LOMAC's opened? you're joking? Last time I checked there was zero new terrains, zero new cockpits and no customized avionics...

BTW SF2 had now mission editor, comes with expansion pack 2 or is available as separate DLC.

It's unmoddability of LOMAC FC 2.0 that keeps me from playing it more

I remember when patch version 1.02 of this sim came out and everyone was ecstatic just to have fps tweaks so they could run it on their 256mb systems...

I have been playing Lomac and its many "updates" since the title was available for order not so long ago (well I hope it was not so long ago :-D ). Although the updates and support has been sparse and lacking at times, especially with the loss of a carrier buddy tanking with the S-3 many patches ago, the multilayer and the 3d models and flight characteristics are about the only things that have kept ,e engaged with this sim for many years.

Yes I have been playing Lomac for sometime now, but let's face it...

The gameworld is somewhat sterile.

The AI is fairly dumb.

There has been sparse developer support. (one patch and that's it)

There are no coms whatsoever (unless you are in multiplayer on voice).

No true sense of AWACs, GCI, etc.

No real separation of bad or good territory or airspace, just places where you don't fly because of S-300s.

The campaigns have no "point".

The single missions are there because???

The mission editor, although useful, still lacks a lot of basic functionality.

The list goes on and on, but frankly the only thing that has been keeping this series going has been the "eye candy", multiplayer, and "eye candy" enhancements by the sim community (which in themselves show the dedication and skill of the modders, because "tweaking" the Lomac world is worse than getting service at the DMV during lunch hour.)

No sim "code" will ever be prefect, and basic rule of thumb is you can't please everyone.

But Lomac (and a good chunk of the DCS series) will always be known as the sim (or sims) that was (were) missing "something".

There is part of me that hope FC3 may improve part of the Lomac. Unfortunately, based on precedent, I believe we may just see another minor "eye candy" update just like all previous incarnations, and to a certain extent DCS, with more convoluted menus/interfaces added and previously functioning features "broken".

If the developer were to focus on fixing or adding one feature to Lomac besides "eye candy" improvements, I believe they could take an sim with some decent and ok aspects, and make it truly great.

I suggest looking at what has been accomplished. There's no sim that doesn't have 'something' missing, but DCS/FC are sims which are improving an moving forward, and there has been a huge lot of stuff added besides 'eye-candy' (did you know by the way that flying is a completely visual thing most of the time?).

FYI, focusing on 'one feature' isn't productive for anyone.

Last time I checked people started and stopped terrain development. Here's a hint why: As the capabilities of PC's grew, and the airframes simulated were understood better, larger areas were called for, with more accuracy to the terrain modeling.

It turns out that it's quite a large task, and few people even bothered undertaking it, let alone finishing it given the huge volume of work required.

After all of these years, I have focused on what has been added to Lomac and the DCS series; however, most of what has been accomplished have been minor "eye candy" updates or superb 3rd party addons and tweaks (ie Work by the SimMod Team or GYS).


Of course, and I wholeheartedly understand the issues that developers, scripters, modders, etc. have to face. You can't find and fix everything, and you can't please everyone. They work very hard at what they do (be it for pay, breaking even, or even freeware); however, if one pays for software can they expect some sort of support or update (even paid) at a later date? Or like, leave it, or wait till the developer repackages years down the road?


Not that I minded the key and HOTAS bindings in Lomac, I had to wait until Blackshark to get a clickable and functioning cockpit.
FC2 brought some sorely needed FM and weapons improvements for the F-15 (to the anger of Russian aircraft flyers, but most of the major improvements were "eye candy" eye appeal, and visual damage model for the flyable aircraft. Now how many years was it between 1.01 and FC2 again???


Unless there are inclement weather conditions...


Exactly, which is why one can hope that with FC3 and any later DCS installments one can only hope the focus will be beyond aesthetics...

In other words, you do not actually have a clue of what you're talking about. You actually haven't bothered to make a thorough comparison. I have no idea what you're basing your opinion on. It's like you played each one for an hour and didn't bother to look further.



ED has added major features with each iteration.



Yeah, right, the 'major' improvements were eyecandy, because it isn't like we spend huge amounts of time tuning missiles and FM's on BOTH sides (although some chose to ignore this, or whine at their favorite pet peeve). It isn't like major improvements were made to the AI or the Mission Editor either, right - and hey, how about that new sound engine.



And? IMC is happens, but flying is still a majorly visual job. That's why instrument flight is considered hard.



As they have done every single time, even if you can't see that. It's ok, people notice whatever they want to notice.

I don't agree with you here. It's clearly about workflow that require hand building terrain in 3ds max. An expensive piece of software, and forgive me harsh words, but very stupid workflow.

LockOn and DCS are very closed sims when compared to others available. Take a look how many maps are made for Il2, Strike Fighters, Arma series, EECH, hell, even for such niche sim like Condor. I won't start about FSX sceneries. For LockOn/DCS there are none. We are flying over Crimea since Flanker.

It's a good sim, I have most of ED's sims and fly them very often, especially Black Shark. But come on, you can't call it 'open'. Swapping 3d meshes with prettier ones, or flying F-14 with Su-33 cockpit doesn't count for me.

I for one thought this discussion was about the linage of Lomac and what to expect with FC3 and newer DCS modules. However; if it is not, then I am ready and waiting to talk about whatever you would like good sir.


There is respecting a difference pf "opinion" and there is what you want (or demand in certain cases) the other person to say....


I suggest you take time and re-read my original post, if you would like, I would gladly take the time to you sit down and explain things. I truly do not mind, for it happens to the best of us...


Next time I log onto a server, I will be sure to bring my stopwatch and timelogbook.


Could you elaborate on some of these features?


Slammers that go 10nm before losing energy in Flamming Cliffs instead of 5NM like in 1.02, I will concede that (although another update after 1.02 would have been use before wait X amount of years to purchase a new product.)


Ahh yes, the same fly straight and pump chaff and flare intervals whenever the AI "sees" a ground radar turned on. That feature has been present since the release dating back to the days when P3 processors were in vogue.


Oh you mean, the great sound mods developed and distributed by third party users?


Never said it didn't, I enjoyed flying Walmis's or GYS's F-15s through the early morning Georgian fog as the next person, but I'm not sure what that has to do with much of anything? Nonetheless, you raised the issue, so I digress.



Duly noted...



I do apologize good sir, for I should have had the foresight to notice and like whatever is you would want me to notice and like.

I would have to agree with you somewhat here empeck. A lot of issues with Lomac (through its long linage) has been the struggle it has been for modders and developers to even add skins to the game. Simply put, when something is added to the Lomac universe, mostly functions solely was as a "swap". Modman has helped drastically, and with subsequent products the options have been expanded (ie supposedly you are able to have an infinite about of skins for user aircraft), although I am high skeptical of this.

I have had direct conversations with people who were doing terrain add-ons, and it more about the amount of work, difficulty of finding adequate meshes and reasonable textures, not to mention populating roads, railroads, buildings etc. than workflow - but perhaps I wasn't told everything.



I didn't call it open. There's always room for improvement. I think Nevada might be a hint.