Flogger23m

What is performance like, and what resolution are you running at along with system specs? Any good videos showing off how it looks yet?

I would think if Razbam cannot come to a satisfactory agreement that the F-15E would remain. I assume any contract to build a 3rd party module for DCS would include some clause that would allow them to retain the product as is should development cease. And then they would develop it themselves when they have the time and can take in the profit minus the 3rd party cut, or take the product as is and give the license to another 3rd party developer. But I could be very wrong. Though it would be odd if a 3rd party was working on a module, and one person retired, one died, etc. and the 3rd party ceased to exist and there would be no contingency plan in place to finish a product being sold.

I personally don't use Discord. It is a horrible way to follow and find information as well as have a discussion. It works nicely for real time communications with a few people, but as a public discussion platform it is terrible. Discord also has a million pop ups, noises, and notification settings that I can never fully disable. The program is bloated and quite bad. Developers who use Discord for information is something I don't understand and never follow.

The problem with full fidelity is if they can get access to such information. The is one of the biggest hurdles, if such information is available to model it. Don't expect an F-35 anytime soon, or even something like a Super Hornet. An F-15C likely falls into a similar situation. For full fidelity modules the list is going to be limited. If I recall modern Russian planes are essentially off the table, early MIG-29As seems to be the most modern that can be done. Things like a Rafale or even modernized F-16s will be off the table as well. For the most part it will be older stuff and specific variants of those. A-4s and whatnot. If they can do an F-15 I doubt it will be a modern F-15. Probably an old F-15A or F-15C pre-AIM-120. Certainly not the modern planes with AESA radars and AIM-9X.

Then this is probably not for you. I don't have those planes and have little interest or time to learn/map controls for those three planes as high fidelity modules. But for $10 with simplified controls I can probably get a few hours of fun out of them. Not exactly the planes I wanted to see, but it is a nice development. If a third party developer wants to do more simplified FC3 level planes I'd welcome that. For variants that cannot be modeled fully avionics wise it would be great. Much like the J-11 that was added a few years back. I wouldn't mind paying for something like an Su-27SM2, an updated F-15C with AIM-9X & JHMCS, or even other planes like Mirage 2000-9s and F/A-18Es. As it is I'm sure we're running out of full fidelity planes to model currently anyways.

Most likely there will be something to differentiate them in the mission editor. F-5E, F-5E (FC) or something. So for old missions, just update them and copy/paste the F-5E flight and change it from F-5E to F-5E (FC). They might do something else though, where if you own F-5E or F-5E FC, it will auto detect which you have so you don't need to place both in a mission. And if you have both, when you select it, you will have an option likely once you hit "Briefing" or whatever the spawn button is. At $9.99 I will buy the upgrade although I have little interest in the F-5 and almost zero in the F-86 and MIG-15. But at that price I'll probably fly around enough to be amused given the price. If some third parties start doing other FC aircraft based on the planes we have in game I'd certainly be interested. If someone took the Su-27 or MIG-29 and used them as the basis for an Su-27SM2, modernized J-11, or MIG-29SMT I'd be very interested in buying those. I doubt such variants can be done as a full fidelity module. And remember, even the upcoming Eurofighter isn't based off of a real variant but rather a "guesstimation" and combination of various Eurofighters sub variants.

5070 will likely release around this time next year. So it will be a longer wait most likely if you're looking for a sub $400 RTX 4070.

Thank you will look into the debug tool. Turning down visibility range from ultra to high resulted in a big performance jump, from 45-55 to 45-55 to 75-85. Sometimes it goes up to 75-85, other times it drops back down. Seems to be a bit inconsistent, so will turn down more of the above settings to see if I can get it to stabilize at the higher 75 range.

Doesn't DLSS run in place of DLAA and MSAA? Pixel density is set to 1.2. For the resolution modifier is that something that is done via the Occulus software? I do have the basic Oculus software installed, how do I enable the debug tool? For Nvidia settings: pre-rendered frames - 1 Power performance - prefer maximum Low latency mode was off, turned it to ultra.

Decided to get a Quest 2 for $200. While it isn't the newest VR tech I find it to have acceptable visual quality. My frame rates tend to be 70-80 when using the Quest 2, although when I select a flyable plane it drops to around 45. When running without VR, I get around 80-130 frame rates depending on mission size and location as a reference. The attached photo shows my current graphic settings. What settings are best to turn down with my configuration? I have mirrors turned off as well. Specs: RTX 4070 Super Ryzen 7800X3D 32GB DDR4 SSD NVMe SSD Win 10 Pro

As long as that is clear before buying that would be helpful. Personally looking forward to Iraq but after that I really want to see a non-desert map.

Don't really like the idea of selling partial maps. I realize they can all be played online with lower detail, just makes things inconsistent. If someone buys a small portion of the map, will they be able to upgrade to the full map at the cost difference? Or will it be $30 + $30 + $30 each $90 instead of $70)? And for future maps it would be nice if there was something aside from deserts/middle east. Even Nevada is a desert. I don't mind them, but another map with lots of green would be a nice change of pace. With Sinai and Iraq coming we'll have a large portion of the middle east done, but I hope there is something else in the works that isn't more of the same. There is South Atlantic but that is just one out of 6 modern day maps. The two free maps are of course nice, but one is very small and the other is over a decade old.

Is this going to be the exact model that we already have? Or will it be a slightly different version? Would there be any possibility of the slightly upgraded NATO variations of MIG-29As that were in service in the mid 2000s at a later date? Some examples below. The Mirage F1 module has many sub-variants, which is why I was wondering if we'll see other variations of the MIG-29A or if just the circa 1980s variant.

Thanks. I will keep an eye out for a used model, but they seem to hover around the $500-600 range. I ended up getting a Quest 2 from Walmart, but won't open it right away. With cash back and perhaps selling my $50 game credit I may be able to get it for around $160-170 or so after tax. Until then I will be looking for a used Pro if one pops up on ebay.

Seems like the lowest price I can find on the Quest Pro is around $600. I'm sure it is a top tier headset, but it is also out of my price range. New will be around $1000. DFR does look quite good though, at least in terms of performance increase. I have an RTX 4070, 7800X3D, and 32GB RAM. Would the Quest Pro at a higher resolution with DFR on run better than a lower resolution Quest 2 without DFR? Thanks, will the patch be out soon?

Cheapest I can find a Quest Pro is for $1000, or an Amazon third party for around $900. I will pass on the Reverb as WMR will stop being supported in 2026. Seems like if you download and store the installer you'll be able to use it past that date though. I can only find the Pico 4 on newegg through a 3rd party seller. Around $420. Quest 2 is $200 on sale from major retailers. Comes with some gift cards that I may be able to sell to offset the cost. Obviously this is an older device, but the low price is temping. There is also a Quest 3S coming, and I assume that will be better although priced higher. My main worry would be Meta's software. Someone here pointed to the thread about a recent software update. Is it possible to not auto update software, or are all Quest products tied to some crappy software that requires auto updating? I don't quite have the money for a very high end headset and I also doubt I can get acceptable frame rates at extremely high resolutions anyways. I have an RTX 4070, 7800X3D, 32GB RAM which is decent but extremely high resolutions will probably be too much. Just wanting something that can be a decent upgrade over the Vive, which I'll sell to offset the cost.

Is this still an issue with Quest VR headsets, including the Quest 2? Is there anyway to not auto updated Meta VR headsets? Or is it mandatory each time you plug the VR headets in it while having an internet connection? If so seems like a massive oversight.

They can always do what they did with the F-15E. Keep both around, just make one have the new 3D model/textures but the basic functionality. Then for those with the paid module they can use the 2017 version which has the crew-able positions.

That is what confused me. If it had crew-able positions I would understand including that as part of a paid bundle. But for basic landing/taking off I think they should just replace the old 3D model with the new one. It would be like adding a new KC-135 module with crew-able boom positions, which certainly should be be a paid module it you want to fly or control the boom. But then deciding to prohibit people from refueling from it in F-15s, F-16s, F-18s, etc. unless they too own the KC-135 module.

You can load up DCS and fly a mission quickly to test, just like we have been doing for almost a decade since the issues started propping up. Especially with the BMP-2/IFV accuracy.

It has been this way for a few years. An AIM-9X is easily spoofed by an AI plane flying in a straight line that drops one or two flares. Yet evasive maneuvers and lots of flares can seldom defeat the AI's K-13 and similar missiles from the 1960-70s. This is something that has been quite annoying for a while. Using an AIM-9X with a helmet mounted sighting system has a low accuracy even against AI planes that don't use flares. The AIM-9M on the F-15C is almost useless against anything that isn't flying perfectly straight and doesn't drop any flares. Is there some type of artificial difficult/AI cheating setting that needs to be disabled, or is the missile design just this poorly implemented, or does the AI use some type of magical cheats by design? I think we've been waiting a decade for them to fix the BMP-2s that are more accurate than dedicated anti aircraft guns that can shoot maneuvering F-15s and Flankers out of the sky. A quick Youtube search will show you how inaccurate and high the dispersion on the BMP-2's 30mm are against other vehicles. But that is another topic entirely. But a bit disappointed that we can't even use semi realistic dog fighting missiles. Especially when a single plane costs more than a multi million dollar AAA game. Quite embarrassing.

Thanks. I would probably have to look for a used model. I have an RTX 4070 Super, although I have a feeling that might be problematic. The resolution on the Reverb G2 is higher than 4K apparently, and I assume my GPU will run out of VRAM and have major performance problems. CPU is a Ryzen 7800X3D, 32GB of RAM. At 2560x1440 I get between 80-130 frame rates. I assume with such high resolutions frame rate will be half, my worry would be VRAM. I assume all newer models will not have the fresnel lenses. Would the Quest 3 be a big upgrade over a Quest 2 overall?

Recently acquired an HTC Vive. I eventually got it setup for DCS and it works well. Of course the problem with the Vive is that it is an older headset, and resolution is quite low and blurry. Things that are easy to spot in the distance on my monitor are significantly harder to see on the Vive. However, it works quite well aside from that and it has sold me on the VR concept for DCS. Now I am looking into getting a newer VR headset that will hopefully feature higher resolution and better image quality. I will be using it with DCS, and possibly some other flight sims or space sims. Possibly Half Life Alyx. But right now I am more or less just playing DCS. What headset should I be looking at getting? I am okay with buying second hand, provided there is replaceable face cushions and whatnot. The Vive came with two base stations, so if I can save money by buying a VR headset only and reusing the base stations that would be nice. It also came with two motion controllers, although I have not yet used them. HTC has some new models up, and there is the Quest 2, Quest 3, and I've heard good things about HP Reverb G2. Any suggestions on what is the best to use for DCS, and what is the best for the price (~$300 or so)?

That is correct, at least for most variants. This is also the MLA, which is better than the older variations but does not have the generally improved handling of the MLD. Still better than the older or export variations like the MS. Will be tough to choose between the two, though I quite like both planes. Though I suppose if I go with an older plane it will probably end up being the F-14 or F-4; maybe both. Once F-15E gets more polished I will be getting that though. May get the AV8B once that goes on sale. I also hope Razbam will someday do a more modern Mirage 2000-5 variant.

Exactly. I don't mind the higher functionality and crew positions to be behind paid DLC, that certainly required a lot of development time. The only thing that annoys me is when basic 3D models and whatnot are behind paid DLC. Thankfully there is a basic option to takeoff and land with the F-18. I personally have zero interest in playing as a carrier crew member so the module is of little interest. I would be annoyed if things like weapons were locked behind paid DLC, like new weapon 3D models, or certain models of AIM-120s, etc.