nrgized

While the difference in focal length between two pictures can lead to confusion. I wouldn't immediately dismiss the areas of interest Dave brought up. In particular the glare shield is what I noticed immediately. The RAZBAM Harrier glare shield juts straight out. It does appear the bottom half does have some flare outwards though. Pictures referenced around the internet show a very distinct bowing inwards on the top half. The lower half has a flare outwards. Also the transition from the top lip to the bottom does not appear to be as abrupt. There are enough examples available that one can rule out focal length differences as being a false flag. All images and videos of the RAZBAM Harrier show that the top of the glare shield is level. It would not be level if it had the features mentioned. Regardless of focal length. The second reference image is a great example of the top half having a pronounced inward direction.

Thank you for the suggestion. Unfortunately my enjoyment from this game is derived from flying with others and not single player PVE scenarios.

Can't really DCS NTTR when theres like at most 15 people in MP. :cry:

The texture source plays no part in performance. A 1k texture is still a 1k texture. Yes some textures don't equally compare at the same resolutions. If your world texture is a hand drawn image or a satellite photo makes no difference though. So that being said and ignoring the mip map issue why do we have textures that look like the above and not satellite photos? This performance argument most often cited here is a straw man. The distances drawn in DCS often accompany this argument. There is nothing complex in terms of rendering that DCS performs. PBR in Normandy will be the first modern feature to nullify that statement though. With proper LOD, frustum culling, instancing, and other techniques there is little excuse for the lack of detail. Most aircraft have more geo density then half the world in front of the cockpit. Especially in NTTR.

NT bro... NT... 1.15. You can't win a race when you're the only runner. That is pretty self serving. Nevada is a very simple repeating color palette that is nothing like the real life geographic location. Even knowing about the mip map issue. The color palette of NTTR can be summed up in the following 4 colors. Nothing like the wild variations of color found in Nevada. You can see hints of real satellite photography throughout the map. Yet it looks like someone took the source and then using the color palette above colored the poop out of it and removed any sense of detail. It even looks like the bushes from the satellite photography are what became the brown noise in the land textures. Missing is all the the beautiful rust, brown, grey, red, and white colored terrain. Because of the very limited attempt at vegetation and its simple color palette this place is the moon. And frankly how this map isn't just raw satellite photos in 2017 is beyond my understanding. I had more fun flying around Google VR getting these comparison photos then I ever have in NTTR.

First, you did make blanket statements at everyone flying in VR. Your last post came off as a rant. I hate/am annoyed at VR players because they shoot myself or other teammates down. I'm sure it happens though so I get the frustration. I play on Blue Flag and have not encountered that scenario as of yet however. More often then not blue on blue is because someone isn't on coms. Second, my disagreement is with the point you've stated numerous times. That in its current state because of specific downsides VR isn't amazing. I was not disagreeing that shooting down teammates is O.K. The current areas in VR that are lacking do not out weight the upsides for myself and numerous other people in this thread and others.

Then that is a huge disappointment as the quality of NTTR leaves a lot to be desired. Its barren in relation to desert foliage. Fly around google maps and you'd think NTTR is the moon. The map textures are only some what passable as decent quality when viewed at medium+ altitudes. Compared to Normandy its a C- and will only be exasperated when Caucasus gets updated.

If you play blue, which I do, whats the point of even connecting when its like that? I don't even bother connecting if teams are like PVE mode. Yet as you can obv see others don't mind sadly.

Watching people fly through trees and getting laughed at for not hauling ass at 120 knots because that would put my EGT near 700 both make me cringe. Mission builders putting farps in the mountains with helos at 100% full load and a full load of ordinance only compounds the issue.

Lots of great info guys, thanks!

I have to strongly disagree, it's more than awesome its super awesome. Sounds like you have issues based on certain personal experiences which you are then blanket applying to everyone flying VR. I commonly fly with 10+ people in VR on various servers and I've not heard any of those excuses used. If anything more often then not I hear "Im in VR cant confirm request other verification". I wouldn't call a curved screen crap as you put it, I'd def say it has short comings during its infancy. But the immersion that curved screen would allow over a 2d monitor would be well worth it.

Yes that's the drug that VR hooks you with. All the early release features of VR are negated by the very simple yet powerful feature of immersion. I am flying! I am looking around, fov sucks, but I'm still turning and moving like I would if I weren't a pc jockey. I have depth perception. One of the reasons why you like pretty high resolution displays with sim graphics cranked to max is because it helps with overcoming the fact you know you are sitting in front of a flat 2d screen. A true pit though with projectors etc is about the only completion for VR though. Even then having sampled the fruits of VR I can't imagine a projector setup unless it's in stereo. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sigh never get in an argument with the PR department. I so don't know how to respond to the fact you don't see the ludicrousness that a simple inversion took 3+ years to fix. Or that it is but one of many issues. Rarely is it huge problems that mess up your day. More often then not its death by a thousand cuts. With that good day sir!

And my very first response to your first post layed out that using our wallets isn't the solution because the amount of people that will purchase anything out weighs the rest. It requires mommy and daddy, ED in this case, to step in and start taking more action against the developers. If ED has puts the breaks on VAEO great. But what about the four modules later BST and the Huey? Oh that's right they are helping on the hornet no conflict there huh? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Have the module pulled off the store that's what I would do for starters. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

People generally flip out when they feel ignored and don't have the ability to rectify the situation. Go ahead and tell me how that's wrong or immature of them. That's the put your head in the sand and ignore the issue response. ED is partially to blame for the discontent of various 3rd parties. You can't test a module before purchase. They don't allow refunds. They allow developers to do various things without consequences. If you find yourself in a situation where a decent percentage of your user base has pitchforks in hand. The last thing you should be doing is telling people that they shouldn't be harsh. You need to be looking at why the hell the situation is happening and fix that above all else. If you do the pitchforks go away on there own. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Let me go convince someone to let me cut there lawn for 60 bucks and spend the next year plus doing it. See if they don't start *dumping on me* when I don't return phone calls and when I do respond I tell them it's a work it progress yo, it's to be expected. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bravo sir!

I'm sorry but if anyone is throwing a blanket over anything its you. You're lumping all 3rd party developers under the same umbrella and using everything they do collectively to counter argue. They are all different from each other. Right now the F-14, Mig 21, Mirage and Harrier developers should be looked at for how a 3rd parties should communicate development updates and issues. Anyone not acting like those mentioned 3rd parties I'm going to toss under the buss of X-File like non-existent developers. BST exist in the forum in one place, the Russian forums for the MI8. That is probably why that Dim bug has existed for 3 years.

This all from the first page of searching the BST forum for "dim" https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=176978&highlight=dim https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=153570&highlight=dim https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=155226&highlight=dim https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=149677&highlight=dim And your last statement only reaffirms a very big reason so many are frustrated with 3rd party developers. Product released and forgotten about by and large when it comes to maintenance and fulfilling promises for future feature updates. Grats on the Hornet wheres my multi-crew Huey after these years? Its not developers intentions and what they do behind closed doors that matters. Its what they do openly that defines who they are by the customer.

I did not state early access was a bad idea so please stick to the points given. Nobody is complaining about in progress items being incomplete. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thats a pie in the sky way of thinking as human nature shows time and time again. There is almost always a sizable group that will take something regardless of its state/quality. They are the drones that prevent any meaningful sanctions against bad behavior. Hell they also end up being part of the complainers, go figure! You want examples of no motivation? Then explain how the Huey navigation light switch has been inverted for so long and reported numerous times. Its literally this easy a fix! Swap the two. If DIM_SWITCH_STATE == BRIGHT { brightness_gain = 0.5 } else { brightness_gain = 2.0 } And third parties also need to be gag ordered from talking about features that will only come from future updates. If the feature is not part of release you should not be able to wave it around as a selling point for the module. Yeah again looking at the Huey.

The whole idea of early access in its current form needs to die. The weekend warrior developers get all there money from early access and have no motivation to continue support because the bulk of sales have happened already. Early access should be a maximum of $15 buy in. The $15 is awarded as in store credit that can be applied to the module when released. And ED also needs to disallow 3rd parties from starting other aircraft when they don't even have the previous one out of early access or its in horrible shape. Fix the one you have before you start doing the next.

Awesome, thanks!

Thanks Boltz! I did notice that the wiring connectors, the round connecting plug bit not the wires, are a pretty penny. $75 was last I remember seeing although I did find some cheaper ones. Knowing original connectors aren't cheap I was still planing on on using them instead of rewiring the connectors. The extra price payed for the connectors would help offset having to learn how and perform the rewiring of the panels. And while providing no real benefit for the sim it would keep the panels in there original state. A thought I like for whatever reason. As for connecting the wires in broad terms what is involved with that? I don't imagine the arduino board has connectors for a AN/ARC 131 :smilewink: I've seen threads here where people have various buttons etc connected to small little boards it looks like they built which then connect to the button box boards you hook up via usb. Is that the sort of thing that needs to be worked out? Thanks for the help again. Trying to get my compass pointed in a direction to start learning what I need to.