Demongornot

Why people want a GRAPHIC engine make calculation for flight model or avionic ? absolutely no sens. Its definitely NOT the graphic engine who provide things light flight model, avionic, AI and other things like this, for object collision and basic physic yes maybe and only a bit of it, but the graphic engine have NOTHING to do with aircraft comportment, exactly like Cry Engine or any other big graphic engine can do so various type of game that they can be in a software with a totally opposite way to work. We can basically implemented a flight sim with EVERY graphic engine of the world, the only problem will be the visible distance and for some of them not able to handle big map the size of the map itself cause cause issue, but actual graphic engine are today capable to do way more than what DCS or even EDGE can do, CryEngine for example don't care about the map size and he can rendering a map with a really huge display distance even for the moment where no game/software that it was use for need it, he still be able to do it, and with a beautiful graphic engine like this, make optimization for show "far away" render with a COMPLETELY simplified model who take a minor computing percentage. I don't know what Outerra is capable to do, but after see this : i'm sure it can handle all the Georgia with all city, cause in this video we clearly see COMPLEXES geometry huge construction with a lot of polygons, and don't lie yourself, building or house in DCS are something like 5 polygons, its a box with a texture nothing else, and unlike DCS Outerra don't need to cheat by using a false scale effect, put the camera in front of a building in DCS and look up, if you told me that you REALLY have the impression to look at a really huge building with several floors, you are lying or you have a problems with your eyes or your brain, in this video we can clearly see HUGE building and even without full screen video it look like a giant building and feet like we are a human size next to this. About all screenshot of Nevada the false size effect is exactly the same, it mean for me that EDGE was not more powerful than Outerra (who was not yet finish). The number of polygons from "futurist building" in the video link i have send is probably over all the polygon of all the city of DCS. For answer point per point to what GGTharos say : 1 no one need accurate reproduction of the real world location, i'm sure almost no one who flying in DCS will flying exactly at the same way if rather than the Georgia it was a totally fictional map, and for a lot of things like national security it can cause problem to do a perfect reproduction and it will probably prevent the sim to using a accurate reproduction for a global map, and anyways the terrain itself of Outerra is more accurate than the DCS one (i only talk about the ground, nothing else, don't forget that it was a real time autogenerated terrain, don't expect miracle compare to hand made one). 2 Town and large city can be reproduced, and with the autogeneration capability we can even expect an SDK who provide autogeneration of city without need to hand made it, generate based on divert maps. 3 Type of road...CTR perfectly answer it, and traffic who care ? Outerra can handle it anyways but a lot of people for FPS saving disabled this in DCS and even when it is activate it have almost no influence on the flight except on free flight when someone want to shoot civil cars, for the moment Outerra work only as graphic engine demonstrator and not as a finish software, AI can be added, and with AI civil road and AIR traffic can be generated, cause if road traffic is a valid point to defend DCS, the missing air traffic is also a big point for discredit it, cause in an AIRCRAFT sim, air traffic was way more important than road traffic. 4 Rail line like road can be important for navigation (even if no one have ever do a real VRF flight in DCS) and CTR also answer. 5 Power lines are also another simple object that can be implemented and based on the same way to see Outerra, DCS have also a lot of things who are missing. 6,7 Water are perfectly handle by Outerra and unlike DCS the water look nice, in DCS we CAN'T have any idea of the altitude over the water that we are, disable the info bar, go in the middle of the sea far from coast and don't look at the shadow, try to flight closer as possible of the water without using the GPWS sound and without look at the wave caused by the low altitude flight (wave who eat more FPS than a whole city or airport) and we can correctly modeling a lot of things, including streams and large rivers (and maybe way more) and other oceans (DCS don't have cause only the Black Sea was present) 8 For both port and large airfield they can be also modeling, Outerra proof that it can work with a high number of polygons and texture, way over what DCS try to do. 9 The weather is here : Weather in game is composed by two things, visual effect of the weather (fog, cloud, rain, snow and other things) and effect in object, its only a simple variable, and when we think about the fact that weather and by extension, wind are important on aircraft sim, we can ask the same thing in DCS regarding the turbulence totally false and the turbulence/wind/vortex created by aircraft, the R77 missile is enough important in size and speed to make a small aircraft and helicopters to crash, its not something that we can just forget to implement and say : no problem it is realistic without it. Mainly when it real life it cause a lot of crash and when in a COMBAT aircraft sim we have a lot of situation where in real life the presence of turbulance and other effect can really change things, like pass supersonic really close to an helicopter with a 13m large and almost 20m long aircraft (F15c) who was way more bigger than a R77 missile. 10 Various season CTR already show it, and except the visual effect the only things that really affect the sim is the temperature who still a variable, and who can be false if user set winter temperature in summer mission, ok it also affect the hours for the day and night cycle but every game who handle day and night in cycle can handle a scripted sun time or the course of the light source, don't forget that Outerra handle the whole globe. 11 Damage of building, units and other things, why it can't be implemented ? a lot of game come with no damageable scenery and after some patch make it totally destructible, look at the PhysiX map of Unreal Tournament 3 for example, and what is a damage and destruction except a detection of "damage point" (like health and move power in MMORPG) an animation of collapsing and a simple disabled it box/visual presence and a damage texture on the ground ? 12 Who have already using a single time (except maybe for check if it was really rendered correctly) using moon, sun and/or star to navigate, DCS with a totally false moon/sun cycle and totally fictional star map will change absolutely nothing for 99.9% of user. Don't forget that Outerra use a 3D realistic scale reproduction of the earth, it mean we can coding the position of the sun to be 100% accurate depending of the date/hours, and maybe more accurate than DCS even if the difference can't be see by user, for the moon its the same things and honestly i don't imagine any possibility who can prevent Outerra to using real star map except maybe if someone who take if for make a simulator was too lazy to recreate it. 13 its funny cause DCS miss a LOT of man-made object that anyways actual graphic engine can't even dream to rendering, Outerra can, and with actual graphic and size effect its useless to handle it in DCS, and the whole texture of the whole terrain in DCS was totally false, the crop fields don't look like real one and a lot of time i look at the ground and just say : what i'm supposed to look right now, it look like nothing i know. And Outerra using a 3D grass (way better than the funny DCS one), and over a certain distance he using texture only, Outerra use autogenerate terrain, and in a simple way, it don't use data from roadmap, city and other things like this, but if it was hand made or autogenerated for a final use (i will back to this) we can see a lot of ground texture various and beautiful (cause way higher resolution than DCS). 14 its here : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULyJmHgQBz4 The point is : Outerra don't cheat by using a false size effect for saving computing power, it can handle the whole earth in a real size, it handle beautiful graphic with complex ground geometry and high resolution texture, it can handle map deformation, it can handle a lot of polygons and HD texture without having performance issue, and so on... And Outerra like i said is actually based in real time terrain generation based on real world data, it provide fast but realistic (over DCS) terrain data, a lot of things are missing but some SDK can also be using for autogenerate city, road, rail lines and a lot of other things based on a lot of data for create a definitive map or use this to always autogenerate it, and it was always the same. So for me, without REAL proof, Outerra its one of the various example that DCS and every flight sim like MFS, X Plane and other are totally under optimized and using a really bad graphic engine. Even for the game structure itself, no multicore support yet, its another thread i know but for example, i have watch the last video of the game X Rebirth who still in development, the team was not bigger than ED team, but they actually have a working system who can handle multicore, the game will automatically create process based on the number of CPU core, if we have a 12 core CPU, it will create 12 thread (but it still magically communicate...). Anyways its nice to defending the sim like it actually is, but one day we have to wake up if we want to make progress and rather than just put hands your hears and say : "BLABLABLA the sim perfectly work and no other software do better" its maybe time to realize that the sim have a LOT of problems and a lot can be solved and admit that the graphic engine are actually bad and EDGE won't be a revolution, just another aircraft sim graphic engine where other graphic engine can do way better including for rendering distance, don't forget, we don't care how the game process, the important is what we see on the screen, some graphic engine can use interactive and dynamic background based on several 3D data who can for almost no computing power show perfectly mountains, city and other point of scenery, even with modification like smoke due to crash or anything else and still using (cause of this huge computing power saved) a really high resolution and complexity ground rendering, like combining both short range of Arma 3 and medium/long range of Aerofly Pro FS, and everyone who i talk about this completely agree, except here. I hope one day CryEngine or other giant graphic engine will be using for create a flight sim.

I know but it still have a minor difference for a lot of software between both, but maybe DCS cause of the huge map can take an advantage for more memory cause i have never tested DCS in 32 bit, i have never see any software really using my 16Go of memory, but windows itself profit of this and take more memory. The problem is that the actual game structure are really disastrous, it look like a battlefield, a lot of files are missing, other are here and useless, maybe since LOMAC and no user can change it, we have no possibility (maybe except by making dll) to associate sound or visual effect to something, i was trying to create an F-15E, but no files can permit to change a lot of settings and i was totally unable to make my aircraft fully working cause i can't get a lot of things to work, no possibility to adding aircraft (only modifying existing) things like auto-trims from the F-15C are completely hiding, i can't change the RWR type even with the 3D F15C cockpit and its impossible to set sound for this aircraft. Same for sound and effect, if ED dear give the possibility to change this by lua we will be able to add effect (like the famous wing vapor) lightning effect, adding sound and more things like this, we will be able to fix ourselves several issue, like the actually bullet impact sound missing, wingtips vortex and create our own aircraft. FSX work well for both adding and editing at 100%, PMDG and Ariane Design proof that we can make aircraft more complex than what the game was supposed to handle, but in DCS we still be unable to do simple operation like this, its sad. What we need its not really the fix of all this problems, its a more open possibility in the sim, and i'm sure ED Team wont be sad to see a lot of "fan made" fix for a lot of bug that they can use.

Next year Windows 9 will come with 128 bits !!! Anyways i have see a lot of 32 bits software who don't change and get better perf when launched in 64 bits.

A graphic engine correctly optimized don't care about the full map but only about what it rendering and preload, nothing else, after this, create a globe its not an hard task, look at Kerbal Space Program or Orbiter or even Space Shuttle Mission 2007, they show the solar system with possibility to go to any planed, maybe the graphic was not really good but its not a big graphic engine and it was only optimized for space, MFS can do and X Plane can also. Even Cry Engine have actually show that it is possible to show really big scenery with high level of detail, correctly optimized a graphic engine will calculate the more complex in a short radius, use a simplified version for a little bit more range or high speed camera moving, and medium/long range can be identical to Aerofly Pro FS. Its not cause we need huge rendering distance that we need to show a car 1000Km away or even to calculate it, unlike what people say, CryEngine or Unreal Engine was completely capable to rendering the full globe with high level of details at short range and photorealistic in single simplified texture with almost no 3D object at medium/long range. In fact every big graphic engine today are capable to do it, its become easy to show full details in a limited radius and use simplified version for the long range, even if it was 10000Km away cause it was simplified, exactly like Aerofly Pro FS do, and big graphic engine can do better. The only reason why they don't do it its cause they don't need to, video game don't need map big like this and it was really long to create a really big map with high level of detail and maybe 10 different level of details including 3 with object and 7 other with texture only, but with auto generated terrain created by a software who will using real life data and image for create a correct reproduction of the global map it was possible. So yes, EDGE if it was good like dev team say will be able to rendering global map.

One of the good new with EDGE is the possibility to global map, maybe softly modified for national security like false position and characteristic for national security surveillance radar and some other things like this, i hope one day DCS will also move forward into hybrid military and civil aircraft sim, giant aircraft producer studio like Ariane Design or PMDG can create or import some nice B747 B737 and other aircraft, cause DCS actually have a lot of advantage that MFS don't have, AFM support, communication, advanced avionic radar and interaction between aircraft. I wonder be able to create some new aircraft but it was actually not possible, and i hope that we will be able to see several civil ship created by third party and also by amateurs or for free from third party cause it risk to become really expensive. Anyways i just hope EDGE won't take too much time to be born.

Single thing to say : Its stupid to simulate (and rendering) aircraft without pilot, we are not supposed to simulate a computer with a camera inside the cockpit but a pilot, that why we have hypoxia and G effect. And who care about those who don't want to see the body when a simple key can disabled it, feature must NEVER be delete. And i don't talk about the kneeboard who was not yet correctly implemented (no loadout, no mission customization, no airport chart, nothing). Since only half of things are actually simulated, for me its just a "realistic" game but not a simulator. So if you want a simulator and realistic feature, pilot body, kneeboard and other feature related to this must be simulated. In Combat Helo we will be able to exit the heli walk around and take another Apache (and a single aircraft is inside, try to find the logic with DCS who have several). @Frogisis Read the title : toggle-able

I have always try with my A10 when i shoot on ground to reach my bullet after ricochet and see if it can damage my aircraft or not but the A10C is not fast enough... It remind me the story of the pilot shoot down by its own bullets... For curious : http://www.check-six.com/Crash_Sites/Tiger138260 :D

I want to see this also but it was impossible for B2 AI or KA-52 flyable. First of all the B2 is completely stealth as you know, F117 its the only one stealth aircraft in the game and it was an old aircraft, it will be impossible to really implemented the B2, mainly cause of the technology this aircraft have, i'm sure you don't even realize the real potential of this aircraft. Cause of this profile and the fact that he have no rudder it was completely unstable and without the advanced computer inside it will be impossible to control the aircraft. Second it use a lot of technology that now we know all but who still classified and in fact people are not supposed to know it but everyone now know it. For example the B2 everyone think that it use a simple engine exhaust right ? false, the B2 use a lot of technology that a lot of people don't realize. First of all, the aircraft use the entire trailing edge as a giant exhaust system, we have several picture where we can clearly see the heat effect not only behind the official engine exhaust but directly from the left wing edge to the right wing edge (impossible except with a giant exhaust system) cause the official exhaust system was totally wrong and expose clearly the aircraft to any IR sensor from satellite, also for several year in airshow where the B2 is it was totally illegal to take picture to the back of the aircraft, and its not surprising that this system exist, when it switch from standard to this system it permit to reduce drag, improve maneuverability (its work a little like a thrust vector system), reduce IR signature and it also permit to use all engine for a...less conventional use, but you have to find yourself about the B2 and the MHD technology, and the guy who say all this thing its far to be an amateur or someone who make stupid theory, its one of the greater French (and also world) scientist actually alive and he was the one who discover the MHD, sadly its hard to find this in English, it was almost only in French... But even the electronic warfare and the stealth technology make this aircraft almost impossible to reproduce if we want to keep this aircraft realistic and the simulator with a correct balance between aircraft. And for the KA-52 it was a way too much advanced technological aircraft, this helo for sure like the SU-25TM and greater is still completely classified and we can't dream of find half of information for the avionic, sensor and things like this, USA give information about AH-64, that why its possible to create some aircraft like this, but it was impossible for the KA-52 sadly, and the KA-50 was the first DCS aircraft to be release, at this time multiple aircraft position/player was not yet implemented, and its not even yet, it will be with the next patch but not before. And finally aircraft like SR-71 and U2 (even if cause of the speed it was almost useless until we have world map) is possible to be implemented and also the AH-64 or the MI-24/28, i wonder see the Mi28 and except the A and the D variant every other version have night attack capability.

Seriously ? No one know how to change this ? Things like pilot type (everytime i eject i got a Russian pilot when he leave his seat). Ground attack possibility (i have no A2G option in commands windows even with the aircraft set in "Battleplane, or Multirole Fighter", i have try to see how SU-27/33 and Mig can be A2A and A2G and i have found no difference. How to make the aircraft don't need to be trimmed (every aircraft in FC3 except the F-15C need to be trimmed, if its possible for the F-15C its also possible to do so for F-15E) and other options like this ? I have look in every files and the only files type that really change something in the aircraft was Aircraftname.lua SFM_Data.lua and PlaneConst.lua It mean that an important file is hide somewhere in inside something i have not yet found (i have open every .lua file in every folder) maybe its inside a DLL ? Edit: Ok i stop to work on my aircraft, no one answer me, a lot of files are impossible to found or hide inside some DLL, slot and a lot of other are impossible to modified like the EDM format who provide any upgrade of existing model and force to recreate totally the model and who need to buy a 3000$ 3D software and other bad things like the fact that we can't have choice of sound, hud and other things, no tuto are available, its impossible for community to adding aircraft, it will be faster to recreate my own sim than create an aircraft in this sim if no one answer me, a lot of file are completely observant and was useless since LOMAC and other are missing, the structure of this simulator are really bad, i'm surprise that it can work... ED team/moderator and tester always told me : do it yourself, when i complain about something, but community have absolutely nothing for create something more important than a simple skin, and no one dear help us, the only thing we are stuck to is to wait for 3D party (who have huge support and probably all the list of lua/dll command handle by the game, access to AFM and a lot of other advantage) who take huge time to be finish and who are expensive. This sim is commercial and don't care about customers, i won't wast anymore my time to do something that people told me to do and finally don't want to.

RIP and good flight to the heaven.

Hi here ! I have looking in every folder and every files i have found and i have not found anything about it. I want to make options for aircraft like air/ground mode (i actually try to make a FC3 like F-15E and he only make air air even with a new radar multirole entry) or option like auto trims (F-15E like the F-15 from FC3 have automatic trims) and other options like this, and how to choose the entry for the input key. And with everything setting correctly in input controls i get no CMS, no weapons and basically nothing, i'm sure its cause of the same option file i have not yet found who handle all this options. And except the cockpit i basically able to modifying almost everything except this. Thanks !

I apologize if what i say look offensive against people, don't get wrong, i totally respect ED Team as a person, they are programmers, they like aviation, they like physic and aerodynamic, they must be some nice people to do so. I respect them, but i just don't respect the way DCS is done, everyone have to admit it is full of bug and optimization are completely missing... And by the way i will listen at what EtherealN say, i was actually learning some basic since some times and when it will be done i will probably learning the C and if i can the low level language. By the way i starting by creating an aircraft for DCS, not a DCS of course i'm not a Third party but a FC3 like, it will permit myself to learn more about the structure of the sim.

We can't opening a .EDM file for modifying or view it ? the plugin only permit to save .EDM files ?

I have try on the trial version of 2012 and when i opening any 3D object all i get is : File Open Failed

Actually i have 3 joystick. The Warthog the X52P and a simple Cyborg. And i have 3 headset with Razer, Logitech and also a Tritton Ax Pro, so i have 3 head and 6 arms... :megalol: And if you want i can also explain you why i have all this headset and joystick. @Sorin i have a solution, change ED's coders...Maybe we will get something who work and no new bugs with new patchs... Anyways like everyone know its a really old engine and anyways EVERYTHING need to be change, and if a solution to make the game itself running on multicore can be found, it will be a waste of time, like make exploding a nuclear weapon for making some Wind turbine turning. And again (even if now i stop to talk about my idea) i have NEVER say to make the game ITSELF using a multicore, just using external application for a thing who take too much performance and another who need performance... But when i see that DCS are the ONLY game i have ever see who rather than give us extremely ugly visual effect (for the release date of DCS World, NO other game have relative to the date a so bad effect like this, also true for graphic rendering itself, compare with ROF or Aerofly pro FS for example) and its the only one in the world who rather than make ugly effect, make them kill all your performance. :noexpression: So yes i will still think what i think about ED codders until a see a REAL change, i'm not pretending to be actually able to do this, but every other codder with their (supposed) level of knowledge about codding who make game do better in all side... Anyways enough talk about this too, everything is already writing. :(

Ok ok i have understand, rather than see any good point of my idea you just see all potential negative point (maybe their is no negative point at all in fact but nevermind) and find a way to fix it. I have understand you don't want to see any improvement before EDGE is release (in a lot of time, will be full of but and will kill performance) And as an inventor i know that even if the first idea can't be use, we can just learn about the suggestion who was a part of the idea like the improved AI or anything else, but you just say : NO. So ok stay with the game with the worst optimization of the video game story and the worst AI of all software i have ever see and keep told me that i'm wrong, i will wait for Seven G who like i have just said in another thread, have realistic and beautiful smoke (not a plastic one completely unrealistic who made a creepy and impossible cone at start of the smoke) who don't do any FPS drop and also to Arma 3 where the game even in Alpha have 200 time less bug than DCS and who have a support of almost a patch per day with one of the best graphic engine of the history (for a team far to be big like big game company). The only thing who working correctly (and still have some bugs anyways) is the AFM and the avionic. And you will say probably : at least it work... Yeah but a car "simulator" with a perfect car reproduction who operate on planet like Mars (without oxygen, or just simple traces) with a lower gravity and where all the surface is water (you have understand that i don't talk about Mars but a planet with all other property except water the temperature) will be NOT a simulator, mainly if with the big wind of Mars like plane the car was not affected by weather and the graphic engine is not optimized to show water, it what the actual DCS look like. So yes i'm totally wrong and DCS is a master piece that codder mastering at 100%, the landing gear who broke always at slow speed for FC3 aircraft (and where no update was done with the autoupdater supposed to be here for this) and the simulator who have FPS drop by reducing the use of CPU/GPU and who have bad performance without even using the whole computer power or low computer config who get more performance than the biggest one or even the fact that is common to get more performance in the game maxed out than minimum setting is the perfect proof that the simulator work well and that i'm totally wrong, the proof was that no one have the clue to talk about it and prefer just see the only "bad" point of my idea without even give the proof that it can't work, at least i have give example of SIMILAR working idea. Still defending the game i will still laugh, and i will never give any idea for any optimization or graphic or anything else, like the graphic engine i have propose, that several codder who actually know a lot about graphic engine told me that it will work and then here people still told me that it can't work just cause they always act like this when someone talk about graphic engine or optimization of DCS, cause any optimization or bug change make people nervous and they don't want to hear about... People are fun... Anyways i will still give idea about gameplay cause now that DCS are release no other company see the need to create a new sim and we are stuck on this one, and i want to see GOOD and REALISTIC possibility even if we can't have a correct graphic engine and cpu/gpu management. For answer to shagrat, for the last time : I have not say to make the game use a single apps who will use several core including one for AI and effect, i was talking about make a separate apps for EFFECT (who actually consume for a couple of explosion and smoke more performance than the whole game) and AI for have the possibility to make them use more power and get something better than just the "worst AI of all the story of video game" who have ridiculously simple script actually and no possibility for anyone to make them less stupid, and for people supposed to work on their own graphic engine who will handle multicore, (and who will magically communicate) who have already done a separate core for sound and who are supposed to mastering C++ and maybe low level codding, it wont be hard, mainly when AMATEUR can do it for other software without access to source code... But nevermind. And actually food tester do, for things like cuisine you can't judge without know it, that was not true for everything, in computer even a kid who have never hear about the word codding will easily see that DCS are optimized by using the feets on the keyboard, it contain more bug than working feature and the visual rendering and the effect are just ugly. And without ear about FPS he will understand that explosion and smoke cause a ridiculous fps drop like no other game have ever do in the history of all video game. So yes beta tester of microsoft are capable to coding, understand how work the game and how it was codding and capable to modifying some part of windows, at least for the one i know, and like everyone do when someone talk about graphic engine or optimization, they just talk about what they want and even when they use all the whole threat point per point they just make it sound like they want by carefully choose quote the part of the text they want, i have also talk about someone working for a big video game company that i have already told him this kind of idea and who totally agree, and at least the game he and the team of this company don't do more bugs than feature... Anyways useless to talk about it anymore, you get what you want i will no more give idea for any kind of optimization and just still laugh at how the sim "try" to working correctly with all this bug, leak of feature and the total miss of optimization that can't get good FPS on computer than actually NO GAME are hard enough for consume all the computing power of the modern machine. This post was writing with the : sarcasm and criticism engine 2.5 !

Its not an official page, the DCS A10C facebook page is my old one before i leave facebook and give the lead to someone else, and the new admin do a really nice work, but its not an official page. If you want something that can really give us information on the Hornet look at what Wags use for avatar : http://forums.eagle.ru/member.php?u=3338 :D @RhineHornet Yes Seven G its really nice and the dev are not afraid by making REALISTIC effect, and at least the smoke in Seven G are pretty beautiful, look realistic and don't do any FPS drop and working mirrors don't kill your FPS, and except the terrain texture and the fact that a single aircraft is available Seven G are way more better to my eyes than DCS and its not yet finish... Look the missile and his smoke at 3 minutes of your video ! beautiful !

@Neverminded First, no, a lot of people just answer wrong cause they are too lazy to read the whole post, i assuming that i have write a long one, so now that i have clarifying things, people do understand. And no, you never say this, and it can, like i have already say and like REAL THING actually DO and WORKING its possible, like Follow me car for FSX who using a splitted application, still able to work by receiving data from the game and input data to the game, like AI Carrier do, like FS Traffic, AI Carrier, FS Traffic, FS Passenger, PMDG/Ariane Design/VRS and other aircraft do (so don't told me that AI can't be switched into another application, mainly when AMATEURS can do it) so if an amateur who have NEVER even see from far the source code of FSX can get it work (just look at PGDM or VRS, they using their OWN physic/flight model, avionic and anything else and just use FSX asa graphic support and they still working perfectly) why the original coders can't get the sim to work like this ? It CAN communicate, its called the information export, the same thing that can get the gauge working when someone create a cockpit for any aircraft, data exportation can also work for a lot of things, including AI and visual effect. @EtherealN I understand, and what i understand is that people told me that something ALREADY WORKING in another software its impossible to do, not just impossible with this software, but impossible at all, its the same logic than old scientist saying that Asteroid can't exist cause : There is no rocks in the sky. A lot of people with really nice programming skill including one time, a guy who working for a great video game society (that i wont mentioned the name), a codder, told me that a lot of things that you, guy in this forum told me that it was impossible was finally completely possible and for some example already existing, one of my best friend is actually beta tester for Microsoft and have a really big programming skill and he totally agree with everything i have ever say in previous thread where i get the same reaction, and its definitely not someone who will lets me think something impossible. Its not cause someone with a "unknow" programming level think that something already working for a lot of software was impossible that it is. And by the same logic multiplayer is not possible cause after all AI aircraft that we see on MP mission are controlled by the server and not inside our computer, but yes i'm wrong and everyone know that DCS don't have and will never have multiplayer cause it can't work and AI can't communicate data... And finally no one answer me when i ask if i need to upload to youtube my video for show FPS/CPU/GPU drop issue or if it won't help and i can avoid a long upload time... ?

So i don't need to still compressing my video for CPU/GPU/FPS graphic usage decrease if the team already work on this problem ?

@c0ff _1 Gun affected by Doppler effect its normal, every sound in the universe are, its just a problem of way too much exaggerate Doppler effect, and not only for Gun but for every sound, aircraft don't sound correctly when flyby, the test can be easily do by use ctlr+F11 (free) camera and move it at high speed around the map, the sound distortion will be way too much pitched in high for closing or low for go away, and sometime it have big bug, when we move the camera fast to any sound and we stop it with 5 of num pad, the sound will stay highly pitched by Doppler effect even if we don't move relatively to the sound source and when we press a single time in scroll up or down of the mouse wheel, the sound back to the normal volume. _2 In reality no one have put his ear inside the supersonic shockwave but inside this area its NOT a big sound compression created by the object sound, any quiet object who reach mach 1 create a sonic boom, its a shockwave not a sound compression (even if we can easily think that it was)... And i know the first cone is created by the supersonic wing profile at first contact with air and the second will be created by the other edge of the wing, and in some condition we can hear both sonic boom, that why the real name its double sonic bang, but in standard condition they are too close for the human hear to differentiate this, mainly with sound echo/reverberation ob other object. And before this patch the last patch who change this, sonic boom use its own file and it work well. Stay inside the mach cone (cause we move at the same speed and at constant distance of the object who create this mach cone) and ear the sonic boom from an aircraft who passing next to us, even with a really small speed difference are both two completely different things, maybe not for physical law, but for any observer or anyone who hear it, its totally two different things. Inside sonic cone yes its a long continue loud sound, but its NOT created by the aircraft engine, like you way yourself in fact in reality we have 2 wave, each created by a side, leading edge and trailing edge of the wing it mean that this sound is created by the wind and not by the engine, so even if the sound work well for sonic boom (and it don't) it was incorrect to use a simple distortion area of the engine sound and make it louder for fill this area. You want a way to do it ? First create a sample for the sonic boom sound that we hear when a supersonic object flyby. In fact the correct thing will be to create 4 of this sound, one for small object like bullets and any debris, another for missiles, another for small and medium size fighter and a last one (almost identical to the one for fighters) for big aircraft like for example the SR-71 or the XB-70 or the one present on the game the B-1 bomber and the Russian equivalent. Now sample this sound and create with the sound we hear on the begin another sample who will be the sound that we hear inside the supersonic cone shockwave. Now when we put the camera or we fly inside the shockwave cone, we here the long sample, and when we leave this area from ahead we just stop to hear this and when its from behind the first sound (the simple supersonic boom like before) was played. For optimized it, when we are a non moving thing and we hear this sound, it don't need to change, and when another aircraft produce this sound and pass in front of us the sound will be "fade" faster than the speed difference is low, cause when we fly fast we can't hear any resonance or flyby engine sound. Another idea i give to you ED team for free...Its not like this that i will make money as an inventor haha... Anyways maybe cause of the camera that we can move around it can be wrong (even if with my idea it can work) but don't forget that it was supposed to be a simulator and it mean cockpit view only optimistized first, external camera and other impossible things must never keep features away from the realistic use, and actually with the new vertion of the sonic boom sound, it was unrealistic and kill immersion in the game. And the B point. And yes sound distance must be realistic this cause game is supposed to be a simulator. And for for rejoining the 2-B and the 3 point that you write. The sound is too loud from close distance and it disappear too fast, it mean the only way to correcting the sound too loud is to turn down the "World" sound slider down, and it mean that the distance will one more time decrease and it will be really way too much shorted compare to real life. And yes it was realistic but way too much loud for a game, even for a simualtor, cause with canopy close the sound is normal and when we open it the sound is between 2 and 3 time louder, it mean that we ear take a big shot and we don't want to become deaf cause of a game, and it also mean that when we talk with anyone in skype or TS we don't hear anymore peoples. And for finish yes Sobek correctly "traduct" what i have try do say, the sound must never be hear that soon when aircraft fly by from us, like we can hear in this video.

The bug is really big, everytime a big explosion/visual effect is present on the sim, GPU and CPU usage decrease, its the cause of the FPS drop. I have done a video and i just compressing it now it will be long cause its a 20 minutes UHD video, i have record it from my camcorder for avoid any other FPS drop than the game itself, FPS is running but only for show FPS, nothing more. Its not from sound, but the have also constating CPU usage drop in the core where the sound of DCS run. Its the onboard sound card of my MSI Z77A-GD65 (really nice sound card inside) shot board. It was recorded using a Stereo mode (i have also try with my Razer Tiamat who use 7.1, my Tritton Ax Pro who using optical and my G930 in USB who using its own sound card (even if the motherboard/PCI-E sound card of user can help the Logitech, but i have no sound card installed except a little USB one since some day and only for a microphone, it don't have any interaction and the one of my Motherboard) and all sound issue i have already report for the sound don't change, regardless which sound device i use, and i was experienced it with old computer who having a Asus P6T SE without sound card and G930/ Hifi -> "Philips C355 mini hifi system". With or without mods. I was compressing the video (two time for faster youtube upload) and i will create a new topic in "bugs and problems" part of the forum with the link. @hypersonik Yes the problem is random, some people with huge config have bad performance and some with smaller PC have better performance with same graphic settings, those who don't get 10 fps are lucky, it still be really badly optimized. @Luzifer Ok so i'm wrong and you're right, i remember now that when i split into 3 identical pipe a main one with 1L/minute, i obtain 3 litter by minutes... I brb i will ask to my bank if i can get 3 account with 500 $/€ each by split in 3 a 500$/€ single account.

I know that EDGE was a terrain engine, referring to what was announced it was with EDGE that multicore and probably multi GPU usage will be available. EDGE was the perfect occasion to stop to using CPU based game and open to correct GPU usage, new terrain/graphic engine mean also big change in the code structure, almost everything have to be completely done another time, that the reason why Duck Nukem Forever took this long to be release, its cause the graphic engine was changed and it mean need to do one more time all code since almost the begin. And the logical way will be to profit only of this for change the game main and source code rather than do it twice, but its your choice... And magical ? so i'll send a mail to everyone who can make running mods/addons in another app for a lot of game with modding support and ask them to give me magic lesson, i have always dream to make appear a bunny from my hat... Export ? he exporting level are enough for create a whole cockpit with ALL gauge, screen and anything working, the radio with TARS is another example of exporting/importing information to the game. The main process will for sure have to calculate effect with things like position, time, size, duration and things like this, but its not what make the game lag, its the CPU based effect and it can be process by another core, it will not be the first time that effect will be computed by a separate apps. Same for AI, they can use basic script for exporting data and rather than use completely expired script they can use way more and really profit of a real computing power with trajectory calculation and a lot of things that actual script are clearly completely unable to do. For both AI and effect several AMATEUR have already do it for a lot some game or software with modding support. For the sound i have already create a thread for explain how wring it is : http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=104369 Now excuse me i will be unavailable for answer for a certain time, i will do the work of your tester team and make a bug report about the FPS drop caused by effect by collecting data. I running on crossfire (disabled for DCS) HD7970 Lightning with a Ghz edition for the first slot one and an I7 3770k at native 3.5 and 3.9 with turbo overcloack to 4 Ghz with turbo and i don't have more FPS than you. Also i have a lot of time constating LESS performance with minimum graphic and low screen definition than Max setting and maximum screen definition. But yes i'm wrong and the sim was perfectly optimized, everyone know it...

In fact, if "not yet active" aircraft can be really see in the parking area and that our pilot have the possibility to walk away and enter inside aircraft. We will have first the possibility (with a smoke or a beacon) to show our position when crash and eject "safely", it mean mainly with the new UH-1H helicopter, possibility to extraction of pilot and maybe lets him be copilot or at any of both door gunner position, the helicopter can move us to any airport, we out of the Huey, we walk to any aircraft available and we take it. CAS will be improved with A10C/KA-50 and rescue/protection/extraction mission will be available and really nice.

Wow a lot of answer... @Neverminded The CPU is not 16 Ghz but its the equivalent, each core can be use with 4 Ghz, its not something like 4ghz for 4×1 or thing like 4Ghz available for a single core only if 3 other are not used, the CPU itself is not 16 ghz i agree but its the equivalent cause he can use 4 different application who need 4 Ghz each or just a software who can use 4 core. And you don't have the vaguest idea of what i talking about and you have for sure (like everyone see to do here, but i can understand that no one read untill the end, it was long) don't read the end, one more time i don't talk about make the simulator using 2 core for itself + another for the sound, i talk about using AI and Effect as a split application, and separate application mean = easy possibility to use another CPU core. I know how difficult it is to bring an already existing program by itself and in a single application inside multicore support and i also know that we have to totally rework the source code, that why i talk about split feature and make it using external apps who can EASILY be switch the any core we want, like mods and other addon for FSX who using their own apps like FS Passenger, Follow Me car, FS Traffic, AI Carrier and other things like this. And i don't know if FSX have multicore support, but still NOT change what i talking about, in fact someone already do a software who really acting on the game, look at the clickable radio menu by PeterP : http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/84648/ It was not the perfect example of what i talking about, but it still be something close. Anyways DCS using 2 core, one for the sim itself and another for the sound, if something like the sound can be exported with actual game structure, AI and effect can also be. @Luzifer & St3v3f If you have a 1ghz prrocessor, you can split it into billions of logical core as you want, it will still have 1 ghz. Like the HT technology for CPU 4 physical core at 4 ghz CPU will still have 4×4 and not 4×8 Ghz with 8 logical core, each core have 2 Ghz available and if one take 3 Ghz his "brother" will only have 1 Ghz left, it can have how many core for all process he want, it will still have the SAME total computing power. @C0ff _I totally understand that you can't read all my thread but sadly you miss the most important part. Yes i know that DCS will moving to multicore support, but not before a long time and probably only with EDGE. My idea permit "immediate" change and improvement of visual effect/performance and AI _What you mean by "Elaborate" ? _And i know that. And i understand what you say and if i just was saying : please move NOW DCS into multicore support, its answer will be clear and simple, but i have not say it even if, cause of my long post and cause of the title, it look like. I and also know that for modifying the actual game and bring it to real multicore support it was long, complex and take a lot of process. And i have already see the size of the team. And yes multicore is the future and the present of PC, we already have 4 core, some have 6, and soon 8 and 12 will be really common. And my solution was NOT a true multicore support in fact, just a temporary solution who can permit to using another CPU core and have better support with visual effect/performance, AI and available feature, ideal for Third party, community modders and for you ED team. I know that visual effect, (maybe also physical effect like more advanced weather/aircraft vortex and turbulence can be adding) and AI can be split of the game main process and using they own executable, and another executable mean easy possibility for anyone to use core affinity and lets the game using 3 core and i know that using a single process in multicore support (what everyone think i talk about) its one of the most difficult task. And my idea was available really fast cause split the CPU Based effect process and the AI in an external application its not the longest or the hardest task ever and who know it can maybe be available for the 1.2.4, cause i propose a really simple idea completely far away from make the whole game using multicore support, and Effect cost a lot of performance to everyone, and the AI are not the best and need to be improve and profit of more process power, so you can do both in the same time. And actually visual effect have a problem (i will study it and post it into bugs and problems part of the forum) and everyone complain and have a real performance issue of FPS drop who can cause for 50% of the time a crash, it was a reallu big ussie, you can profit to correct this and make it using an external process rather than the main process of DCS, and it wont take anymore too much computing power in the core where it run, it mean big issue correction and better support, and AI also will probably change (even a little) for the use of multi position UH-1H helicopter, so it was also the best time for split AI to another process. And like i have said, my idea can help you ED Team to work and experiment more actively a lot of new feature and possibility for the real multicore support. I also know that in a first time split app for effect and AI wont give us a big performance change, but it will still a better performance than actually and permit to improve a lot of feature. _And i agree, even if a lot of feature and optimization are missing DCS is great, and in the future, with global map and maybe civil aircraft support it will be way better than FSX or any other civil/military aircraft sim.

Welcome to DCS World where guy are able to pilot fighter aircraft, are training for surviving in hostile territory and don't know how to swim ! More funny with F-18 and SU-33 pilot !