#3691630 - 12/02/12 12:20 PM
Re: Review: DCS: P-51D Mustang
[Re: citizen guod]
|
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 3,743
HeinKill
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 3,743
Cloud based
|
Good discussion and I also respect your points of view as experienced users of the DCS P-51.
I'm sure the arguments about whether this module is a full combat sim or not, are 'old hat' in the world of dedicated P-51 forums, but again, this review was not written for people who already know that. This review was written for people who read the blurb on the DCS website and are considering buying on the strength of this:
The DCS: P-51D Mustang offers both highly-detailed simulation and easy-to-play "game" mode options for both hardcore and casual gamers. When in simulation mode, this is the most authentic simulation of the P-51D Mustang that has ever been created for the PC. Enjoy both the thrill of flying this legendary warbird and operating its various weapons against a variety of ground and airborne targets...A powerful yet easy-to-use mission editor allows you to create your own missions and campaigns. A one-click Mission Generator also allows you to instantly create battles as small or large as you wish.
So I hope people can see why I looked at it both as a survey sim, and a combat sim, and why I did focus a little on the 'easy to play "game" mode' as battles small and large, and easy gameplay mode are key features the developer promotes.
Not sure why you think I show a bias to FSX. Certainly I personally don't think I have, even though I conclude the Accusimmed P-51 has more to offer in gameplay potential and immersion, with the exception of the inability to use the weapon systems. Is that conclusion really bias, or just an opinion?
At the same time I conclude the DCS P-51 is good value for money compared to the FSX Accusimmed version, if you are looking for a hi-fidelity P-51 to fly around in. Surely then that is bias in favour of the DCS platform?
It is always the case that people will agree or disagree with a reviewer's opinions and I remind you of mine because they seem a bit lost in the discussion above (I actually feel like my conclusions are quite well aligned with what people are writing above...seen from the point of view of both users who are satisfied, and those who are unsatisfied with the release. And taken in context of what the developer PR promises.):
Good
Beautifully realized cockpit and working controls All weapons and weapon systems simulated (unlike on FSX Mustangs) Models failures of aircraft systems as well as combat damage Great implementation of radio commands Good FPS on my medium range system
Could Be Better
FM is prone to "over reacting" to control inputs Online interface can't be filtered to deliver only P-51D relevant servers DCS World maps and objects not built for WWII era aircraft or scenarios Limited gameplay options beyond training and training style missions AI controlled P-51D seems not to have same FM limitations as player
|
|
#3691646 - 12/02/12 01:36 PM
Re: Review: DCS: P-51D Mustang
[Re: HeinKill]
|
Joined: Nov 1999
Posts: 79
Chaos
Junior Member
|
Junior Member
Joined: Nov 1999
Posts: 79
|
So I hope people can see why I looked at it both as a survey sim, and a combat sim, and why I did focus a little on the 'easy to play "game" mode' as battles small and large, and easy gameplay mode are key features the developer promotes. Sorry, still don`t see it. You should`ve focussed on the high fidelity part which is the meat of the sim. Arcade mode is tacked on to include the casual gamer. A casual gamer does not buy A2A's P51, does he? This is why your comparison is flawed... it's not fair and balanced. Not sure why you think I show a bias to FSX. Certainly I personally don't think I have, even though I conclude the Accusimmed P-51 has more to offer in gameplay potential and immersion, with the exception of the inability to use the weapon systems. Is that conclusion really bias, or just an opinion? How can A2A P51 offer more gameplay and immersion when DCS P51 offers at least as much as A2A and add combat to the mix as well... The only thing that is 'missing' from DCS P51 is scenery that covers the entire world... Is _that_ the feature that tips the balance in your opinion? I stand by my point that it is the user`s problem to not fully inform himself before he clicks the `purchase` button. ED has been very open about it and the marketing blurb is just a one liner that every product has. Show me where you think it is misleading because that is what you are suggesting.
Last edited by Chaos; 12/02/12 01:58 PM.
"It's not the years honey, it's the mileage..."
|
|
#3691654 - 12/02/12 02:02 PM
Re: Review: DCS: P-51D Mustang
[Re: citizen guod]
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 13,786
PFunk
SimHQ Redneck
|
SimHQ Redneck
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 13,786
N. Central Texas
|
Good review. Told me exactly what I needed to know.
"A little luck & a little government is necessary to get by, but only a fool places his complete trust in either one." - PJ O'Rourke www.sixmanfootball.com
|
|
#3691661 - 12/02/12 02:23 PM
Re: Review: DCS: P-51D Mustang
[Re: citizen guod]
|
Joined: Nov 1999
Posts: 79
Chaos
Junior Member
|
Junior Member
Joined: Nov 1999
Posts: 79
|
I just want to make something clear. My experience with A2A product is nothing more than reading a website and watching youtube videos (I am somewhat familiar with FSX). Not nearly as well informed to discuss this any further and I've tried to stay objective as much as I can. I fail to see how this can be considered a good piece because it clearly isn't, IMHO. It goes against everything that would be considered a `review` or `comparison`.
PFunk, What did you need to know that wasn`t on ED`s website? Are you just chipping in to back up HeinKill because he`s a fellow reviewer? I think he`s quite capable defending his own point (which still escapes me but that is beside the point).
Last edited by Chaos; 12/02/12 02:28 PM.
"It's not the years honey, it's the mileage..."
|
|
#3691664 - 12/02/12 02:39 PM
Re: Review: DCS: P-51D Mustang
[Re: citizen guod]
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 72
saf1
Junior Member
|
Junior Member
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 72
Denmark/Sweden
|
I have the DCS P51, FSX, CLOD, Il2 1946. Other products I have DCS vice are BS2, the A10. As Fred pointed out there are not alot of servers for the P51 active anymore. That was`nt the case, when the beta came out. Have asked my self why and where have they gone I belive I know why The review is fair as it right clear points out, what is missing and that`s why Im not flying it anymore (the world Im flying in is kind of, hmm off). Have people lost interest? I have
Up there the world is divided into bastards and suckers. Make your choice. Derek Robinson, Piece of Cake, 1983. Sådan er det bare.
Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit, ASUS Motherboard P9X79 Pro, Seagate Baracuda Green 2TB SATA 3.0, DCZ SSD Agility 3 Series 2.6 120GB, HD7950 3GB GDDR5 PCI-E, Corsair XMS3 1600Hz 8GB Vengeance CL9, INTEL Liquid Cooling LGA1155 - LGA2011, INTEL LGA2011 Core I7 3.6Ghz - 3820, Silver Power SP - SS850 850W PSU, 24" Benq HDMI LED Monitor
|
|
#3691754 - 12/02/12 06:28 PM
Re: Review: DCS: P-51D Mustang
[Re: Chaos]
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 13,786
PFunk
SimHQ Redneck
|
SimHQ Redneck
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 13,786
N. Central Texas
|
I just want to make something clear. My experience with A2A product is nothing more than reading a website and watching youtube videos (I am somewhat familiar with FSX). Not nearly as well informed to discuss this any further and I've tried to stay objective as much as I can. I fail to see how this can be considered a good piece because it clearly isn't, IMHO. It goes against everything that would be considered a `review` or `comparison`.
PFunk, What did you need to know that wasn`t on ED`s website? Are you just chipping in to back up HeinKill because he`s a fellow reviewer? I think he`s quite capable defending his own point (which still escapes me but that is beside the point). For one, I don't have the time to go poring over a bunch of forum posts at ED to get the general idea. He hit the high points. I'm a casual simmer, and his attention to that really helped me make a decision. Those points are hard to find since the number of people who fly DCS products in Game Mode can be counted on the fingers of two hands.
"A little luck & a little government is necessary to get by, but only a fool places his complete trust in either one." - PJ O'Rourke www.sixmanfootball.com
|
|
#3691758 - 12/02/12 06:33 PM
Re: Review: DCS: P-51D Mustang
[Re: scotsmen54]
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,892
GrayGhost
Hotshot
|
Hotshot
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,892
|
How can anyone say DCS-P-51D offers same immersion when it does not take into account the day to day operation of the aircraft. More important in a Combat Sim., but you start every day with a new aircraft. If you have x No. of aircraft in the SQD. and you have some down for repair then your Combat Status changes.
So you have Combat but you don't have the full realism of the Aircraft, A2A does this but does not have Combat, well that is a much smaller issue compared to wear and tear on the aircraft. Both have something to offer but for performance of the aircraft and day to day realism A2A is ahead in that area. A2A does not have Combat features DCS does great but aircraft lacks full realism. From what I read in forums as well lacks the aircraft performance compared to accusim model. Not my take but from other forum members including people here. That's a great single player feature but generally doesn't fare well in multi-play. Generally. One might say though that SP is more important. Squadron management will come, but frankly I don't believe most people who play cooperatively or competitively will give a flying flip about wear and tear, just like they don't normally care for weather, bird strikes or random failures. If your plane is damaged badly enough when you bring it back from combat, it's probably out of the picture for a good while. Don't need wear and tear for that. As for the flight model, the DCS FM and A2A FM are different. That's all there is to it ... accusations of lack of accuracy or performance is BS. You can't compare aircraft on the Eagle Dynamics forum as it is not allowed. OK, understand it is a company owned forum. So lack of complaints or observations is limited to the Bug forum and that gives you a good indication that DCS is not upto Accusim yet. Fact. Ever shot anyone down with the A2A product? How's the DCS one 'not up to it' yet? They're different sims with different purpose, they just both simulate the pony. Todays Combat aircraft for FSX are just about equal to DCS and the VRS F-18 is by far the best of them all. Don't forget A2A has done this P-51 several times and now with the accusim model, it is a real rival for DCS. You really don't know what you're saying.
-- 44th VFW
|
|
#3691774 - 12/02/12 07:02 PM
Re: Review: DCS: P-51D Mustang
[Re: citizen guod]
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 13,786
PFunk
SimHQ Redneck
|
SimHQ Redneck
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 13,786
N. Central Texas
|
If it was snide, it certainly wasn't intended that way, so I'm sorry if that's how it came across to you. It definitely wasn't meant to be taken that way.
I just felt that the review pretty much covered it. If you thought there was something else at work, I can't speak to that.
"A little luck & a little government is necessary to get by, but only a fool places his complete trust in either one." - PJ O'Rourke www.sixmanfootball.com
|
|
#3691783 - 12/02/12 07:24 PM
Re: Review: DCS: P-51D Mustang
[Re: citizen guod]
|
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 13
Spectrre
Junior Member
|
Junior Member
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 13
|
Seriously, folks...can't we all just get along and enjoy the bloody software???? Who cares about what "mode" people play?? If people come and play then they may try other things too. This whole "full switch just the way it's done IRL realism or nothing" mentality does no one any good. With that said, I will climb down from my soapbox. With regards to the review, I thought it was a bit biased at first also. Then I went back and gave it a thorough reading. Very nicely done. Seriously. The reviewer hit all of the important points IMHO. I don't know if I would have compared it to the Accusim model but I can see why it was done. It's just too bad people are more worried about what mode the review was done in than actually reading what was said. Kudos to the reviewer.
It's not the fall that gets you. It's the Godawful sudden stop at the end.
|
|
#3691811 - 12/02/12 08:13 PM
Re: Review: DCS: P-51D Mustang
[Re: scotsmen54]
|
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 297
EtherealN
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 297
|
Which FM is more real is up to individual taste but I have to go with the pilots that fly them,hence A2A. Yes ED had access to a P-51 and a pilot but I do believe if you want to look around, A2A managed to get more references for their Model. More references? "Had access"? TFC, the publisher of the DCS series, owns and operates P-51s for both airshow work and movie work. That's what hides behind "had access". Pilots and maintainers who do the Mustang for a living, in-house. How many P-51D's does A2A own? The flight model question is simple: none of us here are qualified to say much of anything about it. But like you I do lean towards experience, and TFC sure has lots of experience with P-51's. :P
|
|
#3691964 - 12/03/12 02:22 AM
Re: Review: DCS: P-51D Mustang
[Re: citizen guod]
|
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 29
BillEinstein
Junior Member
|
Junior Member
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 29
Shanghai
|
The real pilot's feeling is important. But the feeling in the sims can be adjusted by the curve and deadzone of the stick. And most real pilots have little chance to exam their p-51 in extream conditions, such as low altitude spin, over G actions, kill the engine in mid air, etc.
Last edited by BillEinstein; 12/03/12 02:24 AM.
|
|
#3691981 - 12/03/12 03:15 AM
Re: Review: DCS: P-51D Mustang
[Re: citizen guod]
|
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 297
EtherealN
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 297
|
Heh, yeah, when your aircraft is one of very few 70-year old war survivors... You end up careful. Every time there's an accident with one of these (like the collision at Duxford) it's not just material damage, it's a part of living history up in smoke. Also, it needs to be pointed out that Scotsmen goes on about several things here where I don't feel he quite understands how these things work: "Full access". What does this even mean? That there weren't people hiding the secret things? Having access to aircraft and pilots is good. I did not dispute that A2A have had so. But let's consider that you are making a Formula 1 simulator. What does you best - getting to make appointments with MacLaren a little now and then, or owning the cars yourself as well as employing the drivers and maintainers yourself. This is a non-trivial difference. Whether it made a difference in either direction for the simulators? Not like I'd be qualified to check that. Not like anyone else here, I think, would be so either. Neither approach has an automatic advantage because everything depends on what people did with it. Regarding "experience building a P-51 model", I don't see the relevance here actually, not as stated. The IL-2 team has experience of this. Microsoft Flight team has (well, had) experience. Eagle Dynamics has been making simulators since pretty much a couple weeks after the fall of the soviet union, including military, and has shown what they can do in both fixed and rotary aircraft, including systems modeling. I trust them to not mess up. Someone else might trust A2A to not mess up. But I do take exception when this is presented like A2A has some magical access that, it is implied, was not available to a company that owns and operates the darn thing itself. Takes some serious compartmentalization to take that line of reasoning. On the issue of maintenance and persistent wear, I don't agree that this is a big deal for a war simulation, not as implemented by A2A. What accusim and all of that does, which is what I find attractive in it, is that it helps you simulate actually owning the thing yourself. It's as close as you can get to having one of these for real. But it's nowhere near what you'd see as an actual combat pilot out at war. A combat pilot reports the problems he found during flight to the chief (who then berates the pilot for dropping some change in the pit etcetera etcetera), whereafter the pilot goes to get #%&*$# while crew works on the bird. If the bird isn't ready by next mission, the pilot flies an other aircraft, or none. It is a function that can be useful, but it does not require what accusim does and is not worth the time to do for war specifics. But towards simulatíng ownership rather than war? It's effing amazing.
Last edited by EtherealN; 12/03/12 03:19 AM.
|
|
#3692048 - 12/03/12 08:17 AM
Re: Review: DCS: P-51D Mustang
[Re: citizen guod]
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 62
Zoky
Junior Member
|
Junior Member
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 62
Serbia
|
To all ED forum mods: You guys should be happy that he didn't mentioned some of the DCS major bugs in his review To guy who did review: Good review. Can u do one for A2A B17? I have B377 with CoS and I'm thinking of getting B17
Last edited by Zoky; 12/03/12 08:17 AM.
By reading this post you agree that i'm not responsible for any of your reckless actions
|
|
|
|