Verdungo

If you have an Nvidia graphics accelerator and you are using the Nvidia control panel, remember to press the "apply" button on the lower right corner.

First of all, yes, it is true that some of you have waited Black Shark for two years and probably most of those people will buy it no matter what. However, there are other potential customers too in addition to helicopter sim enthusiasts and lock on fans. I, for example, have waited this game for about a year now and although I'd really like to get my hands dirty with Ka-50, I will not buy BS if it includes too restrictive DRM. I think there are many other people like me who would really like to play a new highly detailed simulator but still regard it as a game that can be ignored if necessary. Simply put: You may have a choice, but I do.

Many games in Russia are protected with StarForce so I wouldn't say nobody wants StarForce since Russians buy those games. Whatever copy protection they decided to use in the Western release, I hope they'll announce it soon so that I know is this sim worth waiting for.

That site isn't that accurate anyway as it says that Sacred 2 is going to be released on 7th of November, although it has been already released in Europe and it will be released in North America on November 11th (according to Wikipedia).

BlackShark LLTM PREVIEW 1280x720.AVI (244 354 838 bytes): Video: MPEG4 Video 1280x720 25.00fps 2008Kbps [Video 0] Audio: MPEG Audio Layer 3 22050Hz stereo 96Kbps [Audio 1] It plays on my Media Player Classic so I say you download ffdshow (http://sourceforge.net/projects/ffdshow) and it should play fine.

I seriously doubt that the USB dongle itself is the reason why the game has not been cracked. Steel Beasts Pro PE can only be bought from their website, it costs 125 USD and it is a simulator so it's no wonder it hasn't been cracked. If the protection method really is that powerful, why hasn't anyone else used it? In my opinion playing online should not require a registered game (in other words there should be an ability to connect directly to a server by entering the IP address of the server or an ability to play LAN games without Internet connection). Instead what should require a registered game is server browsing, online flight statistics etc. This is nothing unusual and most games use this method but recently some games have restricted players' options by not including the ability to connect directly to a server by IP and disabling the LAN mode (Gears of War to some extent, Diablo 3). IMO the game should be the same regardless of whether the player has registered his/her copy or not. The only thing that should change is how convenient it is to play the game, for example if the game is not registered, it should require a DVD in drive in order to play, otherwise one could play without a disc in drive. Trackmania United Forever is a good example of this ideology: It lets you make a copy of the dvd, it lets you play without a disc in drive, it requires a serial key but it doesn't require internet connection. In other words you can play it in LAN or alone even if you aren't connected to the Internet without any restrictions (well there are couple of tracks that can be unlocked only by playing online, at least that is the case in Nations Forever) but it gets much, much more fun in online where there are dozens of people in one server competing each other. Of course Trackmania is a totally different kind of game compared to Black Shark but it shows that if the multiplayer is well designed, people want to play it even if the singleplayer/LAN isn't gimped down.

What do you mean by that? DCS should have no singleplayer modes at all or that the singleplayer modes should be made really boring and simple? Or do you perhaps mean that the multiplayer part of DCS should be really awesome?

The manual would also increase the price of the game, therefore some people could not afford it. A good alternative would be, in my opinion, to sell the manual separately and give a discount to those who have registered their DCS: Black Shark games online with their unique serial key. Of course I would love to have a big physical manual in the game box but I don't think many people would pay 80 euros for it if all they want is just the game.

How much are people ready to pay for the manual? ED could really make some good money by selling printed manuals and maps and that sort of stuff provided that the printing process isn't too expensive.

Although I understand why people want to have an in-game server browser, in my opinion development resources should be reserved for more important stuff, such as debugging, developing the new engine, developing A-10 module etc. Besides as you said we have HyperLobby that is fairly adequate even for a game of size of IL-2. Should an in-game server browser be implemented at some point, I think that HyperLobby support would still be nice as with it we don't need to open the game just to check if there are good servers online.

True, but just because all games do not support this, it doesn't mean that they or any other future game shouldn't. It's not that big a deal when changing graphics settngs, but it can get pretty annoying when setting up controller settings and experimenting with them.

Can those menus be accessed when in game? It is a shame if the graphics options cannot be accessed while still playing a mission.

Can the windshield wiper be damaged?

Why does the cockpit look a little strange in those old BS videos? Has the FOV been changed or is it something else? It is also good to see that the graphics have improved a lot since the days of Lock On: Black Shark.

I think the current DCS website is fine. It is easy to use, the colours are not too dark or vivid, and it is much wider horizontally than the ones you have shown us. Oh, and there is already the BS Wiki project, which should become a nice repository for information in the future.

Me too.

I got a little bored and decided to watch the producer's notes again, but this time more closely. However, there were some things I did not quite understand so here are some questions: 1. After the Ka-50's auxiliary power unit was started in the first producer's note, the fuel shutoff valves for left and right engines were enabled at the engine panel. Later, when the left engine was started, the pilot raised the red lever that opens the left engine cutoff valve. What's the point in first enabling the valves and later on opening the valves? Why can't one just simply open and close the valve when needed without having to click those two switches? 2. What happens if I try to start the engines without turning on the engine governors? Will the engines get damaged, or will they simply just not start? Respectively, if I am already flying and decide to turn off the governors, what happens then? 3. Why is it important to resize the Shkval's targeting cursor to the size of the target? Is it because the Shkval compares the brightness of the area inside the targeting cursor to the area outside the cursor? 4. In the sixth producer's note some weapons were introduced, including the 2A42 autocannon and rockets. According to that note, there is a switch in the primary weapon control panel that lets the pilot decide how long the bursts of 2A42 rounds and rockets should be. Since the minimum burst length is 10 rounds, it is not possible to use the 2A42 as a semiautomatic weapon in the Ka-50, right? Is this because of the cannon itself or a designed feature of the Ka-50? Also, is it really not possible to launch less than 10 rockets per burst? Sounds like a waste of ammo to me.

I seriously doubt it. To me it looks like Jet Thunder won't be released earlier than 2010.

I don't know if this works, but Moslo should be able to slow down programs: http://www.hpaa.com/moslo/

Yes, a link would be nice as I didn't see any new screenshots at http://www.simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=postlist&Board=60&page=1

Creating a simulator can be pretty difficult, you know.

That doesn't really differ from regular game installations. In most games you just install it without internet connection and in order to play online you obviously need a connection. In Race 07's case if you want to play online you need to use the online installation. So it's practically the same thing, you just need the internet connection at different time. I have nothing against separate offline and online installations but I really don't see what's the point in that. I hope you got my point, it's kind of hard to explain. By the way, does Race 07 require online installation to play in LAN? PS: Actually I understand the point of two separate installations IF the game uses Steam. However, that isn't really useful for a game that doesn't use steam. It would be cool to see that feature in Black Shark, though.

Actually I wouldn't be happy if ED were going to use some copy protection that requires an internet connection. When I buy a game, I want to be sure that it is possible to play the game ten years after buying it. That is why I'm not going to buy Mass Effect or Spore. I don't even see a good reason to use copy protection as high detail flight sims are not mainstream games. I think that most of the people who download Black Shark are going to try it and then remove it after realizing that it really is a simulator, not an arcade game. There are also alternative ways to reduce piratism. For example, ED could create an update manager that would be, at first, the only way to get game patches. Using that manager would require a cd-key so warez guys couldn't download patches using the update manager unless they have a real cd-key. Also, if there was an in-game server browser, the same cd-key would be required to get the server list and to join servers. ED could also publish a collector's edition which would include, for example, a cool Black Shark poster, concept art, making of videos, an instruction manual and so on. For those who are going to play other DCS titles as well, it might be more encouraging to buy Black Shark if the buyers of the previous modules got the latest screens and videos before other people. The main idea is: Instead of punishing the people who actually buy your titles, why not give them something the others are unable to get? Other games have sold well too regardless of the fact that they lack a powerful copy protection. For example, The Witcher role-playing game has sold quite well (over 700k copies IIRC) and it doesn't include a nasty copy protection. In addition, CD Projekt - the developer of The Witcher - was not even well-known in the gaming culture before releasing The Witcher. Another example is Sins of a Solar Empire, a scifi real-time strategy from Ironclad games. Ironclad Games has profited over 10 million US dollars from selling Sins of a Solar Empire and it has no copy protection at all. This is practically the only thing that worries me about DCS. It is also the only thing that determines whether I'll buy this game or not as the game itself seems to be so darn good.

Wow! I had no idea how advanced the Ka-50's autopilot system really is. Basically all you need to do is take off, enjoy the view, and then land. Btw, the terrain looks awesome. The textures may not be as sharp as in next gen FPS games but I really like that snowy land texture.

I checked some of 1C's games and it seems that they have used at least Securom and StarForce. For example UFO: Afterlight (2007), UFO: Aftermath (2003), and A.I.M use Securom, whereas UFO: Aftershock (2005) and Russian version of Death to Spies (2007) use StarForce. So it is possible that 1C releases StarForce protected games in the future, but I don't think that's the case if the developer doesn't want it.