I’m not holding my breath for the dynamic campaign being a game changer, at least for most. Here’s why.
My theory on video games. They key into two head systems to make them “fun”, adrenaline (which DCS has in spades) and dopamine. Of the two, dopamine is far more powerful and keeps em coming back. WoW, Candy Crush, X-Com, you name it.
A good dynamic campaign should handle both. Keeps adrenaline flowing with the unexpected, and allowing some sort of “progress”, “achievement”, “like” etc., for the heroin.
Where I see DCS dynamic campaign falling down is on the second part. Hooking the user (er… player) requires a positive consequence that is easy to achieve, at least at first, a freebie… (this is why games can be dangerous for kids… real life is rarely like that).
The easy part is really counter intuitive to the “realism” on the table and complexity of the jets. Blowing up a bridge is way harder in a Hornet than say a WW2 bird where “war” progression can come easier.
Without it, progression doesn’t hook, and the campaign becomes pretty much a soul-less random mission generator, kinda like the Falcon 4 campaign ;P Well regarded academically, but how many people actually got anywhere in it?
I suppose it could be done with the right AI and balance, but that is so hard.
A simpler solution is creating a “character” and a story. Key progression off that, and let the AI be dumb. I dunno, I just don’t see them going there. It isn’t who they are. I bet they are going to tackle the AI route and angsty posts will ensue. Would be happy to be surprised though…
Edit: Sorry for all the edits. Sparked lots of extra thoughts that related.