grammaton_feather

I don't think I spent much time on this one because it was launched when I was on a time-out from PCs. A friend used to play it and I watched him on it sometimes.

DCS World is massively improved since 2.5+ and with continued future improvements like the supercarrier and VR performance improvements... However... There are some aspects of DCS that haven't seen any improvement: 1: External cameras... The external cameras are generic and haven't improved since the early days of flight sims (Jane's/Microprose). The external views are largely unrealistic. Coming from a 3d animation background where cinematic camera movements can be fully simulated for greater realism... DCS World is really deficient in this area. In the world of PC based racing simulations there has been a shift from generic external views to offering realistic drive-by views with camera lag, zoom, drift and shake. If I select an external view of an aircraft in flight... that view is locked rigidly. Does not deviate unless by mouse or key control. It looks very unrealistic. The flyby view is also lacking because the flyby camera is a fixed position at the time you initiate flyby... your plane is generally too far away on the flyby view. What I'm proposing is an external camera system that brings realistic cinematic views. When I select an external view of my aircraft.. there should be drift, variations in proximity between cam and aircraft. The crucial point here is that we're no longer just showing a generic game view but something that enhances the realism and faciliates much more realistic DCS video creation. What we're simulating is real aircraft cinematography which involves filming the aircraft from another aircraft. To illustrate what I'm talking about: ^^ Some really good aircraft cinematography. Study each scene and notice how it's not just the target aircraf in motion but the camera filming the action. For external F2 there should be drift on x,y and z axis. For chase there should be drift as above but also a delay. Flyby view needs some major redesign whereby the camera dynamically adjusts its zoom to maintain a certain proximity to your aircraft. The flyby cam should provide a very close flyby at its peak along the tracking curve (perhaps proximity adjustable). This cinematic camera system might have its own menu options to adjust drift, shake, zoom, lag (all of the controls I have available when I use gorillacam plugin for my cinema4d animations). 2: The second area I'd like to see improved... The awful subtitle messages plastered over the 3d world. I don't need to see radio message texts for words I can hear. I don't need words telling me my rounds have hit a mig. Are you aware people have been asking for options to FULLY DISABLE the text for 4 years+ now?

4 years later and still subtitles are forced ON.

Why is it that the devs ignore this simple request? Why are subtitles FORCED on a non-arcade flight sim. I'm actually wondering why I keep pouring money into this sim when those bloody annoying ugly subs are ruining recorded vids. Is there anyone who can investigate knocking the text out by removal of certain files/scripts?

Already did that. Still have subs ruining the videos. It's bizarre a sim like DCS has forced subtitles. What muppet thought that was a good idea? Why do I need text telling me I've hit a mig-21 with guns? It's fine if the devs feel DCS is an arcade game.. in that case just go full-on Call of Duty and show score and "mmmm-multi-kill" The forced subtitles have been a thing forever... If there were some files/folders that could be deleted to stop them appearing that would be good. I have no hope the devs will ever add an option to remove it.

I did search for existing threads on the subject but couldn't find anything. I absolutely detest the subtitles plastered all over the screen. Is there a way to get rid of ALL radio messages? Obviously I'm not referring to the training missions but anything outside of training.

Thanks! :)

You're not the only one confused. I found the FOH site confusing. After buying into the event to support veterans I was directed to the https://splashonegaming.com/foh/ which gives two options... FOH or Sign-Up. Felt like I was stuck in a loop with the site not having access for anyone who'd already purchased a ticket for the event. The email also gave the same splashone FOH link. Now we're into September and the links are dead and I tried emailing ryan via the emailing link today but the email bounces back as out of action. Joined the discord server for splashOne gaming but can't see any info for the event there. Not complaining... it's just all new to me so I'm finding it confusing :)

Very disappointing Leapmotion has turned out to be a dismal failure. All these years in development and integration into practically nothing. And yet it would have been the ideal solution when you compare it to some of the clunky alternatives.

Thanks for link. Looks like it's far from ready for use with DCS :(

Wondering why DCS devs decided to integrate this particular glove design given the early stage of development?

So I only noticed recently DCS World has integrated capto glove support. How well are the gloves working in DCS with hardware HOTAS?

Aha! Ok, I get it now finally. We need massive deforestation for better sensation of speed.

Yes, I understand that part now... What I'm still fuzzy on is... Nevada and Gulf give a greater sense of speed in VR. Is it because of the ground detail? A few times in this discussion trees have been mentioned but I still don't get how tall trees reduce the sensation of speed.

OK, I guess ground detail more apparent on Nevada and Gulf helping to maintain a sense of speed at low level. I understand the FOV effect on speed now thanks to the explanations given here. I will go back in and check the ground level detail on caucasus to fully understand what's happening.

Video demonstrates it well... but how come Nevada and Gulf have much greater sense of speed than Caucasus? Caucasus are the real problem here. It's more like a hot air balloon ride.

Tried Nevada and Gulf and they both have realistic speed sensation. It's the caucasus where the problem lies. The movement at low level looks and feels slow. More like a Cessna flight. It's only an issue in VR on Caucasus but it's severe to the point where I would not want to fly there.

OK, so explain how IL-2 gives a great sensation of speed at low level in VR. Pretty much what you'd expect from a real aircraft. There's something seriously wrong about the way it's rendered to VR on DCS. And if I recall... this slow sense of speed isn't present on Nevada. I will test this again.

I did wonder about the field of view but I haven't noticed this outside of DCS World. I will test in IL-2 today.

So how do you explain the massive difference in ground speed shown on the monitor? Cockpit videos of REAL low level high speed flight reflect the same speed shown on a monitor... not VR. ^^^

Been noticing something odd when flying any modern jets in DCS... When I'm low level there isn't a realistic sense of speed. It looks more like I'm flying a pitts special or even a Cessna! Lifting up the VR headset momentarily and seeing how it looks on a conventional monitor I see a very realistic sense of speed over the terrain. Lower the headset back in place and the aircraft appears to be flying much slower... no real sense of speed. Running HTC Vive... Framerate is 45 but I notice even when flying over sea at low level with an fps up to 89 it still looks slower in VR. Is this a GPU issue? Running a GTX 1070 on an overclocked Ryzen 1700 (3.9ghz).

AIRIO key is rejected when I try to register it. Tried numerous times. Latest Vaicom pro and voice attack. AIRIO DLL is in the vaicom extensions folder.

Apparently Nvidia doesn't know 98 percent of the other VR game developers exist either.

I am going to contact Nvidia to find out how much they actually push their tech? If they'd created the same sort of campaign as Oculus + Palmer Luckey to bring the rift from prototype to market then it might be a whole lot more successful.

Sounds promising anyway. 2.5 has been a great update visually. VR performance is worst around runway/airbases for me. It would be nice if DCS could support multi GPU but if we are honest... SLI is an antiquated system. The idea of having to link two GPUs with a connector is absurd. DX12's ambition of leveraging whatever GPU's are connected along with integrated CPU graphics processors is a better solution. Systems that rely on individual game developers to support are generally doomed though. How many games use PhysX? How many use Havoc? VRworks has been around for a year+ and aside from Unreal engine support and a handful of games has almost no support.