Hey, here is a chance to really help out with the Normandy project if you have a few minutes:
https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3088835
The alternative is listening to Wags and I doing British accents and believe me nobody wants that. 
4 Likes
Iām pretty good as saying āehāā¦ alotā¦ along with ācrikeyā.
But I limit my voice to eastern US and Fexican
To be honest. Iām fine with it (and would actually be excited about it) if there was some cost to entry into other eras. Vietnam, Falklands, Gulf War - I will gladly pay money for asset packs that makes those places flyable and with assets that are appropriate. I mean, I get the whole āfracturing of the MP community thingā - but Iām willing to bet that there are four other people out there that would love to play a Vietnam map as much as I would - and would be willing to pay $50 for the map, $20 for assets, and $50 for an A-6 (or F-4, or A-4, or Huey, or whatever).
I still scratch my head on this. If we were a gathering of astronomy buffs, or an R/C aircraft club, weād be talking about spending money here and there on our hobby (our passion!), yet suggest to simmers that we might have to spend some additional money for the pursuit of our hobby and the temple catches on fire.
All I want is a sustainable business model by ED because they make stuff I like. And hopefully they can maintain that level of player interest and profitability that allow them to continue to push forward.
3 Likes
I think it goes two ways, with the RC club thereās no cut-off if you cannot buy it, you can still enjoy the flying, discussions and building. With DCS, you are straight out of luck. It creates a barrier of entry, especially when you compare Nevada/Normandy to the old georgia, introducing new people to DCS is impossible because āYeah you have to 60 for that aircraft, then another 60 for a pretty mapā. DCS doesnāt feel like a singular product anymore in that regard. Itās a patch work of money drains.
DCS for me, has been creating many of the frustrations that caused me to bail on FSX, because you had to toss a ton of money to get something representable. They ought to make sure their base product is actually worth buying. It was their own choice to make DCS World free to play, if they didnāt want to neglect it then they shouldnāt have abandoned it like this(Look at standard units and their qualityā¦).
2 Likes
See, I vigorously disagree with that. There is literally NO barrier of entry to introducing a new person to DCS World flying is there? I mean, if we are intent on bringing a friend into DCS - canāt they download DCS World for free, and we put them in the Su-25T and let them fly for free in Georgia? I mean, I donāt take up golf and go buy a membership and buy the latest Taylor Made woodsā¦I rent a bag of clubs, buy a round at the local public course, and try it out. The P-51 and Su-25T are supposed to be the entry points.
Now, one could argue that ED might actually be smart to model a civilian aircraft for free for DCS World - like a Cessna 172 or a light trainer like the C-101 (edit - maybe they should offer a dumbed down version of the L-39?). Because the Su-25T is actually pretty complicated, and the P-51 can actually be kind of hard to fly. If it is about getting more and more people into DCS World, I think the free and easy is a good lure, and then when they see people zipping around in M2000s, A-10Cs, and Ka-50s, they will thinkā¦hmmā¦Iād like to do that too!
3 Likes
Sure, they may be entry points but I still feel the final product you buy lacks a completeness in the current environment. I suppose itās a matter of perspective.
Iāll be curious how the WW2 environment is received. For some reason, in my mind, I feel like the WW2 environment is going to need a significant boost in immersive components to allow it to compete with other WW2 sims. Now, temper my opinion with the fact that I know jack squat about other WW2 sims, but I think you will need a lot of action going on both on the ground and in the air to give an authentic WW2 experience. I donāt know the current status of sims like BoS or IL-2 or Cliffs of Dover, but you are going to have to have campaigns and missions that can compete directly with that type of content. It wonāt be enough to put gorgeous assets on a gorgeous map.
3 Likes
Indeed, I think they might have a hard sell with IL-2 and the like though if they also start charging for campaigns instead of including those with the WWII units. At that point it becomes more of one of those āBuild your own robot!ā magazines where you have to buy every part month by month 
I feel similar. Despite the pretty map and the new assets, I have doubts that DCS as a platform is really suited for WWII. I donāt think that overall it will be able to compete with the other purpose built WWII sims. Somehow I feel that this whole WWII endeavor is a distraction of resources that would be better spend to improve on things that DCS is more suited for.
But somehow it brakes down to a core problem of DCS, a modulartity that is bottle-necked by core features being depending on ED. Each aircraft, map and era has its own unique requirement which depend on limited ED resources to reach its full potential, or sometimes to even work at all. The Viggen recently highlighted severe shortcomings in low-level AI or improvements to the anti-ship mechanics, requiring ED. The Gazelle is limited by AI-vegetation LOS issues, depending on ED. RAZBAMās Harrier will require ED to program AI STOVL logic. Belsimtekās helos need sling load mechanics. The MiG-21 requires a GCI simulation. The Hornet will require a new SAM AI for proper SEAD. The WWII birds require a new damage model system. The modern fighters need a better missile simulation. A Tornado would require a strike planner. A Viking would require submerged submarines. WWI planes would require hand signs. The list is almost endless. Each DCS developer can and does add new modules with a huge variety at will, which have greatly diverging requirements to the DCS core, for which ED does not have the resources to fulfill them all. And it wont get better as time goes by, it actually gets worse as modules are added quicker than core DCS improvements by ED.
3 Likes
A very pungent reply. Old bean, pip pip! Iām with you, eh!
Imagine what core improvements an f111 would bring?
1 Like
Nah, bad tasteā¦
Sorry. 
I think there has already been a strong response to WWII, and the more ED adds to it the stronger its going to grow. I get the concern though, really there are no current devs, at least on the level of ED doing modern combat flight sims. But when you look at WWII, they have atleast one strong competitor in IL2, although the experiences can differ there as well.
Of course I am a little bias, as well I have a little clearer look into EDās direction as well, so I have to take that into account. But the strong, bigger ED gets the stronger and bigger DCS will get, drawing in fans of different eras is going to help them.
3 Likes
There is a WWII team. They even brought on a new producer for WWII, Racoon. So while it does distract development (so do the release of 3rd party modules to get them ready for release) when they get ready for release, general development isnāt effected.
2 Likes
Thanks for the replies @SiThSpAwN - it is nice to have some assurances and confidence in the project. I think the big drawing points are worthy of mention: the fidelity of the flight models, the fidelity of the aircraft, the incredible VR integration, the incredible level of detail the talented developers at ED are capable of, and the base graphics engine that is growing more impressive with each build. So I think a lot of the pieces are there. Hopefully the āputting the soul into WW2ā will come as wellā¦as that will really be the glue that brings it all together.
Who knowsā¦maybe yaāll will convert me to a prop pilotā¦!
1 Like
I gained the impression that the focus on the Normandy map has delayed both the Caucasus map makeover and the 2.5 integration. Is this assessment incorrect?
2 Likes
As I said, the only delay is to get the Normandy map ready for release, a lot has been done for both the Caucasus map and 2.5 integration already. They will be able to get back to it once Normandy gets released. Honestly though, things like effects for 2.5 are probably still being worked on, so I dont think all work on those two items has completely halted, focus is just to get Normandy out the door right now, least that is my understanding.
I remain optimistic. I donāt think that it is going to take long to get some interesting missions/scenarios created. In the opening up a can of worms dept, I wish that Combined Arms had infantry. One of my best sim memories is relieving a besieged city in WW2Online either with CAS or by dropping a stick of paratroopers to come to the rescue. Call me cruel, but flying down a country road in a Hurri, spotting a troop truck, returning to strafe, and watching to little dudes diving for the trees or ditch, all the while knowing that a human was controlling every one of them was a rush. Youāll not take our town!
3 Likes
guys, I love you all, butā¦
There is also no cut-off in DCS etc. You can still enjoy flying etc. even if you dont buy Normandy. There is lots of guys who still didnt buy Nevada and they are enjoying the flying etc.
There is nothing like when Normandy comes out that every single player will play only Normandy and Caucasus and Nevada can be tossed away.
All I heard in the past years was that without adequate map is DCS WWII not enough immersive. Now with the map, I bet, they will sure switch to another whining 
Always the same, do you realy think that guys who creates maps will program STOVL logic? GCI simulation? SAM AI? etc.?
Exactly that! I will buy you a beer! 
1 Like