#4406176 - 02/19/1809:11 PMHow to make successful airplane simulator game 101
Joined: May 2011 Posts: 258IceecI
1975-1997 R.I.P.
IceecI
1975-1997 R.I.P.
Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 258
How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
1: Make sure graphics are good, to mislead people with eye candy, so less people see games' faults.
2:Make sure that game has multiplayer, doesn't matter how good or working, just make sure people can kill each other. 3:Make sure not pay too much attention to details (waste of time, that time can be spent more efficiently building new sellable stuff in the game) and in online kill fest no one really notices some faults, be it flight model or any other plane 'feature'.
4:Make sure to keep multiplayer working to keep getting more new customers, killing other people in game afterall, is what gives players a satisfaction and happiness. Other game faults, such as planes' systems, flight models etc. are all secondary issues and they don't need any special attention.
5:Make sure that all planes are equal at performance in one way or another (missile, guns etc.), since no one really cares the realism in 'realistic' flight simulator. This also ensures that players with less experience can keep up with the more experienced players, more experienced players don't have any right to be better than new players.
6:If there are some other developers after money too and want to share their creations, don't be afraid to ask a cut of their profits, cause without you they wouldn't exist, right? Asking assurance of their skills isn't necessary and would be arrogant, so just let them do their thing and don't be picky when it comes to their products and accept them as part of your game if needed, doesn't matter if they are faulty, people will blame the developers of them, not you - and you still get paid.
7:In rare cases when you are going to correct some faults, make sure that you delay fixes as much as you can, so that other developers have enough time to bring out new planes and models, that makes sure that people will buy them, since no one wants to fly a broken plane - so instead old (now deliberately) broken plane, they buy the new planes in hope that they work . They only notice the faults in them later after it's too late.
8:Make sure to keep game's features always somehow broken. That ensures that you always have something to 'fix', then when 'fixing' the bug, introduce another bug at the same time. Since you are 'fixing' the first bug, the new one rarely gets attention and makes sure that you can repeat this thing again. Goal is to make people think that you are fixing something, when it's actually just the opposite. This also gives other developers more time to reach their goals.
9:Make sure to limit customer's ownership of the bought products as much as possible, in any means necessary.
10:Remember that morality and capitalism doesn't match with each other and try to make money as fast as you can. In case your means and actions create some negative feedback and such, provide promises of better future for the game (for example that bugs are being taken care of, nothing to worry about, etc.)
11:Hire some people who can efficiently 'brainwash' people so, that they think what they are buying is actually a good buy. Also make sure that these individuals have very good skills at misleading, suppressing unwanted truths and that they have such an ego which prevents them from being guilty of any actions they have taken. When it comes to any Internet forum activity such individuals need to be carefully chosen.
12:In case of problems relating to bad sales or such, have a backup plan; for example providing lower prices for products for limited time, ensures that people will be convinced of your goodwill and that you're 'giving', not taking. Profit gaining of such actions can be corrected later by increasing the sale prices and that leads to a situation where you actually have more customers and still get more profit even with temporary sales.
13:Deny all negative feedback about your game. Customers can't know anything since you are afterall, the one(s) who make(s) the game.
Give a man fish and he gets food, give a man a fishing rod and he asks for another one.
Inline advert (2nd and 3rd post)
#4406220 - 02/20/1812:30 AMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
No, your title should be "How to make a frustrating and hopelessly flawed airplane simulator 101". Because DCS is far from a successful airplane simulator. ED may still be in business but that is down to their private/military contracts not the crap they toss to the likes of you and I. Several years of development for every module? They would need to sell a #%&*$# ton of modules to make any form of profit on 3-5 years work. Remind me again how many modules are actually finished? They are still working on most of them or so we're told. So continual work on modules that are long past their sales peak. Very little profit in that. A successful or competent company would not still be working on a module that was no longer bringing in any money. A successful, competent company would have finished them long ago so that every sale was profit. Not these clowns. Throw out unfinished crap under the "beta" umbrella tell everybody "nothing is ever finished were continually updating and improving our products" we're supposed to be impressed with that. I'm not. I want a product as advertised when i buy it not 5 years later. The way things are, it it weren't for their private contracts, these clowns would fold before any of us actually got what we paid for.
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
#4406239 - 02/20/1802:23 AMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
And i'm still waiting for EDs efforts to finish. Lucky, for you, you havent paid me for my efforts. Unfortunately, for me, I have paid ED for theirs.
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
#4406264 - 02/20/1808:36 AMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
Joined: May 2011 Posts: 258IceecI
1975-1997 R.I.P.
IceecI
1975-1997 R.I.P.
Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 258
Well in defense of ED, I have to say that they probably planned to try, they just couldn't get that far.
Give a man fish and he gets food, give a man a fishing rod and he asks for another one.
#4406290 - 02/20/1801:21 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
Playing a different game, which i do, doesn't change the fact that I and others have paid for products that remain unfinished after soooo many years. It doesnt change the fact that ED are incapable of delivering their part of a financial transaction.
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
#4406376 - 02/20/1805:32 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
It's never been a big issue for me, you transfer the license then the new person can use the module. I've done it 4 or 5 times in the last 2 years.
You and the other party are breaking your eula in that case. It states quite clearly on your account that "Sharing and trading of modules is a violation of the EULA and is not longer possible." You better hope sith huckabee sanders isnt reading this. You may find you can no longer use your modules.
Last edited by Johnny_Redd; 02/21/1803:04 PM.
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
#4406546 - 02/21/1803:40 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
A couple of users that frequently post here claim they're pointing out the flaws in DCS as a way to standup to poor policies & quality in flight simulators as a whole. Interestingly, when something actually illegal is done by a flight sim dev days pass without comment from them. It will be interesting to see how they react, as a few of them have claimed they do play FSX/P3D.
From the sounds of it, I am hearing some mixed things about the product itself. Some claim it is horribly modeled while others seem to think it is fairly accurate and one of the better FSX addons. Anyone familiar with FSL and how their quality is? Apparently the AVSIM forums are deleting all criticism for it and that is standard procedure over there going back some years?
#4406647 - 02/22/1812:32 AMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: VF9_Longbow]
A couple of users that frequently post here claim they're pointing out the flaws in DCS as a way to standup to poor policies & quality in flight simulators as a whole. Interestingly, when something actually illegal is done by a flight sim dev days pass without comment from them. It will be interesting to see how they react, as a few of them have claimed they do play FSX/P3D.
From the sounds of it, I am hearing some mixed things about the product itself. Some claim it is horribly modeled while others seem to think it is fairly accurate and one of the better FSX addons. Anyone familiar with FSL and how their quality is? Apparently the AVSIM forums are deleting all criticism for it and that is standard procedure over there going back some years?
FSLabs products are absolutely top notch. The modeling is extremely detailed, people complaining that it is horribly done don't know what they are talking about. The systems are very advanced. The actual modeling of things like fuel burn, handling characteristics is not yet perfect, but give it time and it will be as close as it's going to get using the P3D engine..
Unfortunately, I am not sure about the future of FSLabs anymore. This is not the first time the owner has been in trouble for including payloads of questionable legality with his aircraft installers - he did it before with the PMDG MD-11 about 10 years ago. Unfortunately, this time he went way overboard and may face jail time for it.
#4406792 - 02/22/1806:23 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: VF9_Longbow]
Force10 I'm just a Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,183
CA
Originally Posted by VF9_Longbow
Unfortunately, this time he went way overboard and may face jail time for it.
Agreed.
Harvesting login and passwords is the highest form of Malware and is heavily frowned upon despite the intentions. I'm just amazed nobody on the team thought about this while creating it.
Asus Z87 Sabertooth motherboard Windows 7 64 bit Home edition Intel I5 4670K @ 4.4 ghz 16 gig 1866mhz Corsair Vengence Pro memory EVGA GTX 970 Superclocked 4gb Video Card Intel 510 series 120gb SSD (boot drive) Samsung 840 1TB SSD Onboard Realtek sound ______________________________________________________
Oddball from Kelly's Heroes: "If we're late, it's cause we're dead"
#4406794 - 02/22/1806:33 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: Force10]
Unfortunately, this time he went way overboard and may face jail time for it.
Agreed.
Harvesting login and passwords is the highest form of Malware and is heavily frowned upon despite the intentions. I'm just amazed nobody on the team thought about this while creating it.
I suspect that the thinking was that nobody would notice, which was really unrealistic in this day and age.
Notice how the community manager suggests "taking a break"
Funny stuff. Almost as funny as my response to Skatezilla asking me to find Carmen Sandiego in my hawk thread...but not quite.
So the suggested fix to all of the issues in 2.5 is to roll back to 1.5? ah yep again 'funny stuff'
Perhaps if a 'community manager' is going to comment on consumer opinions then perhaps lock the thread or merge it into the abyss. Maybe the CM should think about a response but not give an actual response. There Sobek....relay that message back to your loved ones,
I just can not be FKD enlarging the photos...think of it as though I have done half a job like ED\TFC\BelsimTek and the likes.
Edit: fixed
Last edited by Winfield; 02/23/1809:54 PM.
#4407018 - 02/23/1806:10 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
Its funny how folk are saying just wait. Thats all folk have been doing for the last 4-5 years. 'Its a beta just wait until its a release' 'Its constantly being worked on, nothing is ever "released"' It's all a bit of a scam isn't it? I guess the 1.5 is still there so folk cant ask for their money back now that their purchases are unusable in 2.5
DCS Kickstarter Wags July 2014 "In this July 2014 update, the primary news is in regards to the restructured backer rewards. After a careful review of the older system under RRG, we found it financially unattainable." Wags October 2017 "the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog."
#4407045 - 02/23/1809:47 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: cichlidfan]
Which he should have realized right after posting. Go figure.
Another post that holds no merit or added value to the topic at hand.....Go figure.
#4407060 - 02/23/1811:27 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
Joined: Mar 2003 Posts: 3,922Paradaz
Senior Member
Paradaz
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,922
UK
I've got 32GB RAM and can confirm that DCS 2.5 still runs like a dogs arse. Remember all that testing that was done on 2.5 before the beta release?......no, me neither.
2.5 was clearly just a rush release just to get 'something out there'....just like the original 2.0 was. Whilst two of the dev streams are now combined, the intent was clearly just to continue working on it whilst the community continue to find all the problems that ED can't be bothered to find themselves.
Still, they continue to push the payware campaigns in their latest newsletter and not a single mention of any progress or intent around the 2.5 'release'. Same old story. INCOMPETENT
On the Eighth day God created Paratroopers and the Devil stood to attention.
#4407072 - 02/24/1812:51 AMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: Paradaz]
Joined: May 2011 Posts: 258IceecI
1975-1997 R.I.P.
IceecI
1975-1997 R.I.P.
Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 258
You just made a lot of dogs' arses angry by comparing DCS to them.
I'm running R7 @ 3.8GHz which is almost twice as fast as my earlier 8370 @ 4.3 GHz accompanied with Crosshair VI (old: Gigabyte 2 y old mobo) & 32GB 3000MHz RAM (old: 32GB 1666MHz) & 1060 6GB @ 2.1/8.7 (old: R9 390) and I get worse performance with DCS than before. Earlier I had all settings maxed out and it was all good, now when using newer hardware, MSAA 4x already starts to drop framerates to unaccetable levels. They also said that the performance should be similar with 2.5 than before, but the heck it is, not to mention the broken lighting, unfinished cockpits for the lighting (which they should have made compatible with the new lighting already before they release the 2.5 - Heck even F-5E cockpit textures missing mipmaps! Had to correct that myself, took 1 minute of my precious time, apparently that was too hard task for BST to accomplish.) So yea sure invest hardware, that'll run game better ... after they have optimized it for 21th century hardware, maybe I check back after 10 years and see how it's working, who knows there might be a working ground radars by then.
But, like they said they have bright future ahead, sure yea, they just didn't define whether it's near future, or far, very, very distant future.
Originally Posted by Paradaz
I've got 32GB RAM and can confirm that DCS 2.5 still runs like a dogs arse. Remember all that testing that was done on 2.5 before the beta release?......no, me neither.
2.5 was clearly just a rush release just to get 'something out there'....just like the original 2.0 was. Whilst two of the dev streams are now combined, the intent was clearly just to continue working on it whilst the community continue to find all the problems that ED can't be bothered to find themselves.
Still, they continue to push the payware campaigns in their latest newsletter and not a single mention of any progress or intent around the 2.5 'release'. Same old story. INCOMPETENT
Last edited by IceecI; 02/24/1812:57 AM.
Give a man fish and he gets food, give a man a fishing rod and he asks for another one.
#4407074 - 02/24/1812:51 AMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: Paradaz]
Joined: Dec 2001 Posts: 4,840ricnunes
Senior Member
Such is the folly of trying to have a testing version for experienced and willing-to-be-inconvenienced users but not backing that up with the caveat that it is not supposed to be played and enjoyed. It's a working version to do the work of testing and improvement. They tried to cash in on "oh wow, look how X is released" impatiently. It's no wonder that half the forum has uninstalled DCS to install the beta tester frustration box. Their hype train has no brain brakes.
#4407089 - 02/24/1804:46 AMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: Paradaz]
You just made a lot of dogs' arses angry by comparing DCS to them.
LOL!!
Originally Posted by bisher
Yes, we would not want to take away any merit of this thread
While the presentation of facts may leave something to be desired due to the passionate nature of us flight simmers, it still doesn't take away the simple truth that FACTS are FACTS. Feel free to counter those if you think they are wrong.
Some posts are made to exaggerate and make fun of the facts, but that doesn't make those facts disappear.
Originally Posted by Paradaz
I've got 32GB RAM and can confirm that DCS 2.5 still runs like a dogs arse.
Who the fk makes games that NEEDS 32GB of RAM to start with? What's their minimum requirements now? 32GB RAM, i7 Kaby or higher/newer, 1080Ti or better?
BTW, where are we with regards to a proper "release" of 2.5 1-2 weeks after beta release?
- Ice
#4407090 - 02/24/1804:51 AMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: Frederf]
They tried to cash in on "oh wow, look how X is released" impatiently.
This was set by Wags in the first place, "promising" a release of 2.5.... anyone know why he did that? I mean, we've been waiting ages for 2.5 anyway, why the sudden "we need to get this out the door by [date]!!"??
Originally Posted by Frederf
Their hype train has no brain brakes.
Can you imagine how ED would be doing if it was more honest and toned down or did away with the hype train entirely? IMO their current modus operandi is to hype hype hype and get as many people to buy as early and as quickly as possible.... for a module that may not see completion for another few years.
- Ice
#4407108 - 02/24/1808:30 AMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
Joined: May 2011 Posts: 258IceecI
1975-1997 R.I.P.
IceecI
1975-1997 R.I.P.
Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 258
- Ice "While the presentation of facts may leave something to be desired due to the passionate nature of us flight simmers, it still doesn't take away the simple truth that FACTS are FACTS. Feel free to counter those if you think they are wrong. Some posts are made to exaggerate and make fun of the facts, but that doesn't make those facts disappear."
Well said
Give a man fish and he gets food, give a man a fishing rod and he asks for another one.
#4407109 - 02/24/1808:33 AMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
Thanks! Some people seem to forget that we're here to talk about this simulator and this developer, both good points and bad points, and not about each other.
- Ice
#4407177 - 02/24/1804:48 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: - Ice]
They tried to cash in on "oh wow, look how X is released" impatiently.
This was set by Wags in the first place, "promising" a release of 2.5.... anyone know why he did that? I mean, we've been waiting ages for 2.5 anyway, why the sudden "we need to get this out the door by [date]!!"??
Originally Posted by Frederf
Their hype train has no brain brakes.
Can you imagine how ED would be doing if it was more honest and toned down or did away with the hype train entirely? IMO their current modus operandi is to hype hype hype and get as many people to buy as early and as quickly as possible.... for a module that may not see completion for another few years.
DCS as software is actually quite good and worthwhile. A lot of the hurt feelings come from trying to have it both ways what's "out" and "done." But the tactic of hyping pre-orders and testing builds as true releases I fear is working. The customer base has a large number of people who are susceptible to the hype machine and happily participate on the hype-preorder-play-anticipate_the_next_module cycle. Putting out flawed modules and shifting programmers onto the new project seems to be making money.
#4407231 - 02/24/1808:40 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
Oh, no argument there! The hype train works! The problem is the train wreck at the end.... some see it coming, others are too busy enjoying the ride.
As for DCS as a software, again, no argument there! It has a lot of potential, and we can see this as far back as 5-6 years ago! The problem is a lot of that has yet to be realized. Can you imagine how ED would be raking in the cash if they had true leadership and worked like crazy towards a clear goal? Knock things out in a timely manner, produce modules that people actually WANT? Just imagine even 1.5.X engine.... but with a Hornet, a Tomcat, an AH-64, a Phantom, and the environment/assets to fly in/against. Even if they released these modules at a sub-DCS level, maybe something between FC3 level and DCS level....
- Ice
#4407249 - 02/24/1809:35 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
IMO what holds DCS back is not the lack of specific aircraft module, is the lack of quality war environment, period! I believe that if DCS had a well done war environment, with no major bug, they would have much and much more success, even with only one plane at FC3 level. Surely having more advanced modules helps but i don't thing that's the root of the problem.
Last edited by xXNightEagleXx; 02/25/1801:47 AM.
#4407274 - 02/25/1801:58 AMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
War environment can only really be remedied with a dynamic campaign engine IMO. Very big work. My suggestion is that if they made wiser choices with their aircraft modules, they'd have better successes. Of course, that is coupled with being able to release said modules on time...
Imagine something like EECH or EEAH but in DCS, but we only have the Shark. The Huey and the Gazelle aren't really attack helicopters, but imagine the possibilities if we had an Apache module and maybe even a Kiowa module? Have the Kiowas search ahead, Apaches come in to sanitize the area, then Hueys come in to drop off troops to secure the target. Three human players, one on each helo type, could have the time of their lives playing that non-DC mission. Or get more friends and put a couple of them in the Shark for OpFor and see if you can accomplish the mission before the Sharks come in and ruin the day.
- Ice
#4407292 - 02/25/1806:05 AMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: - Ice]
Longbow 2 was my favorite , very good semi dynamic script based campaing.
An intro like this actually had people like you and I on the edge of their seats....the uploader is incorrect, this was from the original, an intro video is lacking in DCS....ED should have stuck with the original 20 year old engine with all of their aircraft, at least it had me 'on the edge of my seat' and not on here reporting on how many bugs there are every release. ED never fixed the original engine....just carried on with a new design and learnt nothing from their mistakes from the previous or listened to consumer complaints
#4407330 - 02/25/1801:59 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: Haukka81]
Janes Lonbow was by far a my favorite war environment all those years ago. Chuck Yeager's air combat is up there, as is S.W.O.T.L, B-17 etc etc. oh I miss those days
Missed that boat, unfortunately. Too young
Started out on Jane's F/A-18 though and loved those intro videos!!
Originally Posted by Haukka81
Cant understand how dcs wont run good, least in my system it runs really good. 80-120fps, vis distance ultra, max trees, 2xMsaa etc..
Note that the complaints are present both from members here and on the ED forums, so it can't all be fake news Might be a sign of a poorly-optimized software if it can't even run properly on systems within minimum specs.... or ED can't do a good job of properly specifying what the correct minimum specs should be.
- Ice
#4407342 - 02/25/1802:28 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
I'm not saying anything about your system, Haukka81, but I'm sure you'll find people with higher specs than yours complaining about issues. I guess just be thankful that it works fine on your system.... but again, might be a sign of a poorly-optimized software to be having these issues.
- Ice
#4407358 - 02/25/1804:35 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: - Ice]
I'm not saying anything about your system, Haukka81, but I'm sure you'll find people with higher specs than yours complaining about issues. I guess just be thankful that it works fine on your system.... but again, might be a sign of a poorly-optimized software to be having these issues.
Yes, there is problems with some systems , stutters etc.. HDD based systems least seem to not work good. But ED is allready known those problems with performance. Im sure those will be fixed.
But i and my brother pc’s run fine. And it runs fine with our Finnish game group friend too. About 7 different pc:s , no problems. So performance problems are not so critical like some here like everybody belive. Maybe we are just lucky here in Finland :P
There is problems and bugs that is fact , those will be fixed sooner or Later.
Well, one guy on the linked thread says he does NOT have an SSD and he is NOT experiencing problems, so having a HDD isn't automatically the issue. Again, poorly-optimized software. ED is aware? You mean ED was not aware of this before releasing the beta to the public? See, issues like these could be excused if ED stuck to a tight timeline.... but for a software update that is years late, "they are aware and it will be fixed" doesn't really carry much weight anymore.
DCS as software is actually quite good and worthwhile.
Worthwhile? Yes, I would say so. The Su-25T, Ka-50, A-10C, FC2 and the Huey are all worthwhile. But what's IMO worrisome is that all the good and worthwhile modules (see list above) are all older/oldest modules. None of the modern modules are IMO worthwhile, with some of them being completely misplaced within what should be the DCS scenario (such as the WWII aircraft/modules, F-86/Mig-15, etc...) while the rest remain in a perpetuated state of in-completion and as such full of bugs and missing features. This IMO proves how incompetent ED and its partners really are/became!
Regarding the DCS software being good, I disagree! I would say that together with ED's incompetence the fact that their software is bad (or the basis of it is bad) is another reason for the current state of DCS. I say this because DCS was supposed to be a modular sim, but it is NOT! For example everytime a new module/aircraft is released a new version of DCS must be released - This is something which should never happen with a TRUE MODULAR sim! For example when a new aircraft is/was released in truly modular sims such as FSX, P3D or even in the Strike Fighter Series would you need a new version of the software? Of course not!
Originally Posted by Frederf
[quote=xXNightEagleXx]IMO what holds DCS back is not the lack of specific aircraft module, is the lack of quality war environment, period! I believe that if DCS had a well done war environment, with no major bug, they would have much and much more success, even with only one plane at FC3 level. Surely having more advanced modules helps but i don't thing that's the root of the problem.
Yeah, I fully agree with this.
#4407499 - 02/26/1811:09 AMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
RPS: MBot’s dynamic campaigns for DCS World seem popular. Have they influenced ED’s thinking at all?
Matt: While we certainly applaud his efforts, we have much bigger plans for DCS World on this front. We are pursuing much more ambitious plans that incorporate community, cause-and-effect continuity, strategic and tactical goals, player performance tracking and rewards, and accounting for time periods.
A bit too early to go into more detail, but this is very much a high priority for us moving forward post-2.5.
Im quite sure that they may finally get things roll.
Well, if it's taken them this long just to hack out the CORE program, I'm not holding my breath on a war environment. Might be released just in time for me to enjoy during my retirement. FYI, I'm not even near 40 yet
Originally Posted by Haukka81
Mirage 2000 and Viggen are really great
Well, if the Viggen managed to lose the interest of a Swedish (IIRC?) player, I don't think it's that great.
- Ice
#4407561 - 02/26/1803:50 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
One swedish player wont proof anything. Im Finland and i dont care hornet , i fly F-5 or A-10A But yes, viggen is made for special role: low level fast strikes against targets in cold war time. So it wont be everybodys plane. But its really well made module.
Im near 40 so i may not see dc in dcs either
But im still really happy what i can play nowdays, when i started flight sim’s there was no radio traffic audio, flight models were really simple, very basic radar model etc.. and all this in resolution 320x240 ... so we have come long way. And then there was bugs and no internet to load fixes
I dont want arque with you too much for nothing, you have your view to simming and i respect your opinions.
Being said swedish player, past 50 btw, and Viggen might be a nice "player only" plane/module but bring some AI into you missions and they will orbit target until shot down or level bomb ILLUM flares giving the 3 Rb05 carrying AI planes in the flight some 2 max 3 seconds to see target and launch.
Basically, the AI is totally unable to use the machine unless you ask them to bomb from altitude, not how Viggens are utilized.
While at it, many things do not work as a player either, you cannot track a target in SPA and flight plan test doesn't work either along with another 6 points I have in a textfile to be tested after each update.
Been out over a year but nice you like the module, great for you. Do you fly many SP missions with it?
#4407575 - 02/26/1804:32 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: - Ice]
Not even bad, for SP missions it's pretty much useless. Fly MP, fine. But try to use it offline you soon realise it's a player only module.
I have 8 missions (SP only, planned campaign that I probably will shove down the drain) trying to get any use out of this but anything but level bombing or daytime Rb05 they fail, be it ARAK, AShM or night action (or player measuring probable landing area from inbound fleet in first mission giving the campaign a good or bad start).
As said, been over a year now and no progress at all on the module (on the contrary, they re-implement bugs every other try showing very low code control, if any). Getting really really tired waiting.
Last edited by theOden; 02/26/1804:57 PM.
#4407584 - 02/26/1805:00 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
Joined: May 2011 Posts: 258IceecI
1975-1997 R.I.P.
IceecI
1975-1997 R.I.P.
Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 258
Wait for F-14 - then we have a party!
Don't they even care how things look with Viggen - and they then try to sell F-14? Oh no that name change doesn't fool everyone.
Give a man fish and he gets food, give a man a fishing rod and he asks for another one.
#4407631 - 02/26/1808:06 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
I'm not saying that to prove anything. I'm saying that if something cannot hold the interest of a person who is a fan of the aircraft, well, there are issues that need to be addressed. I was referring to theOden and he's explained the issues in his post.
Originally Posted by Haukka81
But its really well made module.
Like I said, based on theOden's experience, it doesn't seem to be the case. If Mokkeri wishes to refute it properly, maybe he should teach theOden how to make the AI do what theOden claims the AI doesn't do. That way, theOden learns something new and Mokkeri proves that the module is more well-made than originally thought of and we end up with a win-win for both parties.
Originally Posted by Haukka81
But im still really happy what i can play nowdays
True, we have come a long way I cannot imagine having 5 screens if it were CRT monitors!! However, that still doesn't excuse ED's shortcomings and failings.
Originally Posted by Haukka81
I dont want arque with you too much for nothing, you have your view to simming and i respect your opinions.
Thank you! I appreciate that but I don't see arguing as a bad thing, really. I want you to argue with me, with this definition of the term: give reasons or cite evidence in support of an idea, action, or theory, typically with the aim of persuading others to share one's view.
Not this definition: exchange or express diverging or opposite views, typically in a heated or angry way.
Let us argue in an adult manner. Let us share our opinions and share our reasons or evidence behind those opinions. It is easy to respect people who can argue properly. Those who can't, well....
- Ice
#4407646 - 02/26/1809:32 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: - Ice]
I'm not saying that to prove anything. I'm saying that if something cannot hold the interest of a person who is a fan of the aircraft, well, there are issues that need to be addressed. I was referring to theOden and he's explained the issues in his post.
Originally Posted by Haukka81
But its really well made module.
Like I said, based on theOden's experience, it doesn't seem to be the case. If Mokkeri wishes to refute it properly, maybe he should teach theOden how to make the AI do what theOden claims the AI doesn't do. That way, theOden learns something new and Mokkeri proves that the module is more well-made than originally thought of and we end up with a win-win for both parties.
Originally Posted by Haukka81
But im still really happy what i can play nowdays
True, we have come a long way I cannot imagine having 5 screens if it were CRT monitors!! However, that still doesn't excuse ED's shortcomings and failings.
Originally Posted by Haukka81
I dont want arque with you too much for nothing, you have your view to simming and i respect your opinions.
Thank you! I appreciate that but I don't see arguing as a bad thing, really. I want you to argue with me, with this definition of the term: give reasons or cite evidence in support of an idea, action, or theory, typically with the aim of persuading others to share one's view.
Not this definition: exchange or express diverging or opposite views, typically in a heated or angry way.
Let us argue in an adult manner. Let us share our opinions and share our reasons or evidence behind those opinions. It is easy to respect people who can argue properly. Those who can't, well....
Well it was not hard to test. I just put one AI Viggen with antiship task and loadout. My plane was f-15 and i just follow what AI will do.
Last edited by Mokkeri; 02/26/1809:36 PM.
#4407647 - 02/26/1809:36 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: Mokkeri]
This has been reported to ED and we are hopeful for a fix
Its just dcs AI that cant Keep up with new weapons..
But there is multiple other AI problems no mater what module, raported least 3 serious problems myself. My personal Number one thing in dcs 2.5 now Is AI, it really needs more brains to Keep up with threats/weapons/tasks :P. But i can wait fixes, hope to get some before im 40
This has been reported to ED and we are hopeful for a fix
Its just dcs AI that cant Keep up with new weapons..
But there is multiple other AI problems no mater what module, raported least 3 serious problems myself. My personal Number one thing in dcs 2.5 now Is AI, it really needs more brains to Keep up with threats/weapons/tasks :P. But i can wait fixes, hope to get some before im 40
Yes AI is far from perfect. However AI works if you dont make silly waypoints. You must use some workarounds, for example for Viggen if you want that AI will shoot all his rockets in one pass, you need to use ground attack task and force that he will launch all weapons. On CAS task he try to make pinpoint attack to vehicle and make multiple attack runs. Windy conditions ruins AI accuracy for unguided weapons (same happend to me also). Reaction to threat option is better change to evade fire so AI will not abort mission.
#4407756 - 02/27/1810:26 AMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: Mokkeri]
This has been reported to ED and we are hopeful for a fix
Its just dcs AI that cant Keep up with new weapons..
But there is multiple other AI problems no mater what module, raported least 3 serious problems myself. My personal Number one thing in dcs 2.5 now Is AI, it really needs more brains to Keep up with threats/weapons/tasks :P. But i can wait fixes, hope to get some before im 40
Yes AI is far from perfect. However AI works if you dont make silly waypoints. You must use some workarounds, for example for Viggen if you want that AI will shoot all his rockets in one pass, you need to use ground attack task and force that he will launch all weapons. On CAS task he try to make pinpoint attack to vehicle and make multiple attack runs. Windy conditions ruins AI accuracy for unguided weapons (same happend to me also). Reaction to threat option is better change to evade fire so AI will not abort mission.
Yes, i know. Made missions back in flanker times, but still we have many Ai things fubar since lomac, maybe ED should finally try to fix those. After least 10 years Ai still cant fly NOE right and many things have to micomanage trough waypoints etc.. so mission making comes pain (and I love mission making in every sim)
Dcs AI is simply worst ever in my simming life 1989> today.
But i hope and even belive bit that ed will get his #%&*$# right now. But only time will tell :P
Yes NOE is not AI's strong point, especially when they abort mission and make slow speed NOE flight back to base. Caucasus is full of AI wreckages on my missions.
#4407818 - 02/27/1804:22 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
1) That's not your wingman 2) If that was RF-15F - they're not meant to be shot from visual distance to target i.e. wingmen don't know how to use viggen's radar.
Give a man fish and he gets food, give a man a fishing rod and he asks for another one.
#4407826 - 02/27/1804:37 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
1 when i was talking about wingman, 2 It was RF 15F and in my opinion that was not visual distance. It took 3.5 minutes fly to target at speed 590knots
#4407829 - 02/27/1804:52 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
Joined: May 2011 Posts: 258IceecI
1975-1997 R.I.P.
IceecI
1975-1997 R.I.P.
Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 258
I think we are finished here...
Edit: Oh one more thing, why weren't you flying viggen as that AIs wingman?
Last edited by IceecI; 02/27/1805:03 PM.
Give a man fish and he gets food, give a man a fishing rod and he asks for another one.
#4407834 - 02/27/1805:15 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
In ME you need to assing shipgroup as target and order wingman to attack mission target and rejoin.
#4407868 - 02/27/1806:46 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
Joined: May 2011 Posts: 258IceecI
1975-1997 R.I.P.
IceecI
1975-1997 R.I.P.
Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 258
Says who? Wingman should be able to read radar and attack the ship when ordered. So what I said earlier is correct - what should I say to get that to your head?
Give a man fish and he gets food, give a man a fishing rod and he asks for another one.
#4407870 - 02/27/1806:50 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
How they id friend or foe with radar if it is not pre planned anti ship mission. I dont think that search and destroy anti ship mission is very realistic.
#4407882 - 02/27/1809:22 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
So it seems that the mission has to be structured in a specific way in order to get the desired AI behavior. Any other way, even with the correct weapon and the target staring the AI in the face, the AI cannot/will not engage?
- Ice
#4407905 - 02/27/1810:12 PMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
It's better to build every mission with objectives. After all it's only AI so it's better to tell what you want them to do. If you just put them fly around and hope that they will do something, dont expect much. Yes Viggen wingman will engage ships in visual range but not with long range ASM(i only tested RB04). I just tested RB 05 and RB 75.
EDIT: One more test with RB15 and wingman will engage ship in visual range, maybe RB04 has longer min launch range.
Last edited by Mokkeri; 02/27/1810:20 PM.
#4407967 - 02/28/1806:31 AMRe: How to make successful airplane simulator game 101
[Re: IceecI]
Air to ground AI needs just better search and destroy ”mode” or something like that.
Ai is never perfect , even BMS AI has serious problems with ground attack, usually AI wingmens turn around way too slow and get killed.
I dont why its so hard to make even semi-good ground attack AI in any sim. Maybe too much variables OR maybe all dev’s are just intrested just AIR to AIR AI ???
Well, I never really liked to bother with AI Human wingmen are so much better. Annoyed me in DCS A10C when AI wingman seems to have eagle eyes and spot ground targets from very far away, but no way to talk my eyes onto target.