Call DCS a sim or a game... it doesn't bother me what you call it. I still have lots of fun with DCS. Because it doesn't float any one person's boat for reason X, Y, or Z doesn't mean it is utterly worthless for everyone or even a majority. It just so happens that DCS is the closest PC combat flight sim to what I would like to have. FSX with TacPack doesn't cut it for me. Falcon 4 doesn't cut it for me. Jane's F/A-18 doesn't cut it for me. I still like the Strike Fighters series, but I am having a lot more fun with DCS since the P-51D, UH-1, Mi-8, F-86, MiG-15, MiG-21, Bf109, and Fw190 have been released. There is enough variety in every aspect for me to never get bored.

As far as the original topic of the post: I have never enjoyed campaigns. It doesn't matter whether it is scripted or dynamic or something in between, campaigns are boring for me. It doesn't bother me that other people love campaigns. Nor does it bother me that someone who spends time making campaigns wants to get paid for it. If aircraft modules and/or terrain don't come with campaigns at all, no skin off my back. If a Korea, Vietnam, or Israel terrain/campaign ever gets released, I might try it out. But I have all of those in the SF series games and rarely played them.

How can anyone come to the conclusion that selling campaigns has become the "focus" of ED? Clearly, DCS 2/NTTR has consumed significant game engine development resources. If we can take ED at its word, it has also been simultaneously making progress on the F/A-18, Normandy map, WW2 fighters, etc. All of the third party developers seem to be focused on various aircraft (and in some cases terrain and possibly campaigns/missions to go with them).

You can argue all day about the lack of direction of EDs development and the pace of progress, but DCS has made tremendous progress since I first bought LOMAC. As I have little interest in ground attack or modern fire-and-forget air-to-air weapons, the addition of WW2 and Cold War era aircraft is what really got me to commit to DCS World. Not FC3. NOt the A-10 or Ka-50.

Since whether something is "a good game" or "worth playing" is extremely subjective, most of the above opinions about DCS (and they are just that, not facts) need to be qualified with "not a good game for me" or "not worth playing for me" etc. If liking something that you don't like makes me a "fanboi", then feel free to label me as such for disagreeing with you. But its not like I am blindly loyal to DCS -- I own just about every other sim that covers my interests. It is just that DCS has finally reached a point where it is the best air combat sim / game currently available FOR ME.


forum: a public meeting or assembly for open discussion
discussion: an extended communication (often interactive) dealing with some particular topic
censorship: practice of suppressing a text or part of a text that is considered objectionable