#3583707 - 05/31/12 11:44 PM
DCS Combined Arms... my opinion...
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 28,506
Magnum
Lifer
|
Lifer
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 28,506
Naples, Florida
|
I'm sorry.... but like I've stated before, (not that my opinion matters to anyone but me, lol), I am not liking the direction DCS is taking...
They made Lock On and Flaming Cliffs... great games, then they made Blackshark, then A10C... both excellent sims... each of those games/sims are a dying breed for PC gamers, but we have plenty of battlefield games/simulations, why don't they stick with what there great at, and what is needed for PC gamers... true flight simulators.
I'd rather see DCS Apache, DCS F/A-18, DCS Harrier... etc etc
Do you really think this combined arms is going to work? Will the armor be as detailed and great as SB Pro PE? will the infantry support AI be true? Will recon vehicles work? will there be machine gun teams/defenses? TOWS? etc etc... and all modeled true and work well together?
Will tanks have a sim driver position? TC? Gunner... first person, 3D view? etc etc
My point... I don't see how combined arms could ever be as simulation as there individual planes/helicopters they have done... I think sim wise, were going to be very disappointed in this. Game wise, probably not... I see this more as a modern day RTS... like maybe that European Escalation game.
Don't take this post as a attack on DCS... I love there sims and have bought them all, and will continue... just don't think were going to get what we expect or hope with this new direction.
rebuttal? Opinions?
|
|
#3583725 - 06/01/12 12:10 AM
Re: DCS Combined Arms... my opinion...
[Re: Magnum]
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,892
GrayGhost
Hotshot
|
Hotshot
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,892
|
None of the guys that work on aircraft systems like 3D models, avonics, FM ,etc, worked on CA.
Further, CA is more than just jumping into a bunch of vehicles and gunning.
People are already seeing the opportunities for more dynamic play with this module, in MP and SP.
Last edited by GrayGhost; 06/01/12 12:12 AM.
-- 44th VFW
|
|
#3583733 - 06/01/12 12:36 AM
Re: DCS Combined Arms... my opinion...
[Re: Magnum]
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,943
Nate
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,943
Dublin, Ireland
|
In fact it is the guys responsible for the Ground AI in DCS that are the driving force behind this. I don't think there is any intention to best SB Pro PE - not yet anyway. BTW ever since Flanker 1 the ultimate goal of Eagle Dynamics was a Digital Battlefield - This is a (Large) step in realising that goal. I understand your desire for DCS:-US Fixed Wing, I do. You must realise the time and effort required for such a project. Time and effort costs money. Money needs to raised somehow to fund major projects. It would be so easy to drop sims and develop FPSs if money was the main goal, thankfully it isn't. But it is necessary to stay afloat. Titles such as CA, FC3 and Mustang are what will eventually get you DCS:-US Fixed Wing. If they did not exist nor would DCS:-US Fixed Wing, nor likely ED for that matter. As for your questions about CA - you'll have the opportunity to find out for yourself sometime this month. Nate
|
|
#3583806 - 06/01/12 03:30 AM
Re: DCS Combined Arms... my opinion...
[Re: Magnum]
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,572
Kontakt5
Hotshot
|
Hotshot
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,572
|
I've never played their flight simulators, but I understood they were supposed to be pretty accurate. In the present state that we see here, the screenshots are not- they look like an amalgamation of Battlefield and flight simulation with a pilot's HUD overlay displayed in the vehicle optics, for instance, that HUD overlay over the external AAMG, the graphics displaying the hull and turret orientation prominently in the gunner's sights. The gun being physcially shown in the center of the sight picture looks like the Battlefield games- the sights for these tanks are not mounted directly above the gun with a 1x magnification like that, that's more of a gamey depiction such games do to give you an idea of the gun you're firing.
No one gets out of here alive.
|
|
#3583887 - 06/01/12 08:08 AM
Re: DCS Combined Arms... my opinion...
[Re: Magnum]
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,342
Remon
Member
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,342
Greece
|
and how much it will all cost... if add-ons are 10 to 20, how much for the battlefield experience... and what happens when you want to multiplay, all need every add-on?
just questions in my head about all this. Nah, it seems like you'll only need the module you want to play on. What I don't know, is the way extra models are going to be handled. Like, if you don't have the Mig-21 module and you join a server that runs a mission where the Mig-21 is the opponent, will your client download a lower quality model of the a/c right when you join the server, when you get the mission or when you see one? This could make things a bit awkward. Also, don't forget that the main attraction to the Combined Arms is the JTAC and the strategic layer. Think the ground unit control as a bonus. And with the addition of Iris as a 3rd party developer (who, btw, they're announcing 3 new aircrafts for DCS today) I wouldn't worry about the series future as a flight simulator. Good point about the cost of having all vehicles playable Magnum. I think that in respect of playing with people with those addons though, maybe there will there will be non-playable, external model only versions which will be able to be downloaded via dcs world so that everyone's on the same page so to speak? Or maybe I'm just being naive Don't forget that even right now you don't have to own both the A-10C and the Ka-50 to be able to play with/against them in DCS. I can't see that changing right now. EDIT: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fy30-qGoFg&feature=player_embedded
Last edited by Remon; 06/01/12 08:21 AM.
|
|
#3583956 - 06/01/12 11:44 AM
Re: DCS Combined Arms... my opinion...
[Re: Magnum]
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 128
Lasstmichdurch
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 128
Germany, Frankfurt
|
I for myself understand this DCS CA thing more than their P51... ED is on its way to a Virtual Battlefield to enlarge possible income through a wider customer/user/land-armor-range... With the P51 you an/one old plane nothing else...only a test/propeller-plane, to show what is possible...
Give me one ping Vasili, only one ping...
|
|
#3584002 - 06/01/12 12:41 PM
Re: DCS Combined Arms... my opinion...
[Re: Magnum]
|
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,231
HogDriver
Retired Flight Simmer
|
Retired Flight Simmer
Member
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,231
|
I'm looking forward to trying CA out. If it is simpler than DCS: A-10 and Black Shark, that ends up being a benefit to me because I play too many other games to commit to the massive learning curve that A-10 has.
Perfectly understand your concerns though Mag.
I refuse to buy a flight sim that I have no interest in playing, on the off chance that MAYBE someday they'll make the one I really want to play.
|
|
#3584088 - 06/01/12 02:55 PM
Re: DCS Combined Arms... my opinion...
[Re: Magnum]
|
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 49,716
Jedi Master
Entil'zha
|
Entil'zha
Sierra Hotel
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 49,716
Space Coast, USA
|
I would think all external 3d models will be included in the base "DCS World" engine and new models will be added via patches. The parts you DL and activate (like the 750MB one for A-10C for example) include the cockpit, missions/campaigns for that plane, the symbology in cockpit/HUD...all the things that you'd need ONLY if you're flying it yourself. This is a bit different from ROF's way, where every plane is in everyone's install, you just pay to unlock it, but that's because otherwise everyone would have GB's of extra data in DCS World for flying all the planes even if they own just one. However, the bright side is someone with just the Ka-50 can fly with someone who has just the Su-25T with no fuss, just the issue of getting a mission that allows it (which honestly has become difficult in recent years as DCS mission makers all seem to be keeping their MP missions on their own--sometimes locked to their squad only--servers).
This is sort of the inverse of the Arma way. In Arma, infantry is modeled in detail, while vehicles on sea, ground, and air are modeled more simply and are there just to support the infantry side. Here, the flying is the focus and this will enable support on the ground side. ADA too dense for those A-10s or 50's to get to you? Take out the SAMs yourself and then they can come in and help you stop the tank column you couldn't alone...
The Jedi Master
The anteater is wearing the bagel because he's a reindeer princess. -- my 4 yr old daughter
|
|
#3584416 - 06/01/12 10:05 PM
Re: DCS Combined Arms... my opinion...
[Re: Tigerwulf]
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,572
Kontakt5
Hotshot
|
Hotshot
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,572
|
Good point about the cost of having all vehicles playable Magnum. I think that in respect of playing with people with those addons though, maybe there will there will be non-playable, external model only versions which will be able to be downloaded via dcs world so that everyone's on the same page so to speak? Or maybe I'm just being naive Or if they made them all playable, they will use more or less generic sights for all of them- getting accurate fire control representations of these vehicles can be very difficult if not impossible for some vehicles; the US military has actually been fairly cooperative and transparent as far as nations go, you tend to see more detailed depictions of US simulations than any other- not just because they are popular for the US market, other countries have been much more stingy with this information. Even here, there are things that are puzzling- they have the depiction of the M1 Abrams gunner's auxiliary sight with stadiametric range finder (for manual operation), rather than the computer controlled gunner's primary sight- and it's glowing as if it's a projected image like an aircraft HUD, it shouldn't be glowing, those markings are actually etched into the glass. The semi-circle appearing in the upper portion of the Abrams gun sight looks like the T-72 analogue range finder, except instead of displaying range, it shows the turret bearing.
No one gets out of here alive.
|
|
#3584801 - 06/02/12 02:58 PM
Re: DCS Combined Arms... my opinion...
[Re: Magnum]
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 8,152
Cat
Egyptian Mau
|
Egyptian Mau
Hotshot
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 8,152
Somewhere....over the Rainbow
|
My take is like this.
Consider the MiG-21bis. It's going to be as close as you can get to jumping into a real one. It's a third party aircraft, realistic-to-the-switch. Created by Beczl, a Hungarian who grew up loving the aircraft that protected his country, and obsessively detailed. Beczl also created a very detailed AI S-125 surface-to-air missile for FC2. It's a beauty.
Now consider another Hungarian, Hpasp, and his "SAM Simulator." Which models, among other things, the S-125 in exacting, and amazing, switch-for-switch detail.
Now imagine ED reaching out to Hpasp and proposing the S-75 and S-125 systems designed into DCS World. Switch-for-switch missile systems. Up against players in IRIS F-15s or ED's fixed-wing whatever, or Beczl's MiG-21.
Imagine some tank nut who grew up with the "Dolly Parton" T-72B creating a T-72 module with Steel Beasts-level precision for DCS World. Or some ex-U.S. tanker doing the M-1A1(HA) or Bradley the same way. This isn't impossible. If they can do the MiG, they can do the ground vehicles the same way. It is just a matter of time and it's got to start somewhere. DCS World got its start with the original Su-27 Flanker.
Miao, Cat
|
|
|
|