Okay, granted that a fighter pilot's life is 99% training, but how many training scenarios does he have? versus how many training scenarios are in DCS?

Is there a repository of DCS [insert aircraft name here] training missions?

Also, most of my "training" experience has been in the A-G role with the A-10C, which is really easy to set up as the targets are either stationary or just moving along at a steady clip on a more-or-less straight line. How about training scenarios that are A-A in nature? Like a 1v1 dogfight from a defensive/offensive/neutral position? Or 2v1/1v2 fights? Or 2v2 fights? Or 2vX fights?

Bottom line -- even if "DCS is the same" as RL in terms of "you can do training," RL training can be so much more varied that it's not really boring.

why DCS is less popular than P3D or FSX ? fewer websites.

if it were not for SimHQ and LockOnFiles, outside the consumer support forum and Virtual Sqns , DCS practically would not exist.

the only website that hosts downloads is LockOnFiles - and we do it with despite the consumer support forum censoring links to our site, a way they found to make us less popular and less viable.

(unique among developers, DCS works hard to sabotage a website supporting them)

Combatace gave it a try but their focus is now elsewhere.

there are a dozen big P3D-FSX websites/stores supporting our community

DCS : 2 (and they are at odds with both)

is DCS boring ? no , I managed to make several packs of missions for Lock On/ LOFC and entertained myself a lot doing them and flying them , there are several payware campaigns around, did not buy any, but they must be worth a try.

in my opinion, it all boils down to dismal community/mod maker management.

I agree with everything you said except for the quoted part above.

You see, one of the biggest advantages or even biggest selling point from FSX (as well as P3D and X-Plane) is that FSX models the ENTIRE planet - I want to fly over Canada, fine! I want to fly over Portugal, fine! I want to even fly over the Black Sea region like for example above Georgia, I can do it as well in FSX (as well as P3D and X-Plane)!
With DCS you can only fly over a single rather small map (well two, if you own Nevada) which covers only a very small part of the entire Black Sea region.

And this reason ALONE and not to mention others such as the already mentioned ATC (which could in theory be added to DCS in the future) is enough for DCS not being a viable alternative to FSX (as well as P3D or X-Plane).

And I don't think that adding the entire planet to DCS will ever be a possibility...

And even that is hampered. So much is locked down preventing the expansion of mods.
Or, even worse the really good mods arent shared and kept private. But shown in screenshots to torment people.

I look back at the TW series and how successful it was due to the modders, when the dev gave up.

Thirdwire and TK were in my opinion a benchmark of community management and positive attitude, a pity it ended like it did.

mod making support in DCS is terrible

form a skin maker perspective it is all the way downhill

we reached a point where I get into arguments about why should they start releasing templates in time and get in return a "they are too busy right now to release templates"

and it gets worse, they released the F-86 and MiG-15 templates years late and compressed it in a way that is so sloppy that I could not believe my eyes.

In a way, though, TK has the same problem...business management. He needed someone higher up to tell him what direction to take with his series. He could code, but he didn't have a good enough grasp on his market to spend his resources on what would make him successful.

He blew away too much on things that didn't give him a big enough return. He apparently nearly went broke making the mission builder/campaign creator and the Iceland terrains, because of the work behind the scenes, but the front-facing presentation was nothing spectacular. Yeah, they worked, they worked great. But Iceland looked emptier than it should and the tools were hardly flashy enough to make people buy it in droves.

We all wanted the F-14, and it took him forever but he finally gave it to us. Then he gave up because he spent far too much on it (his best selling ever and it still didn't make enough!) and found he could make more and spend less on mobile crap.
While I supported his mobile efforts as a way to bankroll the PC side, I was very sad when it supplanted them.


The Jedi Master

If I made a mission, I could not "fly" it unless it was a training mission. Making a "story" mission with triggers and scripted events, I'd have flown that mission numerous times testing it so much so that I cannot then fly it with my mates pretending not to know how the "story" unfolds. It just kills it for me. It's like watching a movie that you've written, cast, directed, and edited... it's fun watching it unfold but you can't sit there and pretend you don't know how it ends.

I agree with you 100%. Actually I already agreed with you on the post you quoted

I'm not a fan of that either, that's why we share a good 90% (at least) of not only mods (range objects) but documentation and the NTTT mission Stuka is/has been building to replicate the actual ranges.

These aren't even available internally but to give you an idea what Noodle (range object developer) and Stuka have been up to....

http://www.476vfightergroup.com/showthread.php?5205-476vFG-3D-Models-Preview-Thread

Thanks Snoopy. Glad I'm not the only one who felt this way. Not everyone has the same gift. I can skin some, but not at the level of Tom. Others can code and add things most cant. A community will share and prosper. I guess we've got too many "my d*ck is bigger types". One guy had on his server title "playing with toys, you wish you had" I was like F-you buddy. What a tool.

Thanks to you and the 476th for the range stuff. It's very appreciated and adds immensely.

-Jeff

I was a tester / mod for thirdwire, TK himself said the Core Engine behind EaW/SFP1/WoV/WoE/WoI/FE/SF2:WoX/SF2:NA reached it's life end, and coding a new one from the ground up would be too costly for the type of company he was.


During WoX DX9 Development, they spent more time developing Community Wanted features than anything else, and then when the engine was hitting limits and the lockdowns on CAT files and DLLs started being put in to stop people from stealing the Models, people got sour w/ him.

Stealing models to use in a different game?

I Assume.

Can't imagine what other game they'd use those models in.



The Jedi Master

TK and a few of us found his models in GTA Game Mods, as well as BF/1/2/V Mods and FS2004 Mods.

One certainly gets the sense that modding is... barely tolerated, let alone encouraged.

Any scraps of examples or information is usually out-of-date and from 2012 (and, usually, written by the community anyway), and anyone who actually knows any answers are either behind NDA, don't leave documentation after leaving the community in frustration (fair enough) or barely struggling to get by themselves.

Take for example the 3DS-2014-only modelling tools, which is hard enough to get hold of as a trial, and impossible to buy, now. Aerofly FS2, a new property from an undeniably smaller company that had unexpected popularity, just released their SDK tools: It supports 3DS 2012,12,13,14,15,16 and Cinema 4D, which whilst none of them free at least includes available software.

I've actually seen people arguing that it is a good thing that they are so closed off about modding because then you would have "lots of low quality mods", and "non-serious mods" whereas I really believe a modding community thrives on it's breadth - both as examples of the crazy things people can do, and because otherwise the really skilled people aren't going to bother pushing so hard against the tide.

+1

Mods alone have caused me to purchase games from the developer. TK with Strike Fighters 2 is a perfect example. I purchased it so I could play a mod and I actually had to buy a couple expansions since the mod required it.

I fly SF2 still, but I don't think I have ever flown it bone stock. TK can thank the modders for helping them sell their product.

I guess I missed the "scenery" part of your post.

Anyway, when I see someone "hinting" that DCS could attract FSX player or even as I read a couple of times in the past that DCS could become the "next FSX", I just look at the planet Earth size "map" of FSX and then at the small Black Sea map (the same applies to Nevada as well) of DCS and I just say: NO WAY! (and I simply don't need any other reason!)

SF was great because TK understood how important mod making is.

the future of modding in this community is not great if you consider how often updates demolish mods,

and we have updates that leave skins with white patches because someone forgot to test any made by the community

you have the horrible templates that Belsimtek released (F-86, MiG-15, Su-24, Su-24M) and the messed up F-5E template , not to mention the none to be had Spitfire (*) template or hard to find Mirage 2000 template (I use for DCS the template made for the P3D M2K)

all this leads me to believe that the developer is sending a message to the community : if you are serious about doing quality work, don't bother.

the F-86 template that Belsimtek released is specially odd - and if you can compare it with the outstanding one that Milviz released, it is incredibly bad.

thankfully there are a lot of alternatives in P3D , otherwise it would be very frustrating.

(*) not released maybe because the model is not finished, eventually, in 2 or 3 years time it will be ready for release.

TW demolished mods the last year or so before TW Went Quiet on the PC Front.

Templates are released when they know the model will not change anymore.

The F-86F Changed dozens of times texture names and uvw wise..