The future of SF?

[DreyAzzov 11]

First off to compete with DCS they would have to move the game to steam. 

[FastCargo 412]

No.

 

The best way to compete is not to compete if you can help it.

 

Yes, Steam is the largest distribution service.  But it's not the only one.

 

GOG.com for instance is big in the gaming world.  And frankly, fits quite close to the TW series of approaching DRM...as in none.  Having the TW series on GOG would give it far more exposure than it currently has.  And GOG could take over hosting and distribution duties, in exchange for a cut of course.  If TK decides to shut down the PC part of the store...I can't see why he wouldn't go this way...it wouldn't (I don't think), cost him anything.

 

Second, don't do the same genre as everyone else...if you can fill an area that isn't being filled, so much the better.  For instance, don't bother with WWII...god and everyone has done it to death.  TK was smart in starting with the Vietnam war era aircraft.  No one is focusing on that theatre and era of air combat.  Heck, even now, no one is making any sort of serious incursion.  Up until recently, I would have also said the Korean Air War is an area ripe for a sim.  It still can be...a F-86 and a MiG-15 does not a KAW sim make.

 

The biggest issue with DCS is it's schizophrenic.  It's trying to be all things to all people, diluting the entire brand.  Yes, it has fantastic aircraft...what little that exist.  The only full scenario/theatre is the same one that first came out with the original Lock-On....over a DECADE ago.

 

Right now, except for that particular theatre, DCS remains a combat aircraft simulator, not an aircraft combat simulator.

FC

[Do335 382]

Oh a WW2 title made out of SF/FE can differentiate itself I think so. WW2 is a large cake like modern and the other ww2 titles has shortcomings. Il2 is a bit old, lacks dynamic campaign and I fear right now with SAS making most content is the issue of stability, as in every other open source-ish projects. The lack of campaign functions in IL2BoS is apparently criticized as well. IL2Clod is almost multiplayer/virtual squadrons only. War thunder focuses entirely on casual gamers and online types. However! The problem is are the ppl favoring campaigns just a few individuals congregating on SimHQ or is there a larger demand potential. Korea YES. I'm trying to mod but certainly if I can buy it and spend my free time flying then superb so personally wanna see it more. The problem much like Mig Alley and the later BDG group that never gained much popularity with MA is that how many ppl will care about the forgotten war on the western side or if they're willing to expand to the treacherous Russian/Chinese market... DCS is comfortable with it due to, I reckon strong DRM and geopolitics.

Edited April 11, 2015 by Do335

[+Stary 2,427]

Hypothetically I think GOG is a much better platform by it's very nature aims towards more mature customers base.

I have no problems imagining Steam re-release of SF2 bundle with dozens of prerelease reviews like "tiz game iz brokah!!! fix it!!!1111", you know how, let's say it politely, younger players react

 

Do335 with all respect CFS3 is superior than SF2 in many areas not only graphics wise (especially when you put WOFF libraries and shaders into bare/modded CFS3!!!). As you tend to point towards WW2 SF2 title -how about -zero- options for switching pilot's station or manning defense turrets? Also no way to have bailout animation is immediate immersion killer for me in such case. More than in jet era. In my book SF2 is like Streak says it is -from post war around '48 (Israel's first war) through Korea to late 60s, ok make it end of Nam so mid 70s. I have hard time recollecting other flight simulator that rivals SF2 in the avionics and missiles fidelity in this timeframe. Post 90s it's not that great I think, that's why I stay from this timeframe -lack of even simple EO sensors slewing, ground locks etc you know. I think 99.5% post 90s aerial warfare was "accurately dropping this into that window from here" kind of engagements, maaaybe with 2008 Russia-Georgia and ongoing green men-Ukraine just bit less sophisticated

 

As for DCS playability, well I still am battling with myself regarding buying the Sabre and 109K as I see that after the first 30 minutes to hour of uberhype after buying MiG-15 or 21Bis (about 100 bucks for two planes...) I can't say I was flying them later on past the 2 hours flytime mark. And that is my BIG issue with anything DCS -right now I treat is as a pricey way to have handy zoomable reference data for cockpits modelling

[Do335 382]

Stary, yes CFS and IL2 does much better as ww2 dedicated sims with much larger budgets, but my point is with proper marketing the campaign engine can differentiate SF enough to get a slice. In fact with source code and resource available I suppose one can enhance the lacking areas enough to a proper sim (or at least one that'll look good in feature list and poster screenshots) to any era like TK supposedly wished the things he'd done but never did, and it'd be hard not to make a good game due to the underlying campaign engine and gameplay features, just technically guestimating that probably it'd be easiest with Korea, while missile and ww2 era more complicated.

 

Otoh every game has its intricacies... it's 99% away from the full blown matrix after all but with enough exposure ppl would know it. Exactly why TW games never got enough of that I'm not clear and guess you guys have a better idea of it. I just know atm that these games are hugely undersold, and one reason I suspect is due to the fact that gamers are generally unwilling to, pay, for a good AI, missions and campaign engines.

 

right now I treat is as a pricey way to have handy zoomable reference data for cockpits modelling

LOL that's also the reason I'm sometimes tempted to buying to use it as reference material.

 

...

 

Which cockpit?!!!...

Edited April 11, 2015 by Do335

[+Stary 2,427]

Ok, this will be longer than usual and a bit of a rant. But I'll try to make this funny for you.

 

Maybe SF series are underexposed beyond sane reasons because, get this, TK doesn't want them to be more exposed? What if he never wanted?

 

Allow this thought to sink in in you head for a while...

 

done? Good

 

See, I have never ever seen a single SF or SF2 series ad on the net on various flight simulatinons portals -while I am flooded with ads for, excuse moi, "who-gives-a-s**t Gold Dx10 Most Realistic Edition, We assure you Tom's drunken uncle's second wive's cousin flew it back in '64 so we know it's as good as it gets" plane for FSX/P3D/P3D2 or XP9/10 by ArmchairExpertsStudioNumberSeventeen*

 

In fact I was quite suprised when Series2 sort of quietly rolled through late 2008 till 2010 and I have not been exposed to numerous ads and banners encouraging me to try "fun survey simulatiors series covering classic jets era from 1950s to 1970" or something akin to that. Then I did what we SF afficionados are soo used to doing -that is, waiting. Waiting so maybe after he gets the base code for Series2 polished maybe around SF2:Israel he'll start flooding the sites with ads and links to his store. No? Ummm ok, let's wait a lil' more then! maybe he's keeping it low to shock the sims world with the bang of North Atl... ohh wait, nevermind. For me it is and has (allways?) been waiting for the guy to step in and deliver.

 

Then, let me expose you to the familiar main menu screen of North Atlantic:

 

 

Yup that. Need more cowbells. I mean JJ's lens flares. Or Christophers Walkens at this point. Walken and Abrams walks into a bar. Nevermind

 

But you know what that screen says? That person that made it doesn't give a s**t about the main menu screen in the title they were working on for past months. It isn't the obscure credits screen, it isn't the campaign loss screen either. It's the screen every. single. customer will be exposed to first and 300th time they launch Strike Fighters 2 North Atlantic executable.

 

See, my point is -it's a very lazy screen. 10-15 minutes of PS screen. The stick randomly first font we can pick from the fonts pool screen.

 

Kind of "I no longer give a single afterthought what you will think of this main menu layout and graphics" screen. The "I am bored with this" screen. The "I don't care at this point what the one who might review this title on SimHQ will get as first impression" screen.

 

Back on track but that was relevant:

Maybe TK got just tired with running the forums, having to answer the newcomers this or that or dealing with community in general? Maybe TK got, who I am kidding at this point, he seemed fed up with modders and their silly questions and proposals and God forbit requests long time ago? The odd disappearance of forums on Thirdwire site was an indicator for me. Funny as in the first place as oldtimers know it was the dedicated modders who made the series bloom with all them mods.

 

Sorry for not much of a productive post but I just realised early April of 2005 was the first time I ran Wings Over Vietnam. And the sucker stayed with me through all the firther incarnations till this point. 10 fucking years. So I think I have right to rant from time to time.

 

And I still can't see my sorry ass after ejecting

 

*forgive me small pun aimed towards certain XP10 sites that constantly flood me with ads like that. Ohh well might be I aim it as the "hardcore" crowd in general too

[Do335 382]

waiting

lol...2 weeks eh. Anyway Im sorry mate. Take care Stary.

 

 

 

As for TK well, perhaps he's tired of the old big budget days and just wanna do his own thing. Open modding support are something that games that wanna profit rarely do now. Neither is a robust AI and mission/campaign system. TK did them all and very well and devoutly supported modding. Perhaps he didn't wanna go big at all but just something he liked. ...Then perhaps along the way he got tired of doing his own thing, as if the lack of funds and workload placed on him finally got too much. Anyway that's the impression I got reading his posts thus far.

Edited April 12, 2015 by Do335

[+Stary 2,427]

as if the lack of funds and workload

ummm... wait, isn't the whole thing behind advertising a hope to gather more funds from increased exposure sales? As for workload I wonder what would happen back in say SF2 development phases if someone with good knowledge of either programming and say modelling or say texture artists approached him with offer to work for him on SF series? You know things that happen when the titles series you work on get more net exposure via advertising. Cause and effect etc

[Do335 382]

^Yeah that's a (internal?) question only TK can answer I suppose. If ventured a guess he wasn't hiring.

 

http://bbs.thirdwire.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=7664&p=48249&hilit=coder#p48249

http://bbs.thirdwire.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=7303&p=45532&hilit=months+artwork+behind#p45532

...

 

He is the only coder and apparently the only tech support.

 

 

But there could be merit in his thinking. Flight simming, wargaming etc, like many other hobbies actually, are niche of niche. A company can throw $$$ outta for ads and get minimal returns. I've seen other game buiz owners with same line of thinking. I think Tk's focus market is even smaller due to nature of his game.

 

And heck Stary, TW is around for more than a decade. And it's still around for mobile. TK hasn't had a bad run at all I reckon.

Edited April 12, 2015 by Do335

[+Geezer 3,569]

ummm... wait, isn't the whole thing behind advertising a hope to gather more funds from increased exposure sales? As for workload I wonder what would happen back in say SF2 development phases if someone with good knowledge of either programming and say modelling or say texture artists approached him with offer to work for him on SF series? You know things that happen when the titles series you work on get more net exposure via advertising. Cause and effect etc

 

I've been following this thread with great interest but, until now, didn't have anything to add to the discussion. I've had experience designing GUIs for big aerospace corporations' software programs and found that guys that are good with "hard" code are frequently not good with "soft" requirements such as graphics or promotion/advertising. Its a right brain/left brain thing - their minds just don't work that way.  Stary's comments about the lack luster screen above are a case in point.  The screen's appearance probably won't tempt a buyer who is unfamiliar with the virtues of TW products.  It ain't fair, but that's how life works. 

 

Generally speaking, TK's stuff has always been graphically challenged - roughly 5-10 years behind what might be called the state of the art.  Yes, the guys commenting on this thread see past that, but you are talking about attracting NEW sim enthusiasts who don't know what TW guys know.  What does such a person see when they almost accidentally stumble across TW?  They see graphics that, in some ways, don't even measure up to the IL-2 releases of the mid-oughts.  Note that I am not a big fan of IL-2 but, to be clinically accurate, IL-2 has frequently set the visual standard for flight sims. 

 

An energetic and well thought out promotion effort could partially compensate for this deficiency: "Look under the hood, and see the essential goodness of the TW system."

[ZoltanTheHun 101]

I do not necessarily think that the graphics of the series matter that much. Yeah, the ground was not that great in most parts of the series, but in my opinion, in the air, it still can look really gorgeous. One problem though that the engine is old and it could push more on modern architectures, so a new engine would be welcome. I often wonder what would it be if the game had the graphics of the Wargame series, that would be great, but....

 

Smaller and cheaper improvements could be easily made in my opinion. Like:

1. Get the MiG-23 HUD working. (In addition I never understood why TK never made Red campaigns available by default, a WoV Red campaign would have been fantastic and hugely challenging)

2. Campaign extensions. These again do not require that much effort I think, you do not need new models or anything, Simply what if you could be in charge of the Air Command? What if you could organize the campaign? Let's expand on the concept of the mercenary campaign, and have a campaign where you have a mission with goals like bomb this and that, than you have to select all the aircraft involved(though maybe it is interesting only in the heart of the more strategic minded people).

3. We need a mod central(similar to steam workshop). This is again good, because it is a single programmers job, so no additional people involved. The great thing for TK was, that all the things here are fan made. He should just ask the money for the coding, all else is basically provided by the community. Now mods would be stored at one place and people could up-vote planes on accuracy, and we could integrate all the weapons and terrains into packages. (Actually this can be done right now, without any TK involvement, maybe there is already some software like partially providing this functionality, it is just that I am not aware of it)

4. Get back multiplay. This is a tough one because of the coding difficulties involved with that. However, with my previous 2 points together, imagine a dynamic campaign system, where people can select certain aircraft and  fly the missions all over together and against each other with a persistent online map. That would be great.(I am not sure if any game has this on the market right now without some kind of community made tools, probably yes, but here the point is making it convenient for people to join one)

5. More radio commands, like cancelling mission. Custom voices(maybe it is already possible). I think the community could put together some really great stuff in this regard.

 

 

Maybe some of this  is already there(esp sound mods), I am new to the community...

[+gerwin 451]

(In reply to Stary)

 

If you take three aspects of making SF games:

1- Coding.

2- Replicating real life objects based on reference material.

3- Filling in some bits with graphics based on artistic freedom.

IMO 1 and 2 is where Third Wire is very good at, and what I look for in a game/sim.

3 is where they are mediocre. Like the tilesets for Dhimar, Vietnam, GermanyCE. Like menu Backdrops. Like the Spacecraft in star vector.

Honestly, I found that if I do a lot of Coding or technical trouble shooting, my mind gets in state where things like artistic skill and even chatting suffers. Until you clear your head, Like sleep.

 

TK was most likely honest when he wrote repeatedly "it is about what we can afford".

Must says, I am generally content with the current state of the game. When I picked up the game in 2007 I really missed an Editor, Proper Naval War and Helicopters. Since 2012 it is only the helicopter part that remains.

 

 

Had a few silly ideas yesterday:

- Group of coders *including mue*, get access to a advanced source of Falcon (Derived from the leaked Falcon 4.0) and gradually adapt it to use the assets of SF2.

It remained closed source to protect the assets from piracy. The game was adjusted to have simplified take-off and landing procedures.

- An SF2 Modders group makes a top notch mod for SF2 with all the quality assurance of an AAA title, and a dedicated website and advertising campaign, which sparks such an interest that SF2 starts to sell, and ThirdWire picks up development again.

Edited April 12, 2015 by gerwin

[+Stary 2,427]

Gerwin funny as I was thinking from time to time about the 1) porting of selected top quality mods into other sim engine, my thinking being mostly CFS3 for Korea (I love that engine!) or DCS keeping the "lite" nature of the SF2 way things work 2) having a paid programmer willing to rewrite engine of SF2 3) rebuilding the SF2 as a whole in otehr engine suitable for the task be it freeware or not

 

these are more or less afficionado's lunacy and wishful thinking of course but hey, it's the way my mind talks with me sometimes

[+russouk2004 6,958]

Steam is ok but if it ever dies you are f***ed...and most steam games are then useless...standalone better

[+gerwin 451]

Gerwin funny as I was thinking from time to time about the

1) porting of selected top quality mods into other sim engine, my thinking being mostly CFS3 for Korea (I love that engine!) or DCS keeping the "lite" nature of the SF2 way things work

2) having a paid programmer willing to rewrite engine of SF2

3) rebuilding the SF2 as a whole in otehr engine suitable for the task be it freeware or not

 

these are more or less afficionado's lunacy and wishful thinking of course but hey, it's the way my mind talks with me sometimes

 

Rewriting everything from scratch is painful to think about. It is like repeating the programming hours of TK, maybe a little less because the game design / file structure is already decided. That is like giving half your working life to the project.

 

Falcon 4 is the interesting because the source is available. No such thing for CFS3 or DCS. No source means we'll have to take it as it is, until it dies out over the years, together with all that is invested in it. (fails to run on the next windows versions etc).

 

I haven' t tried CFS3/DCS myself. Sticking to Il-2 for WW2, SF for everything beyond. Did try Falcon BMS a little; it was difficult.

[+Stary 2,427]

there is also BOB code and Mig Alley code I think still available if you'd like to take a look

 

ohh and VSF framework

[+gerwin 451]

there is also BOB code and Mig Alley code I think still available if you'd like to take a look

 

ohh and VSF framework

 

Where are all the latest BOB + M0G Alley patches and source files? All links are dead.

 

VSF Framework looks cool. Too bad it is a commercial framework. Probably you can interface with it, but they won't give the real source.

 

Edit

Found these files for MiG Alley / Battle of Britain so far:

migalley.exe ; 13.162.532 ; Mig Alley original Source

mig123.exe ; 2.310.904 bytes ; Official Mig Alley Patch 1.23.

mig_085_f2.rar ; 2.703.700 bytes ; MiG Alley Executable v0.85, Dated 13-05-2005 by BDG, goes over Patch 1.23.

Bobsource2.exe ; 16.891.025 bytes ; Battle of Britain original Source

bob_v099.exe ; 61.750.076 bytes ; Battle of Britain patch 0.99 by BDG, Dated 01-01-2005.

Seems BDG ( Battle of Britain Development Group) does not publish the modified sources.

Edited April 12, 2015 by gerwin

[+streakeagle 871]

I loved what was done in BoB2 and wish that the planned P-40 Flying Tigers evolution of the sim had been done. DCS P-51/Bf109/Fw190 is great, but BoB2 is easily the equal in aircraft modeling and has fantastic dogfight AI. MiG Alley should have been brought up to the same standard as BoB2. They were also at one point planning on updating B-17, including the addition of multiplayer. Alas, all that is left are minor updates to BoB2.

[+Stary 2,427]

BOB2 has I think the best WW2 AI I experienced so far edit: Yeah I was soo hyped the BDG would take on Mig Alley later after polishing BOB2 but that felt into oblivion. I know they were planning Flying Tigers but that too somewhat went under radar few years ago.

 

Also based on BOB2 was an odd more arcadey (or lite in SF series sense) flight sim rerelease, have disc somewhere, Sky Defenders or something to taht effect was the name

 

RE: VSF -the Canvas Knights WW1 sim is developed in it with the cooperation of the VSF programmer to an extend. That is for me quinte an interesting platform for numerous reasons but the 3-years keys you loose after you (apprantly) install it on another system pissed be big time when I bought it in late 2010. There's freeware edition available that has time limit too of course plus it's again, quite interesting to look into for any flight simulation fans. Together with sea/underwater simulations etc, impressive for a one-man show.

Edited April 13, 2015 by Stary

[beachav8r 360]

Still catching up on this thread, but I think FC hit the nail on the head: you don't want to compete with DCS World with regards to FM or systems fidelity. Why would you? The SF series has always been about the gameplay and the ability to hop into a wide array of aircraft and theaters and be up and flying within minutes instead of tens of minutes. I'm a huge fan of DCS sims, but I see no reason to strive for that with TW sims. In fact - I'd argue that DCS would probably be well served to move more toward TW type gameplay in some aspects.

 

BeachAV8R

[Do335 382]

Yah Beach ask them to make out of fuel AI not crash and/or give them a speed bonus to stay in formation easier like TK did, so your wingman won't crash in the next AAR:p

 

If they're willing to take time off making switchology so it sells better to the "realism" stereotypes that is!

 

In fact - I'd argue that DCS would probably be well served to move more toward TW type gameplay in some aspects.

 

BeachAV8R

[beachav8r 360]

Yeah - they (ED) know about the AI fuel issue and it is being addressed.

 

Regarding Thidwire and TK - there is always another component beyond profitability that I think it important to consider. Among the various curves that you could use to plot game developing, there are two that are often used to make decisions - time invested vs. profit. On the mobility platform, I'd guess that maybe those curves intersect closer to the "profitability" regime of the graph. One thing that isn't perhaps plotted is the developer's personal goals and satisfaction. Say what you will about TK - but he's been plugging away (mostly alone) at this for decades now with pretty good results. I think he takes personal pride in his work and his work actually reflects that. Yes, there are some odd design choices like Stary has mentioned regarding the apparent laziness about updating the easy things like the menu interfaces..but overall the improvement over the years have been pretty good. If I had to guess, I'd imagine that TK would *love* to round out SF2 with some of the things we'd all like to see. In my opinion, the investment into getting MP working would pay huge dividends in TK's personal pride index (LOL) because getting 8 or 12 players playing SF2 MP would be game changing in my opinion. He could re-roll out SF2 (or hell, change some menus and call it SF3!) with MP and a HUGE audience would climb aboard (I'd do everything I could to feature it prominently..that's for sure!). I mean, c'mon..how many current games are offering 8 or 12 players the ability to do an Alpha Strike in Vietnam? Or something similar in Desert Storm? Yes, I know, and have read the estimates for the cost of adding MP to SF2 - and that is certainly an obstacle. But to vault SF2 (3?) to the top of the sim genre for that - damn, make room on the shelf TK for a flight simmers version of the Oscar.

 

Yeah, my analysis is colored by my enthusiasm for what is already in there, and my desire to see it reach that level..but I don't think it is that far of a reach. The only question is whether it is something TK wants, or if he wants to keep with the mobile platform stuff. Then again, TK (in my opinion) has already established himself among the flight sim greats: CJ Martin, Wags, Gilman Louie, Scott Elson, etc..so it isn't like he has anything to prove.

 

BeachAV8R

[Do335 382]

Agreed Beach, seems that TK played pretty close to heart like it's his baby.

 

One can say he never wanted to be big.

 

Or can say he didn't because he didn't want to.

 

But I'm thinking coming from his early Jane's days when big budgets plummeted all for nothing, his experience was the former.

 

 

I'm really not trying to duplicate what they or other FS developers have done in the past, since most of them have gone of out of business Spending more and more to make bigger and bigger games that appealed to less and less gamers (only to hardcore simmers, like they all did back in the 90s) is not really what we intend to do here

 

TK
--

 

 

 

And having spent thousands and thousands of hours on Falcon4 I tend to agree with him. Those devs rocked hard, made an awesome and extremely in-depth sim that dwarfed everything else even to date, but rocked themselves out in the process. To think selling that to average gamers who mostly just want to play point and shoot games with 40 bucks a pop... nan. I think my second/third college year was spent like a ghost coz was reading Falcon manuals all night, testing, flying and modding it and still having information overload learning it 6 years later, they surely are dreaming to ask a middle-class career/family man for that who make up the bulk of gamers revenue wise.(?) At the end of day we are armchair pilots and not real fighter jocks, otherwise we'd joined the air force!...

 

 

So I reckon maybe TK thought he figured it out and decided to do his own thing by setting up TW and keeping it small and low budget. With benefit of hindsight with DCS being successful and all, as said there could be something he miscalculated. He supported campaign engine, mission generator, AI and modding. These things don't sell. But they cost big time development resources wise. Perhaps it's still his old Jane's self playing a part, or the business model evolutions hadn't come to that point yet as SF1 was 2003 after all, or geniuses like Wags just invented them along the way, or just like Beach said it's TK's personal goal....

 

Anyway what if he dropped those and kept pumping out DLC addon planes, plane pack bundles, SF3.0/4/5 graphics engine updates with a few other changes mixed in? Most ppl mainly loves shiny new planes and nice gfx. And for missions god knows there're them and campaigns being uploaded to CombatAce all the time, like DCS and other games are leveraging nowadays: community or "volunteer based content contributors", which, doesn't incur dev cost at all. And heck aren't the fans all too enthusiastic and willing to contribute. Ironic that when asked to do some DLC planes TK mentioned along the lines that "There's no campaign for them."

 

Or put it another way, at 2012 he was still doing the same thing he did 10 years ago based on basically the same engine. Some changes had to happen for business to continue and thrive. (Maybe mobile is the answer there?...) If one's read Kodak and related stories recently that could be the same principle. But... heck if TK had went just for the money grabbing route myself wouldn't be flying it though.

 

My thought at this point. Sorry for another wall of text as ya old timers probably have more to say and it probably doesn't comfort the disgruntled PC fans any but it's my honest thought atm and writing it out is for myself as well.

Edited April 13, 2015 by Do335

[FastCargo 412]

I don't know if I would consider DCS 'successful' in the traditional sense.

 

The question is always the same:  'Do you make enough money in revenue to offset the cost of development?'  It isn't enough just to have number of sales...you still have to make enough revenue in total to stay in business.

 

I question if DCS in totality has been able to do that.  When you look at how much detail goes into each release, not including those that want to upgrade to the AFM level, I can't really just imagine how much it costs.  And how many potential DCS projects that were announced have simply vanished like smoke.

 

I want DCS to succeed...I've bought several of their products.  I still question the long term viability of the current revenue model.  When one of the largest companies on the planet decides the hardcore flight sim world isn't profitable enough to remain in, that should say something.

 

FC

[Do335 382]

FastCargo.... I can only speculate with TK's views that DCS is based in Russia, hence significantly lower cost is one factor. (As in "Made in China" which sounds familiar)

Edited April 13, 2015 by Do335