Community produced game?

[toonces 4]

Great thread.

 

A few ideas I had.

 

First, with respect to 'pledging' to finance the game. I'm sure many of you already know this, but alot of board wargame companies use a similar method for producing new wargames (eg. GMT, MMP, etc.). Essentially it is a pre-order system. The designers come up with an idea, sketch out the basics of the game and some preliminary graphics, and then the game goes up for pre-order. Usually it's 500, but some are 750 or more depending on the cost of developing the game. A buyer logs on, pledges to buy with his order info and credit card info, and when the game reaches the number of required pledges it goes into production. It can take years for the whole process to complete. If you were going to pursue this, I don't think it would be unreasonable to do, but getting 5000 'pledges' would be near impossible IMO.

 

Speaking for myself, I'd pay $100 or more for a really good study sim with Falcon's fidelity of the F-4 (or any number of other planes actually). You're still talking about 2500 pledges for what would truly be a niche sim. Not likely.

 

Second, what would a study sim of the F-4 offer that Lock-On doesn't offer, or Falcon 4 Red Viper with some of the add-ons? I haven't played Lock-On, but my understanding is that it is a higher fidelity version of Strike Fighters. How much more fidelity can you actually offer?

 

Third, I like the idea of having two aircraft modeled initially (but to make this worthwhile, they'd both need to be 'study' caliber). BUT, more importantly is the campaign engine build around the planes. IMO, what keeps games like Falcon so playable is the dynamic campaign engine built around the game. Having a great flight model and fidelity is great, but the immersion comes even more from the campaign in which you're flying.

 

I often wonder why there's been such a horrible lack of study sims since Falcon 4. I wonder if the market simply isn't truly there. There's always some of us that will buy a product like this, almost regardless of cost. I don't know how much I would pay for a truly Falcon'ish Phantom sim- but it would be in the hundreds. But from a marketing standpoint, I don't know how many of us are out there compared to folks who just want the latest Call of Duty release at Best Buy.

[MigBuster 2,861]

Second, what would a study sim of the F-4 offer that Lock-On doesn't offer, or Falcon 4 Red Viper with some of the add-ons? I haven't played Lock-On, but my understanding is that it is a higher fidelity version of Strike Fighters. How much more fidelity can you actually offer?

 

Hopefully 1960/70s avionics, weapons and tactics - which would make it different (i think) but maybe again not popular. Trouble with Study sims is the time to learn and actually play the darn things - never had the patience or time to play them properly when I was younger myself - and we are talkin Falcon 1 which wasnt much different to SF in many ways detail wise (press E to switch the engine on/off) - so the main market would surely be 22+ ?

 

I havnt played Lockon myself yet - but was assuming its mainly Modern warfare related?

 

5000 would be some target - though 500 paying $500 (£250) as a development investment - and a possible share of profits - (if there were any )

 

I would probably put that up - though would like to know who these trustworthy people are C5 keeps harking on about.

[column5 62]

1. Have you broached any of this with TK already. Is there anything you are not telling us?

 

No, this is purely hypothetical, although I am serious about the idea.

[column5 62]

Second, what would a study sim of the F-4 offer that Lock-On doesn't offer, or Falcon 4 Red Viper with some of the add-ons? I haven't played Lock-On, but my understanding is that it is a higher fidelity version of Strike Fighters. How much more fidelity can you actually offer?

 

Well, the first thing it would offer, and by far the most important, would be the same moddability that SF enjoys. In fact, my concept is that the SF engine would be used, but with new DLLs necessary to support whatever new features are added. That way, you could add any SF/WOV/WOE planes to the new sim, albeit at a lower fidelity than the F-4 or whatever the study plane turned out to be. Modders could make their own high-fidelity planes if they were so inclined (Mirage Factory).

 

I think it would offer other things over Lock-On as well. Nostalgia, for sure. But also the fact that so many countries have or still fly the F-4, it should have a lot of appeal throughout the world.

 

Finally, no one has found the magical combination of fun, playability, and realism that I personally would consider optimal. SF and its brothers are a little too light, Falcon is way too heavy. Lock-On...it never grabbed me enough to delve into it and find out. Plus I don't trust Russians to accurately model US aircraft.

[+Typhoid 231]

not sure the business model will work too well. but it might over a longer period of time. In other words, I doubt you would get the up front investment, but over time you would probably get that number in sales. You would have to have a "no promises" clause somewhere in that the project could crash and nothing might not ever be fielded.

 

I would be astonished if TK went along with this idea. Doesn't seem to meet his business model.

 

But I like the idea and I would even be willing to chip in for a copy, in advance.

[JediMaster 451]

I think it would need a bigger MP component than TK's sims have now.

As far as how detailed it is, I think LOMAC's level was fine.

It has been done before, BTW, with just 2. Razorworks' awesome Apache/Havoc and Comanche/Hokum series. You had campaigns flyable from either side, MP campaigns, savable, good data fidelity without being F4-complex, etc.

A jet version of that would be great, although I know TK's existing engine isn't suited for that exactly.

[+Paladrian 11]

Have you considered that instead of having thirdwire do the work, maybe you can use the money to pay them a license, and form a team of volunteers to do the work? Maybe even hire TK as a consultant. It could be cheaper that way (although I admit that it could be a lot harder to accomplish). Just an idea

 

I also like Lexx's idea, having 2 very different aircrafts modeled gives the game more potential for modding, just as the inclusion of F-15 and A-10 in WOE gave the game modern avionics that can be used for a lot of other aircraft

[column5 62]

Have you considered that instead of having thirdwire do the work, maybe you can use the money to pay them a license, and form a team of volunteers to do the work? Maybe even hire TK as a consultant. It could be cheaper that way (although I admit that it could be a lot harder to accomplish). Just an idea

 

A really interesting idea. My only concern would be that managing programmers is sort of like herding cats...

[DWCAce 19]

I'm liking what I'm reading here, it has certainly captivated my interest. I'd pay for another in depth sim ( I loved the detail of F4, granted it is extreme! :) ). Being and F-14 nut I'd like to see that, but the F-4 would probably be better, seeing as how there are still (friendly) countries flying it.

[Erwin_Hans 6]

Community produced game is a good idea

But what Community do is based on a important basic.....

The basic structure

 

I think if someone made a basic structure,and open it to community

than........everyone will be a MODer to product new game....

 

I think,if the game pays community enough,than community would do it.

 

But there is still a pig problem in Community produced Game

 

That is "Still need two weeks",You can't control a community MODer when to complete his part......

 

-Erwin.Hans

[Stwa 18]

No, this is purely hypothetical, although I am serious about the idea.

 

Well, I think you have enough of an idea, consolidated in your mind to create some marketing pages at your site and to approach TK now.

 

I think what you are planning pretty much hinges on whether he can find the time to do this. Having $250,000 K rolling in is bound to interest him somehow. If you get his buy in, then your site already receives donations, so you just fix it so it take pre-orders, albeit delivery is a long way out. If after a few months, nothing is rolling in then you can always cancel and refund 49.00 out of 50.00 or whatever you need to cover pay-pal expenses etc..

 

If TK doesn't buy in, then I am sure, the situation will look different to you.

[Icarus999 70]

True, true...

 

TK's sim is generally "detailed" enough as far as aircraft, as streakeagle has shown in his/her F-4 flight models. The avionics is light, but more important needs are...

 

Ramp up the AI coding, add things like abstracted air-air refueling for player and AI, working ground radars that function as a basic ground control intercept for AI (see even the old 1995 Su-27 Flaker sims), stuff like that. Maybe even a mission editor inside the sim that can use these newer features.

 

All this can deepen the air warfare environment far more than having one or two "detailed" player planes.

 

EDIT -- abstracted air-air refueling would be something like a designated "tanker" aircraft flying waypoints, and any AI aircraft that comes within, say, 10km of that tanker gets instantly refueled. Although it sounds 'lite' it adds very hardcore mission features such as AI aircraft having to find a tanker...actually getting close to a tanker and flying formation waiting for fuel could be restricted to player plane if desired.

 

Another need is for AI aircraft to actually stop flying when they run out of fuel!

 

Exactly, this series kicks serious butt in the aircraft detail department, what is needed is an expanded user (noob) friendly mission editor that gives the user a mission-with a target or a series of them and allows him to assign flights of appropriate aircraft to attack these targets.

 

I am new here and perhaps a bit naive about what can be accomplished on reasonable development budget but it strikes me that the current series is an incredible starting point. After seeing the photoreal terrain from razbam, the incredible Siberian sun/ sky mods from lexx_luther and the fantastic aircraft/ campaigns/missions you have teamed up to build it seems that if you guys had T.K. on board and worked as a unit the sim you could produce would be revolutionary…

 

let's say it it is a desert storm type mission, the player in this mode gets the option of assigning different types of aircraft to sets of targets to complete the overall objective. He can pilot any plane in the mission while AI pilots attack the other targets- perhaps the player could also toggle back and forth between cockpits-

 

So for instance-

F-117's and F-4G wildweasles take out the SAM defenses

 

AH -64 apaches take out anti aircraft artillery in selected areas then work with A-10s to take out

tanks in others

 

F-15c's fly mig cap at one side of the map while F-14d's fly mig cap at another

 

F-18/ F-16/ F-111/ tornado/ A-7/ A-6/ Av-8b/ A-4 units each have a pre programmed ground

 

target to hit yet are free to be called in on a new target after they hit their programmed target

 

B-52's carpet bomb troop emplacements

 

RF-4 phantoms recon the targets after the strikes and also provide real time intelligence

on troop/ armor units movement

 

All of the previous aircraft mods work just like WOV, WOE and Strike Fighters but they can be included in the mission editor - So if a player wants to get creative and add a mod like the fantastic F-4S-L Phantom mod and put a USMC reserve skin on it- Ala 1991-it is just drop in and play.

 

The strategy planning target assigning mode as referenced above is an addition to normal single mission game play, so that someone who lacks the attention span to plan an elaborate multi element attack can just jump right into a standard single mission style game such as what already exists on Wings over Europe.

 

Imagine the multiplayer possibilities!

 

Also consider:

for beginners who want to move beyond arcade style and actually learn to fly.

A flight tutorial mission

A top gun - fighter weapons school random mission generator

A bombing range

[Roberto Skylord 1]

I was daydreaming a little bit tonight, and had this thought. I don't know if is even remotely feasible, but here it is.

 

Suppose that a group of trusted people in the Strike Fighters community got together and incorporated a business with the intention of producing a flight simulator.

 

Well, just putting some spice in your daydreaming, you already saw The Combat Simulator Project (CSP) link?

The development seems very slow, seeing more like a study tools for the community, but being an Open Source project I believe that it can be modified to make a study sim of F-4 Phantom or whatever desired aircraft. The version that I tested sometime ago had a Mirage 2000 as aircraft to fly. What's the extension of the work to make it, I don't know and maybe can't be possible make some money with it, but very pieces of simulator are already in hand.

[+Typhoid 231]

one comment. Don't focus on campaigns or missions. Those can and are being developed all the time by the community here for free. Any such project should focus on the core game engine improvements such as Multi-player, system improvements, etc. In other words, don't spend money on what modders are doing for free.

[column5 62]

Since this discussion has turned out to be pretty interesting, I'm going run a couple of polls...

[+Jug 99]

one comment. Don't focus on campaigns or missions. Those can and are being developed all the time by the community here for free. Any such project should focus on the core game engine improvements such as Multi-player, system improvements, etc. In other words, don't spend money on what modders are doing for free.

 

This whole thread is really good. I hope it does not end up a puff of smoke. I was thinking about sims in general and how I would compare my actual experiences flying to my sim experiences and it all comes back to the same thing. Fighter pilots, these days, never work as a lone wolf. Air operations are never lone wolf or single flight operations. If there is a way to imerse the pilot in air operations over a theater where there are multiple types of aircraft on multiple missons over a hotly contested area where performance contributes to overall victory or defeat and getting to a tanker or to a location for a "hot turn" really affects the outcome is where a sim would have the capability to stand out. A two ship or four ship is really part of a major air operation and targets of opportunity abound. While it may sound daunting at first, it is untouched turf in the sim world. FACs that really do FAC duties, escort duty that is real escort duty. Airplanes are mobile artillery and their main job is to move dirt. One-on-one fighter stuff rarely occurs and if it does, one of the sides has to dump his payload to fight and, therefore, has lost the fight before the first maneuver. Integrated air defenses rarely are 'integrated' and any jet in the air is fair game to a AAA site or SAM site with even minor communications difficulties. Rescue ops are right in the middle of the larger war is much more interesting than a stand-alone mission. When the landing rollout includes wiping sweat off of your nose, you're getting close. Does anybody see what I mean. Any other real flyer out there see what I mean?

[+starfighter2 112]

Nice idea C5. I will support that kind of community produced game. But, if I can choose which AC will be sim "main" thingo - I will take F-14, not F-4.

[FastCargo 412]

This whole thread is really good. I hope it does not end up a puff of smoke. I was thinking about sims in general and how I would compare my actual experiences flying to my sim experiences and it all comes back to the same thing. Fighter pilots, these days, never work as a lone wolf. Air operations are never lone wolf or single flight operations. If there is a way to imerse the pilot in air operations over a theater where there are multiple types of aircraft on multiple missons over a hotly contested area where performance contributes to overall victory or defeat and getting to a tanker or to a location for a "hot turn" really affects the outcome is where a sim would have the capability to stand out. A two ship or four ship is really part of a major air operation and targets of opportunity abound. While it may sound daunting at first, it is untouched turf in the sim world. FACs that really do FAC duties, escort duty that is real escort duty. Airplanes are mobile artillery and their main job is to move dirt. One-on-one fighter stuff rarely occurs and if it does, one of the sides has to dump his payload to fight and, therefore, has lost the fight before the first maneuver. Integrated air defenses rarely are 'integrated' and any jet in the air is fair game to a AAA site or SAM site with even minor communications difficulties. Rescue ops are right in the middle of the larger war is much more interesting than a stand-alone mission. When the landing rollout includes wiping sweat off of your nose, you're getting close. Does anybody see what I mean. Any other real flyer out there see what I mean?

 

Jug,

 

I see exactly what you mean. The closest in terms of a campaign engine that this has gotten is the Falcon 4.0 series, with with EECH/EEAH series a close second. The only problem with these sims is that they are VERY complex, esp F4AF and so appeal to only a limited audience. I think the TW series campaign engine strikes a better balance...maybe could use some slight beefing up...

 

FastCargo

[column5 62]

One thing I think it is important to remember is that we all enjoy these sims because they are fun, not because they are realistic. Changing that equation could be dangerous. In my own opinion, fun should always trump realism--even while we are trying to increase realism, nothing should be implemented that isn't fun or interesting to do in the game.

[JediMaster 451]

Well, here's the main thing...a complex campaign system does NOT require complex avionics system modeling.

You could take TK's planes, terrain, modeling, etc and mate it with an F4-style campaign and it would work. Likewise you can take a plane as complicated as the one in F4 and give it a bare bones SP/MP game to go with it. In fact, it was done, and it was called Back to Baghdad. Anyone remember it? No? That's because it was like flying a REAL F-16 simulator. All the switches, bells and whistles, accurate systems and all, but outside the cockpit was NOTHING. Horrible terrain, AI, campaigns, etc. Oh, and it was $100.

 

I'm not saying it doesn't cost as much or even more to make a fancy campaign as it does to make fancy systems modeling, just that a fancy campaign does NOT require the "study" that advanced systems do.

[Sixgun 0]

I am in agreement that TK's system as a base is pretty much ideal, and that what most of us want and lack are some added capabilities like AAR, helicopters, fully implemented carrier ops, and a real multiplay capability. Maybe larger maps, and a more complete damage model. Anyone remember loosing their hydraulics in Fighters Anthology?

 

I played Janes' Fighers Anthology for a lot of years even after "better sims" came out just because of all the things you could do with it.

Edited February 13, 2008 by Sixgun

[+malibu43 142]

This whole thread is really good. I hope it does not end up a puff of smoke. I was thinking about sims in general and how I would compare my actual experiences flying to my sim experiences and it all comes back to the same thing. Fighter pilots, these days, never work as a lone wolf. Air operations are never lone wolf or single flight operations. If there is a way to imerse the pilot in air operations over a theater where there are multiple types of aircraft on multiple missons over a hotly contested area where performance contributes to overall victory or defeat and getting to a tanker or to a location for a "hot turn" really affects the outcome is where a sim would have the capability to stand out. A two ship or four ship is really part of a major air operation and targets of opportunity abound. While it may sound daunting at first, it is untouched turf in the sim world. FACs that really do FAC duties, escort duty that is real escort duty. Airplanes are mobile artillery and their main job is to move dirt. One-on-one fighter stuff rarely occurs and if it does, one of the sides has to dump his payload to fight and, therefore, has lost the fight before the first maneuver. Integrated air defenses rarely are 'integrated' and any jet in the air is fair game to a AAA site or SAM site with even minor communications difficulties. Rescue ops are right in the middle of the larger war is much more interesting than a stand-alone mission. When the landing rollout includes wiping sweat off of your nose, you're getting close. Does anybody see what I mean. Any other real flyer out there see what I mean?

 

I aggree.

 

I think the TW series could be a much more satisfying experience if the A/C, flight modeling, and avionics were left alone (we'll maybe tweaked a little and made more in depth) and the only change was a more immersive dynamic campaign experience similar to that of F4AF. More communication/cooperation with other flights, more missions being carried out at the same time (ie - things happening along the way to the target, not just once you get there).

 

I usually find myself only being able to play one or two campaign missions a day, since the trip to and from the target area are pretty much the same every time ( zzzzzzz....).

Edited February 13, 2008 by malibu43

[Thog10 0]

If it's too much based on study, it won't be as popular and you might run into trouble getting people to buy it. One-plane biased games have never really done well. I'd put in the F-4 for studies and a bunch of planes from the downloads section for publicity. The F-14, -22 and others are good enough.

 

 

I remember that the approach taken with the Jane's USNF/ATF/FA series was to have their "core aircraft" be flyable while all others were easily made flyable through a "cheat." (No more than a selectable menu in the last versions.)

 

It seems to me that much of the efforts of modders in less-moddable sims is to make those AI aircraft flyable even if it means using a F-15 cockpit as you take a spin in a F/A-18. Might giving players a similar "cheat" allow the purists to claim that the sim is a "study sim" while making those hungry to fly everything with wings happy?

 

One other thought: does any one else miss story and plot in flight sims? Perhaps I am only looking back on the "good old days," but I seem to remember more attention to setting the scene. I wonder what could be done to enhance the immersion experiance without big studio $$$ on hand?

[Rambler 1-1 9]

my point is that if you make a sim with a couple of really detailed planes in there, you could make it more appealing just by adding in some already-made planes. They would make for more interesting AI, and you could fly them too, because I found they are just as good as some of the stock planes.

 

Thog, the problem (as far as I see) isn;t making other planes flyable: you can tell that just by looking in the downloads section. I think everybody is trying to decide what to do with this sim, what the focus should be, ect. Also, a storyline is a good idea, but it'd be tough to integrate (I think) and we don't really want another Ace Combat.

 

However, adding a charachter for a campaign wouldn't be a bad idea. It could help showcase the highlighted planes.

[Viper6 3]

I would definatley support you guys. 1 down 4,999 to go

I'm in. 4,998 to go!!