Jump to content

sc_neo

Members
  • Posts

    765
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by sc_neo

  1. The lighting is very dim on my end as well. I fired up the nttr landing quick start mission and turned every light and backlight to it's max and the cockpit stayed very dark.
  2. The oxygen hose on the pilot model misses it's textures on my end. Do you see a proper texture?
  3. And a proper neck has been finally implemented. The HUD shifts in both horizontal and vertical plane when you turn your head left and right and up and down. Very nice! As far as i can tell it's now the first module that has not only an eyepoint that is moved a bit forward from the neck, but a bit upward as well.
  4. I don't have the Tacmanual, but i take it you have reported this to Razbam in detail before?
  5. @Viper2097 Ok, i bite :) What is the Tacmanual, and can you outline like five things that you found are modeled wrong? Without breaking forum rules of course.
  6. PC has officially stated that they are working on a new flight model for the Gazelle. So patience is king i reckon.
  7. Actually, i prefer the longer dev. time for the Viggen, even that it had to fall back in effort because of the F-14 for quite some time....because the end product is and will be much better compared to it being finished within 12 or 18 months and never to be touched later on except for bug fixes. So i'd rather have all those tech. upgrades that came with the F-14 project coming to the Viggen as well instead of the Viggen finished and done earlier. Still, having it feature complete at some point would be nice of course.
  8. Nice to see things are happening on the Viggen, but to manage expectations a bit on my end: will the Viggen be finished this year as stated at the beginning of 2019, or will finalizing of the project take a longer timeframe?
  9. In the end it comes down to the following question: do we want ED to keep making vehicular modules (aircraft/ships whatever) AND do the base game stuff in paralell, or do we want them to totally quit on the module side of things and focus solely on the engine/tech/game side of things. And one thinh i think is worth remembering; i surely can believe that a lot of people at ED really like building aircraft. So its not just about what we want, but the people going to the office every work day must finally make that decision as a group. We do like companies that are not only top-down....hey, you guys freaking do what management wants, do we? So, if they keep making aircraft or other modules in parallel with the game stuff, then there really is no reason to change the business model right now. First, it probably does not make sense to hire 100 new tech guys and hope that the speed up on the game side of things translates into higher income that balances the increased costs. Secondly, if the man-hour balance between modules and tech/game development does not change, then there really is no point in charging for non modules stuff that everyone gets so the playbase is not split. So the best way to ensure further game development still remains buying new modules (yeah especially ED ones like F/A-18 and F-16), forget about the EA issues, and rather take them as a "thank you and appreciation by ED" for your continued support. So, i kinda changed my mind on the "let us pay directly for the core game development" because; this would only make sense if A. they hired a bunch of new staff that would only work on the engine and tech or B. they shifted more and more staff away from module development. And both are decisions that the guys at ED should decide by themselves, not us. Additionally, i bet DCS would be a worse product if ED would withdraw completely from module development. A good deal of the tech we want like the ground radar or IFF are probably better developedd as part of an aircraft project than in isolation. Finally, maybe a slight shift in the staff allocation from 50/50 to a golden 66/33 for game and module development would be a more suitable framework. But thats just a ratio that feels good to me, i have no clue whether this would speed up or better the game side of things in any way.
  10. Whatever way of financing: it is a balancing act and staying on the good side of the consumers always means you have to deliver fair value for money. And overall, i feel that people paying for DCS are pretty observing and critical towards what they are getting for money spent.
  11. I am usually not a supporter of a subscription model. I just dislike the fact that it's emotionally harder to step away from something for weeks/months if you continue to pay for it. And i like the fact that i can purchase the stuff i want or want to give support on, but still can let DCS rest for some time without that nagging feeling. And if it was a monthly fee that could be canceld on a monthly basis as is the case with most video streaming services, what would be the point? Hopping on and off doesn't provide ED with the stable income that would be the intention behind a subscription model. But, a subscription on the price level of about 5-6 dollar/euro could work if it was delivering something new and tangible, something where it is more obvious for the enduser that it is a continous cost for the producer and that does not put a second pricetag on somehting you already paid for. Meaning: moving away from hand crafted maps (yeah, based on sattelite imagery) that we purchase individually now, to the whole globe that you invariably need to stream from the cloud because of the sheer amout of data space required. We see this technology coming on other products on the market, if you want that amount of detail covering pretty much everywhere, than this will likely not be a thing you can put on your hard drive in all its stunning glory. How that would be paid for, is another matter of course. But since it would likely require some streaming aspect from EDs/third party servers, a monthly fee or one-time-payment for a specific time period would be an option that doesn't sound too unreasonable. So the model could be like this: pay individually for specific aircraft/modules, no strings attached. Pay monthly/yearly for getting access to that ever evolving streamed "spherical globe" that has got it all. Key to whatever route ED will take in regards to future financing; is to be more open about what the costs are for certain aspects of development and product continuation. On reddit Mr. Grey stated that he as (singular?) owner has as of yet not taken out a single dollar as profit for himself. Which should mean all income goes to keeping the business alive, i.e. employee sallaries, rent, equipment, licencing and other upkeep costs. So if ED was open and honest about what would be directly financed from a subscription in regards to the overall world terrain and engine/tech, i actually might consider this. And yeah, they don't have to give us numbers on how much they earn through their consumer side products, but other companies do this too. The video streaming portals do tell how many subscribers they have and one can come up with rough numbers on how much income that generates and whether the service you get is fair for what you and everyone paying for that service chime in. So the price of one module per year to ensure a hopefully "speedier" development of the base game would be ok in my opinion.
  12. You assume ill intent where there is non. First, you can host an untouched DLC mission by simply loading it from its mods/campaigns folder. Whether you can join this mission without owning the DLC i am not sure since my bro and i both own the campaigns. I could test this with a free account though. If it indeed it is as simple as that, than by all means, there ain't any DRM to talk home about anyway. Additionally, breaking a license could mean; either trying to actively break the DRM protection with various tools or whatnot, OR modyfining the actual product code if said license prohibits that without exception. If DCS is all about the second issue, than good night to any mods at all.
  13. @COXY_99 "1. Well you can easily take missions from any paid campaign and edit it." By this you meam that you can edit the missions in a text editor and exchange ai and player positions for clients and such? Thats the way turning a dlc campaign into a coop campaign fairly easily. You can't do this same action in the ME for you can't save dlc campaign missions there. @CHPL "1. There is no copy protection for multiplayer" What do you mean by this? I own a bunch of dlc campaigns and i can host those and connect as a client. Are you saying this circumvents the DRM somehow already? Because afaik chaning AI for client via a text editor does not alter the DRM of a DLC mission one bit and protection is still valid and uncompromised. I for one would love to finally see native coop campaigns and yeah, the trigger part might be more challenging to design, but i imagine well worth the effort. Some dev. will do it eventually, especially if more and more coop modules come out. Might be as well you guys :) BTW: multi coop in the sense of shared cockpit AMD 2-4 ship flights aka 4-16 human players would be the DEAL!
  14. Auf die Gefahr hin mich zu wiederholen: die finanzielle Halbwertszeit eines heutigen Spiels bzw. Moduls in Bezug auf DCS, sind einige Wochen bis wenige Monate. Um lange den Vollpreis verlangen zu können, muß der Entwickler entweder ein Ausnahmeprodukt ala GTA 5 reißen oder eine "Reiz-situation" schaffen, die die Kaufbereitschaft des zahlungskräftigeren Klientels möglichst lange streckt. Oder anders gesagt; nach release kann im allgemeinen der Preis nur nach unten gehen, und das erwartet auch jeder. Vor release, erwartet das eigentlich niemand. Für ED ist es sicher rentabler zwei Module gleichzeitig, und dafür vielleicht etwas länger im EA zu haben.
  15. Yes, the coming visual update, thats true. But, the wording from the AMA makes it sound like there is something coming for the A-10 thereafter in the future. We'll see.
  16. Thats great to hear! However, i've got a hunch that the A-10C might get a bigger overhaul in the not too distant future, maybe a higher suite than we currently have, or at least with some additions. At least Wags wording from the recent Mudspike AMA kinda sounds like the A-10C module will get the same treatment like the KA-50. First a visual cockpit update, and after the KA-50 is done maybe a more encompassing update to its systems. From the Mudspike article: " With the upcoming revamp to the Black Shark, we’re seeing a free update to an old module combined with paid DLC to add new gizmos. Do you see this as a viable way of continuing support for all the elder modules in the back catalogue or is this something you need to try out first? Yes. We will continue to update older content as DCS World grows, and part of that will be updating older aircraft modules like the Ka-50 and A-10C. While we will provide a free update version of these modules to existing owners, we will also provide more feature-rich versions of the module to new and existing users. These more feature rich versions will be offered to existing owners of the module at a substantial discount. Once the Ka-50 and A-10C updates are done, we’ll look at other aircraft to refresh. A big one for me would be an update to the F-5E for example."
  17. I just redownloaded the A-10C guide with the added booksmarks. Really cool you are adding those bit by bit to all guides. Concerning the A-10C...that guide has been out for quite some time and with a dang short of 100 pages falls a bit behind your latest guides lengthwise. Do you have plans to go all out on that guide some time in the future, or will it stay at its current scope/level of detail?
  18. I guess on of the differences is likely physical access of whatever agency to ED offices in Russia and a 3rd party office someplace around the globe. If the company offices are just around the corner and in your legal jurisdiction... Concerning investment recuperation. They could easily fathom real "money down" interest by sort of kickstart style pre-purchase (i know, not the right time atm). Simply annouce the project as possible if x number of copies can be sold. So everyone interested can buy it the usual way, but you don't get charged unless a certain amount of copies have been sold. That would actually be a good time to test out this pay half for EA, pay half on final release. If those numbers of 160.000 A-10C copies in 10 years, and 50.000ish for something like the Hornet in its first year are true (numbers from Hoggit), then i can very well imagine that if an expensive eastern 4th full fidelity module sold only half that, this might not be enough.
  19. So my new GPU arrived and i went back with my backup installation to version 2.5.0.15365, the initial public release/stable version of the unified 2.5 build from 4.4.2018. An yeah, i have not have had the time to do proper testing between that and the current release version, but from booting up the same NTTR A-10C instant action mssions, there is a significant difference in RAM usage. For instance, the A-10 CAS instant action, the current build used double the amount of memory, almost 10gb working set vs 4.3gb with the old DCS version. This needs more rigorous testing, and probably not all cases will be that clear cut. But i feel my hunch was correct, and currently DCS uses substantially more memory than 6 to 12 months ago. I know the VRAM memory purger was added in june last year and this is the only bigger change that i can recall that might have changed things up to what we see now. @Bignewy Can you recall any change that might have upped DCS 2.5 memory usage significantly within the last 12 months (though my feeling this has changed around early spring this year)?
  20. Ja, hab auch gedacht das man nen aktivierbaren key bekommt. Es ist aber so wie du es beschreibst. Die Hardwareprüfung findet ja nur beim einlösen des coupons vom jeweiligen Händler statt. Haben wi für beide Spiele schon erledigt. Wenn dann das Spiel auf dem AMD account freigeschaltet ist, kann man sich dort einloggen und sich das Spiel dann auf den eigenen uplay-account aktivieren. Sollte eigentlich ohne Streß gehen. Hättest du an einem oder beiden keys Interesse? Habs halt hier im dcsler Forum eingestellt, da ich bei der Gemeinschaftsbestellung für Tacview letztens mit den Leuten hier gute Erfahrung gemacht habe.
  21. Mein Bruder und ich haben gerade neue AMD GPUs gekauft und hätten zwei mal 'Ghost Recon Breakpoint' aus dem AMD Raise the Game bundle für Uplay zu verkaufen. Preis jeweils 42€ Gruß, Markus
  22. Hrm, i wonder on which map the Viggen campaign will be placed. Cobra stated that the F-14 campaign is coming for Caucasus, but did not specifiy where the main Viggen campaign would take place. New undisclosed map incoming?
  23. Very nice, thank your! Concerning adding this via a special tab in the settings; i am fine with the NVGs simply working on all models, i don't need the extra tab in the settings. But i am fine either way.
  24. Actually, wouldn't a proper FFB stick be nice for FBW aircraft as well? For instance, the "feel" of F-16s force sensing stick could re kinda replicated with a FFB stick in that movement of the stick is severly limited through its motor system. And doesn't the F/A-18s controls provide some feedback to the pilot despite being FBW?
×
×
  • Create New...