Rise of Flight

[Die Hard]

Yeah, but with MS FSX (or CFS, for that matter) you're not restricted to the bones Microsoft and its third-party developers throw out to you. There's quite a bit of content developed by the community that's every bit as high-quality as the "official" additions. There's also a big difference between 8-10 flyable aircraft (seems to be a general standard for the more recent commercial sims) and 2.

Strange. I remember a time when most flight simulators only had one flyable aircraft. I'm obviously very old.

[Die Hard]

Most games wont use such an archaic feature.

Server log-in, even for offline play, is the DRM of the future. More and more games use this type of DRM: All current and future games from Relic. All current and future games from Valve. We'll probably see it as standard on Steam, and UbiSoft and EA won't be far behind.

[Die Hard]

I've been reading both those boards and I see nothing that I haven't seen at the beginning of every new flightsim since the early 90's.  Surely you'd admit to seeing fanboi cheerleading on these boards as well?  Imagine is some people from WB or WWIIOL came over to these boards and started criticizing things they didn't like about AH.  What would you expect the reaction to be?  I've seen the exact same flame wars here.  I guess its human nature when people start forming communities to protect against attacks from perceived outsiders.  I've always thought that dumb.  As gamers in an increasingly small genre, we have more in common that in difference.    

Wab

QFT!

[Saxman]

Strange. I remember a time when most flight simulators only had one flyable aircraft. I'm obviously very old.

You're probably thinking of the Janes "study" sims of the mid- to late-90s.

Key phrase being MID TO LATE 90s.

[Ack-Ack]

And the ones that were thinking about this kind of CP/DRM now can look at the backlash that was generated at NeoQB's decision to use such draconian measures.  Mostly Steam seems to be the lesser of several evils and it works moderately well in that regard. 

The RoF DRM is rather mild compared to others like Spore.  When Spore was first released, you could only install it on 3 machines period.  That meant once you installed it on three machines, you couldn't install the game anymore on any machine, regardless if you had uninstalled it on one of the 3 machines.  Now that is a draconian DRM, thankfully, it's been changed but it took a lot of community screaming to get it done and even now, it's still a rather draconian DRM.


ack-ack

[Ack-Ack]

Server log-in, even for offline play, is the DRM of the future. More and more games use this type of DRM: All current and future games from Relic. All current and future games from Valve. We'll probably see it as standard on Steam, and UbiSoft and EA won't be far behind.

Actually, the trend is moving away from an all encompassing DRM (by that I mean a company using a single DRM policy for all of its games) and moving towards a case by case solution. 

For example, Spore was released with the most Draconian DRM ever implemented in any game up to that point.  With the original DRM for Spore, the customer was limited to only 3 installs.  That meant if the game was installed just 3 times, you would never be able to install it on a 4th computer, even if you uninstalled the game on one of the 3 computers.  EA has since changed it due to consumer complaints and the fact that it didn't work (Spore has become the most pirated game in the history of video/PC games) as intended.

EA, along with some other major studios/publishers are now moving towards more 'DRM friendly' solutions, even to the point of not using them and going back to more simplified checks such as serial codes and needing the CD to play.  Sims 3 uses a simple serial code and no DRM at all. 

Fallout 3 is another game that only requires the CD and serial code (though by running the fallout.exe instead of the falloutlauncher.exe you can bypass needing the CD).  You're going to see more games that either use a DRM or a simple serial code or CD check and that is going to depend on the title.

One of the major issues with using DRMs is not whether or not they work (properly implemented, they do work quite well) but rather how they are implemented.   Most studios/publishers agree that the problem with using DRMs is how the companies that use them decide to implement them into their product.  Starforge was an example of a DRM that wasn't properly used by Ubisoft and caused quite a bit of problems. 




ack-ack

[Die Hard]

Take Relic's Company of Heroes for example (great game btw). Simple serial check during install, no other local DRM. I can install it on as many computers as I like as many times as I like. However I must be online to play, so I can only play using one computer per serial at a time. I find this completely reasonable, and certainly much better than more intrusive local DRM solutions like Starforce or limited number of installs etc. People who don't have an internet connection on the computer they play games on are such a tiny minority that they don't make any demographic at all. And you don't need a constant connection to the internet either, just when launching the game so it can check if your serial is valid; so even on dial-up or a mobile solution it shouldn't be a problem.

[Die Hard]

You're probably thinking of the Janes "study" sims of the mid- to late-90s.

Key phrase being MID TO LATE 90s.

Falcon 4, Jane's F-15, Apache Longbow, EF-2000, F-22 Total Air War, E/F-18, just from the top of my head. Recent combat sims with only one flyable aircraft exists; DCS: Black Shark was released last year.

[Saxman]

Falcon 4, Jane's F-15, Apache Longbow, EF-2000, F-22 Total Air War, E/F-18, just from the top of my head....

As I said. All mid to late-90s, with your one exception (Black Shark).

The "study" sim is archaic and just doesn't make sense any more commercially, especially given that most of the limitations of disk space and computer capabilities have been left behind. Even Falcon 4.0 has been heavily modified by the community to greatly expand its available flyable aircraft (which is probably where it owes much of its longevity).

[ariansworld]

Name one flight simulator where you get new official planes for free. Aces High? Nope. You pay for them through your subscription.

I have already elaborated this a few times.  Why dont you learn to read a thread.

[Die Hard]

I have already elaborated this a few times.  Why dont you learn to read a thread.

I know, but it doesn't seem to sink in with some people, so I repeated it. Is that a problem for you?

I know how to read thank-you-very-much. When will you learn how to spell?

[allaire]

Falcon 4, Jane's F-15, Apache Longbow, EF-2000, F-22 Total Air War, E/F-18, just from the top of my head. Recent combat sims with only one flyable aircraft exists; DCS: Black Shark was released last year.

Also look at the titles.  They are named after one aircraft.  Goes to reason that they would have one aircraft.  RoF is a WWI combat flight sim and it goes to reason that there should be more than aircraft.  If it were named Albatross, Fokker, or Spad it would go to suggest that there is only one aircraft.

I've been reading both those boards and I see nothing that I haven't seen at the beginning of every new flightsim since the early 90's.  Surely you'd admit to seeing fanboi cheerleading on these boards as well?  Imagine is some people from WB or WWIIOL came over to these boards and started criticizing things they didn't like about AH.  What would you expect the reaction to be?  I've seen the exact same flame wars here.  I guess its human nature when people start forming communities to protect against attacks from perceived outsiders.  I've always thought that dumb.  As gamers in an increasingly small genre, we have more in common that in difference.    

Wab

The problem with this is that there is not really anyone comparing RoF to anything other than a replacement to the aging RB3D.  Its not really people going over there comparing it to OFF, FE, or even Canvas Knights.  They are talking about their problems with the sim and are getting stomped on by the fanboys.  I can understand that kind of reaction but some of those are taking it way to far.  Most of them come across as looking like they are blindly following along.

I understand that some types of DRM/CP are in the future but some are far more distasteful than others.   Now I have to go to work.

[Die Hard]

Also look at the titles.  They are named after one aircraft.  Goes to reason that they would have one aircraft.  RoF is a WWI combat flight sim and it goes to reason that there should be more than aircraft.  If it were named Albatross, Fokker, or Spad it would go to suggest that there is only one aircraft.

There are four flyable aircraft included from the start in ROF, so I'm not sure what your point is.

[MiloMorai]

There are four flyable aircraft included from the start in ROF, so I'm not sure what your point is.

No there wasn't. There was just the Fokker D.VII and SPAD 13. The N28 and Albatros Va, were to be in the initial release but were for some reason not. The N28 and Albatros Va are available for free download now.

[allaire]

You do know how to read the quoted part as well?  I know there are 4 flyables for the NA release.  My point is that RoF is a WWI combat flight sim where you should have more than one aircraft.  The study sims i.e. Falcon 4, Jane's F-15, Apache Longbow, EF-2000, F-22 Total Air War, E/F-18, and Blackshark, all of which you named and which I quoted, have the name of one and only one aircraft in the title.  That is an indicator that the sim covers one aircraft and not a multitude of them.  My point is that people that try to compare the single aircraft sims with ones that cover an era of a war is comparison that doesn't work.