What is DCS?

Fox One, a third party doesn't have to use an FM that they developed themselves. They can purchase or license one from another source. (Whether there is any other actor that would be interested in licensing out their FM's I don't know though.)

Actually there are free FM engines that are designed to work as plugins out there, such as JBSim.

As for the FM thing, the FM will be at whatever level the 3rd party devs are able to deliver it at; currently ED offers the SFM only because the AFM is in the process of being properly documented and hashed out to make it useable by third parties. Third parties will also be able to supply their own FM engine AFAIK.

Yeah, I got that impression from Wags' post, as he specificaly said that they are "currently" (note the emphasis) unable to provide the AFM to 3rd parties. It seems that not many ppl get what "currently" means.

Yeah, I got that impression from Wags' post, as he specificaly said that they are "currently" (note the emphasis) unable to provide the AFM to 3rd parties. It seems that not many ppl get what "currently" means.

Hmm interesting point of view.

I currently do not own a Ferrari.

YES! This must mean that I'm getting one in the future. Thank you for clarifying that ;)

All joking aside, I know what you meant. Although I took it as Wags just not wanting to set anything in stone. Without currently, that would mean never, and as he always says, everything is subject to change. It certainly isn't a guarantee if that's what you're implying.

And what would ED have to gain from that? ;)

Seriously, be less pessimistic, people. Awesome things are going on, enjoy the ride. :)

If thats a response to me, it wasnt meant to be pessimistic, it was more of stating that they have something good and they might not want to share it in an environment that might cause it to drift out of their reach...

 

I cant tell you how much I am enjoying the days at ED right now... :)

I don't think it's in EDs best interest to not share the AFM with the 3rd parties for the sole reason to have the upperhand in plane simulation. Of course I don't know what the license agreements entail, but I find it hard to think that they don't want to have an overall realistic game, cause if ppl think that they don't get a DCS level quality product from the other companies, they probably won't buy their modules, which would defeat the purpose of having those licenses. I mean, for example, ppl would be more receptive to the idea of buying IRIS's lower quality planes like the F-22 if they knew that they would be supporting a company that down the road would provide them with a DCS level, in every aspects, F-15.

I dont know that I agree 100%, alot of people still play Lock-On, I would imagine alot will purchase FC3. Those planes dont have the fidelity of A-10 and BS2. If a 3rd party dev makes a module with fully 3D cockpit, with every button know and switch working and a FM that feels as legitimate (based on people like me that have no clue what its like to fly a modern military jet in RL) I think most people will be happy.

 

It really depends I think (and this is pure speculation) if ED can package the AFM in a way that can be used by 3rd Party devs without being able to be disassembled and used somewhere else. I would have to feel they feel strongly about what they have created with A-10 an BS2 that they want to protect it. Perhaps we will see something like a few years back when every FPS was licensing their game engine.

 

Really though I have no clue how the 3rd Party Dev relationship will work, we will see...

Yes, but those who stil play FC will buy FC3, a sim that has 6 planes. I don't see them buying every release just to have one quasi-simulated plane. Besides, with DCS level releases you can target both markets by having different levels of difficulty, something you can't do with FC planes.

Not a bad guess, but also not necessarily correct. I believe that ED is not discounting the possibility of providing an AFM SDK.

I would guess that the AFM is still a WIP (but then again, it may be a WIP forever - always getting better :) ) in the sense that it is probably not yet completely polished or documented and thus effectively not ready for 3rd party consumption.

Just my humble opinion.

AFM shouldn't cause you any trouble. :)

In some sense, planes fly the same - ie. you pull stick back, houses get smaller, push stick forward, houses get bigger.

Obviously each aircraft will handle differently; they may have different sustained turn performance, different climb performance, different aproach and touch-down speeds, but generally you have the same flight techniques and then you specialize on the characteristic details for each aircraft, as far as sims go anyway.

So is a "UFO" module out of the question? :alien:

The overall "simulation operating system" is termed DCS World and is a free program that includes a free Su-25T for the player to fly. All DCS products will plug into DCS World as unique modules within the same software installation. DCS products will not be limited to aircraft, but will include maps, missions, campaigns, environment objects, weapons, vehicles and ships. We even hope to look into a train simulation component in the future!

What about underwater environments, and submarines?

Third party products to DCS are supported by ED and there are already several qualified 3rd party teams creating new aircraft that will plug into DCS World. In these cases we leave it up to the developer to decide the level of systems fidelity, but we do expect certain "DCS Standards" to be maintained such as detailed and accurate models and cockpits, mouse clickable cockpit controls, and 6 DOF view control. Third parties are provided access to our Standard Flight Model (SFM), which ED can assist to adjust and improve to suit the requirements. Given the extremely complex nature of our Advanced Flight Model (AFM) in DCS we are currently unable to provide a SDK for 3rd party use. However, 3rd parties are also invited to offer their own Flight Models should it prove to be satisfactory.

Super high fidelity, and AFM are must wanted for every DCS title (even 3rd party products)! :(

In parallel, we are also developing Flaming Cliffs 3 (FC3), which will also work within DCS World. However, Flaming Cliffs 3 will require an installation of Lock On: Modern Air Combat to be present on your computer. FC3 will probably be the last version of this critically acclaimed product line.

It's great to get ride of mid fidelity aircrafts, and especially Ubisoft!

Amazing news! I also love the idea of civilian aircraft in the world, I'd love to fly a cessna or a 747 but with better graphics and overall better engine than xplane or fsx, I guess I just want one world to fly in with the best physics, graphics, sounds and so on possible.

I'd love to have "The Best Simulation Engine Ever"! :)

Clutter, Something to be protected or destroyed. A bit of imagination and they can serve some useful purpose...

 

Also:

 

There are people that use DCS / FC for aerobatics, no reason why they shouldn't use it for anything they want.

Lots of things to simulate, lots of interests, lots of customers, lots of in come, and eventually ED can redesign "The Best Simulation Engine Ever" from scratch, without any loss!

No reason why you couldn't do a UFO, 747 or anything you want that fly's for that matter, even the first Wright Brothers airplane.

Hmm would we need an AFM for that.

Now the UFO AFM would be one hell of a challenge!!

Submarines, well technically I guess you could do it in DCS and getting sonar to work would be interesting.

2- Except for very, very rare cases, one 3rd party choosing to do an aircraft for DCS does not preclude another 3rd party from doing the same aircraft.

lets say that producer A decides to do an X-wing and its accepted into DCS and then a producer B decides to do the X-wing again and is also accepted into the world.

there will be some differences between the two, just for argument shake lets say they will have a 20knot difference in max speed or a slightly different turning rate. How will DCS handle this situation?

a) you will allow both?

b) you will only allow the more accurate?

c) ...????

 

there will be some differences between the two, just for argument shake lets say they will have a 20knot difference in max speed or a slightly different turning rate. How will DCS handle this situation?

Sounds perfectly normal to me - no two airframes are 100% alike.

Sounds perfectly normal to me - no two airframes are 100% alike.

this is something that should be included in the mission builder, to allow for model fluctuations (so you don't always fly with 100% plane). But the question still remains, what is the limit of allowing different models of the same airframe.

Don't stick on the 20knott difference but think of the principle.

this is something that should be included in the mission builder, to allow for model fluctuations (so you don't always fly with 100% plane). But the question still remains, what is the limit of allowing different models of the same airframe.

Don't stick on the 20knott difference but think of the principle.

Then it's up to the customer who flies it in SP.

Or up to the mission designer or serveradmin who allows for it to be used in MP.

Internal standards aside, developer-integrity will probably be enough to ensure that no sub-standard products are released. That and the certainty that the community will crucify them for it :D

Then it's up to the customer who flies it in SP.

Or up to the mission designer or serveradmin who allows for it to be used in MP.

OK so there is such a mechanism to "bann" certain models or to "allow" only certain models? excuse my ignorance but I haven't had the chance to install dcs world.