What Am I Paying For?

I fairly recently spent a week in Las Vegas, flew in and out in the window seat of an Airliner, and flew for several hours in a helicopter at both low and fairly high alitude from Vegas, to the Hoover dam, to the Grand Canyon, and back again. Maybe the terrain contour is close, maybe not, but I can tell you it looks a hell of a lot different from reality in every single regard.

& Yet...

I have spent my career flying around Nevada and have landed in all but the airfields within the Restrict Area, and that is what Nevada looks like believe me. Enjoy it, it makes it easy on the frame rates.

 

352ndRJ

Re - rivers & roads running at odd angles.

Part of the problem is that an attempt has been made to put a representative sample of roads and rivers in the places where roads and rivers are.

When they are placed close to their actual course over (what is still in the current release of the Caucasus map) a fairly low resolution terrain mesh, some peculiarities show up.

The earthworks that allow a flat road on the side of a mountain simply aren't represented on that low detail mesh, and if the available representations of streams start with something 2 m wide, they're going to appear to pop fully formed from their origins.

Having their placement procedurally generated would mean either that rivers and roads would take courses that are completely divorced from actual paths, or they would still be running across slopes & across transitions that are unnatural because of the low detail level of the terrain mesh.

Thanks wet. Just to be clear the tech I was talking about isn't just procedural, it's procedural plus simple and quick tools to edit. See a very brief demo here at 7:30.

Thanks wet. Just to be clear the tech I was talking about isn't just procedural, it's procedural plus simple and quick tools to edit. See a very brief demo here at 7:30.

These tools are very impressive. But I fail to see your point.

I don't believe any of the DCS maps have been hand-crafted tree by tree and building by building. I'm sure there's a lot of automatic object placement taking place during the map-building phase using a variety of input parameters like radar based elevation maps, satellite imagery, maybe stuff like Open Street Map and so on.

I believe the upcoming Normandy map showcases alleys that grow along roads and railways.

And I wouldn't be surprised if ED have some very powerful tools of their own.

Ultimately, I don't think that Star Citizen video showed truly procedural generated and vegetated landscapes, and I don't think DCS World could become bigger quicker by using those same tools.

Of course it would be amazing if DCS World actually spanned across the entire globe, with some theaters available in high detail, but I don't see that becoming a priority for the foreseeable future.

We dont have CPUs to calculate even the smallest of trees for a second when its leaves are moving, far far away we are.

Thermodynamics is so complex that you have to find an approach other than trying to accurately simulate it, you simply cant down to the deepest complexity. Not in realtime and even less with our CPUs and RAM

Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

The wind seems to be just a constant force although it varies with height. So yes more like a fan than the real thing.

Try turbulence, or simply use dynamic weather...

DCS is worth every Penny you spend on it but be warned, i needs lots of time to learn each module to be good at it.

I for one own more modules than I will EVER be able to master completly, no doubt.

...and I keep buying more :P

I guess I'm a DCS fanboy but not without good reason.

How you look at the price of modules will be probably have a lot to do with

your age and how much you are interested in aviation.

As a kid, for me, flying a F86 sabre jet or P51 mustang was not something I

thought I could ever do. We grew up without PC's and smart phones. We

built plastic models of these aircraft and hung them from the ceiling of our

bedrooms looking up at them with awe.

Back in the day I worked on Data General mini computers that we unloaded

off a 5 ton truck with a power tailgate. 64KB of core memory and a 5 MB

drive that had 2 16" platters in it. The drive weighed close to 200 lbs. 100

Grand would get you your very own Nova 1200 with a teletype for I/O.

Nowadays there is kind of a Tsunami of software and hardware choices and

kids growing up today see incredible software daily and still are waiting for

something better next month.

Attention spans are short and many companies are competing for gamers

dollars from every direction.

Being a realist I understand that this is a niche market. My biggest fear is

that ED will not succeed financially and this type of software will no longer

be available to guys like me. I'm not as concerned that a highly detailed

aircraft of map module costs $60.

As a business man say 10,000 modules at $60 = $600 grand . 10

programmers at say $50 grand a year = $500 grand. Not such a huge

profit for so much work is it ? Never mind the continuing support and

bug fixes required after the sale.

It's all about scale. You either have volume or margin and ideally you have

both but that's rarely the case.

Yes the modules aren't cheap but I have yet to be disappointed by any of

them. Warts and all. I'm like a little kid sometimes just looking around in

the air from my cockpit thinking wow this is awsum.

I can fly these aircraft to my hearts content for years to come. Compare

that to a 1 week vacation to the destination of your choice and see that

there is great value here.

So I continue to support this company as best I can,when I can. I just hope

there's a lot of people like me out there so we can continue to see this

fantastic software evolve.

So for me. That's what I'm paying for.

Saying all that though I can certainly understand that many people won't

feel the same way I do and that's just fine.

Extremely well said @Slap_Chop ! I too live in fear that there might not be enough paying customers to keep truly hardcore simulation a relevant market.

It's up to us to try to help the right people find their way to DCS and keep the dream alive.

Do you fly in VR @Slap_Chop? If you ever come on down my way you are invited to try out the VR motion sim. I'm about 2 hours drive west of New York City.

So those of you who were here when I was somewhat harshly criticizing the NTTR map in this thread, it seems some of my criticism was based on a partially broken build!

I just found in another thread comparison images, and I only started flying NTTR after the 2.05 patch that seems to have broken these textures and meshes: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=177641&page=5

I think the most telling comparison shots are the last ones posted in that thread.

So I 75% retract my complaints pending seeing NTTR after it's working properly again. =P

Trip, that 6DOf Motion platform is just fantastic !! Thanks to guys like you

this sim exists.

Constructive criticism of modules is a good thing. It's just makes things more

real. I'm really interested to hear what people with more knowledge than me

have to say.

Ultimately we end with a better sim closer to real thing.

Man I'd love to have a ride in that rig of yours. I'm in western Canada so

it would be a bit of a drive.

But a man can dream.

When looking at the "money well spent" vs. the "time you spend enjoying" DCS is pretty cheap in a way.

I always like to compare it to visiting a cinema watching a cool movie.

A night at the movies cost you roundabout 10-30 EUR were I live.

+Ticket 10-18 EUR

+Snack popcorn or nachos 5-8 EUR

+A soft drink 3-6 EUR

...and you need to get there.

Cheapest calculation: walk there and just the ticket = 10EUR

That gives you an average 110 minutes (movies over 2 hours cost more).

It is passive fun, you can just sit and watch.

For four of these movies at the cinema (or two DVD/Blu-ray for that matter) I get a DCS module that equals to a minimum of 8-10 hrs fun just trying it out and learning the basic systems and how to operate it.

The overall time I spent in for example the A-10C, Huey, Black Shark, Mirage or Hawk goes into dozens to hundreds if hours per module over the last decade...

For me it looks like a lot of bang for the bucks. :)

P.S. I am aware you need a HOTAS Joystick, PC etc., but you wouldn't calculate the Car, for the sole purpose of driving to the movies, would you? ;)

Sad

Don't get me wrong here.

But what am I paying for in all of this?

Wonderful that DCS World is free, but to get anywhere you need to buy the new maps, get the latest aircraft, and we are talking in the area of $60.00 a shot.

I have bought three planes in excess of the freeies that come alone with the download (1.5)

But Now version 2.0 is the hope of the future. I understand that Rome wasn't created in a day, but...

A Whole lot of the info out there doesn't follow with the latest version and you better be careful of the downloads you add because some are for version 1.2 and will cause 1.5 to crash and no one cares to tell you whiich one is which. Think I'm kidding or just ragging? Go on the forums and read it for yourself.

I think this game (sim) is the best I have ever come across, But does DCS know where this is going to end?

That this rate, and these prices, I believe this sim is doomed to the same fate as Strike Fighters and Falcon 4.0 AF.

 

 

What does thou think to be so?

I know what you mean, so all I'm going to say is the History of gaming is sad......... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Combat_flight_simulators :cry:

I'm surely not the oldest user of ED products, but I've been around for a while. And I think the future looks very bright right now.

 

We're getting more and more high quality modules. The work ED has done in terms of graphics and terrain engines is just outstanding. Coming from 1.2, the new graphics engine is a massive leap ahead, and the stunning new Nevada terrain is also way beyond the old Caucasus map. With Normandy just around the edge, it seems this map is going to be even more beautiful. Plus, Caucasus is going to get a major overhaul as well.

 

Then the modules. ED/TFC themselves are kicking out great stuff, and I just can't wait for the F/A-18, though the Hog is currently my favorite aircraft of all of them - even though it was only their second fully clickable module. The depth of the modelling is just amazing.

 

And then we have an increasing number of 3rd parties providing us with new toys at a much higher rate than ED could on their own.

 

I'm now at a point that I don't buy anything just because it gets released. Most of all it doesn't make much sense to me to own something I won't have the time to learn anyway. That said, I never regretted my last minute decision to get the Viggen pre-release, what a fantastic module!

 

So, I don't know what you're paying for. I am paying for very high quality content that's there for hours and hours of fun, while also providing me with an amazing community and Multiplayer environment. :thumbup:

+1 I couldn't have said it better myself

I think @Slap Chop hit the nail on the head.

I think entertainment media and equipment should be evaluated at cost per hour of enjoyment. Some people in the DCS community buy all the modules not because they plan to spend a significant amount of time flying them but to continue supporting DCS. I think this is an excellent practice (except for any sub-par modules) for those who can afford to do it.

Also Slap Chop, thanks for the kind words. A shame you are so far away.

DCS is an absolute bargain when it is compared with real flight..

When flying a helicopter in real life costs $425 per flight HOUR, I finally had to give it up and DCS has filled this void nicely... For the cost of a few hours of real flight time I can build a kick ass machine and buy every module DCS offers...

Based on the amount of time I have played... DCS is an amazing deal.

Is this even a question?

It costs a lot less than going on date, and there's no grantee that you'll get laid :D

DCS World comes with a free map, that free map is being updated for free to look closer to the quality of the new maps we will be seeing. You also get constant updates for free, model updates and new models are added all the time. You are getting 2.X updates for free, new lighting, new effects, new cloud system, etc all for free. You get my wonderful company for free...

 

I see nothing but perks ;)

Yeah, that's true, there are people who like all this pretty graphics and nice models, lighting and everything you mentioned, but honestly, for me at least, and the guys I fly with, the bugs in flight modeling, air-to-air missile physics and guidance, features promised years ago and still not delivered are just breaking the experience and are holding me back from giving more money to ED until such features and bugs are rectified and delivered!

the bugs in flight modeling

Which FMs did you have in mind?

Okay, probably "promise" is the wrong word, for ex: statements like "we aim to release (state feature here) by the end of this year" and "coming to DCS World soon". That's the stuff I'm talking about. Although no promises were made, it gets the hopes up and we (the consumers) end up getting disappointed when things don't get released.

As for flight models, there are some ED flight models which need addressing (at least that I know of) like the F-15C over-stress modelling is absent and then come the third parties which are in constant state of addressing their flight models. Modules that come to mind are Mirage, MiG-21, Hawk.. et cetera. I know its not easy and I'm no programmer and they are doing their best, but its just taking too long IMHO.

My point to ED is get the underlying game mechanics and merge in place so that third parties and everyone get a stable base, then focus on making it pretty. That's my gripe!!! Yes, I know, you guys will say they are different teams altogether, but still its taking too long and we are not getting younger everyday. Oh well, let me just stop there. :music_whistling:

for the most part, ED and BST modules have rock solid FMs.

They do. The only gripe I can think of is the still missing Huey powerplant/drivetrain thermal/friction/overstress damage model, but other than that, they are indeed excellent.

However, what happens with the 3rd party FMs remains to be seen. Let's say that I'm not overtly optimistic as regards some of them, but may well be wrong - and would definitely like to be, for that matter.

OK, out :)

Interesting discussion. I think DCS does a great job modeling the aircraft and systems. The scenery is great, but only where there is some. To me, part of realism is having a realistic world to fly in not just in terms of detail, but also scope. I think confining aircraft to relatively small geographical really limits the market that DCS appeals to.

DCS is a good flight simulator, not just a good combat flight simulator. It could be a great flight simulator, if it were willing to model more or all of the world in lesser detail. Why not model the whole world, and fill in the detail later?

Start with basic land and oceans, add runways and navigation systems and go from there.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk