I may get flamed for this video but I simply miss having persistent large scale dynamic campaigns that I could get invested into. I really hope that we get this again in modern day sims. To me it seems like such a shame to take all of the hard work everyone has done to take these beautiful full or semi-full fidelity planes and play them on such desolate and static environments. Let me know what you think. I hope this video is seen as a call for hope and not to be a huge bummer. Let's hope we get some progress in 2023. Happy New Year Everyone!
Pretty thoughtful, hard to get flamed for it (hopefully) 🙂 I think there is an even bigger point here, video game industry as a whole had forgotten the value of dynamic & large scale gameplay with its emerging stories and replayability value, and focused on other things. I think we might be at a turning point though, things like the battle royale genre & its affiliate highlight that you can do more than arena gameplay & retain players pretty well. You had to have PUBG developed as a mod/community thing for devs to realize it 😅 WT I think is less a cause and more a symptom, it's where people default in lack of an alternative. Failing a meaningful large scale campaign and emerging gameplay you might as well go for the second-best in terms of 'addictiveness', e.g. the meta progression and unlocks, and stick with quick arenas for the gameplay. But I think it took more people from non-sim games (e.g. world of tanks) and "upgraded" them than the reverse, but makes sense that you'd see these from your point of view.
YES I agree completely Enigma. I get tired of the sim community drooling over clouds and rivet counting fidelity. Start demanding a compelling game (and associated elements like competent AI) to go along with the simulation being built.
And ED is so invested in scripted campaigns to be a substitute to this. No offense to Baltic Dragon or anyone else building campaigns.. I just don’t want to see that and it’s not an acceptable replacement for what BMS delivers on 25 year old software
Asa developer, I am an ex-wwiionline player and I have spent time on your Cold War server. I have lot to say so please stick with me. First to a degree you are right. I am going to stick to DCS as it is my choice, I haven't played War Thunder for a long time. I joined ww2online 12 months after its launch, boy it was rough but as you highlighted it improved and was fun. It suffered from being a small design/development team but the payback was the rolling campaign made it fun. Its weakness was getting out content and features due to some early architecture issue and the code base. Now the Enigma Cold War server does give you a feel for the WWIIONLINE and I commend people to try it. I did a design for road convoys to resupply units at the front, whether the design would work with the current server remains to be seen. But the big issue is the integration of the client to a server. Also the need for a more dynamic feel to the Enigma server to give it a lived in feel for some PvE combat as well as PvP. A weakness in ww2online. I wish I could help as I am developer of over 30 years experience. But I am not a games developer so I am not sure what I could do for you? Oh and I am an old air Cold War Warrior. Your analysis of the results of the war are spot on. Here in Europe many external contractors now come from Eastern Europe to help meet the shortage of commercial developers like myself. In my current employment we have a large number of them working remotely to help us develop a new product. Then someone started a war! Now most of the team are in Moldova, but there is a member in Ukraine. They are working so hard to try and keep working to feed their family, in trying conditions. In Moldova there are power cuts making production slower due to Russian air strikes and bombardment. Thank god for cloud storage of source code. At a previous job we had developers from Kiev who were Sim developers cross training to get some new skills away from games. Nice bunch, who I have no contact with alas, clearly they have this year likely been thinking of something other than writing games! There is a shortage of developers in the world and games development is the least well paid so most developers migrate to commercial work. With Russia and Ukraine being at war many people are focussed in survival not development of any software! It is from this region that many of the companies who write combat sims come from. For there to be a Renaissance new games houses will need to appear in the Western Europe and other parts of the world for it to occur. Good luck Enigma and I wish you all the success in the world for I think we seek the same thing.
Did Total Air War have dynamic campaigns ? You are complaining about the state of things ? ha!, what about us, the very few that would like a single player dynamic campaign to justify those 60$ modules of DCS. The thing is that i really want the Hind but for the same money i can buy Warhammer Darktide and can play tens if not hundred of hours of good co-op fun rather than a beta helicopter with no campaign just quick missions.
Honestly. Roughly thats 'gaming' in general these days... i lot of the points that Enigma talks about is relatable in sense to modern day gaming as a whole..
BMS dev, I'll be happier if you could work on present 4.5 & 5th generation fighters fitted with AESA & PESA radars + large MFDs instead. There's already DCS giving low & high fidelity cockpit fighters from cold war to 90's era with more aircraft filling the void trying to complete the collection. There's no way you could fight DCS in their field therefore it's better for you to focus on current & upcoming generation fighters to capture your different field of audience instead. It shouldn't be hard for you if you're not making high fidelity cockpit. As long as you have the cockpit layout and get know roughly how they work after visiting western & eastern manufacturers at few expo, you could make it happen. Why not add these fighters into your arsenal & sell it on Steam? US - F-15EX, F-15C with AESA AN/APG-63CV3 AESA, F-16V, F/A-18E/F (added advantage F-35A/B/C & F-22). Russia - Su-27SM3, Su-30SME, Su-35S/UBS, Su-34M, Mig-29SMT/M2 Mig-35, Mig-31 (Su-57 extra mile) China - J-10C, J-11D, J-15B, J-16, J-20A/B NATO - EF2000, Rafale C/M, Gripen
@@jawarakf a lot of that stuff is classified, it'd either be very unrealistic and therefore not a simulator or they'd get in a lot of trouble if it was realistic
@@Flaruwu come up with realistic ones first especially aircraft available for export market, they could provide general information needed for this game expansion. Almost all 4.5 generation aircraft shouldn't be a problem in low fidelity
My first real Multiplayer experience was Falcon and I was hooked. I joined a LAN group who literally handed me a a phone book sized print out of the Falcon Manual and told me read certain chapters first and come back in a couple of weeks for a flight in the dynamic campaign they had been running for months( yes Months). I dutifully read the chapters and then practice flew some training missions until the Next LAN weekend came .I joined them and I still remember that experience like it was yesterday I'm now nearly 50 years old and I'll never forget how alive it felt and how everyone got involved with what the next mission would be and what that outcomes influence it would have on the campaign. Would we split in to different Flights and do a multi pronged Approach? Would we perhaps take a new airfield? Our choices mattered a great deal. Cooperation was key. LAN group members came and went due to Real life and then eventually disappeared into the Memories of a few old men. I wasn't able to get that feeling again until I joined a Online Squadron a few years later and played IL2 1946. A fun experience and some great memories but no Falcon. Then came DCS World ,Graphics to die for, cockpits full fidelity an active and passionate community. But sadly It lacks that Alive feeling of the incredible Dynamic Campaign Falcon Had. I have gotten to a point in DCS where I load up the sim and then just either sit in the main UI and Don't know what to do or just jump into a plane and go for a sightseeing flight. Because I know that to start a Multi hour mission where It will likely Bug out and can't finish it will sap my will to play. I have literally every aircraft Bar a couple I buy every Campaign that seems interesting but never quite gives that feeling again. Then a new Module comes out and I'm excited to learn it and play for awhile only to remember the problems the SIM has Not addressed and the Dynamic Campaign it lacks.
I have exactly the same situation. I own every modual and just about every static campaign. I then do just as you sit in the UI.... Funny; after you have all that DCS has to offer but still find it boring. However, I just useually end up on a multiplayer server flying around (then only to have players run into me). Or trying to fly a formation without any voice contact. Hope something changes soon
War thunder has posed itself to capture a huge section of the market base for several reasons. It has variety (which is important at some point) but more importantly I believe it captures so many players because it easily provides "sim-ish" gameplay in short packages (15 to 30 min in airRB). The controls are the same across all vehicles (I don't need to learn a new cockpit to be a decent pilot in a new airframe) and I can easily sit down and play a few games without having to dedicate a couple hours like I might have to in other fuller sims. Its alluring to casual players because its more sim than theyre used to, and the variety is overwhelming. Its alluring to more serious players because of the convenience, and doesnt require hours of dedication to milk *some* outcome of fun from. It is perfectly posed to suck up the most players with the blandest experience, and then milk the money out of them. I don't think its a "bad" game, but its definitely run by a bad company that doesn't *really* care about its players past its ability to make money off of them, and as you said, the lack of any kind of dynamic interesting campaign has set a bad standard for the rest of the industry and players.
I think you articulated this perfectly. As someone who didn’t grow up with the older sims, I was and still am unfamiliar with them. After looking into them, I’m surprised to see they had so much to offer. Once I got into dcs, I was blown away by sim, but after some time I started to feel there was something missing. I think the dynamic Cold War server is the closest we have to filling that gap. Thanks for what you do for the community.
Good articulation, bad microphone. Those breathing and salivating sounds really distracted me from the point, got to repeat parts of the video and concentrate on what was being said
Falcon's dynamic campaign is the only true simulation of modern air combat I've played because of the threat layers and level of activity in the AO. You truly needed to know how your radar and avionics functioned to be successful. The immersion of getting to know the AOs and see them develop was second to none in my opinion.
Never played those old games, but if IL2 had a proper sense of scale in a multiplayer setting I think I'd shit my pants. Engaging large numbers of human + AI fighters and bombers would be a dream come true.
WW2OL was a mindblowing experience. Joining a large squad was a no-brainer, and you'd get with your air wing on a saturday to put up 20 or so fighters and a half dozen or more bombers to support your ground guys operation. That was coordinated with a few other big squads, and your counterparts on the other side would always come and ruin your plans. It was wild! Deal with the enemy air, maybe get lucky and strafe a few trucks of infantry heading into the contested city, giant furballs, the whole deal.
Might want to checkout aces High 3, it has the large multiplayer arena. Base is smaller than it use to be but still can get up to 150 on weekends. I have played there since 2006 along with IL2 and WT. I keep going on back to AH.
you should definitely try out the old games. Firstly they are free and secondly they are still developed further to this day. The immersion is so much better, Hell, even the physics engine in Il-2 1946 is way more realistic than what Great Battles have (WT is based on that physics engine, by the way). The dynamic campaign in Falcon 4 BMS is mindblowingly realistic. The wealth of different mission that can be flown is huge. And every time you play it, the campaign will develop differently with a bunch of whole new challenges.
@@josefwitt9772 Aces High was pretty fun too, especially the fact that is was a way to play sim and manage bombing a lot better, allowing you to fly 3 bombers at once (with the AI flying the other two until you got shot down).
At this point, I am unsure DCS has either the engine or the staff capable of creating a dynamic campaign. Perhaps when that extra thread arrives it might open things up, but I remain skeptical. BMS announcing incoming VR support got me to immediately pick it up, once that arrives it's at least an auto-try from me.
I think ED's core team have been stuck on implementing multicore for a few years now. It's understandable, adding multicore support to an existing engine isn't easy, there are so many potential pitfalls. It does need to be done before anything else is bolted on to the engine, though; not just for performance reasons, but also for architectural reasons - it's easier to develop a new feature when the foundations of the engine aren't changing drastically underneath you. I reckon that when multicore ships, we'll see faster progress on core content features, as the majority of the core team will then be able to switch to working on other content pieces.
I still believe that ED really cares and will deliver the dynamic campaign. We will see. At some point it HAS to happen. I would imagine that I am ahead of the curve in terms of burnout and that other players will reach the point that a lot of us are at. It is just a matter of time IMO.
@@Enigma89 We've all got our fingers crossed, really. As there really is SO much potential there with DCS. One thing I would never accuse them of is not caring, but yes the burnout and fatigue with constant DCS engine/code limitations really does start to get to you.
@@Malakhit24 It would certainly make sense, but my main concern is that the rollout of multicore could understandably be incredibly messy. It may not open up moving staff onto other projects if it's a bit of a disaster on launch.
In the old days we had a lot of CONTEXT. I am from the days of Microprose, I played F-19 and F-117, Jane's, etc. We didn't had much graphics but it was a lot of fun, because they had content and context, thus helped a lot to immerse in the phantasy. Now it is all open world. I guess this add to the theory that humans need purpose in life and even in games to have fun.
I'm also from that era.... F19! WHAT A GAME! Playing that on the 386 for hours on end was amazing. I never got bored of it. Then TFX, EF2000, F22. All great campaigns with good pilot progression, medals, etc.
I still fire up F-117 from time to time. I just started playing DCS a few weeks ago and I feel the same stagnation. Beautiful game but just feels unfinished if you want the sense of scale it just isn't there. Makes me wonder if there is a gap for a low-fidelity sim, that focuses more on those moving pieces.
Gunship 2000 was my favourite from Microprose. I often wonder if the lack of graphical detail sparked the imagination and thus the combination created something more than modern games can offer. I see people complaining about big manuals in DCS but old school games had big manuals too, though not so complicated.
@@ilkkakoski82 I don't recall that game. I've just been looking up all the classics on YT. In my memory, EF2000 was almost real graphics 😂🤣 I wonder if I'll look back at FS2020 in 2040 and think it looks terrible?!
As a DCS content creator myself, I've come across the same issues. Frankly, I don't think that the base code will be updated in order to allow for our Wishlist that you have posted. The stated problem is that making planes and tanks has a direct impact on the bottom line. Updates to the code may or may not bring in new players. The flight sim community is a very niche, middle aged, whale heavy group with disposable income. This demographic has largely spent the money that they want on the base games... the only way to engage their wallets now would be to keep the treadmill of planes and tanks going. Unfortunately, the larger the library of that content grows, the harder it will become to patch it all in to the updated engine *IF* it were to be made... unfortunately, the longer we travel down the path of milking the whales, the less likely it will be that we will ever get anything else.
If ED came out and said that they don't have the income to make large overhauls of the code, but offered a patreon, or something like that in order to fund it, I'd pay. I'd contribute a lot for it. Even if I didn't get anything but the updated product, the same updated product that most everyone else would get for free, I'd be grateful that it was being done and that I got to help make that happen.
It's a problem of economic incentives, DCS' current business model doesn't incentivizes that but if they added a premium account-like system (gives you access to all the terrains ?) it would change the incentives.
@@Tetemovies4 Which very quickly turns into a subscription for what we previously were able to buy directly. The less flight sim games emulate modern gaming monetization the better if you ask me.
@@er00ic That depends on what the subscription is FOR. A subscription for modules is dumb: it just means you have to keep paying for something you already bought. But a subscription service more akin to an MMORPG makes sense: a subscription for an actual ongoing SERVICE. In DCS, I would absolutely pay a subscription fee for a service that developed 2-3 sophisticated missions per week and offered them on a server with a live Game Master managing REDFOR. Missions with proper IADS, multiple brigades on the ground in sensible fighting positions, actual allied strike packages designed to work together with cooperative strike, SEAD escort, DCA escort, jammer support, and assigned tankers, tasked to strike a sensible target set.
Tarkov really is the best example IMO. I'm not one for looter shooters to begin with, but that was a game I was quite hyped for only to play it for a few days, get some middling loot, get bored, quit, and then repeat the process every 6-12 months. The hideouts are really the only new thing (besides one or two new maps) that happened prior to my current hiatus and all it did was add another annoying reason to have to play Groundhog Day: The Game, against players with insane gear and lightning reflexes. If your gameplay loop requires constant resets to prevent stagnation so bad even Brezhnev would blush, you haven't made a game, you've made a particularly advanced slot machine. PUBG held my attention for even less time as it had all the features (or lack thereof) that I dislike in Tarkov while also having a very "generic mid 20teens FPS" feel to it. On the other hand, while I also take long breaks between sessions and think it gets repetitive, I actually enjoy vanilla DayZ standalone as it gives me options and doesn't give me baggage. I can explore, survive, hunt players, team up, whatever - and without mods, I don't have to deal with gamey power fantasy shit like traders with safe zones and god tier equipment, or doomforts popping up everywhere. When it comes to campaigns and old sims... DID's flight sims, particularly with their Total War system, were amazing. I nearly had to repeat a year of school thanks to F-22 Total Air War. I'd sit in the AWACS mode for hours, hopping between flights as a virtual international incident played out. I highly recommend trying it if you can get a hold of the game; I once also saw a really good short documentary piece about the company and their rise and fall here on YT, though don't remember the channel it was on. On the ground, M1 Tank Platoon II provided a similar fix for my burgeoning tank nerd. You know me well enough to know which game I consider to have inherited its mantle, so I'll leave it there for now. All in all, really good points, and really well made. Use your UA-cam influencer street cred to make the BMS guys finish the 16A pit quicker and I'll come join you.
I completely agree with you, and I'm in the same boat in regards to taking a hiatus from Tarkov. However, Nikita did say the game servers will no longer wipe when the game is in stable release, and when that day comes I will pick the game up again as I am still very fond of it, but in the meantime I hate having my progress wiped every 6 months
Dude you totally missed the actual problem with dynamic campaign and tarkov. Tarkov have so much potential, it's still on Beta, and it's been accomplishing a lot in realism terms. Those skills systems are realistic to a certain extent and even rewarding I'd say. Nikita isn't any other big company ruler around the world. He have real plans to make Tarkov an actual Military Simulator. The clues are everywhere, taking away arcade players to Arena is one, inserting BTR vehicles into the game that you can shoot the turret and some other basic mechanics. Tarkov is still BETA it's not something to compare to a full game release!!!
Man fuck the recoil imbalance among players It's one thing for me to suck from not being a lightning fast 18 year old anymore, but now they want me to grind out all this bullshit to be on a level playing field? Too many times I've caught people's sides or behind and it didn't matter because I didn't OHK them. They just snapped and gunned me down. Good ammo or not
You sir just hit the nail dead center on the head, DCS is all shiny and good when you are new to it but old timers tend to get VERY disappointed as time goes by with such a poor depth of dynamic combat simulation. Thank you for bringing awarenes about this topic, i knew i did well subscribing to your channel. Happy new year to you all, i hope for the best for everyone.
I'm glad I watched all the way through -- top notch content. You make great points about how there is a way forward to make these games better -- love the hopeful message. I think you're right.
I grew up with Ace Combat. I love aviation and when I discovered War Thunder back in 2013-14, my mind was blown. Aircraft could shoot at eachother and you could destroy engines. Clip wings. It was so much compared to what I had always known. So I've stuck with it. I have tried to get into DCS in other flightsims but I don't exactly have the space for a HOTAS set up. College sorta kills that for now. But War Thunder was always good about mouse-aim. That's why I stuck around. Nevertheless, you hit the nail on the head. It is very repetitive. The only reason I stick with it is because I'm interested in the next big thing and I'm a bit competitive in the skies. Monkey Brain happy when I get a kill. But it is bland in the end. And I don't know how they can change it. However, there is a part of me that is hopeful for a possible future with dynamic missions. War Thunder has been taking notes as of late when it comes to other games in the flight genre. The battle music has been something that is niche, but they've put effort into. Larger maps have been popping up in Air RB. And there is generally some experimenting that is being done. But, that could just be me being hopeful. My hope is to one day be able to boot the game up and find myself battling in what is essentially an Ace Combat mission but actually a multiplayer dynamic campaign. But the groundwork is currently not there for that. Honestly they could probably do with working on some smart AI to flesh the world out a bit. As for other games, I would like to escape the jail of War Thunder. I think whenever the F4 drops from Heatblur, I might be in a position where I can take a look at least. But time will tell.
As a BoS pre War Thunder guy, you could go fully flight stick and sim with WT and back in 2012 it was pretty novel. IL2 and DCS did it better in the long run but WT was there. But yes their strength is Arcade and somehow because of the budget crowd realistic took over.
I own almost every module in dcs except for maybe 2 or 3 and I haven't touched the game in months. After playing regularly since early 1.5 there are just too many issues that have been overlooked for years. This combined with the lack of content has been the reason why i've taken a bit of a hiatus from dcs.
But why would they do more when there is ppl who will buy any airplane they make, why waist time on things that dont bring money , when ppl will buy new airplanes no mather what. They can be lazy when it comes to what Enigma talks when there is so many players who will just keep buying new stuf no mather what.
@@countzero7 The people who are buying every new module that releases aren’t the problem. The problem is that eagle dynamics entire business model depends on the preorder and early access sales to drive development. That has been an issue for a long time and is the reason we got half baked modules for a few years. Pretty much anything the released by belsimtek/ED between the hornet and the F-16. Eagle dynamics needs those sales in order to fund development.
same here. i own so many dcs modules but havent played dcs in about 6 months. its riddles with issues for me i cant overlook so ive stopped playing until it becomes usable for me. I got a quest 2 for christmas so i bought vtol vr and WOW. It is so incredible. So thats what im going to play for the long term!
@@countzero7 Counter point, if people essentially boycotted DCS and stopped buying modules, they would have no budget and would have even less reason to work on the game, it would be abandoned and everyone would go "what did you expect, nobody is buying anything and the player base is dead" Kind of a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.
DCS is amazing and that's where I pin my hopes for the future of flight sims. IL2 suffers from what I think are insurmountable problems and War Thunder is in another type of market entirely.
DCS is sadly a broken mess with UFO AI, worse damage models than IL-2 CLoD which released in 2011, and a mismash of maps and planes that cannot create a cohesive theater with any fidelity or scale. It also runs like garbage in VR, which is the present and future.
Thanks to WT I got into IL2 and eventually DCS because I wanted more realistic experience, and maybe it will drag more people like me to these games. But I'm actually glad we have only few sims now because of example of Hardcore FPS games. When I was starting there were just few of them if we don't count really old ones. Most famous probably Arma 3, Verdun, Red Orchestra and Insurgency. All had lot of players and experience was awesome. Then developers of Insurgency came out with Day of Infamy, later with Sandstorm, Verdun developers made Tannenberg and Isonzo this year, Squad became a thing, Tarkov, Post scriptum, Beyond the wire, Hell let loose, and even Ready or not, Ground branch or Zero hour are famous now. Main point is community got devided between these games and most of them, even they are so good, are dead now just because no one is playing them and it's making me sad because I had a lot of fun in them. Sometimes less games is better for community even tho they are not perfect, at least we have people to play with.
Dude the Arma Russian servers are so good to play... It's crazy how deep in detail hey go over to build massive military simulator experience out of game you'd never imagine. They fill up their arma servers so fast, and also, I'd say that Russian gaming companies can turn the tide of all this dark age of Simulator Era Games. Micropose still disappoints me, I hope they'll change, and maybe we'll see like: stormworks with a very concise multiplayer campaign being polished. EDIT: most of servers are full and just to correct, they're locked to their community, which isn't hard to join, just requires some Russian language knowledge.
The issue with transferring people to these sims is most dont want to spend money on a joystick. dont want to spend money on the modules and taking time to learn everything about the aircraft with a 20 year old pc
Here is what WT did right: I don't need to read a 300 page long instruction manuel to then get shot down in a 60€ module for a few weeks while using a 300€ HOTAS on a 2000€ rig with a 200€ trackIR kit until I can get one good sortie. WT is what brought me back to sim-lites like Squad, PS and GHPC, I like having a simulation happening behind the screen but I don't have the time/willpower to spend 35hrs/week to learn to fly/drive a vehicle at a mediocre level (and then repeating that process for every new 60€ module) especially when other time consuming hobbies are involved. Edit: Now WT is far behind me but it showed me the type of simulation/ease of use ratio I wanted to have access to and a slow renaissance might be happening with indie devs exploring new avenues as GHPC is showing for tank sims.
I've started playing dcs (yeah, modern mfd stuff) with just the simpliest Logitech joystick and after around 50 hours have been scoring positive kd in gs server, even without headttacking. Of course I feel like average player skill there isn't that high, I scored more than 2 kd while being drunk as hell after around 400 hours, but you are overrating learning and equipment curve a lot. Dcs can give you positive feedback quickly without building a cockpit in your house of you are willing to learn
@@Tetemovies4 yeah, but no one actually thinks about having fun anymore. I try to, and it works. I play air arcade mostly. Everyone else is focused on grinding the top vehicles.
You're right on. Modern flight sims are a relatively shallow, non-immersive experience. It's time to get old-school again! BMS with VR and the upcoming new terrain engine will see a surge of new players no doubt. It'll be interesting to see what the expanding and re-visioned IL2 team are working on now - they seem pretty excited about it (latest DD). And ED in their latest update have just given a progress report on their dynamic campaign engine - maybe a year or two away? Probably AI is the other key factor that really needs to get to a new level. Maybe the tech is getting there with the pretty amazing but limited GPT 3.5 and the much heralded upcoming GPT 4 as a sign of general AI progress. Fingers crossed. Things in that field seem to be moving pretty fast. Keep up the good work. And buy yourself a New Year coffee or whatever on me. :) Cheers & salut!
BMS fanboying, ChatGPT simping that shows you have no idea what you are talking about or what it even is (its not fucking AI, its an LLM). Lol. Really checking the boxes for the desperate whiners I expected in these comments.
Since simulation reached home computers (basically since gaming itself started in the eighties) we have been pursuing fidelity. We have come to a point in which companies sell fidelity airplanes because that's what we simmers thought we were after. Turns out, that was only partly true. After long sessions learing and training unbelievably true-to-life airplanes, we find ourselves missing that old feeling. Bottom line: thx for having created the cold war server. It means A LOT in this context.
Same story with racing game. We have super duper simulators, but where is the classic Gran Turismo formula ? (GT1 to GT4) I want to play a career mode where you need to pass painful driving licences and grind early championships with a shitbox car that you get to upgrade slowly. Meanwhile in modern Forza, the game basically gives a 500 hp Corvette after 5 minutes of gameplay 😂 And modern Gran Turismo has you grinding for hours to collect cars you cannot use in any race 😵💫
I’m only a warthuder player, and I don’t even play on PC but what you is say super valid. They just added the F-16 and Ming-29 and nothing felt like it changed. I didn’t know any of those old sims existed but I love the idea of them, thank you for bringing them to light. I really hope new games come out with a full dynamic war.
That would be great, and I agree. I think War Thunder can actually make that type of game work by utilizing the WWM framework for individual campaigns with different vehicle types including putting player controlled ships, planes, and tanks in the same match, wih dynamic objectives, spawns, and combat areas appearing on the map. Even just modernizing the current modes of Air RB and Air Sim would probably make players very happy though lol.
as much as i already enjoy regular war thunder (rb and sim), i really do yearn for larger live campaigns on assymetrical maps. there are already a few games on friggin roblox that manage to pull this off, so it's really disapponting seeing war thunder remain with arcade-y gameplay when it could flesh it out and satisfy the strategy side of milsims.
It's worth noting there is a dynamic (sort of) campaign for Great Battles - Pat Wilson's Campaign Generator which works fairly well though it is single player and coop only. Other limitations hamper the Great Battles series from providing the experience you're looking for. E.g. no strategic bombers and the computational cost of it's AI limits engagement sizes. And the engine timers. The GD engine timers.
Dear Sir, everything you say about the status and future of swimming is correct. We have a long way to go to delivering on our vision of Dynamic Campaign despite working on this core element for quite some time. The rate of development is too slow for my liking but it is moving in the right direction and I trust will meet with your expectations. Thank you for your passion and support. Happy New Year to you and your family. Kind regards, Nick
Thank you for taking the time to watch and to comment. If I may take a bit more of your time, I would really impress upon you to make sure that the dynamic campaign system is able to support multiplayer day one. I wish you, your family and company's staff a happy new year and good fortune into 2023.
@@Enigma89 Dear Sir, thank you for your kind wishes. MP from day one message received. Let me review and revert back to you at some time. Maybe we could have a chat in the New Year. Once again, all my very best wishes to you and you family. Yours Nick
I’ll be honest, I have been simming for a long time. I think EF2000 was one of the first sims to make me realize the value of dynamic game play, even though it didn’t work that well. DCS does a great job of making the plane you are flying seem as real as possible, but we could use a campaign generator. I took a break from flights sims after they started to lose their mojo. When I did go back, DCS was the only choice for me. But I’m more of a purest when it comes the simulation, hence the word. I want to feel like and have the learning curve of a real plane. I hoping that improvements will come. For me simulation is not a all out kill fest like say a Call of Duty style game. I like the depth and the investment of time. That said, I would like to see DCS get past that one hurdle (dynamic campaign) that from my point of view would elevate the game to new heights. I have my fingers crossed that we will see it soon.
Oh man, I used to play SEF-2000 (the Windows version) and boy do I miss a dynamic campaign. It was awesome to see the results of your actions change the balance of the war.
Hello sir! I am the annual winner of the King of The Hill event in Aces High of 2019 and playings since 2004. I do feel somewhat the same about modern flight SIMs. But luckily Aces Hight is still rocking on with special events and the regular arena still attracts more than 50 players at one time up to 250 online at the same time. Aces High 3 might not look as good as the newest games, but the mmo aspect of AH is great and is truly an uniek experience. Upcoming month we will have another special event spanning 4 weeks with about 70 players singed up. Axis Vs Allies 1943 the battle of Paris. Flying bombers, escorts and intercepters, simulating the battle with both sides having a change to win this key battle. Feel free to join my squad and see what it is all about. I will have a chat with the organization to get you all settled. (Or anyone else that is interested for that matter) Happy new year sir
Its why I miss Janes simulations. I had the Longbow gold back in the day and was fun to play the Apache in that game. You had to worry about ground troops as well as other threats. You have several campaigns to play and even a training set of missions to teach how to fly and use the chopper.
I had countless hours of fun playing the original Falcon 4.0 and Allied Force. Dynamic campaigns were great. Missions were unpredictable and varied. Also liked influencing the outcome. Might be worth mentioning CFS3. That game also included a dynamic campaign where your efforts directly influenced the outcome of the overall campaign.
I'm so glad you did this video. Few months ago I found out about BMS, immediately jumped right into it. I have never played DCS because of the amount of knowledge you have to gain for flying one aircraft, but when I found out about the dynamic campaign on this game I went nuts reading the manuals. But I thought to myself, why has this dynamic campaign not been implemented in other games? There are others that attempt the same (such as Strike Fighters 2) but none will have the same feeling as actually fighting another country's army and being just another pilot in a huge scale war as this game does. This has to be implemented MORE.
I was very very very young when IL-2 came out, but I still loved playing it at as a 4 to 5 year old. The entire pacific theater and European theater at my finger tips. Without growing up with this on my grandparents computer I wouldn’t be where I am today. It not only showed me how good gaming could be but put me in my career path today already on my way to fly with United Airlines and learning to fly the T-6 Texan with my local Commemorative Airforce wing. If I were stuck with these arcade fast paced tasteless game like war thunder I don’t think I’d ever be motivated or inspired like I was growing up.
My dream wish: all hard core developers come together to create a consortium. For campaigns we have Command from Matrix, for infantry we have Arma, for air: DCS and BMS, scenery: fs2020 and soo on. Each developer with its expertise. And we have Unreal Engine 5 and VR technology. Soo we have everything to make a leap on sim but the problem os get everyone to work together. Hell, we even have Kerbals to weaponize space! 😄
IMO, the solution would be for someone to take the DIS protocol that lets various military sims communicate and revamp it for the modern, civilian, sim era. You don't have to have as detailed coordination among the developers as long as everyone uses the same protocol.
@felcas WWIIOL continues development in 1.0 with new content and complexities (indirect artillery from 13k meters) while being committed to transitioning our massive gaming world to UE5.
I used to think DCS was all about that: allowing us to drive tanks or other vehicles like in that T-72 sim or even captain a naval vessel with its plethora of arsenals besides flying fancy jets (that will eventually be supplanted by bombers).
I still remember the full two-page ad for Falcon 4.0 in PC Gamer. "Perfection is never rushed. It actually travels at about Mach 2." I know ED has said they're working on a dynamic campaign, but once you play BMS, you see all the features supporting that dynamic campaign, and they're not in DCS. There's just a lot of really basic stuff that BMS does which DCS doesn't. It feels like a chasm that ED cannot bridge in my lifetime on their current game engine at their current pace of development. I don't think 1C Game Studios can do it either. I sincerely hope I am wrong. I understand these are companies with financial constraints, but it feels like people are drifting away. I still buy modules to support them, but each new module generates less interest for me. I just don't see myself buying the DCS F-4 or the Eurofighter or the F-15E. I'm also reluctant to get my hopes up for the next IL-2 module, because I can't imagine what they could do to excite me if it isn't the Pacific Theater or the Korean War. I don't think I'll be buying another IL-2 module that isn't one of those.
A point not considered in the video is that many players have economical restrictions which prevent them from acquiring a 2000 USD machine exclusively used for entertainment and used by a single person. That's why War Thunder seems to "trap" so many sim players, is not that they are trapped by the game, they're trapped by their budget. War Thunder offer an experience which only require 500 USD to access (Gaming Console) sometimes even less (previously owned machines). All of which makes me think that the Sim world is not in a dark age, it diversified to accommodate different budget requirements. Tryhards can acquire their 5000 USD set ups, and the rest of us just play War Thunder.
As a producer/designer of a Falcon 4.0 release (OIR) I agree. There’s a lot of potential in DCS, but it just doesn’t feel alive. The F4 campaign was and is the king Also, as a producer/designer of Air Warrior, I like the mention of Aces High and WW2OL but frown on not mentioning the sim that literally spawned them both (HiTech started by creating a viewer for AW cam (replay) files). :-) Great video!
@@Enigma89 Thank you! I love following along with what you're doing with the online campaign. Haven't flown MP DCS yet, but plan to at some point. Probably not before the Phantom. Curious, as a MiG-21 driver, what you think the Phantom will be like in your cold war scenarios? The NVAF had problems with the Phantom, but I think a lot of that was down to tactics - they didn't use the vertical a lot. Wondering whether the Phantom dominance will translate, if at all, to online DCS. I'd be interested in a video followup to the ED 2023 and beyond next week that gives your ideas about how the coming cold war planes will change the play you're currently seeing.
@@garycooper4512 I don't have a good answer. We will have to feel our way through it. The F-4 is really capable so we hope to balance the scenario or throttle F-4 usage in order to make it fit within our universe.
thank you for your work on Falcon 4.0, it made my childhood! Dynamic campaign was amazing, I've spent countless hours just tweaking the ATO. Regarding the Phantom, as a fairly new MiG-21 driver I think the Sparrow will make a difference (maybe it'll be king of SARH, you know, in the land of the blind...) as the only thing the reds got going for it is the measly R3R. MiG-21 drivers better come up with updated tactics (perhaps copy the NVAF tactics?). I don't think the usage need to be throttled as it fits 100% in there.
Having come of age in the "golden era of sims", I don't have rose colored glasses of that time. As great as Falcon 4.0 and IL 1946 are/were...they were incredibly niche by the time of those iconic releases. Falcon 4.0 was a bargain bin title quickly at the local retailers I went to. The sim community was small even then and marred by bug ridden messes of marquee titles at launch that took ages for patches or community fixes. IL 1946 came out at a budget consolidation of the IL-2 series after all. IL 1946's heyday lasted because of the community investment. That's the issue. Modern gaming makes modding harder and the focus on monetized multiplayer makes single player content harder to come by. A dynamic campaign should have been standard, but at that point one is designing a game within a game and development funds are tight as is in this niche space. I don't see this as a dark age, so much as a transitional one. The core sim audience is older (the genre always skewed toward the older crowd like hardcore turn based wargames do) and said audience wants a mix of the best from the past with the modern fidelity of today. That will come at a cost and there might not be enough of a community to justify said cost unless it grows. DCS alone needs a better entry and tutorial system, along with SP content that can make sense of it's complexities to novices and noobs. DCS has some of those basics already, but there needs to be more consistency so that core game updates don't keep breaking SP campaigns for example. More focus needs to be on the "bones" to justify all the effort into what are some of the best simulations of combat aircraft ever made.
Yeah, Indeed sadly th3e dynamic campaign which will never fet old to players is exactly opposite to what is the goal of game/sim developers. They want us to buy new shiny airplanes and when we're done with learning it and realizing there's little to do with that - we would be next one :(
MSFS 2020 is what funneled me into DCS. One of the hurtles for me getting into flight sims was justifying to myself the cost of a HOTAS. Flight sims can be a real money sink and that means you have to be truly passionate about it.
I'm not nearly old enough to have experienced this sim 'golden age' you talk about, turning 23 in the next couple of months. I did switch to DCS in 2020 after having played War Thunder for a grand total of 7 or 8 years after finally losing the hope of some actual development in regards to a dynamic campaign or more fleshed out game-modes, despite the amount of money and time I stuck into that game (which I will say, I still don't regret). I came to DCS initially because the work the community did on the community servers on their own dynamic campaigns was pretty astounding, and it was a lot of fun to play. Though, recently I've been making a lot of co-op missions myself and I've noticed DCS's native lack of complex mechanics for a lot of things like SAM sites, aircraft AND ground AI and an overall lack of depth in the high-fidelity modules they release; The IFF-system being one of them. I believe this to be the reason why there's this *NEED* for a massive community effort to get any kind of dynamic campaign set up and working. I believe the core to this problem being that both titles (War Thunder and DCS) do not have any real competition in their respective target audiences. World of Warplanes is infinitely worse than War Thunder in nearly every aspect, in my opinion, as it does all the same things War Thunder does but at a worse level. Granted that it doesn't have the same predatory economy system that War Thunder does. And with NOR being a military sim project, DCS has no competition at all; MSFS 2020 is targeted to a whole different audience and the only other alternative we recently saw a sneak peek of turned out to be for military use. DCS has no reason to push for too much innovation. I'm very grateful to the community for all of these great pieces of script and all of the mods that allow me to 'complete' the sim and turn it into an experience I'm hard-pressed to find anywhere else.
I played War Thunder for years before eventually switching to Il-2 as Gaijin continues to further nerf the economy into the ground. Mostly play the Career (Dynamic Campaign) mode. Absolutely love flying my 109s.
War Thunder player here. To be honest, I never treat it as a simulation because it simply isn't, no matter whoever claims it is, even for the "Simulator" mode. It's an arcade game with some "realistic" elements. It may looked like one back in 2013-2014, until Gaijoob realized that they could not milk anything from developing new game modes (dynamic campaign included) and has gone for keep adding new toys with the horrid grinding instead. I tried DCS World with the Su-27 module 5 years ago and I loved the combat system. It looked even more robust than whatever War Thunder is today. Unfortunately, I'm not a big fan of spending majority of my free time cruising from point A to point B. I prefer the Ace Combat-style gameplay with a bit of "realism". That's why I still play War Thunder until there is the replacement. However, if there is someone who is interested in War Thunder for the modern planes and doesn't mind the lengthy gameplay, I will tell them to stay away and go for DCS World instead. I mean, it takes way much less time to learn how to fly your favorite module than grinding for the same plane in War Thunder from the zero. The grinding mechanic is that bad. For the dynamic campaign, at least there is a hope that ED will develop it for you all one day, while Gaijoob will give you none.
You're spot-on, and I'm glad someone else identified how WT and the like ruined the current sim landscape. Only indie projects are really pushing back against this for now (ex: GHPC). The consequences of the current state of the market are very interesting in ways I didn't expect - in particular, the audience perceptions and demands we deal with are striking in how clearly they've been molded by WT (i.e. "WT brain rot").
I really wanted to mention GHPC in here because I think it offers a ray of hope to break the yoke from the Snail. The way that those guys are talking about their game is very refreshing. I thought this video was getting quite long and I haven't tried GHPC yet because I only really play multiplayer so I am waiting for that to come but I will jump in with two feet on that game. I am really rooting for them.
What about war thunder is a good game, it has no simulation and it is not comparable to il2GB or DCS, steel beast!!! It's a good game with good and bad things, it's silly to blame him for something or insult his community. I'm going to insult the CODs because people don't play Post scriptum Squad or Arma 3... wtf?!
@@Enigma89 I think you should pick it up. It's on sale for a few more days I think and I picked it up for christmas. Even if you don't make videos on it, it's a ton of fun to mess around with in your free time
This is why I still enjoy playing Aces High III. The player base is not what it once was, but the dynamic war and camaraderie you build by flying with guys for years, or well over a decade in my case, just makes the game. AH took a big hit when War Thunder came out just like the rest, and really hasn't been the same since player base wise. Still, it has a loyal base still, though smaller, and the constant revolving war with 3:00 AM Base takes and multi-hour missions keep it going. I definitely share the same feelings and hope things improve for sims in the future.
Aces High 3 is where I’ve been off and on for 16. Played IL-2 and WT for a bit and a little DCS. Always came back to AH and that’s where I’ve been the last 4 years solid. Nothing could beat peak AH in the multiplayer aspect and honestly I think it’s still the best.
@@whiteman78 I play MSFS 2020 pretty regularly as well as DCS. IL2 here and there, but Aces High has stayed. I’ve been playing for 13 years now. Made great friends when I started that have kept me as a Rook and a Claim Jumper since day 1. It’s one of those games you can’t beat, even if it’s hay day has past. Peak aces high was an experience for sure. - nasty
Random question, did you ever try World War mode during one of the seasons for War Thunder? Road to the West (which was Fulda Gap and Battle of the Chinese Farm) was some of the most fun I've ever had in games, period.
Good on you for putting such a huge amount of thought and effort into this. I don’t have the level of knowledge or experience to comment intelligently one way or the other, but just wanted to offer my compliments.
Another point: in old times we had more time to play and sims was simpler. Now even warthunder is more complex then many top line sims from the past (way back before falcon 4). And now, we have less time to play and if you like hard-core sims , you really need to dedicate yourself, because hard-core sims are astronomically more complex then before. Result: many people don't want to invest that much time to learn hard-core sim but just have fun with a soft-core sim. Jump in have fun, bail out.
Oh god this. Every time I get nostalgic and enthusiastic for BMS I remember the 2+ hour torture it is to configure and remember all the goddam key assignments.
As a long time War Thunder player, I agree regarding the dynamic campaign. We did have something called World War Mode, but it was extremely basic and tough for individuals to get into as the matches were both short and dominated by squadrons of quite literally a pool of 128 people rotating in and out 24/7 and coordinating each match so that each incidence would result in a victory. I would love something nice and massive like this but I think that it may become dominated by a few select groups.
Yes. Back in the good old days we had multiple companies making good flight Sims, today there are 2, il2 for WW2 and dcs for non WW2. BMS kind of counts but it's a mod of a golden age game.
I'm 19 year's Old I started playing warthunder in 2016 but I wanted to get on dcs and I was limited by my bad PC when I got a good PC I started playing more dcs and started leaving warthunder because I joined the Air force academy and became a pilot a dream that All flight simers have I don't have time to advance my self in dcs so I play for fun on the weekends and I think since I would be flying combat aircraft in real life I don't know my future in simulators like dcs
I played a lot of IL-2 in my teenage years and I truly miss the sense of scale and immersion like you. I do however truly hope that the large amount of new 3rd party devs in DCS, will prompt eagle dynamics to develop the game engine and leave modules to 3rd parties.
In war Thunder's defense, I believe it's not meant to be a simulator game like the others, it's a mix of arcade and sim which mixes into modes such as realistic battles, flight models aren't exactly perfect and a lot of flaws are still present.. Still a great video, definitely got me more interested in other flight sims
I appreciate your take on this. I started with war thunder and got fed up with everything about it. When I switched to DCS, I found a great community and fell in love. I feel very lucky to have joined DCS when I did. There’s so many amazing modules available, so many more on the horizon, plus the promise of engine improvements shows me that DCS could be the way forward(emphasis on could).
It seems it's not all doom and gloom, there's a sim for each niche, WT for casual flyers with limited time, DCS/Il2 BoX for those who want something more advanced. Also BMS is growing strong. Their TvT events are fantastic, and new 4.37 trailer looks soo tasty ;). So I hope it's gonna be fine in combat flightsims land.
Hey Enigma, first of all thank you for all the good work you are doing. I've flown on your servers from time to time and it was always a fun experience, and I appreciate amount of work you and your team put into them and into DCS community as a whole. As per your video, I have some point to agree on and to expand or give some maybe unique and interesting perspective. Being an eastern european (russian) myself, I've flown Il-2 from 2007-2008, being only 13-14 years old (I'm 29 now), and it was good. From scripted and dynamic campaigns, to multiplayer, to virtual squadrons, to participation in most hardcore MP projects there was at the time. In parallel I've played I tried LOMAC, FC, but after a while got bored, because I always loved warbirds more, they felt more alive and more interesting gameplay-wise. I vividly remember the time you are speaking of, when Cliff of Dover were teased to us, circa 2010. I was active at the forum where developers put their dev diaries, and I remember when almost from the first ones I understood that something was wrong. They were creating the game which was not to see success from many reasons, the main being that they were focusing on exciting new tech that gave them opportunity to make great-looking graphics, but completely ignoring gameplay and user experience. Back then I made a post, describing how the then-modern air sim should look like, and got downvoted to oblivion by fan boys, especially because of comparison with Wings of prey, which already came out and was pretty good gameplay-wise and had a nice (though unrealistic and arcadey) campaign mode. Then war thunder came out, and you described very well what happened next. But you didn't see that Gaijin leaned heavily in the sim community, and major part of their success was because it was marketed as the sim of the future, and almost entire russian sim community (largest in the world I dare say) was backing them and supporting them. I, too, played war thunder from the beginning, participated successfully in some of their championships (can you imagine offline tournament for simmers now? War Thunder made it possible for a short time, in 2013-2014, they paid for tickets to Moscow, for hotels, nice prizes - I got GTX 780 for instance as a prize for second place). Then I became a flight model tester (alpha tester for planes), and I've seen that even some of the devs were hardcore simmers themselves, even quite famous in Il-2 community. And their FM were not bad, it had issues and still has, but it is better that in Il-2 1946 for instance. Then the shift happened, war thunder management obviously understood that simmers, which fueled their initial success, nevertheless is a niche community, and there are much bigger money to be made in casual gaming. They still marketed sim as their "high-end", but aimed at arcade players. It's like with everything; image of the company is their top products, but most of the people use middle-range products, more affordable but still good. In parallel, DCS was falling into the same rabbit hole as Cliffs of Dover. They made gorgeous models but there were nothing to do in them, and you can throw switched for only so long. I might be wrong but I think the sole reason why they survived is maybe defense contracts and modern combat sim community still flying Flaming Cliffs modules. I think you are doing good work explaining that thought that shiny new planes are not the end goal, the end goal should be creating immersive and engaging experience, and that can be done by multiple ways. You said that Il-2 is still de facto golden standard for combats sims, and that is right. And thats not because it has great graphics, or even great flight model or damage model. To be honest, by modern standards they are primitive. It just gives you the chance to FEEL like a true WWII-era pilot. DCS WWII modules will never (or at least not in the near future) will give you that, because those planes, while superbly made, are out of context, and I personally would pick flawed War Thunder to fly warbirds every day, because even in its current state it gives me unparalleled feelings of being there, in the cockpit of warbird in the middle of the dogfight.
Interesting perspective. I think you'll always have this divide between sim pilots who fly via game pad versus those of us that use a HOTAS setup. Many of us like the depth and feel of each airplane, its systems and mastering it. Many couldn't be bothered - too complex. I notice you didn't feature any clips from Aces High...i know they are still around, I played that sim for many years. Just haven't seen anything "new" there that made me want to go back
Hi, I'm 20 years old. I do not have enough knowledge about the sim community but I can say this. I am a slave to the snail that is Gaijin. I love that game so much. I love tanks and I love planes (nobody plays naval). I do intend one day to build a sim setup so that I can play war thunder sim. Sometimes I catch myself side-climbing in first person in my aircraft and I can't help but ogle at all the fascinating dials and seeing how lowering/ raising my throttle affects them. I will also go on to say that I am a MEC (Manual Engine Control) enjoyer and even though I know the difference between automatic and manual controls is very small, i'll fully open the radiators of my P-51 Mustang every single time that I take off of the runway. I have thought about playing DCS one day but there's one thing that is always at the back of my mind: the complexity of aircraft controls and the price of planes. Granted War thunder premiums are slowly approaching the cost of planes in DCS. I do hope one day to join the sim community, not just for aircraft but also for racing (especially Rally sim). Thank you for your informative and thought provoking video Enigma, have a nice day.
I never realized that the dynamic campaign for Falcon 4 was made by an intern. That's really impressive! I'm hopeful that the current big flight sim games will make some of these changes in the next few years, but at this point I'm watching the indie community. Microprose has a few upcoming flight games they're publishing (B17 Flying Fortress the bloody 100th, The mighty eighth vr, Tiny Combat Arena) that look pretty good. If they do well enough, maybe it'll stir up additional interest in sim or sim-lite development from other developers and we'll start seeing a revival in the flight sim genre. Fingers crossed, anyways.
Yeah it was pretty surprising when someone told me and dug up the article for me. You can read more about it here. sites.google.com/site/falcon4history/interview
@@Enigma89 Cool that he went from doing this to becoming a Technical Director at EA. Wish we had more interviews like these and dev diaries from games in that era. Lot of interesting things to learn there.
They can't. The current games work under cores that just can't manage them. Until they're willing to start over from a blank sheet, it just can't be done it seems. BMS works because deep down, the bones of Falcon 4.0 were well considered and solid. With that mods and add-ons can basically accomplish anything a group of competent programmers can think of. Especially as a non-commercial product that doesn't have to deal with licensing costs and limitations. The way the game Business works now means these kinds of goals are unattainable commercially.
@@mzaite Then I'll just keep on playing BMS, until someone comes along and make a modern flight sim with a dynamic campaign. I'm sure someone will. Thanks for your reply.
Be careful of rose-tinted glasses.The dynamic campaign in Falcon 4.0 barely worked when it was released. It was extremely buggy. I never managed to get through 2 days of the campaign, until BMS was released.
idk if people agree but as a vr game that is only like 2gb VTOL VR is a pretty good simulator, i mean you can literally interact with everything* in your cockpit (everything being if there is support for button XYZ inside the cockpit by the workshop plane addon creator)
Enigma- DCS needs dynamic campaigns to bring new life into it, and the ability to run them as well ED two days later- HAPPY NEW YEAR! Have some dynamic campaigns! and engine improvements as well!
Agreed on the war affecting output. This year has been pretty stale for most sims, with minimal new content. Not to mention the now grey area of creating more modern eastern equipment.
One of the OG STALKER devs was KIA a few days ago. The Phantom devs also said the war is a big part of why that module wasn’t released this year. Fully agree with the overall take here though. I’m not even excited for nee modules now because I don’t have anything new to do with them.
Incredibly solid points brought up in this video. The fact that you'd be flamed by asking more of your passions is pretty crazy. It's clear even from the comments here, that there is a burning desire for more dynamic and long term campaigns, as well as more intricate and detailed system simulation. It's also great to see that there is interest in adding more depth to ground units and troops, and the suggestion of an AI commander is definitely an interesting idea. It's encouraging to see that there is a desire for content that players can really sink their teeth into, rather than just new aircraft. Hopefully, observant developers 😏 will take these suggestions into consideration and work towards bringing more innovation and competition to the flight simulation space.
15:10 congratulations for blocking a player that wants to play the game that makes i definitelly better , btw i dont care if you support ukraine or russia i think its odd to put either flags on your tank let other do and put on their tank they want
Maybe I'm in the minority here but I play war thunder specifically because it isn't a true sim and is more like a video game where I can just hop in, play some matches, and then go about my day.
You do have a really good point. I have seen this myself when I have tried to get friends into DCS. They ask, "but what do you do?" I realized that is a hard question to answer. You can buy some campaigns for your aircraft (more money?) or go on public servers, but again you are beholden to what the community makes. While it is fun to make your own missions for your group, it is time consuming. 40+ hours to make a good in-depth mission for a group of 30 people to fly for 90 minutes and then it's over. I am hoping with DCS having their new dynamic campaign right around the corner (this year hopefully) it will break this cycle. I do have to say though that sometimes just "flying" (navigating, refueling, monitoring your aircraft and airspace around you) in DCS many times is it's own reward.
The reward of moving around and just doing the same thing is kinda done for me. At least in IL-2 the player base has a very high skill so the fights are very interesting.
The whole argument of players being "trapped" in WT isn't just wrong, it's obviously wrong if you stop to think about it even for a moment. War Thunder isn't keeping anyone from DCS any more than Genshin Impact is. You can't grow potatoes out of turnip seeds, no matter how much you water and cultivate them. The millions of people playing Genshin Impact aren't just buds awaiting to bloom into beautiful DCS potatoes under the right circumstances. And while DCS and WT are thematically similar, they are fundamentally on different levels of hardcoreness. The bulk of casual WT pilots flying with a mouse are never ever going to become DCS players, no matter how often you water them, or how much dynamic content there is in DCS.
I remember the golden age with fondness and I thought by now we have had more dynamic environments not less, thank god for indie dev's, they are rekindling some great 90's content ,helicopter gunship dex is just one guy and recreates Gunship! feels for me. Great article and now a subscriber.
I am someone who migrated to the flightsim world coming from warthunder and I can say that this is now one of my greatest passions. I love to play DCS but I still keep coming back to warthunder for one single reason and that is to play the sim mode for wwII planes. I particularly dislike cold war/modern jets in warthunder. So every time I wish to play with one of these, my first choice is always DCS. While I have Il2 I prefer to play ww2 stuff in warthunder because I always have a bad time actually finding people in the il2 mp servers, they always feel a bit empty to me and the ones in DCS I'm not even going to mention. Also, I agree a lot with you that dynamic campaigns and more combined arms content would make wonders to DCS, this is something I always missed in it and it's something I really crave. For instance, I never knew about wwii online and bms and while I'm typing here I'm already googling them because just what you showed in this video already got me in awe! I also enjoy Combat mission and CMO, so I'd really love to see all of these experiences combined into one single Simulator like DCS.
I wouldn't call it a dark age. On paper we have more modules and features than we've ever had before buuut I would however call it a awkward period where transition needs to happen. We're living with games that are these old legacy projects. Ancient codebases and limited markets. In a time where life is getting more and more expensive, dropping cash on a HOTAS and a powerful PC just to run DCS is less and less appealing. This makes it difficult to justify extensive large scale projects like dynamic campaigns or even large refactoring to sort things out. Fundamentally DCS, WT and BoX were not designed to have dynamic gameplay. Hell they weren't really *designed* at all. Not in a way that would be recognised in more western gamedev circles. You rightfully picked this up with BMS that at it's core the supporting systems are there to create a better gameplay loop. So what does this mean? It means either the big boys have to hard pivot, something expensive and risky. ED seem to be sloooowly moving this way, but they could fuck it up. Gaijin will never change, why would they? They're printing money. F2P games leach off the same feedback loops as gambling, While they can serve as a funnel they should not be seen as market leaders in any sense beyond revenue. So we gotta hope for new products have to step in. This is for me where the is quite a bit of hope, there is a vast void for more systems driven semi-sims along the lines of "GHPC". Games that simulate enough to make the gameplay feel representative but also doesn't waste time and resources on endless fidelity and ignore the context a piece of equipment like a tank is supposed to work in. Nobody is doing this for flight sims yet though and I don't know if it will happen soon. Gamedev is hard, generally speaking unless you are lucky you will be underpaid and potentially mistreated. Small Indie studios can and have stepped up but it's an incredibly risky proposition for folks. Add the layer of the niche interests required to get into sim gaming and you get the idea. This makes it very difficult to retain the technical talent required for the complicated bullshit that is making a Sim. Still, if a relatively small team can get together and develop and idea with realistic scope that plans from the start to incorporate Recon, SAMs, Mission planning, CSAR etc, make the required compromises on presentation. They'd have something special. If they need QA then I'll be first on that boat :) That still leaves ED's efforts, for now we are a captive market and can only hope. But I do think they are trying, it's just if they can do it before everyone's patience runs out. Recent community efforts have helped shed light on the need for more dynamic content, but it will always be an uphill battle at current until significant momentum is gained. Just a few loose thoughts Enfield
Additionally, any successful ...successor. Needs to be as playable on a controller as HOTAS. We need to remove the barrier to entry to proper simming. This can and should be done.
@@SuperMegaCyrus Tico used to rock a 360 controller while being one of the top killers in a 21, with the shittiest missiles to boot. It can be done, and older Cold War airframes are the way 😤😤
19:30 i almost cried when u got to the caveat abt using the dark ages as an analogy despite possible historical fallacy of the colloquial understanding of the dark ages chef’s kiss lmfao 🙏
aw cute, he has an entire 5 minutes segment of bullying a T-72 just because of decals. What else, do you fire down teammates because you don't like the sound of their voice?
@@xSupra Screws around in spawn while he's in one of the more capable tanks of his team that was more than able to cap B or C, possibly saving the rest of his team that was holding A
I think you're right about DCS. How many of us DCS players have told a wingman; "Just over there is where the SAM site spawns, watch out." Or something similar? So while I agree with your statements, I don't think you touched on what I see as the biggest problem DCS has. Their utter lack of consistency is the biggest problem as I see it. MiG-21, but no F4? No MiG-17? A spitfire Mk Ix, but a BF-109 K4? No Stuka? Hurricane? F4F? P38? A6M, Kate? Every historic aircraft has a nemesis, and ED is famous for not making a nemesis. Again, how long has the MiG-21 been out, without player flyable F4s? DCS development teams doesn't flush out the modules with assets and player modules to match. This means that any scenario thought up by a mission maker, is going to be...imperfect. There is no 20mm Orliken AA gun, no Vietnam map, no Cold war era infantry units (FAL infantry anyone?). There is no way in mission editor to make your own airport. There are no Japanese modules or assets, because "what war in the pacific?" DCS developers have the attention span of a goldfish, they simply want to get the next module out, without looking at the sim as a whole and finding holes to fix/ patch/ plug. They allow third party developers to make whatever, with no regard for how it fits. Cool, I like airplanes and helicopters and I'll take what I can get, but someone at ED needs to get out a whiteboard and make a plan to fill the massive holes in the sim. ED could put out bids to developers, "We need a A6M in 1 year. Who can do it?" and then pick the best one. Contract bidding by developers would help. Ed could say, "sure you can make such and such a module, but you also must make these 5 AI assets to help our core game." Again, the attention span of a goldfish. Fill the voids ED. Nemesis modules, consistency, and hold 3rd party developers to so sort of schedule. Make a campaign worth something at the very core of the game. Make the world feel more... correct. (I believe sheep are the most popular livestock in most of the world...no sheep assets in DCS. No camels to smoke, no horses pulling ammo carts in war weary Germany..., no water buffalos for Asia, no Donkey's or mules for Korea.) Granted there are sheep in the Falkland's map, but they're part of the scenery and can't be moved. Despite that map, and the most famous war surrounding the area where both sides used FAL rifles...nope can't have infantry with FAL's. You can't shut off the lights to a city in DCS by bombing a central power plant. DCS cities don't have a power grid, they have magic lights that always come on. (How many more options for mission editors would it be if you could bomb a central powerplant and knock out power to a city?) There is nothing that comes as close to flying combat aircraft as DCS, which is very, very sad. Basically, combine the ground unit modeling from war thunder, with the world from Flight Sim, and the aircraft modeling from DCS (plus their assets and nemesis if those ever come out) and you'd have one hell of a simulator.
Yes, this degenerate political moment, encouraging war and ethnic strife, killed this youtuber for me. No matter how reasonable things he says about games, he will be perceived with nausea. However, what difference does it make if his main audience happily eats US/NATO propaganda, then everything is OK, the losses are insignificant, and even favorable - they lead to a more politically consistent audience.
4:00-4:45 ignores massive problems with combat in BMS, like AIM-120Bs that outrange R-27ERs at all altitudes easily or SAMs that until very recently did not even attempt to shoot down missiles. Apart from general confusion which is not nearly as bad as you described once you get used to the environment, this makes combat itself much easier than in DCS, unless you decide to attack 1980s fighters and SAMs with 2010 A/G missiles, which seems to be a thing on most DCS PVE servers. Or TLDR: BVR and air to ground in BMS is piss easy in that it does not require more than point, IFF, click resulting in a guaranteed win.
Dude. You're saying that War Thunder has it's flaws - fair point. At the same time you're ruining a match by bamping into that Z player. I get why you might be doing it and by all means write the guy in a private section, tell him his is supporting an agressor and etc. But eh you'll just ruin a match for 10 other players. I'm so tired of these Russia/Ukraine supporters team killing each and getting in each other's way. I hope you'll get banned for doing stuff like that. P.s. to everyone who's gonna be triggered by my comment: I don't live in Europe or anywhere near it, I have no idea of what's going on there, I come to play a video game and I see crowds of cringe ass dimwits ruining games *becoz flag/Z/Azov Sign* (highlight the one you like more).
He doesn't care as he does not even play War Thunder. His account is like lvl 20 and just a bunch of top tier russian premiums with negative KD. Also the "Jagdgeschwader 26" Nazi larper name on his account tells you everything you need to know about his opinions on Ukraine.
@@b4sed0nwh4t yeah man, I honestly don't want to offend anyone as I'm sure I don't see the whole picture as I'm very far from the conflict. This guy though right at the start of the video states that he's out of politics and at the middle of the video is harassing his teammate. This is a very rude and juvenile move. Let's assume that the side he's on is truly righteous and is better then he's just compromising the side he represents by acting as an absolutely toxic person and very selfish player who gets to ruin everyone else's game due to his own thoughts and beliefs.
Warthunder player here, played since 2016. Man dynamic campaigns sounds so cool! The snail failed with world war mode big sad…. I’ve tried WT Sim battles (I mainly do GRB/ARB (ground/air realistic). A couple times but I do not have a stick or throttle just a keyboard. Warthunder ground is always capture the enemy point or domination over 3 capture points that are in the same spots. Air (realistic) is just team death match as bombing the same points/ airfield is too predictable and you usually get intercepted way before the base and ground attack is near suicide. It’s frustrating that it’s been the same type of battles for so long. And that unless you’re in a squad of buddies (max of 4) your teammates are only playing for themselves 90% of the time. Something’s gotta give! Loved the video! Good hunting! o7
I started in MS Flight Sim 95 and SU-27 Flanker from 95. It was inevitable that I found my way back to Eagle Dynamics through the SU-27 module. The 90s had so many sims! Tanks, boats, sums, mechs, space, towers, ants... Lol. It was a really interesting time for pc gaming.
Great video. I’m very much a novice and at 43 I’ve been playing with my teenager who got us both into the genre thru war thunder on Xbox. Together we built a dedicated machine for the sole purpose of playing IL2 which we enjoy immensely. We purchase new modules regularly and spend most of our time getting slaughtered on the Finnish server. While I enjoy the game I don’t have the time to get really good at it but I know enough to be cannon fodder and have fun messing around with my son. I also bought MSFS and DCS but never play them as there just is not enough time for it all. A flyable B17 would be the holy grail for us.
I would recommend checking out the Microprose b-17 (or b-24) game that they have coming. It should let you multicrew with your kid. It's not out but it is coming. Have fun!
I'm back after a year and the big three may be major but when you look, there's more than just them. Combat Air Patrol 2, Tiny Combat Arena, Wings Over Flanders Fields, Rise of Flight, Aces High and WW2 Online are still up and you can play them. this isn't good, however, because even if they are out there when you look, you have to look, and nobody wants to go looking.
I am old fart and this video really nails it. It's the emptiness of the simulated world. In my late teens I played a lot of microprose's F-19 stealth fighter (Amiga). Even it had quite rich environment. A lot of radars to avoid, enemy combat air patrols, ... You could plan your own route to target and back and hope that nothing comes on way. Then I played shortly Hornet Korea, which was my first sim for PC. It had nice graphics for Voodoo 2 card but dull missions. Falcon 4.0 changed it all. I spent countless of hours with it. Then came original IL-2. Nice graphics and lot of flying. Again emptiness if you fly out of missions route or target area. My saviour was VEF (virtual eastern front), a kind of dynamic online campaing where single missions was hosted by individual players. Then LOMAC, again emptiness and it has continued since. Lately I have played more War Thunder than DCS simply because it's easy to take part for simulation missions and for a degree you can do what you want: dogfight, attack or be sneaky attacker avoiding enemies. My dream would be something like DCS combined with Falcon 4 stylish AI war engine. I even don't require modern DCS degree of avionics simulation. LOMAC/Old DCS level with working basic avionics (which is more than war thunder offers) is enought. But environment must be lively.
I absolutely get where you are coming from. Since my dad was a fighter pilot I played a lot of flight "sims" like MSFS, Combat Flight Simulator, Falcon 4 or Crimson Skies from a young age. I never really touched War Thunder since I was interested in more "normal" games instead. The game that brought me back to flight sims (or more accurately space sims) was Elite Dangerous. I just loved everything about it: the dynamic world, the rather complex flight system and creating new and fun builds for the ships. Ace Combat 7 (and probably the new MSFS and the "lack of content" in Elite) was the game that made me want to fly an actual (virtual) aircraft again. I neither play DCS nor the other mainstream flight sims. I want to but the lack of anything consistent or even dynamic (like Elite's Milky Way galaxy and background simulation) keeps me from playing most sims especially since none of my friends are interested in flight sims. The only flight sim I ended up playing regularly is VTOL VR. It's nearly perfect since it is easy to pick up but still complex enough to stay entertaining. The only thing it is missing is a good campaign but no other flight sim can give that to me. It's a very good thing and very refreshing that you speak about flight simming as a part of normal gaming. It sometimes feels like there's some sort of toxicity towards casual players that come from other games (e.g. Ace Combat or Project Wingman) in the flight sim community (except for Warthunder). This, the complexity and the need for an flight stick are probably also things that keep players from getting into simming. A WW2 European Theatre Elite with a complex background simulation would be so awesome but since it doesn't exist I guess I'll install Falcon bms again and test out the vr support.
I've heard the description used that moder simulation is about simulating the plane, and old Sims were about simulating being a pilot. I like DCS, but I want both.
I may get flamed for this video but I simply miss having persistent large scale dynamic campaigns that I could get invested into. I really hope that we get this again in modern day sims. To me it seems like such a shame to take all of the hard work everyone has done to take these beautiful full or semi-full fidelity planes and play them on such desolate and static environments. Let me know what you think. I hope this video is seen as a call for hope and not to be a huge bummer. Let's hope we get some progress in 2023. Happy New Year Everyone!
Pretty thoughtful, hard to get flamed for it (hopefully) 🙂
I think there is an even bigger point here, video game industry as a whole had forgotten the value of dynamic & large scale gameplay with its emerging stories and replayability value, and focused on other things. I think we might be at a turning point though, things like the battle royale genre & its affiliate highlight that you can do more than arena gameplay & retain players pretty well. You had to have PUBG developed as a mod/community thing for devs to realize it 😅
WT I think is less a cause and more a symptom, it's where people default in lack of an alternative. Failing a meaningful large scale campaign and emerging gameplay you might as well go for the second-best in terms of 'addictiveness', e.g. the meta progression and unlocks, and stick with quick arenas for the gameplay. But I think it took more people from non-sim games (e.g. world of tanks) and "upgraded" them than the reverse, but makes sense that you'd see these from your point of view.
YES I agree completely Enigma. I get tired of the sim community drooling over clouds and rivet counting fidelity. Start demanding a compelling game (and associated elements like competent AI) to go along with the simulation being built.
And ED is so invested in scripted campaigns to be a substitute to this. No offense to Baltic Dragon or anyone else building campaigns.. I just don’t want to see that and it’s not an acceptable replacement for what BMS delivers on 25 year old software
Asa developer, I am an ex-wwiionline player and I have spent time on your Cold War server. I have lot to say so please stick with me. First to a degree you are right. I am going to stick to DCS as it is my choice, I haven't played War Thunder for a long time. I joined ww2online 12 months after its launch, boy it was rough but as you highlighted it improved and was fun. It suffered from being a small design/development team but the payback was the rolling campaign made it fun. Its weakness was getting out content and features due to some early architecture issue and the code base. Now the Enigma Cold War server does give you a feel for the WWIIONLINE and I commend people to try it. I did a design for road convoys to resupply units at the front, whether the design would work with the current server remains to be seen. But the big issue is the integration of the client to a server. Also the need for a more dynamic feel to the Enigma server to give it a lived in feel for some PvE combat as well as PvP. A weakness in ww2online. I wish I could help as I am developer of over 30 years experience. But I am not a games developer so I am not sure what I could do for you? Oh and I am an old air Cold War Warrior.
Your analysis of the results of the war are spot on. Here in Europe many external contractors now come from Eastern Europe to help meet the shortage of commercial developers like myself. In my current employment we have a large number of them working remotely to help us develop a new product. Then someone started a war! Now most of the team are in Moldova, but there is a member in Ukraine. They are working so hard to try and keep working to feed their family, in trying conditions. In Moldova there are power cuts making production slower due to Russian air strikes and bombardment. Thank god for cloud storage of source code. At a previous job we had developers from Kiev who were Sim developers cross training to get some new skills away from games. Nice bunch, who I have no contact with alas, clearly they have this year likely been thinking of something other than writing games! There is a shortage of developers in the world and games development is the least well paid so most developers migrate to commercial work. With Russia and Ukraine being at war many people are focussed in survival not development of any software! It is from this region that many of the companies who write combat sims come from. For there to be a Renaissance new games houses will need to appear in the Western Europe and other parts of the world for it to occur.
Good luck Enigma and I wish you all the success in the world for I think we seek the same thing.
Did Total Air War have dynamic campaigns ? You are complaining about the state of things ? ha!, what about us, the very few that would like a single player dynamic campaign to justify those 60$ modules of DCS. The thing is that i really want the Hind but for the same money i can buy Warhammer Darktide and can play tens if not hundred of hours of good co-op fun rather than a beta helicopter with no campaign just quick missions.
“We have more buttons to press but less to do” is quote of the decade for simming…
Honestly. Roughly thats 'gaming' in general these days... i lot of the points that Enigma talks about is relatable in sense to modern day gaming as a whole..
As BMS dev , surviving from Antic age , i would like to thank you fot this video that captures exactly why we continue working on Falcon 4.0 legacy :)
Excellent! Thanks for your work
BMS dev, I'll be happier if you could work on present 4.5 & 5th generation fighters fitted with AESA & PESA radars + large MFDs instead. There's already DCS giving low & high fidelity cockpit fighters from cold war to 90's era with more aircraft filling the void trying to complete the collection.
There's no way you could fight DCS in their field therefore it's better for you to focus on current & upcoming generation fighters to capture your different field of audience instead. It shouldn't be hard for you if you're not making high fidelity cockpit. As long as you have the cockpit layout and get know roughly how they work after visiting western & eastern manufacturers at few expo, you could make it happen. Why not add these fighters into your arsenal & sell it on Steam?
US - F-15EX, F-15C with AESA AN/APG-63CV3 AESA, F-16V, F/A-18E/F (added advantage F-35A/B/C & F-22).
Russia - Su-27SM3, Su-30SME, Su-35S/UBS, Su-34M, Mig-29SMT/M2 Mig-35, Mig-31 (Su-57 extra mile)
China - J-10C, J-11D, J-15B, J-16, J-20A/B
NATO - EF2000, Rafale C/M, Gripen
@@jawarakf a lot of that stuff is classified, it'd either be very unrealistic and therefore not a simulator or they'd get in a lot of trouble if it was realistic
@@Flaruwu come up with realistic ones first especially aircraft available for export market, they could provide general information needed for this game expansion. Almost all 4.5 generation aircraft shouldn't be a problem in low fidelity
I thought Falcon 4.0 was dead, hadn't heard mention of it in years.
From your points, a dynamic campaign for DCS would make wonders for this simulator!
DCS probably is in the best position to lead us forward, we just need the dynamic campaign
Wait for BMS 4.38
@@MaxWaldorf is this a meme, or are they planning on something special for 38 ?
@@alexysaintemarie4259 wait for the 4.37 trailer for more...
On the discord we showcased a couple pics as well...
@@alexysaintemarie4259 VR Support is the big thing, plus they will be able to develop separate avionics for other aircraft other than F-16
My first real Multiplayer experience was Falcon and I was hooked. I joined a LAN group who literally handed me a a phone book sized print out of the Falcon Manual and told me read certain chapters first and come back in a couple of weeks for a flight in the dynamic campaign they had been running for months( yes Months). I dutifully read the chapters and then practice flew some training missions until the Next LAN weekend came .I joined them and I still remember that experience like it was yesterday I'm now nearly 50 years old and I'll never forget how alive it felt and how everyone got involved with what the next mission would be and what that outcomes influence it would have on the campaign. Would we split in to different Flights and do a multi pronged Approach? Would we perhaps take a new airfield? Our choices mattered a great deal. Cooperation was key. LAN group members came and went due to Real life and then eventually disappeared into the Memories of a few old men. I wasn't able to get that feeling again until I joined a Online Squadron a few years later and played IL2 1946. A fun experience and some great memories but no Falcon. Then came DCS World ,Graphics to die for, cockpits full fidelity an active and passionate community. But sadly It lacks that Alive feeling of the incredible Dynamic Campaign Falcon Had. I have gotten to a point in DCS where I load up the sim and then just either sit in the main UI and Don't know what to do or just jump into a plane and go for a sightseeing flight. Because I know that to start a Multi hour mission where It will likely Bug out and can't finish it will sap my will to play. I have literally every aircraft Bar a couple I buy every Campaign that seems interesting but never quite gives that feeling again. Then a new Module comes out and I'm excited to learn it and play for awhile only to remember the problems the SIM has Not addressed and the Dynamic Campaign it lacks.
Totally agree with u
Oh yes! I printed my falcon manual out at work. Was it 400 pages??
I have exactly the same situation. I own every modual and just about every static campaign. I then do just as you sit in the UI.... Funny; after you have all that DCS has to offer but still find it boring. However, I just useually end up on a multiplayer server flying around (then only to have players run into me). Or trying to fly a formation without any voice contact. Hope something changes soon
I was never able to join a LAN group and enjoy multiplayer, there is a special place in my being for Falcon 4.0.
War thunder has posed itself to capture a huge section of the market base for several reasons. It has variety (which is important at some point) but more importantly I believe it captures so many players because it easily provides "sim-ish" gameplay in short packages (15 to 30 min in airRB). The controls are the same across all vehicles (I don't need to learn a new cockpit to be a decent pilot in a new airframe) and I can easily sit down and play a few games without having to dedicate a couple hours like I might have to in other fuller sims.
Its alluring to casual players because its more sim than theyre used to, and the variety is overwhelming.
Its alluring to more serious players because of the convenience, and doesnt require hours of dedication to milk *some* outcome of fun from.
It is perfectly posed to suck up the most players with the blandest experience, and then milk the money out of them.
I don't think its a "bad" game, but its definitely run by a bad company that doesn't *really* care about its players past its ability to make money off of them, and as you said, the lack of any kind of dynamic interesting campaign has set a bad standard for the rest of the industry and players.
I think you articulated this perfectly. As someone who didn’t grow up with the older sims, I was and still am unfamiliar with them. After looking into them, I’m surprised to see they had so much to offer. Once I got into dcs, I was blown away by sim, but after some time I started to feel there was something missing. I think the dynamic Cold War server is the closest we have to filling that gap. Thanks for what you do for the community.
Thank you!
Good articulation, bad microphone. Those breathing and salivating sounds really distracted me from the point, got to repeat parts of the video and concentrate on what was being said
@@sungasunga9301 Video was fine. Sounds like you have some attention span issues.
Falcon's dynamic campaign is the only true simulation of modern air combat I've played because of the threat layers and level of activity in the AO. You truly needed to know how your radar and avionics functioned to be successful. The immersion of getting to know the AOs and see them develop was second to none in my opinion.
There was another sim that had a great campaign that was dynamic as well. I forget the name but it was from the early 2000s.
Never played those old games, but if IL2 had a proper sense of scale in a multiplayer setting I think I'd shit my pants. Engaging large numbers of human + AI fighters and bombers would be a dream come true.
WW2OL was a mindblowing experience. Joining a large squad was a no-brainer, and you'd get with your air wing on a saturday to put up 20 or so fighters and a half dozen or more bombers to support your ground guys operation. That was coordinated with a few other big squads, and your counterparts on the other side would always come and ruin your plans. It was wild! Deal with the enemy air, maybe get lucky and strafe a few trucks of infantry heading into the contested city, giant furballs, the whole deal.
Might want to checkout aces High 3, it has the large multiplayer arena. Base is smaller than it use to be but still can get up to 150 on weekends. I have played there since 2006 along with IL2 and WT. I keep going on back to AH.
you should definitely try out the old games. Firstly they are free and secondly they are still developed further to this day. The immersion is so much better, Hell, even the physics engine in Il-2 1946 is way more realistic than what Great Battles have (WT is based on that physics engine, by the way). The dynamic campaign in Falcon 4 BMS is mindblowingly realistic. The wealth of different mission that can be flown is huge. And every time you play it, the campaign will develop differently with a bunch of whole new challenges.
@@josefwitt9772 Aces High was pretty fun too, especially the fact that is was a way to play sim and manage bombing a lot better, allowing you to fly 3 bombers at once (with the AI flying the other two until you got shot down).
please read the reply to the original post that i put up il2 cliffs has everything you can name about a full war scenerio
At this point, I am unsure DCS has either the engine or the staff capable of creating a dynamic campaign. Perhaps when that extra thread arrives it might open things up, but I remain skeptical.
BMS announcing incoming VR support got me to immediately pick it up, once that arrives it's at least an auto-try from me.
I think ED's core team have been stuck on implementing multicore for a few years now. It's understandable, adding multicore support to an existing engine isn't easy, there are so many potential pitfalls. It does need to be done before anything else is bolted on to the engine, though; not just for performance reasons, but also for architectural reasons - it's easier to develop a new feature when the foundations of the engine aren't changing drastically underneath you. I reckon that when multicore ships, we'll see faster progress on core content features, as the majority of the core team will then be able to switch to working on other content pieces.
I still believe that ED really cares and will deliver the dynamic campaign. We will see. At some point it HAS to happen. I would imagine that I am ahead of the curve in terms of burnout and that other players will reach the point that a lot of us are at. It is just a matter of time IMO.
@@Enigma89 We've all got our fingers crossed, really. As there really is SO much potential there with DCS. One thing I would never accuse them of is not caring, but yes the burnout and fatigue with constant DCS engine/code limitations really does start to get to you.
@@Malakhit24 It would certainly make sense, but my main concern is that the rollout of multicore could understandably be incredibly messy. It may not open up moving staff onto other projects if it's a bit of a disaster on launch.
I really hope BMS gets vr working.
In the old days we had a lot of CONTEXT. I am from the days of Microprose, I played F-19 and F-117, Jane's, etc. We didn't had much graphics but it was a lot of fun, because they had content and context, thus helped a lot to immerse in the phantasy. Now it is all open world. I guess this add to the theory that humans need purpose in life and even in games to have fun.
I'm also from that era.... F19! WHAT A GAME! Playing that on the 386 for hours on end was amazing. I never got bored of it. Then TFX, EF2000, F22. All great campaigns with good pilot progression, medals, etc.
I still fire up F-117 from time to time. I just started playing DCS a few weeks ago and I feel the same stagnation. Beautiful game but just feels unfinished if you want the sense of scale it just isn't there.
Makes me wonder if there is a gap for a low-fidelity sim, that focuses more on those moving pieces.
Gunship 2000 was my favourite from Microprose. I often wonder if the lack of graphical detail sparked the imagination and thus the combination created something more than modern games can offer. I see people complaining about big manuals in DCS but old school games had big manuals too, though not so complicated.
Jane's USAF was my favorite as a kid. Never found anything as fun.
@@ilkkakoski82 I don't recall that game. I've just been looking up all the classics on YT. In my memory, EF2000 was almost real graphics 😂🤣
I wonder if I'll look back at FS2020 in 2040 and think it looks terrible?!
As a DCS content creator myself, I've come across the same issues. Frankly, I don't think that the base code will be updated in order to allow for our Wishlist that you have posted. The stated problem is that making planes and tanks has a direct impact on the bottom line. Updates to the code may or may not bring in new players. The flight sim community is a very niche, middle aged, whale heavy group with disposable income. This demographic has largely spent the money that they want on the base games... the only way to engage their wallets now would be to keep the treadmill of planes and tanks going. Unfortunately, the larger the library of that content grows, the harder it will become to patch it all in to the updated engine *IF* it were to be made... unfortunately, the longer we travel down the path of milking the whales, the less likely it will be that we will ever get anything else.
If ED came out and said that they don't have the income to make large overhauls of the code, but offered a patreon, or something like that in order to fund it, I'd pay. I'd contribute a lot for it. Even if I didn't get anything but the updated product, the same updated product that most everyone else would get for free, I'd be grateful that it was being done and that I got to help make that happen.
It's a problem of economic incentives, DCS' current business model doesn't incentivizes that but if they added a premium account-like system (gives you access to all the terrains ?) it would change the incentives.
@@Tetemovies4 Which very quickly turns into a subscription for what we previously were able to buy directly. The less flight sim games emulate modern gaming monetization the better if you ask me.
@@er00ic Yes that's the point, it's a subscription my argument would be null if it wasn't.
@@er00ic That depends on what the subscription is FOR. A subscription for modules is dumb: it just means you have to keep paying for something you already bought.
But a subscription service more akin to an MMORPG makes sense: a subscription for an actual ongoing SERVICE. In DCS, I would absolutely pay a subscription fee for a service that developed 2-3 sophisticated missions per week and offered them on a server with a live Game Master managing REDFOR. Missions with proper IADS, multiple brigades on the ground in sensible fighting positions, actual allied strike packages designed to work together with cooperative strike, SEAD escort, DCA escort, jammer support, and assigned tankers, tasked to strike a sensible target set.
"The snail may get bored of printing money." thats a good one
Tarkov really is the best example IMO. I'm not one for looter shooters to begin with, but that was a game I was quite hyped for only to play it for a few days, get some middling loot, get bored, quit, and then repeat the process every 6-12 months. The hideouts are really the only new thing (besides one or two new maps) that happened prior to my current hiatus and all it did was add another annoying reason to have to play Groundhog Day: The Game, against players with insane gear and lightning reflexes. If your gameplay loop requires constant resets to prevent stagnation so bad even Brezhnev would blush, you haven't made a game, you've made a particularly advanced slot machine. PUBG held my attention for even less time as it had all the features (or lack thereof) that I dislike in Tarkov while also having a very "generic mid 20teens FPS" feel to it. On the other hand, while I also take long breaks between sessions and think it gets repetitive, I actually enjoy vanilla DayZ standalone as it gives me options and doesn't give me baggage. I can explore, survive, hunt players, team up, whatever - and without mods, I don't have to deal with gamey power fantasy shit like traders with safe zones and god tier equipment, or doomforts popping up everywhere.
When it comes to campaigns and old sims... DID's flight sims, particularly with their Total War system, were amazing. I nearly had to repeat a year of school thanks to F-22 Total Air War. I'd sit in the AWACS mode for hours, hopping between flights as a virtual international incident played out. I highly recommend trying it if you can get a hold of the game; I once also saw a really good short documentary piece about the company and their rise and fall here on YT, though don't remember the channel it was on. On the ground, M1 Tank Platoon II provided a similar fix for my burgeoning tank nerd. You know me well enough to know which game I consider to have inherited its mantle, so I'll leave it there for now.
All in all, really good points, and really well made. Use your UA-cam influencer street cred to make the BMS guys finish the 16A pit quicker and I'll come join you.
I hope they do it, would be amazing. Thanks for sharing your experience. Very much on the same wave length regarding tarkov and pubg
Tarkov was ruined by the skill system but I agree, constant resets is no way to make a game.
I completely agree with you, and I'm in the same boat in regards to taking a hiatus from Tarkov. However, Nikita did say the game servers will no longer wipe when the game is in stable release, and when that day comes I will pick the game up again as I am still very fond of it, but in the meantime I hate having my progress wiped every 6 months
Dude you totally missed the actual problem with dynamic campaign and tarkov. Tarkov have so much potential, it's still on Beta, and it's been accomplishing a lot in realism terms. Those skills systems are realistic to a certain extent and even rewarding I'd say.
Nikita isn't any other big company ruler around the world. He have real plans to make Tarkov an actual Military Simulator. The clues are everywhere, taking away arcade players to Arena is one, inserting BTR vehicles into the game that you can shoot the turret and some other basic mechanics. Tarkov is still BETA it's not something to compare to a full game release!!!
Man fuck the recoil imbalance among players
It's one thing for me to suck from not being a lightning fast 18 year old anymore, but now they want me to grind out all this bullshit to be on a level playing field?
Too many times I've caught people's sides or behind and it didn't matter because I didn't OHK them. They just snapped and gunned me down. Good ammo or not
You sir just hit the nail dead center on the head, DCS is all shiny and good when you are new to it but old timers tend to get VERY disappointed as time goes by with such a poor depth of dynamic combat simulation. Thank you for bringing awarenes about this topic, i knew i did well subscribing to your channel. Happy new year to you all, i hope for the best for everyone.
Thank you for your support Pokri
I'm glad I watched all the way through -- top notch content. You make great points about how there is a way forward to make these games better -- love the hopeful message. I think you're right.
Much appreciated!
I grew up with Ace Combat. I love aviation and when I discovered War Thunder back in 2013-14, my mind was blown. Aircraft could shoot at eachother and you could destroy engines. Clip wings. It was so much compared to what I had always known. So I've stuck with it. I have tried to get into DCS in other flightsims but I don't exactly have the space for a HOTAS set up. College sorta kills that for now. But War Thunder was always good about mouse-aim. That's why I stuck around.
Nevertheless, you hit the nail on the head. It is very repetitive. The only reason I stick with it is because I'm interested in the next big thing and I'm a bit competitive in the skies. Monkey Brain happy when I get a kill. But it is bland in the end. And I don't know how they can change it. However, there is a part of me that is hopeful for a possible future with dynamic missions. War Thunder has been taking notes as of late when it comes to other games in the flight genre. The battle music has been something that is niche, but they've put effort into. Larger maps have been popping up in Air RB. And there is generally some experimenting that is being done.
But, that could just be me being hopeful. My hope is to one day be able to boot the game up and find myself battling in what is essentially an Ace Combat mission but actually a multiplayer dynamic campaign. But the groundwork is currently not there for that. Honestly they could probably do with working on some smart AI to flesh the world out a bit. As for other games, I would like to escape the jail of War Thunder. I think whenever the F4 drops from Heatblur, I might be in a position where I can take a look at least. But time will tell.
As a BoS pre War Thunder guy, you could go fully flight stick and sim with WT and back in 2012 it was pretty novel. IL2 and DCS did it better in the long run but WT was there. But yes their strength is Arcade and somehow because of the budget crowd realistic took over.
I own almost every module in dcs except for maybe 2 or 3 and I haven't touched the game in months. After playing regularly since early 1.5 there are just too many issues that have been overlooked for years. This combined with the lack of content has been the reason why i've taken a bit of a hiatus from dcs.
But why would they do more when there is ppl who will buy any airplane they make, why waist time on things that dont bring money , when ppl will buy new airplanes no mather what. They can be lazy when it comes to what Enigma talks when there is so many players who will just keep buying new stuf no mather what.
@@countzero7 The people who are buying every new module that releases aren’t the problem. The problem is that eagle dynamics entire business model depends on the preorder and early access sales to drive development. That has been an issue for a long time and is the reason we got half baked modules for a few years. Pretty much anything the released by belsimtek/ED between the hornet and the F-16. Eagle dynamics needs those sales in order to fund development.
same here. i own so many dcs modules but havent played dcs in about 6 months. its riddles with issues for me i cant overlook so ive stopped playing until it becomes usable for me. I got a quest 2 for christmas so i bought vtol vr and WOW. It is so incredible. So thats what im going to play for the long term!
Same here but no more money for Ed!
@@countzero7 Counter point, if people essentially boycotted DCS and stopped buying modules, they would have no budget and would have even less reason to work on the game, it would be abandoned and everyone would go "what did you expect, nobody is buying anything and the player base is dead" Kind of a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.
DCS is amazing and that's where I pin my hopes for the future of flight sims. IL2 suffers from what I think are insurmountable problems and War Thunder is in another type of market entirely.
DCS is sadly a broken mess with UFO AI, worse damage models than IL-2 CLoD which released in 2011, and a mismash of maps and planes that cannot create a cohesive theater with any fidelity or scale. It also runs like garbage in VR, which is the present and future.
@@virtual_warbirds I'm actually optimistic about VR in DCS. It doesn't run at peak efficiency now, but up until last year it was nearly unplayable.
@@rickeydart3040 no dude, it's gotten so much worse then early 2.5 it's unplayable for over half my squadron.
Greg!!!!
Thanks to WT I got into IL2 and eventually DCS because I wanted more realistic experience, and maybe it will drag more people like me to these games. But I'm actually glad we have only few sims now because of example of Hardcore FPS games. When I was starting there were just few of them if we don't count really old ones. Most famous probably Arma 3, Verdun, Red Orchestra and Insurgency. All had lot of players and experience was awesome. Then developers of Insurgency came out with Day of Infamy, later with Sandstorm, Verdun developers made Tannenberg and Isonzo this year, Squad became a thing, Tarkov, Post scriptum, Beyond the wire, Hell let loose, and even Ready or not, Ground branch or Zero hour are famous now. Main point is community got devided between these games and most of them, even they are so good, are dead now just because no one is playing them and it's making me sad because I had a lot of fun in them. Sometimes less games is better for community even tho they are not perfect, at least we have people to play with.
I just bought a joystick to play dcs after playing WT for a year.
Lol what? Plenty of people play hell let loose, post scriptum and squad.
@@willsimpson3783 Hell Let Loose and Squad, yes. Post Scriptum is dead.
Dude the Arma Russian servers are so good to play... It's crazy how deep in detail hey go over to build massive military simulator experience out of game you'd never imagine.
They fill up their arma servers so fast, and also, I'd say that Russian gaming companies can turn the tide of all this dark age of Simulator Era Games.
Micropose still disappoints me, I hope they'll change, and maybe we'll see like: stormworks with a very concise multiplayer campaign being polished.
EDIT: most of servers are full and just to correct, they're locked to their community, which isn't hard to join, just requires some Russian language knowledge.
The issue with transferring people to these sims is most dont want to spend money on a joystick. dont want to spend money on the modules and taking time to learn everything about the aircraft with a 20 year old pc
Here is what WT did right: I don't need to read a 300 page long instruction manuel to then get shot down in a 60€ module for a few weeks while using a 300€ HOTAS on a 2000€ rig with a 200€ trackIR kit until I can get one good sortie. WT is what brought me back to sim-lites like Squad, PS and GHPC, I like having a simulation happening behind the screen but I don't have the time/willpower to spend 35hrs/week to learn to fly/drive a vehicle at a mediocre level (and then repeating that process for every new 60€ module) especially when other time consuming hobbies are involved.
Edit: Now WT is far behind me but it showed me the type of simulation/ease of use ratio I wanted to have access to and a slow renaissance might be happening with indie devs exploring new avenues as GHPC is showing for tank sims.
I've started playing dcs (yeah, modern mfd stuff) with just the simpliest Logitech joystick and after around 50 hours have been scoring positive kd in gs server, even without headttacking. Of course I feel like average player skill there isn't that high, I scored more than 2 kd while being drunk as hell after around 400 hours, but you are overrating learning and equipment curve a lot. Dcs can give you positive feedback quickly without building a cockpit in your house of you are willing to learn
WT gets around the initial time investment problem but it's definetly more time consuming than actual sims.
GHPC is the best hope we have to break the yoke of the snail
you dont need to read the 300 page manuals to fly in dcs either
@@Tetemovies4 yeah, but no one actually thinks about having fun anymore. I try to, and it works. I play air arcade mostly. Everyone else is focused on grinding the top vehicles.
You're right on. Modern flight sims are a relatively shallow, non-immersive experience. It's time to get old-school again! BMS with VR and the upcoming new terrain engine will see a surge of new players no doubt.
It'll be interesting to see what the expanding and re-visioned IL2 team are working on now - they seem pretty excited about it (latest DD). And ED in their latest update have just given a progress report on their dynamic campaign engine - maybe a year or two away?
Probably AI is the other key factor that really needs to get to a new level. Maybe the tech is getting there with the pretty amazing but limited GPT 3.5 and the much heralded upcoming GPT 4 as a sign of general AI progress. Fingers crossed. Things in that field seem to be moving pretty fast.
Keep up the good work. And buy yourself a New Year coffee or whatever on me. :) Cheers & salut!
I appreciate it thank you for your kind words. Also very curious on what happens in IL-2.
BMS fanboying, ChatGPT simping that shows you have no idea what you are talking about or what it even is (its not fucking AI, its an LLM). Lol. Really checking the boxes for the desperate whiners I expected in these comments.
Since simulation reached home computers (basically since gaming itself started in the eighties) we have been pursuing fidelity. We have come to a point in which companies sell fidelity airplanes because that's what we simmers thought we were after. Turns out, that was only partly true. After long sessions learing and training unbelievably true-to-life airplanes, we find ourselves missing that old feeling.
Bottom line: thx for having created the cold war server. It means A LOT in this context.
Well said!
Same story with racing game.
We have super duper simulators, but where is the classic Gran Turismo formula ? (GT1 to GT4)
I want to play a career mode where you need to pass painful driving licences and grind early championships with a shitbox car that you get to upgrade slowly.
Meanwhile in modern Forza, the game basically gives a 500 hp Corvette after 5 minutes of gameplay 😂
And modern Gran Turismo has you grinding for hours to collect cars you cannot use in any race 😵💫
I’m only a warthuder player, and I don’t even play on PC but what you is say super valid. They just added the F-16 and Ming-29 and nothing felt like it changed. I didn’t know any of those old sims existed but I love the idea of them, thank you for bringing them to light. I really hope new games come out with a full dynamic war.
That would be great, and I agree. I think War Thunder can actually make that type of game work by utilizing the WWM framework for individual campaigns with different vehicle types including putting player controlled ships, planes, and tanks in the same match, wih dynamic objectives, spawns, and combat areas appearing on the map. Even just modernizing the current modes of Air RB and Air Sim would probably make players very happy though lol.
as much as i already enjoy regular war thunder (rb and sim), i really do yearn for larger live campaigns on assymetrical maps. there are already a few games on friggin roblox that manage to pull this off, so it's really disapponting seeing war thunder remain with arcade-y gameplay when it could flesh it out and satisfy the strategy side of milsims.
War thunder is not even a sim lmao, it's just some dumb arcadey game where you fly and shoot everything. How is it a sim?
It's worth noting there is a dynamic (sort of) campaign for Great Battles - Pat Wilson's Campaign Generator which works fairly well though it is single player and coop only. Other limitations hamper the Great Battles series from providing the experience you're looking for. E.g. no strategic bombers and the computational cost of it's AI limits engagement sizes. And the engine timers. The GD engine timers.
Dear Sir, everything you say about the status and future of swimming is correct. We have a long way to go to delivering on our vision of Dynamic Campaign despite working on this core element for quite some time. The rate of development is too slow for my liking but it is moving in the right direction and I trust will meet with your expectations. Thank you for your passion and support. Happy New Year to you and your family. Kind regards, Nick
Thank you for taking the time to watch and to comment. If I may take a bit more of your time, I would really impress upon you to make sure that the dynamic campaign system is able to support multiplayer day one. I wish you, your family and company's staff a happy new year and good fortune into 2023.
@@Enigma89 Dear Sir, thank you for your kind wishes. MP from day one message received. Let me review and revert back to you at some time. Maybe we could have a chat in the New Year. Once again, all my very best wishes to you and you family. Yours Nick
Sure I am happy to chat, my email is enigma89gaming@gmail.com Happy new year.
I’ll be honest, I have been simming for a long time. I think EF2000 was one of the first sims to make me realize the value of dynamic game play, even though it didn’t work that well. DCS does a great job of making the plane you are flying seem as real as possible, but we could use a campaign generator. I took a break from flights sims after they started to lose their mojo. When I did go back, DCS was the only choice for me. But I’m more of a purest when it comes the simulation, hence the word. I want to feel like and have the learning curve of a real plane. I hoping that improvements will come. For me simulation is not a all out kill fest like say a Call of Duty style game. I like the depth and the investment of time. That said, I would like to see DCS get past that one hurdle (dynamic campaign) that from my point of view would elevate the game to new heights. I have my fingers crossed that we will see it soon.
I will cross my fingers with you, let's hope we hear news in 2023.
Oh man, I used to play SEF-2000 (the Windows version) and boy do I miss a dynamic campaign. It was awesome to see the results of your actions change the balance of the war.
Hello sir! I am the annual winner of the King of The Hill event in Aces High of 2019 and playings since 2004. I do feel somewhat the same about modern flight SIMs. But luckily Aces Hight is still rocking on with special events and the regular arena still attracts more than 50 players at one time up to 250 online at the same time. Aces High 3 might not look as good as the newest games, but the mmo aspect of AH is great and is truly an uniek experience.
Upcoming month we will have another special event spanning 4 weeks with about 70 players singed up. Axis Vs Allies 1943 the battle of Paris. Flying bombers, escorts and intercepters, simulating the battle with both sides having a change to win this key battle. Feel free to join my squad and see what it is all about. I will have a chat with the organization to get you all settled. (Or anyone else that is interested for that matter)
Happy new year sir
Tell em Dutch!
Eagler
@@eagler8196
Its why I miss Janes simulations. I had the Longbow gold back in the day and was fun to play the Apache in that game. You had to worry about ground troops as well as other threats. You have several campaigns to play and even a training set of missions to teach how to fly and use the chopper.
I had countless hours of fun playing the original Falcon 4.0 and Allied Force. Dynamic campaigns were great. Missions were unpredictable and varied. Also liked influencing the outcome. Might be worth mentioning CFS3. That game also included a dynamic campaign where your efforts directly influenced the outcome of the overall campaign.
I'm so glad you did this video. Few months ago I found out about BMS, immediately jumped right into it. I have never played DCS because of the amount of knowledge you have to gain for flying one aircraft, but when I found out about the dynamic campaign on this game I went nuts reading the manuals. But I thought to myself, why has this dynamic campaign not been implemented in other games? There are others that attempt the same (such as Strike Fighters 2) but none will have the same feeling as actually fighting another country's army and being just another pilot in a huge scale war as this game does. This has to be implemented MORE.
For the records AI crashing on ground was a 4.36 bug (not in 4.35 ) on alternate theater , this is fixed in 4.37 :)
Thanks for noting
I was very very very young when IL-2 came out, but I still loved playing it at as a 4 to 5 year old. The entire pacific theater and European theater at my finger tips. Without growing up with this on my grandparents computer I wouldn’t be where I am today. It not only showed me how good gaming could be but put me in my career path today already on my way to fly with United Airlines and learning to fly the T-6 Texan with my local Commemorative Airforce wing. If I were stuck with these arcade fast paced tasteless game like war thunder I don’t think I’d ever be motivated or inspired like I was growing up.
My dream wish: all hard core developers come together to create a consortium. For campaigns we have Command from Matrix, for infantry we have Arma, for air: DCS and BMS, scenery: fs2020 and soo on. Each developer with its expertise. And we have Unreal Engine 5 and VR technology. Soo we have everything to make a leap on sim but the problem os get everyone to work together. Hell, we even have Kerbals to weaponize space! 😄
IMO, the solution would be for someone to take the DIS protocol that lets various military sims communicate and revamp it for the modern, civilian, sim era. You don't have to have as detailed coordination among the developers as long as everyone uses the same protocol.
@felcas WWIIOL continues development in 1.0 with new content and complexities (indirect artillery from 13k meters) while being committed to transitioning our massive gaming world to UE5.
I used to think DCS was all about that: allowing us to drive tanks or other vehicles like in that T-72 sim or even captain a naval vessel with its plethora of arsenals besides flying fancy jets (that will eventually be supplanted by bombers).
Ultimate Monopoly
I still remember the full two-page ad for Falcon 4.0 in PC Gamer.
"Perfection is never rushed. It actually travels at about Mach 2."
I know ED has said they're working on a dynamic campaign, but once you play BMS, you see all the features supporting that dynamic campaign, and they're not in DCS. There's just a lot of really basic stuff that BMS does which DCS doesn't. It feels like a chasm that ED cannot bridge in my lifetime on their current game engine at their current pace of development. I don't think 1C Game Studios can do it either. I sincerely hope I am wrong.
I understand these are companies with financial constraints, but it feels like people are drifting away. I still buy modules to support them, but each new module generates less interest for me. I just don't see myself buying the DCS F-4 or the Eurofighter or the F-15E. I'm also reluctant to get my hopes up for the next IL-2 module, because I can't imagine what they could do to excite me if it isn't the Pacific Theater or the Korean War. I don't think I'll be buying another IL-2 module that isn't one of those.
Thanks for sharing your perspective and making a thoughtful response!
A point not considered in the video is that many players have economical restrictions which prevent them from acquiring a 2000 USD machine exclusively used for entertainment and used by a single person. That's why War Thunder seems to "trap" so many sim players, is not that they are trapped by the game, they're trapped by their budget. War Thunder offer an experience which only require 500 USD to access (Gaming Console) sometimes even less (previously owned machines). All of which makes me think that the Sim world is not in a dark age, it diversified to accommodate different budget requirements. Tryhards can acquire their 5000 USD set ups, and the rest of us just play War Thunder.
As a producer/designer of a Falcon 4.0 release (OIR) I agree. There’s a lot of potential in DCS, but it just doesn’t feel alive. The F4 campaign was and is the king
Also, as a producer/designer of Air Warrior, I like the mention of Aces High and WW2OL but frown on not mentioning the sim that literally spawned them both (HiTech started by creating a viewer for AW cam (replay) files). :-)
Great video!
Make a falcon world 5.0!
Thanks for your work on the project! I would imagine it must feel surreal to see people talking about Falcon 4.0 still after all these years.
@@Enigma89 Thank you! I love following along with what you're doing with the online campaign. Haven't flown MP DCS yet, but plan to at some point. Probably not before the Phantom.
Curious, as a MiG-21 driver, what you think the Phantom will be like in your cold war scenarios? The NVAF had problems with the Phantom, but I think a lot of that was down to tactics - they didn't use the vertical a lot. Wondering whether the Phantom dominance will translate, if at all, to online DCS. I'd be interested in a video followup to the ED 2023 and beyond next week that gives your ideas about how the coming cold war planes will change the play you're currently seeing.
@@garycooper4512 I don't have a good answer. We will have to feel our way through it. The F-4 is really capable so we hope to balance the scenario or throttle F-4 usage in order to make it fit within our universe.
thank you for your work on Falcon 4.0, it made my childhood! Dynamic campaign was amazing, I've spent countless hours just tweaking the ATO. Regarding the Phantom, as a fairly new MiG-21 driver I think the Sparrow will make a difference (maybe it'll be king of SARH, you know, in the land of the blind...) as the only thing the reds got going for it is the measly R3R. MiG-21 drivers better come up with updated tactics (perhaps copy the NVAF tactics?). I don't think the usage need to be throttled as it fits 100% in there.
Having come of age in the "golden era of sims", I don't have rose colored glasses of that time. As great as Falcon 4.0 and IL 1946 are/were...they were incredibly niche by the time of those iconic releases. Falcon 4.0 was a bargain bin title quickly at the local retailers I went to. The sim community was small even then and marred by bug ridden messes of marquee titles at launch that took ages for patches or community fixes. IL 1946 came out at a budget consolidation of the IL-2 series after all. IL 1946's heyday lasted because of the community investment. That's the issue. Modern gaming makes modding harder and the focus on monetized multiplayer makes single player content harder to come by. A dynamic campaign should have been standard, but at that point one is designing a game within a game and development funds are tight as is in this niche space. I don't see this as a dark age, so much as a transitional one. The core sim audience is older (the genre always skewed toward the older crowd like hardcore turn based wargames do) and said audience wants a mix of the best from the past with the modern fidelity of today. That will come at a cost and there might not be enough of a community to justify said cost unless it grows. DCS alone needs a better entry and tutorial system, along with SP content that can make sense of it's complexities to novices and noobs. DCS has some of those basics already, but there needs to be more consistency so that core game updates don't keep breaking SP campaigns for example. More focus needs to be on the "bones" to justify all the effort into what are some of the best simulations of combat aircraft ever made.
Yeah,
Indeed sadly th3e dynamic campaign which will never fet old to players is exactly opposite to what is the goal of game/sim developers.
They want us to buy new shiny airplanes and when we're done with learning it and realizing there's little to do with that - we would be next one :(
MSFS 2020 is what funneled me into DCS. One of the hurtles for me getting into flight sims was justifying to myself the cost of a HOTAS. Flight sims can be a real money sink and that means you have to be truly passionate about it.
Nice to see Aces High get a shout-out. You know your stuff.
I'm not nearly old enough to have experienced this sim 'golden age' you talk about, turning 23 in the next couple of months.
I did switch to DCS in 2020 after having played War Thunder for a grand total of 7 or 8 years after finally losing the hope of some actual development in regards to a dynamic campaign or more fleshed out game-modes, despite the amount of money and time I stuck into that game (which I will say, I still don't regret).
I came to DCS initially because the work the community did on the community servers on their own dynamic campaigns was pretty astounding, and it was a lot of fun to play. Though, recently I've been making a lot of co-op missions myself and I've noticed DCS's native lack of complex mechanics for a lot of things like SAM sites, aircraft AND ground AI and an overall lack of depth in the high-fidelity modules they release; The IFF-system being one of them. I believe this to be the reason why there's this *NEED* for a massive community effort to get any kind of dynamic campaign set up and working.
I believe the core to this problem being that both titles (War Thunder and DCS) do not have any real competition in their respective target audiences.
World of Warplanes is infinitely worse than War Thunder in nearly every aspect, in my opinion, as it does all the same things War Thunder does but at a worse level. Granted that it doesn't have the same predatory economy system that War Thunder does.
And with NOR being a military sim project, DCS has no competition at all; MSFS 2020 is targeted to a whole different audience and the only other alternative we recently saw a sneak peek of turned out to be for military use. DCS has no reason to push for too much innovation.
I'm very grateful to the community for all of these great pieces of script and all of the mods that allow me to 'complete' the sim and turn it into an experience I'm hard-pressed to find anywhere else.
I played War Thunder for years before eventually switching to Il-2 as Gaijin continues to further nerf the economy into the ground. Mostly play the Career (Dynamic Campaign) mode. Absolutely love flying my 109s.
War Thunder player here.
To be honest, I never treat it as a simulation because it simply isn't, no matter whoever claims it is, even for the "Simulator" mode. It's an arcade game with some "realistic" elements.
It may looked like one back in 2013-2014, until Gaijoob realized that they could not milk anything from developing new game modes (dynamic campaign included) and has gone for keep adding new toys with the horrid grinding instead.
I tried DCS World with the Su-27 module 5 years ago and I loved the combat system. It looked even more robust than whatever War Thunder is today. Unfortunately, I'm not a big fan of spending majority of my free time cruising from point A to point B. I prefer the Ace Combat-style gameplay with a bit of "realism". That's why I still play War Thunder until there is the replacement.
However, if there is someone who is interested in War Thunder for the modern planes and doesn't mind the lengthy gameplay, I will tell them to stay away and go for DCS World instead.
I mean, it takes way much less time to learn how to fly your favorite module than grinding for the same plane in War Thunder from the zero. The grinding mechanic is that bad.
For the dynamic campaign, at least there is a hope that ED will develop it for you all one day, while Gaijoob will give you none.
You're spot-on, and I'm glad someone else identified how WT and the like ruined the current sim landscape. Only indie projects are really pushing back against this for now (ex: GHPC). The consequences of the current state of the market are very interesting in ways I didn't expect - in particular, the audience perceptions and demands we deal with are striking in how clearly they've been molded by WT (i.e. "WT brain rot").
I really wanted to mention GHPC in here because I think it offers a ray of hope to break the yoke from the Snail. The way that those guys are talking about their game is very refreshing. I thought this video was getting quite long and I haven't tried GHPC yet because I only really play multiplayer so I am waiting for that to come but I will jump in with two feet on that game. I am really rooting for them.
What about war thunder is a good game, it has no simulation and it is not comparable to il2GB or DCS, steel beast!!! It's a good game with good and bad things, it's silly to blame him for something or insult his community.
I'm going to insult the CODs because people don't play Post scriptum Squad or Arma 3... wtf?!
@@Enigma89 I think you should pick it up. It's on sale for a few more days I think and I picked it up for christmas. Even if you don't make videos on it, it's a ton of fun to mess around with in your free time
Not suprised the lead dev of GHPC is shilling on his own game like it's some sort of miracle lol.
This is why I still enjoy playing Aces High III. The player base is not what it once was, but the dynamic war and camaraderie you build by flying with guys for years, or well over a decade in my case, just makes the game. AH took a big hit when War Thunder came out just like the rest, and really hasn't been the same since player base wise. Still, it has a loyal base still, though smaller, and the constant revolving war with 3:00 AM Base takes and multi-hour missions keep it going. I definitely share the same feelings and hope things improve for sims in the future.
Aces High 3 is where I’ve been off and on for 16. Played IL-2 and WT for a bit and a little DCS. Always came back to AH and that’s where I’ve been the last 4 years solid.
Nothing could beat peak AH in the multiplayer aspect and honestly I think it’s still the best.
@@whiteman78 I play MSFS 2020 pretty regularly as well as DCS. IL2 here and there, but Aces High has stayed. I’ve been playing for 13 years now. Made great friends when I started that have kept me as a Rook and a Claim Jumper since day 1. It’s one of those games you can’t beat, even if it’s hay day has past. Peak aces high was an experience for sure.
- nasty
Random question, did you ever try World War mode during one of the seasons for War Thunder? Road to the West (which was Fulda Gap and Battle of the Chinese Farm) was some of the most fun I've ever had in games, period.
Good on you for putting such a huge amount of thought and effort into this. I don’t have the level of knowledge or experience to comment intelligently one way or the other, but just wanted to offer my compliments.
Another point: in old times we had more time to play and sims was simpler. Now even warthunder is more complex then many top line sims from the past (way back before falcon 4). And now, we have less time to play and if you like hard-core sims , you really need to dedicate yourself, because hard-core sims are astronomically more complex then before. Result: many people don't want to invest that much time to learn hard-core sim but just have fun with a soft-core sim. Jump in have fun, bail out.
Oh god this. Every time I get nostalgic and enthusiastic for BMS I remember the 2+ hour torture it is to configure and remember all the goddam key assignments.
As a long time War Thunder player, I agree regarding the dynamic campaign. We did have something called World War Mode, but it was extremely basic and tough for individuals to get into as the matches were both short and dominated by squadrons of quite literally a pool of 128 people rotating in and out 24/7 and coordinating each match so that each incidence would result in a victory.
I would love something nice and massive like this but I think that it may become dominated by a few select groups.
Yes.
Back in the good old days we had multiple companies making good flight Sims, today there are 2, il2 for WW2 and dcs for non WW2.
BMS kind of counts but it's a mod of a golden age game.
I'm 19 year's Old I started playing warthunder in 2016 but I wanted to get on dcs and I was limited by my bad PC when I got a good PC I started playing more dcs and started leaving warthunder because I joined the Air force academy and became a pilot a dream that All flight simers have I don't have time to advance my self in dcs so I play for fun on the weekends and I think since I would be flying combat aircraft in real life I don't know my future in simulators like dcs
I played a lot of IL-2 in my teenage years and I truly miss the sense of scale and immersion like you. I do however truly hope that the large amount of new 3rd party devs in DCS, will prompt eagle dynamics to develop the game engine and leave modules to 3rd parties.
Let's hope!
Yeh man Il2 had a great atmosphere, even the old school music and art style. Made it feel so immersive.
In war Thunder's defense, I believe it's not meant to be a simulator game like the others, it's a mix of arcade and sim which mixes into modes such as realistic battles, flight models aren't exactly perfect and a lot of flaws are still present..
Still a great video, definitely got me more interested in other flight sims
As someone who grew up in the war thunder Era and sort of graduated to dcs I had never thought of it like this before.. interesting
Same here but i graduated to GHPC am more of a tanker then a pilot never the less what he said was also intresting
I appreciate your take on this. I started with war thunder and got fed up with everything about it. When I switched to DCS, I found a great community and fell in love. I feel very lucky to have joined DCS when I did. There’s so many amazing modules available, so many more on the horizon, plus the promise of engine improvements shows me that DCS could be the way forward(emphasis on could).
It seems it's not all doom and gloom, there's a sim for each niche, WT for casual flyers with limited time, DCS/Il2 BoX for those who want something more advanced. Also BMS is growing strong. Their TvT events are fantastic, and new 4.37 trailer looks soo tasty ;). So I hope it's gonna be fine in combat flightsims land.
Hey Enigma, first of all thank you for all the good work you are doing. I've flown on your servers from time to time and it was always a fun experience, and I appreciate amount of work you and your team put into them and into DCS community as a whole.
As per your video, I have some point to agree on and to expand or give some maybe unique and interesting perspective.
Being an eastern european (russian) myself, I've flown Il-2 from 2007-2008, being only 13-14 years old (I'm 29 now), and it was good. From scripted and dynamic campaigns, to multiplayer, to virtual squadrons, to participation in most hardcore MP projects there was at the time. In parallel I've played I tried LOMAC, FC, but after a while got bored, because I always loved warbirds more, they felt more alive and more interesting gameplay-wise.
I vividly remember the time you are speaking of, when Cliff of Dover were teased to us, circa 2010. I was active at the forum where developers put their dev diaries, and I remember when almost from the first ones I understood that something was wrong. They were creating the game which was not to see success from many reasons, the main being that they were focusing on exciting new tech that gave them opportunity to make great-looking graphics, but completely ignoring gameplay and user experience. Back then I made a post, describing how the then-modern air sim should look like, and got downvoted to oblivion by fan boys, especially because of comparison with Wings of prey, which already came out and was pretty good gameplay-wise and had a nice (though unrealistic and arcadey) campaign mode.
Then war thunder came out, and you described very well what happened next. But you didn't see that Gaijin leaned heavily in the sim community, and major part of their success was because it was marketed as the sim of the future, and almost entire russian sim community (largest in the world I dare say) was backing them and supporting them. I, too, played war thunder from the beginning, participated successfully in some of their championships (can you imagine offline tournament for simmers now? War Thunder made it possible for a short time, in 2013-2014, they paid for tickets to Moscow, for hotels, nice prizes - I got GTX 780 for instance as a prize for second place). Then I became a flight model tester (alpha tester for planes), and I've seen that even some of the devs were hardcore simmers themselves, even quite famous in Il-2 community. And their FM were not bad, it had issues and still has, but it is better that in Il-2 1946 for instance.
Then the shift happened, war thunder management obviously understood that simmers, which fueled their initial success, nevertheless is a niche community, and there are much bigger money to be made in casual gaming. They still marketed sim as their "high-end", but aimed at arcade players. It's like with everything; image of the company is their top products, but most of the people use middle-range products, more affordable but still good.
In parallel, DCS was falling into the same rabbit hole as Cliffs of Dover. They made gorgeous models but there were nothing to do in them, and you can throw switched for only so long. I might be wrong but I think the sole reason why they survived is maybe defense contracts and modern combat sim community still flying Flaming Cliffs modules.
I think you are doing good work explaining that thought that shiny new planes are not the end goal, the end goal should be creating immersive and engaging experience, and that can be done by multiple ways. You said that Il-2 is still de facto golden standard for combats sims, and that is right. And thats not because it has great graphics, or even great flight model or damage model. To be honest, by modern standards they are primitive. It just gives you the chance to FEEL like a true WWII-era pilot. DCS WWII modules will never (or at least not in the near future) will give you that, because those planes, while superbly made, are out of context, and I personally would pick flawed War Thunder to fly warbirds every day, because even in its current state it gives me unparalleled feelings of being there, in the cockpit of warbird in the middle of the dogfight.
Thanks for giving your point of view it was interesting to read.
Interesting perspective. I think you'll always have this divide between sim pilots who fly via game pad versus those of us that use a HOTAS setup. Many of us like the depth and feel of each airplane, its systems and mastering it. Many couldn't be bothered - too complex. I notice you didn't feature any clips from Aces High...i know they are still around, I played that sim for many years. Just haven't seen anything "new" there that made me want to go back
The graphics in Aces High are super dated, almost to the level of the original SU27 from 1995.
Hi, I'm 20 years old. I do not have enough knowledge about the sim community but I can say this. I am a slave to the snail that is Gaijin. I love that game so much. I love tanks and I love planes (nobody plays naval). I do intend one day to build a sim setup so that I can play war thunder sim. Sometimes I catch myself side-climbing in first person in my aircraft and I can't help but ogle at all the fascinating dials and seeing how lowering/ raising my throttle affects them. I will also go on to say that I am a MEC (Manual Engine Control) enjoyer and even though I know the difference between automatic and manual controls is very small, i'll fully open the radiators of my P-51 Mustang every single time that I take off of the runway. I have thought about playing DCS one day but there's one thing that is always at the back of my mind: the complexity of aircraft controls and the price of planes. Granted War thunder premiums are slowly approaching the cost of planes in DCS. I do hope one day to join the sim community, not just for aircraft but also for racing (especially Rally sim). Thank you for your informative and thought provoking video Enigma, have a nice day.
I never realized that the dynamic campaign for Falcon 4 was made by an intern. That's really impressive! I'm hopeful that the current big flight sim games will make some of these changes in the next few years, but at this point I'm watching the indie community. Microprose has a few upcoming flight games they're publishing (B17 Flying Fortress the bloody 100th, The mighty eighth vr, Tiny Combat Arena) that look pretty good. If they do well enough, maybe it'll stir up additional interest in sim or sim-lite development from other developers and we'll start seeing a revival in the flight sim genre. Fingers crossed, anyways.
Yeah it was pretty surprising when someone told me and dug up the article for me. You can read more about it here. sites.google.com/site/falcon4history/interview
@@Enigma89 Cool that he went from doing this to becoming a Technical Director at EA. Wish we had more interviews like these and dev diaries from games in that era. Lot of interesting things to learn there.
Your written summary sums it up very nicely. I still can't believe that no one has developed a dynamic campaign since Falcon 4 and IL-2!
They can't. The current games work under cores that just can't manage them. Until they're willing to start over from a blank sheet, it just can't be done it seems. BMS works because deep down, the bones of Falcon 4.0 were well considered and solid. With that mods and add-ons can basically accomplish anything a group of competent programmers can think of. Especially as a non-commercial product that doesn't have to deal with licensing costs and limitations.
The way the game Business works now means these kinds of goals are unattainable commercially.
@@mzaite Then I'll just keep on playing BMS, until someone comes along and make a modern flight sim with a dynamic campaign. I'm sure someone will. Thanks for your reply.
War thunder had the opposite effect on me actually it made me more interested into dcs
You really put words on feelings. Awesome video as usual 👍
All my best wishes for 2023 !
Thank you! You too!
Be careful of rose-tinted glasses.The dynamic campaign in Falcon 4.0 barely worked when it was released. It was extremely buggy. I never managed to get through 2 days of the campaign, until BMS was released.
Exactly, before BMS became what it now is, Falcon 4.0 had a lot of issues.
idk if people agree but as a vr game that is only like 2gb VTOL VR is a pretty good simulator, i mean you can literally interact with everything* in your cockpit
(everything being if there is support for button XYZ inside the cockpit by the workshop plane addon creator)
Why arnt you using sim mode in war thunder and not using cockpit mode in rb???
Enigma- DCS needs dynamic campaigns to bring new life into it, and the ability to run them as well
ED two days later- HAPPY NEW YEAR! Have some dynamic campaigns! and engine improvements as well!
Agreed on the war affecting output. This year has been pretty stale for most sims, with minimal new content. Not to mention the now grey area of creating more modern eastern equipment.
Well said
One of the OG STALKER devs was KIA a few days ago.
The Phantom devs also said the war is a big part of why that module wasn’t released this year.
Fully agree with the overall take here though. I’m not even excited for nee modules now because I don’t have anything new to do with them.
Incredibly solid points brought up in this video.
The fact that you'd be flamed by asking more of your passions is pretty crazy.
It's clear even from the comments here, that there is a burning desire for more dynamic and long term campaigns, as well as more intricate and detailed system simulation.
It's also great to see that there is interest in adding more depth to ground units and troops, and the suggestion of an AI commander is definitely an interesting idea.
It's encouraging to see that there is a desire for content that players can really sink their teeth into, rather than just new aircraft.
Hopefully, observant developers 😏 will take these suggestions into consideration and work towards bringing more innovation and competition to the flight simulation space.
15:10 congratulations for blocking a player that wants to play the game that makes i definitelly better , btw i dont care if you support ukraine or russia i think its odd to put either flags on your tank let other do and put on their tank they want
This is not just an issue with sims, but gaming in general. The art form is basically non-existent because it is all about maximizing profits.
16:10 bro what the fuck
Maybe I'm in the minority here but I play war thunder specifically because it isn't a true sim and is more like a video game where I can just hop in, play some matches, and then go about my day.
14:33 wow my man hates war thunder and goes into it to grief
im all up for griefing russian bots
A real giga chad
You do have a really good point. I have seen this myself when I have tried to get friends into DCS. They ask, "but what do you do?" I realized that is a hard question to answer. You can buy some campaigns for your aircraft (more money?) or go on public servers, but again you are beholden to what the community makes. While it is fun to make your own missions for your group, it is time consuming. 40+ hours to make a good in-depth mission for a group of 30 people to fly for 90 minutes and then it's over. I am hoping with DCS having their new dynamic campaign right around the corner (this year hopefully) it will break this cycle. I do have to say though that sometimes just "flying" (navigating, refueling, monitoring your aircraft and airspace around you) in DCS many times is it's own reward.
The reward of moving around and just doing the same thing is kinda done for me. At least in IL-2 the player base has a very high skill so the fights are very interesting.
The whole argument of players being "trapped" in WT isn't just wrong, it's obviously wrong if you stop to think about it even for a moment. War Thunder isn't keeping anyone from DCS any more than Genshin Impact is. You can't grow potatoes out of turnip seeds, no matter how much you water and cultivate them. The millions of people playing Genshin Impact aren't just buds awaiting to bloom into beautiful DCS potatoes under the right circumstances. And while DCS and WT are thematically similar, they are fundamentally on different levels of hardcoreness. The bulk of casual WT pilots flying with a mouse are never ever going to become DCS players, no matter how often you water them, or how much dynamic content there is in DCS.
I remember the golden age with fondness and I thought by now we have had more dynamic environments not less, thank god for indie dev's, they are rekindling some great 90's content ,helicopter gunship dex is just one guy and recreates Gunship! feels for me. Great article and now a subscriber.
"Try keep the channel as apolitical as possible" 14:17
*clip of soyboy raging on a friendly player over a Z*
Im so proud of him
I am someone who migrated to the flightsim world coming from warthunder and I can say that this is now one of my greatest passions. I love to play DCS but I still keep coming back to warthunder for one single reason and that is to play the sim mode for wwII planes. I particularly dislike cold war/modern jets in warthunder. So every time I wish to play with one of these, my first choice is always DCS. While I have Il2 I prefer to play ww2 stuff in warthunder because I always have a bad time actually finding people in the il2 mp servers, they always feel a bit empty to me and the ones in DCS I'm not even going to mention.
Also, I agree a lot with you that dynamic campaigns and more combined arms content would make wonders to DCS, this is something I always missed in it and it's something I really crave. For instance, I never knew about wwii online and bms and while I'm typing here I'm already googling them because just what you showed in this video already got me in awe! I also enjoy Combat mission and CMO, so I'd really love to see all of these experiences combined into one single Simulator like DCS.
I wouldn't call it a dark age. On paper we have more modules and features than we've ever had before buuut I would however call it a awkward period where transition needs to happen.
We're living with games that are these old legacy projects. Ancient codebases and limited markets.
In a time where life is getting more and more expensive, dropping cash on a HOTAS and a powerful PC just to run DCS is less and less appealing. This makes it difficult to justify extensive large scale projects like dynamic campaigns or even large refactoring to sort things out.
Fundamentally DCS, WT and BoX were not designed to have dynamic gameplay. Hell they weren't really *designed* at all. Not in a way that would be recognised in more western gamedev circles. You rightfully picked this up with BMS that at it's core the supporting systems are there to create a better gameplay loop.
So what does this mean? It means either the big boys have to hard pivot, something expensive and risky. ED seem to be sloooowly moving this way, but they could fuck it up.
Gaijin will never change, why would they? They're printing money.
F2P games leach off the same feedback loops as gambling, While they can serve as a funnel they should not be seen as market leaders in any sense beyond revenue.
So we gotta hope for new products have to step in.
This is for me where the is quite a bit of hope, there is a vast void for more systems driven semi-sims along the lines of "GHPC". Games that simulate enough to make the gameplay feel representative but also doesn't waste time and resources on endless fidelity and ignore the context a piece of equipment like a tank is supposed to work in.
Nobody is doing this for flight sims yet though and I don't know if it will happen soon. Gamedev is hard, generally speaking unless you are lucky you will be underpaid and potentially mistreated. Small Indie studios can and have stepped up but it's an incredibly risky proposition for folks. Add the layer of the niche interests required to get into sim gaming and you get the idea.
This makes it very difficult to retain the technical talent required for the complicated bullshit that is making a Sim.
Still, if a relatively small team can get together and develop and idea with realistic scope that plans from the start to incorporate Recon, SAMs, Mission planning, CSAR etc, make the required compromises on presentation. They'd have something special. If they need QA then I'll be first on that boat :)
That still leaves ED's efforts, for now we are a captive market and can only hope. But I do think they are trying, it's just if they can do it before everyone's patience runs out.
Recent community efforts have helped shed light on the need for more dynamic content, but it will always be an uphill battle at current until significant momentum is gained.
Just a few loose thoughts
Enfield
👏
Additionally, any successful ...successor. Needs to be as playable on a controller as HOTAS. We need to remove the barrier to entry to proper simming. This can and should be done.
@@SuperMegaCyrus Tico used to rock a 360 controller while being one of the top killers in a 21, with the shittiest missiles to boot. It can be done, and older Cold War airframes are the way 😤😤
19:30 i almost cried when u got to the caveat abt using the dark ages as an analogy despite possible historical fallacy of the colloquial understanding of the dark ages
chef’s kiss lmfao 🙏
Thanks lol
dude is angry because he believes WarThunder is supposed to compete with MS Flight Simulator
Warthunder needs to bring in a proper Air RB EC mode. You're right. The aircraft models are so good but the gameplay is so poor.
aw cute, he has an entire 5 minutes segment of bullying a T-72 just because of decals. What else, do you fire down teammates because you don't like the sound of their voice?
"Bro I try to stay as apolitical as possible" - some Ukroid after proudly harassing someone who shows support for Russia.
@@fuzionzz8415 "I see myself as a very neutral person" *harasses those who show support to a widely disputed side*
@@TheArcticFoxxo Not to mention just being completely useless to his team lol.
@@xSupra Screws around in spawn while he's in one of the more capable tanks of his team that was more than able to cap B or C, possibly saving the rest of his team that was holding A
I think you're right about DCS. How many of us DCS players have told a wingman; "Just over there is where the SAM site spawns, watch out." Or something similar? So while I agree with your statements, I don't think you touched on what I see as the biggest problem DCS has.
Their utter lack of consistency is the biggest problem as I see it. MiG-21, but no F4? No MiG-17? A spitfire Mk Ix, but a BF-109 K4? No Stuka? Hurricane? F4F? P38? A6M, Kate? Every historic aircraft has a nemesis, and ED is famous for not making a nemesis. Again, how long has the MiG-21 been out, without player flyable F4s?
DCS development teams doesn't flush out the modules with assets and player modules to match. This means that any scenario thought up by a mission maker, is going to be...imperfect.
There is no 20mm Orliken AA gun, no Vietnam map, no Cold war era infantry units (FAL infantry anyone?). There is no way in mission editor to make your own airport.
There are no Japanese modules or assets, because "what war in the pacific?" DCS developers have the attention span of a goldfish, they simply want to get the next module out, without looking at the sim as a whole and finding holes to fix/ patch/ plug. They allow third party developers to make whatever, with no regard for how it fits. Cool, I like airplanes and helicopters and I'll take what I can get, but someone at ED needs to get out a whiteboard and make a plan to fill the massive holes in the sim.
ED could put out bids to developers, "We need a A6M in 1 year. Who can do it?" and then pick the best one. Contract bidding by developers would help. Ed could say, "sure you can make such and such a module, but you also must make these 5 AI assets to help our core game." Again, the attention span of a goldfish. Fill the voids ED. Nemesis modules, consistency, and hold 3rd party developers to so sort of schedule.
Make a campaign worth something at the very core of the game.
Make the world feel more... correct. (I believe sheep are the most popular livestock in most of the world...no sheep assets in DCS. No camels to smoke, no horses pulling ammo carts in war weary Germany..., no water buffalos for Asia, no Donkey's or mules for Korea.) Granted there are sheep in the Falkland's map, but they're part of the scenery and can't be moved. Despite that map, and the most famous war surrounding the area where both sides used FAL rifles...nope can't have infantry with FAL's.
You can't shut off the lights to a city in DCS by bombing a central power plant. DCS cities don't have a power grid, they have magic lights that always come on. (How many more options for mission editors would it be if you could bomb a central powerplant and knock out power to a city?)
There is nothing that comes as close to flying combat aircraft as DCS, which is very, very sad.
Basically, combine the ground unit modeling from war thunder, with the world from Flight Sim, and the aircraft modeling from DCS (plus their assets and nemesis if those ever come out) and you'd have one hell of a simulator.
“I’m trying to be A-political”
*shows 5 minute clip of bullying Russia supporter
Deserved
@@rayotoxi1509 I LOVE “Corrupt side (Ukrainian) Vs. Corrupt side (Russian).” I WANT TO BE GIVEN A FALSE DICHOTOMY AND WAGE WAR WITH MY FELLOW MAN
Yes, this degenerate political moment, encouraging war and ethnic strife, killed this youtuber for me. No matter how reasonable things he says about games, he will be perceived with nausea. However, what difference does it make if his main audience happily eats US/NATO propaganda, then everything is OK, the losses are insignificant, and even favorable - they lead to a more politically consistent audience.
@@rayotoxi1509 does that mean we should go to lower BR's and bully every single german WW2 tank?
4:00-4:45 ignores massive problems with combat in BMS, like AIM-120Bs that outrange R-27ERs at all altitudes easily or SAMs that until very recently did not even attempt to shoot down missiles. Apart from general confusion which is not nearly as bad as you described once you get used to the environment, this makes combat itself much easier than in DCS, unless you decide to attack 1980s fighters and SAMs with 2010 A/G missiles, which seems to be a thing on most DCS PVE servers.
Or TLDR: BVR and air to ground in BMS is piss easy in that it does not require more than point, IFF, click resulting in a guaranteed win.
Dude. You're saying that War Thunder has it's flaws - fair point. At the same time you're ruining a match by bamping into that Z player. I get why you might be doing it and by all means write the guy in a private section, tell him his is supporting an agressor and etc. But eh you'll just ruin a match for 10 other players. I'm so tired of these Russia/Ukraine supporters team killing each and getting in each other's way. I hope you'll get banned for doing stuff like that.
P.s. to everyone who's gonna be triggered by my comment:
I don't live in Europe or anywhere near it, I have no idea of what's going on there, I come to play a video game and I see crowds of cringe ass dimwits ruining games *becoz flag/Z/Azov Sign* (highlight the one you like more).
He doesn't care as he does not even play War Thunder. His account is like lvl 20 and just a bunch of top tier russian premiums with negative KD. Also the "Jagdgeschwader 26" Nazi larper name on his account tells you everything you need to know about his opinions on Ukraine.
@@b4sed0nwh4t yeah man, I honestly don't want to offend anyone as I'm sure I don't see the whole picture as I'm very far from the conflict. This guy though right at the start of the video states that he's out of politics and at the middle of the video is harassing his teammate.
This is a very rude and juvenile move. Let's assume that the side he's on is truly righteous and is better then he's just compromising the side he represents by acting as an absolutely toxic person and very selfish player who gets to ruin everyone else's game due to his own thoughts and beliefs.
Warthunder player here, played since 2016.
Man dynamic campaigns sounds so cool! The snail failed with world war mode big sad….
I’ve tried WT Sim battles (I mainly do GRB/ARB (ground/air realistic). A couple times but I do not have a stick or throttle just a keyboard.
Warthunder ground is always capture the enemy point or domination over 3 capture points that are in the same spots.
Air (realistic) is just team death match as bombing the same points/ airfield is too predictable and you usually get intercepted way before the base and ground attack is near suicide.
It’s frustrating that it’s been the same type of battles for so long. And that unless you’re in a squad of buddies (max of 4) your teammates are only playing for themselves 90% of the time.
Something’s gotta give! Loved the video! Good hunting! o7
Z
I started in MS Flight Sim 95 and SU-27 Flanker from 95. It was inevitable that I found my way back to Eagle Dynamics through the SU-27 module. The 90s had so many sims! Tanks, boats, sums, mechs, space, towers, ants... Lol. It was a really interesting time for pc gaming.
You bullying the dude with the Russian flag made me dislike the video , but tis a nice video nonetheless
Great video. I’m very much a novice and at 43 I’ve been playing with my teenager who got us both into the genre thru war thunder on Xbox. Together we built a dedicated machine for the sole purpose of playing IL2 which we enjoy immensely. We purchase new modules regularly and spend most of our time getting slaughtered on the Finnish server. While I enjoy the game I don’t have the time to get really good at it but I know enough to be cannon fodder and have fun messing around with my son. I also bought MSFS and DCS but never play them as there just is not enough time for it all. A flyable B17 would be the holy grail for us.
I would recommend checking out the Microprose b-17 (or b-24) game that they have coming. It should let you multicrew with your kid. It's not out but it is coming. Have fun!
SJW emitting virtue signal+20
I hope Putin sees this, bro.
I'm back after a year and the big three may be major but when you look, there's more than just them. Combat Air Patrol 2, Tiny Combat Arena, Wings Over Flanders Fields, Rise of Flight, Aces High and WW2 Online are still up and you can play them.
this isn't good, however, because even if they are out there when you look, you have to look, and nobody wants to go looking.
you're wrong
Seriously, laughed my ass off watching this. It's like a bad hoggit post in video format. Even has the falcon 4.0 delusions and WT ranting.
Insightful video, subbed.
I am old fart and this video really nails it.
It's the emptiness of the simulated world.
In my late teens I played a lot of microprose's F-19 stealth fighter (Amiga).
Even it had quite rich environment. A lot of radars to avoid, enemy combat air patrols, ...
You could plan your own route to target and back and hope that nothing comes on way.
Then I played shortly Hornet Korea, which was my first sim for PC. It had nice graphics for Voodoo 2 card but dull missions.
Falcon 4.0 changed it all. I spent countless of hours with it.
Then came original IL-2. Nice graphics and lot of flying. Again emptiness if you fly out of missions route or target area.
My saviour was VEF (virtual eastern front), a kind of dynamic online campaing where single missions was hosted by individual players.
Then LOMAC, again emptiness and it has continued since.
Lately I have played more War Thunder than DCS simply because it's easy to take part for simulation missions and for a degree you can do what you want: dogfight, attack or be sneaky attacker avoiding enemies.
My dream would be something like DCS combined with Falcon 4 stylish AI war engine.
I even don't require modern DCS degree of avionics simulation. LOMAC/Old DCS level with working basic avionics (which is more than war thunder offers) is enought. But environment must be lively.
I absolutely get where you are coming from. Since my dad was a fighter pilot I played a lot of flight "sims" like MSFS, Combat Flight Simulator, Falcon 4 or Crimson Skies from a young age. I never really touched War Thunder since I was interested in more "normal" games instead. The game that brought me back to flight sims (or more accurately space sims) was Elite Dangerous. I just loved everything about it: the dynamic world, the rather complex flight system and creating new and fun builds for the ships. Ace Combat 7 (and probably the new MSFS and the "lack of content" in Elite) was the game that made me want to fly an actual (virtual) aircraft again.
I neither play DCS nor the other mainstream flight sims. I want to but the lack of anything consistent or even dynamic (like Elite's Milky Way galaxy and background simulation) keeps me from playing most sims especially since none of my friends are interested in flight sims. The only flight sim I ended up playing regularly is VTOL VR. It's nearly perfect since it is easy to pick up but still complex enough to stay entertaining. The only thing it is missing is a good campaign but no other flight sim can give that to me.
It's a very good thing and very refreshing that you speak about flight simming as a part of normal gaming. It sometimes feels like there's some sort of toxicity towards casual players that come from other games (e.g. Ace Combat or Project Wingman) in the flight sim community (except for Warthunder). This, the complexity and the need for an flight stick are probably also things that keep players from getting into simming.
A WW2 European Theatre Elite with a complex background simulation would be so awesome but since it doesn't exist I guess I'll install Falcon bms again and test out the vr support.
It’s like we are at an all time high for fidelity but an all time low for immersion.
I've heard the description used that moder simulation is about simulating the plane, and old Sims were about simulating being a pilot.
I like DCS, but I want both.