Why I am unlikely to buy from DCS in the future...

Hi folks,

the title of the topic might seem misleading. You might think that I am not happy with DCS.

Actually, it is quite the contrary. Let me explain.

I have been a fan of the company since 1995 and the days of Flanker 1.0. Heck, I was even a Beta tester for one of the V2 sub versions. Over the last two and a half decades DCS has always had a place in this simmer's heart (hard drive).

While I traditionally preferred Soviet-era aircraft I would occasionally jump into the A10C and the F15. And I enjoyed them too.

When DCS starting putting out new aircraft I bought the A10C, then the Mirage, then the Harrier, then the Mig-21, then to JF-17, then the Hornet and finally the Supercarrier. I also bought Nevada and the Persian Gulf.

The A10C was their first advanced aircraft so it was a natural move for me - even though I preffer CAP just as much as CAS. Great product.

The Mirage was unique - It is French eh! - it is a delta wing - and yes - it is a multirole aircraft. Great product.

The Harrier was also unique - VTOL - who does not want that right ? Great product. Made me read up on the Falklands conflict too. I also remember Maggie - very well.

The Mig-21 was a purely sentimental purchase. I originally come from a country that originally had almost 200 of them - plus I wanted to support DCS more than anything else. Consequently, I did not spend much time on it.

The JF-17 was another unique piece for me. A glimpse of China and Pakistan in a compact multi role package. If the Hornet had not come out it would be my favorite DCS aircraft today.

Then the Hornet came out. What can I say ? The depth is insane - at least for me it is. And it is still evolving. Multi role - yummy !

The Superacarrier was a no-brainer after that. No regrets.

So now what ?

The F-18's systems are so complex (to me anyway) that I have plenty to learn - and keep learning for a long time. I do not see the need to buy anything else. I have more than enough to keep my 63-year old brain busy for a long time. And the JF-17, Harrier and Mirage will do great as occasional diversions from the F18. If I buy anything else I will not have the time to dedicate to the module (probably not the brainpower either) so it would be a waste of money.

Yeah, I will likely purchase something just to support DCS. But will I fly it ? I doubt it.

What I can see myself spending money on are three things:

-Additional campaigns

-Additional training missions - even though You Tube is a great source. But it requires weeding out to get to the video applicable to the current state of development.

-A study-level Soviet/Russian multi role aircraft. This is definitely the big one for me. Su-27SMK with the F18 depth ?

How much do you want for it ?

$200 ?

You got it.

Now I do understand that there are likely at least two reasons why DCS develops mostly Western (and not Russian) modules.

- there is not enough demand to cover development costs

- a reluctance of the powers-that-be to allow sensitive information about Russian jets to be ported over to the simulation world - even if that information relates to an older version. If we do not have the latest F18 version we also should not aspire to the latest Su-37. But a first-generation multi role Su-27 - I do not see a problem with that. I guess Mr. Vladimir may have a problem with that. I understand.

Anyways, I think you get my drift. DCS is - as far as I am concerned - a victim of it's own success.

Love the company. I just hope they can stay around for a long time. They may need to re-invent their business model - I wish them all the best.

Thanks for reading folks.

I agree with all that.

My situation is similar. I already bought all the plane modules that I'll ever fly in the next five or ten years (I can fly only one or two planes at the time)... BECAUSE of their high quality (level of detail)!

The free A4 is a lot of fun too!

The last four modules I bought are all still EA, WIP. Time to wait before buying more WIP.

I'll probably buy the Syrian map some day, after I upgrade my PC.

Maybe I'll buy the Eurofighter some day, if the reviews are good. Maybe.

Voice Attack and Simshaker were two great additions Well worth their price.

I too would pay for good missions, especially training missions, but that's not on offer, too bad. I make-do with youtube tutorials and with the free missions made by the community. Some of them are really fun.

I would even pay for a DCS World 3.0 with improved ATC, improved AI and AI flight models, and a working track recording/replay system (long live tacview!) but that's not on offer either.

I am staying on 2.5.5 until 2.5.6 is ironed out. The supercarrier can wait.

So, thank you ED! I am enjoying your products very much! Keep fixing and improving those EA!

And everybody have a great weekend!

I don’t think anyone can blame DCS for targeting some 4th gen headliners. If you can manage a license for them, why not? But now that they got those bad boys, It would make sense to turn back to more simpler content, like wwii, 1st to 3rd gen jets. Personally I prefer to fly low cost, fun little carts (F-5, MiG-19), than an expensive Mercedes with more excessive bells and whistles that keep it in the shop and draining the wallet.

Do yourself a favor and buy the Huey along with a VR headset. ;)

Do yourself a favor and buy the Huey along with a VR headset. ;)

Yes, VR is an area where I can see myself going - eventually.

But, the current resolutions available are not good enough. If I cannot read the F18 gauges without clicking the Zoom button it is a no-go for me.

One day - yes.

Yes, VR is an area where I can see myself going - eventually.

 

 

But, the current resolutions available are not good enough. If I cannot read the F18 gauges without clicking the Zoom button it is a no-go for me.

 

 

 

One day - yes.

You obviously didn't try the Reverb :music_whistling:

I can even read the small text on the moving map without using zoom...

You obviously didn't try the Reverb :music_whistling:

 

I can even read the small text on the moving map without using zoom...

?!

 

What I can see myself spending money on are three things:

 

-Additional campaigns

-Additional training missions - even though You Tube is a great source. But it requires weeding out to get to the video applicable to the current state of development.

-A study-level Soviet/Russian multi role aircraft. This is definitely the big one for me. Su-27SMK with the F18 depth ?

 

How much do you want for it ?

 

$200 ?

You got it.

Next big things for DCS I see few things.

1) Complete overhauled AI, based to military command structure and doctrines. Implement a basic moral system for each unit (will to fight, emotion status to combat etc) and many other features that are common in many older and modern RTS games. A new communication system, what works over the radio frequency system in DCS. So that units needs to communicate to exchange information between. This is critical system to dynamic campaign and overall CA module, where you wouldn't anymore ever have a realtime information unless you are looking a video feed of the area. Otherwise you should only have such information only that is based to commands, like be in X position at the Z time, positions these, direction this etc etc. And this requires good artificial intelligence gathering, automatic AI mission generation and tasking to all units.

2) dynamic campaign, that really requires the above. SO that we can actually generate new scenarios, new whole war situation. That can be simulated X hours forward or reverse at will. So we can play same mission again and again, or speed up to wait to get a new interesting one.

3) Definitely a REDAIR top aircrafts. I personally wait MiG-23MLA very very much. My favorite these days (years ago I thought it was ugliest fighter ever done) as started to research it more and more. So I can be happy to see the top fighter from the 80's before time went past and MLD came as too late.

But if I leave MiG-23 away, I would totally pay for three aircrafts.

A) Su-27M (the first one, not the one that became Su-35S) so glass cockpit, nice radar and all from the late 80's. And no, I don't see MiG-29 anywhere as interesting as other Su-27 than S model we have now.

B) Su-25SM. Just to compete with A-10C etc. But still not major glass cockpit etc. Of course dream would be to see a Su-25KM Scorpion. But even Su-25A would be amazing thing!

C) Su-24. A Frontline strike fighter, compete with F-111 and so. There is a nice mod in development, hopefully see a release sometime.

So... Su-27M would be money income for ED.

But what I have started really want to see in DCS, is civilian aircrafts. I want to see something like R-22 helicopter, or Boeing 737 and lots of various small civilian passenger aircrafts, rotor and jets. As we need to have peace time interceptions, air policing etc.

And I really want to see cargo aircrafts like C-2 Greyhound and An-72. As that would bring more players from civilian market too. Just transport cargo from airport to unprepared fields, dropping to troops etc etc. Just pure flying.

You obviously didn't try the Reverb :music_whistling:

 

I can even read the small text on the moving map without using zoom...

I think we're in a pretty good place now with VR personally. I'm on a rift S and have no issues with reading things in the cockpit.

Is it perfect? No not yet, but is it good enough? Most definitely! And for me an absolute game changer.

You obviously didn't try the Reverb :music_whistling:

 

I can even read the small text on the moving map without using zoom...

Same is with Rift S.

I never binded the zoom in Rift CV1 after testing it.

And I always said that once one can read main cauges etc in all modules, VR is good enough. As CV1 was such that you couldn't example read F-5 speed indicator without zooming. So no idea what Mach you were etc. So you must learn the needle position to know what speed you were.

Rift S changed all that just like Wags told. You can read everything without leaning or without zooming.

On specs the resolution can sound minor compared anything else. But the major differential was OLED panels changed to new RGB panels and definition became high. Difference is like night and day.

Rift S made VR ready in DCS.

Never need zoom, no need to lean forward at all etc. The only real problem is to look to your but as the Rift S HMD unit is sitting higher on face than CV1, so easier to see upward, but less on your feet and especially side panels around your hip.

Why I am waiting more of a higher Vertical FOV increase than horizontal.

My situation is similar, but I will buy modules

a - As far as I'm interested in the aircraft

b - I believe it is well done already (no early access support from me)

I am fine with not being able to master everything in an aircraft because of not having enough time. I'll learn each of them bit by bit, as I get to spend time with them.

Yeah, Unless you have 5000 thousand euro budget for a proper wired VR like the ones from Varjo, then I just wouldn't bother with it if you're thinking you'll get everything plus, it's a huge step back in resolution, you won't be able to read any text AFAIK, or barely.

That's not to say those who are into it and the devs who are developing int are doing it for nothing, the journey may be the destination, reexperiencing the evolution one pixel at a time I guess.

I guess Mr. Vladimir may have a problem with that. I understand.

Eeeeeee, Here we go again ... :lol:

Infact you put so much effort into your post, so I challenge you to find my past rants on lack of soviet-block jets, and the whole "putin letter" thing.

You might have a fun read ... I'm not going to start a new rant right now.

But then I heard just a couple of weeks ago someone posted a reminder about some rumor that Sukhoi actually .... threw the old documents away.

?!

What exactly didn't you understand?

I don't get the "?!"

Do yourself a favor and buy the Huey along with a VR headset. ;)

how much for the vr?

now, is that crazy or what spending that on that when you have things like homes, cars, families....

computer=$$$ ... it gets to be quite expensive flying this stuff... :joystick:

I guess if you can just spend and spend :doh:

This has pretty much been my sentiment for a while. Most people will only be able to juggle a few airplanes at a time depending on their complexity. Therefore I no longer buy newer airframes unless I really want it. My last purchase was the Super Carrier and the F/A-18. The SC was a worth while investment as it will always be of use for Naval operations. But I have barley flown the Hornet because I am still trying to master the Tomcat. But I still fly the Viggen because its still fairly simple to remember to operate. Heck even though I have not flown the F-86 in a long time I still feel confident enough to hop in and figure things out again.

But I would certainly be interested in buying some future maps or some other different types of aircraft that we currently don't have that are simple to operate like a C-2 Greyhound.

What exactly didn't you understand?

 

I don't get the "?!"

Did not quite get the fact that you were referring to a new VR. All good now...

 

How much do you want for it ?

 

$200 ?

You got it.

 

Now I do understand that there are likely at least two reasons why DCS develops mostly Western (and not Russian) modules.

- there is not enough demand to cover development costs

- a reluctance of the powers-that-be to allow sensitive information about Russian jets to be ported over to the simulation world - even if that information relates to an older version. If we do not have the latest F18 version we also should not aspire to the latest Su-37. But a first-generation multi role Su-27 - I do not see a problem with that. I guess Mr. Vladimir may have a problem with that. I understand.

 

Anyways, I think you get my drift. DCS is - as far as I am concerned - a victim of it's own success.

 

Love the company. I just hope they can stay around for a long time. They may need to re-invent their business model - I wish them all the best.

 

Thanks for reading folks.

FC3 style Su 37, Bars radar, better radar, great detection reange to BVR air combat and stable target tracking all direction 20 - 25 km and no1 dogfighter!

Dream! :cry:

Su 37 Video:

Yep, I feel you. I thought I'm done too as I had almost all I wanted and could handle at a time but then they came up with Supercarrier, so I wouldn't worry - they'll figure out how to get the cash flowing :)

There are great free campaigns and missions so one can fly every day a new mission. There is MP with limitless possibilities. You can train every day carrier recoveries, AAR, dogfighting, A2A, A2G - I mean you have to to stay proficient. And this all with one aircraft only is plenty.

But I would still buy study-level F-15C, maybe E too. I'd buy North part of PG surely, maybe Syria too - depends on available content because that's what sells maps for me. I'd even try some heavy too. Everyone has something like that that's yet to be done and will be hard to resist.

Thank you so much for this post, I noticed you also want a full fidelity modern russian plane such as the su27, this is by far my most wanted thing to be added in DCS, not to say that american planes are bad, but they sorta feel a bit boring because that's what I mostly see irl, having a russian modern fighter would bring this equally as huge eastern side world of aviation to DCS and show what the modern russian side looks like.

The jf17 is already the first step to this goal and thankfully it was wonderfully done, the next step is the full blown russian fighter.

Yes I do get there are licensing issues and such but I still hope one day...

Yeah, Unless you have 5000 thousand euro budget for a proper wired VR like the ones from Varjo, then I just wouldn't bother with it if you're thinking you'll get everything plus, it's a huge step back in resolution, you won't be able to read any text AFAIK, or barely.

Better stop writing old information.

You are now talking about Oculus Developer Kit 1 kind VR systems, that is from 2013. Yes it is "only" 7 years ago, but DK2 was better and CV1 was much better.

In CV1 it became possible read most texts, but not the fine details like Su-25T speedometer fine lines or is the altimeter in 6 km or 7 km position. You needed to know better the instruments by their hands positions. HUD was always possible to read well.

Rift S changed everything. You can read everything as long the texture artist is not trying to make labels difficult to read on display even.

With the Rift S it is possible to just glance labels or any instruments and see what there is written and what they indicate. It is little better than 1080p display.

I definitely feel where the OP is coming from. The F-18 is my favorite modern jet IRL, so of course it's my main ride. But unless something really interesting hits, and I can't think of what's out there that would really get me salivating, I probably won't buy another modern jet. What I would/will buy is more WWII aircraft, and more early cold war aircraft. This is of course providing that there is sufficient improvement to the period assets, damage modeling, and Ai behavior. The aircraft from this time are fairly simple to learn, but all definitely have there own character. I would also buy a fully modeled armor module, from any and all eras. And of course helicopter warfare could use a serious revisit. But as far as modern multi role jets go I'm kinda done. I got the Viper on sale to support ED, but doubt I'll log much time in it, ever. I can see some of the European birds, but I suspect most will pick a favorite, and fly that. I know that's how it'll be for me, and that favorite will be the Hornet.

The thing with DCS is that you can buy aircraft for different reasons. I have more aircraft at this point than I'm willing to be proficient in, but there are still more I want to buy. Some I don't even really use for combat but just to fly.

I don't really see a need to change things. DCS also seems to have done well in growing its user base over the years, and the new players who aren't saturated on modules may not feel overwhelmed by new offerings.

I too can understand the OP point of view.

One of the things that appealed to me with DCS was the detail. I have ben flight simming since Micropose flight Sim on the C64, and one thing that turned me off for a few years (I realized in hindsight) was the plethora of basic and incomplete aircraft available on sims in the norties. I downloaded them all and never really learned any aircraft well.

Fast forward to a few years ago when I found the A10 on DCS, a highly detailed aircraft that took time to learn. It was only last xmas that I felt the need to move on to the F18, and it was a tough decision between that and the F14.

I keep a Huey in Hangar for a change of pace and nostalgia, and am also building a WW2 stable, as these are technically easier to learn, and give me a change of pace/different experience but I am unlikely to use more than one modern aircraft every year or two.

I would much prefer to see core improvements, new sceneries and enhancements to the environment I fly in than new aircraft, (especially early access ones which I will not touch until a certain level of completion is achieved). Modules such as the Supercarrier, and good scenery will encourage me to part with dollars more than a new aircraft.

I really hate VR: it separates the haves from the have-nots.

For me, DCS is about two things:

1. flying jets; and

2. flying helicopters.

For WW2, I'll go to <the sim that we're not allowed to talk about but which is much better>. However for helicopters and especially jets, its awesome. I'm sincerely hoping they finally realise there is merit in developing a full DCS Vietnam scenario ie. map, a/c, assets, etc.

More Nato fighters for me does nothing. I didn't bother with the russian jets except the Mig21. I didn't bother with the Harrier.

What I'm really annoyed about is dividing up the community by paid maps. Would prefer more free maps that we can get 20 servers with 20-30 players on doing PVE rather than 200 servers with 2-3 people on, which is the case now. No fun in flying alone in a hostile environment.