npole

The bottom of the OR has the vent cracks.. you can see the keyboard through em.

There's the ventilation slots at the bottom, you can see the keyboard trough them. However with a fully clickable cockpit (another reason to have only A10C level aircrafts) you don't need the keyboard at all, you can literally look at the switch and click it with a command on your hotas.

There's even the pins to connect the sensor on the current PCB. The retail version will deffo have a 6dof positional tracking (you need around $40 to add it, by buying a completely separate device, like the Hydra.. so imagine what would be the price of introducing just the sensor into the OR ... won't make sense otherwise). 1080p will be great, also we don't know for sure if they really go for 1080p or for something more (possible two versions?), btw I never tried the 1080p version, so I can't judge, looking at the opinions around (E3), who tried it, have said that isn't just slightly better.. but a giant step forward, I believe it's pretty than enough to read the HUD. What I know is that this tech revitalized a certain type of gaming, and any game supporting it is having "free" advertising all around. We should join the new technology, this company is dying because of the niche market, we should attract more people, nor looking at the window hoping for the best. The OR implementation requires a very minimal coding effort, and the "advertising" in return is much higher than the time spent on it (regardless of the technical issues), ignoring it woul dbe wrong.

You can do it right now, using the aircrafts available today (there's even planes of different eras!), why someone should wait for a F35?

Italy in example, it is a lvl2 partner (only after the UK that is a lvl1 partner), is reviewing the whole F35 agreement, and not only because of the global economic situation. Btw we're OT here, since this thread is dedicate to the simulation not to the real aircraft.

They said they will continue to develop it anyway, so I expect to see a dedicate forum in the "third party" area, where DCS users may eventually follow the progress. If it'll be good enough, eventually, it will turns into a official module.

Of course, I hope there will be many other aircrafts steps into DCS (assuming they'll be enough accurate), we have tenth of different fighters that may become a reality! :)

Again, i'm interested into the facts, and I operate of logic. It's not a matter of like (or not) a particular aircraft, neither about third party modules.. in example I don't think I would ever fly the Mig21 (talking about another third party developer), but I recognize the reason behind that choice. I'm not there to "bash" em because I don't like the Mig21, it wouldn't make sense! I'm interested into the DCS success (nor because I earn money from it, but because it will continue to exists.. giving to me fun). Now talking about the fun, what I'm worried is that inaccurate third party modules will step into DCS, transforming a "serious" simulator into something else, at that point I will bail out.. the problem is that there's really not many places where to go. :) To resume: it's not about KI; it's not about the F35.. it's about the consequence = the possibility that DCS will dive towards the inaccuracy, becoming less and less simulative.

Facts, not words. There's no hater that can fight facts. On the other side they can fight a bunch of "promises". I never said or wrote that, you're interpreting my words in the wrong way, so please do not put in my a mouth a phrase that I never wrote (this would be certainly against the forum rules). To reply to your question then, my answer is: "No, I did not". There's certainly some stupid people in the world, but I never labeled anyone of this forum with that word. If anything I would call those ppl who pledged: "extremely naïve".

Doesn't make sense, the devkit has the purpose of let you support the hardware now, so you'll be in time for the retail version (because after the support, you have much time to fine tune it and correct the possible issues). Waiting for the retail version is plain stupid (in fact who's supporting the OR, it's doing it today.. nor the next year). We already know that the OR consumer version will have a min of 1080p screen and the 6dof tracking, there's no need to wait for it to believe it.

The problem is exactly this.. KI did not proven to be capable of doing what he claimed, it's just a bunch of words: we can do this, we can do that, but the facts (and the money) is something else. In fact only 316 people trustem them, again: 316 PERSONS .. it is such a low number that more than one bell should ring into your head: am I doing something wrong? Obviously yes! Probably KI believed that a bunch of "believers" were enough to finance a "dream".. but the reality is pretty different. I'll give to you my money ONLY AFTER you have proven (with facts) that you are capable of doing what you want to do.. otherwise let's see you on release time. The F35 is the worst decision they could ever made, probably they believed that developing a "unknown" aircraft would have been easier (ppl does know nothing about it, so we can just invent everything: the flying model, the avionics.. who will notice it's completely off?), but ppl aren't that stupid.. we'll apart some of them (316?). Now KI will ask for money elsewhere... this project will never see the light as someone would imagine (DCS level module) .. if not in several years... by that time we will have more concrete aircraft released (hopefully). And to be honest.. man.. the F35 (I mean the real one) is overpriced crap, made only to steal money here and there... and those countries participating into the project are figuring it right now.. cancelling their orders, turning on something a little more concrete (the good "old" superhornet.. or the Eurofighter). And you still surprised why this thing didn't even hit the half of the funds on KS? :) I am suriprised that there were those 300 giving 32k for nothing instead!

You need to add the support of it, nor the "feature"... and for a basic implementation (rendering + tracking) you need days .. nor weeks or months. So it's not like you have to abandon what you're doing to dedicate your time into the Oculus Rift, it's more: dedicate some working hours of a single coder into it. This is not a matter of lack of resources.. this is just about ignoring "the future" (and being late when anyone else is already there...).

It's the same concept of years ago, but with a big important difference: the screens (at human price) required to build a effective HMD appeared only today. You could have imagined the same HMD 10 years ago, but you couldn't have built it. This is why the Oculus Rift is finally the real deal, and not the "virtual reality" we're used to see advertised around years ago. The fact that ED is ignoring it (and the devkit) while the rest of the world is implementing it in any type of game is really frustrating. If you ever tried a OR you know what I am talking about.. it gives so much fun that really "forces" you to play something else who supports it, because your favorite game (in this case DCS) doesn't work with it. One example? War Thunder has nothing to do much with a simulator, neither I like it much, but with the OR IT IS a blast! ..and more you play it, more you ask yourself: why the hell ED is not moving a finger? This is really frustrating...

Che intendi? Di "quella" Eagle Dynamics? ... di QUESTA eagle dynamic visto che siamo sul forum di DCS. :) Per quanto riguarda RRG Studios invece, sono quelli che hanno sviluppato IL2 per di UbiSoft... poi sono "scomparsi". Non che la notizia mi faccia impazzire, gli aerei della seconda Guerra nello scenario di DCS non ci stanno molto bene.

The level of approximation building a so recent (in fact not even completed) aircraft is potentially much higher than the one that affects the A10C, making the simulation more a guessing game than a "DCS level" module. We all know that the A10C is not 100% like the real counterpart, but it's damn near to it; the F35 would never be that close in the short term, that's why I suggested to postpone the project for when the times are more mature and to dedicate the effort to something that could potentially give a much better result. KI can have a different opinion, i'm not here to tell em what to do, i'm merely express an opinion. :)

I agree, but it would suits much better with the whole rest.. eventually. But the problem isn't just about the era (what about the P52?), but about the info available for a certain aircraft (we discussed much about it in the previous pages tho).

It must be because this thread is in the DCS forum. It would be better to concentrate the effort for something better IMO. No, I don't. Exactly.

I kinda wish they'll cancel this, to dedicate their efforts to something "better" for DCS (a fourth gen fighter).

They aren't really haters, but "old people" (i'm talking about their mentality) that refuses to accept the innovation because they doesn't really understand how it works: if I don't understand something, I call it "useless". Luckily these ppl are left behind by the progress. They won't cause much damage tho (unless they can make decisions, and most of them can't)... you can just ignore em. ;)

Realismo per realismo.. se pure riuscissi a distruggere le piste, chiunque potrebbe partire da qualsiasi altra parte, taxiway, parcheggio, se non addirittura dai prati... visto che "l'off-road" e' simulato malissimo (specialmente con i velivoli "arcade" come quelli di FC3 ad esempio).

Yup, I have been considering of transforming/integrating my racing cockpit to be used for flight sims as well.. but then I've realized that for a much much much much more less I would have a complete dynamic cockpit using the OR in the near future (i'm receiving my devkit next week, but I look more at the final version with improved res). Btw the silence by ED is frustrating... they could add the rift support with minor effort really but they seems not interested (waiting for the retail version is IMO stupid, we need to introduce it today and tweak it with time, nor waiting the next year).

EDGE and F18.. the rest can wait. :)

I'm saying this from the start.. and playing with a little of malice, I can say that going with a "unknown" aircraft, none would have the capability of saying if it is accurate or not, especially in the avionics.

Really? Even the US government has some reserves about it: http://pogoarchives.org/straus/ote-info-memo-20130215.pdf ...do not consider the partners that are considering to cancel their investment this days. Being fanboy about an aircraft is stupid, and calling other "ignorant" (especially after not having performed any reaserch) is childish. This has nothing to do with the KI project, this is about the real F-35. If you have data to support your tough, they'll be welcome, otherwise it would be more convenient for me to ignore you. :)

It's a combination of reasons: 1) the simulation world is a niche market, the crowd interested into flight simulators (in general) are a way less than traditional (casual) gamers. 2) taking the already small number of customers you need to consider only those ones that trust unconditionally those KI words. Me in example, I follow this forum and I play DCS by a while already, I love any simulative module (ie: A10C, BS/2, UH1) .. but I don't like much the approximation and the compromises. I believe (if i'm right or wrong doesn't change the meaning) that KI doesn't have enough data to deliver what it promises, and I think that this module wouldn't be at DCS standard in the near future (maybe in "some" years.. but surely not in the time they have announced).. so I wouldn't put much of my money into it. My idea: if they would have dedicate their time to something else, in example an F14, F16.... today they would have collected X3 those money, not from ppl outside here, but from any single member of this forum. The criticism is not about KI ability, but it's about the choice of that plane: not enough data + you don't even know if it will really be delivered worldwide (looking at the latest news, there's even a chance that the F35 "as is" will never see the light! :) ). we must be honest... the F35, whenever the good intentions, is a failing project (I mean the real one, not the DCS module).