Making DCS more accessible to new players.

Of course DCS offers that. In spades! Where it lacks is helping people get started, or put them in a position where they know enough so that they can learn by doing.

I still don’t get your point.

DCS has all the resources imaginable for players to learn the aircraft

-Manuals

-Interactive training missions

-Trainer and two seat aircraft and the ability to fly with another person in the same plane.

-For control mapping, I do believe it will automatically recognize your stick or HOTAS and assign commands although I’ve never tried this myself.

-Quick Start guides for those who just want to get going and don’t want to pour through the entire manual. Realize a lot of these modules are still in Early Access and don’t have this yet.

-Game Mode for players who don’t want the full realism.

-Official Tutorial Videos

 

Outside of the sim itself there is a ton of user made content like guides and videos.

 

So I don’t get what you think could be added that’s feasible. DCS is really a niche product that doesn’t have mass appeal.

Look at the civilian flight sims. Those are hugely popular, way more so than combat flight sims. Those are just as complex and have way less resources for learning them. Some of the aircraft don’t even come with guides or manuals. Yet they are still hugely popular.

 

You don’t seem to have any real suggestions and just keep constantly complaining. What’s your point?

Meanwhile, enjoying the P-47 immensely.

 

Mapped to my TM HOTAS, total hands off operation for all combat operations. Dive flaps, cowling, inter cooler, oil cooler, bombs (toggle), guns (toggle), K-14 controls, prop, mixture, boost so on and so forth.

 

Took me about 4 hours of testing, and reading the manual. Another 4 hours of watching Greg's You Tube series to understand technical errata, and Chucks Guide (manual).

 

8 hours, over about a week off and on of putzing around. About an hour a day, with plenty of "Instant Action" and already built in "Training" content right in DCS.

 

8 hours, probably the amount of time spent by OP opining about how horrible DCS is to get started in. No one wins in this thread, especially the new user. In fact if I were a new user, and came onto this thread, I would be very put off. Not by the thread itself, but how difficult the OP makes DCS seem.

 

The only thing positive in this thread, is the folks tirelessly showing all the content that is available. Hopefully folks find this, instead of the overwhelming negative outlook. :thumbup:

In fact if I were a new user, and came onto this thread, I would be very put off. Not by the thread itself, but how difficult the OP makes DCS seem.

 

..you say that with a straight face after writing you, already an experienced DCS pilot, just spent 8 hours on manuals and youtube researching how to fly a WW2 plane.

 

:music_whistling:

In fact if I were a new user, and came onto this thread, I would be very put off. Not by the thread itself, but how difficult the OP makes DCS seem.

I agree. The OP is making DCS seem like an unapproachable mystery when it’s far from that.

The F/A-18C took me about three weeks and maybe 20 hours in the plane itself to figure it all out. Including A2A refueling and landing on the boat. And yeah I have a life and a job and all that.

You don’t seem to have any real suggestions and just keep constantly complaining. What’s your point?

 

I can repeat myself, or I can point you to my OP. There are plenty of concrete suggestions there for things that really are not difficult to implement, and would have made a TON of difference for me, or anyone with a background similar to mine (not new to flying, new to DCS and new to modern military aviation)

 

But frankly, the biggest help would be if people stopped saying:

 

1) its a niche product (and try their hardest to make it even more niche than it should be).

2) customers have an attitude problem

3) RTFM

I can repeat myself, or I can point you to my OP. There are plenty of concrete suggestions there for things that really are not difficult to implement, and would have made a TON of difference for me, or anyone with a background similar to mine (not new to flying, new to DCS and new to modern military aviation)

 

But frankly, the biggest help would be if people stopped saying:

 

1) its a niche product (and try their hardest to make it even more niche than it should be).

2) customers have an attitude problem

3) RTFM

Your OP is a giant wordy run-on complaining rant that makes little sense. The only suggestion you seem to have is a “virtual buddy” where you want someone to hand hold you and do everything for you.

1. This isn’t really feasible and you already have interactive training missions which essentially do the same thing.

2. If you did have an actual instructor you’d make them nuts with your lack of self motivation. If I was “training” someone in DCS, my instruction would be something like “tomorrow’s lesson is on delivering unguided bombs, be prepared for the lesson by reading pages 131-151 of the manual”

 

DCS already provides everything that’s feasible in a game today to help new players. But those players need to have some willingness to put in the effort.

Im seeing this through my own lens as a noob who got started in the F14 (and crucified for being a noob with the wrong attitude and not reading the right manual).

crucified by whom?

..you say that with a straight face after writing you, already an experienced DCS pilot, just spent 8 hours on manuals and youtube researching how to fly a WW2 plane.

 

:music_whistling:

He learned more in those 8 hours than your ideal student "learning by doing"

he also clearly stated he was flying during those 8 hours.

You think the manuals are bad because you want to think the manuals are bad.

Thats not the point. If you can be competitive in any sim or game in 20 minutes, or even 20 days, how could it possibly be an interesting game?

 

Ive been flying a soaring simulator on and off for about 15 years and I have a similar amount of RL soaring experience, and Im still only barely competitive, and by that I mean I may typically be top 10 in a 50 player race. I will almost never win. Newbies have zero chance of winning, or even be remotely competitive without 100s if not 1000s of hours of practice and experience, even studying at least some theory. But they can still have fun every step of the way, just learning how to fly, then staying up, catching ridge lift or wave, trying to complete a task, or at least getting as far as they can and learning as they go. That is what matters and what keeps new players hooked: achievable challenges, learning by doing and having fun as you ride that learning curve. Then it doesnt matter how high that curve goes, or how long it takes to master. If anything, the more there is to learn the better.

As a relatively new player I can only state that my experience is very different to yours and I am having a load of fun with DCS. It took me a few seconds of a Google search to find that Chuck's guides were great for quick reference and as you say there is so much to discover that the only limit is time.

There are virtual instructor add-ones in the civy flight sims. Like a Flying School where the instructor grades you on all your handing, everything from taxi speed to use of your lights and engine management, landings etc. it’s pretty cool. But creating something like that for DCS aircraft and weapon systems would just be too much. It already takes years to complete a module in DCS so this sort of extra work would just be impossible.

https://www.mudspike.com/dcs-world-barriers-to-entry-myth-busted/

I know, 2017, but still valid.

When I decided to stop being lazy and learn the A10-C after around 3 years of just flying around a couple of times a year, it took me all of 3 hours one Saturday afternoon of doing the weapons training and watching a few videos, the next day I was on multi player servers bombing and hitting everything at over 20,000 feet. DCS has everything you need to learn to fly whichever plane you want, you just have to want to learn how to.

And yeah, DCS is Free! How much more accessible can that get?

Edited July 14, 2020 by SharpeXB

https://www.mudspike.com/dcs-world-barriers-to-entry-myth-busted/

I know, 2017, but still valid.

 

12 year veteran of the series says he has no problems following the beginner tutorials. :doh:

 

If you actually want to prove the point, please live stream your girlfriend / brother / sister / mother / neighbor learning the A10 or F14 using the built-in tutorials. You can help or do the stick for them if they dont have enough stick experience, but donate $1 to charity every time you need to answer a question. Could go viral.

"...because I couldn't figure out how to bind a button" is one reason for giving up with DCS I've never heard before.

If you actually want to prove the point, please live stream your girlfriend / brother / sister / mother / neighbor learning the A10 or F14 using the built-in tutorials.

I put my friends on DCS and they immediately crash into the ground

“That’s the ground, pull up. Pull up... you’re gonna die...”

Yeah they suck at video games. This isn’t for everyone.

 

You seem to want to market this game to people who are completely inept and have no motivation or enthusiasm for it. Why?

 

It’s not like this game isn’t accessible to “noobs” if they try and put some effort in. A noob can actually try.

You seem to want to direct this game at “quitters”. People who will just give up at the first hint of anything difficult.

There’s room in DCS for noobs but not quitters. There’s no way to help someone who won’t help themselves or even try.

Edited July 14, 2020 by SharpeXB

catering to quitters eventually makes everyone quit

they burn out the patient teachers and repel the invested

it works great when your business plan is to keep duping quitters year after year, but it's not a plan for longevity.

 

if simulations were a suitable genre for this sort of business, they wouldn't have died out in the first place.

Edited July 14, 2020 by probad

Just to add, if I was a new player and I saw this thread and how the OP keeps referring to new players as "Noobs" I would think what kind of egotistical assho**** play this game, and I would probably never come back to this forum or play online.

 

 

"In internet slang, noobs are hapless, unskilled beginners who don’t know what they are doing. As far as gamers are concerned, a noob is a nothing more than an easy kill—or a real nuisance as a teammate".

 

 

So vertigo, you are more likely to stop new players trying DCS not the learning curve.

Edited July 14, 2020 by Bearskin

I put my friends on DCS and they immediately crash into the ground

 

Read my post again. This isnt about their flying skills, its everything else. I assume you have at least some friends or family who you wouldnt deem too stupid to follow a tutorial that doesnt even require touching the stick?

 

Yeah they suck at video games. This isn’t for everyone.

 

There is a problem, or at the VERY least "room for improvement" even for people who dont suck and who have 1000s of hours of RL and simulator stick time. For people who have flown actual F18s.

 

You seem to want to market this game to people who are completely inept and have no motivation or enthusiasm for it. Why?

 

Like former jet fighter pilots ? Like 10 year xplane veterans who still cant complete startup tutorials without getting two dozen hints and tips per hour from their twitch followers ? Are they all completely inept?

 

You seem to want to direct this game at “quitters”. People who will just give up at the first hint of anything difficult.

 

More blame the customer. But lets roll with it, lets say its true. Lets call them quitters, people who want to have fun playing a game in their free time, who actually want their hand held during their initial learning and not have to treat it like work and read through 500 page manuals and googling before having fun. If that turns out to be 50% of the market, or even just 10%, why would you not want to cater a little more for them? Its not 10 or 50% more work to improve the tutorials and provide some better in game help. And I guarantee you the actual percentage of people being put off by the "RTFM" learning curve is a lot higher than 10%. Or 50%. FSX sold over 20 million copies, overwhelmingly to non pilots, by helping them to learn to fly rather than throwing a book at them. By making something that would otherwise be inaccessible to "inept" quitter customers, accessible and fun. Your mom would have been able to follow the FSX tutorials and eventually learn to fly. I bet FS2020 is going to do the same. At the same time, DCS barely manages to teach qualified jet pilots how to fly and fight jets in DCS.

Edited July 15, 2020 by Vertigo72

Beyond identifying DCS is hard for new players (true) and that it needs a virtual trainer (impractical) I'm really struggling to see what your point is.

Beyond identifying DCS is hard for new players (true) and that it needs a virtual trainer (impractical) I'm really struggling to see what your point is.

 

Whats impractical about having an option to hover your mouse over a control or panel and get some useful help? Whats impractical about a 3 line script during a cold start that detects you are stuck and offers help? about training missions that help you set up your controls, and non module specific help with setting up and using head tracking / mouse / VR controls, the various menu systems, comms systems,. and do that before you teach them how to test emergency hydraulic pressure. What impractical about just about anything I have suggested ?

 

As for the point; I was actually hoping to have a discussion about concrete things that can be done. IMO the best way is by looking at noobs trying to play the game. I gave you my account, because unlike most here, I can still remember where I struggled. But all Im getting is that absolutely nothing should be done because the only problem is customers with attitude problems, or nothing can be done because reasons.

Edited July 15, 2020 by Vertigo72

But all Im getting is that absolutely nothing should be done because the only problem is customers with attitude problems, or nothing can be done because reasons.

 

You are remembering where YOU struggled. Another player may struggle with something entirely different.

 

New players will find DCS complex. Well actually it's x10 more complex than they realise. Trying to develop an interactive trainer that can anticipate even the majority of questions that might come up would be a monumental task, and I suspect just not within the means of ED to develop.

 

If you want a productive discussion the best thing to do is accept what you're asking for won't happen; that'll allow the conversation to move on and allow for opportunities to think of practical alternatives.

You are remembering where YOU struggled. Another player may struggle with something entirely different.

 

Sure, thats possible. But people coming from civilian aviation or civilian sims all have a similar background and similar gaps in their knowledge. That even largely applies to WW1/2 sim pilots. We all know more or less how to fly. But almost none of us will know what bogey dope means, or the difference an SA-9 or SA-15. Also looking at some DCS livestreams, we seem to struggle with the same things, from setting up controls and fighting to keep your head steady trying to click a switch to interpreting the RWR.

 

But one big difference is between modules, and one really big problem is that ED leaves it up to module vendors to make training missions and explain things that every DCS pilot should learn.

 

To give you a very simple, concrete example, I saw a newbie trying out the F18 on youtube, and his navigation training mission explained TACAN rather nicely. If you happen to buy the F14 module first, your navigation lesson doesnt even mention tacan, let alone explain what it is or how to use it, . not even say its basically a VOR.

 

Same thing with auto start. In the F18 cold start training, at least you are told that option exists. In the F14 cold start mission, the first "basic" training mission in the list, literally the first thing they say is you should have read the manual by now, then for the next 15 minutes it teaches you how to test your fire warning lights and hydraulic power. God knows how it is in the Mirage or Mig21 or whatever other module new players buy first.

 

How is solving stuff like that "impossible"?

 

New players will find DCS complex. Well actually it's x10 more complex than they realise.

 

Which is completely fine and part of the attraction. Chess is more complex that you and I realize. But I can teach you the moves in 15 minutes. You dont need to get newbies to the point where they master the game. Just to the point where they can have fun with what they know, and learn by doing.

 

Trying to develop an interactive trainer that can anticipate even the majority of questions that might come up would be a monumental task,

 

It cant be both true that virtually everything a noob needs to know to get started is already in the tutorials and training missions as most people here claim and providing that information interactively or more logically is a monumental task as you claim.

 

Its really small things that can make a ton of difference. But it would help if people listened or watched noobs instead of shouting "RTFM". Well actually, I take that back, it wouldnt help, it would help if ED did.

..you say that with a straight face after writing you, already an experienced DCS pilot, just spent 8 hours on manuals and youtube researching how to fly a WW2 plane.

 

:music_whistling:

 

Those 8 hours included learning things like this (thread) about the interaction between the hydraulic regulator, the supercharger, and the turbo-supercharger.

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=280389

 

Those 8 hours included learning that torque needs to be accounted for, and engine power applied smoothly to reduce "nose sway" and instability. Those 8 hours included learning to trim for speed, and engine settings. Those 8 hours included learning to how to map a throttle quadrant to my HOTAS to fly the P-47 effectively.

 

Those 8 hours included more technical errata, I would never get out of any other flight sim or game. DCS is the "game" for nerds like myself that want to understand how a particular airframe does what it does. I am still learning. Those 8 hours got me comfortable in the P-47, but the learning still is ongoing. I am loving every minute of it.

 

Next thing to learn? Nailing the tail dragger landing. Again a combination of engine power, torque, trim, speed, and AOA on touch down. Nothing else comes close.

 

Yet, you seem to bounce from rail to rail on how bad DCS is, what it needs to be better, how hard it is - what did you expect from a "study sim" that models engine torque so faithfully, that it induces "nose sway" during combat, landing, and other aircraft operations?

 

What did you expect from a "study sim" that allows you to understand all the inner workings of the P-47 supercharger, turbo-supercharger, regulator, and air management via the cowling, oil cooler, and inter-cooler controls?

 

Were you expecting the "other title" type of simplicity? Then do like I do, buy the other title, and have fun there just flying, and shooting stuff. Come back to DCS when you want to be fully immersed, and have the mindset to do so.

 

Two completely different genres, nothing wrong with owning both, and getting what you need from both - because the reality is, they serve two completely different markets - why force one, to be like the other?

 

Why force DCS, or the user community into a mold, that is already filled by other titles. DCS stands alone (or one of a few titles) that appeal to nerds that pore through technical errata like myself. Love it for what it is. If you want to "improve" it, contribute like many who post here do. If you don't like the presentation, for $60.00 you can find it in another title.

It cant be both true that virtually everything a noob needs to know to get started is already in the tutorials and training missions as most people here claim and providing that information interactively or more logically is a monumental task as you claim.

 

I think your idea of what constitutes 'getting started' sounds much more like 'being proficient'.

 

If you've gone through a training mission, whatever it might be, such as how to drop a bomb, and by the end of it you can do that, the mission did what it was supposed to. That's getting started. The training mission isn't there to answer absolutely any question that you might have, which is what you appear to be asking for.