Rotorhead

I first heard of it when I was at work. I and my fellow workers watched those videos in awe, having hard time to believe this. That fireball looks exactly like in those U.S. movies. I'll tell you, if i saw one of those things coming at me (like in the first dashcam video), I'd definitely use underwear change!

Hah! What did I predict few days ago! Now only if it means good or bad news...

Just finished listening the interview, and... Good job Wags :thumbup:

You're right, Darkwolf, the FFB issue is believed to be already fixed AFAIK. But the bad news is, we won't see it until netcode gets fixed. :(

No offense, but I'm getting allergic to claims like that. I was told the same by Sobek some time ago and here's what I answered: Says it all I guess. True, but we bought a working product. In case of the particular FFB bug (which is my biggest concern), we're waiting for over three months now. I've bought G940 almost exclusively for DCS, and now it serves just for collecting dust. There was no disclaimer screaming "Logitech G940 not supported with this product". I gave ED my money for their product and now I cannot use it in a way that meets my expectations. Don't get me wrong, I'm happy for ED's efforts on fixing the netcode (even though I don't fly online). It's a work that MUST be done and the sooner it gets done, the better. But please, don't be surprised that lots of people gets frustrated. And calling them trolls because of that does not help matters either.

Please don't make fun of 2012 doomsday believers just because it didn't come as scheduled! You'll see, the world will end some day. Maybe after 100, 1000, or a million years but then, those doomsday believers will be free to say: "You see? We told ya!"

I never said there are no aviation fans between occultists. But I don't find it very likely to find one there. I think that Wags would have much greater succes when appearing in a show about science, or games, or something like Top Gear, or almost in everything else.

Well you can believe in whatever you like, but personally I don't know anyone who is seriously interested in aviation and clairsentience or thriving their spirituality at the same time. These things do not even fit well together IMO.

It appears that Iran is going to shoot a TopGun remake. They already have F-14's, and this time, MiG-28's will look really futuristic. I'm not sure if this thing can make a 4G inverted dive though... :D

To be honest, after having a look at their website, I haven't a slightest idea how appearing on this type of radio show can bring any new audience to DCS :wassat:

I'm just wondering how long it will take until this thread gets moved to Chit-Chat section... :music_whistling:

I've experienced similar issue on my old system with a low-end GPU. I was able to achieve around 60 FPS when looking down, but no more than 14 looking towards the horizon, no matter how low settings I used. My GPU load wasn't anywhere near 100% too. Not sure about CPU load though. What is interesting, this issue came with DCSW 1.2.0. In previous beta release, I was able to maintain between 25-30 FPS at all times except huge battles, even with that poor system. AFAIK, nobody came up with some serious explaination why FPS was affected so badly on some systems by introducing 1.2.0.

Exactly, fixing one small broken thing might possibly break an other working one. Therefore, it's surely better to release them all in one huge bunch, tested and solid as a whole. I'm sure that ED has their good reasons to do what they do, but you know what I meant.

Well there are 2 choices. We can wait some time for a stable release, or ED can release a broken one now, and then we will have to wait for a working one anyways... So i guess it's fine for ED to take their time and do it right. Only thing I'm not happy about - there are other bugs in 1.2.2 (especially that G940 one!!! :furious:), which won't get fixed until ED makes multiplayer work well. For SP folks out there (like me), it means they have to wait for stable MP to fix their bugs, even if they don't need it. And I'm really not willing to wait 6 more months for fixed FFB... But at least we know that ED is doing their best. I really appreciate their frequent updates during last few weeks. Let's hope that everything will go well and we'll see 1.2.3 as soon as possible!

:thumbup: Music to my ears. Thanks Groove.

For me, it's a little bit of everything. Although choppers are my interest number one, sometimes I feel the need to get past Mach 1 and pull some G's and the Hornet will be just fine for this purpose. :) And I also like multirole jets, because they are much more fun than those purely dedicated to A2A. In F-18, there are loads of buttons to push and many interesting stuff like tgp, guided weapons and the like, and I just love to operate these devices. And about the naval ops. Although I'm not exactly into this stuff, I'm sure that landing on a carrier will add nice extra chalenge to our sim. ;) The C version (not-super) AFAIK.

Great news, just great! I hope everything will go as planned and this issue will get fixed in 1.2.3. I think we've deserved it already! :)

Groove, I believe that the best explaination of the mentioned bug on this forum can be found in this Suchacz's post. And it behaves like that for all DCSW modules. However if the bug is gone in the latest build, that would be awesome news! :thumbup:

We really don't know who is developing those modules. But whoever is making them, it does not mean they will be below A-10C level of fidelity. Look at Beczl wit his Mig-21. In some aspects, he's setting new standards for DCS, actually. Belsimtek's UH-1 seems to aim nowhere below A-10C standard, too. The same can be said for L-39 or Hawk developed for DCS, for example. Other 3rd party devs claim that they're trying to achieve the same with their modules. Generally, A-10C fidelity modules are what this community asks for, and 3rd parties are trying to deliver. So I'd expect nothing less with those newly announced ones. Finally, one has to have close relations with RuAF / Sukhoi to get a license for modelling Su-27SM for entertainment sim. This seems like a good reason to hope for a high fidelity module, too.

+1 on that! Nice to see a wonderful plane like Flanker to get the attention it deserves! I fell like a kid before Christmas right now!

It's little unusual that those modules haven't been announced anywhere outside that video yet. But on the other hand, if they were announced by Wags himself in official DCS media, I think it means something.

Yeah, I guess we'll have to wait quite some time to see all those new modules in action. But on the other hand... You don't know whats going on behind the closed doors. While some other 3rd party devs are showing their progress from the very begining, ED and some others may not. Look at Belsimtek for example. Few months ago, most of us hadn't even clue that this company existed and then all of sudden, they announced their UH-1 to be almost ready for beta release. Well, it's delayed a bit right now, but no matter - you got the point. ED might follow the same strategy as well. There were rumors about upcoming US fast-mover for quite a time, but nothing official until now. Which makes me think, maybe they were working on it all the time, but they just didn't want to announce it yet. And, don't forget that ED is working primarily for military customers. Both Ka-50 and A-10C are based on military sims. So, what if they are already developing Su-27SM sim for the military for a long time, but just recently received the permission to make a entertainment sim out of it? ;) I'm really not trying to imply that those announced modules are "just behind the corner" (oh how i wish...), but just because they announced them now does not mean that they are starting from the ground.

Did I hear right? F/A-18C? Mi-24? :thumbup: ....and Su-27SM??? :clap_2::clap_2::rotflmao: NO WAAAAAAY! Somebody tell me I'm not dreaming!

And one more thing. I love when people say that violence is caused by culture, or even better, by violent movies or video games. Not that I am fond of these, but: Most of the killing and violence took place in ages where no movies or games were available. Today, some people feel sorry for a mass murderer, because he gets arrested for the rest of his life. In medieval ages, they used to cut thieves' hands off or to burn witches with no regrets. I think they had to watch very bad movies to be that senseless. Or, I always wondered which video games young Hitler used to play that he grew into such monster... Seriously, I'm not saying that we are not affected by our culture. Same people would behave very differently in different cultures, ages, or even different situations. All I wanted to point out is that not everything is as straightforward as some people claim. It's easy to say "Video games are making our kids violent", but where are the real reasons of todays violence? Are the parents raising their kids in a good way? Do the world leaders give a good example to the rest of us? Is our society healty as a whole? There's always a bunch of reasons behind everything not just a single easy one.

No, it's not. As long as you can tell good from evil, you cannot apologize murder by saying "It's not my fault, I am violent by nature." That's what you have you conscience for. But that does not mean that there are no violent tendencies left in us. Humans used to be predators, they had to be violent to survive. It's still part of their nature. But their intelligence and conscience are another parts of it. As human society developed, they have realized that it's better to use their brains instead of fists, and they will benefit more from cooperation than from fighting each other. That it's good to protect the weaker, to help their wounded fellows, which in turn helps their society to be bigger and stronger. It's up to our society, and especially up to each and every one of us, to decide which part of our nature we want to use. I think that every sensible person, unless driven into desperate situation, should pick the non violent path. But some just don't... And when talking about going into space, it's known that biggest progres of space technology took place during the cold war. Why? Because of competition between USSR and USA. Both of them tried to be the best, the first... You see? Another kind of fight. A non-violent one, but still a fight. People are born to compete. But they should be enough intelligent to do it in a non violent way, and to know where to stop.