From Matt Wagner on the ED forums:

THE FIGHTER COLLECTION AND EAGLE DYNAMICS TO RELEASE LOCK ON: FLAMING CLIFFS 2.0 UPGRADE

DUXFORD, UK, November 17, 2009 – The Fighter Collection and Eagle Dynamics will release Lock On: Flaming Cliffs 2.0 in early 2010. This will be an upgrade to the unofficial Lock On: Flaming Cliffs add-on. Lock On: Flaming Cliffs 2.0 will feature all the flyable aircraft of Lock On: Flaming Cliffs and include several fan-requested upgrades to aircraft, sensor, and weapon systems. Lock On: Flaming Cliffs combines a large stable of modern U.S. and Russian aircraft to fly over Russia and Georgia with game play for both casual and hardcore flight simulation enthusiasts.

Lock On: Flaming Cliffs 2.0 will feature the same world environment and game functionality as the Digital Combat Simulation (DCS) series and will be online compatible with the Ka-50 attack helicopter simulation DCS: Black Shark www.digitalcombatsimulator.com. Lock On: Flaming Cliffs 2.0 will allow Lock On pilots and Black Shark pilots to now fly online together in both cooperative and head-to-head online play.

The Lock On: Flaming Cliffs 2.0 upgrade for owners of Lock On: Flaming Cliffs 1.12 will be available for sale as a download from the Eagle Dynamics Lock On web site for $14.99 USD. http://lockon.co.uk/. The upgrade will first be released in English and Russian with French, German, and Spanish versions to follow.

By using the DCS environment, Lock On: Flaming Cliffs 2.0 users will have improved terrain, mission editor, AI flight models, 3D objects, artificial intelligence (AI), and multiplayer. The aircraft of Lock On: Flaming Cliffs 2.0 will include:

• Su-25 (new 3D model)
• Su-25T
• A-10A
• Su-27
• Su-33
• MiG-29A
• MiG-29C
• F-15C

Several new missions and campaigns will be included in Lock On: Flaming Cliffs 2.0.

Source: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=47144

that is good news, thanks!

Sweet!!!

It would be really nice if it was a complete install that just asks to see your FC DVD/CD as proof of purchase.

Awesome! I have been waiting for this upgrade for ages. I just hope that the new 3rd party models like the F-15 work without any problems. Otherwise Whalmis (sp?) has to rework his model, if he is still interested in it.

Brilliant, really looking forward to this update, O knew the rumours about the patch for FC but an update is just jet porn! sneaky devils hanging around at ED's evil corporate headquaters!!!

Staffan

I'm not a regular LOMAC / FC or BS user (I hardly touch them to be honest) despite having purchased all three, but this is massive news isn't it? All we need now is a persistent world on a campaign server!

No mention of removing the old Star Force copy protection in Flaming Cliffs? Like other companies have done with update/patches?

From the SimHQ Q&A:

what a brilliant update for this simulator.
not only does it fix a few things, it also brings new features we've seen in Black Shark.

15 bucks ? no problem
prepare to standby

Thanks Ken - nice to see you. For a non FC owner (primarily because of SF allergy), I'm not clear on just what this implies about the original FC. I assume a person has to first buy FC. If you then install FC in order to next apply the new upgrade, won't this also install the old SF for FC, but then require only an online check for the upgrade? Still means SF for Flaming Cliffs' original install?

Or is it as IvanK suggests above - no FC original install, just a disc verification?

Hey Eugene,

I guess I'm not sure either. As an update to FC, I assumed it would replace the current config, but that's just an assumption without any facts to back it up. It does sound like you need to install FC for this to work, in which case the SF drivers will be installed, even if they are later removed.

I read somewhere that they are going to have a version released later that adds on to a base Lock On install, without Flaming Cliffs, and they say that should be released in spring, if the info I read is accurate.

Thanks Ken - I'll watch for more news on it. Ever since Beach's series of Training essays for FC, I've been interested - but put off by the SF issue. I've always been on the Falcon 4 side of the aisle no matter how many times I've installed and re-installed original LOMAC. But an upgraded FC w/o SF would appeal to my bipartisan nature.

Eugene... I jumped into this forum today to ask the very same question re: the original Flaming Cliff's copy protection. I like the fact that the FAQ says the copy protection for Flaming Cliffs 2 will be same as BlackShark (StarForce on-line activation only) but as I have Lock-on Gold I think that means that I will have to install the Flaming Cliffs version first and hence install the Starforce drivers on my PC.

I'm good with any combination of events that gets Flaming Cliffs 2 on my PC without having to install the original drivers.

Ricob, I guess we will have to wait for more info from users and development. One possibilty - if the version of SF on FC is the kind that only installs its drivers when you launch the sim, AND the upgrade removes the code that forces that install from the existing FC files on your never launched version on your hard drive, then we would be good to go. Those are two big ifs. But if true, you could install your original and be careful to never start it until after applying the upgrade.

LO getting a second wind is great news, fast movers and helicopters in the same sim things just keep getting better!

Waiting to see how this patch works in relation to SF. I've been wanting to get FC, but refuse to have those SF drivers installed on my new rig. If the patch can work around that, I'll buy it in a heartbeat.

Please keep us FC fence sitters updated on how the SF problem is handled.

FC 2.0 does not install SF drivers. Please check the FAQ - online activation only is used.

Yes I read the FAQ, BUT if I have to buy the FC disk and install it, would it not install the SF drivers as mentioned in the post above?

That is why I am waiting to see how this is handled. If it's just a matter of FC 2.0 doing a full install after checking to see if a legit disk is in the drive then no harm.

GG, I don't know if you read any of the other posts in the thread (including one of mine), but the question is what happens to the SF installed by FC 1.12?

I've got FC 1.12 installed and never had an issue, but I'm running a dedicated gaming rig, and can understand why some people wouldn't want to take the risk.

Edit: I see Teradhead beat me to it.

Installing FC (v1.0) will not install starforce, the starforce install is only triggered when FC is first run, if I recall correctly. So it may be possible to install v1.0, leave the Disc Based starforce dormant and install FCv2.0.

However ED has said they are looking at producing another product that would include FC v1.0+2.0 in one package, to be installed over a base LOMAC Install, however I'd imagine a higher price tag for this.

Nate

Talk about flying below radar, what a great and sneaky gift. I had just recently gotten back into FC so for me, the holidays have arrived early. ED rocks.

Nate, thanks for this. You are confirming what I suspected about the nature of the SF drivers that are part of FC at present. Not installed until you launch FC the first time.

Any updates you see are appreciated. I think the key is whether or not the new patch, activated online as it will be, will override - or not! - the original FC code that installs SF drivers when launched. I don't know if that code is in the primary .exe, and that the new patch will replace the old .exe...or if the launch code is elsewhere, but also will be replaced. One can only hope.

A less pleasant development would be that ONLY the potential new product combining FC and 2.0 would remove the old SF, leaving prior owners of a separate FC disk still subject to the older SF drivers.

I guess it is too soon to tell.

I'll buy it and the Flaming Cliffs if there is no SF on my system. If there is, forget it. If installing FC off the CD installs SF, but the 2.0 negates SF drivers, I could live with that.

Sorry, sometimes I give vague answers because I'm not certain of the official reply.

If you install FC2.0 and you have never run FC (the CD version, which is the one that installs drivers) then you don't have to worry about it.

If you install FC2.0 over FC CD version that HAS been run, then you can use the SF driver removal tool to remove the SF drivers - I would would do so before installing FC2.0.

FC2.0 does use SF - it uses an online activation version of it, which does not use a disk driver.

Great info, GG, thanks!

True widescreen resolutions?

I cannot wait for this one. My first true upgrade to a computer was because of LOMAC and I'd gladly upgrade again.

Who needs an excuse, right?

pfunk

Hehe, yea ppl would ask me how much lockon cost, I'd tell em , "It cost me about a grand!"
This is exciting news. Never was into the helicopter but this will be a good interim to tide me over until the A10 module is released.

this is good news, best way to get rid of SF drivers with win7... cool

This is what I have researched and come up with,about copy protection. I will use me and my game for an ex sample.

I install LOFC (CD version ). Then I buy LOFC 2.0 and install it. Now this is activated over INTERNET. I read where the activation are the same as BS (limited). Now I change hardware ect....Reinstall OS ect... and have just a few points left on my last activation. Then the last activation is used. What happens then ? Do I go back to LOFC with SF disk check. Do I reinstall the whole game,and try to get more activations or am I I of my money.

I understand copy protection. But this is just another way to get your money over and over.Once I buy the product it's mine. This is nothing more than a lease of a software game. Nothing more.

If that happens, you can ask ED for new activations/new serial (http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=593519&postcount=49).

I'm looking forward to flying support ops in my Ka-50!!!

The more I think about it the more I look forward to it! I can't wait to see it!

Why no multi-core support, a cpu-intensive game like this really needs it.

You aren't the first to ask that, but apparently it would require rebuilding the entire simulation engine from scratch. It has been said that 64bit support will be first, before multi-threading.

Nate

Ah. Well most new computers nowadays sells with Windows 7 64-bits but i dont think it will help fps much, hopefully we will see multicore support in the future. The FPS could be so much better.

Looks like more trash.

FC is unstable and runs like crap. Sorry, I can't play a game like this without AA/AF and 15 frame rates.

Instead, maybe they should focus on getting the damn thing to run. Take advantage of quad core, modern video cards ect.

It is a sad joke that FC kills my AMD 9950 and GTX 260 with 4GB of RAM so badly that it is unplayable.

I paid for multiple copies of LOMAC and a copy of FC, but I have had enough with PC game developers releasing nonfunctional crapware.

Must be something with your rig mate! LO:FC 1.12b runs fine for me maxed with 50+ FPS (still FPS hit down low over cities and self shadows are broken but thats known issues) and I have similar setup as you, C2D E6850 @ 3 GHz, 2 GB RAM and a GTX 260 191.07 WHQL on XP Pro, running LO:FC @ 1280x960 with AF x16 and AA x8.

Worked pretty OK on my old AMD 2600+ with a GF6600 as well even if I had to tone things down a bit.

BTW, I'm really looking forward to FC 2.0 and to see some mixed op's with rotary and fixed wings aircrafts. I think it will be a blast to have fast movers joining the DCS world quicker than we expected and I'm confident it will breath new life in LO:FC MP due to it's built in MP lobby and seemless join-in progress. If done right I actually think TFC/ED have a real winner here, FC 2.0 for those who not got the time (or interest) to learn a study sim and DCS:X for those who like switches and prefer going all-in!

Actually this recent news made me reconsider my previous stance on DCS: Black Shark so now I'm learning to handle the Ka-50

PS: Nice to see you still around Mr. Jim and you need to update your sig. pointer to NoSIG, new URL....

/KC

Ditto KeyCat. See my specs below. FC runs just fine on my rig. I'll probably add some more RAM for FC 2.0, and get a new computer in 2010. But at the moment, LOMAC:FC is my preferred flight sim. I've learned and played all the F4 versions, the Janes, etc. But FC has just the right balance (for now) of realism, eye candy and playability.

I've had FC installed on a similar machine. Video card was a HD 4870 1GB though, and a different motherboard. Had the same performance.

Also, they made it possible to play online with FC and BS. It should have been there from the start. It was originally going to be an addon... then they ripped out some flyable aircraft, threw the name DCS in front of it, and charged $60 for it calling it a completely new sim.

Lame.

The only reason they did that was so they can charge you $60 for BS, and then make you rebuy most of the new content again in FC 2.0. As in, the terrain improvements in BS ect.

The two are separate products for good reasons, whether you like them or not. There was never any plan to 'separate the two to charge people more' as you claim.

The 'ripping out some aircraft' deal wasn't exactly a simple matter to take care of either, nor is putting them back in. It's all work, which isn't going to be done for free.

DCS itself is a huge work - DCS is not FC, no matter how much you'd like it to be 'just throwing DCS in front of it'.

the proof of the pudding is in the tweaking

LOFC with 2 GB of add ons:




not paused , I used to get 100 FPS on an Nvidia 4600 on a blue background like this one bellow:


this is a good average 80+, half of that for a dense mission is typical:


Intel DX58SO, Intel Core i7 920 Quad Core 2.66GHz, 4 GB 1333 RAM (CORSAIR XMS3 2x2GB PC3-10600 1333MHz), 2x500GB RAID 0, WinXP Pro, Nvidia GeForce GTX285 1 GB

It actually was going to be an addon originally. Half way through they renamed it to DCS: BS, and asked more than a full price for it.

Was it work? Obviously. But what you fail to comprehend is that they renamed it just to ask more money for it.

And they are separate products? Then why are they making them online compatible now? When they should have been originally.


This is very much like Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2. Throw a new name on it with 70% of the content, jack the price up, and sell it.

But that is fine by me. Buy games, especially ones that can't run on any hardware that can be acquired by man, for insanely high prices.

Thomas DW, obviously you can get 100 frame rates with while looking at the sky. I am talking about being in a cockpit looking at the terrain.

Sure, I might be able to achieve a playable frame rate if I turn down the AA/resolution. But then I won't be able to see crap. This is a game where you need to be able to spot stuff.

With my 19 inch monitor, aircraft are already damn near impossible to see at really close ranges. Forgive me for not being able to afford a $800 50 inch screen.

I was there when it happened, actually, beta testing it. What you fail to comprehend is that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, nor what the underlying reasons are. DCS by all rights is a full, complete piece of work, whether you want it to be or not.



Indeed, they are - and there are plenty of reasons, some of which were mentioned officially (Such as the desire to continue the product line for at least a little while, and give the community some much for asked updates, not to mention a downright huge functionality increase).

There are other reasons as well, not the least of which are legal and the desire to self-publish.

What you think 'should have been' and reality are two different things.

They are being made compatible online, again, due to consumer demand - and IT IS extra work, what on earth do you think we've been beta testing so far?



$15 too much for you? Sounds like its jacked up? I think not.



Yeah, I get 60 doing that, running medium to high settings out of the pit on a GTX 260-216 and E8500.



I have AA at 8x. No real need for more, and the res is 1920x1080. What are you trying to spot?



And what's 'real close ranges', and which aircraft are we talking about? There are some known LOD issues which IIRC are not curable with AA, though they never stopped me from getting and keeping a visual with a 19" screen inside 10nm. Sure, sometimes a plane will dissapear in the haze or blend into the ground. That's fine, it happens, and it isn't unrealistic either. Perhaps your expectations are unrealistic.

If it's that frustrating for you then I suppose by all means, abandon it - but your unfounded, out-of-line accusations and downright ranting are not helpful.
If you have a problem, people can try and help you solve it. You aren't helping anyone help you.

From what I understand, the update will transfer the original LOMAC (FC) content for use in the new improved DCS engine (which is not the same as the engine used by LOMAC). Correct me if I'm wrong...

good question ... ...

from a mission I made





that is a nice average - 40-60 ground, 60-80+ air

Personally I think USD 15.00 for the FC 2.0 update is a very fair price for what we will get -> long waited bugfixes, updated editor with triggers etc., integrated MP lobby and on-line compability with DCS:BS to name a few.

Sure they may be re-using some models/textures/etc again but USD 15.00 is the same as ordering 1-2 beers in the bar and that sh_t not even tastes good (j/k - personal preference, prefer single malt or a good tequila myself).

Also I don't understand where you got the DCS:BS pricetag "USD 60.00" from? I payed USD 40.00 buying directly from their site?

That being said I still dislike the choosen DRM in DCS/FC 2.0 with it's limited installs but after reading up on ED's policies where they state that "if more activations are needed more are provided with proof of purchase" I'm willing to take their words for it and I'm sure ED isn't here to screw it's customers really....



Just my 0.20 SEK!

/KC

I'm no ED cheerleader, and was annoyed that none of the bug fixes released in FC were available for free for the original Lock-On, as I had no interest in flying the Su-25T. I also think some of the content in FC 2.0 falls under the category of bug fixes (revised/more accurate missile and aircraft performance, for example), which I think should be free.

However, given the additional content - new multiplayer code, revised graphics engine, revised/new sound engine, new UI, new mission builder, new missions - I think US$15 is pretty reasonable.

BS was announced as an addon. It was later when they called it DCS and said it would be stand alone.

One quote I found in 2 minutes of google searching:

"2- Although the original plan for the Ka-50 project was to just add the Ka-50, it has grown substantially greater than this. Be it a new mission editor system, advances in ground unit and helo unit AI, new AI units, etc., all of these have contributed to the time and resource budget necessary to complete the project given a constant-size staff. So, although this has pushed dates back, you will get a much more feature-rich product in the end."


Yes, they added some other improvements... doesn't mean you can charge more than full price for "a new sim". Well, you can, but that is lame.

Next thing we know, there will be ACAS (Advanced Combat Air Simulator), which will be an addon for DCS, only renamed and touted as a "brand new sim". And it will come with the $60 price tag.




$15? Point me to one link which had BS for $15 when it released. I recall it was $60.

And the "extra work" should have been included in the first release (like it was in FC). Make up your mind... is it a completely "new sim build from the ground up", or an expansion. Can't have it both ways.

Hell, we can even charge $15 for LOMOAC 3.0. Make it online compatible with FC/DCS.



I'd love to know what you have to do to make it work like that. Apparently, no one on SimHQ new when I asked months ago.



I can't afford a monitor that large or a system to keep up with the high resolutions. I just want to play with some AA with at least 1440x900.



2-3 km, per the in game labels/tags.



Don't recall asking for help. Just calling out how lame the FC 2.0 expansion is.

I decided I'd skip DCS: BS when I found out about the price increase and the incompatibility between it and older versions. The crazy DRM has kept me off of it to. I was going to buy it on release, but when news of the "brand new sim" came out, I quickly changed my mind.

FC 2.0 just makes it even less likely that I will pick up a reduced price version of DCS:BS... let alone FC 2.0.

Excuse me, the price charged was the pretty much the market price. What do you mean 'more than a full simulator'? It was charged as much as any game. You are talking non-sense.
The amount of work done for DCS was quite extensive, and the amount of work ongoing still is quite extensive.



I'm talking about FC 2.0, as in accordance to the thread title unless otherwise specified. What you think should have been included or not is irrelevant, as it measures nothing. I could go post that I think my car should have included a rocket engine, but I'm pretty sure I'd be laughed at if I went to rant about it like you are doing here. That judgment is not yours to make - you can choose not to buy, that's it. You can choose it isn't worth the money to you, but you can't devalue other people's work. You can pretend to, I suppose, but then I'll have to assume your time is worth nothing.



Nothing. Straight up install - in any of FC, FC2, and DCS:BS.



I have seen lamer rants, but not by much.

Disagreeing = ranting to you.

Interesting.

Flogger, I can certainly see why someone might interpret your series of posts here as ranting.

Keep it civil, everyone.

I hope you'll understand if we value your feedback with similar regard.

Perhaps true in your case, but not in general.

From a recent interview with one of ED's senior designers in Russia:



From the FC2.0 announcement FAQ :

Hey EB, any info on whether Mavericks will still be able to be taken out by SAMs?

I'm assuming you are referring to the issue as known in FC. In FC-2.0, the AI and weapons modeling is based on what we currently have in Black Shark, plus some tweaks and adjustments.

Yeah, the Mavericks getting hit by SAMs was a killer for me and one of the reasons I put it down.

If that gets fixed, I'll be back on board.

Also, EB, any chance we might maybe get some strike capability back? I know it's a little late in the game, and I'll live, but I miss hitting runways, parked aircraft, buildings, and other stuff like I used to be able to do in Flanker 2.5

Signed,

An Old Flankerite.

Thanks EB, the Mavericks and SAMs in FC is what I was referring to.

I am looking forward to this.
I always loved flying the Su-25. Even if i never really learned how everything worked in the T variant.

This is the best news in ages, the best flight sim ever getting fresh graphics! Thanks a miilion! Worth every cent.

Hi everyone,

Just got DCS:FC2 and installed it on two of my computers.
LOMAC runs very well on both of these machines but FC2 is unusable even on the LOW settings.
Only the A10 is flyable, everthing else chokes, very choppy.
DCS: Black Shark is usable on these computers.

I expected decent running on this machine:

Dell vostro 2510, XP SP3, 3 Gb ram, Nvidia GeForce 8400M GS 512 MB dedicated RAM, Intel Core 2duo T5670 @ 1.8Ghz.

Is there a problem with this program or is my machine way too light for this.
I have noticed 2 problems as well:

1) Modify joystick AXIS tune to get deadband and curvature for X,Y, RZ
At flight start Pause/Break key no longer works and machine is locked up, power switch reboot needed.
2) Logitech extreme 3d pro joystick throttle axis not recognized (Z axis), cannot get it
to control throttle, must use keys.

For the little that this offers over LOMAC, and in my case complete unuseability,
I consider this program to be buggy and a waste of my time.
I've removed it until I get a much more powerful machine.

Your machine is definitely under-spec ... it's not the game being buggy, it's your expectations

You need to lower a bunch of settings (in fact, run everything at low) ... the sweet spot for the LO/FC series has always been a 3Ghz processor.

Thank you GrayGhost.

Yes I agree, the fault is certainly mine trying to run on my low spec machine.
I will get a better machine when Battle of Brittain Storm of War releases in 2011.
Anything that runs that nicely should have no problem with FC2.

Best regards

I have not tried BoB, but you're most likely correct. Look for where component prices suddenly 'jump' ... just before the jump is the sweet spot (ie a huge jump between 3.0ghz and 3.3 as opposed to 2.6 to 3.0 for example). You'll get a nice machine buying that way, but it won't hurt if you go closer to the top, either.

IMO, ED needs to optimize their code better because little pauses when explosions go off just ruins the fluidity of their games. And I am talking about all of their titles and not any specific one of them. Well, excepting SU-27 but even that had issues with stuttering back in the day. Just so you know, I have i5 750@3.8ghz, 5870 vid card and 8GB of ram so it is not my hardware that is the culprit.