Thanks guys! Good information. Thanks for the clarifications, too, Nate! You get around!

Man, there is no way in Hades that I am dumping Falcon! That would be for me like dumping IL2 after discovering Rise of Flight. I love hearing "Welcome Back!" from tower when I return from a hairy but successful mission. I still haven't found a sim experience that quite matches that. No, BMS stays until somebody out there realizes that the "smoke and mirrors" aspect of a dynamic campaign bothers only the developer, not the player.

It doesn't help that Aeyes has released a new cockpit for BMS either. lol.

Dumping Falcon is harder than it looks.

Why don't those guys (BMS + Aeyes) make a DCS: F-16C then?




The Jedi Master

Because there is more to BMS than "just the F-16." Even if you put an F-16 in DCS, it won't replace BMS unless something in the "core" of DCS changes.

If the dynamic campaign is so critical (I think it is) why not have a kickstarter campaign? ED sets the goal of what it needs to undertake such a massive effort. Say $50,000 (just an example). You can choose what level you want to pay, and for a minimum amount you get the mod when it is released. Then it becomes put up or shut up for the community.

I am not suggesting we front all the development, but if a sizeable portion can be easily funded, that would send ED a clear message.

What do you think Nate?

Better idea:

You get a couple guys that can show they have the skills to make a good DC. You then incorporate in some fashion (whatever is convenient, depends by country of course), contact Eagle Dynamics, and get licensed. Then do kickstarter to fund yourselves, quit your day jobs, and make it happen.

Not sure why you are asking me - I'm only a tester

Myself, I'll wait for EDs current DC plans to mature.

Nate

You realize for those of us flying ED sims since Flanker 1 we don't honestly believe that. After 15 years, I don't think we should be expected to wait any longer. Now if you're saying they didn't have any REAL DC plans until very recently, and therefore they were lying about making a DC earlier, that's different. Or if you're saying they've made and repeatedly abandoned plans over the past 15 years, that's again something different.
I remember VERY well the pre-LOMAC release discussions about the DC for it. The promise was it would be post-release, or part of an addon like the Flanker 2.5's MiG-29K was. Then it was going to be that other guy making a "plug in" DC for extra money IIRC. Years passed and that plan just evaporated.

When Black Shark was announced and the existence of a DC was denied for it, I threw in the towel. I no longer ask about it. I don't pine for it. I accept ED won't do it. For whatever reason, their vision of how to do a DC is unattainable for them. Others have done it, including Thirdwire (which is done by ONE man), but I guess in typical DCS style they have a massive plan they want to do and if they can't manage THAT then they're not doing it at all. Fine, whatever. If one appears, great. I have ZERO anticipation for it at this point.

I think the phrase is "left money on the table". That's what ED has done IMO for the past 10 years. DCS has its place, but it's not what a majority of simmers want. Majority of HARDCORE simmers, maybe, but like all gaming genres there are more casual ones (who also are rarely vocal but do speak with their money) than hardcore ones. Where they would've done better is expanding Flaming Cliffs.

I thought LOMAC/Flaming Cliffs was perfect. The perfect blend between fidelity, realism, and fun. A-10C and even BS can get a bit daunting at times with the workload. Even the Su-25T can be a bear in complex combat situations. The F-15C, Su-27, Su-33, MiG-29, A-10A...they were just FUN to fly. If you have 30 mins, you can get something done in LOMAC. Not in DCS, good luck even getting to your target in that amount of time.

FC2 being "FC1 with the 1.13 patch in the DCS terrain with BS MP ability" was IMO a shot too low. Maybe it was all they could manage at the time, but FC3 being FC2 for DCS World REALLY sounds too low. Sure, I want FC in DCS World, and I'll likely buy it (despite having bought LOMAC, FC1, AND FC2) even if it's indeed nothing more than "FC2 for DCS World". But I think each new FC release should've added more flyable planes. F-15E, F/A-18, F-16, F-14, MiG-31, ANYTHING. The LOMAC level was fine and I think it would've sold great and not scared people off for being too hard.

Unfortunately, that's the downside to the 3rd party devs being allowed into DCS. Now that they can all do it, one plane at a time, we'll be charged for each plane we want at a higher fidelity than most really need. ED won't be expanding the FC line. I think releasing sets of planes at a lower fidelity that integrate together, like Thirdwire does with SF2 titles, would've been great. I mean, that's what CA is...FC for ground units.




The Jedi Master

ED always had plans for a DC and has not given up. However, there are other things at play and frankly, a DC has not been possible. There are plenty of reasons, they're all either technical or business (technical tends to follow business).



Actually, they survived. If they dove into DC creation they'd have bought the farm. And that again, is for technical and business reasons.



And that is exactly why this level of simulation is allowed in DCSW.



Actually, you can easily do this in DCS, with DCS aircraft. It's all about your style of play.



That's because you're blind to a whole bunch of other things that these upgrades did for the game. I won't be rehashing them here, you can revisit old threads yourself.



There are no downsides. There will be a good number of aircraft released at slightly more than FC level (you might see more animation in the cockpit, etc), as well as those with much higher fidelity. You're making a mountain out of molehill.

CA isn't FC for ground units. That was put in there because people wanted the capability, but the point of CA is high-level tactical and strategic control of assets you would normally not command.