Isn't War Thunder still 15v15?
Whatever War Thunder actually is, there's no denying it draw players like nothing else, and by huge margins. They have found a recipe that works if success is measured in number of online players. The graphics is right up there. Pondering about irrelevant technicalities, using 20-40 year old defunct/dead games as a yardstick is pretty moot.
War Thunder has about 99.9% of online combat flight sim players (70 million registered players). Now, WT is not what any "serious simmer" would even call a flight sim, but that's besides the point. AH is also not what any "serious simmer" would call a flight sim (but eons more than WT though). WT is hugely popular and the reason is a focus on gameplay and graphics with a tint of aviation history.
For any "serious combat simmer", DCS is it. It has about 80-90% of the market with IL-2 as a good number 2, 15-20% perhaps. However I'm sure more than 50% of DCS players also play IL-2 just as much or even more at periods. If I were to bet on which one of these two still was going strong in 10 years from now, my bet would be on IL-2 rather than DCS. Eagle Dynamics recognize the problem however, and have started adding more aircraft with the simplified Flaming Cliff series of aircraft (much simplified and standardized aircraft systems and no clickable cockpit, making them essentially like IL-2 aircraft. Still highly detailed systems and wepons, but it doesn't require 1/2 a year to get a grip of it all for one single aircraft, seriously). Obviously the super high fidelity aircraft in DCS (detailed focus on aircraft systems and full fidelity clickable cockpit) is a niche within a niche, and a sole focus on that aspect alone is ultimately not all that good for business when all is said and done. The new IL-2 game engine will start in Korea, with several jets and last generation props. Where it goes from there will be interesting to see.
Where DCS and IL-2 both are trying to strike a balance between, and continuously exploring and improving the possibilities of- simulation, fidelity, gameplay, graphics, immersion, history, AI, realism, flight models etc and at the same time running a viable business, what is AH focusing on? From what I can se, none of those things. Browsing through this board it's all about some obscure and super nerdy gameplay issues, scoring system, perks and settings that for 99.999 % of the combat sim community is completely alien. People wonder what AH is. Is it an online flight sim, or some odd game of "multiplayer pool" with obscure and often hidden rules ?
In other words, AH is largely lost on most flight simmers. It's not about other sims being better, or having better graphics, it's mostly about people just don't get what AH is.
But what exactly is AH? According to Hitech:
HiTech Creations was founded with a simple philosophy, by Dale "HiTech" Addink, in 1999. It's not to create a large corporation, a vast gaming network, or a line of online games. It's just to create one game, but one that is better than any other like it. Contrary to most companies, our goal is to keep the company small. We know that with a singular focus and an experienced cohesive team that enjoys its work, the production, service, support, and overall level of satisfaction will be unmatched.
Comparing apples to apples, this means the competition is/was Warbirds, AirWarrior and WWII online. In this respect, AH won, hands down. It's seriously better than any other like it. The problem is the last sentence. Nothing wrong with it, but sooner or later life happens, and new blood is needed for the product/company to thrive. A company is like a child. At some point it must get a life on it's own to outlive the parents. Then again, there's no law of nature that say it should. It's a choice, but the rest of the world isn't standing still just because you are. The standard of what is good or not is constantly changing, and new stuff pops up all the time rendering old stuff irrelevant.
Besides, DCS started in 1995 with the Flanker series of sims, gradually becoming DCS as the sim evolved. That's the same year as Warbirds came out, at least 5 years ahead of AH. The focus of Flanker/DCS and everything in between has always been high fidelity, the study sim genre. Comparing DCS to AH is error from the start.
I think AH has a place in this jungle. It's a unique product with a unique experience. At this moment in time though, it's simply not something that attract flight simmers. How to do that? Beats me, but reading the comments on this board is 100% not it
Outspoken, rude, self righteous and down right unpleasant fanboys are not attractive. What is attractive is an engaged community with many contributors. That's perhaps DCS most valuable asset, and they know it. They also know the value of expressing that at every opportunity.
I visit this board perhaps once every couple of months or something, just to see if something is happening (well, other than new skins... What is that all about anyway?) For me to come back to AH I would probably say the following:
- The FM is good. The aircraft behaves like they were on ice on the ground, but the FM in the air is better than the warbirds in DCS (they are laughable). Not as good as IL-2, but OK. It's not something I would change first
- The model of engines and systems are way oversimplified. It severely detracts from the experience of actually flying an airplane. In combat this was a huge factor. No need to over doo it like in DCS, but the basics should be correct. Aircraft with manual prop and mixture setting, should also have it in the game etc. Managing temps and pressure was difficult in RL, and should be difficult in the game. Simplifications should be done by "auto features" and/or AI textual help that can be turned off
- The graphics is OK IMO. A bit higher polygon count wouldn't hurt though, and more detailed cockpit graphics. But, lots of people judge by graphics alone, and for those the graphics is way below the bar
- Localized units in aircraft. Miles per hour in a German and Russian aircraft, is more than enough to shake your head, turn around and never come back. As an option, fine (still way above the line of weird/WTF IMO). Not a deal braker for me, but it would certainly help.
- Remove artificial nonsense like perks and other game rules. Lots of reasons to have it, but the reason to not have it is they makes the whole game just a big WTF for 99% of simmers. I know Hitec would simply say this is a game, not a sim, and that's fine. It doesn't solve the problem though. The problem is "we" want a sim, not a game. The game is called War Thunder anyway, and AH is definitely not a better game than WT
- Improve AI so AI can be used to populate and balance gameplay. Probably controversial considering "massively multiplayer", but it's now 2024 not 1990. At the same time, get "otto" back.
- Introduce rolling plane set. It was by far the best feature of the MA in WB. It gave a sense of grand scale to the experience. A huge immersion factor and an infinitely better solution than perks
Realistically I will not likely come back looking at what must change, and at the same time having all the other sims available where new stuff pops out all the time. Remember, AirWarrior/Warbirds was a big deal back in the day. Nothing else like it, nothing else was comparable. They set a standard. That continued perhaps until 2005-ish with AH, but competing elements coming from other directions already existed way before that point in time. It's the high fidelity sims that have prevailed, and won overall (disregarding WT, since it's simply no flight sim. It just draws lots of people with flight sim interests). Now, DCS is walking very close to the point of ridiculousness regarding fidelity, and has perhaps even crossed the line a few times. Ridiculous is not viable. Regardless of that, DCS continue to set the standard for what is possible. IL-2 is a bit in the shadows of DCS, but what they lack in "glory", they make up for in FM, damage model and "flyability" in lack of a better word. Simply put, despite the clunkiness of IL-2 (compared with DCS), the FM and feeling of flying score goes to IL-2. This makes the new IL-2 Korea with brand new game and graphics engines the most anticipated flight sim thing in several years, decades even.
Lots of bla bla here, but the main point I'm trying to make is that AH is not all that far behind IL-2. It's a different concept, but flight-sim vise it's not that different. But unless something is done, unless AH see some development, it's just going to fall behind even more in every aspect. That's just a fact of life. I'm sure PackMan is still played by a whole bunch of die-hards around the world too, nothing wrong with old games. But a flight sim is something different. It just gets old and weird unless continuously being developed. PacMan can age with grace, AH cannot.
