when you'll click on the link bellow, the number will have changed:

 

https://store.steampowered.com/charts/mostplayed

 

 

1 minute ago, Bonnot said:

That interests me...but I'd been unable to use it - at exception of Steam/ Transport Tycoon !  I'm not really up to programming  !

 

 

Whether or not you'd be able to use it, your point was the incompatibility of old games with newer computer technologies... and Skelthos and I are trying to tell you that this problem of incompatibility... is, in fact, no longer a problem. You may not find the retrogaming version of some games, but retrogaming is feasable nevertheless.

 

 

1 minute ago, Bonnot said:

It is important for those who care to read it , it enlarge our field of thinking and ( I ) take opportunity to pause and try to find solutions.........not on Quantics and bubbles but concrete action like managing my table or watching more closely the emulators .

So, thanks for this  ?

 

 

No problem! You're welcome ! ?

 

 

[Skelthos]

1 minute ago, Bonnot said:

Thanks Skelthos,  I'd no idea of such numbers existed...but are they really existing -as paying and playing persons- or datas given by advertising  managers   ?

On 22 million could be really active in time or floating from one game to another when In IL /RoF so many are 20 years partners  ?

What the real number are are tricky, some of it is active players  some of it are people that have tried it and moved on, we are unlikely to ever see the real numbers. All we can know is that the numbers are strong enough that multiple companies are willing to invest in flight sims, both the software and hardware sides.   

 

On forums like this it is very hard to judge how diverse the community actually is. Only a very small percentage of the users will ever make their way here, and even less will post. This is true of any game in any Genre. 

 

13 minutes ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

Bonnot was talking about a more radical change in the future (well, potential future) of computer science, something like "Quantics" or "bubbles" tech (etc.). But even if there was an insurmountable barrier between those alleged future computers and our present-day PCs, as I said, retrogaming, once applied to these hypothetical upcoming computers, will fill the gap created between the older technologies and the newer technologies.

I understood what he was getting at, maybe a language barrier, or me just expressing myself badly. In my personal opinion we are decades away from anything even remotely like this happening, the Quantics, bubbles, Quantum Computing in general is not close to being realistic for any but the richest businesses. 

 

9 minutes ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

There are 70,539 players playing "War Thunder" right now, all around the world, when you'll click on the link bellow, the number will have changed:

 

https://store.steampowered.com/charts/mostplayed

 

This is likely as close as we will get to real numbers, but important to realize this is only players using Steam. Anyone who playing on PlayStation, Xbox, or without Steam on PC or Mac is not included in that number. 

 

26 minutes ago, Bonnot said:

It is important for those who care to read it , it enlarge our field of thinking and ( I ) take opportunity to pause and try to find solutions.........not on Quantics and bubbles but concrete action like managing my table or watching more closely the emulators .

So, thanks for this  ?

It is an interesting discussion and the original question posed is definitely important to at least some. 

[Zooropa_Fly]

I don't think WT should be included in this. 

It’s easy access via mouse or gamepad which is significantly different to what we generally do here.

I'm not that optimistic about the med-long term for hard core combat sims, certainly ww1 and ww2. And total numbers who've bought a game doesn't say anything about its current or future player base.

There's also any number of external factors coming in to play that could adversly affect the entire industry, as well as our abilities to even play games when we want. But of course we'd better not bring up such things here. 

[Bonnot]

56 minutes ago, Zooropa_Fly said:

There's also any number of external factors coming in to play that could adversly affect the entire industry, as well as our abilities to even play games when we want. But of course we'd better not bring up such things here. 

Yes, those "external factors"  may well be the " ultima ratio " which render any previsions obsolete, any time, anywhere ......

But I'm a pessimist, I try to read/watch serious infos, and to sum up it has nothing to change my mind to optimistic views.

So, let's dream............

[Guest deleted@83466]

2 hours ago, Zooropa_Fly said:

I don't think WT should be included in this. 

It’s easy access via mouse or gamepad which is significantly different to what we generally do here.

I'm not that optimistic about the med-long term for hard core combat sims, certainly ww1 and ww2. And total numbers who've bought a game doesn't say anything about its current or future player base.

There's also any number of external factors coming in to play that could adversly affect the entire industry, as well as our abilities to even play games when we want. But of course we'd better not bring up such things here. 

 

My god Zooropa, can you ever post anything that is simply about flight simulation, and only that, and not loaded up with all your gloom of a troubled world?  

[ST_Catchov]

I'm sorry to say it but when we oldies die out so will WW1/WW2 flight sims on PC. There are a few young fellas into it probably because of their old mans influence in one way or another. Otherwise, consoles are the future with young (and old) who don't want to spend extravagant amounts on PC's, peripherals, and Lord help me to understand, GPU's! Consoles are easy, far cheaper and I'd guess most MSFS players are on consoles. They just want entertainment without the baggage. That's where the money is.

[BraveSirRobin]

3 hours ago, Zooropa_Fly said:

But of course we'd better not bring up such things here. 

 

Then why do you keep doing exactly that?

[343KKT_Kintaro]

11 hours ago, Zooropa_Fly said:

I don't think WT should be included in this.

 

 

We shouldn't count "War Thunder", "World of Warplanes" nor "Ace Combat" among what I call "serious simulation", but this kind of games, the arcades, is worth mentioning in this thread because the  main topic, here, deals with the future of the serious simulation of WWII air combat. Back in the 1990s, when I started playing combat flight sims, the market was quite balanced and the public played both arcades and serious sims, more or less equally. Maybe more arcades but the proportion of players in each category at the time doesn't matter: my point is that each of these two categories, arcade and serious simulation, seemed to have its future assured, at least 30 years ago. Now things have changed and arcades are clearly replacing serious sims.

 

a) One gamer who loves the "Heroic Fantasy" genre and ends up playing "World of Warcraft" is not a player we lost for our community of serious simulation players.

 

b) One gamer who simply loves video games, gives a try to "War Thunder" and ends up playing exclusively "War Thunder", is not a player we lost for our community of serious simulation players.

 

c) A youngster who's not particularly interested in video games but loves military aviation and the epic aspect of air combat during WWII may hear about "War Thunder", give it a try and, then, exclusively stay in "War Thunder" and never give a try to the IL-2 Sturmovik games nor to DCS... that one really is a player we lost for our community of serious simulation players.

 

That latter categories in items "b" and "c" sadly constitute the bulk of the player base who is massively adhering to brainkilling games which not only prevent the player to go deeper into the learning process of what historical air combat was 80 years ago, no, the massive success of aviation arcades also kills the future of our niche which is, again, serious simulation. Years ago, there was a constant generation renewal of the pool of serious players, a generation renewal that nowadays is getting smaller and smaller.

 

As per the above, arcades are not only worth mentioning in this thread, I'm afraid they are an inevitable topic of discussion.

 

 

Edited January 25, 2023 by 343KKT_Kintaro
Brought a precision

[Zooropa_Fly]

9 hours ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

Then why do you keep doing exactly that?

 

I didn't.

 

[Skelthos]

3 hours ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

c) A youngster who's not particularly interested in video games but loves military aviation and the epic aspect of air combat during WWII may hear about "War Thunder", give it a try and, then, exclusively stay in "War Thunder" and never give a try to the IL-2 Sturmovik games nor to DCS... that one really is a player we lost for our community of serious simulation players.

I am not going to say it is a lot, but on reddit and other forums, you do frequently see posts along the lines of "I tried War Thunder/Ace Combat etc, and then heard about DCS/IL2, what do I need a HOTAS to play these/what joystick do I need to play these". At least some of these players are part of the future of serious sims. These games are very relevant to any discussion on the future of sims. 

 

In my mind the best thing we, as players can do is be positive ambassadors of our hobby. If someone is into War Thunder, tell them that is cool, have you checked out IL2? If someone bought the cheapest stick and throttle setup available to try it, welcome them to the community, no need to comment on their choice of stick.   I do believe that flight sims are here for the long term, and I think that we can influence that by being more inviting to new players. 

 

Sadly you see part of sim community actively driving them away. Every time someone snubs those communities, every time someone snubs what realism settings other players use, every time someone snubs another players choice of peripherals we loose prospective community members. I remember a few months ago a post on r/HOTAS some 16 year old kid excited to get into DCS and his dad had agreed to buy him a HOTAS on the condition that he could order it off Amazon. The kid got the Thrustmaster Warthog, you had multiple people telling the kid that his dad was stupid and how horrible the Warthog is. How willing do you think that kid is going to be to continue to engage with community in the future? How many other prospective simmers is that going to drive away?  

 

 

[Zooropa_Fly]

23 minutes ago, Skelthos said:

How willing do you think that kid is going to be to continue to engage with community in the future? How many other prospective simmers is that going to drive away?

 

That kid needs to learn to use his own judgement, and that life will be full of people who have differing opinions.

Anyone who jacks it in because someone else slags off their joystick, isn't likely to be around for long anyway.

And yes, after going through about 5 Warthogs back in the day.. they do suck !

 

S!

[Skelthos]

3 minutes ago, Zooropa_Fly said:

That kid needs to learn to use his own judgement, and that life will be full of people who have differing opinions

Differing opinion are fine, the name calling and hostility, those are not needed.  Well adjusted people are more than capable of discussing differing opinion without the insults etc. 

 

5 minutes ago, Zooropa_Fly said:

Anyone who jacks it in because someone else slags off their joystick, isn't likely to be around for long anyway.

It is less about slagging off the joystick and more about the open hostility. If the community was welcoming instead of hostile, this could be someone converted to a life simmer.

 

6 minutes ago, Zooropa_Fly said:

And yes, after going through about 5 Warthogs back in the day.. they do suck !

No argument there from me, but also no need to treat people who have them and like them like dirt either. 

[343KKT_Kintaro]

Obviously we need to be open-minded, tolerant, helpful and supportive if we want to increase our numbers. Fingers crossed for the future.

 

 

[Guest deleted@83466]

I remember the issue of arcade vs Sim came up a lot in Rise of Flight.  At some point Multiplayer had no sense of being anything other than a cheap arcade game because it was overpopulated by people who did nothing other than fly to the enemy airfield, have a ridiculous dogfight against all odds, die, and then do it all over again.  If somebody didn’t like you, they’d just ram you, and die themselves, because that’s what real pilots do, right?  It completely lost all sense of simulating anything because there stopped being a distinction between mission-oriented servers where people were actually trying to survive (as if they were a real combatant) compared to the icons-on quick dogfight stuff.  People complain about the AI unrealistically chasing you all the way back to your home field, lol, but it was actual people that made the AI look like a genius by comparison.  As a result, I was not a big fan of attracting the types of players that flew it that way, even if it meant less people.  But it’s par for the course:  It’s just what you get when you have planes that start with ‘E’.   I started to gravitate more and more towards DCS.

[343KKT_Kintaro]

@SeaSerpent, I accept what you say... but those players behaving as they behave in the servers, well, this is due to the human weakness one might find in plenty of other people, even in a context different than gaming. Nothing to do with serious or not serious simulation. Rise of Flight is serious simulation because it focuses much more in realism than it focuses in added gameplay (like HUD, speed bars, external views, simplified flight models, etc., features all of them much more related to arcades). I know, your post reads "It’s just what you get when you have planes that start with E" but this is because RoF and Great Battles are surveys, not a studies, and thus need to shorten some procedures. So yes, good, sure, I understand now you prefer DCS, but DCS still cannot provide one map and 10 flyables in one single module. The problem, apparently, is that the simplification of the start-up procedures ends up by giving birth to, let's call it that way, the "Berloga spirit" (you spawn up in the air, you shoot, you die, you spawn, you shoot, you d...).

 

 

[Guest deleted@83466]

Nerds aren’t going anywhere in this world, Kintaro?. I was in some groups in DCS where they would have a 45 minute pre mission briefing with a pdf presentation.  That was a bit much for me, but I became a more satisfied flight sim hobbyist because of it.  And I gotta say, I can fly the f*@k out of any DCS helicopter that comes my way past, present or future! ?

 

My point is, you have no reason to doubt that people interested in this genre of gaming will continue on as it has since you started playing flight sims in your teens. Will WW2 flight sims wane in popularity?  You bet.  It’s the younger people gradually supplanting the older since the dawn of time.  And they’ll have their own wars to mythologize in Hollywood, and eventually adopt into a video game.  Really.
 

So what my guess about the future of WW2 flight sims?  You’ll be simming it until the day you die, Kintaro, with VR headsets and virtual touch controls.  There will be people who are interested in that era for a long time to come, though it might be more niche than it is now. There a 8 billion people on this Planet, and it isn’t getting any smaller. But if all they have is Yalu River, 1952, Sabres and Migs, or Linebacker I with F-4’s, but you really wanted Channel ‘41 with a complete plane set, you can adapt to that, right?

 

 

Edited January 26, 2023 by SeaSerpent
Can you French guys even be happy in a Mirage??

[343KKT_Kintaro]

I get what you mean SeaSerpent, and I'm pretty relaxed about the idea of my favorite hobby disappearing. It's just that it would be a pitty.

 

 

6 hours ago, SeaSerpent said:

And they’ll have their own wars to mythologize in Hollywood, and eventually adopt into a video game.

 

 

Their own wars? flying F-15s over Iraq? or MiG-29s over Ukraine, for example? I guess you got it... the new entertainment will not necessarily deal with aviation. As I said in a previous post, the average young male no longer has a "classical" culture and he's no longer interested in Achilles, nor in Ulysses, nor in King Arthur, nor in the exploits of the aviation combatants during the first half of the 20th Century. The new entertainment is not simulation, simulation is a tribute to reality, it seeks realism, and now the younger generations inherit an entertainment culture that is much more based on ten-million-dollar special effects, blockbusters and super heroes.

 

 

[DBS]

I'm just finding out now that Jason joined Microprose. That's exciting news, Let's hope he took his pacific theatre research with him  

[343KKT_Kintaro]

4 minutes ago, DBS said:

I'm just finding out now that Jason joined Microprose. That's exciting news, Let's hope he took his pacific theatre research with him  

 

 

Jason Williams - Executive Producer - MicroProse | LinkedIn

 

"New Executive Producer at MicroProse working on a new unannounced project"

 

Yes. MicroProse is working on two completely new quad-bomber-oriented simulators and these are, obviously, announced projects. Now, Jason Williams joined MicroProse and is working on a different project though within the same company. And, indeed, we don't know what it is. My hope is in a survey-type simulator, similar to what we had with "Cliffs of Dover" or "Great Battles": ten flyables and one map in one product. This beeing said, with the future visual update of Cliffs of Dover, the MicroProse unannounced project, the 1CGS unannounced project and DCS still in the thick of hardcore simulation, there's still hope for the next ten years to still satisfy our needs in terms of both survey and study military sims.

 

On the original post I said "question marks everywhere, answers nowhere" because this is where we are right now, we really are in a transitional period of uncertainty. This thread also aims to debate about our guessings on what's in the oven right now, the feasibility of a serious renewal of the combat flight sims genre. So, dear fellow pilots, you may have noticed my pessimism in previous posts, but I'm looking for a positive view on the close future as well. This time, the next WWII combat flight sims should ensure  the reenactment of large formations of heavy bombers, workable aircraft carriers and carrier operations, complete and realistic on-board systems that really work, etc. Don't you think so?

 

 

[IckyATLAS]

4 minutes ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

 

 

Jason Williams - Executive Producer - MicroProse | LinkedIn

 

"New Executive Producer at MicroProse working on a new unannounced project"

 

Yes. MicroProse is working on two completely new quad-bomber-oriented simulators and these are, obviously, announced projects. Now, Jason Williams joined MicroProse and is working on a different project though within the same company. And, indeed, we don't know what it is.

 

 

I remember that Jason's "dream" was the Pacific Theater. The dev team is understandably is more oriented towards the Central, Eastern Europe theaters. The Pacific is clearly far away and it has not been a war theater for the Soviet Army. When the Soviet Union declared finally war against Japan, the war was ending.

So that theater was mainly US, but also Australia, UK etc. Who knows maybe he has negotiated with Microprose to make his dream real.

If so he will have an instant customer with me ready to pay sky is the limit ?. 

[Bonnot]

1 hour ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

The new entertainment is not simulation, simulation is a tribute to reality, it seeks realism, and now the younger generations inherit an entertainment culture that is much more based on ten-million-dollar special effects, blockbusters and super heroes.

SUPER HEROES :  I understand you are one the dominant male who understand nothing to Cul-ture !

Give us Super Heroin.e.s  with muscles and mustache, paint our BF 109 xyz  real colors : Pink on Yellow with Rainbow cockads, give the forgotten people their true place in History : can't write all but mind of Atlants, Mu, Martians and Mutants role in elevation of Tecno/democratic states !

Add a backgound of proto-Negululu music and the philosophical depth of Armageddon and SIMS are saved for long !

8 hours ago, SeaSerpent said:

they’ll have their own wars to mythologize in Hollywood, and eventually adopt into a video game.  Really.

Really,  ...

5 minutes ago, IckyATLAS said:

If so he will have an instant customer with me ready to pay sky is the limit ?. 

Me TOO !

[343KKT_Kintaro]

I wasn't producing a value judgement on the super heroes genre, all what I'm saying is that the fantasy genres have invaded the market, they are dominant now, and thus the simulation of aviation is falling into the interest of a minority. A video game that allows the player to step into the fictional universe of James Cameron's "Avatar" films has more chances to be successful than a combat flight simulator that is set during World War II and, plus, is ambitiously and seriously developed. Our serious WWII flight sims have survived til now because, for tens of years, in the 1980s and 1990s there were thousands of adolescents cultured enough in the domain of aviation so that they made fungible the market of serious combat flight simulation. Such market is becoming less and less fungible because more and more the young generations focus their interest elsewhere.

 

 

[Bonnot]

5 minutes ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

the fantasy genres have invaded the market, they are dominant now

To make it short : Woke Culture is replacing our....... Sorry I can't never be serious for a long time  ?

 

27 minutes ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

"Avatar" films has more chances to be successful than a combat flight simulator that is set during World War II

Hollywood was/is a cash machine and delivers what cashes the most : Charlot in the 20's ,white telephones 30's, Pin UP and Champagne, then WAR Movies, American Way of life 50's...........and now ?

The surrounding culture affects all in different ways, and there are pro and cons... we were closer to WWII but newbies are ( probably ) closer to WWIII  ?  and they can be forgiven if they try to forget it !

But distance in time is not always a dominant factor : look at bookstores how many mags deal with History, Archeology , Antiquity.;. more or less seriously...and how collectors or wargamers cash on Antics or Napoleonic figures, a hobby who really began ca; 1920 . It as flourishing periods or dead waters, but survived .It is interesting to remark that it often goes with trend in movies, litterature, even fashion : write "from here to eternity" then Film, Oscars, records......you may influence the trend ?

 

[Guest deleted@83466]

The future’s so bright I gotta wear shades.

[LukeFF]

No offense, but too many of you here are way too melodramatic. Flight sims aren't going anywhere. Want some proof of that? Just go look at how HUGE the ecosystem is for MSFS, in terms of third-party content creators. Then add in all the other sims that are out there - both combat and civilian - and it's plainly obvious that the genre is not dying. 

[Guest deleted@83466]

The only difference is that in the future, the AI will be starting threads on this forum complaining that the human players keep shoulder-shooting, lawndarting, and disobeying orders.

[Trooper117]

I have a shed load of flight sims... I've enough to keep me going until I pop my clogs I reckon.

Even if the flight sims I have that need to be online went west tomorrow, I've got flight sims that don't require an internet connection to play to keep me busy.

Having said that, flight sims will continue to evolve in one form or another I'll wager... Looking at Jason's last post on Linkedin I'd say we are ok for quite some time.

[343KKT_Kintaro]

2 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

No offense, but too many of you here are way too melodramatic. Flight sims aren't going anywhere. Want some proof of that? Just go look at how HUGE the ecosystem is for MSFS, in terms of third-party content creators. Then add in all the other sims that are out there - both combat and civilian - and it's plainly obvious that the genre is not dying. 

 

 

My original post doesn't ask the question if whether or not our niche is dying, but apparently the question was brought up. If you think about it, Luke, all of those third-party content creators do not develop large-scale models of combat features like ballistics, emulated physics for dropping bombs, explosions, aircraft systems behaviour after taking damage, flight models for combat situations depending on low, medium and high altitude, fluid mechanics for plumes behind your bird when it's leaking fuel (or when it's leaking glycol, etc.), drop tanks, fuel pumps and fuel management, emulated physics for fuel tanks on fire, for engines oon fire, for structures on fire, effects of bombs on ships, vehiches, buildings, water, etc.

 

Years ago I did some research, looking for the year when our serious military simulators started. I found that all of them (for DCS, Rise of Flight, Cliffs of Dover and Great Battles) started in the same year: 2003. If 1CGS started its new project in the late months of 2021, and if the new p^roject is a ne core engine, this would mean that nobody started the development of a new core engine for a serious combat flight sim for 18 years between 2003 and 2021. 18 years without anyone saying "ok, let's start now to develop a new core engine for a serious combat flight sim". In the domain of serious combat flight simulation, the last engine to be unveiled to the public is "Cliffs of Dover" back in 2011. "Stalingrad" and the subsequent "Great Battles" series are nothing but "Rise of Flight" with a few coats of makeup.

 

So, it's ok, let's not be excessively pessimistic, but nevertheless the situation is not bright at all for our niche. And it is not for a too long period of time now. We are in 2023, we should take off on board our super well modeled B-17 all along with 299 other B-17s and go bombing Germany in 1942, or in 1943, or in 1944. Rather than that we have 15 year old combat flight sims and brand new civilian flight sims. My understanding is that people like Loft or Jason said "enough is enough, let's start something new", each separately, but, in the end, this is what it seems it's happening.

 

PS: please Zooropa, delete your last comment, believe me, it is not welcome at all.

 

 

[spreckair]

I am not so sure that I agree that the interest in WWII air combat is going to die out.  There are gamers who play strategy games that cover every major war since Rome.  Given that WWII is the only war with a really huge involvement of air power (meaning the national economies of every major industrialized country on max), I think it might have some staying power.  Yes, there might be fewer die-hard enthusiasts in the future, but with 8 billion people in the world today, there might be enough who could be interested in this niche subject.