Dangerzone

Hmm... that then has me wondering. I was looking at the Pimax Crystal light to 'get me by', and then getting the Pimax Crystal Super down the track for the DFR. If the 5090 is not too far away (and is actually going to beat the Pimax Crystal Super) - the question I now have is: Would it be better to have the benefits of the DFR with a 4090, or would there be more benefits and performance gains using a crystal light with no DFR and just brute forcing the output with a 5090 instead?

Thanks for getting back to us with the cause. Renaming the DCS saved games folder should have fixed both these issues, as Tacview and the OH-6A mod areias I underestand it nstalled in the saved games directory. Were you creating a new saved games, and then re-installing these mods before testing?

Why not just go c:\ recursively?

I wouldn't hold your breath. It's been like it for all modules since grass was a thing and hasn't been addressed yet. I doubt ED is going to fix it now just for the Kiowa. As mentinoed above by ThorB - putting down a FARP is the only real solution in grassy areas that I know of.

LOL - normally I'd be with you. Actually I normally joke that the glass isn't half full, nor half empty, but as an engineer the glass is twice as big as it needs to be - a waste of material! But in this instance - them actually saying "2 weeks:tm:" on the video I think was a very big joke, in that they really are hoping to meet that 2 week deadline. It would certainly be great popularity if they did. The chatter of "A module was actually released in 2 weeks from announcement" would echo for quite some time. Considering that they also plan to release a fully featured, non-early access module - I think they have more chance of meeting their deadline as they would have been polishing the module for longer, and not just trying to get it to an 'early access' release status. It's one of the few times I find myself quietly confidently optimistic. Of course time will see, but I am definitely hopeful this time round, as more signs seem to be pointing to it being a real possibility than not.

Did you experience the motion smoothing with DCS at low level? Or was it with another game, or DCS at high level? For me, the real test will be DCS, Low Level and seeing how things like the HUD behaves while things are flying past fast, and how the HUD handles in the rotor blades of helicopters. With other motion reprojection I've seen this work from being fair, to very poorly. It's that mix of an image (HUD) superimposing over a moving background that is the real test and I'm excited to know how that goes.

So the CTD only occurred after restoring some stuff from the open beta, and then only in mp. What is this stuff that you are moving. It sounds like it could be contributing to the issue.

Are you saying that after renaming your DCS directory to DCS.BAK and starting DCS that issues went away in SP, but remain in MP? Or are you saying that the issues only occur in MP and you haven't tried that suggestion yet?

Or both. But definitely a percentage difference for sure! (For those who are lucky enough to actually own both )

Can you try navigating to your savedgames\dcs directory. Find the folder called DCS (or DCS.OpenBeta) and rename it to DCS.Bak (or DCS.Openbeta.Bak). Then launch DCS. Your settings will be gone, but that's OK (for now). Re-run the mission and see if it crashes. This will help to determine if a gremlin has come into your configuration / users config and is creating havoc, etc. You can then delete the newly created DCS (or DCS.OpenBeta) directory, and rename the .BAK one back to it's original name to revert back to what you had if it doesn't make any difference. Alternatively if it solved the issue for you, you can copy back over just your config/input folder, and change your settings.

In saying that 5090 release date this fall? Is there something I don't know about?!? Firstly - I would recommend trying motion reprojection off. I was stuck at 45fps motion reprojection, and was surprised when I turned it off, all of a sudden I was hitting 90fps the majority of the time. With some tweaks to my settings, I fly almost exclusively now with the HP Reverb and 4090. (Well - did until my HP gave up the ghost). Re your question, at the moment I don't think anyone can give a definitive answer. It's all theoretical until the Crystal Light is in the hands of general people and we start getting real life information coming back. Will their 60fps be far better than the HP's and not have that flickering effect? If so - this could be a game changer for many. Even dropping to 72hz could be a good option. We also don't know how much barrel distortion will occur if sub-sampling resolution, or how much worse it will make things, or if due to the high resolution it will still outperform a HP Reverb with clarity while maintaining similar performance levels. For me personally, if my Reverb was still working properly, I'd wait until both the release of the Crystal Light, and the Crystal Super to gain a real understanding of what the real world differences are going to be. I am one that is concerned about having no DFR - but I'm also now a beggar. With my VR headset dying - I need a new VR headset now, so can't afford to wait. It's reported that you can still use Quadviews with the Pimax Light. It obviously won't be dynamic though. How much it affects the outer edge is again yet to be seen (by the masses). Pimax also seem to have their own mirroring/reprojection which could be vastly better than what we see with the HP. I'm optimistic about the Pimax Crystal. I'm thinking (hoping?) that there are enough combination options/between FFR, Subsampling, Refresh Rates (including halving them) and Motion Reprojection that we're going to see it being practical for DCS use not only for 4090's but even as far back as the 3080/3090's. Dynamic Foveated Rendering of course is king, so as always with DCS, it's compromise and seeing if there are combinations that meet your satisfaction.

I can't test mine at the moment, but have you tried logging out of your account (in DCS there's a icon at the top right corner that should log you out of your account). Then try logging back in again when you next start DCS and see if it comes back. If that doesn't work - with DCS closed you could try renaming your saved games\DCS directory to DCS.BAK. Then start DCS (this will give you brand new configurations, and should prompt you to log in again). See if this works. You can always revert back to your old configuration by deleting/renaming the new "DCS" folder and then renaming DCS.BAK back to DCS again. This option really is just to make sure it's not an issue with your local config file. If both of those fail, can you try logging into your web account at digitalcombatsimulator and see if the module is still there for you. If it is, and the above 2 steps haven't worked, you may want to try contacting ED support to see if there's an issue with your account. Please let us know how you go.

Rubbish. I'm very disappointed that there have been no updates in 10 months. This needs to be discussed as I would definitely like to see their methodology change. There are legitimate concerns that need to be addressed and considered in the future. But slandering them by calling it abandonware when the dev's are still here and posting in this thread only 12 posts above showing progress is misleading at best and doesn't help anyone. Unless of course, you have some information that shows that the company has truly abandoned their product, and that the posts above by their dev's are fraudulent in nature, that you would like to share besides updates taking longer than you or I would like?

The 'indications' are that with all the options given (FFR, the ability to downscale, run at at 72hz instead of 90hz - of course 60hz is also an option of course) - that the Crystal Light should be able to run at the same performance as the HP reverb with "just as good, if not bettter imaging". Of course, there is room to increase those to amazing/incredible results by increasing these values to what your system can handle. So the indications I've received are at the very worse, be able to replicate the G2 with no screen door effects, but very likely to be able to achieve more than the G2 with the various options made available to us. Of course, these are 'indication's only. The practical confirmed results of this are yet to be determined. Only a handful of people have had their hands on the Crystal Light, and the real important data will come from real world users with the actual systems when we finally get it in our hands, and not from working through the tech spec's and options. If your G2 is still working OK for you I would strongly recommend to hold off and wait for real world results first. I can't - my Reverb is all but cooked, so I've had to take the plunge and pre-purchase just to get 'in the queue', although looking at some of the chatting on discord at the moment it sounds like the release hasn't gone quite as planned, with some users who ordered earlier than others not yet receiving their order status updates, where more recent buyers have. That's not going to affect the results of the performance, but it's probably another reason to hold off just at the moment until the issues with orders & shipping have been sorted out as well. There is the big screen VR headset as an option for you as well that might be worth checking out. Apart from that, I'm not sure what other VR headsets are currently on the horizon.

Well, this weekend will be 2 weeks from their 2 weeks™ video. If it actually released at the end of this week - this would be iconic.

Sorry I misunderstood you when you said "If no autohover so please to think about adding some kind of human behavior before release" (emphasis mine). Thanks for clarifying.

No - please don't. In saying that, I'm not saying don't include this. I'm all for looking into this as an option, but not the "before release" part. I would hate to see a module that (from everything I'm seeing with the video's coming out) looks like it's 2 weeks announcement may indeed be a week or so away, held up for a month or more over something as minor as this. By all means, consider making this change in the future, but not at the expense of the release please.

Sweet - thanks for clarification. I look forward to the next build.

Hi Skatezilla, My apologies, I'm not sure if I'm doing something wrong or not, but I can only find one place to set the custom launch arguments (Under Advanced Launcher Options), and it seems that this is a global parameter. (ie, I can't have different custom launch options per Build Slot). Is this correct? If so - do I need to create separate desktop icons instead for different custom saved games locations for the one install? Cheers DZ

It quite could be, but I think it's a matter of goals and priorities. There are 2 ways to achieve this. Start with the drift/realism as a higher priority and work the way to stability (aka, George) or start with stabilization as a higher priority and work the way towards realism. Whichever way is used, there will be an element of err, or 'not being far enough' on the side of caution. Given the issues I have faced with George over time - especially in the hover - I welcome the new approach of 'on rails'. While not perfect, I think it's the best of the too evil. As for not being perfect, what's the saying? "Perfection is the enemy of good". That's not to say I wouldn't encourage additional work down the track towards this goal, but not something I would consider a day 1 holdup to get right first, even in a non early access model. Also, if stability with just a slight drift was easy enough - I dare say we wouldn't have gone through the issues we faced with George either. There may be other factors at play that make this first more difficult than is perceived. In 30 years of professional coding I have learned that what appears, and should be 'simple' on the surface often has hidden obstacles that aren't revealed until part way through - and it can be very difficult (or impossible) to relay the reality of this to people who haven't seen those obstacles for themselves. As such, I often tend to give dev's the benefit of the doubt - at least until proof of concept is done by someone else where the code is visible.

I fear I've gotten to a point of module saturation. I look at the F4. See the fun others are having with it, and just go "I don't think I have the mental capacity to learn more, and remember all the new stuff- plus retain what I already fly", even though I want to. I already have multiple airframes that I purchased and never really learned including the A10II, F16 and F15. (Ducks for cover to avoid thewell deserved incoming 'how could you?!?') Helicopters aren't quite as bad, as normally most at least seem more simplistic, but when it comes to new fighters it seems when I try and learn new modules, I start getting messed up between the new ones, and the ones I already fly, and then have to go back and relearn the old ones - in which case I quickly seem to forget the new stuff. I guess IRL that's why pilots aren't active on multiple airframes of different generations simultaneously and maybe I'm expecting too much of my aging brain. I fly almost every helicopter. When it comes to planes, the only ones I feel I can do well in would be the FA18 and the AV8B. The F14 I don't mind with a RIO, but it's very rare I have one, so I rarely fly it except to enjoy traps on the carrier. The A10II, the F16, the F15 criminally almost remain always in the hanger, maybe getting pulled out once in a blue moon for a non-combat joyflight. I don't actually use them much at all because I am finding it too difficult to remember all the intricacies of the different weapon systems. So my question for those who maintain flying many modules is - how do you manage it? Do you actually remember and maintain all of them? Or do you just move from one to the next, and forget existing ones, and then relearn when the 'circle' comes around? Or am I not the only one that struggles and you find it difficult as well? Honestly - if it wasn't for my mental capacity, I would probably own all fixed wing aircraft, but I'm getting hesitant now about getting aircraft that I think is just going to sit in the hanger and not get fully used. It used to be that I loved learning more modules. Now it seems more like a choir. It probably doesn't help that I'm mentally exhausted in the evenings and weekends due to my work being so mentally demanding, but even so - I'd love to know if there are little tricks that people use that have similar challenges like me.

If it was reverted, and it fixes the issue please let us know.

Have you tried disabling CPU core parking to see if that fixes the issue?

I currently have 2 installs of DCS with different configurations, but I'm wondering if I can get away with only having one install, yet still have 2 different configurations for that one install. 2 installs worked in the past, because I used the Open Beta for testing, as well as additional mods, and the stable install for my live / mission days/nights gameplay. Now that ED only has the single branch, but I still want 2 different configs, I was wondering if I could cheat, and reclaim some disk drive space and have a single install, but with 2 (or even more) configs. Interesting. I'll have to check when I'm next on my gaming rig, but I don't think my stable version has a dcs_variant.txt file, only the second install 'open beta'. If so, creating a dcs_variant.txt for my base DCS install might resolve the issue. However I'm not sure what the autoupdate.cfg file contains, so I'll check that out too. Thanks! Oh sweet. Thanks. So if I just add the following to different launches, I could have as many saved game configs/variants as I want? dcs.exe -w DCS (For say my original install) dcs.exe -w DCS.OpenBeta (To be able to use my 2nd install, without having to have a second program install) dcs.exe -w DCS.Sanitized (To create a new one that's brand new/sanitized for debugging) That's neat! Thanks SkateZilla!

I haven't tried low cockpit textures in the AH64. I don't use low because in the UH-1 - the textures really are unreadable. They're a blotted mark at best, and as I fly multiple airframes I opted to keep away from low cockpit textures. That being said, there are 3rd party cockpit textures you can load into the saves games directory and I have used these before. Maybe that's why I'm not getting the hit that some others are?