Jump to content

Realism - wasted effort?


Lace

Recommended Posts

There seems to be a great effort by ED and their 3rd-parties for the ultimate realism in systems modelling which is laudable and is clearly what a part of the DCS community crave. But we also see on a daily basis wishlists for this module and that module, which given the current rate of development would take about 100 years to accomplish.

 

 

So my point is this - do ED and the developers spend too much time on unnecessary realism. We have BIT tests which never fail (I presume), and if they did then what? Do you scrub the mission in the name of realism? Jump into the spare aircraft? In the Viper for instance we have a trim disconnect test (is a runaway trim situation planned to be modeled?). Check the EPU fuel level (will it ever not be 95-102%). My point is all these systems need time to implement and test, and while they appear to add realism to the module, are they not just window dressing? Do those searching for the ultimate realism in their modules actually fly realistic missions? Do they ever spend six-hours patrolling a kill box as a two ship without encountering the enemy? Do they spend an hour on the ground from their step time to engine start to taxi to takeoff?

 

 

 

I'm not saying there shouldn't be full-fidelity modules, but is there perhaps room for a half-way compromise between FF and FC3 type modules. i.e PFM with clickable cockpits and high-fidelity flight and weapons systems, but without the 100% functionality of systems which, lets be honest, for a recreational simulator/game are of little value?

 

 

TLDR; Would you rather have fewer full-fidelity modules, or more modules at a slightly lower level of non-essential detail?

Laptop Pilot. Alienware X17, i9 11980HK 5.0GHz, 16GB RTX 3080, 64GB DDR4 3200MHz, NVMe SSD. 2x TM Warthog, Hornet grip, Virpil CM2 & TPR pedals, FSSB-R3, Cougar throttle, Viper pit WIP (XBox360 when traveling). Rift S.

NTTR, SoH, Syria, Sinai, Channel, South Atlantic, CA, Supercarrier, FC3, A-10CII, F-5, F-14, F-15E, F-16, F/A-18, F-86, Harrier, M2000, F1, Viggen, MiG-21, Yak-52, L-39, MB-339, CE2, Gazelle, Ka-50, Mi-8, Mi-24, Huey, Apache, Spitfire, Mossie.  Wishlist: Tornado, Jaguar, Buccaneer, F-117 and F-111.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 174
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Can’t speak to the efficacy of running checklists covering every single real-world system (Lord knows I’ve skipped one or two from time to time) but as for operational realism, yes, I have flown A-10C missions of 3 to 3.5 hours and returned to base with the same ordinance I left with.

 

We’re blessed with very talented mission makers in our group and sometimes the enemy just isn’t where they were initially reported, or you can’t reach them because they are under too dense an anti-air umbrella so you’ll need SEAD/DEAD help or red air moves in on the AO and you need to head to safety, or your lead/wingman gets zapped (requiring an RTB by regulation)

 

So yes, there are groups that operate “by the book” and the fun lies in sharing an Op with your buddies and getting back Code 1.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

http://www.476vfightergroup.com/content.php

High Quality Aviation Photography For Personal Enjoyment And Editorial Use.

www.crosswindimages.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can’t speak to the efficacy of running checklists covering every single real-world system (Lord knows I’ve skipped one or two from time to time) but as for operational realism, yes, I have flown A-10C missions of 3 to 3.5 hours and returned to base with the same ordinance I left with.

 

We’re blessed with very talented mission makers in our group and sometimes the enemy just isn’t where they were initially reported, or you can’t reach them because they are under too dense an anti-air umbrella so you’ll need SEAD/DEAD help or red air moves in on the AO and you need to head to safety, or your lead/wingman gets zapped (requiring an RTB by regulation)

 

So yes, there are groups that operate “by the book” and the fun lies in sharing an Op with your buddies and getting back Code 1.

 

 

Thats just it. Like you I appreciate 'realistic' missions, and like you will run an abridged checklist for the non-essential items. But if people are missing these type of items anyway, why waste valuable programming hours modelling them in the first place? A player could just as conceivably say 'BIT check complete' or 'MPO check complete' as part of their startup if they want, especially if it isn't modeled to fail any of these checks. The whole game is just 'lets pretend' anyway isn't it?

Laptop Pilot. Alienware X17, i9 11980HK 5.0GHz, 16GB RTX 3080, 64GB DDR4 3200MHz, NVMe SSD. 2x TM Warthog, Hornet grip, Virpil CM2 & TPR pedals, FSSB-R3, Cougar throttle, Viper pit WIP (XBox360 when traveling). Rift S.

NTTR, SoH, Syria, Sinai, Channel, South Atlantic, CA, Supercarrier, FC3, A-10CII, F-5, F-14, F-15E, F-16, F/A-18, F-86, Harrier, M2000, F1, Viggen, MiG-21, Yak-52, L-39, MB-339, CE2, Gazelle, Ka-50, Mi-8, Mi-24, Huey, Apache, Spitfire, Mossie.  Wishlist: Tornado, Jaguar, Buccaneer, F-117 and F-111.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You’re asking ED to nerf one of their (for better or worse) core tenets and honestly, I don’t see that happening any time soon.

 

I guess it’s better to have “X” and not need it than it is to need “X” and not have it?

 

Personally, I prefer to learn all the nuts & bolts because then I can develop a flow for startup that works for me.

 

For those who don’t want to get neck deep, there’s FCS and the upcoming MAC.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

http://www.476vfightergroup.com/content.php

High Quality Aviation Photography For Personal Enjoyment And Editorial Use.

www.crosswindimages.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can’t speak to the efficacy of running checklists covering every single real-world system (Lord knows I’ve skipped one or two from time to time) but as for operational realism, yes, I have flown A-10C missions of 3 to 3.5 hours and returned to base with the same ordinance I left with.

 

We’re blessed with very talented mission makers in our group and sometimes the enemy just isn’t where they were initially reported, or you can’t reach them because they are under too dense an anti-air umbrella so you’ll need SEAD/DEAD help or red air moves in on the AO and you need to head to safety, or your lead/wingman gets zapped (requiring an RTB by regulation)

 

So yes, there are groups that operate “by the book” and the fun lies in sharing an Op with your buddies and getting back Code 1.

 

This applies to my experience too (I only fly online with an organized squadron though, I'd never fly 4 hours by my self).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You’re asking ED to nerf one of their (for better or worse) core tenets and honestly, I don’t see that happening any time soon.

 

I guess it’s better to have “X” and not need it than it is to need “X” and not have it?

 

Personally, I prefer to learn all the nuts & bolts because then I can develop a flow for startup that works for me.

 

 

I agree to an extent, but at what cost to module development time?

Laptop Pilot. Alienware X17, i9 11980HK 5.0GHz, 16GB RTX 3080, 64GB DDR4 3200MHz, NVMe SSD. 2x TM Warthog, Hornet grip, Virpil CM2 & TPR pedals, FSSB-R3, Cougar throttle, Viper pit WIP (XBox360 when traveling). Rift S.

NTTR, SoH, Syria, Sinai, Channel, South Atlantic, CA, Supercarrier, FC3, A-10CII, F-5, F-14, F-15E, F-16, F/A-18, F-86, Harrier, M2000, F1, Viggen, MiG-21, Yak-52, L-39, MB-339, CE2, Gazelle, Ka-50, Mi-8, Mi-24, Huey, Apache, Spitfire, Mossie.  Wishlist: Tornado, Jaguar, Buccaneer, F-117 and F-111.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I don’t know.

 

I’m really not one to sweat module development. If I have “gripes” they’re usually directed more at the overall sim experience vis a vis the core game (and the occasional “Yeah, you fixed B but you broke A, C and D”)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

http://www.476vfightergroup.com/content.php

High Quality Aviation Photography For Personal Enjoyment And Editorial Use.

www.crosswindimages.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree to an extent, but at what cost to module development time?

 

Most of what ED has now and 3rd parties are building is what you would call modular code base to change and use for ..........X

 

ED is even moving into using new tech to simulate how real radars work.

I.E somethings need to be more inaccurate to be accurate. (Looking at you F-15)

 

This also aligns with their other business / deep system building / cost spread too.

 

Most of the aircraft that are full-fidelity are built out of passion, some dev's would go even deeper than what some are now if they could.

 

MAC is the transition War Th etc --> MAC ---> DCS

 

I sit in the middle here as do others I guess....

 

Learn and do it all proper..ish, setup a few missions etc.

 

Multiplayer. Skip all checklist and know enough, get in air and shoot things down with friends. Sling load cargo to build convoy's. Drive a tank and blowup enemy farps for fun. FC3 and full-fidelity.

 

I like learning how things work and the idea behind the work flow to use the systems / combat systems.


Edited by David OC

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

Hopefully the dev time will take less time in the future if the modular build tech is done right. Currently the simulation starts with the pilot in the cockpit - be it cold, hot or even in the air already. It's not about simulating the life of a pilot, so you can change the planes, pilots and theatres however you want. Some systems or switches are still simplified and even omitted so we're not there yet in terms of realism. What people do with it all is not your concern. Btw: there is some simulation of failures - random as an option or mission invoked. I hope it will be improved in time.

 

TL;DR: I want even fuller quality modules whatever time it takes. Of course I'd rather simulate a memorable mission than a boring one. Nothing wrong in that.


Edited by draconus

🖥️ Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX3060   🥽 Rift S   🕹️ T16000M HOTAS   ✈️ FC3, F-14A/B, F-15E   ⚙️ CA   🚢 SC   🌐 NTTR, PG, Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its irritating that trivia comes before the core. Animated LG before ground radar, bit test lights before navigation lights etc There are always reasons of course and they have been given to some degree but still understandable many users would wish some priority change if at all possible.

Windows 7/10 64bit, Intel i7-4770K 3.9GHZ, 32 GB Ram, Gforce GTX 1080Ti, 11GB GDDR5 Valve Index. Force IPD 63 (for the F-16)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DCS is study level. If you want something less you have FC3/MAC.

To dream is not a crime, so if you ask me what I'd like to see in dcs I can answer a tornado ids, an f-104 or whatever; but if I have to say the truth I'd prefer less well done study modules than a lot of deliberately incomplete ones.

According to what feature to develop first, this is due to the correct use of available resources and only ED knows about it. If to do a BIT before a landing gear is useful and necessary, this is what has to be done. If you buy early access this is what you can expect. If you don't like then wait for the module to be finished (like I do, for example).


Edited by nessuno0505
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, but if you ask the devs to scrap realism for more modules in shorter time, then DCS is just not for you.

 

 

What is realistic about a test which never fails? It is still just 'lets pretend'.

Laptop Pilot. Alienware X17, i9 11980HK 5.0GHz, 16GB RTX 3080, 64GB DDR4 3200MHz, NVMe SSD. 2x TM Warthog, Hornet grip, Virpil CM2 & TPR pedals, FSSB-R3, Cougar throttle, Viper pit WIP (XBox360 when traveling). Rift S.

NTTR, SoH, Syria, Sinai, Channel, South Atlantic, CA, Supercarrier, FC3, A-10CII, F-5, F-14, F-15E, F-16, F/A-18, F-86, Harrier, M2000, F1, Viggen, MiG-21, Yak-52, L-39, MB-339, CE2, Gazelle, Ka-50, Mi-8, Mi-24, Huey, Apache, Spitfire, Mossie.  Wishlist: Tornado, Jaguar, Buccaneer, F-117 and F-111.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DCS is study level. If you want something less you have FC3/MAC.

To dream is not a crime, so if you ask me what I'd like to see in dcs I can answer a tornado ids, an f-104 or whatever; but if I have to say the truth I'd prefer less well done study modules than a lot of deliberately incomplete ones.

According to what feature to develop first, this is due to the correct use of available resources and only ED knows about it. If to do a BIT before a landing gear is useful and necessary, this is what has to be done. If you buy early access this is what you can expect. If you don't like then wait for the module to be finished (like I do, for example).

 

 

Blah blah blah...

Windows 7/10 64bit, Intel i7-4770K 3.9GHZ, 32 GB Ram, Gforce GTX 1080Ti, 11GB GDDR5 Valve Index. Force IPD 63 (for the F-16)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Hardcore Sim aspect is what made DCS famous, I'd rather wait my 10 minutes for the INS to align than jumping into a hot Aircraft 5 times per hour.

 

 

No issues with INS etc. They are a core part of the aircraft functionality, and necessary for the proper operation. It is the pointless 'going through the motions' checklist items which have no bearing on aircraft functionality and will never fail anyway that seem a waste of effort.

Laptop Pilot. Alienware X17, i9 11980HK 5.0GHz, 16GB RTX 3080, 64GB DDR4 3200MHz, NVMe SSD. 2x TM Warthog, Hornet grip, Virpil CM2 & TPR pedals, FSSB-R3, Cougar throttle, Viper pit WIP (XBox360 when traveling). Rift S.

NTTR, SoH, Syria, Sinai, Channel, South Atlantic, CA, Supercarrier, FC3, A-10CII, F-5, F-14, F-15E, F-16, F/A-18, F-86, Harrier, M2000, F1, Viggen, MiG-21, Yak-52, L-39, MB-339, CE2, Gazelle, Ka-50, Mi-8, Mi-24, Huey, Apache, Spitfire, Mossie.  Wishlist: Tornado, Jaguar, Buccaneer, F-117 and F-111.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No issues with INS etc. They are a core part of the aircraft functionality, and necessary for the proper operation. It is the pointless 'going through the motions' checklist items which have no bearing on aircraft functionality and will never fail anyway that seem a waste of effort.

 

Again, what people do with available functions is not your concern. If you don't see a purpose don't do it. And, again, failures are simulated.

🖥️ Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX3060   🥽 Rift S   🕹️ T16000M HOTAS   ✈️ FC3, F-14A/B, F-15E   ⚙️ CA   🚢 SC   🌐 NTTR, PG, Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
What is realistic about a test which never fails? It is still just 'lets pretend'.

 

Test and checks can be very important

 

If the mission designer desires it he can add failures to any single player mission.

smallCATPILOT.PNG.04bbece1b27ff1b2c193b174ec410fc0.PNG

Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status

Windows 11, NVIDIA MSI RTX 3090, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 64GB DDR @3200, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, HP Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is realistic about a test which never fails? It is still just 'lets pretend'.

 

 

We like to pretend that we are practicing for the real thing.

 

That's where all this came from right.

 

FC3 Lockon etc

 

To ED building the A-10C many many moons ago (Commercial / civi), that is still the king of fm, systems and weapon systems. That's all the sim's to mine you. OK the F/A-18 is slowly catching up.

 

Do these guy's need that to work? Of course, training procedures, checklist and flows. I just have shorter ones when I just want to play.

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=170812&stc=1&d=1508281208


Edited by David OC

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

Test and checks can be very important

 

If the mission designer desires it he can add failures to any single player mission.

 

 

That's interesting to know - for any simulated system?

 

 

But again, should a system fail on the apron, what is the 'realistic' response at that point? Bin the sortie? Call the crew chief to fix it?

Laptop Pilot. Alienware X17, i9 11980HK 5.0GHz, 16GB RTX 3080, 64GB DDR4 3200MHz, NVMe SSD. 2x TM Warthog, Hornet grip, Virpil CM2 & TPR pedals, FSSB-R3, Cougar throttle, Viper pit WIP (XBox360 when traveling). Rift S.

NTTR, SoH, Syria, Sinai, Channel, South Atlantic, CA, Supercarrier, FC3, A-10CII, F-5, F-14, F-15E, F-16, F/A-18, F-86, Harrier, M2000, F1, Viggen, MiG-21, Yak-52, L-39, MB-339, CE2, Gazelle, Ka-50, Mi-8, Mi-24, Huey, Apache, Spitfire, Mossie.  Wishlist: Tornado, Jaguar, Buccaneer, F-117 and F-111.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
That's interesting to know - for any simulated system?

 

 

But again, should a system fail on the apron, what is the 'realistic' response at that point? Bin the sortie? Call the crew chief to fix it?

 

The failures can be set randomly, so can be played out differently each time you play that particular mission.

 

So recognising a random failure before your flight took off is a good skill set to have.

 

play the same mission again and the failure might not happen until you are at the end of the mission.

smallCATPILOT.PNG.04bbece1b27ff1b2c193b174ec410fc0.PNG

Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status

Windows 11, NVIDIA MSI RTX 3090, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 64GB DDR @3200, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, HP Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

''People ask for hundreds of things that will never be done''

So? That's life. Every airplane, feature, or notion will not be done. That's a blatantly obvious reality no matter how the game is designed, so the whole thing is irrelevant.

 

''Is it *too* much realism''

No. It's not ''too much''. The WHOLE POINT of DCS IS that minute attention to detail. That is LITERALLY the selling point. If somebody isn't interested, or wants 900 airplanes, sorry, 900 3d models with slightly altered stats, then they should quite literally go away.

 

 

 

These kinds of threads are about as sensible as going up to a grape juice factory and asking why they're making grape juice when they could be making orange or apple juice instead because ''so many people OTHER people like THOSE juices''. There are people who produce those other products already. Go buy them.

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

''People ask for hundreds of things that will never be done''

So? That's life. Every airplane, feature, or notion will not be done. That's a blatantly obvious reality no matter how the game is designed, so the whole thing is irrelevant.

 

''Is it *too* much realism''

No. It's not ''too much''. The WHOLE POINT of DCS IS that minute attention to detail. That is LITERALLY the selling point. If somebody isn't interested, or wants 900 airplanes, sorry, 900 3d models with slightly altered stats, then they should quite literally go away.

 

These kinds of threads are about as sensible as going up to a grape juice factory and asking why they're making grape juice when they could be making orange or apple juice instead because ''so many people OTHER people like THOSE juices''. There are people who produce those other products already. Go buy them.

 

 

I think you are deliberately missing my point. I am not questioning the dedication to realism, nor am I asking for 900 copy-and-paste aircraft. I am just pointing out that when there are such glaringly unrealistic elements to the game, why do module developers (and users) get so hung up on the tiniest detail being correct? I know so many of these issues (weather, blast/shrapnel effects, etc.) are being worked on, it just seems that realism is important in some areas, but not in others.

 

 

Besides, not everyone comes to DCS for the 'realism' as such, for some it is simply that it is the only modern combat flight simulator on the market. So no, realism is not 'LITERALLY the selling point'. DCS is essentially a monopoly. P3D is far too limited as far as combat goes, so that leaves what exactly as 'competition'? Play their way or not at all.

Laptop Pilot. Alienware X17, i9 11980HK 5.0GHz, 16GB RTX 3080, 64GB DDR4 3200MHz, NVMe SSD. 2x TM Warthog, Hornet grip, Virpil CM2 & TPR pedals, FSSB-R3, Cougar throttle, Viper pit WIP (XBox360 when traveling). Rift S.

NTTR, SoH, Syria, Sinai, Channel, South Atlantic, CA, Supercarrier, FC3, A-10CII, F-5, F-14, F-15E, F-16, F/A-18, F-86, Harrier, M2000, F1, Viggen, MiG-21, Yak-52, L-39, MB-339, CE2, Gazelle, Ka-50, Mi-8, Mi-24, Huey, Apache, Spitfire, Mossie.  Wishlist: Tornado, Jaguar, Buccaneer, F-117 and F-111.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

…it's also worth pointing out that DCS still skips over huge swaths of systems and settings (as well as adding in things that simply shouldn't be there), so it is quite obvious that minute attention to detail isn't the whole point and the selling point. Rather, it's enough attention to detail to satisfy the needs of [customer], which may at times result in seemingly rather eccentric priorities as far as what should go in and what should not.

❧ ❧ Inside you are two wolves. One cannot land; the other shoots friendlies. You are a Goon. ❧ ❧

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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