Yskonyn

Indeed, suction feed.

Looks good! They will serve you fine for a long time. Congrats!

I have been using the 4 for quite a few years now and it suits me fine. Provided I have never used the 5. But regardless, the 4 does its job perfectly. One tip I can give you in advance; if you find your view control to be erratic, as in you have trouble focussing the in-sim view steady towards one point, you will probably get much better result by enabling V-Sync in the videocard's graphics options and/or the VSync option in the sim options menu. Perhaps the 5 copes better because it has a higher refreshrate, but with the 4 I have always found I need to enable VSync when using it.

:thumbup::megalol:

I would not fuss too much about which ones to get. In the relative scheme of all things flight simming its the hardware you will use the least amount of time unless you specifically aim to fly choppers. So I would go with the cheaper option. Besides, nobody ever looks under your desk, so leave the cool looking stuff for ON your desk and save the 60 bucks. ;)

Lol, a Level-D sim eh? I bet if you mounted the cheaper X52 setup on a hydraulic platform (provided it could communicate with DCS) you would still come darn close to that level of performance, or at the very least; the feel of it. The X52 is a great stick. It gets a bit sloppy with age and -personally- I was never able to get used to the 'snappy' center with its rather weak spring. Ergonomically and button wise, though, its pretty good and definately one of the top cheaper options. I dont know why this is relevant, but I fly too. :D

That is pretty amazing work, right there!

Well that is the thing, isn't it? If you dont like it, uninstall. Regardless of what others think of it.

Changing the UseDefaultSnapViews to true again solved my issue. Note that I deleted the files from my Saved Games\DCS folder structure. The files are only present in my DCS World install folder.

Do you guys know how they (used to) test bird impact and engine performance? Note the cannon at 0:39 :D Frozen chickens! Its also hilarious to see the impact testing on the windshield.

Previous iterations of X-Plane used some kind of freeware terrain mesh / texture package that covered the whole world at a decent scale. I would love to see such a thing for DCS World.

+1

I don't think it would. Most people would still keep on using TeamSpeak, because a lot of Wings have more than one channel on a TS server. So in game radio functionality is nice in theory, but it would require people to switch all the time. And a program like TS is still needed to communicate when outside of DCS. So the current solution with TARS is pretty ideal and saves for a lot of switching applications. ;)

MadTommy didn't say: Don't do it, OR ElSE! Now did he? He just gave his opinion on the matter without claiming anything further. Your reaction is indicative of why discussions end up heated up on these boards; people just seem to have a hard time accepting someone else's views. We are not here to be right, we here to discuss and provide feedback. And if people would respect and accept the views of others a bit more, the discussions around here would be less about hair pullling and heartaches. ;) You can still disagree while accepting someone's view, you know.

+1 here

I have the exact same issue. When I shift my X, Y and Z axis on my TIR by moving my head, the HUD symbology remains at a fixed point from my position it seems. This results in the HUD symbology being in view fully when I press my nose against the glass so to speak. When I relax backwards into the default position, the symbology runs out of the window because I am moving away from the HUD window, while the position of the symbology seems fixed in relation to my head position, so it moves backwards as well as I move my head, making it go ' in front of the glass' so to speak and therefore out of the scope of the window... I never had this before.. :S

Lol! That would be awesome indeed! :D

No need to restart this all again, Isht. All your questions have been answered, in multiple different ways. Read back this thread, please. Stop trying to pick a fight.

Very eloquently put.

:D Oh yes, I questioned it. I even doubted it. But I was merely trying to explain why I thought (and understood to a point) why people were posting being dissapointed. No head of steam here. I still love the pink cloud that is ED and its modules. I just prefer them to be study sim fidelity. :D

No, little devil, you! :D In Wags' weekly update post there was mentioning of DCS <aircraft> at first too! Not just in the Newsletter. But of course, I will go in the history books are the lunatic of the ED boards now. :joystick::megalol: EDIT: See, at last! Proof I am not insane! :D

Nowhere! :) But obviously you missed the fact that Wags has edited one (or both) of those posts later. There actually was DCS: F-15C and DCS: SU-27 in there before. And that's part of what started the debate.

Well I dare to call this incorrect. It was, and one of your testers has even confirmed that a few days ago in a different thread that I quoted earlier. The DCS brand was marketed as the high fidelity simulation, at least it was during DCS A-10C development. It was only with the consolidation in DCS World that this has changed and became a broad platform for modules of varying fidelity running in the DCS World environment. So yes, DCS World was never reserved for hi-fi stuff only, but the brand or label 'DCS' in front of a module was. Lots of people here have that impression too,otherwise this debate hadn't started in the first place. Again, it's fine if things change because a view in the company has changed (or needed to change for that matter), but keep calling it what it is.

I don't think it is. The engine ED uses has always been CPU limited, not GPU.

Well worded and exactly how I look at it now and have done initially. Despite the dissapointment I felt earlier. IF, however, the focus of DCS stays 'study sim'.