New Pay Model

[schmiefel]

I didint even know it existed until yesterday. The point is not how successful they are or where, or how good their implementation is, the point is there are apps and addons that allow users to turn XXX (or YYY) in to a military simulator with most of the functionality you would expect, like multiplayer, radar, weapons, sams, IFF, AAR, mission editors, destroyable target etc.

 

have a look here:

 

https://www.vrsimulations.com/tacpack.php

 

or more details here:

https://forums.vrsimulations.com/support/index.php/TacPack_Documentation

 

Here is a video a DCS pilot introduces an F18 in YYY:

 

 

Ive fast forwarded it, I just wanted to get a feel for it. And at least that F18 module is actually rather impressive. Here is another one showing a phantom with a better terrain mod:

 

 

Cant really judge its realism or anything but it doesnt really look horrible, given what they are working with.

 

So again the point is not that those addons would be better than DCS. Im quite sure they are not. But it does suggest that it may perfectly possible to turn a modern civilian simulator like ZZ2020 in to a military one through addons and API. And I can see DCSW becoming that addon and bringing together what I am confident will be the best (looking) flight simulator and terrain/mapping engine with what already is the best military simulation to create something rather frigging awesome.

 

XXX, YYY, ZZ - cited brand names deleted with reasons - and it really doesn't matter which civil flight sim brand it could be as I describe in the following

 

1. the mentioned Lockheed Martin flight simulator (YYY) is NOT for public simmer hobby usage - period
   
2. there is still no substantial AI etc. available that reacts to an attack or performs attacks on its own
   
3. there is no mission / sandbox creating tool available that has to be integrated within the "civil" simulation
   
4. what about MP?!
   

I could go further on with this list. But be sure as long as those civil flight sims are in the business, if it would have been suitable to add and integrate military flight simulation on a substantial basis it would have already been done and widely used. Yes, there are certain military aircraft in there. They are to some extend very well simulated. There is to my knowledge one (!) commercial supported add-on for tactics and weapons but most Air-Air and a little Air-Surface but not vice versa. I stand with it: mixing up those two genre is much too complex and finally would lead to things no one wants to really show off, like hunting down airliners in a MP environment. That maybe generate some "fun" for kids and narrow-minded folks but one would rather get a below 18 rating for such a "simulation".

 

So this next whataboutism leads to nothing that helps with the actual situation. There are good reasons why DCS is - despite some negative aspects, shown mostly by its age of technology - one of the most versatile military flight simulators still in the market. There are big and famous simulation studios for military flight sims that where already in the market when the producers of the now as DCS known brand showed up too, and most of them are dead since many years, because they couldn't or didn't want to stay in that niche market. Maybe ED doesn't get the turn around this times - that would be a real pity. But I am very confident that they are nowadays stronger in the business than ever and that the team in the background is really working hard getting the things together - just their users / customers have to show some passion and confidence as well...

[Vertigo72]

[*]the mentioned Lockheed Martin flight simulator (YYY) is NOT for public simmer hobby usage - period

 

The exact same addons work in FSX. You knew that but for some reason chose to ignore it. And that is extremely relevant, because not only is FSX a "public simmer hobby sim" and the precursor to FS2020, microsoft have also confirmed they will provide an SDK and support the same level of modding and third party addons as they did for FSX. Cant find the interview, this will have to do:

 

https://flyawaysimulation.com/news/4953/#sdk

 

Hence, if it could be done in FSX, it will almost certainly be possible to do in FS2020.

 

[*]there is still no substantial AI etc. available that reacts to an attack or performs attacks on its own

 

Indeed. Someone would need to write that. Not easy and no one is saying recreating everything DSCW supports and implements as an addon to FS would be a trivial task. Far from it. But the fsx@war developer, see below, planned AI for both ground and air units, and may have done it partially? as I have seen at least ground troops engage each other in fsx. Yes, very basic and pilot AI is quite a bit harder and even if he did make something, no one should expect a 1 man hobby project to be on the level of what ED delivered. But that doesnt mean it cant done in fsx or FS2020. Particularly by a team who have already done it so well before and already have that code, like you know, ED.

 

[*]there is no mission / sandbox creating tool available that has to be integrated within the "civil" simulation

 

There actually is. Or was. Created by a single guy, freeware. Its called fsx@war:

Careful, actual site is down, hosting malware now.

 

Is it as comprehensive as DCSW? Well, duh, of course not, its not even in the same ballpark (edit: hmmm, its actually surprisingly comprehensive. Maybe not DCSW level comprehensive but kudo's to its dev!). Again, no one is saying replicating DCSW is at all trivial. Doesnt mean it cant be done, by ED or others.

 

[*]what about MP?!

 

If you had even glanced over the links I provided, you would have seen. Thats for FSX, which didnt really have much MP capability itself, unlike FS2020

Edited June 16, 2020 by Vertigo72

[schmiefel]

1) the showcase videos you mentioned were showing the LM sim! And this one adresses professional civil and military flight training

 

2) you like to completely ignore the other notes I made, that no serious publisher would rather like to showcase military sim pilots hunting down civil airliners in their respective civil sims and vice versa military sims rather don't have much civil elements as combatants but as fractions to take care of - so its very unlikely to get any tools / support from professional studios for this

3) plus: no serious attempts to improve this were done in the last 20 years - why should ED ever think about it? Just because it suits your mission that the DCS horse is at least engine-wise dead, can't / won't be improved by its publisher etc ... the horse you are riding with all those arguments is getting more and more ridiculous

 

 

Edit: maybe you should try harder to avoid this "vertigo" argumentation and get back to oriented flying :joystick::pilotfly:

Edited June 16, 2020 by schmiefel

[amalahama]

Why is not this thread closed already? Poll was completed, results are pretty illustrative, there is no need for further discussion, if ED implements a monthly payment model they will bankrupt because large parts of their player base will go away. Period

[Irishlad200000]

Definitely do not agree, as I and many have purchased all the modules that I want! If they went subscription that would stab us in the back! Also it’s a sandbox sim, you only need to buy what you are interested in! That’s the best about it!

[Vertigo72]

1) the showcase videos you mentioned were showing the LM sim! And this one adresses professional civil and military flight training

 

I brought up fsx@war (note the name!) and tacpack to prove the things you all said could not be done with FSX have been done on FSX. I said it, I linked it, but since no one here seems to read, I also provided some videos and the best ones I found showcasing those mods, which also work on P3D, which itself is an extensive mod of FSX, happened to use P3D, because,well, who in their right would want to fly FSX today. Somehow you feel justified using that to disprove my point about FSX? Thats just beyond the pale.

 

2) you like to completely ignore the other notes I made, that no serious publisher would rather like to showcase military sim pilots hunting down civil airliners in their respective civil sims and vice versa military sims rather don't have much civil elements as combatants but as fractions to take care of - so its very unlikely to get any tools / support from professional studios for this

 

What are you talking about? You think a military sim based on FS2020 would share the same world with the civilian sim? Hey cessna pilot, can you please hurry your take off, i gotta bomb your airfield?

 

As for companies not wanting to be associated with military.. LOL? You said it yourself, who owns P3D: Lockheed Martin. Yeah, no one wants them associated with the military.

 

If you meant microsoft doesnt want it; they seem happy enough to sign contracts with the military but maybe they dont want their name on a military sim. But they wont have to. They sell FS2020, and anyone with the SDK will do with that what they want and put their own name on it if they want. I dont think P3D has many "made by microsoft" stickers on it.

 

3) plus: no serious attempts to improve this were done in the last 20 years

 

FSX sucked. Its ugly. Its flightmodel is crap. It was barely any good when it came out in 2006. Why would you even want to use that as basis for something modern or highly realistic ? Some guys did for some reason, but I cant understand why. Let alone why P3D used it. Congrats to them for making it work I guess?

 

But FS2020 rewrites the books on flightsims. no one ever attempted what MS is doing with it. You can pretend its just another sim, but it isnt. Its a paradigm shift and I dont see how anyone can compete with that; they are going to steamroll the sim market whether you like it or not.

 

And you may think ED can ignore it because it makes combat sims, and MS doesnt. Until a few days ago, I would largely have agreed. But they cant ignore it, because if 2 or 3 part time enthousiasts could use the SDK to turn FSX in to a somewhat credible military sim in their spare time, imagine what a better funded team can do with FS2020. Imagine what ED could do with that. And so not everyone will ignore that. Aerosoft will not. Razbam will not. Heatblur will not. My guess is even P3D will not. And did you know, they are owned by lockheed martin? Someone keeps reminding me of that. The same company who happen to produce the F16. And F35. And F22. And a few dozen other military jets. And simulators. One of them based on an ancient microsoft simulator...

 

ED may ignore the threats and opportunities of FS2020 but they shouldn't and I dearly hope they wont. But you go ahead and keep ignoring everything.

Edited June 16, 2020 by Vertigo72

[StressLess]

... If 2 part time enthousiasts could turn FSX in to a somewhat credible military sim in their part time, imagine what a better funded team can do with FS2020. ...

 

What's any of this have to do with the lame idea of ED destroying themselves by going subscription? BTW - you're being fast and loose with the term "credible military sim" here, even kind of overselling it a bit (ok, overselling it a lot)!

 

I don't get the impression that you actually understand the niche that DCS occupies in the part of the military sim market that's accessible to us mere civilians!

 

Their closest competitor is IL-2 Sturmovik, who themselves produce aircraft that compete strongly with the simpler FC level of aircraft modeled in DCS. And IL-2 doesn't do modern aircraft at all, though in the slice of the milsim niche they do service, they make a great product!

 

But who else makes professional study level simulations of military aircraft and landscapes of ALL eras that are affordable and available to the general public worldwide?

 

If you haven't yet, listen to the Nick Grey interview done at the Grim Reapers YouTube channel on the P-47 where he does a DEEP dive into how modules are developed (starts at

):

 

 

Of note is that those who purchase early access modules subsidize the cost of development not only with the dollars spent but with the effort put forth as beta testers as well, shaving what could be hundreds of dollars off the cost of the modules otherwise, as well as halving the time it takes to develop these modules vs. ED doing everything in house. Without their current business model, doing what ED does would not be practical at all!

 

If they had to release ONLY completed modules, there would be no DCS World! Or we would be limited to the simple FC level of modeling you see in all other milsims, relegating DCS to being just another "Johnny Come Lately".

 

It's hard to second guess more than 30 years of milsim development and marketing from the armchair perspective of a end user!

Edited June 16, 2020 by StressLess
If you can't competently argue BOTH sides of a debate, you aren't prepared to argue EITHER side!

[Vertigo72]

to bring this back to the original topic; Ive been arguing ED needs to find ways to be able to spend a lot more resources on its underlying game and graphics and VR engine.I wanted to somehow pay ED for more base layer and graphics engine development instead of supporting the making of ever more map modules that further reduced my framerates. But replacing their engine with FS2020 and getting microsoft to maintain most of that, well, that also solves my problem; I can pay the money I wanted to send to ED to microsoft and in return get a map of the entire planet, a well as, with little doubt, the most advanced and optimized flightsim graphics engine out there. You know, that works for me.

 

But it can also work for ED, because I will gladly pay ED to deliver their DCSW content and tools and underlying logic and physics and AI to FS2020. DCSW is free, you can argue all day if should remain so, but if they provide that same functionality as a FS addon, I dont even really care how much they would charge for that. Literally. If its $1000, Ill buy it without thinking twice. If its a lot more, Ill mortgage my house. Sell my kidneys. It would mean a performance/visual boost no amount of CPU and GPU upgrades could ever deliver in the next decade. And if you calculate the price per km2 of map, it would still be the bargain of the century.

Edited June 16, 2020 by Vertigo72

[StressLess]

to bring this back to the original topic; Ive been arguing ED needs to find ways to be able to spend a lot more resources on its underlying game and graphics and VR engine. But replacing it with FS2020 solves my problem entirely. It solves my issue that I wanted to somehow pay ED for more base layer and graphics engine development instead of supporting the making of ever more map modules that further reduced my framerates.

 

If ED ever makes a DCSW FS2020 addon, then I can pay the money I wanted to send to ED to microsoft and in return get a map of the entire planet, a well as, with little doubt, the most optimized graphics engine out there. You know, that works for me.

 

But it can also work for ED, because I will gladly pay ED to deliver their DCSW content and tools and underlying logic and physics and AI to FS2020. DCSW is free, you can argue all day if should remain so, but if they provide that same functionality as a FS addon, I dont even really care how much they would charge for that. Literally. If its $1000, Ill buy it without thinking twice. If its a lot more, Ill mortgage my house. Sell my kidneys. It would mean a performance/visual boost no amount of CPU and GPU upgrades could ever deliver. And if you calculate the price per km2 of map, it would still be the bargain of the century.

 

So fixing DCS World involves scrapping it and going with a different product that has little to do with the primary niche that DCS World currently dominates?

 

And you're saying your ideal version of DCS World is something other than DCS World? Sounds like you took a wrong turn somewhere and ended up in a part of town you just don't want to be in, and instead of turning around and leaving you want ED to screw the rest of us over just to fit your idea of perfect? :doh:

Edited June 16, 2020 by StressLess
Getting to the nitty gritty, has he saved face enough to end this thread?

[schmiefel]

Please @Vertigo72 do us a favor an ask MS for a beta access for your favorite flight simulation. They have a development forum, too, that you can spam then with new crude business development ideas, as this over here gets a big waste of time and effort...

[Vertigo72]

So fixing DCS World involves scrapping it and going with a different product that has little to do with the primary niche that DCS World currently dominates?

 

Those are just empty words. Doesnt mean a thing. Would you not like to see the visuals performance and optimisations not too mention, ridiculously detailed entire world map of FS combined with all the things we already have in DCS? If you dont want to have that, then I dont know what to tell you. 30 FPS stutter VR and 2 cartoonsish cloud types must be something some people really love.

 

And you're saying your ideal version of DCS World is something other than DCS World?

 

What is DCS world to you? Is it a graphics engine? A VR engine? A terrain engine ? A weather simulation? A sound engine? A frigging chat room? It has all of those, but is that what you love about it? I dont think so.

 

Calling a DCSW port to FS "something other than dcsworld" is about as silly as calling a future version with good performance, dynamic weather and advanced clouds, vulkan api, proper multithreading and support for nvidia VR APIs "something other than dcs world". Why does it matter to you if its microsoft that makes the underlying engine or ED? Does anyone who flies P3D care?

 

you want ED to screw the rest of us over just to fit your idea of perfect? :doh:

 

How exactly would you be screwed?

 

You will be screwed, along with ED, if lockheed martin or someone else comes out with a credible military sim based on FS2020 engine and ED doesnt. Then you are screwed and may not even see your EA modules finished, because good luck to ED surviving on selling only 40K Km2 maps to new users, while the other guys offer the entire world in stunning detail.

 

Besides, you where so against subscriptions because you wanted to own the software. You do. You bought it. Be happy with it. Im sure if ED goes the MS FS route they will honor their pledge to finish the EA modules you bought. You can then keep using yours forever and DCS is already almost perfect according to you. It doesnt need new clouds or performance increases or VR or its all PERFECTLY FINE. Im the only one who wants to see big changes in the engine. So why would you be screwed?

 

You dont want to pay maintenance fees or or subscriptions fees, you didnt buy into a 30 year forever free update program. If you dont want to move to a DCSW V4 or V5 that uses a microsoft engine, because it offers nothing you want, then dont. That was exactly what you wanted to be able to do by owning the software. Or was what you really wanted that other users keep buying 40K m2 KM maps to fund your core updates for the next few decades ? I told you that couldnt work.

Edited June 16, 2020 by Vertigo72

[Northstar98]

Those are just empty words. Doesnt mean a thing. Would you not like to see the visuals performance and optimisations not too mention, ridiculously detailed entire world map of FS combined with all the things we already have in DCS? If you dont want to have that, then I dont know what to tell you. 30 FPS stutter VR and 2 cartoonsish cloud types must be something some people really love.

 

This is just the same as the aforementioned mating of DCS and Outerra (which is crown king of terrain mesh, not to mention underwater and deformable terrain).

 

And you are just assuming everything will work, based on little more than speculation. MSFS2020 isn't even out yet.

 

Calling a DCSW port to FS "something other than dcsworld" is about as silly as calling a future version with good performance, vulkan api, proper multithreading and support for nvidia VR APIs "something other than dcs world". Why does it matter to you if its microsoft that makes the underlying engine or ED?

 

:doh: This is so embarrassing.

 

Also what is this special pleading going on?

 

Vertigo, I don't know, but there might be more of a difference between DCS World - optimised. And MSFS2020 - DCS edition. It's at least a major rewrite to get it to work, DCS isn't even cross-platform, now you think that making it a mod of MSFS2020 is a feasible thing to do? It's in exactly the same boat as Outerra + DCS World, and that never happened with no plans to make it happen.

 

Seriously if ED do this , I have no idea what they should do with existing customers. Wether they should get it for free or discounted or only get plane licenses if and when they are ported, or nothing at all. Thats the same discussion as for charging for V3.

 

Okay, let's forget that MSFS2020 has a completely different engine, completely different graphics engine, quite likely completely different FDM, quite likely doesn't support damage modelling or RADAR at all. Will it even have a mission editor?

 

This sort of stuff isn't just a port away, you know how fragile stuff is on DCS, where a simple hotfix patch gets dropped and everything breaks - now you're expecting stuff to work on a completely different platform? I am currently 21 years old, DCS evolved from LOMAC, a game from 2003, so we can effectively say it's taken nearly 2 decades to get to where we are now.

 

Now you want everything to be started basically from scratch, maybe/hopefully excluding artwork. So you can turn DCS into a mod of MSFS2020 and the entire platform is out of ED's hands.

 

Making DCS World work inside of MSFS2020, again, a product that you're glorifying (a lot), that hasn't even been released yet. This like positively reviewing a movie based on it's trailer and synopsis.

 

Heck we don't even know if it'll even be subscription! So not sure why it was even brought up, other than to derail this thread all the way off to bloody Mars.

Edited June 16, 2020 by Northstar98

[Silver_Dragon]

DCS evolved from LOMAC, a game from 2003, so we can effectively say it's taken nearly 2 decades to get to where we are now.

 

A little correction, DCS evolve from Su-27 flanker series on 1995 and ED born on 1991. They have near 40 years on Simulation developing.

 

About Outterra, MS2020 and others engines, remember ED build profesional training / military products, and start from Scratch your simulator has not a option.

[Northstar98]

A little correction, DCS evolve from Su-27 flanker series on 1995 and ED born on 1991. They have near 40 years on Simulation developing.

 

So it's taken even longer to get here! 2 and a half decades.

 

About Outterra, MS2020 and others engines, remember ED build profesional training / military products, and start from Scratch your simulator has not a option.

 

Absolutely.

[Vertigo72]

This is just the same as the aforementioned mating of DCS and Outerra (which is crown king of terrain mesh, not to mention underwater and deformable terrain).

 

You cant seriously equate those two. You cant seriously compare the resources that microsoft, a trillion dollar company has been and will be pouring in to making FS2020 an actual state of the art simulator + SDK with... outera. A company with how many employees again? Who never produced anything other than a tech demo.

 

Its just silly.

 

 

Vertigo, I don't know, but there might be more of a difference between DCS World - optimised. And MSFS2020 - DCS edition. It's at least a major rewrite to get it to work, DCS isn't even cross-platform, now you think that making it a mod of MSFS2020 is a feasible thing to do?

 

It will be a very substantial rewrite, that much Im sure off (which btw, I suspect may be needed anyway afaik ED have admitted that much). I wouldnt expect this to be done in 6 or 12 months; if they want to have anything like the current functionality at the getgo, my guess is it would take years. But at the same time, it will be a lot easier to accomplish for ED than for almost anyone else starting from scratch andf without their background, experience, algorithms, research data and code snippets to look at. I wil also credit microsoft with at the very least one thing: making life easy for developers. Fantastic tools, documentation, APIs, debuggers.. no one does that better. Dont believe for a second ED does.

 

Okay, let's forget that MSFS2020 has a completely different engine, completely different graphics engine, quite likely completely different FDM, quite likely doesn't support damage modelling or RADAR at all. Will it even have a mission editor?

 

Of course you couldnt use the FS2020 mission editor even if it has one. Youd need to add that, and a lot of other stuff, just like those guys did for FSX.

 

I have no idea if FS2020 does radar, it actually might, its not like civilian planes dont have one, but almost certainly not up to ED standards. Neither did FSX, it had none. Now look at that F18, a2a, ground radar, rwr, ecm, countermeasures, its all there. If 3 guys can do that, I think ED can too.

 

That the engine is different is kinda the point, no? But is it going to be more difficult for ED (or Heatblur) to adapt what they have to FS2020 than for other third party module makers? No.

 

Besides, want to bet that heatblur and co will not (re)create their modules, initially as demilitarized models for FS2020 anyhow? They would be crazy not to. I will buy their F14 (again), I want to buzz my own house with it. They already did all the research, they have all the 3d models, the sounds, the textures, the systems logic. It will still be a lot of work to make it work with FS Im sure, but far less than for anyone starting from scratch, and the target market will be huge. So that will happen anyway. ED wouldnt want to focus on making planes, PLENTY of developers will do that. They should focus on the things no one else does. the "DCSW" layer. Then get plane developers onboard with that.

 

Making DCS World work inside of MSFS2020, again, a product that you're glorifying (a lot), that hasn't even been released yet. This like positively reviewing a movie based on it's trailer and synopsis.

 

Yeah, keep saying that. its all hype. And fake. Cherry picked screenshots. Recorded at 1/10th realtime speed and then sped up. Or you can talk to people who have actually used it.

Edited June 16, 2020 by Vertigo72

[Silver_Dragon]

You cant seriously equate those two. You cant seriously compare the resources that microsoft, a trillion dollar company has been and will be pouring in to making FS2020 an actual state of the art simulator + SDK with... outera. A company with how many employees again? Who never produced anything other than a tech demo.

 

Its just silly.

 

 

Only check I/ITSEC, ITEC and other military simulation expos. Microsoft not coming into them with a "FSX", coming P3D (old Microsoft ESP sell to Loockeed Martin) on air training simulation and BIS with VBS engine (ARMA military) only as other examples. ED has coming some years with the old TBS / Military training versions. Other companies as AVIA TS, using a ED version engine to training has show your products as Mi-8 trainer on that expos.

Edited June 16, 2020 by Silver_Dragon

[schmiefel]

Quite fascinating how this has finally moved from "new pay model" with a subscription in mind to a "military flight simulation" add on / mod for a not even released new civilian (!) flight simulator ...

[Vertigo72]

Quite fascinating how this has finally moved from "new pay model" with a subscription in mind to a "military flight simulation" add on / mod for a not even released new civilian (!) flight simulator ...

 

I guess you are the only one who still hasnt understood why some of us want a different funding model (hint: its not why you keep saying I want it) and thus you also can not understand why switching to a third party gfx/terrain/weather/vr/network/.. engine could be a different way to solve those very same problems.

[schmiefel]

Me and 80% that voted in that poll.... How blind we must be not to see the holy grail you and "some" are offering generously for our relief ... Please excuse my misbelief

[Nightstalker]

I'm more interested in seeing what a little old company like MicroProse brings to the table over the next couple of years. That is where the competition is going to come from. If we see a Falcon5 with a dynamic campaign all bets are off! I love DCS and I've been buying their products for years but healthy competition is good for the hobby. MicroProse is the whole reason I got into flight sims. After listening to a recent interview, I think some serious competition may soon be coming down the pipe. I'm almost entirely a single player as are the majority of DCS players. I find that having no dynamic campaign and the fact that some of the modules ship with no campaign at all leaves the game very sterile and lifeless so I wish they would really pick up the ball when it comes to the single player experience.

 

I think it's about time DCS may need to move towards a whole new game engine. If you look who MicroProse is teamed up with, you will understand whey MS2020's solution is not the only one available. It's really time for a DCS World 2.

[StressLess]

I guess you are the only one who still hasnt understood why some of us want a different funding model (hint: its not why you keep saying I want it) and thus you also can not understand why switching to a third party gfx/terrain/weather/vr/network/.. engine could be a different way to solve those very same problems.

 

I'm insulted, that's ME that keeps pointing out that this is simply about your wanting to get the modules for (almost) free! Keep your opposing thread participants straight would you??

 

Actually there's a pool going on what naïve or simply asinine idea you will come up with next and I'm behind a bit 'cause you have come up with some REAL doozies that truly stretch the imagination!

 

Question is whether we can keep you going long enough for me to win my money back...

Edited June 16, 2020 by StressLess
No particular reason, was going to do a poll but decided not to...

[Northstar98]

You cant seriously equate those two. You cant seriously compare the resources that microsoft, a trillion dollar company has been and will be pouring in to making FS2020 an actual state of the art simulator + SDK with... outera. A company with how many employees again? Who never produced anything other than a tech demo.

 

Its just silly.

 

Right, what the hell are you talking about? I'm not starting a pissing content here, stop getting all salty.

 

This isn't about the dev team at Outerra or Microsoft, this isn't about comparing the 2, the fact is, porting DCS into something else (regardless of precisely what) has been suggested before, your idea isn't new, it was deemed unfeasible then, it's just as unfeasible now.

 

It will be a very substantial rewrite, that much Im sure off (which btw, I suspect may be needed anyway afaik ED have admitted that much). I wouldnt expect this to be done in 6 or 12 months; if they want to have anything like the current functionality at the getgo, my guess is it would take years. But at the same time, it will be a lot easier to accomplish for ED than for almost anyone else starting from scratch andf without their background, experience, algorithms, research data and code snippets to look at. I wil also credit microsoft with at the very least one thing: making life easy for developers. Fantastic tools, documentation, APIs, debuggers.. no one does that better. Dont believe for a second ED does.

 

You wouldn't expect it in 6-12 months! I bloody hope so, we haven't even got a workable 2.5.6 build in 6 freaking months!

 

:doh:

 

Of course you couldnt use the FS2020 mission editor even if it has one. Youd need to add that, and a lot of other stuff, just like those guys did for FSX.

 

Oh well if it can be done for FSX, then it must mean it can be done, merging 2 completely different platforms into one. :doh:

 

Especially one, that isn't even released yet.

 

I have no idea if FS2020 does radar, it actually might, its not like civilian planes dont have one, but almost certainly not up to ED standards. Neither did FSX, it had none. Now look at that F18, a2a, ground radar, rwr, ecm, countermeasures, its all there. If 3 guys can do that, I think ED can too.

 

Right, name me a civilian aircraft with a TWS mode...

 

No disrespect to those developers, they did great given the unsuitability of the platform, but they were the only ones out of tonnes of military developers to actually implement stuff instead of just doing the aircraft. DCS is all on its own without any real competition for modern aircraft and a more limited userbase.

 

That the engine is different is kinda the point, no? But is it going to be more difficult for ED (or Heatblur) to adapt what they have to FS2020 than for other third party module makers? No.

 

:megalol:

 

I don't think you quite get what adapt means...

 

More like completely start again, all those years of development completely wasted. Literally the only thing salvageable is probably the 3D model.

 

Besides, want to bet that heatblur and co will not (re)create their modules, initially as demilitarized models for FS2020 anyhow? They would be crazy not to.

 

:megalol:

 

Yeah they'd be crazy not to completely start again for a completely different platform, when the one for this platform isn't even finished yet. Tell me Vertigo, do you think Heatblur has the resources to develop 2 F-14s in parallel, for completely different engines (again, one that isn't even freaking out yet)?

 

Jesus Christ :wallbash:

 

I will buy their F14 (again), I want to buzz my own house with it.

Well if you'll buy it...

 

They already did all the research, they have all the 3d models, the sounds, the textures, the systems logic.

 

Meanwhile those textures and systems modelling (particularly lighting) gets broken every other patch, to the point where Heatblur have said they'll only fix it once its more stable.

 

I'm so sure it will work in a completely different, unreleased engine currently in an alpha state and it won't be much effort at all, and they'll definitely be ahead of the game than anyone else :doh:

 

It will still be a lot of work to make it work with FS Im sure

 

"A lot" hmm, how about "unfeasible task"

 

but far less than for anyone starting from scratch

 

Well, they have the research and the 3D model...

 

So that will happen anyway.

 

Oh this idea IS happening now? Are we now predicting the future.

 

ED wouldnt want to focus on making planes, PLENTY of developers will do that.

 

So you can predict the future and read minds. What the hell do you know what ED wants to focus on?

 

They should focus on the things no one else does.

 

Yes, they should do that - it's called DCS World, I'm guessing they shouldn't just abandon DCS World and just have it as a mod for a platform with a completely different engine, different features, different market.

 

Yeah, keep saying that. its all hype. And fake. Cherry picked screenshots. Recorded at 1/10th realtime speed and then sped up. Or you can talk to people who have actually used it.

 

Nice strawman, gonna try and make a real argument next time?

 

"The people who have actually used it" So not you then?

 

And are these the same people who currently have an active NDA? Interesting.

 

I might be understanding why rule 1.15 is a thing...

Edited June 17, 2020 by Northstar98

[Vertigo72]

Im puzzled. If you are so confident that its impossible for ED to port their code so it can work with a third party graphics/terrain/atmospheric/network/ flightsim engine, or more accurately if they cant extract the code they would need and make an addon to another platform that already is a fully fledged simulator, because DCSW is all one big bowl of spaghetti code, and they would have to throw it all out and start from scratch, just how confident are you then they could ever adapt it to a new inhouse developed engine? If their code is such a mess, the sooner they start rewriting it, the better. Might as well do it in a way that also works with FS2020 so rewriting it isnt just a huge cost and something they end up having to give away to a small audience, but also something they can actually sell to an audience of millions.

 

I also have very little doubt that others will be able to deliver what you seem to think ED can not. Even if big players like lockheed martin dont get in to the game, at the very least the tacpack guys will port their software to FS2020 to once again enable all the things that are "impossible" in a civil sim.

 

Tacpack may not have mattered to any of us, and thus not a whole lot to third party content developers, because who in their right minds would want to use the fsx engine in 2020? Pretty much only their government and professional customers in the training market. No gamer would even look at it. Raise your hand if you did.

 

Lets see if that holds true when its based on FS2020. Lets see how many military plane developers will want to produce content for that sim and its userbase, and then need a middleware layer for users that also want to do combat and "blow stuff up". I see Razbam already have a few tacpack modules, Im sure they wont be interested. Or any of the current DCS third parties. They would rather sell hundreds or thousands of copies to DCS users than hundreds of thousands to FS2020 users. Because reasons.

 

Im not saying I think this will rival the scope and depth of DSCW anytime soon. The die hard DCS crowd isnt going to abandon DCS for it. But it will offer enough for (military) sim pilots including more than a few DCS pilots, to open their wallets, and then keep asking for more until it too has plenty of assets and decent AI and comms and campaigns and anything DCSW currently offers that fs+tacpack may not. Meanwhile ED with their perfect business model no one should touch, is stuck selling map modules by the Km2 to a dwindling audience, in an effort to raise money to pay for a vulkan port or finally have some actual clouds. I bet that will be easy.

Edited June 17, 2020 by Vertigo72

[schmiefel]

Im puzzled. If you are so confident that its impossible for ED to port their code so it can work with a third party graphics/terrain/atmospheric/network/ flightsim engine, or more accurately if they cant extract the code they would need and make an addon to another platform that already is a fully fledged simulator, because DCSW is all one big bowl of spaghetti code, and they would have to throw it all out and start from scratch, just how confident are you then they could ever adapt it to a new inhouse developed engine? If their code is such a mess, the sooner they start rewriting it, the better. Might as well do it in a way that also works with FS2020 so rewriting it isnt just a huge cost and something they end up having to give away to a small audience, but also something they can actually sell to an audience of millions.

 

I start to be convinced that you have no clue how software design works. ED has developed the complete design of what we have now as DCSW over the last 30 years. Basic calculations, functions etc. are working within their software design not that of someone else. Its not just throwing some c++ code in an editor, compile it and bingo you get what a DCS plane makes in another environment.

 

Yes they are working on moving away from an DX-based 3D engine to a Vulkan/Mantle based one for years now. Can you remember how long it took to get from DX9 to DX11. And moving to Vulkan is quite not only a trivial job in replacing one graphics library with another. It means re-coding and re-designing a lot of the graphics work already done.

 

Now, I advice before you make another wall of pretty useless assumptions that yout get better informed what software design means, what it is based on, what the basics using different graphics libraries are etc.

 

I also have very little doubt that others will be able to deliver what you seem to think ED can not. Even if big players like lockheed martin dont get in to the game, at the very least the tacpack guys will port their software to FS2020 to once again enable all the things that are "impossible" in a civil sim.

 

That maybe will happen or not ... my crystal ball for all that guess work is currently getting inspected and recalibrated to follow your pink pony thoughts...

 

Tacpack may not have mattered to any of us, and thus not a whole lot to third party content developers, because who in their right minds would want to use the fsx engine in 2020? Pretty much only their government and professional customers in the training market. No gamer would even look at it. Raise your hand if you did.

 

No, I personally had never thought about doing military stuff within a civilian flying focused simulation software ... and no one with a professional attempt would even look at this public gaming stuff. LM is in the professional market for such training devices and the development they took over is focused on this part and if you just take a look at the different licences one can buy there is a special licence just for this professional market. The goal in mind is to provide a PC-based and therefore very cost effective plattform in addition and not to replace those multi million dollar full featured simulators that one needs for professional flight training. And that's the kind of business DCSW comes from, too, if you refer to the roots of the A-10C we can get in a downgraded version for pure entertainment - that's what maybe the french Armée de l’Air is looking for with the advanced development in cooperation with Razbam for their M-2000 pilots or cadets training.

 

Lets see if that holds true when its based on FS2020. Lets see how many military plane developers will want to produce content for that sim and its userbase, and then need a middleware layer for users that also want to do combat and "blow stuff up". I see Razbam already have a few tacpack modules, Im sure they wont be interested. Or any of the current DCS third parties. They would rather sell hundreds or thousands of copies to DCS users than hundreds of thousands to FS2020 users. Because reasons.

 

You are just playing with assumptions based on what - pure guessing?! Or do you have any hard facts to add here? And real military plane developers have quite other and focused tools ... man, get out of your childs room and just take a look at what those professional companies offer as training devices for their stuff.

 

Now I will come up with a real hard to get fact: This new civil flight sim you have a sketchy idea of that its such a professional tool that every company on this planet will soon switch over to offer their professional training devices with it just because it has nice shining graphics and it runs on an average PC device - it is a GAME.

 

Im not saying I think this will rival the scope and depth of DSCW anytime soon. The die hard DCS crowd isnt going to abandon DCS for it. But it will offer enough for (military) sim pilots including more than a few DCS pilots, to open their wallets, and then keep asking for more until it too has plenty of assets and decent AI and comms and campaigns and anything DCSW currently offers that fs+tacpack may not. Meanwhile ED with their perfect business model no one should touch, is stuck selling map modules by the Km2 to a dwindling audience, in an effort to raise money to pay for a vulkan port or finally have some actual clouds. I bet that will be easy.

 

 

Well, maybe they will sell a nice bunch of game packages to professionals as well as those like to get good entertaining software from time to time as well. Same goes for DCS ...

 

Fun fact 1: Did you ever see professional military pilots giving real Case I instructions for one of your other civil flight simulators?

Fun fact 2: There is a market for selling Forza like racing games - and its by millions bigger then that for all the other simulation focused racing titles that even have professional branches (like rFactor pro that was derived from the simulation game (!) rFactor) - but the simulation market is big enough for several other companies not equipped with the million $ budgets a Forza series title gets to coexist. Same goes for the flight simulation branch.

[Northstar98]

Im puzzled. If you are so confident that its impossible for ED to port their code so it can work with a third party graphics/terrain/atmospheric/network/ flightsim engine

 

It isn't my words - it's theirs.

 

It is a completely different everything, and it isn't even released yet. There's no assurance that anything in DCS World will be remotely compatible at all.

 

DCS isn't even multiplatform yet and has been the work of 2 decades to get here now but you're expecting it to be totally feasible to completely abandon ship and have DCS as a mod of MSFS2020.

 

more accurately if they cant extract the code they would need and make an addon to another platform that already is a fully fledged simulator, because DCSW is all one big bowl of spaghetti code, and they would have to throw it all out and start from scratch, just how confident are you then they could ever adapt it to a new inhouse developed engine?

 

It's not 'because their code is a mess' it's because they're doing fundamentally (from a computing perspective) different things. It's the same as DCS World working with Arma 3 or Outerra, the answer is no - it's not happening.

 

There in house work has one key advantage over MSFS2020, it can be tailored made to DCS, it's much more efficient than necessitating a complete rewrite for a completely different piece of software. Plus DCS has already had a major engine change with EDGE, it was tailor made to work with DCS, something MSFS2020 is not.

 

If their code is such a mess, the sooner they start rewriting it, the better. Might as well do it in a way that also works with FS2020

 

Yeah just throw in compatibility for completely different software, sounds doable. :doh:

 

so rewriting it isnt just a huge cost and something they end up having to give away to a small audience, but also something they can actually sell to an audience of millions.

 

What are you talking about? If that audience actually exists, they'd probably be over here wouldn't you think? You're imagining this massive market with a niche for a military flight simulator that for some reason is exclusive to MSFS2020, and are completely unwilling/uninterested in any real military flight simulators, that are actually out yet.

 

I also have very little doubt that others will be able to deliver what you seem to think ED can not. Even if big players like lockheed martin dont get in to the game, at the very least the tacpack guys will port their software to FS2020 to once again enable all the things that are "impossible" in a civil sim.

 

What the VRS guys did wasn't take a completely different, existing flight simulator and port it over to FSX/P3D, they developed a plug-in, a pretty revolutionary plug-in, but a plug-in nonetheless. Big freaking difference.

 

Lets see if that holds true when its based on FS2020. Lets see how many military plane developers will want to produce content for that sim and its userbase, and then need a middleware layer for users that also want to do combat and "blow stuff up". I see Razbam already have a few tacpack modules, Im sure they wont be interested. Or any of the current DCS third parties. They would rather sell hundreds or thousands of copies to DCS users than hundreds of thousands to FS2020 users. Because reasons.

 

Because reasons eh? How about the FACT that none of the developers for DCS have any experience whatsoever working with MSFS2020, and it's not even out yet. And how can you be so sure they'll be a massive market? If there is such a market, wouldn't it be over here?

 

Im not saying I think this will rival the scope and depth of DSCW anytime soon. The die hard DCS crowd isnt going to abandon DCS for it.

 

What are you talking about? You want DCS to become a third-party mod to MSFS2020, DCS World won't be a competing product, it'll be a part of another competing product.

 

Essentially selling away competition free of charge and throwing the development of their own in-house stuff down the toilet.

 

I mean you don't even know what the FDM is going to be like, or even if certain things that are fundamental to DCS will even be supported in the slightest.

 

Meanwhile ED with their perfect business model no one should touch, is stuck selling map modules by the Km2 to a dwindling audience, in an effort to raise money to pay for a vulkan port or finally have some actual clouds. I bet that will be easy.

 

:megalol:

 

You really are something else aren't you?

 

Remind me again why you derailed this thread to go on this MSFS2020 dick waving? Like what are you even doing here?

Edited June 17, 2020 by Northstar98