drwenck

@Ourorborus (and most others) I completely get your point :) Subscriptions aren't ideal, all I want Eagle Dynamics and the user base to think about is how they go forward with development. Some people might want more and more aircraft, but for me (and maybe at least one other user) I'd like to see more resources invested into improving the very core of the sim. How do I, for example, incentivize them to spend the time on making the turbulence and weather effects more realistic? What about better VR integration/optimisation? Hell, I would be very happy to pay $60 for a weather/turbulence mod, another $60 for a VR performance pack, same again for an engine upgrade, ground texture pack, fancy shaders, etc. if it improved things without bugs and was written and updated with robust coding... The thing is I'm pretty sure a percentage of people would think that those items should be part of DCS. But there's not a ton of incentive (other than complaints) to bring these features into existence. I guess the question is... what can WE do to make it worthwhile for Eagle Dynamics to spend time on underlying processes, whilst at the same time keeping existing modules unbroken and relevant? I hope there's an answer ...anyway, I'm off to the store to buy another module

I spend a lot of money on my VR and motion platform gaming setup. 2080TI, Ryzen 7 3800X, 32GB Ram, SSDs, etc. And it's frustrating to see some areas (even if very few) give 3/4, or worse, reduction in frame rates when a few aircraft are parked/taxiing at an airbase. Literally from 100fps down to 20 because models aren't optimized and/or the base simulator doesn't utilize multithreading or cull unseen or overly numerous polygons. (Settings far from max, 1.4 pixel density) This is after many hours of tinkering and modding with shaders, textures, nackground apps, system settings, etc. I don't blame the guys at Eagle Dynamics. The current payment setup literally doesn't reward them to invest heavily in the underlying game mechanics, nor does a single payment setup make module developers responsible to deliver an evolving product. I personally own at least 75% of the modules available in DCS, and I understand that changing the current setup could potentially mean more investment on my part, but unless there is impetus to change, why would they? I don't know the answer, but if you look at nature (Charles Darwin) then if there is a driving force for change, then there is more likely to be one. If the guys only get paid every time they release a new module, why in the hell would they invest a large amount of resources into things other than new modules? Maybe the answer is both (I raise the iRacing scenario again) where both the modules AND the software attract fees. I would also suggest an in-game rating system for modules that gives users the ability to give a star rating and a description at the end of missions, to make developers more responsible for keeping their modules current and optimal. If a module isn't up to scratch, prospective purchasers will see, and the feedback will drive the developers to maintain their product or risk low sales as the product ages/fails to adapt over time. Similarly, if the base simulation is part of the fee structure, it has a chance to evolve and stay as competitive as possible. Maybe one way Eagle Dynamics could transition would be to offer existing purchasers a discount and/or credit to transition payment types? You have to think. What will DCS look like in 5 years time if the main financial driver for the software is predominantly focused on releasing modules? Do you think it will get the same attention to the flight model, weather, ground/scenery, graphics, etc. that Microsoft Flight Sim gets in that time? What if Microsoft opens up its policy on war simulations? (they have previously, and if someone in an office decides they'll satisfy the cost vs. reward analysis to import a dozen airframes from P3D into the MSFS2020 engine, then what happens?). I don't say any of this to offend anyone. I say it because I care greatly about DCS, and I want it to be something we see grow and grow and grow. If you've already invested in DCS, great! - but it exactly that, an investment. iRacing has the community, development and realism it has right now because of the model they've decided to go with. Not because they purely decided to charge $30 per car and left it at that.

Actually iRacing uses an ongoing payment system that I'm very happy to support. They have a very active development schedule and talk about it weekly in their official podcast (including segments with various members of the development and production team). If DCS did this I would also be happy to pay an ongoing fee if the amount of development matched iRacing's. Bring on fancy weather, terrain and VR improvements!!!!

Hi ProsperGuy, Just wondering if you got to the bottom of the problems you were having with the x55 stick not working with the extension. I'm having the exact same issue and wonder if you found a fix. I'll post a reply if I figure it out. Cheers D

Function to change view angle/rotate screen in viewport lua files (monitor setup) (after talking with developers) viewRoll = [absolute angle in degrees] Should be able to add this line into any viewport parameters. I found this useful to rotate viewports to match monitor alignment: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3193405#post3193405 Just thought I'd share

Function to change view angle/rotate screen in viewport lua files (monitor setup) (after talking with developers) viewRoll = [absolute angle in degrees] Should be able to add this line into any viewport parameters. I found this useful to rotate viewports to match monitor alignment: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3193405#post3193405 Just thought I'd share

Function to change view angle/rotate screen in viewport lua files (monitor setup) (after talking with developers) viewRoll = [absolute angle in degrees] Should be able to add this line into any viewport parameters. I found this useful to rotate viewports to match monitor alignment: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3193405#post3193405 Just thought I'd share

Success! After contacting the developers directly, there is an extra command in the viewport lua structure that I haven't seen anywhere in the forums. viewRoll = [in absolute degrees] This solves my problem directly because now I can have all of my displays set up in landscape orientation, and rotate the HUD/front viewport 90 degrees to suit. Alternatively, the projection warping software company (fly-elise) also said that I could arrange the surround group into all portrait mode which would let me then keep windows on the HUD screen. Hopefully someone else finds this useful.

I swapped the primary (vertical/portrait) monitor over to the left hand side of the nVidia surround group, changing the lua files as required. ...but still no good (same problem) it seems that the options.lua overrides the vertical height to match the biggest y value (i.e. the vertical monitor being 1920 pixels tall) ...hence the stretching I've contacted ED support to see if they have any more parameters to configure the viewports lua file, but if anybody else has any suggestions I would be really thankful. Thanks, D

@JG14_Smil No problem to change the HUD monitor over to the right of the nVidia surround group (sorry, wasn't eyefinity). I'd prefer to keep the monitor rotated in portrait (and not landscape like the others) because I use the HUD screen to view my desktop when I'm back in windows. Also, the viewDx/Dy settings only seem to shift the view left/right & up/down to my knowledge. If there are other sub-parameters or the like that let me change rotation (clockwise, etc.) pretty please let me know :) I'd probably better confirm that the "HUD" output is actually just a viewport of the HUD area of the cockpit view. I have set it up like this because the projected image isn't as high a resolution as what is possible on a monitor. Here's what it looks like... (p.s. the monitors below the HUD screen are touchscreens not part of the pc display group in question) I'll try shifting the HUD to the right and post my results. Cheers

Hi, I'm trying to set up a 4th monitor to act as a HUD (the 1st 3 displays are projectors set up in eyefinity). My desktop is arranged so that the 4th monitor will be rotated vertically as shown in the attached Here's the Display properties screen from Windows 7 I've also included a copy of my display related lua files to show you what I've tried so far... My problem is that when I start up the sim, everything gets stretched vertically to match the overall depth of the monitor setup (i.e. 1920 deep to match the primary/left-hand monitor) which causes the eyefinity screens to be stretched also. I'm thinking it might be an issue with eyefinity, but if I limit the options file screen height = 1080 with an aspect ratio = 6.333333 the display works perfectly (instead of height = 1920 with an aspect ratio = 3.1666667). The only problem is that with the output resolution only 1080 high, I can't use the space on the left monitor below the HUD for gauge exports (which I would really like to do). If someone with experience in this stuff could please look over my lua's I would be really thankful! Also, if there is a better way to do this... I'm all ears :) p.s. does anyone know of a parameter to change the viewport rotation angle? I might be able to use that as a potential workaround. Just thinking... 4Screen.lua MissionEditor.lua options.lua