DCSW is simply not set up to build a DC like Falcon's. A lot of things would have to change in the entire concept of the game, not just reprogramming. I'm reasonably certain that at least for now, ED has no desire to go in the direction of implementing aggregation/de-aggregation and other bubble techniques.
The devs did implement the fast battle generator which should be an entry into the DC style of say, Longbow II.
While it's not a DC engine yet, there are a few things in place that could potentially be tied together to create one. As you know, the campaign creation concept is the same as that in Jane's F-18: You basically have a branching mission concept.
Two things that annoyed me in DCS that Falcon's DC easily fulfilled: 1. An environment that's ALIVE. I could make a TE in Falcon if I wanted a sterile environment, but for anything else, I could launch a campaign and the theatre just feels alive. Units taking off or landing, flights egressing or RTB, having to pay attention to AWACS calls in case there are bad guys that have slipped through... in DCS, getting that feeling would either be using the fast battle generator or lots and lots of scripts. 2. An environment that is persistent. Bomb that bridge and if you fly over it on the next 3-5 missions, it'll be there, damaged... take out that runway and you can safely fly over it on your next mission.
While it may take a lot of work for ED to make a DC (and possibly re-design a new system from the ground up), they were willing to move to EDGE so at least we know they're not shy about the effort
Originally Posted By: Troll
I'm trying to get you to explain what you know about how actual development of DCS is hindered by the release of DLC campaign, in any significant way to be measured.
How could it NOT be delayed by these "distractions"?
Originally Posted By: ricnunes
And in the meanwhile, the proper game improvement such as completing the Alpha/Beta aircraft, squashing major bugs (AMRAAMs, HELLOOOOO???), improving the gameplay by adding proper, useful and thrilling content such as DYNAMIC CAMPAINGS (yes, the DCs) or improving other stuff that the game already has (such as the Tanks in Combined Arms) or resuming improving things that are ALREADY IN GAME are apparently "left behind" or "massively delayed". And this seems to me, it's the real reason for the ED/DCS "brutal" delays. The fact that ED and the fan(actics) aren't able to see this, is puzzling indeed.
I'm puzzled that they seem to be happy with aircraft that seem to be in constant "beta" on a platform (DCSW) that has been in "beta" for a good while now. Maybe it's the short attention span? Or the lack of commitment to one aircraft? They fly Plane A and when they hit bugs or it gets boring, they fly Plane B and when they hit bugs or it gets boring, they fly Plane C and so on...
I'm puzzled by the fact that they seem happy with ED just using the "beta" excuse for everything. As if ED just said so and they're satisfied with the answer.
Originally Posted By: Jedi Master
Frankly, I think all module development should have been halted until 2.5 was done, with max priority given to it. As has been pointed out, some of the people working on these modules and DLCs are redundant for 2.5 anyway so they're not really hampering it that much and you don't want them sitting around doing nothing or fire them and hope you get them back in 6 months. Still, even one extra month added to 2.5 because of F-5E and campaign X is frankly unacceptable at this point.
This.
Originally Posted By: Force10
Quote:
Missions are user created, use your wealth of info on how to make the perfect mission and go make one, then host it or give it to someone.
A lot of the best mission makers have been put off by patches breaking stuff.
So you may be right about users not knowing how to make good missions...but apparently some of the guys that do know how to make realistic missions aren't doing it anymore.
It's not even that... I used to customize DCS to give me custom snap views, custom wide-screen views, relocate the comms box, etc. I would have to dedicate a day or two after each patch to make sure my customizations got ported over properly. Then there came a time where ED moved stuff around, so AAA.lua no longer contained the lines I needed for some of my customizations and I had to go to BBB.lua or CCC.lua instead! I would have to trawl the ED forums to check if someone has found out where ED moved the lines so that I would know where to go to get my customizations back!
As a user, I got tired of "fixing" my game after ED would "break" it. I cannot imagine how frustrating this must be for a content creator.
