Jump to content

MAC (Modern Air Combat) Discussion


LCUChap2016

Recommended Posts

  • ED Team

As we noted in a rather recent newsletter, we decided to greatly expand MAC to make it a AAA product. This in turn significantly moved back out production time line. Once we have a confident release date, we will be pleased to announce it then.

 

For now, suffice to say that much of the company is focused on MAC and making steady progress. When there is news to share, we certainly will.

 

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:thumbup:

 

As we noted in a rather recent newsletter, we decided to greatly expand MAC to make it a AAA product. This in turn significantly moved back out production time line. Once we have a confident release date, we will be pleased to announce it then.

 

For now, suffice to say that much of the company is focused on MAC and making steady progress. When there is news to share, we certainly will.

 

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As we noted in a rather recent newsletter, we decided to greatly expand MAC to make it a AAA product. This in turn significantly moved back out production time line. Once we have a confident release date, we will be pleased to announce it then.

 

For now, suffice to say that much of the company is focused on MAC and making steady progress. When there is news to share, we certainly will.

 

Thanks

 

Thank you very much. I am excited about MAC (I loved LOMAC). I purchased the Nevada and PG maps months ago in anticipation of MAC in 2018. While I have DCS World, I work a lot and have a family to care for. I don't have time to learn complicated systems in a study sim. At the same time, I don't want Combat Ace or a total arcade flyer. I have no interest in "earning points" like an arcade game. I want an enhanced version of LOMAC or the older Janes Combat Sims. I want to be able to boot up whenever I have a few minutes, which is usually once a month, jump into a modern fighter with semi-realistic physics and easy startup option, engage in first-person, in-cockpit Single-PLayer action with outstanding graphics. No rock music tunes like some arcade game; no having to earn points to enhance my fighters or buy the next best version like a silly Playstation or Xbox auto racing game. I'm hoping MAC will deliver the perfect experience.


Edited by Plainsman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't feel like this has really been properly communicated by someone from ED, so I'll ask as directly as I believe I can:

 

Is MAC going to be a DCS product that works alongside existing modules inside of the existing simulation? Or is this a separate product entirely?

 

I ask because I can only find community folks saying the latter, and can't seem to find a response from ED saying so. All I take from Wags' response here is that it was pushed back to ensure quality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't feel like this has really been properly communicated by someone from ED, so I'll ask as directly as I believe I can:

 

Is MAC going to be a DCS product that works alongside existing modules inside of the existing simulation? Or is this a separate product entirely?

 

I ask because I can only find community folks saying the latter, and can't seem to find a response from ED saying so. All I take from Wags' response here is that it was pushed back to ensure quality.

 

 

 

It’s entirely separate from DCS as LOMAC has been.

Same modules and theatres though but an utterly separate game!

Less in depth as DCS and more ‚easy hands on approach ‚ for the masses...

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wooooo

For now, suffice to say that much of the company is focused on MAC and making steady progress.

 

 

Lets all get excited about having devs pulled off DCS work.... Nevermind though eh, because DCS is free (except the hundreds we've spent on aircraft), we'll just keep waiting for a new shiny money making project, while the core engine/game is negelected. Hurraayyy!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DCS is free (except the hundreds we've spent on aircraft), we'll just keep waiting for a new shiny money making project, while the core engine/game is negelected. Hurraayyy!!!

 

let’s be honest. the amount of money you spent on DCS didn’t even pay for a single developer for a weeks work.

 

let them work on something to pay the bills and keep the lights on. just like you do in your business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wooooo

 

 

Lets all get excited about having devs pulled off DCS work.... Nevermind though eh, because DCS is free (except the hundreds we've spent on aircraft), we'll just keep waiting for a new shiny money making project, while the core engine/game is negelected. Hurraayyy!!!

 

How do you expect them to make their money and pay bills?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It honestly sounds like it going to be an Ace Combat competitor, which to me would seem a bit off putting for those already in the DCS community. People already mock the FC3 aircraft for being "Arcade", when that term is what you'd describe Ace Combat/HAWX style games as. AAA would probably literally translate into "Appeal to the masses", which is what those games do. They are a great gateway drug into more involved sims like DCS though. The original Ace Combat games led me to Jane's sims so many years back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wooooo

 

Lets all get excited about having devs pulled off DCS work.... Nevermind though eh, because DCS is free (except the hundreds we've spent on aircraft), we'll just keep waiting for a new shiny money making project, while the core engine/game is negelected. Hurraayyy!!!

 

 

I believe the core is worked on by a specific few and or team, that know it in and out, bugs and all for years, very hard to add coders to help and not go backwards. ED has put on many extra hands to move forward on Mac.

 

 

It honestly sounds like it going to be an Ace Combat competitor, which to me would seem a bit off putting for those already in the DCS community. People already mock the FC3 aircraft for being "Arcade", when that term is what you'd describe Ace Combat/HAWX style games as. AAA would probably literally translate into "Appeal to the masses", which is what those games do. They are a great gateway drug into more involved sims like DCS though. The original Ace Combat games led me to Jane's sims so many years back.

 

It's a limited market on the civil side for ED. The commercial training side possibly has more opportunities here and there. I see Mac as an in between filter for people that play Ace Combat/HAWX, War Thunder. That now want something a little more to chew on and a little more realism. These players will get their DCS feet wet on Mac and many perhaps will then turn to DCS and the expensive full fidelity modules.

 

I use the FC3 all the time, once the hotas is setup, it's not a lot different except for the startup button pushing when looking at it from an online battle perspective. Compare the F-18 to the Su-27 hotas setup and they all have a realistic performance and flight characteristics too.

i7-7700K OC @ 5Ghz | ASUS IX Hero MB | ASUS GTX 1080 Ti STRIX | 32GB Corsair 3000Mhz | Corsair H100i V2 Radiator | Samsung 960 EVO M.2 NVMe 500G SSD | Samsung 850 EVO 500G SSD | Corsair HX850i Platinum 850W | Oculus Rift | ASUS PG278Q 27-inch, 2560 x 1440, G-SYNC, 144Hz, 1ms | VKB Gunfighter Pro

Chuck's DCS Tutorial Library

Download PDF Tutorial guides to help get up to speed with aircraft quickly and also great for taking a good look at the aircraft available for DCS before purchasing. Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clickable cockpits on 4 planes?

 

I read somehwere that 4 of the included MAC planes will be fully clickable cockpits (the Migs and F86 for sure). Is this true? Also, I own FC3 on Steam. Will that be taken into consideration for the 'considerable discount' for FC3 owners, or do you have to have bought it direct from ED? Or will it be released as it's own separate game on Steam too?

 

Having played lots of FC3 (and A10C/Ka50), I don't think this will be 'another Ace Combat' if they keep the same fidelity and PFM from FC3. I don't think that people that say that have ever played (or have any idea about) the Ace Combat series. VERY arcade gameplay.

"I mean, I guess it would just be a guy who you know, grabs bananas and runs. Or, um, a banana that grabs things. Why would a banana grab another banana? I mean, those are the kind of questions I don't want to answer." - Michael Bluth

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read somehwere that 4 of the included MAC planes will be fully clickable cockpits (the Migs and F86 for sure). Is this true?

 

No. They are developing simpified versions of those modules (F-86 and Migs) that already exist as DCS full modules. So their MAC version will be only keyboard shortcuts, like all the other FC3 planes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. They are developing simpified versions of those modules (F-86 and Migs) that already exist as DCS full modules. So their MAC version will be only keyboard shortcuts, like all the other FC3 planes.

 

Thought it was too good to be true. I'll still get it as I like having the best of both worlds and a quick option when I'm busy with life.

 

I'd still like to know what the options will be for those of us on Steam if anyone can elaborate?

"I mean, I guess it would just be a guy who you know, grabs bananas and runs. Or, um, a banana that grabs things. Why would a banana grab another banana? I mean, those are the kind of questions I don't want to answer." - Michael Bluth

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ED Just hast to stick to the forumula of MAC being a supplement to other products, hiring new people to offload the MAC maintenance off the core DCS developers, the gravitation always has to be to DCS World even if MAC has 20 million more players, the popularity aspect has to be more or less ignored after some point, 20 million MAC users should never outweight the opinions of the DCS World community, ED needs preparation for this influx of circus and kindergarden, potentially at least, it's easy to be psychologically affected by the mass of people and then have a tendency to babysit them, they come and go and it's not worth sacrificing everything you have done and your passion just to satisfy an angry mob of sorts, most other companies chase money so obivously they just go for the mass and they change their whole soul who they are, most of the time it's a fraud, they basically play a character to appear as if they have the same interests/opinions/beliefs/lifestyle as the customers.

 

But it was said MAC will make money to supplement DCS World and other things right, ultimately the correct formula is hard to predict on a forum and there's so many factors involved there should be also a percentage set like for example 10% of MAC revenue goes to it's maintenance and updates and the rest like 90% is funneled to DCS World which in turn helps MAC later on anyway to some extent, so DCS World would get the extra resources than it would get otherwise, now you could treat it as both helping each other and being equal but this gets deeply philosophical and complicated and this is open bias it's not that I'd be for DCS World because I'm, it's the point, and open, it's not like it's a secret

 

 

Ofcourse that is kinda impossible even for the devs to micro-manage and to do this philosophically-correct, so this is just a rough idea, it most likely is that DCS World got developed by money made by other nonpublic stuff and then DCS World's revenue maybe even funded non-public stuff later, that's understandable as money isn't really separatey like that but it get's mixed up and ultimately you can't figure out or even know what funded what or what got from what, you can trace the amount but if you balance it out it's all mixed like water, unless you basically physically move it and segreagate it like moving bricks around then maybe yes but no company works THAT strict, but hey there would actually be a lot more transparency/clarity if the banking system worked like that haha, so it's all meant "in-general", it should always be MAC that's a supplement for DCS World and not the other way around, and with a major MAC update there will obviously be more finance/devs taken off DCS World temporairly, again all understandable, most likely MAC won't get it's totally separate team but who knows, maybe it may, if it does it'll probably be announced/revealed anyway.

 

 

 

The separation is great, forums too?, but there probably will be some crossover as the MAC community will get DCS World advertisements most likely.

 

Most important part of the formula to keep DCS World and MAC peaceful coexistance and fullfill MAC mission being a SUPPLEMENT not the MAIN thing: All brand new feautres, betas, airplanes, utilities, modules, should come to DCS World first before MAC. THE CENTER OF GRAVITY SHOULD REMAIN AT DCS WORLD. The second important part is that under no circumstance does this relationship change, keep the formula, no matter what goes on at MAC.

 

All advertisments should also have another slide/text/mention at the end for DCS World and the logo, otherwise if if it's too isolated, then they won't know about DCS World either, they'll be stuck at MAC again.

 

A new era ... with new battles ... new design ... Tu-22M for Modern Air Combat ... Available Now! ... For full version go to www.dcs-world.com

 

Btw "MAC" obviously conflicts with Apple's stuff you won't see "MAC" on any promo material most likely, even if it's different field, probably to minimize risk, better. I don't want it associated anyway.

 

And many more, I could go on and do a whole writeup with more things, like how many people will be the ones who are desitned to remain on MAC forever, how many of them are going to go to DCS and stay at DCS, how many will come to MAC and never come back to anything, how many will see MAC news but go straight to DCS world, etc etc it's really complicated if you put all this data down and try to calculate it all, but not right now, this whole talk needs it's own thread, this isn't the right one but everyone's talking about it pretty much.

 

 

And by the way, if the developer does a good job of them not letting themeslfs be influenced by the towering MAC communiy then DCS World community should not fear a thing, if these basics of the formula are followed, it's not even special, just do opposite of what a standard western entertainment company does (there are exceptions), no matter how much the popularity and circus on MAC forums will be they won't outweight in the big picture, while ED can't act like MAC doesn't exist, we can.

 

 

The main thing is that there should never come to and should be no need to do stuff like DCS World revenue being spent on a gazillion of servers to feed MAC people who may be too impatient to wait 10 minutes more for an update, that's an extreme example.


Edited by Worrazen

Modules: A-10C I/II, F/A-18C, Mig-21Bis, M-2000C, AJS-37, Spitfire LF Mk. IX, P-47, FC3, SC, CA, WW2AP, CE2. Terrains: NTTR, Normandy, Persian Gulf, Syria

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Worrazen... relax mate. ED has more information than us, and has probably planned this better. We worry because of our own selfish interests but ED is doing MAC specifically because of their own financial interests. You need to be strong and alive, to be able to churn out new products, many of which require a good amount of investment.

 

DCS is ED's product, their brain-child. We love it because it lets us be something most of us are not... fighter pilots. And while this relationship works because ED produces something we buy, it's such a small community that the expenses can't be covered just by relying on us. ED has never done a "service" model where they charge us monthly or something... we buy a module and can keep it forever (of course not "for ever", but you get the idea). ED would need to make the game appeal to the masses to get some revenue in, and based on how the future looks, they will make their decisions accordingly. And let's be honest... DCS is a very niche community. And not everyone has the time or the inclination to go for full fidelity modules.

 

I have faith that ED won't directly abandon DCS as it probably helps with TBS. But how the money would flow... let's just leave it to the decision makers. What we should do is voice our sentiments and feedback, and trust the developers to continue supporting the game as they have done for more than 2 decades!


Edited by Wolve03
Removed extra line breaks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wooooo

 

 

Lets all get excited about having devs pulled off DCS work.... Nevermind though eh, because DCS is free (except the hundreds we've spent on aircraft), we'll just keep waiting for a new shiny money making project, while the core engine/game is negelected. Hurraayyy!!!

 

Neglected? Perhaps you should go back to flying version 1.5 for a while and then reconsider whether the free assets have been neglected.

I'm Softball on Multiplayer. NZXT Player Three Prime, i9-13900K@3.00GHz, 64GB DDR5, Win 11 Home, Nvidia GeForce RTX 4090 24GB, TrackIR 5, VKB Gunfighter III with MCG Ultimate grip, VKB STECS Standard Throttle, CH Pro pedals

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'd rather the ground AI stopped getting stuck in buildings all the time than having 1000000 polygon tanks to be honest.

+1, pretty is nice to have. Usable without too many issues would be key.

A warrior's mission is to foster the success of others.

i9-12900K | MSI RTX 3080Ti Suprim X | 128 GB Ram 3200 MHz DDR-4 | MSI MPG Edge Z690 | Samung EVO 980 Pro SSD | Virpil Stick, Throttle and Collective | MFG Crosswind | HP Reverb G2

RAT - On the Range - Rescue Helo - Recovery Tanker - Warehouse - Airboss

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... so I voice my feedback here and say that everyone I fly with is strictly against MAC. If somebody is not willing to start lets say with a F 5 and learn those few switches it's just the wrong game.

There are more important things to do, we need better clouds and weather ... and a Vietnam map for example. Non clickable aircrafts should be a thing of the past. We still have a bad mix of arcade F 15's against high fidelity planes on almost every MP server.

 

This is the wrong direction, there should be a standard. This is a Sim, that's why we're here ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what has been said about MAC, it's not for you, me, or the mates you fly with. It's not Flaming Cliffs 4, it's a standalone game in the likes of Ace Combat or Hawx.

 

Either way, yeah, it sucks that ED is spending resources on that instead of DCS stuff, but it's their money and they can spend it in whatever way they think will bring more profit.

Hardware: VPForce Rhino, FSSB R3 Ultra, Virpil T-50CM, Hotas Warthog, Winwing F15EX, Slaw Rudder, GVL224 Trio Throttle, Thrustmaster MFDs, Saitek Trim wheel, Trackir 5, Quest Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

most of the development work seems to be on the hardcore modules, so it appears that you all have nothing to worry about.

 

Wags statement from this very thread seems to contradict your assumption.

 

For now, suffice to say that much of the company is focused on MAC and making steady progress. When there is news to share, we certainly will.

Hardware: VPForce Rhino, FSSB R3 Ultra, Virpil T-50CM, Hotas Warthog, Winwing F15EX, Slaw Rudder, GVL224 Trio Throttle, Thrustmaster MFDs, Saitek Trim wheel, Trackir 5, Quest Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...