JediMaster

That makes sense. While the sides of the ship are port and starboard, and you might give an order for the ship to go hard to port, the rudder is the target of the order here. "Full left rudder" makes more sense than "full port rudder." Saying something like "swing to port, bearing 120 degrees" is one thing as it gives a final result without regard to how you get there (speed of turn). "Left rudder 15 degrees, come to bearing 120" dictates both final heading and also how quickly you want the turn to occur, and "full left rudder, come to 120" means you want to get there FAST. In other words, port and starboard refer to the ship, not other objects. The port side of your cabin is the side of the cabin that's on the ship's port, not the left side of the cabin as when you enter it. The table inside has a left side, not a port side.

Because those are the STALKER guys and the dude playing the guitar is all over the place in those games.

Exactly. The problem is developer resources are finite. As PC abilities increased, they could spend more time on the graphics (models, textures, terrain, etc). They could put more time into the sounds. They could put more time into the modeling (damage, flight, weapons, etc). So...what about the game part? Fewer people probably work on that than worked on the game part of F-19. The UI? Yeah, the 90s games had barracks and stuff that made you feel like a pilot flying in a conflict. Current sims make you feel like...you're flying a sim on your PC. How about AI? Amazingly, the AI in older sims often does a better job in seeming like real opponents. Not sure why. Think about this--how many tens (even hundreds) of millions do they spend on a game like Call of Duty? A game where ALL you do is walk around and shoot stuff. It's mostly visuals! Yet they spend ALL that money just to do that. To make a flight sim that incorporated every lesson learned over the past 3 decades of sims, doing no worse than any of them, would likely require an equivalent budget. We're not getting it with the paltry sums the Russian-made sims have to dedicate to them. We won't get it with the other indie devs of one or two guys like TK or that guy making CAP2. What we have today are incredibly accurate sims that are only passable games. In short, the learning of the sim itself is 75% of the entertainment inherent in it, and if that's not what you like you're getting 1/4 the value out of it compared to the old batch. Those were games that included some simulation in it. Surprise surprise, they were more fun to play.

Yeah, it really would be best if every military in the world disbanded. Without them, no one would be eager to start a war. In the future, all conflicts should be fought by the leaders, directly, with knives in a room.

I haven't made the journey to the cape for a launch since they retired the shuttle. Just doesn't feel worth it. Maybe when they start launching people again I will.

Actually heard the boom from the reentry this time, usually I don't.

These things always assume you live on a street with a name. In Miami, only a handful of major roads get names. Most people live on 199th st or 87th ave or something. Miami city planners were underpaid or lacked imagination I guess!

I would've preferred Top Gun: AGM-65 but Maverick will do.

I think they need to have Lorde do a cover of Shatner's cover of Rocket Man.

I don't know how close this will be to the one Tony Scott was working on a few years back before his death. The guy they're apparently going to pick did a good job with the Tron sequel (another 30 year gap there), but it really boils down to the script.

A long and fruitful career. I listened to the commentaries he did for all his Bond films a decade back, some great stories now. That's pretty much the entire core cast of the 70s Bond films gone now. Bernard Lee (M), Lois Maxwell (Miss Moneypenny), Desmond Llewelyn (Q), and now Roger. I'm sure Desmond is telling Roger to grow up again as Roger pulls another prank on poor Desmond...

So finally Steam and ED keys will be totally separated. I figured that was coming.

Concorde's demise was sealed long before the accident or 9/11. It boiled down to two things--the plane wasn't profitable enough for them (even when it made a profit, they could make MORE profit with a slower plane) and the allowed routes were so limited that there was impetus to spend on a better plane. Why spend billions if it will take you decades to recoup it? They are working on reducing the sound footprint of supersonic planes, though, so I believe in my lifetime we will see a replacement in service, although it may be biz jet territory alone.

B? I thought it was the F-14A?

I have vague memories of this, but it was nice to see it again.

I want Charlie Sheen from Hot Shots in one of the planes.

Large supersonic planes will share common characteristics out of necessity. It seems either VG or delta wings (or both in the 70's case) is needed. The other 70 still exists at WPAFB in Ohio, though, along with many other rare planes at the USAF museum.

That's really the reason, though--we have SF2: WOV with some really great 3rd party planes already. Same reason I don't really care about DCS WWII stuff, because I've got BoS and CloD and others that do that just fine. SF2 can't handle the 21st century stuff properly because TK didn't care to go there. When it comes to making an F-15E or an F-22 or a Super Hornet or a Rafale, DCS is the only possibility. So when I see planes being made for DCS that I've got in BoS or CloD or SF2 that are already great there, while the planes that only DCS could do right get ignored, I'm really annoyed. I don't need the P-51 or Bf109 in a dozen different games when I don't have the F-22 in even one, besides the one they tried to make for SF2 that honestly falls short due to the engine limitations. There it really is "press a button to get a kill" and that's not how it really is. That's why I want DCS to do it and show what that combat is really like. That's just as wrong as thinking that NASCAR racing is just about going in circles while the F1 high-speed parade is "real" racing. Checkers and chess use the same gameboard, but they are different games with different strategies. You may prefer one to the other, but both are equally legitimate games.

I've only watched the pilot, but I've read the book. The main thing is FDR gets assassinated in the mid-30s. His replacement is much weaker and the war ends in 47 I think? Also I think Heydrich does not get assassinated. The main points are on the Wiki page for the book.

After the initial wave of Ka-50 and A-10C, there has been a definite preference for older less automated designs in DCS World. No other planes have avionics as complex as those two, and the only one on the table right now is the F/A-18C. There are tons of 3rd party ones in the works, but the only ones that seem close are all 70s-vintage or older. The ironic part is DCS was a follow on from LOMAC--Lock On Modern Air Combat, yet with only a couple of exceptions the majority of modules present are what is politely termed "vintage", not modern. Many of them are still in service, yes, but are more reserve aircraft than front-line. Or front-line for nations with small under-equipped forces. Pretty much the F-15C and A-10C are it, the rest are all either retired or have been upgraded past the versions we have for the most part. Those upgrades, of course, generally give more advanced cockpits with MFDs instead of steam gauges (like the A-10A to A-10C switch). Therefore, while the F-14A fits in well, I'm not holding my breath for even an F-14D. Nor an F-15E, even though I was flying F-15Es on PCs before the real one entered service! It's been almost 30 years now, and I have to fly Strike Fighters for it or get my copy of Jane's F-15 to work with a modern PC. You'd think with a highly computerized cockpit it would be easier to get them on a PC, actually. I would love to see planes that are considered contemporary in the 21st century in DCS World, but at this point I'd be content just to have a late 20th century slate filled out.

In the past, you could move keys back and forth freely. However, I believe the current policy is any key bought on Steam may be used on Steam or on the standalone version, but keys bought on ED's site for the standalone version will not work on Steam. So, if you're using the one from ED's site, you can use either source but if you wish to play on Steam you must buy from Steam.

I believe the most recent sale was designed to be short on Steam but continue longer on their own site. You might have caught it after the Steam one ended but before theirs did.

He misspoke. I believe he meant "flotilla". Or was it "division"?

I believe they said these vulnerabilities were patched out long ago. Only people with obsolete systems need worry. Of course, far too many people hold onto obsolete systems out of being cheap or needlessly stubborn, but I have no worries at all. If you get caught by this, it's your own fault. To expect a company to patch a vulnerability in 2017 for an OS released 10+ years earlier is not fiscally sound.

People need to be educated away from the "my religion is right and we can kill those of others for that by divine providence" notion. Abolition of religion by removing the fertile soil in which it grows--that of despair, poverty, and desperation. To insist that people will only behave correctly if they are threatened by damnation by some all powerful being, and that a clergy of some type is necessary to convey those messages and tell people how to behave, is to abandon adulthood. It's akin to saying you yearn for the days of being a child when you had parents to tell you what to do and you're uncomfortable with being responsible for yourself now. Religion should be a personal thing. It should NOT be about telling your neighbor that they believe the wrong thing and they need to believe like you do. Of course, no matter how closely your beliefs align, people will still find something to differentiate themselves and fight about. Muslims started almost immediately by splitting into Shia and Sunni. Christianity split how many times now? Greek Orthodox, original Protestant, subgroups, evangelicals... Humanity insists on dividing itself into "us" and "them" based on any arbitrary criteria it can find. Religion is only one of the most divisive because unlike culture, language, or appearance, people will not be swayed by any reasonable argument to live and let live. Different nationalities and races have had fluid allegiances and adversaries over the millennia, but religious antagonism manages to outlast entire civilizations.