Відео

cool beanz

Since you mentioned DI's Hind - which you skipped reviewing - I would have thought you would added Enemy Engaged Apache vs Havok (although the connectable sequel came out in 2000) It's definitely good enough to mix it with these titles - i'd put it as high as in A

Oh man i remember playing falcon 3.0 on the library computer. Funnily enough that's what got me into flight sims.

The EEGS Level 5 gunsight of the F-16 is a "predictive" gunsight. It guesses where the target wil be when the bullets arrive and tells the pilot to aim accordingly. So, to hit a hostile with guns you have to put that little circle on it (the pipper level 5 which appears when you are in gun range with a locked target - aka as the "kill dot"). Best technique is to put the dot in front of the target and squeeze the trigger while the pipper passes over it. At 07:06 you can see it appearing. At 07:07 you manage to put it in front of the hostile. However, it never touches him while you fire. You just missed him

I can see myself earning a medal of honor but never actually reciving it since my engagement against soviet pilots"never happend"

5:09 🤨

dcs ai decides to kill themselves after seeing your dogfighting skillz.. that's pretty advanced ai if you ask me

Jane's USAF isn't worthwhile?!

Ah, MiG Alley. The zenith of Korean War air combat sims. Even Sabre Ace - Conflict Over Korea doesn't come close. I've been replaying it lately, completing everything my child self couldn't. After over a decade of dreaming about playing it, considering it was the biggest influence on my love for retro games, combat flight sim and flying as a whole, it can be seen why. My only gripe is the death of older mod links online, and the low amount of FLYABLE aircraft compared to the modeled total. I'm not saying I want to be able to frag with the C-54 or B-29/B-50, but I am saying that the NKAF could use frag options for the modeled Il-2 and YaK-3. In a perfect world every single-engined aircraft would be user selectable, plus a few more options (Tempest, Firefly, Corsair) but all in all, I'm happy just being able to play it again after so long. I wish I knew where to get the big box, maybe some poor bastard is selling theirs on eBay? Digital downloads from IE are useful, but owning another physical of what is quite possibly my favorite game wouod bring me some happiness.

I remember dropping the nuke in the demo for this game.

I shoplifted this from K-mart when I was a kid.

Very well presented.

No F117 nighthawk 2.0, no Longbow Gold, no Red Baron 3D, no F15 Strike Eagle 3, no Gunship 2000? Well, i guess we know this isnt a list of ALL worthwhile flight sims.

Yeh I think I need to dogfight with some real people to see how I go. The AI seems strange at time between aircraft

How did you even get this running. It barely ran on my Win98SE machine in-period!

Jane’s F15 from 1999 has better AI than falcon 3 even

dcs is a money making machine

DCS hasn't really changed since Flanker (graphics aside).

any thoughts on European air war, chuck yaeger's, red baron(3d), or MS combat flight simulator? Im on potato hardware RN and no money so im looking hard at this era. Wise words in the outtro as well.

I was quite the fanatic player with this.

Yeah it's a good game - but one small point (a biggy actually!) China's involvement wasn't a what if, they entered the war on North Korea's side.

DCS is a ponzi scheme

There's something very amusing about how Korea seems to be a common setting for all sorts of promising/damn good flight sims. Be it regarding the infamous conflict that's shaped it or a return of it in a modern era.

DCS World is a game, where your only real simulation is the cockpit. The joke "Digital Cockpit Simulator" is closer to the truth than official "Digital Combat Simulator" is by itself. The DCS World best offering is to learn how to perform different tasks in different environments. Example, how to use a bombing table to get the bomb dropped on target. Or how to perform a proper gun strafing at low altitude and evade without overflying the target. The multiplayer offers possibility for proper basic flight maneuvers for dog fight. To learn the energy management and learn to control yourself when to utilize stored energy and when not. But that is it, not even BVR is properly possible be tested or played. The other side that DCS World offers, is same as with any other simulator really. How to navigate. So you learn how to handle radio, how to fly route and how to find the coordinates middle of nowhere and how to get back to base. All of these things can be done without AI. And that is where the DCS World works, when you have no AI whatsoever in use. But once you add AI to the equation, DCS World becomes bloated with incorrectness and failures. As simple things as dropping a bomb on truck doesn't work right. And even less about other targets that can shoot back, like a AAA or SAM. So many incorrectness in those that better just not to even think it at all as "simulator", and only as "Target that can do something". This is reason why when I want to enjoy campaign and story etc, I turn to some old 90's flight games, as even simple story in those is far better than what it is in DCS World, because the AI is far superior.

It really isn't that difficult to make a proper AI these days for a military simulator. You only need to observe real military, take notes of the logics and write the AI to copy it. I am talking about ground units, as in what kind units there are (division -> brigade -> battalion -> company -> platoon -> squad -> team -> pair -> fighter) and then what type of (air defense, MBT, transportation/logistics etc) units there are. Understanding that there are human soldiers as basic mechanic for each unit, example MBT has 3/4 soldiers in it. Driver / Gunner / Commander / Loader. Each has their own sensors, that are "vision, hearing, voice and feeling) and functions as duty and performance, and capabilities. You use old RTS games implemented mechanics, as in Close Combat had for each soldier: Moral (Fear vs Courage) Awareness and physical (Fatigued vs Rested) Healt (Normal / Injured / Wounded / Incapacitated / Unconscious / Killed). And you build a individual AI based those small factors, that affect its sensors, its speed, its communication capability (precision, accuracy, memory) etc. In very simple manner with example 0-10 scale. And sum all up to overall value for larger unit. Every such AI is designed to be put on process status. It doesn't need to run all the time consuming real CPU etc. Lot of things are simulated by assuming that unit will perform its duty when in normal condition. So example if you send a few soldiers to walk 5 km one direction and come back, you give them a expected time schedule when they need to be there and then when to be back. So Estimated Time of Arrival. The ETA is not exact. It is estimation. So when no one is looking, you just know that X number of soldiers were sent from A to B and back, through route Y or X. And you expect them to be back in 90 minutes. You put that unit as zombie that will be simulated and checked only when estimated to be back. As nothing odd will happen in there. Nothing is calculated etc. But if there comes something on their path, in their location, that zombie unit is recalled and some CPU is used to check do they detect something, do they do something (make a radio call, engage etc) about it, and where they really were estimated to be. As AI location that is zombie doesn't need to be known exactly where they are, just like you don't know exactly where someone else is when you send them to do something. So you can have thousands of zombies just somewhere, guarding a bridge, observing from a hill, patrolling the road etc. And nothing will happen to them unless some other unit gets close to them. When you do some estimation etc and simulate things. Lot of soldering is really about waiting, doing something irrelevant. 6-8 hours goes to sleeping when only few are awake for guarding. Transportation is just moving stuff or men from A to B. Maintenance for vehicles etc. Nothing that is really requiring anything else than roleplaying that it would be done with schedule. And only when someone gets close to it, needs it to be simualted in more detailed manner and it starts taking some CPU time. A real combat is slow. It is hours work to assault a small town. Not seconds or minutes like now in in DCS. Because everyone is afraid for their life. So combat is slow. And most of the time in combat, you move slowly, carefully, hold position and observe and shoot and pin other down. There is no much of a combat all the time, it is slow hours or days lasting process. And there is no need to simulate everything all the time. What players don't see, we do it with simulation in simple form like paper-rock-scissors. Unit on hill has opportunity over one coming at it. Unit in foxhole has benefit over assaulting. Unit inside building as advantage etc. There is reason why then artillery, air support etc are used to break the locks and take away the advantage and opportunity for own troops to advance and proceed. DCS could very well have hundreds of thousands AI units formed by single soldiers with each having a own capabilities and duties, as > 90% of those would be zombie/sleep while player is cruising 200 miles from carrier. Only when the player gets close to something, they get waken for checking every few seconds to roll dices etc. When player has targeting pod on something, those units gets rendered and animated etc. Only then does the units get more "alive" with more detailed simulation. And that is slow process. Not real-time processing with extreme simulation, but careful military operation.

Playing single player campaigns and single missions in Jane’s Fighters Anthology was the most fun I’ve had in combat flight sims. The AI wasn’t perfect, made mistakes that I could manipulate. Even the ground AI would miss. DCS AI is getting better, but still very predictable.

i love those early 3D graphics

Can you provide a link to the superpak patch for falcon 4.0? I have spent 2 days trying to find any sort of patch that will let me run 4.0 on windows 10, with no success. Everyone tells me to just play BMS but I dont want too, I want to experience the classic version that is less complicated in terms of systems.

So cool

Were you able to use a joystick in all of the games? How do you deal with button mapping?

One you missed was "Back to Bagdad" - it was interesting in that it did a VERY accurate simulation of the radar system in the F-16, and if you had an old CGA card and monitor laying around, you could put that into your PC and use that as a dedicated radar display! The manual was like 70% how to work the radar. But I don't think it was widely known about and didn't get as much market as Falcon 4.0.

I was lucky to play some of these titles. The old gamers who moved on, had good choices in the'90s

What?!?! No love for SU-27 Flanker???

You should change the title to "fixed wing aircraft combat flight sims" as you missed out all the great helicopter sims from the 90´s (well, you mentioned Hind and Apache Longbow by DI). Glad you came up with Fleet Defender in the end, but i´m still missing F-15 Strike Eagle III, Jane´s F-15, USAF, IAF and a few others. And imo, DI´s F-16 Fighting Falcon is very much worth to list, as it was pretty close to Falcon 4.0 in terms of realism. Besides that, i agree with the list. Played all of those (except JSF) plus those i just mentioned.

You have mentioned DI's Super Hornet and Jane's Super Hornet, I would like to mention Hornet 3.0 by Graphic Simulations. It was a superb and realistic sim, but today to make it run, I need to use VirtualBox with Windows 98 installed.

this video came into mind after i watched growling sidewinder playing BMS and mentioning multiple times how the graphics werent that great, meanwhile the entire f4 campaign is so fleshed out its like multiple games in one

The cpu in the other game was nothing to write home about, literally reverses the turn to cross your nose for no reason except to give you the guns kill. Strange how it was on a flat map with no hills to account for.

Great review. How did you run this game? What kind of hardware did you use?

Vulture Kinetics™ is a company firmly having isolated itself from everything all the time, no exposure to the sofware industry, the gaming industry, chipset-affiliation, launcher affiliations, code language affiliations, procedures and practices.. nothing. they to this day call multiplayer "network play" (not a translation error), their Western CM staff see its sole mission to silence feedback, censor and delete bug reporting, stalk anyone they deem dissidents on a purely personal level. The owner has decided to first not replenish personell on gulag level after an exodus of most of the actual talent (hint.. they were internally referred to as khokhols) - that was not allowed to do anything progressive core functionality wise anyway - but also embezzle turnover money away from the company into his decrepited dad's shitty private warbird collection, while preserving the teamworking-inept in a colab scenario across many countries after having not having had any sort of internal organisation or true and tried PM practices. And as for AI, there is none, not colloquially, DCS has no AI, only script-based if-else sequence conditions, based on the flightsimulator (the real hardware one) "waypoint mentality" of the 1980's. Vulture Kinectics™ also openly states that they do not care about "network play", despite PvA being the future for everything and even apart from that this warrants the question: *"If DCS is a singleplayer product, why is it then so abysmal at being one?"* (and I am a DCS "network play"-er btw, and have no other flightsim installed)

MrBeast if he made combat sim comparison videos

Maybe that AI isnt change since Lock on moderd air combat

Thanks for this video. The Falcon franchise was awesome from day 1. I love this comparison. I recently returned to Falcon 1 on the Commodore Amiga and loved it. Awesome sim. I was doing link up PvP.

You did not include ATF Gold or Fighters Anthology Many of the games mentioned did not sell a fraction of the copies of these two

This is pretty much a wide issue to most games these days, AI improvements are stagnant and in fact developers have chosen to make AI worse because good AI "is not fun game design" Thats their argument, in games like STALKER where AI can flank you and even use stealth against you, its brutal which means you have to deliberately use superior firepower, grenade spam to take them out quickly so they never get a chance to flank you. Which is imao, realistic, you rather hit them all if you can, or wait for a chance to do so. Its interesting to see sim games also suffer from same issues, developers prioritise fun over realism.

you sound extremely similar to Mental Outlaw you might as well be the Mental Outlaw of based airsim gaming! :DDDDDDDD

Good ai is impossible to program, dcs is the premier simulator because of its high fidelity and extremely accurate models not because it has good or serviceable ai. Thats why dcs youtubers showcase pvp, and not single player sorties outside of ground attack. Edit: the cpu is serviceable for everything but bfm, i was wrong in saying dcs youtubers dont showcase single player sorties when growling sidewinder uploads bvr and ground attack/cas videos relatively frequently.

I love how the AI is way better than an actual person in warthunder

the way the sun glinted off the canopies of the enemy a/c was just brilliant and should be copied by DCS

Somehow DCS AI gets beat by Ace combat AI... an arcade flight game...

DCS : PFM / SFM