nilpointer

Love it or hate it, that’s capitalism ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

This kind of armchair level, spurious legal expertise is why this thread is where it is every day. Time and time and time again it’s repeated here that what is going to be said has been said, yet you continue to regurgitate the same things as though by typing it for the 400th time you’ll force a change in reality. Do yourself a favour and go look at some sky.

This thread is the internet version of chopping off the head of a Hydra.....it just keeps growing back.

So far it's all been on moderately populated group servers. Examples would so far include, busy carrier with a number of other players also moving to catapults, deck crew on and a few statics, busy Incirlik ramp. I also tried a quick sample set of cold and dark instant actions for the Apache and F-4 on Syria and Sinai. I have not yet done the Nellis ramp and that has been notorious for trouble when populated with the 4090. I will try a few more of these and attempt to grab some sample shots. Note: I don't want to say it "never" went below 90fps as I'm sure that's not true, but certainly the vast majority of the time I had an eye on it there was a 90 there.

@slughead realising this is old now and you probably made the decision but to add some subjective datapoint. I was refusing to do this on the basis of reviews but gave in on the weekend due to some “reasonable” 5090 sale prices at my local and the insane amount of money people will still pay for a used 4090. Were it not for the easy changeover I might not have done it still but I definitely notice a difference. I did a quick undervolt on the 5090 and in my Crystal with everything to as high as it goes and the foveate region set to 200% supersampling (Tallymouse setting) I’m seeing a solid 90fps (set to headset refresh) in any aircraft I’ve tried (Hornet, Tomcat, F-4, Apache). I’ve had a few quick flights with friends online and no change there. Very happy so far. My 4090 was not performing poorly by any means but this is a noticeable bump to me.

As well as comedic value I have also found this thread makes my fingers tired from thinking about all of the energy expended on so much pointless typing. As a result I have kept this short to save my fingers for some useful or even possibly enjoyable task. Update: Fortunately I was able to still click on the "Launch DCS" button

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again… this thread is pure comedy. Anyway back to studying Swiss law in the absence of anything else more interesting to do

I thoroughly enjoy DCS and I realize that by even replying to this thread (that I very occasionally check in on) that I too am making myself part of the problem. But honestly it needs to be said... are people serious? The level of armchair legal eagle action here is pure comedy. I assume most of you also have pretty busy lives and finite amounts of time to spend on things you enjoy? Is this thread really worth some of the energy expended on it? Imagine repurposing that energy to actually do some of those enjoyable things... like even, say, DCS.... or touching some grass FFS. Honestly, mind blowing.

I'm wondering (as I've not found another reference) if the behavior of the in-cockpit controls with SRS is a known issue? Counter intuitively the INT (VOIP) mapping works as one would expect with SRS by keying the INT mike when it is not in Hotmic mode, however the COMM PTT (VOIP) mapping does nothing and instead the Stick PTT mapping is used to key the SRS mic for whichever radio is selected, the main issue being that it also triggers the comms menu at the same time. Any tips or is this to be fixed?

Does anyone else also jump into read these threads and just wonder how civilization hasn't collapsed already? I mean I'm guilty of the odd (private) meltdown because my favourite video game sometimes doesn't work as well as I might like all the time (which is just the nature of software development) .... but you know this really is all such low stakes, imagine for a moment all the other things you can fill your time with while you wait. I know there are a million other things I'd rather do than pretend I can possibly understand the complexities of a situation without anything like a full picture or a specialization in contract law. Plenty of other aircraft to pass the time or just go and breathe some fresh air and stare at the sky

Appreciate all the informative replies here from @mbucchia and @actually_fred For me this is close to a final nail in the coffin of DCS, it’s sad to hear how unimportant this is.

Unless I'm missing something, which I'm confident I'm not an even bigger ticking time bomb is that foveated rendering and eye tracking are not natively implemented by DCS. Not only have the many users of supporting headsets become reliant on @mbucchia to provide the high level of goodwill he already has, but should there ever be some additional change that renders QVF unusable we're back at square one. I love DCS but have also grown weary of the dice roll of it working between patches on the thousands upon thousands of dollars of hardware.

I have seen a number of posts that seem related but as yet I cannot seem to find a definitive answer. The throttle cutoff special options seem intended for throttles with an IDLE detent. I have a CM3 which as others have said allows 0% to be set on the detent and button bindings behind. The issue here is that by having 0% at the detent the throttle is actually perpetually in cutoff when the special option is set to the lowest setting of 3%. To try and avoid this I used the virpil configuration software to set the detent to 3% however at this detent the engine RPM is now just sufficiently enough above the 0% throttle setting (in jet is around 73/74% RPM) to make landing significantly harder to slow the jet down using the "by the book" technique. Can someone please explain how these settings are intended to be used.

Still an issue it seems, just noticed this again taxing behind someone today.