Leaderboard

Hey fellow Warthog owners, Thrustmaster have released a driver update today :joystick: Feel free to post impressions as I am away for a few hours still :cry: Regards

ok lets leave physx out of it. i will let that one go as alot of devs dont use it as much of it can be done on newer cpus anyhow. but im not going to leave out multi-threaded support when that has been around since 2000 when quake3 came out. this is 11 years later and by not including multi-core/threaded support just shows that the original game engine (lockon) has not been messed with to much. am i correct on this? it sure does seem EVERYTHING out these days supports multi-core/multi-threads. so not having it in this game seems strange. im not talking about adding the sound to one of the cores/threads...im talking everything in the game engine should be multi-core that can be multi-core. here is my take on it. it just seems like the people who used to make the addon cockpits for lockon did the same thing for this game and then resold it as a new game when really it just has new sounds (radio messages) and new cockpits that are clickable. i want to see new terrain and geometry.....for some reason when i watch the videos of DCS: A10C it looks just like i was watching lockon original. im sorry but unless someone can show me a side by side comparison it looks the same to me for those 2 games. its just like falcon 4 original vs allied forces.....you can completely tell its the same engine 100% if you do look at hawx 2 gameplay it does look 100x better imho.....now its flying area might not be that big or what not but it does at least look newer. same for IL2 and all its updates.....you can tell its off the same engine and nothing new. when are we actually going to get a new game that was designed from ground up for todays hardware instead of coming off the same old game engine? i dont want to sound ungrateful because without this update then we are left will nothing....i mean it would be il2 (latest version) or allied forces or FC2 or Blackshark. so i am glad DCS did this game but for $60.00 shouldnt we really be getting something brand new? i would think more like the $30.00 range would be more expected. i sure wish there was a demo.

As an 8000+ hour jet pilot, having followed flight simulation since the mid 80s, I can attest this is the most accurate flight model I've flown on a PC. The sound, graphics, detail and "feel" very closely replicate the sensation of flight. You folks at ED have really outdone yourselves. Congrats! Looking forward to learning this airplane and can't wait for your next creation!

I don't think being away from the community for almost half of your life combined with having no amount of knowledge on DCS gives you the right to judge on what is a deserved value. Its not hard, you have a choice to fly and be a part of the most realistic public flight simulator series known to man or NOT. Its not a tricky poser and no amount of whinning is going to change your options. Choose wisely or sit on your hands for another 5 years. :thumbup:

"Бот" ,"лодка" да еще и японская - может хватит.Ты конечно очень любишь DCS...но грань твоей любви порой переходит нормальное восприятие.Может стоит оcтановится и подумать без фанатизма и иллюзий о том что ты пишешь...Ты уж извини, что так прямо и без украс,но другого пути я не вижу как просто сказать тебе по простому - можно любить все что делают разработчики .можно уважать то что делают разработчики ,но это не говорит о том что можно посредственно писать о чем угодно в любой теме ,без выбора...и ты понимаешь о чем я тебе говорю.Что бы не бегать по кругу .иногда единственный способ - остановиться.В том числе и моя просьба не писать твои сообщения с разрывами - читать посты крайне неудобно на весь лист ,особенно не имеющие смысла ни в контексте ,ни в другом понимании. Не стоит злоупотреблять доверием разработчиков и политикой форума .Иногда флуд перекрывает основной смысл темы ,и твой вклад в это дело далеко не последний.Может стоит подумать о том что ты пишешь ,и где ты пишешь,в том числе и как пишешь.- не всем удобно читать твой способ изложения твоих мыслей ,в том виде ,что ты предлагаешь форумчанам. Без обид - но есть над чем подумать. Стоит подумать - что произошло с темой о А-10... Вы что сами не видите ,во что вы её превратили- бессмысленный хаос желалок и хотений. И в том ,кто пришел как новичек ,на форум ,нет никакой пользы. Будьте уважительны к Вашим оппонентам ,что читают Ваши измышления на форуме в поисках полезной информации.

Немножко времечка свободного выкраил и своял на скорячок. Легкая музыкалочка.

Yeah, it only has a new graphics engine (Dx7 to Dx9), completely new sound engine running in it's own thread, new net code, new GUI, new mission logic, completely new flight model engine, completely new instrumentation engine... So... ...no. Seems like it, yes. But in most cases developers will report their game as being "multithreaded" as soon as it is spread out over more than one thread. In that sense - DCS:A-10C (and DCS:BS, and FC2) are indeed multithreaded. I guess Eagle Dynamics just made the mistake of being honest about the exact extent of threading being done. Similarly, any game using Dx9 or later on a Vista or 7 platform can also make a claim at multithreading if the developer is being slightly dishonest - since the driver itself does some threading stuff. In that sense - most games have multithreaded graphics and sometimes claim so on that basis alone. Eagle Dynamics however made the mistake of being honest and does not consider that as multithreading. Show me a game that has that. Any game. Again: you really do not understand this. Here's the list again: New graphics engine. New sound engine. New flight engine. New instrumentation engine. New GUI. New AI. New netcode. New weather engine. New mission logic. New avionics engine. New hydraulics computation. (There wasn't any before) ...and new and expanded map with a much increased level of detail. Here's an idea: go watch some screenshots of Lock On. Then watch DCS:A-10C. Do some comparisons (resources on the digitalcombatsimulator.com site). You are so far off mark it's not even funny. Why not do it yourself? Google works. ... Just wow. See the list above in my post. Do you bitch at Bioware for taking 60 dollars for Mass Effect 2? I mean, for that money you'd expect something brand new, not just a re-use of the Unreal engine? Right? You seem to just completely miss the point.

:megalol::megalol: Newsflash: The Bible also quotes Pulp Fiction!

$60.00 is petty cache to me. im not just going to give my $60.00 away when it is undeserved. this is 2011 and the game should support DX11 and hardware physics and definately be multi-threaded. i dont think there is anyone around that can argue that it should not be at least multi-threaded. you can say whatever you want about dx9 but that technology is OLD....you can not deny it. i pay good money for my system. i have a Phenom II x4 955BE OC to 3.6ghz dual 5870`s in crossfire 4gig ram ssd windows 7 64bit ok if im paying $60.00 the game better be able to take advantage of my system oh and yea i know its a sim but in the end it is a game/software. oh and i used to play falcon4....i had the original binder etc...and followed it for a LONG time. i also had janes F18 and F15 before F4 lockon stole me away from F4. now if i am going to shell out $60.00 the game needs updated TECHNOLOGY wise. and for the people that say DX9 is good enough......then lets just go back to DX6 im sure DX6 would be super fast.... it wouldnt look as nice or have some of the nice features of DX9 "but the flight model is great in DX6" ok come on...if im going to pay $60.00 then give me a game that warrants that price. i dont want updated avionics. i dont want updated cockpits i dont want updated models I WANT updated GAME ENGINE. thanks ps: it reminds me of F4 and the freefalcon developement. can the executable be altered?

im not complaining about the price. im complaining about the price of a rebagged game at a new $60.00 price. if the original game engine hasnt been updated to support DX10 or DX11 and there is no PhysX added for a game that would LOVE PhysX acceleration then why would i pay $60.00? if i wanted to play a dx9 game i would get rid of my win7 machine and my vista machine and step back to the days of winxp.....lets see that came out in 2001 or something didnt it? well really dx9c came out in the days of win98 didnt it? anyhow if im paying $60.00 the game engine should be a DX11 game and support PhysX. im not trying to get anyone ticked off....im just speaking for myself. is there a demo out so i can test it?

you lost me there at "A Flag..." but who cares :D I'm glad they got extra stuff squeezed in :)

I think back to some of the posts written on the beta forums recently, then I see some of those same people who gave ED a hard time writing posts about how great this sim is.. like nothing ever happened. You know who you are. A man can grow by reflecting on his mistakes. Don't be so apathetic that you can't feel regret, or that growth will never happen. At least write a private message to Wags or EtherealN or GGTharos. In the midst of the hard work it took to create this masterpiece you now enjoy, they were taking a beating by you. Remember this and try not to be so shallow in the future. Respect.

You already broke it?

I just don't get it - & maybe I'm tarring you with the wrong brush, but every time a new title is released, people who's sig shows that they've spent literally thousands of dollars on hardware to enjoy their simming experience complain about spending $50 or $60 on the software that makes it all possible...

I never played LOMAC. I only played LOMAC 3, AKA FC2, and I really didn't like it... it's gotta have a clickable pit or I ain't buyin it. So... if I didn't like FC2, and I love DCS: A-10C, what does that say about comparing the original LOMAC to DCS: A-10C? Comparing LOMAC 1 to DCS A-10C is like comparing Richard Simmons to Chuck Norris.

Compassion? Who had compassion for me when I spent 12 hours straight re-playing all training missions for the 8th time just to make sure they still worked? :P Well, I'm exhaggerating, but still. I'll but out though. Not fair to steal thunder here, but I'm bored during graveyard. :P

OK, I've not been idle, but I've not had as much 'pit time' as I would have liked. :( Anyway, just a quick update. Here's my prototypes for the MFCD and the CDU. Still need to perfect my painting process. The buttons on these are just there for size and color test. I have yet to cut out a full set, paint and engrave them... this kinda hinges on painting process. Also, the real MFCD has raised separations between each button. I am testing an alternative that you can see where I am just using an engraved area to represent the divisions. I would have had pics of my UFC too, but I was not paying attention to the orientation when I glued it up and did it backwards! :megalol:

закончена разработка индикации СПО Береза для ЛО2 результат: дизайн, реализация панели СПО, тестирование - Владимир Дериколенко (моделистvv) программное обеспечение - товарищ kreml сделано на основе контроллера F2 (kreml, qw3r)http://www.sukhoi.ru/forum/showthread.php?t=64206 по вопросам самой панели вопросы можно обсуждать сдесь, по контроллеру в вышеуказанной теме. Новую тему лень делать, поэтому здесь: вывод индикации ПУИ [RT]51bb5d28fa7d0bd1cc299fcfc6ca9cf6[/RT] контроллер тотже, F2 Тема некоммерческая, вопросы изготовления на заказ, просьба задавать либо в личку, либо в ICQ(# в профиле) либо в теме по продажам http://www.sukhoi.ru/forum/showthread.php?t=64223 Буду в данном сообщении собирать ссылки на видео по реализованным приборам Топливометр Радиовысотометр

VERSION 1.0 for final release || UPDATED 04.03.2011 || Advanced Profile for Cougar Hotas. It is medium / high and is set entirely in Foxy. I tried to be the most practical possible in the distribution of buttons, always taking into account the real distribution. But being a different command A-10C with respect to the throttle, I had to be imaginative. Mirror 1 - http://www.cavallersdelcel.cat/magatzem/comunitat/perfils/DCSWarthog_Viper.zip The zip contains everything you need, the .tmj .tmm and the text .rtf with installation instructions, as well as the jpg with the image you see below to print. - UHF VHF1 and VHF2 buttons are reserved for the Teamspeak, have no role in the DCS: Warthog. I recommend using the TARS program to improve communications. For limitations of the simulator, to use Snapviews must first activate 'H3 Up with S3'. - Zoom In/Out: Have you set up the axis for it in the sim, it's not a part of the profile. Any bug please tell me. Hope you like and you find it useful.

/Virtual high five to the developers who put this in. Honestly wasn't expecting much change on the mission editor side of things between B4 and release. It is such a pleasant and useful surprise.

I found that my own missions, which were extensively tested and worked very well in the Beta in which they were created, suffered horrible glitches is successive Betas. Helicopters that once performed flawlessly flew into each other and crashed, and enhanced splash damage from weapon effect changes caused friendly casualties to nearby AI that had previously been safe. It's nobody's fault, just a symptom of what happens when you design missions in WIP software. Rather than troubleshoot legacy problems I am going to remake both of my published Beta missions. I will not download or attempt to play missions made for any Beta version, it's just too much of a crapshoot; all decent missions have so many moving parts and it only takes one to be off-kilter for the whole thing to cascade into chaos. I'm hoping most serious mission designers will treat the Release version of the sim as ground zero, because, as explained above, my experience of playing missions built in previous incarnations has not been a happy one and it's sad to listen to users who have downloaded your popular, well tested missions, complain, with justification, that they have fatal errors.

I'm just a hopeless romantic. :P

See the differences? I'm sure that if the ones from DCS wasn't marked as such you'd not be able to do that. Right?:music_whistling:

Constantin Kuznetzov, our new sound engineer. Few months of work and significant contribution to the project. You can give him thanks for new GAU-8 sound too... and some new sounds as well.

Hey I can't speak English well either. Can hardly speak anything actually.

А полет без самолета слабо? :lol: С наступающим ВСЕХ!

А речь и не о Миге вовсе, так что это меня не утешает Да, тактика- основанная на баге игры. Это как уходить от ракет на ПМВ. тоже тактика? да вот к симулятору мало отношения ( в смысле, что в реальной жизни на 3 метрах никто не летает.)

Ну, в ЛО2 они с успехом заменяют ЗСУ, а так как калибр у них побольше то отстреливают все что можно только в путь. Да и, вроде, было где-то признание что их сделали слишком "целкими".

You DO NOT have to buy this simulator. Your money, your call. This simulator does not offer fully multi-core usage, nor DX-11, so this is not game for you, so if that's only things you really care about, you definitely should not buy this simulator I told him :megalol:

Yes, you mostly are. I'll leave it at that ;)

This is not game, this is simulator.

Tnx for info! Now you tell me, does abraams have radar?If you fly lockon2.0 you will uderstand this question... The point is, something is scrued up with 1.02 DCS/ FC2 compatibility patch and LWR does not act proper anymore. I was in so many situation when vehicles with laser rangefinder atacking me and LWR stays spooky silent,like new tenks, BMP's ect.On the other hand, LWR will sometimes alarm you for atacks from other plane, which is not modeled in BS. Also, RWR warning in fighers (FC2.0) when abraams trying to shoot you with his machinegun is "added" in 1.02. Totaly stupid... So, like i sad, problem is not fixed.LWR is working, but not always as it should be... Also, this is is not the first time that someone is asking for LWR bug...http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=54839

@TDBONE1: No comment... I'm going to start A10 and enjoy this great dx9c sim. :pilotfly:

PhysX is the most useless tool for flight model. Amen.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v654/dogeatdog5/IMG_8566-copy.jpg А вот так выглядят настоящие звезды?

На сайте http://www.yuplay.ru Так же есть скидки и на другие продукты. Прям завалили подарками :) ПакФаера не хватает :)

a 4yr. 4 month old thread brought back from the dead... That's got to be close to a record..

good to have you in the community, hope to see you in the air and try out some of the missions you place up.

How was that my strategy, exactly? I did start with the question. My original post opens: "Random question..." Followed immediately by "Is there any reason why X wouldn't work...?" I didn't make any baseless claims. In fact, I didn't make any claims of any kind. I said that it seems like using the random mission generator to plug missions into the existing campaign engine would be simpler than making a full-blown simulated war-style dynamic campaign from scratch. "It seems like, "as in "to me," as in "I'm speculating here, but feel free to chime in with your thoughts." Which nobody has even bothered to offer, actually. Instead, I just get a bunch of people jumping down my throat for having the temerity to ask the question in the first place, as though I'm somehow at fault for not knowing the answer beforehand. Lesson learned, I guess. Don't ask questions. Don't discuss the game's design unless you can program it yourself. You guys sure know how to make a new member feel welcome! No worries--I won't post here again.

The miracle would be an DCS US and RUS fighter package ... imagine just imagine ... DCS Fighters featuring F-16C and SU-27SM ... **** in my pants.

Final and beta checksums Okay, download is done, I just confirmed the checksums given on the download page. Release version MD5 checksums: b4c2b9ead3575d54cdf679cc6b113305 setup-1.bin cce7b894117156ee706b2b4b08ff2dcf setup-2.bin 3c93dbe96c904925aea50204acc11b91 setup-3.bin af4e2aa84087770b24356414e6a2c65d setup.exe Again, these are the old Beta 4 MD5 checksums: b6934525418c2f39b62ee5bb419f4ee0 setup-1.bin 6511008527de3e55b2b23be9fe6ec962 setup-2.bin 126cefd57bbafec83dfee7ff54c964e8 setup-3.bin f88532db264941ec999ca1c0dd2b3a43 setup.exe To calculate and verify MD5- and SHA1-checksums, use something like digestIT 2004. So far I've uploaded ~6.5 GB but I'll keep the torrent running until I go to bed. Happy downloading. :-)

The number of people who think that some software development task is 'trivial' compared to 'some other software task' are legion. Heard it before. So if it's trivial? Prove it by doing it. If you're doing the comparison, you obviously must know what you're talking about. I'm not particularly interested in what it is being compared to since it is erm, trivial. The very use of the word suggests something.

Here we go: [ATTACH]47893[/ATTACH]

Ok, do it. And don't complain that you tried to explain it with 'relatively' ... any time you say 'easy' or 'trivial', go ahead and do it, and show everyone how trivial it is. I don't much care what you compare it to, since you're obviously knowledgeable enough to make the comparison and call things trivial.

You welcome. :) And very nice video indeed. :D After long hibernation, it is time now to go back to some new Saab projects...

PLANE LANDS ITSELF AFTER PILOT EJECTS PLANE LANDS ITSELF AFTER PILOT EJECTS - This F-106A (S/N 58-0787) was involved in an unusual incident. During a training mission, it entered an flat spin forcing the pilot to eject. Unpiloted, the aircraft recovered on its own and miraculously made a gentle belly landing in a snow-covered field. (U.S. Air Force photo)

Ну да, в реале его прикрывают свои ястребы, если рядом могут быть чужие. А в сетевом тандеме ка-50 и а-10, кто их будет прикрывать и кто их будет сбивать? Аим9-ми будут пуляться друг в друга. А акулы будут их вихрями ловить - от это будет реализм :thumbup: Это моё предварительное мнение о том, что нас ожидает в онлайне, посмотрим как будет после релиза, буду рад ошибиться, особенно если совместимость с гс2 всё-таки оставят.

1) Много всяких файлообменников хороших, а ifolder медленный и с рекламой. :( Сайт не личный(:huh:), и одной из его функций, по идее, является файлообмен файлами соответствующей тематики. Странная в общем-то позиция у вас... 2) Эт карашо. :) ЗЫ: не имею ничего против того, что файл выложен не на dcs-fan.ru - это я и сам сделаю, но много чего имею против ifolder. От так вот стоит понимать пост #6. :)