Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 3 of 3 1 2 3
#4416177 - 04/13/18 06:44 PM Re: DCS: F-16C by EDSA & BST [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,831
Paradaz Offline
Senior Member
Paradaz  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,831
UK
They are not releasing a full fidelity FA/18........not even close.

And based on their previous history, we are unlikely to ever see it being completed either.


On the Eighth day God created Paratroopers and the Devil stood to attention.
Inline advert (2nd and 3rd post)

#4416189 - 04/13/18 07:48 PM Re: DCS: F-16C by EDSA & BST [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 486
XIII Offline
Member
XIII  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 486
^^^ this yep

#4416195 - 04/13/18 09:10 PM Re: DCS: F-16C by EDSA & BST [Re: Sobek]  
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 753
Winfield Offline
model citizen
Winfield  Offline
model citizen
Member

Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 753
QLD
Originally Posted by Sobek
The fact that it rained the last two days, i think that was EDs fault too.


The only rain ED creates are tears of disappointment. Which makes me wonder, what update did ED release in the last 2 days??

#4416204 - 04/13/18 11:22 PM Re: DCS: F-16C by EDSA & BST [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,831
Paradaz Offline
Senior Member
Paradaz  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,831
UK
Not a single word about 2.5 progress in today's newsletter......it's all about the new map!

Perhaps the renamed beta has fixed itself and no more effort is required.


On the Eighth day God created Paratroopers and the Devil stood to attention.
#4416209 - 04/14/18 12:41 AM Re: DCS: F-16C by EDSA & BST [Re: Paradaz]  
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 753
Winfield Offline
model citizen
Winfield  Offline
model citizen
Member

Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 753
QLD
Originally Posted by Paradaz
......it's all about the new map!.


Wait for when the paid DLC comes out with it and consumers have to pay for the buildings. After the balls up with Nevada a patch or so ago, ed's think tank will no doubt see their failure as a way to turn it into a positive. Like ThreeLine did with the so called 'memory leak'

#4416215 - 04/14/18 02:01 AM Re: DCS: F-16C by EDSA & BST [Re: Marcocom]  
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice Offline
Veteran
- Ice  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
Originally Posted by Marcocom
They are about to launch a full-fidelity FA18. that means alot of the tech will be reused.

Seems like you are greatly unaware of how the "launch" of the Hornet is going to happen. Might be best to familiarize yourself with that first.

As for re-using tech, ED is indeed "rebuilding the wheel". Either that or the Hornet has more A-A radar modes than the Eagle? Either that or the Hornet uses different weapons from the Eagle?


- Ice
#4418151 - 04/27/18 08:03 PM Re: DCS: F-16C by EDSA & BST [Re: Paradaz]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,462
AggressorBLUE Offline
Check out my
AggressorBLUE  Offline
Check out my
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,462
Jerz
Originally Posted by Paradaz
They are not releasing a full fidelity FA/18........not even close.

And based on their previous history, we are unlikely to ever see it being completed either.



I'd argue the two most relevant data points are the previous DCS aircraft, Blackshark and A-10C. They both did eventually reach "full fidelity", or at least as "full" as is realistically feasible for a public desktop based simulation.

The key word in that sentence of course, is "eventually" smile


My Rig:i5-3570k @ 4.2 GHZ W/ Corsair Hydro H110 Cooler / Asus Sabertooth Z77 Mobo / GTX 1070/ 16 Gigs DDR3 RAM / A Few SSDs, and a Bunch of HDDs / All held together by: Corsair C70 Case

Other Assets Deployed:
HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog SN#22621/CH Throttle Quad/MFG Crosswind Pedals SN#0004 smile
TrackIR TIR 5 w/ TrackClip Pro biggrin
Simpit: Obutto R3VOLUTION


#4418187 - 04/28/18 01:05 AM Re: DCS: F-16C by EDSA & BST [Re: AggressorBLUE]  
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice Offline
Veteran
- Ice  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
Originally Posted by AggressorBLUE
I'd argue the two most relevant data points are the previous DCS aircraft, Blackshark and A-10C. They both did eventually reach "full fidelity", or at least as "full" as is realistically feasible for a public desktop based simulation.
The key word in that sentence of course, is "eventually" smile

Yes, but releasing the Shark and the Hog at... say 90% feature complete is not the same as what features are in the Hornet when it releases.

So far we've not seen any A-G radar yet and ED are just working on the other A-A modes. Heck, the Hornet won't even release with the AIM-120s! So a 30% feature complete is not the same as how the Hog and Shark was released.


- Ice
#4418825 - 05/02/18 04:37 PM Re: DCS: F-16C by EDSA & BST [Re: - Ice]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,462
AggressorBLUE Offline
Check out my
AggressorBLUE  Offline
Check out my
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,462
Jerz
Originally Posted by - Ice
Originally Posted by AggressorBLUE
I'd argue the two most relevant data points are the previous DCS aircraft, Blackshark and A-10C. They both did eventually reach "full fidelity", or at least as "full" as is realistically feasible for a public desktop based simulation.
The key word in that sentence of course, is "eventually" smile

Yes, but releasing the Shark and the Hog at... say 90% feature complete is not the same as what features are in the Hornet when it releases.

So far we've not seen any A-G radar yet and ED are just working on the other A-A modes. Heck, the Hornet won't even release with the AIM-120s! So a 30% feature complete is not the same as how the Hog and Shark was released.


Right, but you were saying the previous history was informing how the hornet launch would go: "and based on their previous history, we are unlikely to ever see it being completed either."

and I'm saying they've a pretty good history of releasing top-notch modules...eventually.

Any while yes, they've never released something as complex as the hornet before, that's the exact point: it motivates the completion of the hornet because it's the gatekeeper for showcasing the versatility of platform in both the retail and contractor space.


My Rig:i5-3570k @ 4.2 GHZ W/ Corsair Hydro H110 Cooler / Asus Sabertooth Z77 Mobo / GTX 1070/ 16 Gigs DDR3 RAM / A Few SSDs, and a Bunch of HDDs / All held together by: Corsair C70 Case

Other Assets Deployed:
HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog SN#22621/CH Throttle Quad/MFG Crosswind Pedals SN#0004 smile
TrackIR TIR 5 w/ TrackClip Pro biggrin
Simpit: Obutto R3VOLUTION


#4418843 - 05/02/18 05:50 PM Re: DCS: F-16C by EDSA & BST [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,598
Frederf Offline
Member
Frederf  Offline
Member

Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,598
A-10C did not reach full fidelity as is realistically feasible for a public desktop-based simulation. It has lots of errors and omissions still which are well within the ability of the programmers and hardware to model correctly. The previous releases made no mention of incompleteness and were not complete then nor now. The Hornet is specifically planned not to be complete at release which is a step backward. The only motivation to complete a project is a customer base that demands completion in exchange for currency. Pre-order numbers for the Hornet suggest that the base is not sizeable.

#4418845 - 05/02/18 06:01 PM Re: DCS: F-16C by EDSA & BST [Re: AggressorBLUE]  
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice Offline
Veteran
- Ice  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
Originally Posted by AggressorBLUE
Right, but you were saying the previous history was informing how the hornet launch would go: "and based on their previous history, we are unlikely to ever see it being completed either."

Sorry, yes. I should have included clearer reference to the Hog and Shark but I assumed it was understood that these two were the last time ED did something right. When I mean "based on previous history," think of it as "post Hog and Shark release".

Originally Posted by AggressorBLUE
and I'm saying they've a pretty good history of releasing top-notch modules...eventually.

Yes, and we will have peace on Earth.... eventually. biggrin

Originally Posted by AggressorBLUE
Any while yes, they've never released something as complex as the hornet before, that's the exact point: it motivates the completion of the hornet because it's the gatekeeper for showcasing the versatility of platform in both the retail and contractor space.

They fumbled their own release of 2.5. They've already set the expectations for Hornet release to be very, very low. It can showcase the versatility of the platform (I assume you mean DCS Core) but it won't be able to do that until it is mostly feature-complete, say about 80-90% which will happen... eventually. I fear that with the pace at which ED works, by the time the Hornet becomes everyone's wet dream, the rest of the flight simulation world and technology will have moved on and that it will be old news by that point.


- Ice
#4418846 - 05/02/18 06:03 PM Re: DCS: F-16C by EDSA & BST [Re: Frederf]  
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice Offline
Veteran
- Ice  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
Originally Posted by Frederf
A-10C did not reach full fidelity as is realistically feasible for a public desktop-based simulation. It has lots of errors and omissions still which are well within the ability of the programmers and hardware to model correctly.

Yes, but what percentage would you say that the A-10C is at compared to a full fidelity release? Still way up there compared to other modules.

Now what percentage would you say the A-10C was at its release compared to how the Hornet will be at its release? Big, massive step backwards IMHO.


- Ice
#4418854 - 05/02/18 06:40 PM Re: DCS: F-16C by EDSA & BST [Re: Frederf]  
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,078
Flogger23m Offline
Senior Member
Flogger23m  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,078
US
Originally Posted by Frederf
A-10C did not reach full fidelity as is realistically feasible for a public desktop-based simulation. It has lots of errors and omissions...


I am wondering if it is intentional? Probably some things the government won't disclose to a foreign (especially Russian) contractor or won't allow in a commercial product. Just like how ED had to entirely omit the more modern RWR of the Su-25T. Not that the plane was of the fidelity of the A-10C, but the Russian government wouldn't allow ED to model the more modern equipment.

My understanding is the A-10C shown in DCS is very out dated in any case as there have been various Suite upgrades.

Page 3 of 3 1 2 3

Moderated by  Force10, RacerGT 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

If you shop on Amazon use this Amazon link to support SimHQ
.
Social


Recent Topics
Happy Thanksgiving
by No105_Archie. 10/13/19 05:15 PM
Happy Birthday US Navy
by oldgrognard. 10/13/19 04:31 PM
American Civil War photos
by KraziKanuK. 10/12/19 04:18 AM
“Masters of Air”
by PanzerMeyer. 10/11/19 10:51 PM
WW2 still finding bodies
by Alicatt. 10/10/19 04:10 PM
That moment in time....
by Bill_Grant. 10/09/19 01:35 PM
A minister, a priest and a rabbi ....
by Bill_Grant. 10/08/19 04:56 PM
Old folks and old tricks
by Sluggish Controls. 10/08/19 06:11 AM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0