Roundup: DCS: F-16C video tutorials, first impressions

With the DCS: F-16C now out for several days, I thought it’d be helpful to round-up all of the videos coming from the community for DCS World’s newest jet. Since it’s release, there have been video tutorials, first impressions and even some reviews (or something resembling one) from all across the community. Here’s some of my favourites and must watches for people wanting to get into the jet, learn how it works, or to have a look at some of the opinions out there on what DCS: F-16C is all about right now.

Tutorials

The best way to get started with a new module is often with tutorials and we’re fortunate that not only does Eagle Dynamics release their own tutorials but we also have dedicated community members that put their own spin on training.

First up, two videos from The Grim Reapers who have already produced about a dozen videos on the F-16 for their YouTube channel. I wanted to draw attention to two out of the set because they are very useful in getting started with a cold start tutorial and a basic, how to setup your joystick. Crucial!

Growling Sidewinder’s radar tutorial is an in-depth look at the Viper’s air-to-air radar and how to get the most out of it. This is a key part of the F-16’s combat mission and very useful to get to know when flying the F-16.

RedKite has done three excellent tutorials on aerial refueling, countermeasures, and the targeting pod. All are worth checking out!

First impression and gameplay

For the next section we’ve got a mix of content that kind of blur together. We have first impressions and gameplay.

I’ve done my own early impressions and now here are some other voices from around the community talking about the F-16. These are their impressions, opinions, and thoughts on the new module. Check them out!

I hope you enjoyed the round-up of content out there for the F-16. There’s lots to learn and lots of opinions on the latest jet for DCS World. And a special thanks to all of the YouTube video creators out there for doing the work that they do. It takes time, dedication, and effort to do these things and I appreciate the effort!

7 Comments Add yours

  1. Eviscerador says:

    I’d just say what Magz said. Would we forgive any third party developer for releasing a module on the state the Viper has been released by ED?

    Do you imagine Razbam or Heatblur releasing a plane on this state? The outrage would be monumental.

    Sure Razbam released the Mig 19 with some issues (which were corrected in no time), sure a lot of the Tomcat features are missing…

    But come on…

    – Degraded Navigation
    – Degraded TGP functionality
    – No damage model
    – No external textures
    – No working lights
    – No liveries
    – Plenty of bugs

    I expect something on early access to miss some features (like the Tomcat, hornet or harrier) but we are talking about core features on the plane. The hornet was released with a lot less toys to play with, but the main frame, main systems and core features were there. Sure the FM had to be polished a bit, radar and IFF were patchy, but you could fly the plane and do some basic AA and AG sorties no problem.

    With the Viper I’m under the impression that people don’t really know if what they are flying is representative or just a big PLACEHOLDER text.

    And as I said before, really the only thing that bothers me about this is the delay on hornet features which I can understand from a business point of view, but man, you delayed your flagship module 2 months (or more!) for… this?

    I guess they were in a real hurry because of license issues or that rogue employee which is being trialed on the US.

    We will see.

    Liked by 3 people

  2. LD88 says:

    I agree with Magz take a s well. For me the big gap was the missing damage model. The Viper has a lot more fighting capability at EA release than the Hornet did, but it doesn’t mean much without a damage model in place. As you recall, the hornet had a number of placeholder items as well (ex. no IFF at first, then a placeholder, then the intended system). I expect they will rapidly address many of the features, like they did with the Hornet when first released, but yeah, from a community standpoint it would have been better to continue to flesh it out more before EA.

    As to F-14B & Mig-19, being fair about it those developers intended on by-passing EA all together, but ED pushed back due to open issues and call it EA for transparency.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. ShamrockOneFive says:

      The missing damage model is a huge problem for the module right now. I wasn’t aware of that in my initial thoughts post but I will be doing a follow up on it and that’s worth mentioning.

      About early access, only RAZBAM intended to launch the MiG-19 into full release and that didn’t really come to pass as the jet was not finished and ED pushed back.

      Heatblur intended to launch a full featured F-14 but it’s still an early access module – see the recent news abut the follow up content. Relatively speaking, Heatblur brought a very complete jet to the sim, but they are aiming higher too. The F-14 was not perfect on release either and it’s had a few issues here and there (still, nothing like missing the whole damage model)..

      Like

  3. Blue 5 says:

    Crikey. About 60% negative I would say?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. ShamrockOneFive says:

      There’s a fair number of negative opinions about the F-16 out there. I want to write something more complete once I’ve had more time with it (it arrived during one of the busiest times of the year for me).

      There are things that are exceptional about the F-16 and a bunch of unfinished things too. It’s less put together than the F/A-18 was on launch.

      Like

    2. LD88 says:

      My intent was not be negative about the F-16, but there were a couple of features you’d traditionally expect be to be further along when E/A opened up. On the flip side, whether ED forces us to wait by not making the module available or they open it and we get to dabble with it (or shelve it and come back in a few) until it reaches a more playable state is 6 of one, 1/2 a dozen of another. The same wait period is probably involved which a lot of folks gloss over… That’s my same stance on E/A in general; I’d rather have the opportunity to explore it during development that wait 2+ years later when its supposedly finished – my assumption being the wait time to completion whether E/A or not is probably not greatly different.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. ShamrockOneFive says:

        Absolutely! It’s going to take the same amount of time either way and this way we get to explore it a bit while they work on it. Very realistic and pragmatic viewpoint IMHO!

        I’m not at all concerned that it will eventually be finished either.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s