Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable

[Animl-AW]

Masters of the Air - Frame 5, the epic grand finale tonight. The biggest scenario response in 7 years. Up to 115+ players.

Saddle up. Show us what ya got

20k furball

[RichardDarkwood]

This is a 2019 video comparing DCS and IL2.  I think it is spot on, fair, and pretty much can directly replace anytime he says "IL2" with "Aces High" and the argument still holds.

I'll keep this vid link for when I am trying to explain to some one the difference.



I expect Combat Pilot will be closer to DCS than IL2 in fidelity.  At least that is what they have been communicating as their intent.

(The main point to this vid is, IMHO, they are hard to compare.  Apples and oranges.  One is not really the competitor to the other even when they overlap airframes.  They can be complementary.  You move to one or the other depending on what you are wanting to do.  They play both regularly. )

Is combat pilot going take as long as other games?

[Animl-AW]

Combat Pot is going to have a hard time straight out of the box, its designed as a one track train. It will take years just to get started, it will be 7-10 years before they expand outside that one track PTO train. Goid graphics headed in the wrong direction. I’d love to be wrong, i doubt I am.

[CptTrips]

Is combat pilot going take as long as other games?

The progress I've seen seems a bit further along than I had expected.  Still, it's not immeninent.

They are going to build the SP half first.  That's smart IMHO.  SP out-numbers MP by a lot.  Maybe 10x.  Williams had lots of RL internal market data from his experience with GB and he confirms this. 
So fleshing out SP first,
* Builds a much larger player-base that drives discussion and hype about the game (e.g. videos, discussion of the game, word of mouth),
* Provides a "farm league" that might move to MP once they have built confidence. 
* Provides a steady, reliable revenue source that funds your MP efforts (Building the SP already build about 80% of what your MP as well).

IMHO, having a viable SP component is one of the big advantages IL2 and DCS have over AH.

Last I heard is that Williams was predicting around 5 yr timeline to complete SP, then start on MP.  It seemed suggested that they may be leveraging a third party developer model like ED and Heatblur so that could accelerate things as multiple teams can work in parallel.

So still way off, but interesting to watch.   

Maybe the real signifigance to CP is what effect it is having on current products development plans getting ready for possibly a major new competitor. 
Williams has a proven track record.
Hitech proved you can sometimes build a better game starting from a clean page rather than hauling along old technical debt.
I don't doubt Williams will be able to tap into large VC money once he is ready to fully utilize it.  i.e. Gets out of the fuzzy front-end of development to where the intended direction and roadmap can be more confidently communicated.

I don't think IL2 and ED are "scared" yet.  But they'd be fools not to watch with interest and maybe make some adjustments to their own roadmaps to get ready.  This won't be some plucky indy game trying to make in-roads.  I think he will end up with money backing him.

[Animl-AW]

The progress I've seen seems a bit further along than I had expected.  Still, it's not immeninent.

They are going to build the SP half first.  That's smart IMHO.  SP out-numbers MP by a lot.  Maybe 10x.  Williams had lots of RL internal market data from his experience with GB and he confirms this. 
So fleshing out SP first,
* Builds a much larger player-base that drives discussion and hype about the game (e.g. videos, discussion of the game, word of mouth),
* Provides a "farm league" that might move to MP once they have built confidence. 
* Provides a steady, reliable revenue source that funds your MP efforts (Building the SP already build about 80% of what your MP as well).

IMHO, having a viable SP component is one of the big advantages IL2 and DCS have over AH.

Last I heard is that Williams was predicting around 5 yr timeline to complete SP, then start on MP.  It seemed suggested that they may be leveraging a third party developer model like ED and Heatblur so that could accelerate things as multiple teams can work in parallel.

So still way off, but interesting to watch.   

In sales, there can’t be much worse than over-selling what doesn’t exist yet. This sets up for disappointment when expectations are too high.

Even IF it comes to fruition, its still a one track train. To keep finances up for that long, with no revenue, it can end up trashed before it gets there. HT and Pyro did it right, give em what ya got so far and get the revenue stream going to support dev.

People can be very intelligent, yet lack common sense. Dies anyone think they can go 5 yrs without income?

That said, HT and Pyro had this game up and running in one year. Because they are that good. I wouldn’t expect everyone to be as good as them. Its a bench mark few meet.

In 5-10 yrs I will be dead and in the ground.

Good luck. I may never see it.

[edge12674]

IMHO, having a viable SP component is one of the big advantages IL2 and DCS have over AH.

I agree, but don't discount variety. 

Yesterday, I had a four hour flying session in DCS.  I started with Banklers carrier training mission in my F/A-18.  After about six traps, I switched to "Instant Action" and flew P-51s/Spitfires dogfighting against A/I Me109s.  Then F-86 against A/I Migs.  Members of the group I fly with on Fridays started showing up on Teamspeak, so I hosted a multi-player server.  We all goofed around flying Apaches vs. Hueys guns only (with a lot of joking and laughing on vox).  Once all the group was present we started a serious mission with three, two-manned, Apaches flying against A/I in challenging weather/terrain.  All of us were shot down/crashed at least once and a good time was had by all on vox.

When I was an "AH only" player I had the following mantras:
1) I don't like jets.."They suck and blow".
2) I don't like helicopters..."Flying them is like standing on a beach ball."
3) I don't like fighting A/I..."Good against remotes is one thing.  Good against the living is something else."

Funny how preconceived notions can change.

[AKIron]

Someone say terrain?

I just made a tour of the various DCS terrains.

Downsized to 1080 which youtube is still processing. I really don't like what clipchamp did to that video, fuzzy.

[Tumor]

I really don't like what clipchamp did to that video, fuzzy.

I think the old one is better... which is not hard to get ahold of.   Don't really care anymore as OBS / Davinci is just too easy.

[Tumor]

So, through videos, I looked at the terrain. It looks like 90s graphics. I was extremely surprised that all that work in cockpits, it appears almost no effort on the terrain. In about 7 videos, I personally didn’t see any as good as AH. Some of what I saw was actually a bad joke. I could not believe I was looking at DCS. The god of graphics, is not really a god at all, except the AC.

This is actually hilarious.  What are you using to look, a 3dfx Voodoo3?

[Animl-AW]

This is actually hilarious.  What are you using to look, a 3dfx Voodoo3?

I have no clue why I would even respond to this.

I saw what I saw. Now, that said, I would hope is has to do with graphic detail turned down. Most were darkwood vids.

I’m not obligated to bite your hook. I saw what I saw. And it was sad.

You 4 are making no ground here, please continue.
Edited: btw, I use a RTX 3060ti.

[AKIron]

I think the old one is better... which is not hard to get ahold of.   Don't really care anymore as OBS / Davinci is just too easy.

I have the Photos Legacy editor and it is better. Going to try the free version of Davinci. Will replace that video on youtube if better.

[AKIron]

When I exported that video from Davinci I didn't see an option for the res I run DCS at, 2560x1440. So I exported 4K. Will be interesting to see what it does with that. There's probably a setting somewhere to change that. The exported movie looks much better than what Clip Champs did. Of course youtube does it's own processing thing.

[Tumor]

I have no clue why I would even respond to this.

I saw what I saw. Now, that said, I would hope is has to do with graphic detail turned down. Most were darkwood vids.

I’m not obligated to bite your hook. I saw what I saw. And it was sad.

You 4 are making no ground here, please continue.
Edited: btw, I use a RTX 3060ti.

Not looking to make ground, I don't care which direction anyone goes... this is an old, old, hangout with good people in it.   AH is still fine and dandy for anyone who wants to engage.  The graphics in any game don't turn me on, the gameplay & style does.  And, I lean hard toward the Sim end and am slightly repulsed by the "Game" end.  In fact, it's not even that... it's the "Game-ER" end that repulses me.  I got almost 20yrs out of AH, and I appreciate that.  The game itself did not turn me away... the gam-ers, the game-the-game styles, Lag-bandits & never-ending-energy stuff etc, that's what burned my excitement. Certain attitudes and most certainly certain players (nobody in this thread unless there's a shade I don't know about) burned AH for me.  It's not like I never had anything else.  I ~always~ had every version of every flightsim (that I knew about) I could get my mitts on to kick around, and I did.  After Air Warrior, AH kept my interest for a long while.  LockOn MAC was promising as toejam... in 2000 or whenever.  IL-2 (the various versions) took a long while to become incredible, but they did. 

The key (IMO) difference between the two as compared to IL-2 & DCS, AH is Easy-Mode from the ground up.  And that's fine... but if it makes you feel better, it's also why I balk at the idea of WarThunder.  DCS is literally "difficult"... a lot of people don't like that.  In fact most people will always choose the path of least resistance.  I like learning toejam, doing different things, and a challenge.  Long ago I lost any interest in Dogfighting my way to chest thumping glory.... it's useless.  There are WAY too man "Game Theory" enthusiasts who have no interest in anything other than being the best ~by whatever means necessary~.

The difference in graphics between DCS & AH is more than noticable.  My rig is no speed-demon by current standards, it's a 3080ti sitting on a 3950x with 64g of budget Ram.  I have graphics cranked pretty high in DCS, trees & grass stuff turned down a bit, with shadows on (that I hate) running 2560x1440.  It's not bad at all.  AH isn't bad at all, EITHER (last time I ran it).  But they are noticably different with DCS light-years ahead regarding detail IF you want it that way.  If you really want to see what DCS can do, go check Jabbers video about "Breathtaking Graphics".. and ya, he had a monster (IIRC).

]

[RichardDarkwood]

My vids look like that because I have the game stripped down for VR performance.

[AKIron]

I don't use VR and have everything just about maxed out. Runs fine with a 3070, 5800X3D, 65GB RAM, and Gen 4 SSD. Youtube just finished processing my redo of the terrain video I made earlier today. Looks much better.