You can compare the two, you can compare almost anything if you frame it right and are careful with your conclusions, but when it comes to WT and DCS the *fundamental reason,* as in the underlying actual purpose and the 'why' a person plays is drastically different in most cases. People typically want to get an experience and sense of realism out of DCS, it's a poor choice if you *don't* want that and you want more acrade-y ness and accessibility, so much so that DCS used to have an 'arcade mode' but it was removed. In WT people want a more arcade-like experience where fun is the focus, so it's about the 'feel' of flying something and that being fun and engaging in a fairly fast paced environment. People who play WT don't typically want to climb to altitude and patrol between two waypoints for an hour, but in DCS people actively seek out that kind of experience. That's why it's a poor fit to try and compare flight experiences, because they were created for different experiences on purpose by design. There are still lots of areas of valid comparison, you just have to keep in mind that they will always be coloured by the game's purpse- you can compare graphics and visual for example, but because they have different purposes they're effectively not competing with eachother so it doesn't 'matter' apart from the purely theoretical or wanting it to be different. Lastly, there's not really a 'need' to prove something is better than another thing in a lot of cases, especially if it's about what makes someone happy. In terms of military effectiveness the F-14 is objectively better than the F-4 in almost every category, but that doesn't mean people don't want to fly the F-4, because people aren't judging it on that, so to them it's not 'better' for them to fly an F-14 in that moment for them personally. It's often the same with games, be it old CODs or remakes like the 2016 Doom, yea they might be 'better' by things you can measure, but in a lot of cases the things that are hard to measure are what make people happy, especially when it comes to nostalgia. If you *did* still want to do a direct comparison to something that's closer (especially in the past, pre 2016 days)to a competitor, though...Falcon BMS, but you didn't hear it from me >_>
I don't think I will be continuing the series because talking about an controversial opinion on youtube is a little hard for me. Since my channel isn't as large as the other ones.
ALSO, why tf does the guy need to apologise. warthunder is getting better slowly but honestly its very slow and gaijin always fucks up their updates and gameplay because they're incompetent. do you know what'll make them competent??? when there's pressure from the playerbase comparing WARTHUNDER to a much better a much realistic a much more complete game DCS. ALSO the other way around, if warthunder gets to a potential better place to be compared to dcs Then dcs will also have to improve, what about the ground vehicle playability?? boats ships?? sure there's that shitty DLC that lets you control tanks but its awful
You shouldn't apologize it's a great question and the video you made was excellent. The only thing is people like to disagree I have played both games a bunch and they have few things in common but im not sure enough to compare. I think we should just conclude on the fact that planes are fun and shouldn't argue over 2 great games !
Man of course you can compare anything, anybody who says "nooo you cant compare these they are too different!!" is fucking stupid because the whole point of comparing 2 things is to find out the differences and non differences.
Yes, that was my point in the beginning. But you guys could of couse start your own comparison of warthunder and DCS! That whould be fun to watch. But for me I think I want to more topics for my channel! :D
You don't need to apologize for people disagreeing with you. If they disagree, that's their problem, not yours. Also, in my opinion, these games are absolutely comparable, especially when considering simulator mode. For starters, they are both flight simulators, and in terms of flight handling they are very similar. Obviously, the DCS models are better, but the war thunder ones aren't bad by any means (in general), there are exceptions, especially when you have literary hundreds of aircraft. I would try it out for yourself. I would do the simulator mode rather than realistic mode or arcade mode because the goals of simulator mode are more similar to that of DCS. Also, just a note: many DCS players actually come from war thunder, including myself. In the past, I tried out war thunder simulator mode and found myself enjoying it. It taught me the basics, I learned how to fly and do basic dogfighting. All without the hassle of spending hours to study an aircraft just to start its engines. Eventually, I wanted a better experience, and I read that DCS was better for this, and now it is one of my most played games. Had I not played war thunder, I don't think I would have entered this great niche that not many people pick up on. Had I played DCS without playing war thunder or any other flight simulator first, I probably would have given up early on, due to the sheer complexity. Thanks for reading. o7
Yes Falcon BMS is a Great game, but I didn't choose it as the main topic because it doesn't have a very big community. But yes your right Falcon BMS is a pretty good game.
