New project from Luthier: DCS WWII [Target complete]

[Art-J]

Originally Posted by zapatista

like what ?

re DCS, i'd say the exact opposite. they are known for their solid track record in regularly producing new high quality combat flightsim elements. they do keep to their deadlines, work with a small team, and their larger more ambitious new projects (like their new gfx engine, EDGE) are not given a firm release date until very close to completion.

for the eager beavers they provide a beta product purchase system that provides significant advantages, not only do you get to play around with your new toy early, most beta stage releases are usually already pretty good and they will give you a significant discount on the final purchase price for doing so. cant be more fair then that imho

for their finished flightsim products, their netcode is solid, they have a good multiplayer function, a very advanced mission builder that provides a dynamic campaign function, and their avionics, flightmodels, and weapons systems and ballistics are very good (near military sim grade basically). my only gripe with them is that the modern era in flightsims is just not my cup 'a tea, and i'd wish they would focus more on ww2 or korean era (which we are about to receive now in the next year).

Ehm, that's a bit of a rose-tinted-glasses look over here, especially re. regularity and keeping the dealines. Nowadays, ED guys are mostly known for two things: a) detailed study sims (I'm OK with that); b) neverending stories of "we're working on it", serioulsy delayed releases and neverending beta-status projects (I'm not OK with that). Ironically, the only modules, which were built and released reasonably fast this year (UH-1 and Mi-8TW) were made by 3rd party company (Belsimtek). The upcoming detailed MiG-21 module is also a 3rd party job.

Their GFX engine has also never been properly optimized for modern hardware, hence everybody waiting for EDGE (almost like for some kind of Holy Grail, which will finally speed up the development in the DCS universe).

These factors, coupled with questionable record of Luthier (I'm thinking about his management of PF and CoD) makes me a bit cautious about this upcoming WWII project. I'd love to see it completed, but for now, I'll just wait and see how things unfold.

[Les]

Originally Posted by Art-J

...I'd love to see it completed, but for now, I'll just wait and see how things unfold.

I agree there's cause for uncertainty, but this is a situation where sitting back and waiting to see what happens is actually detrimental to the chances of the thing working at all. If the Kickstarter campaign fails, nobody even gets the chance to see what the developers can come up with.

In the past developers and publishers would put out a product and if it failed financially, at least you still had the product (you just wouldn't get any sequels or add-ons). Nowadays, with investors less willing to take risks, the end-user has to pay upfront just to get anyone working on the project at all.

Remember too that if the Kickstarter campaign fails, no money is actually taken from those who pledged. In that way, the initial Kickstarter campaign is just as much about seeing if there's an audience at all anymore for detailed combat flight sims as it is about raising money for a particular project.

In my opinion DCS:WWII and BoS should both be supported just to keep the genre of realistic combat flight sims alive and keep the door open for further advancements and developments in the field. The developers have their responsibilities and roles to play in that, but so too does the end-user.

This isn't the time for indulging in skepticism and doubt or for sitting back and letting the cards fall where they may. If people want to keep flying in these games/sims, the developers need to keep coming up with the goods and the end-users need to let it be known in advance that there's an audience/market for them.

[lensman1945]

Originally Posted by Les

I agree there's cause for uncertainty, but this is a situation where sitting back and waiting to see what happens is actually detrimental to the chances of the thing working at all. If the Kickstarter campaign fails, nobody even gets the chance to see what the developers can come up with.

In the past developers and publishers would put out a product and if it failed financially, at least you still had the product (you just wouldn't get any sequels or add-ons). Nowadays, with investors less willing to take risks, the end-user has to pay upfront just to get anyone working on the project at all.

Remember too that if the Kickstarter campaign fails, no money is actually taken from those who pledged. In that way, the initial Kickstarter campaign is just as much about seeing if there's an audience at all anymore for detailed combat flight sims as it is about raising money for a particular project.

In my opinion DCS:WWII and BoS should both be supported just to keep the genre of realistic combat flight sims alive and keep the door open for further advancements and developments in the field. The developers have their responsibilities and roles to play in that, but so too does the end-user.

This isn't the time for indulging in skepticism and doubt or for sitting back and letting the cards fall where they may. If people want to keep flying in these games/sims, the developers need to keep coming up with the goods and the end-users need to let it be known in advance that there's an audience/market for them.

Very well explained Les

[JG52Uther]

Luthier posted at kickstarter.ALL planes at DCS quality, and I would LOVE a flyable B17:

Also, a little clarification since a lot of people seem to be writing about this.
Here's what happens if we hit our base goal, but no stretch goals.
The final product that is released will have the following content:
FREE Flyable P-47
FREE Flyable Spitfire
FREE Flyable Bf.109
FREE Non-Flyable P-51 (can be made flyable for an additional fee)
FREE Non-Flyable FW.190D (can be made flyable for an additional fee)
FREE Non-Flyable B-17 (cannot be made flyable)
FREE Non-Flyable Me.262 (cannot be made flyable)
If you back the project at a $20 level, you will receive either the FW.190D or the P-51 as a flyable.
If you back the project at a $40 level, you will receive BOTH the FW.190D and the P-51 as flyables.
Now, if we hit stretch goals, then all additional aircraft will be seen by everyone as non-flyables, but will be available as a flyable for a fee. If you back at a $20 level, you will choose any ONE of the paid flyables. If you back at a $40 level, you will still receive ALL the paid flyables on release.
If we end up meeting our ultimate $1million stretch goal, that means you will receive 13 aircraft for backing at a $40 level or above.
And yes, all aircraft will be made to the same level of quality and high standards as the DCS P-51.

[Feathered_IV]

I haven't had much experience with DCS yet. I wonder how many B-17's the game engine could put into the air at any one time. Modern sims all seem to heading backwards in that respect.

[ATAG_Bliss]

Originally Posted by Feathered_IV

I haven't had much experience with DCS yet. I wonder how many B-17's the game engine could put into the air at any one time. Modern sims all seem to heading backwards in that respect.

Not really.. It just seems to be the limited modern sims you play. I know ROF can't handle many objects, but Cliffs sure can..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xn1f7vnfxo

[Feathered_IV]

Neat. Thanks for the vid. I was thinking more of stock campaigns and the like on a typical recommended spec machine though. Would be very nice to face up against a few hundred Forts. One of my fonder memories from EAW days!

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by JG52Uther

Luthier posted at kickstarter.ALL planes at DCS quality, and I would LOVE a flyable B17:

Also, a little clarification since a lot of people seem to be writing about this.
Here's what happens if we hit our base goal, but no stretch goals.
The final product that is released will have the following content:
FREE Flyable P-47
FREE Flyable Spitfire
FREE Flyable Bf.109
FREE Non-Flyable P-51 (can be made flyable for an additional fee)
FREE Non-Flyable FW.190D (can be made flyable for an additional fee)
FREE Non-Flyable B-17 (cannot be made flyable)
FREE Non-Flyable Me.262 (cannot be made flyable)
If you back the project at a $20 level, you will receive either the FW.190D or the P-51 as a flyable.
If you back the project at a $40 level, you will receive BOTH the FW.190D and the P-51 as flyables.
Now, if we hit stretch goals, then all additional aircraft will be seen by everyone as non-flyables, but will be available as a flyable for a fee. If you back at a $20 level, you will choose any ONE of the paid flyables. If you back at a $40 level, you will still receive ALL the paid flyables on release.
If we end up meeting our ultimate $1million stretch goal, that means you will receive 13 aircraft for backing at a $40 level or above.
And yes, all aircraft will be made to the same level of quality and high standards as the DCS P-51.

So what happens if you already own the DCS P-51 in DCS world? Does that mena you would have to buy it again for the WWII world? I am asking a hypothetical question I realize no one here may have the answer yet.. I will ask the same quation over there..

[JG52Uther]

The question has already been asked, and AFAIK they are trying to sort something out.No idea how they will approach this though. I bought the P51 in the steam sale, and so far all I've done is sit in the cockpit and wondered how young kids coped with all that complexity and managed to fight in the thing!
I thought CoD was realistic, but DCS is a whole new level.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=b4dPxjxwbEk

[SlipBall]

Luthier lowered the stretch goal for the flyable B-17!!!...include's Southern England!..