|
|
|
#3463125 - 11/27/11 02:12 PM
Re: FC3 Confirmed.
[Re: Paradaz]
|
Senior Member
Registered: 12/06/02
Posts: 2731
Loc: California
|
What's the 'new engine'?
Is it the one we have already paid for twice in DCS A10c and BS2?
This is not a valid concern. Yes, it is an updated engine, and yes you bought it a few times. But Gears of War was built on the same engine (UE3, with improvements/different builds) three times, and sold for full price. My point is that this is nothing new. What irks me is the expensive terrian addon, and the fact that it will split the MP community between those that do and those that don't have it. ED should take a look at what BIS is doing with ArmA 2. BIS released some DLC, however MP compatibility is still kept between people with and without the DLC. If ED wants to charge extra for DLC then that is fine, but it should be done in ways that did not split the MP community. EX) Sell some extra campaigns, new aircraft skins, ect. As for the realism, it is perfect in FC2, and I hope it stays around the same level. DCS seems too advanced for me to get into, and I find the level of realism great in FC2. I would gladly pay more for new flyable aircraft, like a Mirage 2000 and F-16, assuming they are $10 and under each.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#3463171 - 11/27/11 03:40 PM
Re: FC3 Confirmed.
[Re: Flogger23m]
|
Senior Member
Registered: 03/14/01
Posts: 3064
Loc: Fremont, CA
|
This is not a valid concern. Yes, it is an updated engine, and yes you bought it a few times. But Gears of War was built on the same engine (UE3, with improvements/different builds) three times, and sold for full price. My point is that this is nothing new.
...
As for the realism, it is perfect in FC2, and I hope it stays around the same level. DCS seems too advanced for me to get into, and I find the level of realism great in FC2. I would gladly pay more for new flyable aircraft, like a Mirage 2000 and F-16, assuming they are $10 and under each.
I agree with both of these. The first is an excellent argument. The second is exactly how I feel about this series. DCS looks interesting, but it's just too much for me at the moment. Lomac had a nice level of realism and simplification.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#3463352 - 11/27/11 09:17 PM
Re: FC3 Confirmed.
[Re: Nate]
|
SimHQ Redneck
Veteran
Registered: 07/03/03
Posts: 12369
Loc: N. Central Texas
|
First of all, having just bought DCS:A-10C, I can attest that FC2 is most certainly not hardcore. It's not even close. It's not even in the same category. The avionics (the normal systems, not the 'game' mode) are child's play compared to the level of complexity brought to us by A-10C. That bar was been unmistakably raised to a very high standard and no one will be reaching it anytime soon.
I've flown JF-15, JF-18, and Falcon 4.0: Allied Force. Those three didn't even really approach the level of difficulty offered by A-10C.
But, I've discovered something. Someone at ED put some serious programming time into making DCS:A-10C one of the most scalable products I've ever had the joy to fly. I'm hoping that the guys at ED put the same time into FC3, that's all. No one was more more disappointed when Jane's A-10 Warthog never came to fruition. Wags and Elf once said that the original code is sitting on a hard drive somewhere in Maryland, I believe. We finally have a sim that is BETTER than Jane's A-10 could have ever hoped to be.
I just hope that ED makes FC3 as scalable as they did A-10C. That would make it probably the most sought-after survey sim ever made in terms of being everything any simmer of any skill level would ever need.
It would make the Strike Fighters series obsolete.
_________________________
If you can't get everyone to get on board with you, scaring the living hell out of everybody is the next best way to get attention and feel needed. www.sixmanfootball.com
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#3463366 - 11/27/11 09:38 PM
Re: FC3 Confirmed.
[Re: Nate]
|
Senior Member
Registered: 12/17/03
Posts: 4317
|
While the operation of the aircraft is easier, the 'under the hood' stuff is getting more hardcore with every iteration (so far). Missiles, guns, bombs - all have received some sort of touch ups to act more realistically for example. FC2 aircraft parameters were tuned to make the aircraft fly as close to the real deal as the SFM can handle.
This isn't like HAWX where you don't even take gravity into account - you really need to know your stuff to fully appreciate the product, especially in a competitive environment.
_________________________
--
44th VFW
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#3465120 - 11/30/11 01:24 PM
Re: FC3 Confirmed.
[Re: PFunk]
|
Member
Registered: 02/28/07
Posts: 1396
Loc: Belmont, CA
|
...
It would make the Strike Fighters series obsolete.
Hmmmm... not quite. For some, maybe yes. But not for all. The biggest thing keeping me from switching from SF2 to FC2 is the lack of random missions or dynamic campaigns. The first flight sim I had was Graphic Sim's Hornet 2.0. That thing had 28 missions. That was it. And I couldn't have been happier with it. Korea added 28 more. Wow. 56 missions?!?! How could that ever get boring? And I knew every mission by heart... Fast forward to now, and the bottom line is that WoX/SF2, IL-2, and F4AF have simply set the bar higher in terms of reply-ability. All three of those have dynamic campaigns in some sense. I have FC2 and got to be pretty good with the A-10 in the training missions. I went to start the campaign and got shot down on the first mission by an SA-11. Wait... now what? I just go back and fly the exact same mission and know that the first thing I need to do is hit that SA-11? I just couldn't bring myself to do it. I didn't think it would be an issue until I tried it. I would read through SimHQ forums and think "what's with all these snobs that demand dynamic campaigns?" But then I realized I was starting to climb into the same boat. The bar has been/is being raised. So for me, the lack of random missions and dynamic campaigns is the one thing that keeps me from spending all my time in FC2. Plus there is a group of people (what % of simmers, I don't know) that are all about 50s/60s/70s stuff. So, of course, to completely make SF2 obsolete, FC2 would have to greatly expand it's aircraft selection and time frame. In that regard it will never top SF2. Slightly more on topic, I own FC2, but don't have either DCS title. So if I do want to upgrade it's just the one purchase for me. But I do understand why users would be annoyed that they need to pay for separate patches for each of the 3 titles if they want to keep them up to date. As someone totally unqualified to have an opinion on the matter, it seems like a user should have to pay for the upgrade once, and then it could apply to any module they have. Especially if we're talking about the DCS titles. My impression from the start is that they would be modular and could be simply added on top of each other. Now, whether that pricing/business model would work for ED is something I can't intelligently comment on.
_________________________
HP Pavillion Dv6t Quad Edition, Win7 (64), i7 2.0ghz, 1GB Radeon HD6770M, 6GB RAM, 640GB HD, TrackIR 4, Saitek AV8R
Currently Installed:
Rise of Flight
IL-2 DBW 3.0
FSX Acceleration
DCS / Flaming Cliffs 3
Mechwarrior Online
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#3465186 - 11/30/11 02:52 PM
Re: FC3 Confirmed.
[Re: malibu43]
|
I'm just a
Member
Registered: 07/10/05
Posts: 1420
Loc: CA
|
...
It would make the Strike Fighters series obsolete.
Hmmmm... not quite. For some, maybe yes. But not for all. The biggest thing keeping me from switching from SF2 to FC2 is the lack of random missions or dynamic campaigns. The first flight sim I had was Graphic Sim's Hornet 2.0. That thing had 28 missions. That was it. And I couldn't have been happier with it. Korea added 28 more. Wow. 56 missions?!?! How could that ever get boring? And I knew every mission by heart... Fast forward to now, and the bottom line is that WoX/SF2, IL-2, and F4AF have simply set the bar higher in terms of reply-ability. All three of those have dynamic campaigns in some sense. I have FC2 and got to be pretty good with the A-10 in the training missions. I went to start the campaign and got shot down on the first mission by an SA-11. Wait... now what? I just go back and fly the exact same mission and know that the first thing I need to do is hit that SA-11? I just couldn't bring myself to do it. I didn't think it would be an issue until I tried it. I would read through SimHQ forums and think "what's with all these snobs that demand dynamic campaigns?" But then I realized I was starting to climb into the same boat. The bar has been/is being raised. So for me, the lack of random missions and dynamic campaigns is the one thing that keeps me from spending all my time in FC2. Plus there is a group of people (what % of simmers, I don't know) that are all about 50s/60s/70s stuff. So, of course, to completely make SF2 obsolete, FC2 would have to greatly expand it's aircraft selection and time frame. In that regard it will never top SF2. Slightly more on topic, I own FC2, but don't have either DCS title. So if I do want to upgrade it's just the one purchase for me. But I do understand why users would be annoyed that they need to pay for separate patches for each of the 3 titles if they want to keep them up to date. As someone totally unqualified to have an opinion on the matter, it seems like a user should have to pay for the upgrade once, and then it could apply to any module they have. Especially if we're talking about the DCS titles. My impression from the start is that they would be modular and could be simply added on top of each other. Now, whether that pricing/business model would work for ED is something I can't intelligently comment on. +1 malibu If you were to look at the AAR section you will find tons of SF2 AAR's with hardly any at all from the DCS series. Sure it's the most complex sim out there but what can you do with it except fly the same missions over and over. A quick look at DCS and Lock on files shows 1 user made campaign for BS and 1 for A-10. Just a handful of single player missions as well. While I own both sims, I still get more enjoyment out of F4 BMS and SF2 than I will ever get out of the DCS series. For a lot of us sim pilots it's all about immersion and feel like you are in a combat zone. Until the DCS series manages to do this, my money stays in my wallet from here on.
_________________________
Alienware Area 51 X-58
Windows 7 64 bit Home edition
Intel I7 920 @ 3.5 ghz
6 gig 1600mhz corsair in triple channel
PowerColor 6970 PCS+ 2GB with factory OC
Intel 510 series 120gb SSD (boot drive)
Caviar Black 1 TB 7200 rpm
Onboard Soundmax sound
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#3465250 - 11/30/11 04:02 PM
Re: FC3 Confirmed.
[Re: Nate]
|
Member
Registered: 02/28/07
Posts: 1396
Loc: Belmont, CA
|
Not to continue to drift off topic, it is my humble opinion that if one were to take the FC2 level of avionics (slewable E/O weapons, engine start/stop, radar beam direction adjustment, etc...) and apply them to SF2...
... you would have the *greatest flight sim/game ever made*.
* - maybe exaggerated a litte, but I think it would certainly be one of the best.
Edited by malibu43 (11/30/11 04:03 PM)
_________________________
HP Pavillion Dv6t Quad Edition, Win7 (64), i7 2.0ghz, 1GB Radeon HD6770M, 6GB RAM, 640GB HD, TrackIR 4, Saitek AV8R
Currently Installed:
Rise of Flight
IL-2 DBW 3.0
FSX Acceleration
DCS / Flaming Cliffs 3
Mechwarrior Online
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#3465389 - 11/30/11 07:15 PM
Re: FC3 Confirmed.
[Re: Nate]
|
Two-speed Five-Blade Fan
Senior Member
Registered: 11/19/01
Posts: 3199
Loc: Canada
|
To be honest my biggest issues with the SF2 series are the relatively limited ground targets (in the original) and the way the campaign missions are structured (I don't get a feeling that I'm in a realistic warzone from the current mission generators). It would also have been great to have rocket dispersion. Accurately modeling which vacuum tube has failed is less important to me  Especially as it was a visual fighting era.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#3466570 - 12/02/11 11:33 AM
Re: FC3 Confirmed.
[Re: Nate]
|
Member
Registered: 08/12/08
Posts: 132
Loc: San Diego CA
|
Crossing my fingers that FC3 gets the same Random Mission Generator that came with A10C and BS2. If this were the case, I might actually pick it up again.
_________________________
______________________________________________________________
JonK - Keeping the PC chair warm since 1978
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#3466642 - 12/02/11 12:47 PM
Re: FC3 Confirmed.
[Re: PFunk]
|
Senior Member
Registered: 12/06/02
Posts: 2731
Loc: California
|
It would make the Strike Fighters series obsolete.
To me, FC2 already does. The SF series is very limited - no MP, no mission editor, poor mission creation options, ect. It feels like a very incomplete game. I did have my fun with the few titles I bought from the series though. LOMAC just needs to be opened up more to mods... there is the MIG-21 mod which is rather nice, but that has some issues. Considering that, perhaps it is opened up plenty. If ED doesn't do it I am sure the modding community will add more flyable planes.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Previous Topic
Index