I think Flight simming got to be too difficult for the majority of the players. A study sim like DCS, MSFS or Xplane requires lots of learning. Aircraft handling, aircraft systems, navigational principles, weapon systems, procedures and so on. It simply not so attractive for the majority of the world. In the 90's the computers were much slower and couldn't simulate the physics properly together with acceptable graphics and because of that, the flight models and weapons were much more arcade stylish with easier/manageable handlings. Nowadays the realism is much higher and for the real succes the player needs much much more practice and learning and for most of the players are not interesting to learn some hours and go through checklists just to start up the plane then boresight the Mavericks and call the ATC for taxi clearance... And after a month of practice they can only take off, maybe navigate to a waypoint and hopefully land.

Who remembers MS Flight Combat Simulator? One of my all time favs in the 90's.

Love your thoughts.

Watched the video and while the point regarding licensing is good, I'll add a few factors on my own. Beware, its a mucho texto post. Similar to licensing, availability of documents and (importantly) what can be used in a sim also played a rather huge part of why combat flight sims have essentially "streamlined", so to say. Back then, even if you tried your best, you were still essentially limited by hardware. Considering that advancements in computer technology are exponential per year, nowadays a lot of things that were deemed impossible are achievable in today's simulation. However, it all depends on document availability. With US, it's generally good (just look at how many planes are from US in DCS). Europe is more finnicky meanwhile simulating Russian aircraft is....well, good luck. Another factor is the fact most of the old sims were single plane focused, so to say. Tornado, Falcon series (before the inclusion of F-15C in BMS), EF2000 and such come to mind. Exceptions did exist, like 1942, but the general norm was that (study) simulators generally simulated one plane only. It were DCS that was, while I'm not sure if it was exactly the first one, but it was definitely the most dominant when it came to providing high fidelity simulation of multiple aircraft in one platform, a task that was seem to be unimaginable in the early days of combat flight simulation. But nowadays its possible. This also simplifies and complicates things simultaneously. On one hand, you essentially have a platform where you can "easily" go to develop a simulation of the aircraft of your choice. On other hand, DCS has set up some insanely high standards of simulation of aircraft (take a look at Heatblur's modules, they're eye-watering), so if one were to make their own combat flight simulator of the same fidelity as DCS, one must reach minimal standards that were set by DCS. Closest one that comes to that (and in some cases, even exceeds DCS), is Falcon BMS, but that's a free mod, so it's a bit difficult to claim its a competitor to DCS when it comes to financial perspective. It definitely is a competitor when it comes to simulation fidelity and also time retention though. Another thing that I think also plays a role on why there are generally less full fidelity simulators is because DCS itself covers a lot of fields lately. If you want to do missions set in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Georgia and such, DCS is go to. It's far from perfect, there are still a lot of periods which aren't really covered by DCS (few examples: Falklands War (especially notable because we do have a South Atlantic map), Korea War, Vietnam War, World War 2 in a lot of theaters (Eastern Front is essentially non existent in DCS), etc...). This could be used to capitalize by other sims and some have already taken an initiative, like IL-2's Korea and Combat Pilot (although in near-to-far future, we should get PTO in DCS), but the former is a different category from DCS. And also previously mentioned, the standards for high fidelity have risen. A lot of it is module dependent, but some are absolutely groundbreaking for sure. DCS F-14, F-4, even the old ones like A-10C (II) are insanely well modelled. So in conclusion, the evolution of combat flight sims, along with higher standards and document availability are major factors why we got less combat flight sims. Along with other factors I haven't mentioned (cost/profit factor and also specific hobby. Flight sims are not exactly easy to get into if you're not really deep into aviation).

There are other free mods that are worth downloading, T-45 Goshawk, A29 super tucano, A-4E Skyhawk, Pucara.

Looking for drop in replacement for C-17, C-130 and other cardboard models.

I'll have to grab this OH-6 mod. Back in 1993 out in the "back 40" at Ft. Campbell, KY I watched an OH-6 pilot from the 160th S.O.A.R. land on an abandoned bridge railing, balance the chopper for 20-30 seconds on the railing, take off, circle around and do it again repeatedly. The skill level of that guy always stuck with me, so I'd love to take a loach up for a spin and try similar. Thanks for the vid, subbed.

And don't forget the IA-58 Pucara by Pastrana. Another interesting free mod. Nice video!

Ussually, free mods breack something into DCS core ......😢

I think it is tied to market development TBH. Back in the ‘90s, the (PC) game industry was still young and not fully matured yet. As the decades have passed, the market has matured, with major industrial consolidation having taken place, with only a few big publishers/studios, compared to the “wild west” days of the ‘90s. The total gaming market was smaller, with niches being bigger relative to the overall market. The appeal of having combat flight sims hasn’t gotten smaller, but the market for general AAA-titles has gotten far bigger, making the flightsim niche seem comparatively smaller. Flight sim enthusiasts and early adopters of PCs probably had a large overlap, leading to a large growth in the ‘90s, but not keeping apace with the general market in the ‘00s and beyond, as it hit its growth ceiling much earlier. There now simply isn’t a big enough market to chase for a AAA-title publisher to dump resources in, to have a good chance of a return on investment, relative to the other far more popular existing game genres.

Codename flanker is by far the best and most ambitious modding project undertaken by the community in DCS

Glad you like the SK60!🥳🥳

Works a treat , awesome job

Nice video bro

I had an issue with the Gripen, if I activated it it would prevent from ground unit to spawn, idk why or how but it’s pretty anoying since the Gripen is a nice mod

Nice vid. The VSN F-4B/C and Comunity A-4E are missing ;-)

Su-57? There was some development issues with OV-10A so there is some issue with the support.

hey man good video! Have u experienced lag with the Gripen lately?

thx

Two things: BAAS Dynamics mods are no longer updated (SK-60). Also, links are not working in this video. So you can view my old video here which mentions a lot of 100% Free mods like the A-4E Skyhawk: kzbin.info/www/bejne/ZqHFqpaCnrx3bLssi=qZ-JVLdGZpFbiWkO. In this video, I wanted to covered mods I didnt cover previously (unless they were overhauled since like the Gripen)

Good video :) always like free modules, A4E is also a great module.

FYI the aircraft you are flying in BMS in this video is NOT the f15C in 4.37.5 …you should chose the correct aircraft ;)

How are files imported from open kneeboard into DCS? How is it placed on the knee in the game?

they were planning to sell these assets. but somehow they dropped that idea.

Now, if they only could give an update on the Caucasus buildings. Merry Christmas too you all.

How to download these aircrafts? Websites name please

next, the gotta redo the c17 it looks like it's made out of cardboard

by the way, Those 3D external new models were implemented a month or 2 ago. ED just felt like adding it in the notes, even though they already did for when it actually came out, to make it seem like they are doing more than they actually are. Either way great video man! The fact they have to add "free pack" like we should be paying for an upgrade from 10 year old 3D models.

I think it's just too difficult, time consuming, and not financially viable enough for the majority of people who would like to develop a flight sim to actually do it.

Thanks for the video.and Merry Christmas. Great fidelity updates, hopefully next time ED give the C-17 model some TLC

Merry Christmas mate! Heatblur also released updates but the patch notes couldn't be released in time as Heatblurs staff are on holiday. I've heard they fixed some Radar issues on the F-14A/B from someone on the forums but I'm hoping for Viggen updates as well. Maybe even some F4 Phantom updates made it into the patch. I'm looking forward to trying out the new F-16C flight model myself! We can now 'deep stall' the F-16C now, apparently. A lot of F-16C fixes and new HUD updates too!

Because for the most part, they aren't fun and no one wants to say it, but they aren't representative of actual flight. Without the seat of the pants feel, which is essential for being an actual pilot, sims are just too synthetic. It's a niche genre for hardcore fans.

For combat sim which is the niche of the niche yes. Since I dont think there is enough market for developer to developed it. Not to mention getting the data isn' easy However on the civilian flight sim. We ate living in the golden age. The MSFS 2024 release with higher quality default airbus aircraft that enables you to program FMC, and also include an updated chart and database.

I did the install. Noticed the payload layout is vastly different so I will have to do some tweaking on my created missions. But I still don't have any skins available. Any advice with that?

The counter-argument at the time was that since the aircraft's development was significantly / primarily funded by taxpayer money, any data / images that were part of the "public domain" should be fair game for a U.S.-based company. "Should be" - but I don't know if that was ever put to the legal test. I don't know any game studios that could afford to go toe-to-toe against the military-industrial complex's lawyers.

Also I tried iF-22. It attempted to be more realistic than Novalogic's own F-22 game or F-22 ADF from DID, but failed horribly. It is very ugly (way worse than the other two) and extremely buggy

Fleet Defender, EF2000, F-22 ADF/TAW, Jane's F-15, Jane's Longbow, Jane's F/A-18, Falcon 4.0, iF-22, etc all had clickable cockpits. It was the norm for survey/study sims back in the day. Flanker and then Lock On were actually the anomaly

I love it. Too bad my computer almost has a coronary trying to run it.😓

***Fewer***

Anyone play janes f15 simulator back in the day?

The public owns the F-22 name and likeness. Lockheed does not license the F-22 to the US Government. The only part of the F-22 that needs to be licensed is the name "Lockheed" when it appears before the F-22. Other than that, it would be foolish to pay the designer for something the American people already paid for and own.

I'd refuse to go along with paying them for providing free advertising for their produicts, and if they insist I'd rename it, and then deliberately make their stuff look bad. Sometimes the only way to fight BS is with even more BS.

Looking forward to IL2 Korea.

I used to play fighting games soooo much! Went to the arcades and played Street Fighter soo much. I'd prob cover Fighting games much more if I wasnt so booty at them! Ranked is a STRUGGLE

You need to mention how you make it bigger once you're in vr. On the discord they dont tell anything about it :(

Does it work on multiplayer servers?

I always had a hard time installing this mod. I’m glad it has been streamlined. I will have to try it out.

Link doesnt work anymore

The link does not work

That is the best content to help in DCS that I have seen in a while.