DCS WWII: Europe 1944

;)

 

It's probably not a major issue for most fans; at least less of an issue than constantly getting your suspension of disbelief jolted by out-of-place objects for the time period.

Well... many of us moved to SSD drives that are expensive and small... Not that is a stopper but a small problem... I think DCS World with DCS World War 2, DCS Vietnam, etc as modules would sound better... I mean... DCS Vietnam would not fit to DCS WW2 either isn't it?

Also... how is this plug in of A10C to DCS WW2 (if one wish) is going to work? As a copy? 2 Activations? Deactivation?

Anyway. We wish you success in your endeavor... I hope it won't take ages to release though. :D

What in the end leaves the decision to what map(s) one wants to fly on and accordingly one of the two .exe to launch.

Making assumptions based on this statement:

Other products will be mutually compatible, so you'll be able to plug an A-10 into DCS WWII if you so choose, or a B-17 into DCW World.

It should be relatively easy (though perhaps not obvious), to plug the maps and every other asset from DCS WWII into regular DCS. Essentially making a giant DCS with everything (except probably the WWII GUI) from both.

So while the developers chose to make them separate by default, we can probably blend everything back together.

I'm still not getting it. :)

 

If content for one can be used for the other, what you describe is exactly what one can achieve (i thought it was up to the mission maker to make his mission as realistic or unrealistic as he wishes). The distinction between the two seems solely artificial from where i'm standing now. I mean, there must be something that WWII offers compared to World, else there would be no need to make them separate entities. What am i missing? :)

We actually think that a large part of the community will want to have things separate.

I can understand the majority opinion here on the forums right now, because at this time DCS is still a modern jet sim with a strong but limited foray into WWII. In my personal experience though, a large number of WWII fans don't care for modern aviation, and vice versa.

I mean, we'll look at install numbers and see how the inidividual modules do. If we turn out to be horribly wrong and everyone just plugs everything together and uses it as a giant sandbox, or rather two giant merged sandboxes, then we may reconsider.

In any case, like I said, it's mutually compatible. If you want to merge the two products, just plug all WWII content into your DCS World.

try a youtube search for something called splash the zeros.....

Haha, I love that movie. :) Well, the airplane parts, any way.

[EDIT], in response to Luthier's post above mine:

Sounds like you're doing the best of both worlds.. Separate by default, but still giving us the option to combine them into one big DCS World. Sounds good to me. :thumbup:

Looks great. Will definitely be backing on kickstarter. There's some real classic planes in that list that I'd love to fly at the study sim level.

In any case, like I said, it's mutually compatible. If you want to merge the two products, just plug all WWII content into your DCS World.

Are you saying it will be possible to merge terrain, all AI units and other assets from WWII to World?

We actually think that a large part of the community will want to have things separate.

 

I can understand the majority opinion here on the forums right now, because at this time DCS is still a modern jet sim with a strong but limited foray into WWII. In my personal experience though, a large number of WWII fans don't care for modern aviation, and vice versa.

 

I mean, we'll look at install numbers and see how the inidividual modules do. If we turn out to be horribly wrong and everyone just plugs everything together and uses it as a giant sandbox, or rather two giant merged sandboxes, then we may reconsider.

 

In any case, like I said, it's mutually compatible. If you want to merge the two products, just plug all WWII content into your DCS World.

I think it's a good idea to have them separate. As a MP player, it would be confusing having to research the server 1st to know if its a WWII server or one for the A10 etc. Many servers in DCS just have their squad name as the server name. That's kind of how we do it.

So wrapping that all into one, at least from a MP standpoint would be confusing. I'm glad it's separate in that regard. Don't change it :D

I think Luthier has made a good point here. Il-2 got so busy with so much going on after the mods came out that eventually, for sheer ease of use, it was separated to WWI, WWII, SCW, Vietnam etc... But nothing stopped you having your own custom install with whatever you wanted. The good thing about the way it worked in IL-2 was that it didn't require 2 completely separate installs - all the content shared by the different versions was only found once on your hard drive.

This is a good move to get new players involved without forcing a lot of content upon them that they don't really care about. Top stuff, Luthier!

ok guys, i got your points (Wags, Luthier, Skate)

but i think it should not be a problem to keep all modules in one world only - this all about mission and map design/usage

 

a good mission designer wont put both A-10 and B-17 in one mission

however it would be good the fly over europe in an A-10

 

ok i hope we will see soon how will it work :thumbup:

Thing is it's not JUST about MP and custom Missions,

Only a Smaller % of DCSW Users actually play online.

I dont know about you, but I dont wanna fire up a Quick Mission in a WWII Bird only to get shot down by a SU-27.

Until DCSW integrates actual YEAR Restrictions for Objects, they should remain separate.

Great news. I will be in this day one.

However if there is any possibility on making WWII solely in DCSW as opposed to stand alone I highly support that idea.

Reading the reasoning for the separation, I don't get it. If time period is a worry, then label the WWII maps as such: Normany (1944).

There's no reason to fly F-15's on such a map, but there is also no reason to make it difficult to do so. Pointless restrictions add nothing to games and I see them as all to common. Why would you put time and effort into coding a barrier against 21st century technology being placed on a 1904's map? Units can simply be labeled, or we could update the encyclopedia and link it more closely to the ME.

This is a great step forward for DCSW, but I think DCSW should remain the one and only core.

This new project sounds really interesting and I can't wait to see details for the Kickstarter. My personal preference would be one large install with everything in one place rather than two installs.

Separating multiplayer matches on eras can be done via some tabs or buttons in server browser... you don't need different windows install for this :D What if one wants to make a fantasy server with modern planes versus older planes... which is very possible if moving/copying modules is allowed? It will be confusing again. Not to say that the moving of modules looks like a confusing thing.

So just having Modern Era, Vietnam Era, WW2 era and Fantasy era tabs in server browser is more elegant and less resource consuming.

I must admit, I'm still not getting the idea of two separate cores. So I will have to keep two installs of DCSW, even if its major feature was to get all the modules working under one roof? But on the other hand, my modules will work in both of those installs? Doesn't it defeat the purpose of separate cores then? :confused:

Anyway, looking eagerly forward to the video. Let's hope they have heaps of relevant info to throw at us. If so, I'm in! DCS Spitfire, P-38 or B-17 will be soooo sweet! :wub:

My guess for the separation is the DCS-WWII engine will be based on the new " Edge " engine..

Great news. I will be in this day one.

 

However if there is any possibility on making WWII solely in DCSW as opposed to stand alone I highly support that idea.

 

Reading the reasoning for the separation, I don't get it. If time period is a worry, then label the WWII maps as such: Normany (1944).

 

There's no reason to fly F-15's on such a map, but there is also no reason to make it difficult to do so. Pointless restrictions add nothing to games and I see them as all to common. Why would you put time and effort into coding a barrier against 21st century technology being placed on a 1904's map? Units can simply be labeled, or we could update the encyclopedia and link it more closely to the ME.

 

This is a great step forward for DCSW, but I think DCSW should remain the one and only core.

I dont know about you, but I dont wanna fire up a Quick Mission in a WWII Bird only to get shot down by a SU-27.

So they add a check box to the Quick Mission Generator...

Allow non-period units

Simple.

Great news, have been waiting to drop on WWII era for a while. :)

Making assumptions based on this statement:

 

It should be relatively easy (though perhaps not obvious), to plug the maps and every other asset from DCS WWII into regular DCS. Essentially making a giant DCS with everything (except probably the WWII GUI) from both.

 

So while the developers chose to make them separate by default, we can probably blend everything back together.

This will probably work at beginning but I wonder how peaceful will it be with updates and bug fixing?

Today I can see its no easy task to fix bugs in current modular design (perhaps it needs to be even more modular) because anytime a given aircraft has bugs, its module, DCS world and other aircraft modules need a cascade of fixes as well...

eventually they will stand apart? why fix missile logic in WWII and vice versa?

I mean, we'll look at install numbers and see how the inidividual modules do. If we turn out to be horribly wrong and everyone just plugs everything together and uses it as a giant sandbox, or rather two giant merged sandboxes, then we may reconsider.

 

In any case, like I said, it's mutually compatible. If you want to merge the two products, just plug all WWII content into your DCS World.

This will be the very first thing I do.

I kind of already said this, but I think all that is needed is some really obvious way to filter by eras within the base game. On the front page there could be "WWII Mode", "Modern Mode" "Custom Era Mode" buttons. You could even make the launcher take command inputs to launch the game directly into different modes with different desktop shortcuts (but the same install). Obviously this would require tagging every asset according to era/year, which could be quite a bit of work.

My guess for the separation is the DCS-WWII engine will be based on the new " Edge " engine..

What about Nevada?

I dont know about you, but I dont wanna fire up a Quick Mission in a WWII Bird only to get shot down by a SU-27.

Addition to quick mission dialogue:

Allow unit (Su-27): no

I am assuming if someone installed the B-17 into DCS World, they wouldnt be able to have the WWII items such as vehicles and such as they are part of the core, is that correct?

I'd consider that a major problem.

Keeping it separate makes more sense to me. Less to go wrong anytime there's an update with non-related stuff.

What about Nevada?

later this year, probably sooner than DCS: WWII

I still think its more about a bloated DCS World. all the assets that would need to be replaced by WWII era correct assets, audio, items, models, vehicles, etc... you are basically doubling up DCS World... keeping it separate seems to make more sense in the long run.

 

I am assuming if someone installed the B-17 into DCS World, they wouldnt be able to have the WWII items such as vehicles and such as they are part of the core, is that correct?

That too.

So they add a check box to the Quick Mission Generator...

 

Allow non-period units

 

Simple.

Exactly... why build an entire new World... just to repeat the process when Vietnam appears. Then you need to copy modules once more... really complicating things this way.

I'm afraid the DCS - DCS World problem will repeat and is better to anticipate this. :joystick: