Graphical aspect preference ROF vs COD and other stuff

[Stublerone]

Jep, there are some shots in the dark but generally spoken with reference to ROF actual engine, he is mostly right.

Only thing to mark is the DCS thing. Noone ever requested into deep, how the flight modelling is done in the DCS series. My guesses to that: It has also no sufficient up to date flight models. I know of helicopter pilots saying something about incorrect FM at blackshark. But DCS is not having the priority on fm. It is all about learning and using the systems. So I really doubt, that the p51 is modelled right!!! U most also see, that a ww2 combat series within dcs is not really in discussion and would take about 20 years to deliver enough planes, not mention the VERY bad ground details and LODs. This will never happen and they will stick with modern fighters to combine more planes to what they began with a10 and blackshark.

But again: No discussion possible on graphics. Clod has better graphics and more powerful engine. There is nothing to discuss about it. Graphics are never subjective. You can measure it and you cannot mention the graphics together with performance issues, as this is another topic.

[ZaltysZ]

Originally Posted by Stublerone

Only thing to mark is the DCS thing. Noone ever requested into deep, how the flight modelling is done in the DCS series. My guesses to that: It has also no sufficient up to date flight models. I know of helicopter pilots saying something about incorrect FM at blackshark. But DCS is not having the priority on fm.

You made it sound like DCS is like FSX. Nah, FM is very important and complex in DCS, however some bugs creep in sometimes.

Regarding Ka-50. The main concern about its FM is "easy" autoration. However, it is concern and not really a blame, because almost all concerned people have experience only with single and/or light rotor helicopters, which are very different. In other words, there are no one qualified enough (someone who has experience with such helicopter) to say surely if it is correct or incorrect.

[Wolf_Rider]

DCS seem to have enough genuine sources of input to have their FM's appear quite accurate

[Fjordmonkey]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

DCS seem to have enough genuine sources of input to have their FM's appear quite accurate

This. From what I remember from the dev-letters about DCS:Black Shark, they had both testpilots and Kamov engineers in to quality-assess and -assure the FM's on the Shark. They ended up with the best possible FM they could hope to get on a desktop-system, as far as I remember.

[startrekmike]

I imagine that since Eagle Dynamics has access to a lot of the flight and systems data that they would have a easier time making sure that the flight models are about as right as they can make em.

Personally, they feel right to me but I have never flown a A-10C or a Ka-50 myself (unfortunately).

[ZaltysZ]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

DCS seem to have enough genuine sources of input to have their FM's appear quite accurate

Yes. Black Shark was created with some help from Kamov. A10C with help from USAF (ED was doing military version of sim). P51 was created with access to live pony and people working with it (The Fighter Collection). Unfortunately, it would be very hard to create BF109 or FW190 for them as available information is too scarce.

[Wolf_Rider]

@ZaltysZ...

yes, I'm not sure if TFC have any German warbirds in their collection

[fruitbat]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

@ZaltysZ...

yes, I'm not sure if TFC have any German warbirds in their collection

They don't, there aircraft are listed here,

http://fighter-collection.com/cft/

[bongodriver]

Theres one missing on the list