nervousenergy

Depends on how the engine works. Note, for example, that 1946 is the exact opposite of this. Aircraft/objects in 1946 within the 'visible' range of the player will ALWAYS be represented by at least one pixel, so lower resolutions provided increased spotting benefits. Finding a single pixel is much easier at 800x600 than it is at 1200p.

I don't suppose IJ is still in business... his gimbals for the Cougar were legendary.

Windows 10 is a bit faster and has a lot of subtle improvements over 7 (comparing 10 Pro to 7 Ultimate), but right this second there isn't much to say you should upgrade ASAP. That will change, though, as the impact of the 'free' upgrade really hits. This is something MS should have done years ago with W7. The money and power isn't in getting a few bucks for a Windows license, it's in keeping a near monopoly on the desktop, and they should (and finally are) giving it away to keep that monopoly. If they get as rapid an uptake as I expect they will, start to see more things 'just working' on W10, but needing tweaks to work on 7. I have a pretty complex sim setup, and my upgrade went 100% problem free (as far as the sim part goes.) TIR5, 'Hog, CH Quadrant, Slaw Pedals, all working perfect. I deactivated all modules using the Module Manager (just unchecked each of the boxes), ran the upgrade, re-enabled each module (re-checked the box, but could only do one at a time with a DCS restart between each for some reason), and took off on a quick mission. Perfect. The only upgrade issue I had was the driver for my onboard intel NIC. Had to grab the official Intel W10 driver and install before I could get anything. And of course the things I knew I'd need to fix after the upgrade, like re-installing the latest nvidia drivers. Very happy with the whole process, snafu with the NIC aside. This is the first time I've done an actual 'upgrade' as opposed to a fresh install in a long, LONG time... maybe going back to the DOS days. But blowing a whole weekend re-installing tons of stuff didn't appeal to me if I didn't have to, so I gave the upgrade a shot, and am really glad I did. 2 hours and done, including an hour messing around with the NIC.

There's never any guarantees, but reading between the lines pretty much tells us that ED isn't going to spend the time to make any new modules compatible with 1.0, starting with the L-39. They can still pick up revenue through sales of existing modules, but the big money is always made on new modules at full or pre-order pricing. Once you stake future revenues on a release, you're a LOT more likely to see it.

Really interesting... Rendering engine but no Vegas, and an actual release date. Wow.

I'll be very surprised if they release any new modules before World 2 is out. Though if they did a pre-order tomorrow I'd be in. Spits in any form are great, but I'm one of the rare ones that prefer the clipped wing. Loved flying the clip in 1946 like a boom n zoom plane... hard to get in trouble that way.

Polaris has done great work here, and I also think it's too much to expect DCS to provide baseline controller layouts, but I wish they'd give us the ability to assign an action to a switch OFF state in the sim without resorting to custom Lua code. This would truly make TARGET unnecessary to get most everything out of the 'hog.

This. +++ This has all been done before, folks. I'm sure a lot of us on this board flew (are still flying?) IL2 for a decade or more. Warclouds, BoP, Greater Green, Sp vs 109s, etc were all successful for years because they catered to the virtual player that had an hour or two to kill on a Sunday afternoon, and that player could be guaranteed to get into many a scrap during that time. If y'all want 30-60 player servers again you NEED to offer that kind of gameplay. I've gotten several friends that have played a ton of War Thunder to try DCS and were right amazed at how superior the flight model felt, but there's not enough *game* in the sim to keep them here. Warmed-up planes and maps that offer both ground and air superiority objectives in a 4-8 minute flight time max distance are critical components that all-important Sunday afternoon crowd. Now, the hard-core simmer reading this is already scoffing, but here's why this is important to him/her as well: Those Sunday afternoon folks are the ones that are going to get interested enough to join that other wonderful phenomena from the IL2 era: the full-sim persistent war server. If you've never flown Ghost Skies in IL2 then you were really missing out, and that's what y'all are going to be interested in. But that kind of commitment is very intimidating to the new pilot... very few (way too few) will ever go straight to it from picking up the sim. Even the majority of people flying on those popular full-switch servers I mentioned above came from noob Wonder Woman servers first. IMHO, the sim MUST provide a substantial online experience that's a step between War Thunder and the cold start crowd. Look to the past, folks. IL2 figured this out, and for *years* had full servers by offering cutting-edge flight simulation along with approachability. DCS is worlds ahead in flight simulation, but we've lost the approachability. We need it back. There's a reason the pro sports have minor leagues.

I'd still love to know if the standalone server is supposed to be part of the initial 2.0 release. IMHO, it's more important than any other single feature. Re the Spitfire: I'm pulling money out of my wallet and throwing it at the screen WHY ISN'T IT WORKING.... Also totally in shock that I actually bought the A-10 while it was still in beta. I honestly don't remember that, but my purchase date is in January 2011. Looks like that was a good idea. ;-)

Given the dearth of information and history of getting burned by announcing dates, I have this feeling ED will give us detailed information when they're also ready to include a beta download link. I'd prefer a more open communication strategy, but I can definitely see where they're coming from. I've been PC gaming since the start of the industry, hanging on John Carmack's weekly technical update posts on Q2 development that read like one of Greenspan's screeds on the economy: you knew he was saying important stuff, but you had to look up every word and still didn't have much of a clue what he was saying. :smilewink: Unfortunately the days when a team of half a dozen people could release AAA titles in 12-18 month timeframes are long gone. Though I do hope we get more information on what's included with the initial release. I hope they're as far along with the new standalone server, for example, as they are with the engine itself. To me, that's even more important. The graphics are actually pretty damn good right now, but we've got to get better server. I know the external testers are unpaid, so I send them thanks and wish them godspeed.

Depends on if they want to use the maps to drive aircraft module sales. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if they gave away NTTR or made it cost a very nominal amount due to the incredible amount of time it's taken to get it out. I'd think Hormuz would be a more likely target for full module pricing, though I'm sure we'll see it bundled with campaigns pretty quick. I'm more interested in what they're going to do with Normandy and any other WWII maps. The optimal strategy to me would seem to give it away if you own at least a certain number of WWII modules (say, 3 aircraft at least.) Currently there IS no map for all the wonderful WWII aircraft content being released, so we need something ASAP to get the community going. There are lots of folks on the sidelines waiting for something to fly over that's not modern day Crimea. I'm probably wrong on both predictions, and as I currently own every single module for sale I personally won't hesitate a second to buy NTTR or Normandy at whatever they want to sell it for. I'm just hopeful ED has future growth and sustainability in mind, rather than just maximizing next quarter income.

All right, FINE. Damn flash sale... I bought the bloody C-101, so now I own *every* module, even though I really don't care much for jets and even less for trainers... you happy, ED??? GIVE ME SOMETHING ELSE TO BUY. Like a P-47... or a Hormuz map...

Great sale! Now, um... give me something else to buy. At least put the Jug up for pre-order!

Definitely this. I gave away my Saitek combat pedals once I got my Slaw Device set. I may even pick up a second set for the cam. The precision you get with one of these works of art can only be believed once you experience it.

Yeah, I own every module so far except the C101, but modern jets and helis I buy on sale as I hardly ever fly them. WWII and Korean stuff, though, gets bought on pre-order.

Get an extension for the stick and you'll be even more amazed.

Is this true, though? I didn't think ED released sales figures. The D9 and K4 are very popular planes in the WWII community, along with the upcoming Jug and Spit. And regardless of the sales figures, I completely agree with your last paragraph about map/scenarios exploding the WWII community. I don't have any hard data for this, but my strong suspicion / belief is the the WWII community is a potentially much, much larger DCS audience than jets. There is no 'War Thunder' for jets... no World of Jets, etc. I love all military aircraft simulation (and have bought all the DCS modules other than the C-101 trainer, and will likely get that in the next sale), but let's face it... WWII aircraft are far more approachable for most simmers/gamers, and the combat is far more personal and understandable. Plus the continued allure of WWII as the last Great Conflict. I'm really looking forward to the map and hope we get it sooner rather than later. I think just about every part of this community is holding it's breath over EDGE/World 2, and once that finally lands things will break open more. WWII maps almost by their very nature are going to be easier to model, since a lot of it is going to be 'your guess is as good as mine' kind of modeling. Go, ED, go!

I'm hoping the lack of precise data about most airfields and other map features will result in a considerably faster development process. It's not like the modern maps where you can easily spot any discrepancies.

Shows how little I've gotten to that far end of the strip. I had no idea the Stratosphere coaster was gone. The HR Wheel just kind of jumped out at me in that vid since I rode it last May shortly after it's grand opening, and it's really obvious out the plane windows when you're on approach to McCarran. I'll be there in a couple of weeks for the same conference, and I'll try and get some pictures from the plane. Though my post was really 99.9% in jest. :smilewink: If they can add it with little effort, great, but I don't think the Wynn is there yet either. I don't expect them to keep up with the ever-changing strip, but man do I want to fly down it right now. That 60 FPS video was the most excited I've been since strapping on the 109. When they release Normandy, my wife may never see me again...

The High Roller observation wheel? They just finished it last year. It's a huge visual fixture on the strip now... https://www.caesars.com/linq/high-roller#.VUL0-pPzmao

OK, all other dev work on the NTTR map needs to STOP NOW for a critical fix. It's all just ruined without it. If I can't buzz the High Roller, then the map is a total failure. :)

By the time even several thousand dollars worth of GPUs will render that kind of image in real time at usable framerates, we may have a sim engine that will produce it. :smilewink:

If that had been a DCS W2 render, you would have heard the sound of countless sim pilots crying out in disbelief, then suddenly silenced by their obsolete graphics cards...

A lot of work, yes, but relative to what? Compared to the other WWII birds, sure, there's a lot more texture / pit / systems work. Compared to the modern trainers (Hawk, C-101)? These have much more complex systems, but not nearly as much straight-up modeling work in the wireframe and textures department, so they seem a wash. Compared to the Mig 21? I may be totally off-base here, but no way... the Mig is vastly more complex. Heck, the Huey looks to me like it would have taken a lot more effort than a B-17 would. The only way I see a B-17 effort being greater than most modern DCS aircraft would be if our fictional dev team decided to try and model all crew stations and do them all to DCS standards. Just make it flyable with a bomb sight station and it'll sell.

Awesome work, as usual! I really like being able to use the FLAPS switch on the Hog throttle for the three flaps settings in the FW-190. It would be nice if ED would give us the option to assign a state to the OFF position of a DX button. That would solve a lot of issues for those of us not wanting to mess with TARGET or delve into LUA coding. My only suggestion is more aimed at other 'Hog users: pick up a CH Throttle Quadrant to mount by your Hog. Adding six sliders is valuable beyond belief, and cheap after what you paid for the Hog. I picked one up off of eBay for $70. The lack of sliders on the Hog throttle is my only complaint about the hardware, and it's an easy one to fix. Thanks again for the profiles, and most especially the LUA mods!