The contrast to Strike Commander could hardly be bigger.

On the contrary, I think the Jane's name is there now for the same reason it popped up 15 years ago...the publication is known. Their reference books are ubiquitous to those who work in the defense industries and their other publications are well known and widely read.
The fact that there were a bunch of titles released over 10 years ago with that moniker is incidental and probably not very helpful marketing-wise.

That would be like Peter Jackson saying the reason the LOTR trilogy was made was people's love of the Bakshi cartoon from decades back and had little to do with the love of the novel.



The Jedi Master

The reason DCS sims are so dry is the fact there is no dynamic campaign engine.I shelved Black Shark and Lock on because of it pretty quickly.No fluid battlefield and an ability to role play a bit with rank and it collects dust pretty fast.

Just look at EECH and the Falcon series.This is one of the main reasons they are still very popular today and comunity upgrades continue to flow.Maybe developers should get some motivation from that but these days many just don't listen.Luckily,Combat helo will have the same sort of campaign engine.

i think the community modding flourishes there because extensive modding is relatively easy. not the case with dcs. the lack of dynamic campaign and role play elements to the degree of eech and falcon can be made up for by other areas dcs excels in. unfortunately such attempts to further bolster the game's strengths is limited by lack of modding.

But both Falcon 4, EECH and DCS are just too damn complex for an entry-level or casual player.

Completely not true. The avionics and flight models are completely scalable for the casual player. There is no one more casual than I am, and I have a blast with it.

Dude, the casual customer is someone who wants something that looks like Ace Combat but a bit more realistic and runs out of the box. Neither you or I qualify as entry-level or casual users in the accepted sense of the terms. It doesn't matter that the avionics or flight models in hardcore sims are scalable because they are designed as simulators first and foremost and not games. Besides, both EECH and F4 are both over a decade old and require lots of mods to make them look anything approaching decent. So that's a major turnoff as far as casual users are concerned. As far as DCS is concerned, it's whole reason for Existing is that it is a super-complex simulation of the A-10. Scale away the complexity and you lose the whole point of the game.

Again. Strike Commander has been mentioned as a good entry-level sim. Go play it again, then play something like F4, then stop to consider why Strike Commander is a good entry-level sim:

First of all, it has excellent production values and is plot-based. Casual users and especially those accustomed to console games like campaigns that have a definite direction to them.

Second, the combat feels pretty authentic (ie limited weapons, quasi-real physics, real avionics etc) but is cleverly designed so that distances are much closer than in real life, so you get more of the in-your-face action than boring "look at symbols" BVR.

There are many more examples of games that did these things, like Jetfighter III, Thunderhawk, Wings.

So a good entry-level/casual sim needs to be designed as game first, simulation second.

Since EA owns the rights to Strike Commander, when do we see an announcement?

My guess is when hell freezes over. If a big publisher would do it, it'd probably be Ubisoft.

And that is the part I cannot understand. SC was a decent hit for Origin. It has the format to appeal to a wide audience. Why wouldn't EA want to do a Strike Commander 2? The brand name is solid, and they have the rights already.

I can't imagine Ubisoft doing much semi- or light-sim anything going forward, but maybe I'll be proven wrong on that.