Il2 feels more like actual flying in a war. Until it gets a dynamic campaign engine DCS cant really do that. For modern (well cold war) jets and multiplayer with those jets is really where DCS shines imo.
@@Leon-bc8hm I was hesitant on Il2 in VR does it really have good framerates? becuase DCS is awful for that. Also noticed there are so many different versions of IL2 so confused to which one to get?
@@vracan If you get it from steam you have to buy "Battle of Stalingrad" as your base game, and then you can purchase extra aircraft or tanks as you please. If you get it directly from the 1c shop. Then you can get any edition of the game and run it fine. In my experience IL-2 is one of the best optimised VR games put there, it just runs so smoothly, biggest lag is while loading mission but it lasts for like 3 secs. I would definitely recommend giving it a go.
IL-2. in most all its current incarnations is on sale until August 29th at 66% off. I'd quibble with the high fidelity/low fidelity description. With the more contemporary military aircraft, yes, it's important to have access to all to the controls because modern air combat is largely an exercise in systems management. With WWII aircraft it's all about maneuvering and gunnery and physically seeing the enemy first. Some systems access is important and IL-2 has that, along with trim controls which are *very* important as well. Thus, much of the "fidelity" of DCS WWII crates falls under the heading of non-tactical, or what I've long called, nuisance realism. Where IL-2 shines is in the sheer authenticity of the aircraft flight characteristics. The matchups of the various aircraft match closely the historical record. I'm sure the same is true in DCS but there are just too few WWII aircraft and historically based combat scenarios in DCS to compare it to IL-2 if you prefer aircraft of that era. Finally, many of us have actual experience in high-performance propeller-driven aircraft whereas very few of us have that in jets unless we're ex-military. Thus IL-2 *feels like flying* for more people I reckon. On this last point, I'm likely full of shit, though, as I'm seeing fewer and fewer people becoming pilots today compared to 30 or 40 or (*gasps*) 50 years ago when folks like me were taking up flying. 😲
It should be noted that the Il-2 Sturmovik of 2001 is a completely different beast from Cliffs of Dover, which is itself a different entity from the "Great Battles" series. The original Il-2 had expansions that allowed for dynamic campaigns and scripted work and an amazing full mission builder with a ton of customizability once modding became a thing.
@@MrPhantom453 Yup I know it's being worked on but we have no date on when it's going to come out. It's both a highly challenging task and a medium to low priority item on their list. So we most likely won't see it anytime soon.
I think is like this beacuse most of the time you get shot down by 1 missile not lile in il2 where you have to use 99% guns so the damage model is more accurate
Thanks for the comparison video, although as you point out a direct comparison isn't easy. But I should point out that if I was someone who had never played any of the IL-2 series of sims this video would be misleading, in regards that it lumps the old Il-2 sim from the 2000s with Cliffs of Dover and also with the new Il-2 Great Battles series (Battle of Stalingard, Battle of Kuban etc). Although the last two have links to the original sim these are three very separate sims with completely different graphics engines, FMs etc. For anyone interested in the series, here's a very basic over-view: IL-2 Sturmovik (2001): A very old sim which has received so much development that that it still has a very active fan community and continued development from an officially sanctioned 3rd party (Team Daidalos). Wikipedia says it now has 85 flyable aircraft and 45 maps plus a bunch of ai only aircraft. This doesn't include a whole ton of fan created mods. Recommend that you purchase IL-2 1946 (2006) cheap then add all the free patches that came out afterwards. Cliffs of Dover (2011): A Battle of Britain sim with a brand new engine not compatible in any way with the previous sim. These days development is also done by a sanctioned 3rd part, Team Fusion. Il-2 Great Battles (2013): Originally called Il-2 Battle of Stalingrad and using an upgraded version of the engine used in the WWI sim Rise of Flight, this series is being developed with new content on the way. Currently there are three expansions released (Battle of Stalingrad, Battle of Moscow and Battle of Kuban) with the latest Battle of Bodenplatte in early access. NOTE: Great Battles has two other modules that aren't only about WW2 aviation, namely Flying Circus (a bunch of aircraft ported over from Rise of Flight and a WWI map under development) and Tank Crew (a dedicated map and several tanks released with more on the way). These are unified in Great Battles so one can strafe a Tiger in a Sopwith Camel while dodging a Me262 if one wants to! :D
owning most of both, i enjoy both. perhaps ive had a bit more fun in IL2. high fidelity is kewl and all, but for VR players its nice to have the controls streamlined a bit. besides, sometimes you want to just pull a trigger & shoot stuff without going thru complicated procedures, breaking immersion by lifting the vr headset to see the keyboard, et cetera. splattering on the ground by bailing out too low is fun too
This was basically the deciding factor for me, I'd love to fly a modern jet but if it's not in a VR headset it sounds boring as F and I just don't have the patience to blindly do all those tasks.
@@smithyMcjoe personally i play dcs in vr (oculus quest 2). And I’m not able to run that shit. But with il2 I just change like 2 or 3 settings, I even put all the graphic in ultra, and the game is smooth as fuck. What I’m doing wrong with dcs ? The ground is shit, the clouds is shit… and I’m just able to see further than my own plane… where my partner are pixel flying in the air… where they teleport 50/50 of the times. Don’t forget than dcs crash every time
@@christcosmique6619 I dunno, I'm not tech help mate. Probably your computer not having enough power for it to run properly. That also sounds like lag in MP which could be your net speeds. Also my dude, reread your shit before you post it, that took some deciphering.
@@christcosmique6619 yes DCS needs optimizations badly. especially handling of the cpu. this is why I'm thinking of going for Il2 now. but there are so many versions of Il2 I'm confused for which one to get. Any suggestions?
I just cant swallow that BS of DCS FM being superior. Just need to fly the Spitfire in DCS to see how flawed it is (P51 is much better). Il2 is not perfect but the FMs are also top notch and you dont have to worry about flipping switches like a tool.
*Don't forget 100% of the IL-2 Cliffs of Dover Blitz/Tobruk flyable aircraft have CLICKABLE/INTERACTIVE COCKPITS for some sim study. Not all buttons and knobs are clickable (like radios and oxygen-related stuff), but all the important functions are.*
Hot Blonde vs Smokin' Brunette? Impossible to choose just one. I think that the multiplayer experience is WAYYY better in IL2. Easier to learn what the heck is going on strategically, and much smoother framerate / less game crashes. Less intimidating for newbs. IL2 also has a MUCH better functional damage model - no contest there. I have had more fun times flying with friends in IL2 than I have had in DCS, so far. OTOH, DCS is more beautiful, visually. I mean, almost photo-realistic depending on settings and hardware. I personally don't much care about clickable switches, more about the "feel" of the flight model, which DCS does best IMO. Just taking off or landing a WW2 plane in DCS requires much more skill than in IL2, although the differences become almost insignificant when flying / dog-fighting. Also, modern combat jets and helis are awesome (only in DCS). Making and hosting missions in DCS is a breeze, whereas I cannot get it to work in IL2 yet (my fault somehow I know). Just get both.
IL2 is excellent in VR at the highest settings. DCS is unacceptably un-optimised to the extent that an RTX 3090 will not help your fps in any impactful way with high graphical settings becuase of its absence of multi-threaded support.
As an owner of most everything (Sadly? lol) in both DCS World and the IL2 Great Battles series.. I couldn't have worded this better myself. Each title has its strong points and weaker points. It all depends on each player to decide how to give value to those points.
I don't know why DCS bothers with WWII, Il-2 is doing it so well. DCS should stay in modern times- maybe even a UFO or two ;) But seriously, focused goals and not get too ambitious. There are plenty of bugs and fine tuning to be done with what is already out.
Dcs also gave k4 unrealistic power settings that would’ve killed the engine. Also I’m sure it was rare for Dora’s to run at the settings they do on dcs aswell. It just puts allied planes at a unrealistic, and unbalanced disadvantage.
But it is a full sim...100% of flyables have clickable cockpits + mouse over labels. not fully clickable, but all important functions are, even for some basic sim study. :\
Like the review but disagree on the words High fidelity/Low fidelity - a WW2 fighter can only have the controls it has - if it has 30 levers/buttons and switches in the actual plane and you model 30 its high fidelity if an F18 has 200 levers/buttons and switches and you model 200 its high fidelity. you cant put more fidelity in that the actual aircraft has. look at the basic cockpits on Russian aircraft virtually no gauges and minimal control inputs you cant model what's not there. Now if you said IL2 (especially IL2 1946) modded for jet aircraft was a low fidelity model Id agree, but for the core objective of the designers in DCS and IL2 Great Battles they have fully met them. Still love the review and videos though.
I agreed with you 1 month ago but spent 20 hours il-2 and graphics of battle of bodenplatte feels very immersive compared to dcs. I bought the p38 for 5$ and the last released plane are so beautiful and immersive ! I like dcs for jets but il-2 is vastly superior to me for WW2 era (even FM doesn't feel much better in dcs anymore, strangely) ! Dogfights in il-2 feels better and the game run so well !
Oleg Maddox' IL2 series was a phenomenal sim for the PC at the time it came out. Gaijin worked on a version of it and went on to do War Thunder. Our clan flied IL2, played Operation Flashpoint and DCS seems a progression from the idea of combining the two.
DCS is where it's at, as far as being a flight simulator. Basically everything Grim has said here. Phil Style has done an intensive comparison between the DCS Spitfire 9c and the IL-2 Spitfire 9e, and IL-2 does have some dull areas. Flight model and overall quality goes to DCS, specific to those aircraft. But I really don't think IL-2's graphics hold a candle to DCS. The lighting engine is far more photorealistic in DCS, *however* IL-2 does have a lot more (and in some cases better, like clouds) effects. But with no PBR, IL-2 is lacking in the lighting. Last thing is that the IL-2 BoX (BoX, not 1946 or CoD!) doesn't modding communities as strong as DCS, though this was due to 777 especially not allowing it. Recently though, mods have been allowed, so the IL-2 modding community will grow larger. I've been dissing IL-2, but there's a flip side. IL-2 has a crapton more aircraft and at better prices per. There are more maps as well. The community in WWII is larger, getting 60 players on Wings of Liberty at times. A big thing IL-2 has over DCS is multicrew in its aircraft. No DCS warbird has this, though frankly, at present, none would anyways. The TF-51 being an arguable exception, being as old and the lack of attention it (and the Frogfoot too), and that you can't do a thing from the second seat, if it were modeled. The damage model in IL-2 is also exceptionally superior to DCS's, *however* ED is cooking something to do a massive overhaul of the damage modeling, a few years in the making at this point. All of this can make IL-2 a hell of a lot of fun, especially with friends in the backseat. Another big plus I give to IL-2 is Tank crew. It's already better than DCS Combined Arms, and sports all the qualities I've mentioned above. I just got TC myself a few days ago and it's an absolute blast! It's not widely supported yet, but as it developes, I expect that to change. I've already made a muddy track mod for Tiger I 😊 Something I didn't mention because of how it is are the map quality. IL-2 has better quality in their maps, compared to the only DCS WWII map, Normandy, done by UGRA Media. But the maps done by ED outmatch almost all of IL-2's maps, except the tank map (which I can't remember yet). UGRA is supposed to come back to Normandy though. To be fair, their map was in a rough spot, between 1.5 and 2.5, in the short-lived 2.2 DCS. But while Nevada was kept up to snuff, Normandy was meh out of the box.
Very thorough video Phil, thank you! I recommend a part II that explains the difference in system requirements. I think IL-2 is much less demanding in terms of system performance.
Thanks for the comparison video. I used to play Microsoft combat flight simulator back in the day, so I am familiar with WWII planes. I am going to get both simulators when my skytech chronos comes in today.
IL-2 is also like 2eu which is a major bonus. ive been eyeing the P51 on dcs for the WW2 aspect. but as i looked at some videos with the GR squad i decided to dip my toes into IL2 especially seeing the price
As a side note, IL-2 is also dipping its toe into the World War I waters with Flying Circus (and I'm loving it, especially in VR). And tank simulation. And a semi-dynamic campaign via career mode. I have probably spent more money than I should on both IL-2 and DCS... :) Now if I only had the *time* to devote to both... I do bristle a little bit with calling IL-2 (or even the FC3 aircraft) "low fidelity." I've played a lot of flight sims, especially back in the 80s and 90s, and IL-2/FC3 would both be considered pretty hardcore realism by those standards. Low fidelity to me means something like the Jane's series (Naval Fighters, ATF, etc.). Sill a step above "Arcade" a la War Thunder or Ace Combat or something, but a big difference in realism and authenticity. Yeah, compared to the incredible detail of the DCS "Study Sim" or Falcon 4 / Falcon BMS, nothing comes close. I don't know the answer... "medium fidelity?" Maybe it doesn't matter, it's just me. :)
Good point, Jay. FC3 is quite "hard core" compared to what was considered the serious sims of the 90's and much of the next decade. I'm learning the F-15C after quite a few years away from flight sims---and it isn't a cake walk. I read a guide that suggested an FC3 plane can take weeks or months to learn whereas an A-10C can take years to master. I think the terms might be "high fidelity" vs "extreme high fidelity". And . . . IL2 is just a gorgeous sim I find quite challenging in terms of flight models, even in comparison to DCS warbirds (all of which I own). There is something satisfying about DCS warbirds from a pure flight simulation aspect, but the new IL2 series captures the color, stress, and sensation of being in war nicely.
Great points about Hi Fi and Low Fi for new users. Hi Fi looks great, but all the "switchology" & the learning curve can be quite intimidating for a newcomer. Lo Fi is a nice way to get acclimated with the simulator & sims missions before you truly earn your wings.
I really loved Falcon 4.0 back in the day. Haven't really been able to get back into it via BMS... but if BMS had VR support, I'd probably be playing it now. It still does a lot of things that have not been matched today.
I think the flight models are pretty similar as well, i mean of course you dont have interactive cockpit on IL-2 but honestly I dont really mind that much, its more like an action kind of simulator, cant really imagine myself trying to touch some button while dogfight in il-2, and physics and the plane destruction is so epic in IL-2 its insane, I cant find any simulator which do that at least the same level or better, and when you have joystick and pedals and not flying with mouse which is more like an arcade, its really hard to fly those planes as well as in DCS, no matter you have or not the interactive cockpit. EDIT: almost forgot about G force effects on the pilot in IL-2 which are insanely good and has been improved many times already
Been playing VTOL vr, I have il2 so I’ll try that first. I’ve already spent way too much buying iracing cars, and that’s a drop in the ocean next to dcs.
Really has put the cat amongst the pigeons with this one. Reading through some of the comments its quite an even split. Personally I am NEVER going to be able to fly the real thing so whichever one I play I enjoy as its a way of escaping real life (even FSX) even if I am a noob and no good at remembering any of the button/controls and being red/green colour deficient means I have trouble seeing the enemy.
Hi Cap - can the Grim Reapers come up with a grading system to guide potential new DCS simmers on what type of aircraft are easier to learn than others as a (sort of) stepping stone into the full fidelity arena. For example I would suggest the F5E is easier to learn than say the F18C purely because it’s a less complicated aircraft and there for easier to get to grips with. This is just an example but it would act as a guide and maybe you could come up with a table to help? Just a thought 💭
docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1I0YI6ktgJnxK1a-EmwmY8AyOjcQc3gDsJLDtDrMHUUU/edit?usp=sharing click on the tabs at the bottom to select a plane and the difficulty out of 5 is on the right. It's the best we could do.
*sees the title>* OOOOO BOY ...This is going to be fun! *grabs popcorn and refreshes the comment section* Oh yes! You DCS guys better get inside the bunker fast. The IL2 Fanboys return fire will be heavy! EDIT owww poor boys! Cap .. you hurt them with the high fidelity/low fidelity flight models.. :))
@@glados1073 I'm not even sure how they can compare the flight models .. ithe difference is ... t's night and day! I'm guessing that most of them never tried DCS premium models. They probably flew the Su-25T and that's it.
Los que aman la simulación pura y dura para hombres, después de volar el BF109 4 de DCS, el del IL-2 te parece un juguete y ya no podes volver.... Te das cuenta que a la cabina le faltan cosas como por ejemplo las palancas para cortar los radiadores derecho o izquierdo, el marco del vidrio blindado del respaldo es liso... Si DCS tuviera una verdadera campaña para WWll y hubiera una lógica con los modelos que van sacando, los que amamos la simulacion para hombres no podríamos volver a BOX porque está mas cerca del War Thunder que de un simulador de verdad.
To be able to say which flight model is good and which is not you have to be well experienced pilot with background of a lot of flown types, but not a person who is in flight simulation world for a long time. Some times, more complicated and difficult to fly model doesn't mean that its more "real" it might be just a mess of parameters. DCS models are really good for procedural training, they have a better looking cockpit using more complex textures, sound effects are better. So all of that are immersive. But don't get yourself wrong judging about flying physics because of it.
I play both games in VR their both fine and enjoyable and I have mid tier equipment maybe bottom of the line at this point. RTX AMD 1080 make sure you have at least 16 G of RAM or dcs won’t work properly in multiplayer servers.
I'm loving IL-2 1946 and Cliffs of Dover. Will be getting the Tobruk add-on soon for Cliffs of Dover. I prefer WW2 sims so I won't be going to DCS anytime soon.
I don't like the engine damage model in IL-2. It is not dependent on outer environment or how to call that. It works just like the timer. E.G. in IL-2, HE-111 you can use the maximum power only for around one minute. Once you use it one minute and one second, the engine is dead. It does not matter the outside temperature is cold enough to keep engine runing in the max power setup for longer time. In the DCS it depends on outer environment much more. You are able to keep really high power output when the outer environment allows that.
Objection, your Honor. The witness is not an expert on the authenticity of flight models. Having logged a lot of hours on DCS (with a twist grip!) does not qualify a person as one 😉 Other than that, a very nice comparison 👌
Perhaps a fair observation, but the airplane feedback is all a sim pilot can go on. Flying DCS brings out the inner flight instructor screaming "Fly the airplane! Don't let it fly you!" After so many hours of fighting with your aircraft of choice and becoming somewhat proficient at making it obey your commands, sliding over into the IL-2 cockpit most certainly feels irritatingly easy, like flying on rails. So I can back up the witness' statement and majority rules.
@@peterjp4 I agree with you in that DCS teaches you to fly. By grinding in DCS warbirds I finally figured out how to (think about the) touchdown in a taildragger, which I never really mastered IRL. I'm just saying that only a real warbird pilot can really tell if the DCS flight models are spot-on or overly touchy, or if Il-2 is far too docile. More difficult does not automatically mean more realistic 😅
@@sightflimmer3278 As much as a flight simmer wishes it to be, comparing DCS with real flight is vastly more distant than comparing DCS to IL-2. Even a full-motion military simulator cannot simulate inverted flight or the stresses on the body. I kinda hope it gets there someday. Imagine a future where sim pilot's black out at their computer desks because they didn't use the proper breathing technique in high g. Or have severe sinus pains due to lack of pressure equalization after a rapid descent, giving themselves a nose bleed, and fighting to retain consciousness.
@@peterjp4 Haha, that's a very good point when we are talking about combat flying or aerobatics where physical stress is an issue. Fortunately for us simmers, VR may become quite good at reproducing the visual and audio cues which your everyday flying should depend on (and where you should not trust physical sensations anyway because they can be misleading).
I had many versions of IL2 and always enjoyed them. Once wanted to try DCS but after like 2 or 3 evenings of searching and downloading stuff and i still didn't find a way to actually fly without paying like 70 $ for a single plane model and a map i deinstalled all the free stuff i downloaded again and went back to IL2. So DCS is just way too complicated to actually get it running and get started at somewhere without having to read into it for a week prior to installation...
I know your comment is a few months old now. But if you are still interested in dcs: they now have a 2 weeks test license on all(!) modules. So if you have two weeks off work and nothong else to do, you can just download the free stuff and one or two planes you are interested in. 2 weeks is no way enough to master a plane, but its enough to learn how to fly, shoot and find out if you like it. The 2 week period is independent for each module, so you could also test one after the other. The forst purchase for new users is 50% off, so your first module wont be that expensive. Maybe worth another shot for you.
I think they need more trainers. Something like a Tiger Moth to learn real flight. A Harvard. Equivalents for the jets. With some solid training campaigns I think that would help new players a bit. They would still have to invest time in learning but its DCS and that is its gig. I fully appreciate that for the combat guys there are aircraft that would make a lot more sense to be added first. But I also see DCS as a flight Sim not just a Combat sim. I would love to see a flyable Dragon Rapide. I won't ever fly the real one and DCS would be the closest I would ever get. I love the super sexy fighters but i'd be happy to see flyable JU-52, or a Hercules. Which is why I am pretty chill whenever they announce a new plane.
I think the challenge is that they actually have to sell the trainers to people. And face it... if you are a new DCS player with $50 - $80 to spend, and you are faced with choosing between (say) a T-6 or an F-14, which are you going to choose? Even if the T-6 would be really "good for you" to learn on? I mean, okay, I am one of those people excited about the Super Tucano, but that's me. :) If DCS were to go the pure flight sim route, they'd be competing against the likes of X-Plane... which would really water it down IMO. I think they may have found a potential additional niche with aerobatic aircraft, like the Christen Eagle II, though I don't know how well that one sold.
After becoming increasingly hacked off with War Thunder, I started looking around for something else. I fell upon both of these in you tube videos. They Both looked great, so i took a punt and got them on steam. Now my brain hurts, what have i done. lol
il2 also has decent ground combat. while dcs its here and there. in il2. i can have fun(and realism) playing as a panzer 4. while with dcs. playing any ground unit feels like battlefield
IL-2 is a much better VR experience than DCS though If you are new to flight sims and want to experience air combat in glorious virtual reality go with IL-2. If you are a veteran flight simmer that appreciates the finer things in life -and don't care for or can cope with often choppy VR performance- go DCS
don't know why you striked out the warning about VR performance sucking in DCS, becuase it still does in mp even with multithreading and people should know.
I just really dont get when people talk about proper flight models...have you flown a ww2 spitfire? Bf109? How would you know what is rite or wrong? Not being a dick just trying to understand...
dave haag Well ya see most people really don’t know just like ya said, but ya can take the historical facts and data and try to see how accurate it is. Also take the technical and mechanical issues of aircraft and see if that is implemented into the simulator. IL-2 and DCS are the BEST sims that you can go for and experience realistic aerial combat. Now, can we say with certainty that THIS IS how EACH aircraft performed like it did in real life with 100% certainty ? No, of course not, but the developers try their very best to simulate it, and it shows in these 2 titles.
I feel the WWII aircraft feel more like real aircraft compared to DCS.. obviously only WWII aircraft. Are you sure you had all the aides off because I think they are the same flight models :) lol
After trying DCS 109k4 to take off that almost break my flight stick and the twitchy spitfire , il2 BoX is my warbird sim and DCS the jet sim, i love the free su25t!
Hasta ahí nomas... En BOX te revientan el motor, tenes el parabrisas todo manchado y la presión de aceite ni se mueve hasta que el motor se detiene por completo......
@@Specter0420 They are still giving small tidbit updates on the DM progress. Nineline was testing the new DM on the Wulfs last week, and said the DM for Thunderbolt was coming along. No screenshots are (apparently allowed to be) released yet
WWII DCS is getting better and better, performance wise, maps and planes, while Il2 is getting worse, damage model getting more arcade and no systems modelled, maps dont look good that good. IL2 SP is very boring.
Il2 has far better damage models and are high fidelity as fare as I can see, obviously second world aircraft hadn't the same complex equipment. Much prefer iil2 .
Excuse me valued youtuber, but your failure to even mention War Thunder and World of Warplanes is deeply disturbing. It's a clear sign of shilling, we now know whom fills your pockets. Deplorable.
I have been just getting back into flight simulators after years of not playing... I completely agree with you CAP... game fun IL-2... for real flight hard-ons... DCS! oh and X-plane and condor 2 when i want civilian and sailplanes... thanks for the reviews!!!
Best at what, though? That's kind of the point. For balls-out high fidelity simulation of flying a combat aircraft down to the level of the rivets, yeah, it's pretty tough to beat. But if you are doing night bombing against AAA with searchlights combing the sky in WW2, IL-2 captures that much better. I love 'em both.
Il2 feels more like actual flying in a war. Until it gets a dynamic campaign engine DCS cant really do that. For modern (well cold war) jets and multiplayer with those jets is really where DCS shines imo.
Exactly. Been a dcs fan boy for a while and just recently jumped into IL-2 and I’m having so much fun.
Especially because IL2 has a big PvP community dogfighting and tanking. Good fps all around and great VR.
Three years later...still waiting. Come on doods.
@@Leon-bc8hm I was hesitant on Il2 in VR does it really have good framerates? becuase DCS is awful for that. Also noticed there are so many different versions of IL2 so confused to which one to get?
@@vracan If you get it from steam you have to buy "Battle of Stalingrad" as your base game, and then you can purchase extra aircraft or tanks as you please. If you get it directly from the 1c shop. Then you can get any edition of the game and run it fine. In my experience IL-2 is one of the best optimised VR games put there, it just runs so smoothly, biggest lag is while loading mission but it lasts for like 3 secs. I would definitely recommend giving it a go.
Always a tricky one and down to personal preference. I certainly find the IL2 campaigns much more immersive
IL-2. in most all its current incarnations is on sale until August 29th at 66% off. I'd quibble with the high fidelity/low fidelity description. With the more contemporary military aircraft, yes, it's important to have access to all to the controls because modern air combat is largely an exercise in systems management. With WWII aircraft it's all about maneuvering and gunnery and physically seeing the enemy first. Some systems access is important and IL-2 has that, along with trim controls which are *very* important as well. Thus, much of the "fidelity" of DCS WWII crates falls under the heading of non-tactical, or what I've long called, nuisance realism.
Where IL-2 shines is in the sheer authenticity of the aircraft flight characteristics. The matchups of the various aircraft match closely the historical record. I'm sure the same is true in DCS but there are just too few WWII aircraft and historically based combat scenarios in DCS to compare it to IL-2 if you prefer aircraft of that era. Finally, many of us have actual experience in high-performance propeller-driven aircraft whereas very few of us have that in jets unless we're ex-military. Thus IL-2 *feels like flying* for more people I reckon. On this last point, I'm likely full of shit, though, as I'm seeing fewer and fewer people becoming pilots today compared to 30 or 40 or (*gasps*) 50 years ago when folks like me were taking up flying. 😲
Fully agree
It should be noted that the Il-2 Sturmovik of 2001 is a completely different beast from Cliffs of Dover, which is itself a different entity from the "Great Battles" series. The original Il-2 had expansions that allowed for dynamic campaigns and scripted work and an amazing full mission builder with a ton of customizability once modding became a thing.
DCS isn't realistic in terms of damage model... so +1 for the cockpit switches but -1 for the actual combat
DCS Damage Model is one of the (many) things being worked on. Currently being developed for the WWII ED aircraft.
@@MrPhantom453 Yup I know it's being worked on but we have no date on when it's going to come out. It's both a highly challenging task and a medium to low priority item on their list. So we most likely won't see it anytime soon.
@@DreamList Just keep an eye on the news. You might be surprised soon enough :)
The mods sound uncomfortably stoked about the WIP DM in the DCS discord, Nine in particular. I guess he does testing on the side
I think is like this beacuse most of the time you get shot down by 1 missile not lile in il2 where you have to use 99% guns so the damage model is more accurate
Thanks for the comparison video, although as you point out a direct comparison isn't easy.
But I should point out that if I was someone who had never played any of the IL-2 series of sims this video would be misleading, in regards that it lumps the old Il-2 sim from the 2000s with Cliffs of Dover and also with the new Il-2 Great Battles series (Battle of Stalingard, Battle of Kuban etc). Although the last two have links to the original sim these are three very separate sims with completely different graphics engines, FMs etc.
For anyone interested in the series, here's a very basic over-view:
IL-2 Sturmovik (2001): A very old sim which has received so much development that that it still has a very active fan community and continued development from an officially sanctioned 3rd party (Team Daidalos). Wikipedia says it now has 85 flyable aircraft and 45 maps plus a bunch of ai only aircraft. This doesn't include a whole ton of fan created mods. Recommend that you purchase IL-2 1946 (2006) cheap then add all the free patches that came out afterwards.
Cliffs of Dover (2011): A Battle of Britain sim with a brand new engine not compatible in any way with the previous sim. These days development is also done by a sanctioned 3rd part, Team Fusion.
Il-2 Great Battles (2013): Originally called Il-2 Battle of Stalingrad and using an upgraded version of the engine used in the WWI sim Rise of Flight, this series is being developed with new content on the way. Currently there are three expansions released (Battle of Stalingrad, Battle of Moscow and Battle of Kuban) with the latest Battle of Bodenplatte in early access. NOTE: Great Battles has two other modules that aren't only about WW2 aviation, namely Flying Circus (a bunch of aircraft ported over from Rise of Flight and a WWI map under development) and Tank Crew (a dedicated map and several tanks released with more on the way). These are unified in Great Battles so one can strafe a Tiger in a Sopwith Camel while dodging a Me262 if one wants to! :D
owning most of both, i enjoy both. perhaps ive had a bit more fun in IL2. high fidelity is kewl and all, but for VR players its nice to have the controls streamlined a bit. besides, sometimes you want to just pull a trigger & shoot stuff without going thru complicated procedures, breaking immersion by lifting the vr headset to see the keyboard, et cetera. splattering on the ground by bailing out too low is fun too
This was basically the deciding factor for me, I'd love to fly a modern jet but if it's not in a VR headset it sounds boring as F and I just don't have the patience to blindly do all those tasks.
VR tends to run a bit better in IL-2 as well. Solid +90 fps in IL-2 while I only realistically get 40 FPS in DCS (without mods)
@@jasonjrf you mean my DX2-66 won’t run it? I have a 3dfx voodoo card.
What Rig were/are you running back when you got these metrics?
@@smithyMcjoe personally i play dcs in vr (oculus quest 2). And I’m not able to run that shit. But with il2 I just change like 2 or 3 settings, I even put all the graphic in ultra, and the game is smooth as fuck. What I’m doing wrong with dcs ? The ground is shit, the clouds is shit… and I’m just able to see further than my own plane… where my partner are pixel flying in the air… where they teleport 50/50 of the times. Don’t forget than dcs crash every time
@@christcosmique6619 I dunno, I'm not tech help mate. Probably your computer not having enough power for it to run properly. That also sounds like lag in MP which could be your net speeds. Also my dude, reread your shit before you post it, that took some deciphering.
@@christcosmique6619 yes DCS needs optimizations badly. especially handling of the cpu. this is why I'm thinking of going for Il2 now. but there are so many versions of Il2 I'm confused for which one to get. Any suggestions?
I just cant swallow that BS of DCS FM being superior. Just need to fly the Spitfire in DCS to see how flawed it is (P51 is much better). Il2 is not perfect but the FMs are also top notch and you dont have to worry about flipping switches like a tool.
*Don't forget 100% of the IL-2 Cliffs of Dover Blitz/Tobruk flyable aircraft have CLICKABLE/INTERACTIVE COCKPITS for some sim study. Not all buttons and knobs are clickable (like radios and oxygen-related stuff), but all the important functions are.*
Hot Blonde vs Smokin' Brunette? Impossible to choose just one.
I think that the multiplayer experience is WAYYY better in IL2. Easier to learn what the heck is going on strategically, and much smoother framerate / less game crashes. Less intimidating for newbs. IL2 also has a MUCH better functional damage model - no contest there. I have had more fun times flying with friends in IL2 than I have had in DCS, so far.
OTOH, DCS is more beautiful, visually. I mean, almost photo-realistic depending on settings and hardware. I personally don't much care about clickable switches, more about the "feel" of the flight model, which DCS does best IMO. Just taking off or landing a WW2 plane in DCS requires much more skill than in IL2, although the differences become almost insignificant when flying / dog-fighting. Also, modern combat jets and helis are awesome (only in DCS).
Making and hosting missions in DCS is a breeze, whereas I cannot get it to work in IL2 yet (my fault somehow I know).
Just get both.
Hot blonde all day, and hopefully, all night long. You asked and I present you with an answer! ;)
@@DJScaleModels You're choosing one over both? Sucker...... :P
Great video. Both games are great but IL-2 is more my thing because of the setting.
IL2 is excellent in VR at the highest settings. DCS is unacceptably un-optimised to the extent that an RTX 3090 will not help your fps in any impactful way with high graphical settings becuase of its absence of multi-threaded support.
As an owner of most everything (Sadly? lol) in both DCS World and the IL2 Great Battles series.. I couldn't have worded this better myself. Each title has its strong points and weaker points.
It all depends on each player to decide how to give value to those points.
I don't know why DCS bothers with WWII, Il-2 is doing it so well. DCS should stay in modern times- maybe even a UFO or two ;) But seriously, focused goals and not get too ambitious. There are plenty of bugs and fine tuning to be done with what is already out.
Dcs doesn’t give mustangs correct power settings it had in ww2 so it isn’t completely realistic to begin with.
Dcs also gave k4 unrealistic power settings that would’ve killed the engine. Also I’m sure it was rare for Dora’s to run at the settings they do on dcs aswell. It just puts allied planes at a unrealistic, and unbalanced disadvantage.
Dcs just doesn’t do WW2 good enough imo. If you aren’t in a K4 is a done deal unless you have poor situational.
il 2 sucks tho lol so fake
@@randyreal5871 Because you suck too. So fake lol
Cliffs of Dover w Team Fusion mod sure feels more like a high fidelity simulator.
But it is a full sim...100% of flyables have clickable cockpits + mouse over labels. not fully clickable, but all important functions are, even for some basic sim study. :\
Now...which one has the most fun / best combat effects for WW2? That's what I enjoy! The result of the shot!
Like the review but disagree on the words High fidelity/Low fidelity - a WW2 fighter can only have the controls it has - if it has 30 levers/buttons and switches in the actual plane and you model 30 its high fidelity if an F18 has 200 levers/buttons and switches and you model 200 its high fidelity. you cant put more fidelity in that the actual aircraft has. look at the basic cockpits on Russian aircraft virtually no gauges and minimal control inputs you cant model what's not there. Now if you said IL2 (especially IL2 1946) modded for jet aircraft was a low fidelity model Id agree, but for the core objective of the designers in DCS and IL2 Great Battles they have fully met them. Still love the review and videos though.
I agreed with you 1 month ago but spent 20 hours il-2 and graphics of battle of bodenplatte feels very immersive compared to dcs. I bought the p38 for 5$ and the last released plane are so beautiful and immersive !
I like dcs for jets but il-2 is vastly superior to me for WW2 era (even FM doesn't feel much better in dcs anymore, strangely) ! Dogfights in il-2 feels better and the game run so well !
Oleg Maddox' IL2 series was a phenomenal sim for the PC at the time it came out. Gaijin worked on a version of it and went on to do War Thunder. Our clan flied IL2, played Operation Flashpoint and DCS seems a progression from the idea of combining the two.
GR your are a supper RUclipsr keep up the great work you won me I joined DCS and learning as much as I can only through you!
DCS is where it's at, as far as being a flight simulator. Basically everything Grim has said here. Phil Style has done an intensive comparison between the DCS Spitfire 9c and the IL-2 Spitfire 9e, and IL-2 does have some dull areas. Flight model and overall quality goes to DCS, specific to those aircraft.
But I really don't think IL-2's graphics hold a candle to DCS. The lighting engine is far more photorealistic in DCS, *however* IL-2 does have a lot more (and in some cases better, like clouds) effects. But with no PBR, IL-2 is lacking in the lighting. Last thing is that the IL-2 BoX (BoX, not 1946 or CoD!) doesn't modding communities as strong as DCS, though this was due to 777 especially not allowing it. Recently though, mods have been allowed, so the IL-2 modding community will grow larger.
I've been dissing IL-2, but there's a flip side. IL-2 has a crapton more aircraft and at better prices per. There are more maps as well. The community in WWII is larger, getting 60 players on Wings of Liberty at times. A big thing IL-2 has over DCS is multicrew in its aircraft. No DCS warbird has this, though frankly, at present, none would anyways. The TF-51 being an arguable exception, being as old and the lack of attention it (and the Frogfoot too), and that you can't do a thing from the second seat, if it were modeled. The damage model in IL-2 is also exceptionally superior to DCS's, *however* ED is cooking something to do a massive overhaul of the damage modeling, a few years in the making at this point. All of this can make IL-2 a hell of a lot of fun, especially with friends in the backseat.
Another big plus I give to IL-2 is Tank crew. It's already better than DCS Combined Arms, and sports all the qualities I've mentioned above. I just got TC myself a few days ago and it's an absolute blast! It's not widely supported yet, but as it developes, I expect that to change. I've already made a muddy track mod for Tiger I 😊
Something I didn't mention because of how it is are the map quality. IL-2 has better quality in their maps, compared to the only DCS WWII map, Normandy, done by UGRA Media. But the maps done by ED outmatch almost all of IL-2's maps, except the tank map (which I can't remember yet). UGRA is supposed to come back to Normandy though. To be fair, their map was in a rough spot, between 1.5 and 2.5, in the short-lived 2.2 DCS. But while Nevada was kept up to snuff, Normandy was meh out of the box.
Thanks for doing that comparison, I wanted just a quick guide by someone that obviously knows their stuff 👍👍👍
Nice video!
But i habe a question: Where did the video from sunday go?
It's in the schedule, will prob be tonight or tomorrow.l
@@grimreapers Nice, looking forward to it.
Loved the video. Keep it up!!
Your videos are epic, Cap. Been watching for ages and really feel your reviews are the place to go if we want balanced, knowledgeable opinion.
Very thorough video Phil, thank you! I recommend a part II that explains the difference in system requirements. I think IL-2 is much less demanding in terms of system performance.
So in other words IL-2 for VR? cause I got like 10 max buttons I can bind on the HOTAS and can't see the keyboard. lmao
yes makes sense.
Should I invest into other Il-2 modules? So far I own BoS, but the price of other maps and planes is keeping me from tossing money into them :/
Hard to answer but I am enjoying 2 maps and 3 extra planes.
Enable email offers from 1c and just watch for a sale. You can often get them 50% off.
I own both sims. From my point of view, the flight model of DCS WWII-Warbirds are poor and still far away from realistic behaviour.
I noticed the opposite
Thanks for the comparison video. I used to play Microsoft combat flight simulator back in the day, so I am familiar with WWII planes. I am going to get both simulators when my skytech chronos comes in today.
IL-2 is also like 2eu which is a major bonus. ive been eyeing the P51 on dcs for the WW2 aspect. but as i looked at some videos with the GR squad i decided to dip my toes into IL2 especially seeing the price
As a side note, IL-2 is also dipping its toe into the World War I waters with Flying Circus (and I'm loving it, especially in VR). And tank simulation. And a semi-dynamic campaign via career mode.
I have probably spent more money than I should on both IL-2 and DCS... :) Now if I only had the *time* to devote to both...
I do bristle a little bit with calling IL-2 (or even the FC3 aircraft) "low fidelity." I've played a lot of flight sims, especially back in the 80s and 90s, and IL-2/FC3 would both be considered pretty hardcore realism by those standards. Low fidelity to me means something like the Jane's series (Naval Fighters, ATF, etc.). Sill a step above "Arcade" a la War Thunder or Ace Combat or something, but a big difference in realism and authenticity. Yeah, compared to the incredible detail of the DCS "Study Sim" or Falcon 4 / Falcon BMS, nothing comes close. I don't know the answer... "medium fidelity?" Maybe it doesn't matter, it's just me. :)
I'm in the lucky position of being about to retire after 7/8 years away from simming I'm looking forward to everyday being a flying day!
Good point, Jay. FC3 is quite "hard core" compared to what was considered the serious sims of the 90's and much of the next decade. I'm learning the F-15C after quite a few years away from flight sims---and it isn't a cake walk. I read a guide that suggested an FC3 plane can take weeks or months to learn whereas an A-10C can take years to master. I think the terms might be "high fidelity" vs "extreme high fidelity".
And . . . IL2 is just a gorgeous sim I find quite challenging in terms of flight models, even in comparison to DCS warbirds (all of which I own). There is something satisfying about DCS warbirds from a pure flight simulation aspect, but the new IL2 series captures the color, stress, and sensation of being in war nicely.
Great points about Hi Fi and Low Fi for new users. Hi Fi looks great, but all the "switchology" & the learning curve can be quite intimidating for a newcomer. Lo Fi is a nice way to get acclimated with the simulator & sims missions before you truly earn your wings.
I like Falcon BMS
Retro games are so cool! :-)
I really loved Falcon 4.0 back in the day. Haven't really been able to get back into it via BMS... but if BMS had VR support, I'd probably be playing it now. It still does a lot of things that have not been matched today.
Great analysis
I think the flight models are pretty similar as well, i mean of course you dont have interactive cockpit on IL-2 but honestly I dont really mind that much, its more like an action kind of simulator, cant really imagine myself trying to touch some button while dogfight in il-2, and physics and the plane destruction is so epic in IL-2 its insane, I cant find any simulator which do that at least the same level or better, and when you have joystick and pedals and not flying with mouse which is more like an arcade, its really hard to fly those planes as well as in DCS, no matter you have or not the interactive cockpit.
EDIT: almost forgot about G force effects on the pilot in IL-2 which are insanely good and has been improved many times already
great vid , for me IL2 helped me for my DCS spitfire . I enjoy both simulators . your spot on.
Been playing VTOL vr, I have il2 so I’ll try that first. I’ve already spent way too much buying iracing cars, and that’s a drop in the ocean next to dcs.
Really has put the cat amongst the pigeons with this one. Reading through some of the comments its quite an even split. Personally I am NEVER going to be able to fly the real thing so whichever one I play I enjoy as its a way of escaping real life (even FSX) even if I am a noob and no good at remembering any of the button/controls and being red/green colour deficient means I have trouble seeing the enemy.
Hi Cap - can the Grim Reapers come up with a grading system to guide potential new DCS simmers on what type of aircraft are easier to learn than others as a (sort of) stepping stone into the full fidelity arena. For example I would suggest the F5E is easier to learn than say the F18C purely because it’s a less complicated aircraft and there for easier to get to grips with. This is just an example but it would act as a guide and maybe you could come up with a table to help? Just a thought 💭
docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1I0YI6ktgJnxK1a-EmwmY8AyOjcQc3gDsJLDtDrMHUUU/edit?usp=sharing click on the tabs at the bottom to select a plane and the difficulty out of 5 is on the right. It's the best we could do.
What plane is that at 4:00?
The Floof Su-34 I believe
@@J_C7-1 thanks man!
*sees the title>*
OOOOO BOY ...This is going to be fun!
*grabs popcorn and refreshes the comment section*
Oh yes! You DCS guys better get inside the bunker fast.
The IL2 Fanboys return fire will be heavy!
EDIT
owww poor boys! Cap .. you hurt them with the high fidelity/low fidelity flight models.. :))
lols
"" you hurt them with the high fidelity/low fidelity flight models""
Truth hurts...
@@glados1073 I'm not even sure how they can compare the flight models .. ithe difference is ... t's night and day! I'm guessing that most of them never tried DCS premium models. They probably flew the Su-25T and that's it.
@@glados1073 I agree:))
Los que aman la simulación pura y dura para hombres, después de volar el BF109 4 de DCS, el del IL-2 te parece un juguete y ya no podes volver.... Te das cuenta que a la cabina le faltan cosas como por ejemplo las palancas para cortar los radiadores derecho o izquierdo, el marco del vidrio blindado del respaldo es liso...
Si DCS tuviera una verdadera campaña para WWll y hubiera una lógica con los modelos que van sacando, los que amamos la simulacion para hombres no podríamos volver a BOX porque está mas cerca del War Thunder que de un simulador de verdad.
To be able to say which flight model is good and which is not you have to be well experienced pilot with background of a lot of flown types, but not a person who is in flight simulation world for a long time. Some times, more complicated and difficult to fly model doesn't mean that its more "real" it might be just a mess of parameters. DCS models are really good for procedural training, they have a better looking cockpit using more complex textures, sound effects are better. So all of that are immersive. But don't get yourself wrong judging about flying physics because of it.
I play both games in VR their both fine and enjoyable and I have mid tier equipment maybe bottom of the line at this point. RTX AMD 1080 make sure you have at least 16 G of RAM or dcs won’t work properly in multiplayer servers.
I'm loving IL-2 1946 and Cliffs of Dover. Will be getting the Tobruk add-on soon for Cliffs of Dover. I prefer WW2 sims so I won't be going to DCS anytime soon.
I don't like the engine damage model in IL-2. It is not dependent on outer environment or how to call that. It works just like the timer. E.G. in IL-2, HE-111 you can use the maximum power only for around one minute. Once you use it one minute and one second, the engine is dead. It does not matter the outside temperature is cold enough to keep engine runing in the max power setup for longer time. In the DCS it depends on outer environment much more. You are able to keep really high power output when the outer environment allows that.
Im superman in war thunder RB will i be absolute shit in these games?
Yes
Unfortunately VR gloves are hardly a thing yet
I agree with you grim and I play both games their both really fun games
IL-2 Sturmovik!
10:23 ... you mean spitfires, right? Or are we not on the same page here?! Watch your six.
Objection, your Honor. The witness is not an expert on the authenticity of flight models. Having logged a lot of hours on DCS (with a twist grip!) does not qualify a person as one 😉 Other than that, a very nice comparison 👌
^^^ fair observation
Perhaps a fair observation, but the airplane feedback is all a sim pilot can go on. Flying DCS brings out the inner flight instructor screaming "Fly the airplane! Don't let it fly you!" After so many hours of fighting with your aircraft of choice and becoming somewhat proficient at making it obey your commands, sliding over into the IL-2 cockpit most certainly feels irritatingly easy, like flying on rails. So I can back up the witness' statement and majority rules.
@@peterjp4 I agree with you in that DCS teaches you to fly. By grinding in DCS warbirds I finally figured out how to (think about the) touchdown in a taildragger, which I never really mastered IRL. I'm just saying that only a real warbird pilot can really tell if the DCS flight models are spot-on or overly touchy, or if Il-2 is far too docile. More difficult does not automatically mean more realistic 😅
@@sightflimmer3278 As much as a flight simmer wishes it to be, comparing DCS with real flight is vastly more distant than comparing DCS to IL-2. Even a full-motion military simulator cannot simulate inverted flight or the stresses on the body. I kinda hope it gets there someday. Imagine a future where sim pilot's black out at their computer desks because they didn't use the proper breathing technique in high g. Or have severe sinus pains due to lack of pressure equalization after a rapid descent, giving themselves a nose bleed, and fighting to retain consciousness.
@@peterjp4 Haha, that's a very good point when we are talking about combat flying or aerobatics where physical stress is an issue. Fortunately for us simmers, VR may become quite good at reproducing the visual and audio cues which your everyday flying should depend on (and where you should not trust physical sensations anyway because they can be misleading).
I had many versions of IL2 and always enjoyed them. Once wanted to try DCS but after like 2 or 3 evenings of searching and downloading stuff and i still didn't find a way to actually fly without paying like 70 $ for a single plane model and a map i deinstalled all the free stuff i downloaded again and went back to IL2.
So DCS is just way too complicated to actually get it running and get started at somewhere without having to read into it for a week prior to installation...
I know your comment is a few months old now. But if you are still interested in dcs: they now have a 2 weeks test license on all(!) modules. So if you have two weeks off work and nothong else to do, you can just download the free stuff and one or two planes you are interested in. 2 weeks is no way enough to master a plane, but its enough to learn how to fly, shoot and find out if you like it.
The 2 week period is independent for each module, so you could also test one after the other.
The forst purchase for new users is 50% off, so your first module wont be that expensive.
Maybe worth another shot for you.
I think they need more trainers. Something like a Tiger Moth to learn real flight. A Harvard. Equivalents for the jets. With some solid training campaigns I think that would help new players a bit. They would still have to invest time in learning but its DCS and that is its gig. I fully appreciate that for the combat guys there are aircraft that would make a lot more sense to be added first. But I also see DCS as a flight Sim not just a Combat sim. I would love to see a flyable Dragon Rapide. I won't ever fly the real one and DCS would be the closest I would ever get. I love the super sexy fighters but i'd be happy to see flyable JU-52, or a Hercules. Which is why I am pretty chill whenever they announce a new plane.
I think the challenge is that they actually have to sell the trainers to people. And face it... if you are a new DCS player with $50 - $80 to spend, and you are faced with choosing between (say) a T-6 or an F-14, which are you going to choose? Even if the T-6 would be really "good for you" to learn on?
I mean, okay, I am one of those people excited about the Super Tucano, but that's me. :) If DCS were to go the pure flight sim route, they'd be competing against the likes of X-Plane... which would really water it down IMO. I think they may have found a potential additional niche with aerobatic aircraft, like the Christen Eagle II, though I don't know how well that one sold.
@@rampantcoyote3136 Trainer planes don't sell well in a game where you can blow shit up.
Call me when IL-2 have the Viggen....
Lols. Viggen in the ww2 era? That would be pretty hilarious actually.
"Incoming bomber at mach 1.3 on the deck. Intercept!"
Viggen makes every game better.
@@AakeTraak yeah when Mario cart added it, it really in mproved.
@@IanK3b It sure did.
I learned on DCS then tried Il 2 lol..... Il 2 is a joke
After becoming increasingly hacked off with War Thunder, I started looking around for something else. I fell upon both of these in you tube videos. They Both looked great, so i took a punt and got them on steam. Now my brain hurts, what have i done. lol
It's worth it once you have learnt enough.
Did you stick with it?? (bad pun) I hope you did, it's so worth while
il2 also has decent ground combat. while dcs its here and there. in il2. i can have fun(and realism) playing as a panzer 4. while with dcs. playing any ground unit feels like battlefield
IL-2 is a much better VR experience than DCS though
If you are new to flight sims and want to experience air combat in glorious virtual reality go with IL-2.
If you are a veteran flight simmer that appreciates the finer things in life -and don't care for or can cope with often choppy VR performance- go DCS
don't know why you striked out the warning about VR performance sucking in DCS, becuase it still does in mp even with multithreading and people should know.
3,039 views so far and 12,642 different opinions! Almost comparing apples and turtles.
IL2 is more arcade, but if Cliffs of Dover had VR I'd never be out of it.
IL2 Great Battles series does have VR. CoD was coded by the old team and as far as I am aware, the name is the only thing they share.
@@gordonatkins2891 I don't find the battle series half as good as Cliffs (flight feeling wise). The VR in them is cool though, so I suffer them, lol.
DCS needs to offer at least one low fidelity WW2 AIRCRAFT!!!!
For me the IL2 when i want to feel the second world war, but DCS when i want to experience the WW2 planes.
처음에 입문했을땐 너무 어려워서 고통받았던 기억밖에 없습니다 :(
Excellent comparison. Great job. Wish you played FSX as well
DCS= Simulator
IL-2= "Simulator" with OP russian planes (similar to War Thunder)
I just really dont get when people talk about proper flight models...have you flown a ww2 spitfire? Bf109? How would you know what is rite or wrong? Not being a dick just trying to understand...
dave haag Well ya see most people really don’t know just like ya said, but ya can take the historical facts and data and try to see how accurate it is. Also take the technical and mechanical issues of aircraft and see if that is implemented into the simulator. IL-2 and DCS are the BEST sims that you can go for and experience realistic aerial combat. Now, can we say with certainty that THIS IS how EACH aircraft performed like it did in real life with 100% certainty ? No, of course not, but the developers try their very best to simulate it, and it shows in these 2 titles.
I feel the WWII aircraft feel more like real aircraft compared to DCS.. obviously only WWII aircraft.
Are you sure you had all the aides off because I think they are the same flight models :) lol
After trying DCS 109k4 to take off that almost break my flight stick and the twitchy spitfire , il2 BoX is my warbird sim and DCS the jet sim, i love the free su25t!
il 2 is so fake tho. It's so easy
You left out IL2s only real win, the damage model.
Hasta ahí nomas... En BOX te revientan el motor, tenes el parabrisas todo manchado y la presión de aceite ni se mueve hasta que el motor se detiene por completo......
fair point yes it is friggin aweseom. Will DCS catch up?
@@grimreapers I want to say they mentioned they were working on it back in 2017...
@@Specter0420 They are still giving small tidbit updates on the DM progress. Nineline was testing the new DM on the Wulfs last week, and said the DM for Thunderbolt was coming along. No screenshots are (apparently allowed to be) released yet
WWII DCS is getting better and better, performance wise, maps and planes, while Il2 is getting worse, damage model getting more arcade and no systems modelled, maps dont look good that good. IL2 SP is very boring.
At the beginning a f15e .....interesting
Dcs is great but an fps nightmare
Now its backwards for me. Il2 is an fps nightmare and dcs is well behaved.
50cc moped vs Ninja motorcycle...
I prefer modern and speed..
good for you
Trolol. il-2 maps are better than anything DCS and the WWII planes look better. by the way, I own the F-16 in DCS and fly BMS also....
Il2 has far better damage models and are high fidelity as fare as I can see, obviously second world aircraft hadn't the same complex equipment. Much prefer iil2 .
They re both excellent sims get both.
Excuse me valued youtuber, but your failure to even mention War Thunder and World of Warplanes is deeply disturbing. It's a clear sign of shilling, we now know whom fills your pockets.
Deplorable.
it’s all so relative. By almost any standard, IL2 is high fidelity and realism-focused.
I can't play il 2 after dcs it's so fake
I have been just getting back into flight simulators after years of not playing... I completely agree with you CAP... game fun IL-2... for real flight hard-ons... DCS! oh and X-plane and condor 2 when i want civilian and sailplanes... thanks for the reviews!!!
This comparison makes very little sense
DCS gang!
Dcs world is the best
Best at what, though? That's kind of the point. For balls-out high fidelity simulation of flying a combat aircraft down to the level of the rivets, yeah, it's pretty tough to beat. But if you are doing night bombing against AAA with searchlights combing the sky in WW2, IL-2 captures that much better.
I love 'em both.
Comparison:
IL-2 -> ARCADE
DCS -> FLIGHT SIMULATOR
Alberto Pajuelo Montes You meant
IL-2 -> FLIGHT SIMULATOR
DCS -> FLIGHT SIMULATOR
WAR THUNDER -> ARCADE
@@beerbeer8520 IL-2- > ARCADE
DCS -> FLIGHT SIMULATOR
WAR THUNDER -> Kids game
@@albertopajuelomontes2066 I mean, you're clearly insane if you think IL2 is an arcade game but you stay on that high horse
Calling IL2 "arcade" screams pseudo-elitist douche that has probably never even touched a flight-sim but wants to sound cool somehow.