PRESS RELEASE PRE-PURCHASE “DCS: A-10C WARTHOG”

[Cali 6]

Get it here http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.co...r=shop&lang=en

[MigBuster 2,861]

Love this:

 

Recommended system requirements: OS: Windows 7 64; CPU: Intel Core i7-970; RAM: 4+ GB; Graphics: 512+ MB ATI HD4850+ or nVidia GTX260+; Sound card; 6 GB of free space on HDD; Copy protected, requires internet activation; Joystick.

 

 

[JediMaster 451]

Interesting that 64-bit is recommended. Actually, none of that is too off the wall other than the CPU.

[+Dave 2,318]

I can run it.

[GwynO 16]

I might just have been unlucky, but I've learnt to take ED recommended/minimum specs and triple them. I knew when I first got LOMAC that it was pushing it as my laptop was right on the border of the minimum specs. I invested in a desktop with considerably higher specs almost exclusively because I wanted to play LOMAC that bad, I must have changed everything inside that tower, new GPU, new RAM, new processor, new PSU, in the end exceeding many of the recommended specs, certainly processor and RAM, think my graphics card was was a model or two off, anyway point was all that improved was going from not loading at all, to loading and immediate CTD, to loading and being a total slide show for a few minutes then as soon as anything actually happens, freeze and CTD.

 

When DCS came out, I snapped it up knowing full well my laptop was again at the low end, I bought it just to show my support for what by all accounts was a fantastically detailed quality product. I upgraded my laptop but it's still nowhere near playable even in windowed mode with all settings turned down.. it still grinds to a halt and CTD.

 

I recognise the quality of their products just from watching the gameplay videos on Youtube, but wonder how many disappointed gamers are going to have to spend 1000% of the title price just on upgrading their machines , maybe even then still just struggling on lower settings. I'll still be buying it though, call me stupid but in this day and age where we don't have the likes of Tornado and Falcon, any detailed sim like this gets all the support I can give. Eventually... I hope I'll one day be able to afford a rig that can run the things!

[MigBuster 2,861]

Well if its any consolation - those recommended specs above run Falcon 4:AF just fine at full whack

[GwynO 16]

Well if its any consolation - those recommended specs above run Falcon 4:AF just fine at full whack

 

Aye, I've been blown away by how smooth both AF and FF have been for what they deliver! With the right after market mods to prettify them both, they come pretty close to satisfying my itch for a proper DCS type experience... plus Greece and Israel theatres = very, very, very happy flyer

 

Can't wait to see some more videos of this one from ED, the A-10 is one of those beasts I would gladly devote years learning how to use properly. I wonder where they go after this? Back to Russian stuff, forward or back in time? I wish to God they made a DCS A-6, F-111, Phantom and oh so many others, with player modable terrains and so forth so we could have El dorado Canyon missions with all the switchology and procedures... I think I'd better go lie down....

[JediMaster 451]

Other than the 2 released ones, the only ones I've heard mentioned officially were the A-10A and AH-64 (but no model letter). I'd really like the Apache to complement the Ka-50, but I'll go for pretty much anything they're likely to pick. I must say A-6, F-4, and F-111 are not likely.

[GwynO 16]

Aye,whatever they go for next, so long as it continues in the current high fidelity vein, I'm sure it will be awesome. I'd be wary if they went the sci fi route and tried to take some educated guesses to make Fifth Gen stuff. I'm dreading the advent in the coming years of an F-22 sim that sets itself up as "realistic", cue factionalism and flame wars galore as the arm chair OF-9s start pixel counting the virtual MFDs.. whoever went that route would probably throw in the towel ala Microprose with Flanker 4.

 

It's a shame that the older stuff is being ignored, after all, there's so much more readily available, good quality information about the vast majority of what would be needed to make a very authentic Cold War conflict scenario, especially if it's focusing on the smaller conflicts, incidents and so on. (Well, as authentic as anything can be when it's behind a screen)

 

It seems they're really set on the Georgian/Caucasus theatre, having the Hokum, Warthog and Apache make a lot of sense. They have most of the work for a DCS Frogfoot done, so that would free up more time/money for them to concentrate on something else for that setting too.. I would love a Strike Eagle, but even that I guess would go maybe too far into educated guesses, so how about an early variant Fulcrum for the Georgian side of things? Or.. Vipers!

 

DCS A-10C is bringing a change of setting by the looks of it with Nevada which is brilliant, but you won't see many Hokums flying around Nevada, so for a more believable setting to integrate the various DCS components (and cheaper to make out of what's already done) they could shift the focus a little earlier in time to the Balkans. I'll say it again.... Vipers!

And Bombcats!

 

Well, whatever happens next, count me in. (Goes to search for a job to make some disposable income )

Edited October 5, 2010 by GwynO

[Cali 6]

Other than the 2 released ones, the only ones I've heard mentioned officially were the A-10A and AH-64 (but no model letter). I'd really like the Apache to complement the Ka-50, but I'll go for pretty much anything they're likely to pick. I must say A-6, F-4, and F-111 are not likely.

 

Where did you hear that from?

[JediMaster 451]

When I say "officially" I meant "possible routes bandied about by people in ED or TFC online as hypotheticals." The fact that they brought up those specifically meant to me there were seen as feasible products. The ones Gwyno mentioned were NOT and therefore I doubt their probability is in the double digits.

 

I flew F-22s in games in the 90s and they were pretty fair about it. You know it can supercruise over M1.5, it has powerful engines with TVC, it's hard to see on radar but IR missiles still have a chance, agile, and has a LPI radar and datalink that lets it see enemies and fire on them before they see the F-22 and fire back. The cockpit is all glass, so whether or not the symbology and pages were accurate wasn't really that important as I've heard they can be customized by the pilot to some extent anyway, it's just software. I don't anticipate seeing the F-22 in DCS as a flyable (although perhaps as an AI like in Falcon), but I thought iF-22 was a very good sim from about 12 years back.

 

No, my guess is DCS will have 4th gen fighters and equivalent attack, transports, and helos. I think 3rd gen and earlier will be left to TK and others.

[+Dave 2,318]

Looks like they released the Beta Manual. Its awesome!

[dsawan 613]

Yep, looks awesome. I was hoping for the cobra gunship or hueys as an module in future after the apache or a F-4.

[+Dave 2,318]

This is the hardest by far of any sim I have flown. Yet it's a blast to play.

[MigBuster 2,861]

Thats good to hear - need a challenge - besides I cant imagine its ever been easy being an A-10 since it came in.

[+Dave 2,318]

MB if you are on the fence about, I say get it. There is going to be a beta first look by Rugg and I on the site this week.

[+Spectre_USA 7]

Preview in the next couple of weeks over at CombatSim.com as well.

 

I am diggin' the stuffings out of flying out of Nellis.

 

I just hope the Indian Springs annex gets a bit of loving as well, as I've flown in and out of there a few times.

 

Groom Lake is usable, but could use a bit of tightening up as well.

 

Have you done any ramp starts outside of the training, Dave? I had `em both spinning this morning, and watched then spool

down as soon as I shut down the APU.

 

This is not survey or light sim by any stretch. I have so missed these study types!

[+Dave 2,318]

I haven't tried any ramp start ups. After Falcon 4.0 ramp starts do not interest me much. I just spent the last 3 hours on weapons employment. I got the mavericks and dropping bombs in CCIP mode wrkign well. Still trying to learn how to use LGB's through the LP and how to use CCRP wit the JDAM's.

[+Spectre_USA 7]

That is pretty much where I'm exploring as well.

 

Mav's I have yet to tackle, but have CCIP and gun runs going fairly well.

 

Except for the CM rounds not being Combat Mix but Caramelized Marshmallows.

 

I got 3 good runs on some BMP's before coming in to work tonight, the debrief shows hits on all, but no kills. Didn't even

scratch the paint. I worked on the Gau-8 for 3 years and know those big buggers would have creamed those tin cans.

 

No labels or anything, just a zoom in and nose close to the monitor, so I know they hit.

 

Anyway, good fun, am digging getting back into a study sim, as it has been a LONG time!

[+Dave 2,318]

Spec

 

I would post those finds about the GAU-8 on the beta forum because I also ran into the same issue. I think your background with working on them will carry alot of weight in getting that corrected. A GAU-8 should of split those BMP's open like sticking a pencil through aluminum foil.

 

 

[JediMaster 451]

The A-10s gun ripped thru everything but MBT's with ease in FC2, and even MBTs it usually only took 2-3 passes to get them to catch fire. I'm surprised they dialed it back that much.

[+Dave 2,318]

Hey JM, did you survive the dog piling you got at SimHQ? Sheesh some of those comments were rough.

[JediMaster 451]

I think so.

Some of the mods over there know me well and apparently stood up for me as I was being seriously misunderstood. I never saw all of what happened because it was apparently edited out, but you'd think I'd expressed the opinion that Hitler was actually a pretty good guy or something. Apparently my association with this site colored some opinions as well, which is ridiculous because while I'm aware of the feelings some here have to SimHQ I've never been a party to them. You have your opinions, I have mine, none are to be belittled, but that's that. I was never a mod there, but I've been there for almost 10 years. I've seen a lot of people have serious disagreements over that time, it happens.

My irritation at the time probably led me to type more than was necessary and ramble a bit, but it boiled down to: I like Black Shark, I'm getting A-10C because I know I will like that, but I've just had my faith in ED shaken by their statements about the future of DCS and the apparent abandonment of whatever was supposed to follow A-10C (because 2 yrs ago it was said the 3rd DCS module would be out in 18 months, and you CAN'T think of a timetable like that without having something in the pipeline half-done already). Then I read that they said whatever comes next will depend on getting a military sim contract for it and I lost it. Almost no other sim devs have needed a military contract to make a sim, including ED itself just a few years ago, so I don't understand that at ALL.

I support sims by buying them, not playing sycophant to the developer. As someone who buys them, I then feel I have a voice in the future plans of the company as opposed to being the guy in the corner saying "I won't buy it until they put plane X in theater Y in" plus I'm feeding funds back into the company for said development. The whole "you should be thankful they make anything for you to buy, and you should pay 2x as much and be happy about it!!" attitude doesn't fly with me. If I think a company I've supported for 15 years with my money is losing their vision, I'm going to speak up and say so, regardless of whether they or anyone else agrees that they are. I don't think they "owe" me any more than I "owe" them loyalty, but any intelligently run company is going to want to hear their customers' feedback even if they decide not to factor it into their path.

 

Remember, if you build it, they will come (unless they get this bizarre hatred of the Caucasus and won't buy a plane they like because it's NOT set in Europe).

But if ED doesn't build it, no one else will either. The study sim market has contracted beyond the minimum.

[+Dave 2,318]

I think so.

Some of the mods over there know me well and apparently stood up for me as I was being seriously misunderstood. I never saw all of what happened because it was apparently edited out, but you'd think I'd expressed the opinion that Hitler was actually a pretty good guy or something. Apparently my association with this site colored some opinions as well, which is ridiculous because while I'm aware of the feelings some here have to SimHQ I've never been a party to them. You have your opinions, I have mine, none are to be belittled, but that's that. I was never a mod there, but I've been there for almost 10 years. I've seen a lot of people have serious disagreements over that time, it happens.

 

I thought that might of been the case and I apologize to you that you had to be a victim of that whole "guilty by association" thing. You've never had a part in the discord between the sites and for them to hold that against you is wrong (if they did) but I am to blame for that. You have been there for 10 years and I would of hope they would of treated you better knowing that.

[GwynO 16]

Its not the only forum that's seeing bitchy fits over this sim. Its so stupid, for years people have been bemoaning the dirth of jet study sims, now they have one some demented fools are are hell bent on slating it before the final release out of loyalty to some archaic (if still fun) game made decades ago. On the other side of the "Spectrum of Stupiduty" ^tm you have the ultra ED fascists who won't tolerate even a hint of constructive criticism. Jedi is perfectly entitled to his concerns, if you purchase a product, you are in effect putting bread on the developers and publishers tables therefore if they value their product, and by extension their livelihood, they will want to listen to what people have to say. Everybody has the right to an opinion, the trouble only starts when people are unwilling to allow others to have theirs too, usually out of some misplaced sense of loyalty to a particular game or dev.

 

I don't see why people can't just enjoy multiple sims/games for their individual merits, they're not like religions where you have to be on one side or the other.. Even if one day, I have a rig that can play this, I will still be playing FF, AF and Thirdwire sims for their own unique pros that no one sim would be able to deliver in one package, doesn't mean you're a traitor to one side or another, it just means you appreciate variety is the spice of life, same holds true for forums, people (just like women) come in all shapes, sizes and flavours, no sense in people slating others just because they aren't exclusively "married" to one clique and not another. Aaaaanyway! More Pics!!

Edited October 12, 2010 by GwynO