Eugel

DLSS reduziert halt die Auflösung. Im "Quality" Setting auf 66,7%, d.h. statt 1080p würde nur mit 720p gerendert (in Deinem Beispiel) Im "Perfomance" Setting sind es nur 50%, also dann nur noch 540p Nu ist es aber bei halbwegs aktueller Hardware (wie Deiner RTX 4070) kaum ein Problem nativ in 1080p zu rendern, da wird performance-mäßig nicht viel Unterschied zwischen 720p und 1080p sein, vor allem nicht wenn der Monitor eh auf 60Hz begrenzt ist. D.h. Du bekommst kaum mehr Perfomance durch DLSS, muss aber trotzdem mit den Bildfehlern leben.

Well, benchmarks are designed to test the performance, not necessarily to show off the nice eye-candy. The posterboy for raytracing certainly is still Cyberpunkt 2077, and while there is a performance hit, it looks absolutely amazing with raytracing. Also, there are some things to consider: RT in DCS will probably not be done at the same level as it is in Cyberpunk. For example, no one cares about reflections in the wheelcaps of random cars, etc. But I think especially shadows and lighting can be significantly improved. Then we will get Vulcan before raytracing in DCS and most likely at least one new generation of graphics cards, so the performance hit then might not be as big as it would be today.

Never had anything like that happen to me. Whenever I fly the Gazelle, it´s shot down pretty quickly.

Technically, I use both as I do some ME stuff in 2D, but I only fly in VR, so I picked option 1.

Nee sorry, ist schon ein paar Jahre her und das Forum gibt´s auch nicht mehr, kann da leider auch nicht mehr nachschauen.

Habe selbst keine Erfahrung mit denen, aber damals als ich noch Sim Racing betrieben hab, hatten viele aus der Community drauf geschworen: https://www.motedis.com/de/DIY-Bausaetze Einer aus unserer Project Cars Community hatte auch dieses Sim Racing Rig dort zusammen gestellt.

@Flappie thanks, I found the culprit in my case. When I set resolution of cockpit displays to "1024 every frame", it flickers, when set to just "1024", everything is fine. So, if anyone else is having this problem, try changing this setting...

I´m really curious, how would you "make the A-10 stealthy" while keeping all three of these ? If you hang 7 tons of bombs under its wings, it won´t be stealthy. You´d loose the firepower if you added internal stores to an A-10 because you´d never get all of the 11 weapon stations inside. You´d have to completely change the shape of the fuselage and/or the wings to have internal weapon stores, and I´m no engineer, but I wouldn´t be surprised if the massive turbines and straight rudder arrangement were also problematic on a radar screen. Changing all these would most likely affect maneuverability and loiter time as well. You could probably do the same with a Spitfire...

For me, it´s basically a choice of stuttering, lowering the picture quality to a point where it´s no fun or live with motion reprojection. Of all those, motion reprojection is the lesser of the evils. And as jurinko mentioned, I also get only minimal ghosting and distortions with SteamVR, mostly only on very fast moving edges like rotor blades.

Directly after that update, it worked perfectly for me and for the first time I was able to record an accurate, hour+ long replay. But strangely, every other replay since then was just as broken as before. (Recorded in an A-10 in VR)

How would a "stealth A-10" be different from an F-35 ? There are physical limitations how to make an aircraft stealthy. They need a certain shape that doesn´t reflect radar waves right back at their attacker but scatter them. You´d have to get rid of external stores and move them inside for the same reason. But the mission, the A-10 was designed for, doesn´t need it to be stealthy. So, by asking to make the A-10 stealth, you are practically asking it to be replaced by a different aircraft.

Schau mal nach ob dieser Schalter an der Anschlussbox auf den kleinen Flieger gestellt ist. Kann gut sein, dass die Pedale im "Racing" Modus als Slider erkannt werden.

I just got the Black Shark and unfortunately, my ABRIS map flickers like crazy and makes it unusable. I deleted the FXO and Metashaders, SSS is disabled, makes no difference. (I fly in VR)

Das ist einfach die Art und Weise wie DLSS funktioniert. Das ist der Preis den man für den Performance Boost zu bezahlen hat.

You mean the real life examples where A-10s were flying under the radar, blowing up sam sites while dogfighting enemy stealth fighters ? Sorry for the sarcasm, but I couldn´t resist...

Novelty ? Raytracing has been around for 40+ years. I ran raytracing demos on my Amiga 500 in the early 90s. All the "conventional" and "established" techniques you mentioned are just workarounds to get close to achieving the results of raytracing. And not because they are better or simpler, but because until very recently, computer hardware just couldn´t do it fast enough. We are just now entering a territory where hardware can do it in real time, so why settle for an inferior workaround ? Why bother developers with creating shadow maps, illumination maps, reflection maps that look maybe 80% as good as with raytracing, when you have the hardware to get the real deal automatically ? Yes, Cyberpunk is a great example, there are plenty of videos that compare graphics with and without RT, and there are plenty of static objects that just look more realistic. And it´s not just reflections and wet streets.

Not sure what your point is, then. You said it yourself, of course, most effects can be faked, that´s what video games have been doing for decades, but not faking it will always look better and more realistic, that´s what I wanted to point out with my comparison to movies. It doesn´t matter if an object is static or not or how many light sources there are. Raytracing will look more realistic. Raytracing is more than just eye-candy reflections you see in Cyberpunk. It replicates what light does in real life. There are hundreds of instances where that would be amazing in DCS.

Of course, no one "needs" raytracing. But there is good reason CGI effects for movies are done with raytracing. Even with a single light source, raytracing will look more realistic. Yes, I don´t see it worth it in DCS at the moment. And as I said, it may take 20 years, but I´m sure, the hardware will get there to implement raytracing on full scale.

Strictly speaking, Raytracing is useful for any kind of computer graphics as it is the most realistic form of rendering images. And there are plenty of instances where you´d see it in DCS (sunlight through clouds, illumination at airfields or cities, explosions illuminating their surroundings, searchlights from a helicopter, but also the simple rendering of textures on aircraft where you don´t need any fake shadow maps and stuff like that) It may take another 10 or 20 years or even more, but I´m sure, raytracing will come for any game.

How would the A-10 find and get a targeting lock on an enemy sam site from 13 nm without being shot at first ? Mavericks are not a good choice against sam sites. No one in their right mind would send an A-10 into an area defended by sams, trusting that chaffs/flares will protect the aircraft. That´s what HARMs are for.

What stealth ? And you can´t be serious about the A-10 hunting Sams ?! With what ? About all of the sam systems will outrange and outspot the A-10 Also dogfights ? Realistically, the A-10 will be blown out of the sky with missiles before any dogfights might begin. How many dogfights do you think an A-10 would find itself in in a real life scenario ? Hey, I love the A-10, it´s my favorite and most flown aircraft in DCS, but realistically, the battlefields it was built for don´t really exist anymore. Though one can´t deny the impact on morale of the ground troops a gun run of an A-10 has. But the efficiency is questionable.

Especially flight simulation games have always pushed computer hardware to their limit. The other big civilian flight sim does the same. I think it would be much more detrimental to the future of DCS if they stopped pushing further after version 2.5 or whatever. You wrote earlier that you have an i9 and an RTX 3090. So I really don´t understand your problem. But it´s also weird that you raise this point now. Of course not everyone is willing or able to keep up with new hardware. But just now they added DLSS support, which can give a considerable performance boost.

No. DLSS doesn´t make games look better, it´s the exact opposite ! It decreases picture quality to gain performance. And again no. DCS looks better on a 2k screen than it does on a 4K VR Headset. Because in VR, you are looking at the screens from like 5 cm distance and looking through a magnifying glass. You will see pixels ! And most likely you will have to reduce quality settings to be able to run in VR in the first place. So no, it definitely does not look better in VR. And someone else had better performance with 2.0, so should they have stopped at 2.0 ? Or 1.5 ? Increasing hardware requirements have been standard in PC gaming since PC gaming existed.

Oh, I would love ground crews at air bases. As it is, they are very empty and lifeless. Hey, they could even introduce the "Freestyle Fridays" sendoff from the ground crews, that would be amazing. "Game Changer" - maybe not, but it would improve the immersion on the ground.