SkateZilla
-
Posts
21181 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
16
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by SkateZilla
-
-
1 hour ago, Schmidtfire said:
This should have been resolved the first weekend. Now it’s two months later.. What is still being discussed? Seems like a complete deadlock without any solution in sight.
I have spent hundreds of dollars on Razbam modules. The latest one still deep in EA. It does affect my willingness (at the moment) to buy other DCS World products or recommend others to do so. The whole 3rd party model as such is being tested.
Many cool modules and maps waiting on the horizon. Just hoping that this current situation won’t spoil all of that.
Contractual disputes are rarely if ever solved in a weekend, especially because most companies do not have legal departments and support teams that work weekends, in the USA, required documents to be notarized etc etc, can only be done Monday->Friday, as required establishments to do so are usually closed on weekends, as are most law firms.
"Now it's two months later",
Allow me to correct that statement, as According to RB & RB Devs, It's ongoing for about a year now.
*Exact date was never disclosed, however RB has stated it's going on 10+ months. when it became public.*
Considering the amount of information made public by RB, and the Sum in the Amount of being "The High 6 Figures" it's not a small claim that can be settled over a bottle of Dr. Pepper and some Oreos.
That information is just what RB has disclosed, the validity of those numbers I cannot 100% guarantee, so take it at face value.
-
2
-
1
-
-
On 5/28/2024 at 11:06 AM, draconus said:
What messages? If your hardware is capable of running Windows 10 it will run Win11 too. There are workarounds for that artificial limit.
the last few Windows 10 updates, MS has Snuck in "Everything is Better with Windows 11" full screen pop up ads.
-
2
-
-
4 hours ago, Dangerzone said:
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
in the current public build, it's global.
the next public build, it's per slot, as the function was rewritten.-
1
-
1
-
-
48 minutes ago, Irisz said:
Ask Chizh, I personally saw him in a conversation where he talked about it!
Windows 10 is not supported, so it is not up to date!
Running DCS World with a 10-year-old AMD FX processor is a serious joke! You can be an interesting tester if you don't even know that Windows 10 is not supported!
Funny, I'm on Windows 10 now, and DCS Runs fine, and as A tester I was never told it's not supported, so I don't know where you are getting your information from.
You likely mis-read something, because Windows 10 is very much supported and still in use, ED would also not drop support for an OS that has 68% Marketshare.
The only topic of Windows 10 and unsupported is discussion of Microsoft is pushing Windows 10 to LongTermSupport status, which ends in 2025.
Also, Prior to upgrading due to a power surge, I ran a FX-8350 w/ DCS as well.
So the information you're posting is more of "You Opinion" than "Facts".You're an interesting user who registered a week ago, has come here to argue, trying to say you saw conversations that don't exist and attempt to dis-credit others.
A. I Develop Software.
B. I Build Gaming Rigs.
C. I Do 3D Art Composition.
D. I test not only DCS, but products for half a dozen other companies.
I have Credibility, and I'm removing myself from this conversation, as I have more important things to do than continue this repartee.
-
3
-
-
3 minutes ago, Irisz said:
Because SP player or not MP where DCS World uses much more memory!
MP uses more memory because those missions are designed that way, have you seen how much work and detail goes into these online missions?
Downloading the same mission, replacing all the Client slots w/ AI Aircraft and running it locally would use the same amount of memory.
At this point, it's arguing for arguments sake.
-
1
-
-
Just now, Irisz said:
This is outdated, ask the developers personally, it was written on the forum a few months ago!
It's from their website,
I talk to the developers daily, so ...-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, Irisz said:
Obviously you don't feel the problem under 16GB of VRAM, so you don't know about it, you would feel it better if you felt the problem personally! Those with 4 GB of VRAM and low memory will suffer in DCS World. That's exactly what the topic is about. Try not to think based on emotions!
Just think about it, if the 32 GB video cards appear, your video card will only be mid-range! In the meantime, if you have 4 GB of VRAM, try to pray that DCS World runs smoothly on your computer!
Minimum system requirements (LOW graphics settings): OS 64-bit Windows 10; DirectX11; CPU: Intel Core i3 at 2.8 GHz or AMD FX; RAM: 16 GB; Free hard disk space: 200 GB; Discrete video card NVIDIA/AMD 6GB; requires internet activation.
I ran DCS on a 7970 Lightning w/ 3GB of VRAM on LOW w/ 16 GB of System Ram w/ no issues.-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, Irisz said:
The bigger a texture is, the more space it takes up on the SSD! The bigger the preset you set for the texture, the longer the loading time will be, you will enter the server later! The bigger a Texture, the more memory and VRAM is needed! If the VRAM is full, it starts loading the many textures into the memory, which slows down the computer! The paging file also contributes to this, because if its size were smaller, the game would be much faster and would run more smoothly.
Do you remember when a lot of people came to the forum because their computer was freezing due to running DCS World? We're just talking about the topic. Solution: set the paging file to automatic, it's a good way to stress the SSD!
Do you remember the days when the MiG-21Bis appeared? It took years to fix it so that if someone enters the MiG-21Bis on a server, the server does not freeze for 1-2 seconds.
Even then, the intentionally oversized texture was a problem!
From my point of view, that's all about the topic, there are those who understand and would like it all to change! And it would be better if so many paintings didn't take up so much space.
Clearly you don't understand how texture loading, mip-maps, dynamic resolutions and spooling work.
File size on your harddisk, is not what ends up being loaded into ram or vram.
if that were the case, a single F-14 or F-4E would max out everyone's VRAM with just that external model alone, let alone scenery or other objects in the mission.
As for previous comments that it was a big discussion that ended with "An SSD is pretty much required", no such debate or conclusion was ever made.
As for Page Files wearing down an SSD Faster, clearly you dont know how PageFiles and RAM work.
If you have 16GB of Ram, Items are loaded in and out of the ram from the SSD regardless of pagefile size.
Increasing the Pagefile size allows the system to easily find those files to return them to the memory quicker, vs having to index and search for each file every time it's called, HDDs don't have really high random access numbers, SSDs are 100% random access, no moving platters or read heads, no delay in finding and getting the files.
Page Files don't cause lifespan issues with SSDs, that's also been proven by every tech site, as a urban myth.
Even then, the only recommendation regarding pagefiles not being put on SSDs is because they have limited space (less w/ overhead and TRIM).
Reading doesn't really cause wear on the SSD, SSDs are limited by IO/Writes, which pretty mech every tech channel has covered, that no normal gamer / user would ever reach the IOPS Limit before their drive would fail or be replaced.
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, Irisz said:
I don't want to get personal or make comments to you, but it's frustrating that you think that someone who has been here on the forum for 1 week has only been playing DCS World for 1 week. I've been here since Lock On Modern Air Combat, I just haven't registered! I have been flying with ED Flanker for 15 years! I know exactly what I'm talking about when I say that DCS World's textures are overscaled! Because of this, many users with lower incomes are simply excluded from DCS World!
Texture resolution has no direct correlation with consumers income.
If they have lower end hardware (CPU / RAM / GPU) those 4K texture files have Mipmapped lower resolution textures built into them to be used.
So again, Texture sizes aren't a problem forcing users to spend hundreds of dollars on buying entirely new systems/huge upgrades.7 minutes ago, Irisz said:I have nothing to do with it! You know, when a game is properly optimized and doesn't have such photorealistic intentionally scaled-down textures, but is more user-friendly, it allows many more people to play the game, and these games are successful because they can be played on 10+ year old computers without any problems!
You must not have heard the interview with the developer of Heatbluer that he doesn't like to play with his own product because the demands on the computer are so high, and he prefers to play with ED's products because they don't eat up the FPS! I don't want to get personal with you, but you don't play much on MP servers, you test simple missions on SP! I have been following you on YouTube for years, and your opinion is not relevant! I, who have been playing on online PvP servers since Flaming Cliffs 2 since 2009, am completely incompetent, aren't I?
You would be much better off if you played DCS world instead of 12 hours a day on the forum!
I laughed at this for a long time, because they know the problem exists and they don't care, buy another SSD!
Again, TEXTURES are not the reason for the Userbase differential.
WoT/WT is a arcade game, w/ simplied everything. DCS is a Study sim.
Two entirely different genre's. it's like comparing Doom to Arma III.Also,
How are you able to try and tell someone what or what they don't do? (based off their YT Page).
You've side tracked this thread enough.-
1
-
-
29 minutes ago, Irisz said:
Your logic and comprehension are like a bag of dead fish!
Because of this, he is unable to understand what I am talking about!
WOT and WT can be cited as examples of user-friendly scaling of textures, which DCS World cannot do. Millions play the two mentioned games precisely because of this. DCS World is not a popular game for that reason! Also here, as an answer, write the ED marketing text that the developers teach you on the forum what to think. Developers love users who don't think, just buy. Long live FOMO! Purposeful thinking is not fashionable!
2 months ago, a friend of mine uninstalled DCS World because he only has 16 GB of RAM. With my idea, he would still play with DCS Word, because of your way of thinking, ED lost a user!
Everyone pour your money on ED if you can. Let me quietly note that ED was close to bankruptcy a long time ago!
Have fun!
I seriously doubt dynamic client texture resolutions is the basis of which WoT and WT have millions of users and Why DCS doesn't.
I think it has more to do with WoT/Wt being entry level arcade trash, with more microtransactions than a ubi-soft game.
I ran DCS Fine on 16GB, as long as you know what you have, and how to use it, the sim runs.
Users with 8 GB of Ram and 4GB GTX1050s don't need to be attempting to run 4K or Maxxed settings, let alone VR, or extremely large MP Missions.
I think I'll remove myself from this conversation, and leave ya'll to try and use extremely dis-illusioned examples like that to try and get a company to invest development time into something that has no bearing on their customer base either way.Been here a week, an already telling users they are dumb, when I've been here for 2 decades, develop my own software and 3d art. That's funny.
As for playing DCS For decades and just now registering, convenient.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Exorcet said:
You're assuming that DCS is the only program using space. It may not be. And just as a counter example my DCS space is over 800 GB since I've found it comfortable to have two installations when enough space remains. I've also tried to install DCS on a secondary computer like a laptop for a variety of reasons, though I had to give this up due to space.
Yes the user needs to manage space to meet their requirements. That should be extended to liveries for a variety of reasons.
It is a common sentiment to avoid HDD for DCS. It's advice repeated all the time. It seems that you've found that it doesn't hold completely true, but many users will probably be steered toward SSD.
The F-14 livery folder exceeds your estimate alone at 13 GB. It is of course the outlier but I think you're underestimating the cost of liveries which can potentially reach into the 20-50 GB range or beyond. 10-20 GB can easily matter when you combine that space with potential space savings from other files. This should be obvious. Some users are going to have other things on their drives besides DCS. Removing 10 GB of liveries, 10 GB of X-Plane global map, and another 10 GB from a few other programs each can easily net you 50 or more GB. More options only makes things easier for the user and prevents the removal of potentially more important files like entire maps.
Using @Rudel_chw's own example above, if we had the option to remove liveries, that could have been done in place of removing 1 or more maps. PG is 30 GB. The F-14 alone consumes half of that space in liveries. Apache comes in at 5. Mirage F1 at 3.5. My own drive contains 50GB of liveries and I am behind on updates and so missing some aircraft and perhaps some recent liveries.
Not to mention that a manager allows more liveries to be added since it takes away space concerns.
I forgot to address this. MP segregation can be solved as well. If a manager could replace hi res liveries with low res or generic ones, then it becomes possible allow people with different livery folders to coexist. It's also not like the mismatch isn't handled in DCS as is. It just shows a missing livery texture.
In MP, missing livery shows up as the default livery, no missing texture.
Point being, most of the liveries are contained in a single archive file, separating all of them, giving them all IDs, creating a secondary livery manager system, even if it manages them for MP, instead of users downloading them once during update, the servers will get hit with requests to download liveries significantly more.
Like I said, it's easy to sit as a consumer and be like "Building a livery manager would be easy" and not understand there's development costs, as well as long term bandwidth costs, etc etc etc to be considered.
Not to even mention, there are other core aspects of the sim that are a priority over re-configuring the livery infrastructure.
In the future maybe, separate them all give them IDs, etc etc, it would also maybe save on updates, if the livery itself isnt updated, then those files wont need to be re-downloaded, vs if 1 livery gets updated or added, and they are all contained in the same archive, the entire livery texture archive is re-downloaded for a few MB of files.
Not saying the system wouldn't benefit from it if done properly, just saying, right now, it's not something that's a priority, with all the other things coming / in progress (MT Optimizations, DC / RTS Core being integrated, Vulkan being integrated), rebuilding the module and livery infrastructure would be another extensive project, for not only the ED Distribution, but can you imagine how long it would take to have 1000+ Liveries to Steam's shop w/ ID's and the clutter?
As for HQ/LQ Textures, I think it's being over estimated how much space you would actually recover. cutting resolution from 4K to 2K would take a 20Mb dds down to 8 Mb depending on the compression method and colorspace. so it would be an extensive effort to re-organize the corefile just to cut livery footprint from 50GB to 30GB.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, Irisz said:
In my case, I'd rather uninstall DCS World because ED doesn't care about the preferences of REDfor fans. Even if I don't buy a module, they constantly reduce the storage space on my SSD!
I would like to point out that there are users who are not fans of NATO modules.
I recently saw the F4 skins in the news and the different paint schemes that will be available for it. I was just annoyed that my SSD storage is being taken up again because a new flyable plane is coming to DCS World!
I really want to emphasize that my problem is not with the appearance of new products, but with how they affect my storage space without my consent!
Why is it so difficult to create separate directories for installed and non-installed versions of DCS World? Can someone explain to me why my SSD is affected by a module I didn't purchase? Why can't a low-resolution 100-200 MB skin be used for the F4 Phantom AI and leave those who didn't buy the module alone?
There are games that offer HD and SD versions, but the SD versions do not contain 4K resolution textures! I also use the SD version for this game because it's more suitable for me. I don't have a 4K monitor, so why should I need 4K textures?
Yesterday, I read that another game offers its users four types of installable versions! How wonderful is it that they cater to their community like that?
What does DCS World have? I could use an insulting epithet here, but currently, it seems that only those who buy all the modules are valued!
So if I didn't buy the product, don't take up 12 GB of my space. I don't even play in a 3rd generation fighter environment. The F4 Phantom is humiliated by the Su-27 10 times out of 10 in BVR air combat! I never look for such aerial targets under any circumstances. The F-16CM is the best and heaviest training aircraft for Su-27 and J-11A air combat practice! The other game that I still like is successful because it can be played on a toaster and is played by millions, which attracts more people to the game because of this, it is surrounded by the same passion as DCS World. I have been a Flanker addict since 2009! DCS World is the best simulator! The J-11A is currently a fantasy and I'm just waiting for them to fix it because in reality it can do much more!
This game has also become entertainment for whales, and they want to force everyone to spend their money on ED and their computer. I buy parts for my computer when it breaks, not when DCS World releases new modules to ED make money.
If there is a Module Manager, why is there no Skin Manager?
I will reiterate: Those who do not buy the product should not receive these high-resolution skins!
What would make me happiest is if, when I install DCS World, all AI skins are in low resolution! If you don't like the look of DCS World, let the Skin Manager give you the option to choose! It would fit perfectly in the Module Manager. You can install many things for DCS World, so why can't you have a Skin Pack option? DCS World LOW Skin Pack - DCS World SD Skin Pack - DCS World HD Skin Pack! LOW Pack = Low texture pack, SD Pack = Medium Pack, HD Pack = 4K or 8K texture pack!
Basically, I would choose the Low Skin Pack because I come here to fly, not to look at airplanes. DCS World is a simulator, not a Airshow simulator where I go out to the static line and inspect the rivets on the plane!
I respectfully note that I do not want to offend anyone!
Everyone should have the right option to install what they want on their computer!If possible, make a 16K Skin Pack for those who buy 8 Terabyte SSDs and want to utilize the RTX 4090.
I don't even dare to think about the RTX 5090, because this also allows a more powerful and better PC to run DCS World! By the way, I had to buy 64GB of RAM for the PC just because of DCS World...
Why do I feel like it's getting overly technical, and now grasping as straws, over 4-15GB of space, in 2024. I have single movies that take up more space.
A. Module selection has nothing to do "preferences", and more to do with available information, it's well known Red For (Migs, Sukoi, etc) are mainly Russian and they have EXTREMELY strict laws regarding information on military equipment. So you cannot blame ED for that. They are working on a Mig-29A, which by one of your later points, would get destroyed by F-16s/F-18s/F-15s, so you likely wouldn't even touch that, for the same reason you wouldn't touch a F-4E, a Modern RedFor aircraft is never going to happen in the current state of western laws on military information, ever, and not just for ED, for everyone.
B. When you installed DCS, and Agreed to Terms, and when you click "Update" instead of "Later" You are consenting to drive space being used by said update.
C. Texture Resolution has nothing to do with monitor resolution, the higher the resolution of the textures to higher the pixel per inch detail on the aircraft's model. the higher PPI allows more finer details etc etc. You dont need a 4K monitor to see the difference between 2K and 4K textures.
E. Aircraft are added to the core, for use as AI, and Multi-Player. If there was an argument for anything, it would be to enable removal of "CoreMods" of aircraft you have no intention of using. That way you can remove the textures footprint as well as the 1GB or so footprint from EDMs, UI Elements, etc. and the updater will not force you to re-download at the next update.
-
3
-
-
11 hours ago, okopanja said:
While I appriciete the work you have done I must say I do not agree with this reasoning.
The trend of developers including all livereries that there were and those that did not has way more impact than just space.
We see a trend where you will be expected at some point to replace your PC every 2 to 3 years which can be expensive and not sustainable for majority. We are not talking here just disk space: cpu/gpu/ram also play significant role here.
I have already seen very devoted people drop off the scene. Ultimatly its a difference between being a niche and mainstream game. Therefore its actually very important for ED to keep the base footprint of this game lower, so the user base can expand. I can not see anyone in sales want to shrink the userbase of the products. In most cases you will never see these the liveries in the first place, unless you cycle them through F2.
In addition even if you can afford to "race" and replace your PC every year, the more money you spend on PC, the less money you will spend on modules, maps and other content.
Therefore I do believe the DEVs need to think hard about optimizations. E.g. have at least basic pack with few high res liveries and rest low res. If someone wants it let him download the full pack. This is just one way to do it. Other possibility is to implementing LRU livery cache.
There is no trend to replace your PC every 2-3 years, the ONLY time this would apply, is if someone is intentionally buying 2nd hand, clearance, low spec PCs every 3 years just to keep up with Avg Minimum spec.
I rocked a FX8350 (OC'd to oblivion), and 3 R7970 Lightnings, for over a decade, as each 7970 Died due to aged silicon, I eventually replaced my Mainboard, CPU, Ram, and rode out the last R7970 until it started to show IC Failures, then purchased the 6800XT, only because of availability and price, being in the middle of the GPU Price Spike era. So I literally ran DCS on a 15 yr old GPU at this time last year, with minimal issues, and even in VR.
There is a trend, that most power users upgrade to the latest GPUs and such, no one is forcing anyone to upgrade to continue to play DCS.
The Sim evolves, that's the nature of Software as a Service infrastructure, more graphics and things get added as technology develops.
Again, the only argument in there is space, which is easily solved, and if solved w/ a 2+TB drive, would be solved for years.
As more aircraft and theaters are added, it's up to the user to determine which theaters they want installed.
I have EVERYTHING installed, and it's under 700GB, so 2TB should be enough overhead for several years.
If budget is so tight that $150-200 for a drive to last 4+ years isn't feasible, there's always traditional HDDs which range $50 to 100 for 2-4TB.No one is saying SSDs or NVME's are required to run DCS, I run DCS from a WD BLK 7200 Drive fine.
This is the era of larger textures, larder LODs, and growing footprints. This is everywhere, even on consoles, games are shipping at 20 GB ISO Disks, and then downloading an additional 40-50 GB to install and expand into 120+ GB per title.
Developing the Core infrastructure for picking and choosing aircraft liveries to remove, will only cause further Multiplayer segregation, as now server owners will have custom livery sets that each player will have to download and or delete to pass IC, etc etc.
That amount of work to save roughly 4-12 GB in the long run isnt worth it.
If your storage situation is to the point where 10-20 GB is the determining factor on whether or not you can download updates and continue to play DCS, then it's clearly a matter of it being time to upgrade.
-
2
-
-
3 minutes ago, Dangerzone said:
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!
correct.
you don't need dcs.exe in the argument's box, just the command aarguments.
using -w "FolderName" will disable launching w/ App Presets, but it will allow you to launch w/ different \Saved Games\ Folder Sources.
as for dcs_variant.txt, it's only present on non stable versions, unless manually made by end user.-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Rudel_chw said:
I understand the need, I truly do, as in order to install the last update I had to uninstall FOUR maps (Sinai, Normandy 2.0, Syria and Persian Gulf) from my DCS:
.... however, two points:
1) A larger SSD does not cost "thousands" of dollars, I just was looking to expand my PC and a 2 TB SSD costs 90-100 US$ on my country.
2) Saving a few GB of livery space would have not helped me one bit on the last DCS update, as I needed over 140 GB of hard drive space ... so, spending development time to optimize what is essentially a relatively small part of the DCS footprint would help almost no one.
So, updating the PC is unavoidable if you want to keep adding maps and aircraft to your DCS install, the only way to not enlarge it is to simply stop purchasing ever more modules and maps.
To echo that,
NVMe Drives, even PCIe 3.0 NVMe, are sufficient for gaming,
You'll see a marginal difference in loading and none in FPS / Latency between PCIe 3.0, 4.0 and 5.0 Drives,
Those $500, blistering fast 7,500-15,000mb/second read speed 1TB SSDs that YT and Social media are shoving into your shopping carts, are sustained reads w/ 1 large file, you wont see that we multiple smaller files typical with game texture spooling and loading, you'll likely see ~3,500 - 4,500mb/second read speeds, maybe less.
*though it would be a significant step up from Precache HDDs of 90~mb/sec and SATA Limited SSDs at 500mb/sec
You can get a 4TB NVMe 2.0 or SATA SSD for $~200 USD.
I have DCS on a 2TB Sandisk Extreme eSSD w/ EVERYTHING and it's only ~40% used (~650GB).
I still run a copy of DCS on a WD Black Gaming 8TB Drive w/ max read spead of 115 or so MB/Second on the sweet spot of the platters. and there's no FPS / Latency issues, and a bootup / loading time difference of maybe 10-25 seconds.11 pages of requesting a core infrastructure change, citing "we don't have thousands of dollars to spend on SSDs" is not a valid argument.
Even when I ran a 640GB WD Raptor, I Symlinked my _downloads folder to a different drive.-
2
-
-
On 5/22/2024 at 6:22 PM, VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants said:
Need any update for the F-4E and Kola?
The Answer is still the same as it was earlier this month,
App is developed and worked on daily.On 5/2/2024 at 10:45 AM, SkateZilla said:Just letting everyone know,
I have not forgotten about ya'll.
the app is in daily development on my end, most of the issues with the last public build have been fixed, and other things completely re-vamped.
The next public release isnt scheduled until June likely,
As the app is also developed and maintained to aid testers, there are some functions that are integrated into the app that are not in the release version of DCS.
The change log is extensive between the October build and now.
On top of finding a suitable host so I can re-enable the auto update function, I am also looking into 2 separate deployment paths, one for testers and one for the public that way there wont be such a long wait.On 5/19/2024 at 3:14 AM, Dangerzone said:Thanks for the incredible work SZ!
With this utility, is it possible to have once install of DCS use multiple saved games profiles?
I know that dcs_variant.txt I can specify where the saved game install is located. I was just wondering whether or not there are settings in this app that would allow me to specify different saved games locations, and when I launch DCS with Skatezilla, it would either automatically update this file (or otherwise launch DCS with parameters that pointed it to another saved games location if such a parameter exists?)
Also... I notice with my current install (I have 2 DCS installs, one used to be open beta, the other used to be stable), in the app, it shows Slot 1 pointing towards my original Stable release, and the second pointing towards my open beta install (to be expected), but the SG Path for both point to the same location (saved games\dcs.openbeta).
It doesn't matter what I do to try and change this parameter (including manually editing the config file), it keeps defaulting them both to the same location. This doesn't appear to make any difference to DCS launching. (My original 'stable' install still uses the saved games\DCS path - so I'm guessing that this is a display/cosmetic only label, and doesn't have a bearing on the actual launch parameters), but didn't know if this was a bug, or a potential issue with my install.
The App should be auto detecting whatever the dcs_variant.txt or branch in the autoupdate.cfg file is.
if you want to launch and use a different path, then you can use the Custom Write folder or the -w "<foldername> in the arguments line.-
1
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, Ignition said:
Because people want to know the truth.
We only know that all the Razbam modules aren't receiving updates since February and Razbam has no money a few months after releasing a popular aircraft.
so how does spreading rumors or indulging in them get you the truth?, it doesn't, what it does is cause drama and delay both sides coming to an agreement.
You can pull your hair out for weeks, it's not gonna get you the answers you seek.,-
6
-
-
I wouldn't speculate on motive's or circumstances guys. It does no good, other than to spread rumors, as people like to snip and clip forum posts and discord messages for use in facilitating rumors for views.
-
4
-
-
6 hours ago, Pipe said:
They delivered a module as good as any in dcs if not better, what did they get? Nothing
Sat around for a month? They worked many months without pay, I’m sure by your posts that you would be agreeable to this?
Must be nice to live in your moms basement and not worry about eating or bills to pay
Prolly should chill with assumptions about other users living arrangements, and the use of specific adjectives.
We don't need any drama to derail the thread and get it locked.-
6
-
-
On 5/23/2024 at 12:37 AM, Annelid said:
We need to create a DATABASE. Which version of DCS is the best version for playing certain older modules that may or not be supported in the future. So we can roll back DCS to play those modules.
-
1
-
-
On 5/20/2024 at 6:31 PM, Ignition said:
And what if Razbam didn't tell us about the problem as ED says it should have been?
You assume most of the people who play DCS are involved enough to know the status of all the 3rd parties.
If I told you how many contract disputes I see weekly with my employer (*not ED / flight sim related), you'd lose your mind.
Contractual issues are part of doing business with 3rd parties, there's no such thing as a Business w/ 3rd Parties that does not have contractual disputes for one reason or another.
RB publicizing their dispute, was their decision, the terms, at least to the public, are speculation. The motive behind going public is also speculation, so there's no need to comment on the motive or timing, or why. It's Public now, and the outcome hasn't changed because it's public, if anything the only thing being public has done, is stir the pot, and make it harder for both sides to come to an agreement..To quote Xena.
"Two war lords cannot make a peace treaty if their troops are fighting and killing each other in the camp outside of their tent."-
6
-
1
-
-
Considering how public the issue has become, at this point Disclaimer is pretty much a slap in the face, and not needed.
Pretty much anyone that's involved enough in DCS to hit buy on any DCS Module, knows the rumors, ramblings and future assumptions already.It's beating a dead horse at this point constantly asking for a disclaimer, most of those asking for said disclaimer have already purchased the module, so what does a disclaimer do for you? absolutely nothing.
There are better ways to spend your time other than eating/selling the fruit of the poisonous tree, speculating, and spreading rumors.
-
8
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Braunn said:
What's really disappointing is that adult people working for two companies can't work this out. It's not like it's a big deal. Or at least started out as a big deal, now it is.
Kinda what I tell my kids. "Solve it before it becomes a big deal."
From experience, corporate contract disputes often go months before even going to legal mediation, and often months after..
It's disappointing when people assume it's a simple "OK cool, handshake, signed check, resume work." between 2 people.-
8
-
-
17 hours ago, F-2 said:
Good news folks
The very first Super Hornet prototype will be joining the museum of transportation! We soon will have a Super Hornet to scan.
https://tnmot.org/collection/f-a-18-e1-super-hornet-u-s-navy/
Only the prototypes and LRIP1 Units would be accurate, as things changed after LRIP1.
F18 undisplay / hide canopy Arc
in Wish List
Posted
You can edit their size and location in the monitor configuration lua.