DCS World content creator and Apache pilot Casmo has posted a great interview with Eagle Dynamics’ Matt Wagner about the DCS: Afghanistan map. It’s an interesting interview and there are some key takeaways that folks might find interesting. Let’s dig into it!

On the map and other maps

I highly encourage everyone to watch Casmo’s interview with Matt as it covers quite a bit of ground from how long it takes to build a map like this to the economics of it to other projects that they are working on.

While Casmo and Matt did talk about a bit of the pricing controversy, it seems to me that this is mostly a non-issue and the comments from my recent post about it seem to echo that. Those who want the full map will buy the full map and those who only want a specific piece can get that piece for cheaper. One thing that Matt did say that I found interesting is that they are exploring an “edge case” where someone buys one piece, then another piece and then finally buys the remaining piece. Right now that ends up being more expensive but they are looking at a system to discount the remaining purchase.

Matt also reported that DCS: Afghanistan was built much more quickly than prior maps with Eagle Dynamics latest mapping tools streamlining the process. That’s why they are building DCS: Afghanistan and DCS: Iraq more or less simultaneously though Matt did say that it’s still a large team of 20 plus people.

Another interesting takeaway is a bit of a teaser that there are two other unannounced maps in the works and that these are more “green” than Afghanistan and Iraq. Count me as excited by those prospects!


7 responses to “Casmo interviews Matt Wagner about DCS: Afghanistan”

  1. And everyone and their uncle will be asking the same question about the possible new map: “Vietnam?”

    Like

    1. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
      ShamrockOneFive

      Yeah likely! I actually wonder if they might do a Cold War 1980s Fulda Gap style map.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. That is my dream DCS map. Please ED!

        Side note, I was also surprised by Wags’ revelation that the number of folks ordering the SW region was much higher than he expected. I believe he said he thought 1 in 20 might opt for the region but the number was much, much higher. It shows there is an appetite/market for the lower entry point…

        Like

  2. I keep my fingers crossed that we will get a Vietnam map eventually.

    A Cold War 1980s Fulda Gap style map would also be great, though the Navy jocks probably won’t like it.

    Like

    1. As a Navy jock, a 1980s Fulda Gap style map is my dream scenario so you’ve got at least one in on board!

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Touché! 👍

        Liked by 1 person

  3. One pain point has been in exploits or differing challenges between high quality and low quality terrain.

    I’m a bit concerned about a HQ player not being able to fly as low as a LQ player due to less terrain interference. This could have significant impacts on MP.

    Casmo brought this up and to my ear Wags somewhat side stepped the answer by pointing to Normandy 2.0, but to my eye the LQ terrain shown at airbases would be much easier to get low over versus a fully rendered airbase.

    Wags did mention that this idea came about rather recently so it’s possible they didn’t consider the MP advantage ramifications fully.

    For single player, if you’re interested in the map, there’s no issue.

    Like

Leave a comment

Trending