Correct, which makes War Thunder a simulator.
Tank controls aren’t a system, they’re an input.
You can claim simulation is arcade all you want, it won’t change reality.
The input is how the system operates. So of course it is an integral part of the system.
So of course this is needed to emulate a tank.
Obvious troll. Noone can be this stupid. Bye
3 Likes
No, an input is how it’s controlled.
Tank controls are simulated and operated by crew gunners, not us.
Our input is telling them where to aim.
And the system is the gun laying mechanisms.
Not sure why you’re calling yourself a troll…
Abd they do not use proper controls either. It isn’t modellled.
Stop bullshitting
1 Like
You should rewrite to “from 2023”
And thats not even close to simulation. Its arcade representation of tank controls not a simulation.
The closest to simulation is The Steel Beasts followed by Il-2 Tank Crew. Close to certain extent are Squad 44 and Squad. GHPC is on a good track but still in development. Than comes Arma. And that at the end is WT followed bt WoT at the aend.
There’s no such thing as “arcade controls” for software.
It’s a myth made up by marketing teams for advertising.
Its not a myth its game reality. Tanks in WT have arcade controls either for driving or gun control. Planes in WT have sim controls while tanks don’t.
1 Like
There’s no such thing as “sim controls”.
There’s virtual joystick which is just another input method.
It’s ultimately no different than mouse aim, both function to do the same thing, and virtual joystick is far easier to use in-cockpit.
Just cause something is easy doesn’t mean it’s “arcade”.
There are you just don’t know it. Sim controls are controls where player has to do everything (or as much as possible) as he would need to do in real world.
Meaning in WT one press W and vehicle goes forward which is not a simulation but representation and thats not the same.
While in game with sim controls player would need to use clutch, govern RPMs and do transmission shift at correct moment otherwise engine would stall.
Sim controls for tank would also include relative gun controls like other tanks sims have.
Prime example is flight instructor. One can easily do flat turns in AB/RB as flight instructor does correction. Pulling stick too hard in while in sim mode would get you in a spin. Or wing rip.
Flight instructor = arcade controls, no flight instructor = sim controls.
4 Likes
Except we’re not the tank driver, so it would be unrealistic to have the player run the driver’s controls when we’re not the driver.
Thats why WT is not a simulation of reailty but representation of it. In simulation it would be realistic to expect for player to do all by himself as Steel Beasts does, or Il-2 Tank Crew. GHPC is still in development but seems like it will also be simulation game. Arma 3, Squad and Squad 44 even with inaccurate damage model are more simulation that WT due to multicrew support.
2 Likes
Oh sure I do, if its something that I think is fun. I dont think half-a*sed premiums should be rewarded, when there are so many issues they could be working on instead. I want to support the devs, that actually works to make the playerbase happy, not adding cockpitplaceholders on bombers because ‘it would take too much time’ That is a lazy attitude.
Then why are they adding it in the first place? They could even make a stockholder, while they implement it, the best they can, not just add a HE shell that doesn’t even work 10% as intended.
I enjoyed it alot! I am a history buff, so when I’m seeing WW2 tanks getting molested by ATGM’s I weep.
ARB are way too arcadey, you even got nametags above the planes, that is not very realistic is it.
2 Likes
Steel Beasts doesn’t have realistic physics.
Simulator =/= clunky.
And none of the games you listed are as realistic as War Thunder where it matters: Physics.
I especially will not take seriously games with Goldeneye 007 gunplay…
Playing as a crew member and interiors aren’t necessary for simulation.
And simulators aren’t inherently realistic, especially older ones.
@Botoo1
Cockpits are hard especially for bombers that no longer exist.
And many issues take months to years to fix.
DCS didn’t fix their AI for years just cause overhauling it took 3 years.
UI elements aren’t unrealistic… it’s a tool to narrow the gap between us and real pilots in observational capability.
So its not impossible, they just don’t wan’t to make the effort. That is how I see it, lazy…
A bit unrealistic, when the gamemode is named realistic, don’t you think?
1 Like
But simulation is some sort of cluncky as you need to do all things you would need to do in real world.
You obviously have different definition of physics. Steel Beats have the most realistc physics as some armies use it for tank crew simulator training.
Also Steel Beasts and Il-2 Tank Crew surpass WT physics by far. GHPC too even though its still in development has much better physics.
Playing as part of multi crew is first step to simulation as you would need to coordinate within crew as you would need in real world.
3 Likes
No, real-life isn’t clunky.
If your simulator is clunky, then it’s unrealistic.
This is why COD 2019 is more realistic than Squad, cause the gunplay is realistic and not clunky.
Tank crew training doesn’t need physics.
Infantry communications training [Arma] doesn’t need physics, gunplay, etc.
DCS and WT are almost identical in physics simulation and they’re the best in the industry. It also took DCS a few years of catch-up to get to their level last and this year.
Multi-crew isn’t necessary for simulation, see Gran Turismo or Dirt Rally.
You have never done tank crew training I take it?
1 Like
I’m talking about the simulators.
There’s a reason Steel Beasts hasn’t updated their movement physics, there’s no demand from their clients.
“Military grade” is “as cheaply as possible to meet the minimum requirements”.
Which is why all of DCS’s progress is because of random player demands, not because of bigger clients.
It’s not even a game reality. It’s just a reality. Simulator isn’t a gaming genre.
It is a concept used in science, research and development. A simulation doesn’t even have to be a computer program. Even math formulas can do the trick as long as it is a faithful recreation of the principles and workings of the emulated system.
This of course also applies to video games. And the tank controls aren’t recreated in any realistic way.
3 Likes