Sharkh

I think there are some new effects in these videos whats not ingame yet but overall we can make the game almost look like this . In these footages the time of the day the weather and the camera angle is carefully set to achive the perfect lighting to create the best visuals and show DCS at its best. I am not sure but its also possible that these are also rendered replays. As I remember there used to be an option in DCS to render a replay for videomaking purposes frame by frame whats still used the ingame graphical engine but it made everything look a bit smooher compared to usual gameplay . It seems this options have been removed from the game but maybe they still use it internally creating their promo videos. I don't know for sure.

This is not a mainstream game . That would be probably the end if we would buy or don't buy DCS:3.0 because of good or bad reviews. Imagine the steam reviews of DCS if lets say if it would be a 60$ game with one full fidelity module an a single short campaign. I am pretty sure it would be mixed if not worse because this game is not mainstream but a lot of people who don't get this genre would probably still buy it then get disappointed /frustrated after they realize the fact this is not for everyone and need dedication to get anywhere . Beside the two hour refound period of steam would be probably enough for a cold start .:D

I am pretty sure there are enough people at ED with expertise in economy and bussiness management who know the exact numbers of their company so they probably won't charge for a montly sub or make DCS 3.0 B2P just because 100 people vote on this or that at this forum. Personally I think neither of those option would be better we currently have and it would just generate less income not more while also turning away a lot of potential customer who are new to this genre. I am almost sure this product and ED as a company are still in the bussiness exactly because they chose this bussiness model. I am trying hard but I can't imagine any other way what could work better with 100% confidence. This bussiness model and the developement process of DCS has flaws probably and its not perfect but It has been working for years as it seems. I doubt you we will "invent the wheel" here . I did not vote because I don't think any of those option would be the solution for anything but I find the least bad one is the "B2P DCS:3.0".

My first impression about this map is that its really detailed and looks wonderful and I really liked it when I have flown on it for about a couple of hours . I was really hyped about this map and when I bought it I did it exactly so I can get back in time to the era of these warbirds flying above England/France. I expected ED to make it as accurate as possible historically. But now I have read this discussion and it makes me a bit disappointed to read all these comments about its historical accuracy that it has modern areas that should not be there and that a parts of the map was probably modelled with the 80s map datas available. This map was advartised as a WW2 map with historically accurate assets and areas and I don't know how of these claims are right or wrong but the claim that a nuclear powerplant have been placed to somewhere where nothing should be there in this era sounds really weird especially that such technology was not even presented back than an sounds like a well know fact so its not that the map data was not available or something and makes me wonder if this is right how accurate is the rest? I know its not real life but these MAP dlcs are full price modules so personally I except accuracy just as much as from any other module. I know its in EA and its probably not so easy to cover such a huge area accurately so I hope that at least the "out of time" assets and locations will be removed/replaced and most of the more important areas will be represented as accurately as possible historically . offtopic: Where can I find cows at The Channel? :D PS. The level of detail is really great please don't let it degrade much during the optimization process . Thank you ED!

It works . I have just uninstalled everything with that.

I don't see too much difference in performance playing on Normandy compared to the rest DLC map. But I noticed that there are specific mission for specific aircrafts where those "huge and going high alt" smoke effetcs are presented (for the sake of D-day immersion I guess) and with those the performance drops a lot. Are you sure your FPS issues are not due to these custom missions and its visual effects? Have you tried the performance of Normandy with a custom mission built by yourself without these effects?

Thank you ! I have just planned to remove them one by one ingame. :D

Thanks. I might do that the next time. I am just sad that I should have done this every time in the past but I did not. It would be interesting to see how many hours I have spent flying each of my moduels now I have no idea. :D

I am not sure if all authentical but most of it looks like it.

Wait , so did they have changed the log feature? I used to loose all of my datas after reinstalls so I just stopped caring about my datas. While it would have been really nice to know how many hours I have had with each of my modules. Are these datas stored in a cloud now?

Thank you all for the help!

Just as others said its only the FOV setting. You probably used to arcade racers playing with 90+ fovs. on flat 16:9 screen realistic fov setting should be about 40(depending on screen size and your view distance) and than you will loose the speed perception due to you won't have peripheral vision with this realistic setting on a wide screen. Just buy VR or use a 32:9 screen because its the only "partial" solution for this problem. I wonder if you use head tracking because with head tracking the speed perception gets a bit better so I don't feel I am slow while playing in 16:9. I just have to look around more to feel it. Btw In those example video in the OP . It is clearly visible that the DCS footage use much lower fov. If you don't believe that than just ask someone to drive fast while you are on the front passenger seat in a forest road and hold two bigger flat surface on both side of your head in paralel with the road to prevent any periperal vision. Our vision is like that on a flat screen with realistic fov setting . So it can't be fixed because its not a graphical issue of DCS but the "limitation" of flat screens .

The "Snapview saving" is already enabled so I have created the "View" folder and copied the file to there and renamed to "snapviews.lua". But I have checked content of this file and it seems it contains only setting for a few aircraft like Mig-29, KA-50, Su-27. What should I do so new entries will be created for the aircrafts I use? Do I have to enter these new datas manually with notepad?

Hmm... I don't have the "View" directory under "%Userprofile%\Saved Games\DCS\Config" . I have only two subdirectory there "Input" and "OptionsPresets". (I am using the beta so I am not sure if the location should be the same or its different) @Art-J Thank you! Its good to know but I don't have that module yet. :D

Hello, So I have just started to play WW2 more extensively again and realized that while flying the Axis warbirds the seat postion has a slight offset to the right side to make it allign better with the targeting hud better I guess. I would like it if the default seat position would be the perfect center of the cockpit. I know in the .lua files a lot of things can be customized so I wondered witch .lua file at what lines should I edit to customize the default seat postion so on bind "Cockpit postion Normal" command it will be reseted back to that setting. Thanks for the help in advance.

I have bought the A8 but only because I already had the Dora. Good choice! :D

Are you using HDD for either for your windows or your DCS install? These strange stops/freezes has happened for me before when one of my HDD in my system reached the end of its life cycle and started to reallocate huge chunk of datas automaticall at random times (in every few minute) to prevent data loss creating huge CPU load on the system. (I have been using PC for about thirty years and this was the first time I have seen this effect of a faulty HDD and its built in smart feature.) So if you have HDDs in your system its worth to check their health stat with a diagnostic tool to rule out this possibility.

You might became poorer in your wallet but you will be so much more richer by the experience of your new DCS modules. :D I did not plan to buy anything because I have enough module already what I haven't learned yet properly but I felt that ED have been so nice with this free month that I have to buy something. After many hours of of flying different aircrafts I realized I like these ww2 warbirds a lot so I couldn't resist and thought "well... I need at least one more warbird in my hangar before the DM update and later I guess the channel map arrives" so I bought the FW 190 A-8 (as a fan of the BMW brand it was kinda mandatory :D) .

Ahh , and I've kept replying to you if you had been the op since your first post. Sorry I am blind. aww... :D

Than why didn't you ask that in your OP? I am confused. So you have created a thread with the title " Request - put EA modules into stabile version too" When the EA modules are already in the stable . (most of them) Sorry but I am replied to your OP and I don't get it why you have createed this request about lets see again... "Request - put EA modules into stabile version too" when your problem basically that the F/A-18 is not finished yet. ?

Sorry but your OP and your problems was worded so badly so I assumed EA modules are beta only (because I haven't used stable since about 2015) while it seems your wish is that you would like if every new updates for your EA modules would come to the stable version the same time with the OB same with the new moduels what are OB exlusive when they are released. So the point of my first replie remeains the exact same. If you wanna get the latest updates for your EA product or want to play the fresh releases than you have to use the beta because these new updates have to be tested by the OB and its much wider playerbase first to make it sure that most of the issues will be probably found. It seems you keep repeating "but the F/A-18 and dec 31" and I have no idea how is this relevant to this subject when its only 13rd of May. You have that module already in your stable version and you will get the updates in the same way with similar time frames just as anything else previously due to the the reasons everyone described here. I guess when a module loose its "EA" tag that just means its feature complete but it does not mean its perfect so it would still need to be polished and tweaked for months or years to come so the update process remains the same. If you are impatient and wants to try out every fresh update you have to use OB I guess else use Stable. Simple is that.

Thank you all. So I guess I have to deal with this on the long run if I wanna like this bird . @Amazingme Thanks for the link It would be a good read. :) But most of the anecdotes are about the "G" version I am not sure how different was that from the "K" ?

So I have tried this bird for about 10+ hour in the free trial and I don't get this. Is it normal or its the beta that this bird needs full trim forward for level flight else it just wants to climb no matter what? My other question that I realized there is only 2 steps for pitch down trimming while there is about 6 or more for up . What is the reason of this when using only 2 steps pitch up create similar lift like a full stick pull? I really like this bird and I have planned to buy it but this trimming issue drives me crazy so it keeps me on the fence. I have tryied every WW2 bird but only this has this strange feel that it never wants to fly straight. :( What am I doing wrong?

Early Access modules are in "beta stage" of their developement. So I guess the whole reason of having an Open Beta to help with the ongoing developement of these modules in paralel with the DCS "core". You have bought a "beta staged" product so you have to use the OB to access it. What did you expect? Sorry but your request sounds illogical. So I think the only solution. You should not buy early access modules in the future if you don't want to use OB.

+1