An Interview with Simon Kershaw, Producer for F22 ADF

Introduction

Digital Image Design set out to redefine the 3D combat-flight simulation genre in 1997. After their award winning simulation of the EF2000 and its ongoing improvement with 3d acceleration and the TactCom enhancements they set their sites higher. F22: Air Dominance Fighter and the follow on, Total Air War, will integrate the multiplayer and tactical battlefield with a ground warfare intelligence in a comprehensive new stealth fighter simulation.

In December of ’97 DiD released F22: ADF. Air Dominance Fighter is a generation and more beyond DiD’s second TFX: EF2000. Almost every area of game play has been expanded or improved. In graphics, terrain, objects, clouds, effects and damage are much improved. Lighting effects aren't up to Longbow 2, but missiles glow and flares at night are impressive. Maximum resolution has moved from 640x400 to 800×600 in Glide. (Direct3D support expanded greatly with the release of the patch). Voice and comms are vastly expanded, so much so that there is little comparison to EF2000 in this area. The comms you will hear from other flights while you fly in ADF actually represent what is happening around you in real time.

ADFs avionics are finely detailed, bringing us the best yet in an F22 simulation. In flight refueling has been improved, being the most advanced yet attempted in the simulation world. ATC is here, and beyond even iF22. And boom refueling is modelled, the first sim to accomplish this. ACMI is modelled in detail, in spite of some small requests for improvement.

Even though the missions are scripted, the environment is very active and feels dynamic. There is air and ground action all around, showcased beautifully by the Smartview system which has been upgraded to supply voice interaction simultaneously. The sim, like EF2000, has a very immersive feel to it, improved by clouds and effects beyond EF2000. Finally, the AWACS component was an entirely new direction for this level of simulation design, and a percursor to the Theatre Commander mode of Total Air War.

Its no wonder, then, that DiD scooped TWO Top Games Industry Oscars at Milia d'Or Awards Ceremony in Cannes, France in February for F-22 Air Dominance Fighter. F-22 ADF secured the Best Simulation award and went on to win the Grand Prize Game award. It was the first time the Award for Best Game has ever been awarded for a simulation at Milia. Milia d'Or 98 saw a record attendance, with over 8,000 participants, 2,800 companies and more than 50 countries represented.

TAW: the Second Coming

Second Comings are getting to be almost expected in the computer gaming industry. Longbow 2 was well worth the price of admission, adding 3d hardware acceleration, vastly increased object detail, a fully dynamic campaign, new vehicles to fly and even tactical command ability via the mission planner. In the same way, Total Air War will move us beyond the limitations of ADF.

In spite of the beauty and breadth of F22 ADF, the lack of dynamic campaign AI and mission planning locked us into a battlefield that was too predictable and sometimes leaves the player attempting to beat the script rather than the enemy. Roll on Total Air War! TAW will offer tactical planning and a Theatre Commander role along with a dynamic campaign AI. Lets move to the interview with Simon Kershaw.

Csim: First, congratulations for receiving the Grand Best Game award at Cannes for F-22: ADF, the first sim ever to win the overall best! And thanks for taking the time. I know you're busy with the ADF patch and trying to get TAW off the runway.

SPK: Thanks. We have received a very great deal of recognition for F-22 Air Dominance Fighter along with a little healthy criticism, but overall it has been well received. The only significant criticism has been regarding the absence of a campaign, which, as you know, F-22 Total Air War will most certainly correct.

Winning the Milia D’or at Cannes for the Grand Best Game as well as Best Flight Sim of 1997 was a very nice seal of approval. I understand that best game was awarded for the way we had pushed the boundaries of the flights sim genre, and for the depth of detail incorporated in the product.

Csim: Can you tell us about your role in the ADF project?

SPK: was the Producer for F-22 Air Dominance Fighter.. My role as Producer is to lead the team and act as a focus for all the elements and talented people that are brought together to make a cohesive product. Such a complex simulation is a team effort that in the case of F-22 Air Dominance Fighter involved varying numbers of people at different times.

Csim: Place Total Air War in context for us. Where does it fit in the Military simulation universe? In what ways is it unique?

SPK: F-22 Total Air War is a Flight Simulation based upon the next generation F-22 fighter, and its integrated system design. No modern fighter should be considered as the whole weapon in itself. Rather it should be considered as the scalpel in a surgical team, backed by the entire resources of the hospital.

The unique idea behind the F-22 is not its stealth, its integrated avionics, and weapons, or its thrust vectoring, or even Supercruise.

What is unique about the F-22 is the way that its information systems, weapons, and its pilot are integrated in one stealthy, agile fighting platform, AND as part of a greater system that is designed to gain and maintain Total Air Superiority. This is to facilitate the complete war plan, wherever it is deployed, with the minimum loss of allied lives.

F-22 Total Air War is unique because it attempts to emulate all the above with as much attention being paid to the concepts, and details, of modern warfare as to the flying itself. This is the reason why DID features such as the AWACS, Mission Planner and Air Tasking Orders are included in one product. Good as the aircraft are when considered as individual elements, they really need to be understood as being part of a much larger system.

Csim: ADF was unique in its integration of the theatre command perspective from the AWACS module. How will TAW build on this component?

SPK: The AWACS is one part of a total system designed solely with the aim of gaining total Air Superiority as quickly as possible with the minimum of risk.. F-22 Total Air Ware will emulate other parts of this total system with elements such as the War Room, AWACS, Air Tasking Orders, and of course the Mission Planner.

Please note that I use the word Emulate, rather than Simulate quite deliberately. The reason is that even if we and other interested companies were able to gain full access to some of these military systems, it would not be in the National Interest to fully simulate these systems. We can however synthesize the military ideas and displays in to an effective Emulation of the War system.

Engagement and immersion: convincing the participant that what they do matters; this is key! DID has a genuine edge based on our understanding of these military systems which arises directly from both our links with the military on many levels and of course the interests of our staff.

Csim: How will multi-player involvement impact TAW? Will we see a SIMNET approach where one player can act as theatre commander while others fly the missions?

SPK: The multi-player element of F-22 Total Air War will expand on the content of this game area within F-22 Air Dominance Fighter.

DID is pursuing a total war SIMNET Approach which will manifest itself in F-22 Total Air War in some measure, and in future products. Currently Multi-player is being worked on, and I am not able to expand on my comments for the F-22 product at this time.

Csim: Obviously TAW will add an integrated mission planner with ability to select load-outs. How will this planner differ from the one we had in EF2000?

SPK: The Mission Planner included within F-22 Total Air War will be easier to use than the previous product. It will also allow the player to edit many more mission parameters in an integrated and logically thought out interface. The most significant difference is that the new Mission Planner will allow the player both automatic and manual operation.

Csim: ADF expanded greatly on our ability to communicate with other assets and with our wingmen. Will TAW expand these abilities further? In what ways?

SPK: F-22 Total Air War completes our original vision for the F-22 simulation; It is a Total product in that it opens up an unrivalled panorama of exciting new possibilities for the participant. Communications, with all its possibilities, has to come second to the overall game-play.

DID has learned a huge amount in the time that we have been developing F-22. There are so many things that we can do that we can not possibly cram them all into the current product! It’s like a pop singer – every song is different and draws upon different singing skills – so, some ideas appear now, and others will become part of future products.

One of the great strengths of DID is our ability to keep learning so you can certainly expect F-22 Total Air War to significantly expand communications across the total system that I have described above.

Csim: What other new environmental features will we see in TAW? Will we see a wind or turbulence model or weather?

SPK: DID has a vision of what a really great military flight sim needs as part of one cohesive product. For sure as a Producer I would like to see weather in all its manifestations to be simulated because in the real world weather is one of the factors that has a major influence on what military hardware is used, and how.

The weather within F-22 Total Air War will be what we can currently make the code base do, in the time we have available. I do not expect that there will be a significant difference to the previous product, but then that is not the main focus of TAW. Nevertheless, we are DID, and when we get an opportunity, we tend to sprinkle a little magic on our products!

Csim: ADF gave us some new enemy fighters and brought the enemies under the same constraints as the virtual pilot. Will TAW bring us any new platforms like the Su-32N or new weapon systems like the JSOW or LOCAAS? Or will the enemy have new weapons like R-37 anti AWACS missile?

SPK: When any developer starts a new product, there is a list longer than you have ever seen, of things we would like to include… Over the course of the project we have to compromise on some of these things in order to get a product out there for you to buy.

I certainly have a list of new aircraft and weapons that I would like to get into a flight sim. As in the previous answer, if we get the opportunity to include extras in the cast, then we will try to do it.

Csim: Everyone who follows DID knows that WARGEN was the heart of EF2000. Can you give us an overview of the WarGen II system? What are its essential components and what is it designed to do?

SPK: I am sure that all the developers who are really seeking the Holy Grail of a Dynamic Interactive Campaign have sweated blood to produce campaign code that deals with the desirable issues. At DID, WARGEN has been continually developed in pursuit of the ideal solution.

What we have learned along the way is that there are several possible compromises that will address the same problem. WARGEN 2 is not one, but several systems; built from modular code. Some of these elements will appear in this product, and some will appear in other products.

WARGEN 2’s essential components are that it builds a real time campaign based on a real world balance of power, within a simulated real world environment. The player will be able to interact with this world, and all actions (both the players, and AI controlled elements), will have an effect on that world.

Csim: How do these components compare to the first WarGen system? What is unique about WarGen II?

SPK: The player is part of a war fighting system just as surely as he would be if enrolled within the US airforce. WARGEN 2 immerses the player more deeply than we accomplished with EF2000. Both versions of WARGEN are unique; you must remember that WARGEN 2 is geared to a different type of conflict.

EF2000’s campaign was based around the Cold War, NATO’s fight against the Soviet block in Europe. Whereas WARGEN 2 within F-22 Total Air War is geared to the changed world in which the USAF may find itself fighting many diverse opponents with different abilities and power, in a number of scenarios that are possible in the same area of the world.

WARGEN 2 will definitely handle things differently within a campaign, exactly how will remain our secret, but essentially it does a different job.

Csim: I understand that WARGEN II owed its direction in part to the theories of John Warden. According to Warden destruction of the enemy is NOT the essence of war. This grows naturally out of his perspective on the interdependence of systemic elements such as leadership and infrastructure. How does this aspect of theory impact the TAW campaign?

SPK: Yes, definitely. John Warden has commented favorably on our efforts. His ideas reflecting the changing role of the USAF today has been taken on-board at DID.

The WARGEN 2 campaign does take account of the theory that you can render a country unable to wage war in several ways. For example, you might attack your opponents air bases, or you may attack his command centers. Remember earlier, I talked about the F-22 as part of a greater system? This stealthy but expensive platform has abilities that are suited to waging air war TOTALLY, and that includes the different policies the president can choose from in order to wage a war.

Csim: Warden writes that, [when we think] about winning wars we must take a strategic and operational-or top-down- approach if we are to succeed. Why is the top-down approach so revolutionary, and does it impact the campaign in TAW?

SPK: Just as I earlier outlined why you should consider the F-22 as part of a military system of which the aircraft is just the sharp end, you must consider that no one (in the real world) goes to war because they enjoy waging war for its own sake.

Political Influence and waging any kind of war are two sides of the same coin. As Clausewitz said: War is the extension of politics by other means … The war is just the sharp end of a total system designed to influence events to each countries own agenda.

Traditionally when a country wages a war it has focused on the war itself; how to cause so much damage that the enemy can not continue the war. In the modern world you are going to meet enemies who have a very different interpretation on what defines a win, and how much pain they can take.

Look at the Gulf War. Both Saddam Hussein, and the UN appear to think they won at the time because they have very different philosophies. John’s top down approach is revolutionary because he says we should look at who is fighting, what motivates them, as much as where are the enemy’s military forces, and his industrial muscle.

An enemy is more than military vehicles and facilities; more than static targets. Within F-22 Total Air war we have considered that you might short cut the process of destroying your enemies ability to wage war by creating command confusion. You might render an air base useless by lack of fuel, weapons, and power at a lower cost to your forces and in shorter time than by just shooting the hell out of the sharp end.

I would like to add that most people see straight away that a countries own agenda might be greed. An agenda may also include securing a wider peace so that a countries industries might benefit... These are the reasons why a country needs to have total control of the air.

Csim: Can you sketch for us what an average game is going to look like in the new campaign at the command level. What am I going to have to take into account in order to win?

SPK: For a start you are going to have to read and grasp all of the above.Then you are going to have to apply the concept and philosophy of Total Air War at any point of presence within the F-22 Total Air War campaign you elect to populate with your own virtual presence.

You will be following a war policy, but within that, you will be trying to use your points of presence to leverage a result in which you win.

You will have to see as much as there is to see, work out what the enemy is doing, and deal with it at any, or all of the points of presence, that you have at your disposal. Working out exactly what all this means is going to be the fun in F-22 Total Air War Campaign. I do not think that there is going to be such a thing as an average campaign.

Csim: How will politics manifest itself in the campaign?

SPK: If you get the enemy leader in your sights, and you have a go-ahead from higher command, then shoot him, or her! Whatever you do, you must remain alive, and so must a significant number of your allied forces.

Csim: In early design information we were thrilled at the inclusion of the AWACS perspective, but I don't think many understood what this meant for the strategic level of the sim. Tell us about strategic use of the AWACS in terms of air doctrine in TAW.

SPK: The AWACS was always considered as part of the Campaign, but included within F-22 Air Dominance fighter as a sim-expanding feature, and to give the serious pilots a chance to train.

You have not fully used the AWACS until you have used it in Campaign!

As in the real world the AWACS is the essential tool to understand what is happening in a 3D space that you wish to control. Only with control over this 3D space can you effectively, and with minimum losses, be able to follow any other kind of activity, strike, sea ops, ground war etc. The AWACS is part of the big system. Lose the AWACS, and all your assets are on their own!.

This is part of the reason why the F-22 is designed to additionally datalink with its own kind, each F-22 is capable of becoming a mini AWACS.

Csim: Will it be possible to lose my AWACS in TAW? What happens to the virtual Commander when I do?

SPK: Yes you could lose the AWACS. Each country can only afford a finite number of such a valuable and expensive aircraft. You can bet that just as you place great emphasis on killing the enemies AWACS, they in turn will be looking for your AWACS …

If you were the AWACS commander when it is killed then you are no longer at that point of presence, and if it was the only AWACS you had in theatre, then all your points of presence have lost their Strategic view.

Csim: Tell us about resource management. Just how critical has this become as a tactical element?

SPK: The resource you are interested in depends on which point of presence you are occupying when you consider the question. If you are looking at the entire war, then you will be concerned with aircraft losses only in their total effect on the war, but when you are the pilot the resources of concern will be any mission that you protect, your wingmen, and yourself. When you are a dead pilot, that becomes a very critical tactical matter!

Csim: How do resource management and the ground war relate? Can the enemy take out my supply convoy and so limit my ability to fight? Do I have the same opportunity?

SPK: As stated earlier, all elements in the campaign have some bearing on all others. The leverage that each element can exert to effect the greater war has been decided by the F-22 team.

Csim: How much will the virtual Commander have to concern himself with the ground war in F22?

SPK: The virtual Commander is concerned with the Total Air War, as the product name suggests. Part of that idea does concern the ground war, but it is largely directed at the air element in the same way that general Chuck Horner was given the JFACC role during the Gulf War.

Csim: So far I've restricted the theory questions to the NATO side. What about the war from the other side? Under what doctrine will the enemy operate, or is it important for me to know?

SPK: It is very important for you to work out what war policy the enemy is following. The only way that you will find is to observe their overall behavior surmising their aims from the information presented to you. The enemy will be fighting the war for their own reasons as previously stated.

Csim: Will we see any graphical enhancements to TAW compared to ADF?

SPK: Yes there will certainly be some graphical enhancement. This will mainly be to fix things that we see as a problem, but may also involve enhancement for the Campaign.

Csim: What feature of TAW excites you the most?

SPK: Actually I do not see any one feature that really does it for me, what I see is a collection of features that work together with great synergy. As the Producer I get to see the potential for this sim while in production; the nuts and bolts that everyone within DID produces, getting welded together to produce a Ferrari! I see a product that will have appeal to many people who have an interest in military aviation, F-22 Total Air War has been considered from the top down, and right through the middle.

Csim: What is the multi-player goal for TAW? How many people will be able to participate in a game on the internet? What about LAN?

SPK: We can write our products so that they will support large numbers of users online occasionally. The sim player wants reliability in a part of the game that is inherently complex and this means we must compromise on the numbers we can support for an acceptable level of reliability. In F-22 Total Air War the figure we are willing to compromise to is eight players.

Csim: What will be the upgrade path for owners of ADF? Will TAW be available as an upgrade for a small cost?

SPK: After considerable consideration of all the marketing and technical problems, DID with its publisher, Infogrammes, has decided to release F-22 Total Air war as a complete product. In a very real sense the totality which Total Air War opens to the participant is infinitely greater than that offered in ADF. In addition the box will contain high quality materials to match Allies & Adversaries, but this time around the focus is upon strategy.

Csim: Recently there was an announcement regarding force feedback for TAW. Are you considering any other new abilities for TAW, like dual monitor support for the AWACS interface? The virtual battlefield seems the wave of the future and new hardware like Voodoo 2 is suddenly opening new possibilities. Can you tell us anything about the next TFX from DID?

SPK: You will no doubt have heard of the Skunk Works? Well their security is nothing compared to the workings of DID’s R&D; division. Strange Alien hardware, (and software) is allegedly sighted from time to time, I have to say that I have SEEN nothing!

Csim: Can you tell us anything about TANK? Will we see TANK this year? Is TANK the first module in a virtual battlefield?

SPK: SIMNET and the total battlefield are of interest to DID, both for military and sim use. TANK as it is currently known ( a working title) is part of that vision. It is the first DID product to make use of new game engine technology which will appear in future products. For the exact nature of this game engine and capabilities, I refer you to the last answer. A publishing date for Tank will be disclosed in due course – when DID feels the time is right.

Csim: Thanks Simon, and best wishes to all the team at DID!

SPK: Thank you for this opportunity to speak to those who often have strong opinions on our products. Whatever your viewpoint, or anyone else’s for that matter, the content of our sims is the result of a great team made up of very hard working and talented people, who while passionately pursuing their work, have to make careful decisions, and compromises.

DID’s products are the result of many peoples efforts. It starts with the drive and vision of our Chairman: Martin Kenwright, and extends to include many influences from outside the company. Once combined with our unique approach, the results, we hope, are a kind of magic …

Simon Kershaw
F-22 Total Air war, Producer