[pedant]
FC3 came out for DCS World, loooong after A-10C. FC2 was released for the A-10C pre-DCS World and looked much more primitive, although it was still better than the Ka-50 original release.
[/pedant]
My problem with Normandy has more to do with the road networks and hedgerows that donāt play nice with the AI. I donāt know if ground pathing needs to be updated or what, but itās very annoying to have AI get all lost in a town because they want to drive half off-road rather than in the center of the road as required for the majority of the map. The level of quality is adequate for DCSā purposes in my book.
The Channel map I feel was the wrong direction given the WWII planeset, both current and projected, and we should have done Bastogne or similar instead. But Iāve ranted about that enough.
Iāve talked about maps before, but Iāll repeat here anyways: maps should be designed with a purpose in mind. Normandy and the Channel being relatively small is fine because for the WWII tactical level, itās more than enough space. Theyāre also, curiously enough, ideal for helicopter operations. When you throw modern jets into the mix it gets small, save for the A-10 and Su-25. Thatās an acceptable compromise for what we get.
Likewise, Iām fine with maps like the Persian Gulf/Strait of Hormuz having a reduction of overall detail in favor of a larger play area, because the focus should be on modern jets and their capabilities. We need areas to reach out and stretch our legs so itās not a knife fight in a phone booth, which is what you get when trying to jam modern jets into a game like ArmA3. Giving up some lower level detail and resolution works out for doing a 1,200nmi round trip strike mission and actually makes us use skills like aerial refueling.
2 Likes
That looks like Douglas Baderā¦
2 Likes
Right you are mate. Itās undoubtedly a hackneyed stereotype, but when I think of an RAF fighter pilot, this is what comes to mind.
On the other hand, when I was a young lad, say 8 years old, I had the pleasure of accompanying my father to the MG factory to pick up an MG B. It was white with red leather and wire wheels. This would have been in '65. I remember that it had a placard on the dash in front of the passenger which read something like, āConstructed for Captain Daniel Blakeā. We rented a house in Suffolk and I can imagine that my dad was living the dream driving that MG to work at RAF Woodbridge. Sorry for the tangent.
8 Likes
Didnāt we request a badge for epic de-rails?
You were right on cue!
1 Like
So what happened to the car Dan? Did it make it back to the US at the end of your Dadās tour?
ED deserves support. But they also deserve some pushback for the several missteps since the original WWII products released. Where are they headed with two overlapping yet incompatible mapsāthe original of which still runs at half speed and looks like many shades of brightly saturated greenish mustard. Their plan has been a mystery to me ever since that video Oleg made from his well worn couch so many years ago (for those of you who remember). In the years hence it has been a hodgepodge of planes and assets of general high quality but little else beyond a pretty sandbox.
I know many of you will justifiably push back against me on this. But I also know that I am not completely alone in seeing an increasing number of expensive products that offer no game, no campaign to speak of, nothing to keep the player coming back for more. The stuff gets prettier and prettier (if itās under EDās control) but so what? What is one to do with any of it? Yes, this rant parallels one I have been making about IL2ās French/Normandy/D-Day/Channel/IāveRunOutOfNames map. But that was about wildly variable pricing, not content, which in their case is decent.
If ED wants me to part with my money they must also offer a game. It doesnāt need to be a dynamic campaign or a slick static story with Brad Pitt voice overs. It can be as simple as a weeklong multiplayer event featuring the Channel and the P-47 and if the promise of good times is enough, I will buy both for the experience of that week alone. Money is not the issue. Iāve invested over a thousand since Flanker 1 back when I was half my current age. But I feel that those 25+ years of āinvestingā have steered ED away rather than towards the hope my money was funding: engaging gameplay built around properly modeled physics, plausible AI and historically accurate assets.
11 Likes
Still one out of four not too shabby 
3 Likes
Not going to get any pushback from me. Solid points.
Brace for impact! 
No, not really. I agree that DCS lacks game. Donāt agree that Normandy looks and performs that bad though. 
I think ED were hoping for more external developers jumping on the project and starting to churn out content, while ED supplied the the game to do it in.
But making content for a game in perpetual development isnāt easy. Suddenly you need to go back and change every mission in the campaign you sold, because some trigger logic changedā¦
And with the level of detail in the aircraft modules, you just donāt jump into the fray making a completely new theatre of operations, with a bunch of aircraft and a map, because thatās a huge investment.
But maybe if ED iron out the wrinkles and can present a more finished product, maybe we can get more content creators that will give us the āgameā we wantā¦
But in the end of the day, it is what it is.
I wish combat flightsimming was as popular as Fortnite. Then we might have several different developers fighting for our attention and money, so we could really vote with our wallets.
7 Likes
You see, I totally agree with you AND I totally agree with me (to feel otherwise would be the definition of insanity). But there is a trap. Iāve been setting it for a generation. You are setting it now. Letās call it āPoor Russiaā. Poor Russia is how we defend this continuous development model. It is noble. And it isnāt necessarily wrong. But these Poor Russians have been successfully selling simulators since before a quarter of Mudspikers were born, probably. ED was likely a full-time team of two or three when Flanker hit the stores. Now they number in the dozens at leastāwith piecework adding to that a staff of hundreds. No, they are not EA (thank the gods!). But they are by any definition a successful, albeit smallish, global developer.
They are wonderful people, ED. As are 777. They listen to us and patiently explain why things are the way they are. They have given me much more joy than my money has purchased. Sometimes thoughā¦ 
1 Like
I think part of this can be placed on the theme of DCS as a sandbox game/simulator. Thereās maps and assets provided, but itās on the user to do things with them. The problem then becomes creating scenarios is a full time job and the more a scenario tries to do, the more likely things are to come apart at the seams. On top of this, the sandbox nature isnāt sandbox enough, so youāre still restricted in what you can do ā without getting into the problem that to make compelling scenarios, you also have to know your way around scripting to achieve comparatively simple things. For example, if I want to have a rotating patrol of aircraft that will take off, patrol, land, then fire up another patrol to take their place, my choices are complex trigger conditions or a script snippet. It shouldnāt be that hard, but it is.
Iād really like for DCS to be more open about GUI, cutscenes, etc. and allow mission creators far more flexibility in creating a narrative, but ED feels that this isnāt necessary and that the status quo is good enough. Perhaps, coming from OFP/ArmA, Iāve been spoiled by what we can do in the face of problematic AI, physics, and assets.
5 Likes
Yeah, they are. ED are a talented bunch!
But the thing is, if they were really successful and could print their own money, someone else would want a piece of the actionā¦
Maybe we can pin our hopes to MSFS2020 to once again spread the joy of flightsimming to the masses? What we need is kids like we once were. The kind that couldnāt get enough of airplanes.
The general publics love of aviation is lost, and we need to find it again.
And until we do, there wonāt be enough flightsimmers around to split the bill.
On the other hand, I see almost daily new threads pop up on hoggit about how to this or that very basic thing in DCS, because they just found out about it, fell head over heels in love with it and want to know how to load the nevada terrain or some such thing.
3 Likes
The largest problem Iāve seen is with the AI. The AI FM is just so out of this world unfair that it makes it a bear to play unless youāre doing PvP.
2 Likes
I find that setting the levels in a mission is a must. Go up against 4 Exellent AI and you are done! I am setting leaders as high and wingmen as good. I am about to move up to all HIgh. But you need luck all the time. Im getting lucky in the Jug and the Messer lately. 
Ever wondered about the skill naming convention (Average-Good-High-Excellent)? In what world is average the lowest end of the scale 
