They are doing their thing, ED is doing theirs, I think they are in different lanes, ED is competing with themselves to make the best sim they can, be it WWII, Modern, etc… I never hear an ED team member compare their work to anything but the real thing.
3 Likes
But Tovarisch, neither of these are glorious Fighter Aircraft # 23 from Design Bureau of Mikoyan and Gurevich.
4 Likes
That was my reaction. “FC4?!”
And with four more aircraft? This ought to be interesting, and I know it’ll definitely get me into DCS again. I wonder which four they have in mind…
2 Likes
I am very happy to hear that ED is planning on serving this portion of their customers. Good show.
hoping for a Tornado or F-4…
I agree, I know I love the full fidelity stuff, but aircraft like the F-15C, while easy to get into still provide a lot of fun.
4 Likes
F-4 is going to be a full fidelity module from belsimtek, is it not?
My FC4 wishlist: MiG-23, MiG-27, MiG-27 and Su-17.
My favourite DCS aircraft by hours flown is the crane, the Su-27 by a wide margin.
Given our current map selection and era and the orientation of Jupiter and Mars, I think my wishlist would be MiG-23, Jaguar, A-6 and Su-30.
3 Likes
I’m going to be so busy with the Harrier, Hornet, Phantom, and Jug, that my head explodes thinking about more aircraft.
1 Like
My head already exploded long time ago. I mean I lost the track somewhere around the magical date of May 2017… sweet sweet Mirage… hope we will get to know each other oneday 
Yes, F-4 will be fully fidelity as far as I am aware, ED and I am sure BST are still very intent on doing full fidelity, but nothing wrong with slipping in some FC fidelity modules here and there as well I think.
1 Like
I’m not that concerned about what they pick as long as they kinda stay in the Cold War stable. Nothing past the early 90s.
1 Like
Here I’ll be negative nancy.
If there’s to be an A-6 I want it full blown DCS.
3 Likes
No, not acceptable. I have worked long and hard to corner the market on obstinate negativity and contrarian curmudgeon-ing. I won’t have people muscling in on my turf!
3 Likes
You call yourself a negative nancy? Don’t make me laugh!
2 Likes
Exaclty, THIS is NEGATIVE NANCY!
8 Likes
I applaud them for listening to inputs from the customer base.
FC3 was a huge success and continues to be an actively flown aircraft pool.
While the hardcore niche wants the full module, from what I’m reading and seeing, the majority of simmers online are kids. Short attention span (get in and fly now) and limited funds. So more bang for their bucks.
A FC4 module set, could quickly fill in huge gaps and close up some theaters.
Looking forward to the future news.
3 Likes
I really don’t see it being a big problem to have both a FC version as well as a DCS level module of the same aircraft. It would be a win/win for ED because we would all most likely buy both versions if the FC version of an airplane was released well before the full fidelity module.
That sounds like a great idea to me. A way to get more customers for essentially the same product. Don’t know how easy it would be to implement, though…
gestures aggressively towards my DCS fidelity F-15 that doesn’t exist
I think that depends on two factors: the initial investment in the module (i.e. how they set up the code to integrate with more complex systems in the future), and the value the organization places on that work.
Using FC3 as an example, many of the modules have at least basic hooks for more complex systems if ED/BST so choose, but it seems like that additional hurdle has consistently been a lower priority under new modules and fixes for existing ones.
I believe the intent is there, but if a nascent career in software has taught me anything, there are always a bunch of things you want to do after you clear your backlog. Problem is that backlog never seems to get cleared.
It’ll be interesting to see how it plays out going forward.
3 Likes