I_Gamer

New weather / clouds is high on my wish-list for DCS. This would be a great Christmas present from ED. ;)

I believe the team literally just completed the landing gear animation this past week, so may be something that is already planned - but it's so early in development, they haven't gotten to it yet. Could be wrong, though.

Mentioned this on reddit, but I'll post here as well, with a few additions. I saw a post somewhere on the ED forums where Wags explained that this EA release is a much earlier version than we got when the Hornet was released to EA. So, essentially, the Viper in its current state is like an 8/mo baby, and the Hornet, when it released to EA, would be a 3/yo toddler. So, we all got the Viper sooner than we originally thought, and those of us that paid for it - get to be a part of the "public" development process just that much longer. ED is in this weird spot - they can choose to wait, and develop it more (like the Hornet) - though some people will make the "WHEN IS THE VIPER COMING OUT, GIVE NOW!". Their other option is to release it early, like they did, but now are under the "THERE IS SO MUCH MISSING, WTF ED!?" It's a trap, either way, and it's unfortunate. All that said; I'm pretty excited for the Viper and where ED takes it. The sound design is by far the best they've produced in a module, with room for improvements on some of the accuracies of course - and the overall feel of this module is fantastic so far. Yes, it's early, but we all knew that. Thanks to the entire ED team on your dedication to bringing this beautiful bird to life inside DCS, I can't wait to see this "grow up" into one of the best modules in the game.

The comm squelch should be a higher default value to mitigate this, I've had the same issue. :P

See video: The afterburner effect / particle clips, and also takes too long to disengage after moving throttle back to idle/mil power. Also - I noticed that the shock diamond is not very long, was this an intentional design choice? It looks very similar to the AI's shock diamond, which I never found very realistic. Anyway; great flying so far, looking forward to flying this through EA!

I think you're talking about the "wind noise", it's extremely annoying. I pretty much all but disabled it for the Hornet sound mod I did. I tried lowering the volume but it just didn't do it, I ended up bringing the radius by which you can hear it in to about 50ft instead of 1200ft. :P

Version 3 is now live! Main post updated.

Brand new video! Go check it out. Official release for v3 will be next week, the 26th!

I don't know if this is open to the public, haven't found any downloads available.

This is awesome! Quick nitpick though; "Nine" (9) should be pronounced "Niner", in the aviation world. Unless I'm missing something? I hear "Nine" all the time and drives me bonkers lol. Minor thing, but sometimes its the small things that make the difference.

OVGME repo is fixed and updated, thanks to Moltar for the assist!

From my limited experience in messing around with the "auto_width" function, it acts as a stereo separation processor if a sound source is mono. If set to false, it keeps that given sample (or set of samples) to mono. I could be wrong, but this is what I've noticed while messing around with various functions. Also, you should experiment with the different "listmode" functions. In the next update for my F-18 sound mod, I'm heavily using the "ASR" function to give a more realistic dynamic to the outside effects. It's a huge step forward for me. Don't feel like you need to even put in a "listmode" function, if you want a different source to play each time the sample is activated. Putting in "Random" will only play one sample from the list you defined, where-as if you leave it blank - it will randomize each time it's activated. :)

I know this is what you guys are aiming for, which is why DCS is amazing - it was just an example. Why not just say "Well, we can't implement feature X because that type of situation cannot be accurately modeled - since it's not how feature X works in the real world"? Instead of completely dismissing comparisons all around. I'm sure people will still make broad comparisons, but I do not like the idea of just dismissing things completely because they can't be achieved in the real world - isn't that the fun of games and simulators anyway? Dream a little! ;)

I may be misunderstanding this statement, but your guys' view on comparisons needs to be put in check. What about - if instead of comparing how DCS works with another sim/game. Why not look at it as an opportunity to do it even better? It's this little thing called "excellence". You can look at features of other games and simulators and compare features for the purpose of making a competing product better. Being inspired by someone/something and trying to do it better is a huge part of creating better products all around. For example; DCS has an "Okay" weather system with weird clouds (which is being worked on, I know). However; Ace Combat 7 and the new generation of FS(2020) looks to be stunning. You don't make the comparison of saying "But, DCS isn't like AC7 or FS...". True, however, comparing individual elements is a valid argument and the same situation should be taken into account when trying to compare products. It's not fair to compare, say, Battlefield 4 to ArmA 3 - they're two completely separate titles that are marketed towards different player bases. That's not to say one developer team can't learn from the other's downfalls, mistakes, or lack of some sort of other "feature". That is exactly what Call of Duty seems to be doing in their latest MW title - learning from past mistakes, seeing what the people are actually wanting, and improving their strategy to reach more people. All while making their game look better and play better. Who's to say DCS can't do the same? DCS won't grow, neither will ED, if everyone on the team is turning a blind eye to what the industry is actually doing.

That's nice to hear, hopefully that will allow a better and more efficient workflow for you guys. Tracking the amount of feedback and bug reports DCS gets seems like it wouldn't be a very fun task, especially having to manually sort through forum posts. ;)

Thanks for trying to answer these, NL. Honestly; I'm kind of surprised that ED hasn't integrated a better/more efficient bug tracker that both the dev team and users can look at to get an idea of which issues are being worked on - or on EA aircraft; which features are either planned, work in progress or completed already. I hate to compare, but honestly the feedback tracking system that Bohemia Interactice uses on a lot of their products is fantastic. I honestly think that a better/more efficient bug / feedback tracker would solve a lot of the "communication" issues people are complaining about.

Long time no see, all! It's time for another update. :) v3.0 Revealed! YouTube: Version 3.0 of this audio overhaul/sound mod will include a lot of fixes, adjustments, and new additions to make the Hornet sound even better thanks to some newly recorded audio. More news inbound in a few short weeks! Keep your eyes and ears peeled ladies and gents! :)

Whoop whoop! This is amazing guys. Can't wait to see more!

It's my hope that the ED dev team shift their focus from developing modules to further improving on their core simulation. Things like better AI, ATC, Weather, 3D/Rendering, Sound, FX, immersion (civ traffic, animals, people, vehicles), etc.... I could almost see ED doing this and letting 3rd parties develop new aircraft (at least for several months) until the core engine/game is in a better position. I'd love to see DCS make a huge step forward with 3.0 (even though a ways away now). All of the current, as well as future, modules would be so much more enjoyable if the aircraft themselves were not some of the only things highly detailed/simulated.

Issues like these mentioned are reasons why I haven't gone beyond 2-3 hours of initial work getting this to sound better - there are too many back end issues HB needs to address with the way the game handles the current sound files. Fortunately the base sound infrastructure on the FA-18 by ED was integrated a lot better, which paved a nice path for the overhaul I created - HB did not follow suit on this, which means making a proper overhaul is next to impossible. I made it sound better, but is far off from being a product where I feel it is to "Echo 19" standards. Hoping the Viper follows the same path the Hornet has been on (in terms of audio fidelity and infrastructure). Anyway, nice work Bananimal. A step in the right direction, for sure. Modders have a little bit more flexibility when it comes to content creation - as the community does not have to strictly abide by copyright free/royalty free material, whereas companies or 3rd parties (like HB) do have to abide by such standards and are more limited with what sources they are allowed to (legally) pull from.

That makes more sense to me than having pre-orders start in the middle of a work week. :P

I'm not pre-ordering till I see and hear more about it, but the newsletter did say Pre-Orders started today (22nd of May). I assume this was a typo then?

Thanks for the support here fellas, hopefully HB can look into this soon! I'm ready to start work on the Tomcat, but for now I am just sitting here twiddling my thumbs. ;)

Hey there HB team; here is a direct excerpt from the "F-14 Sound Mod" thread in the Mods/Apps section of the forms. Leaving here for some feedback I gave on the sounds in the Tomcat, any chance that these could be addressed or looked at? Thanks guys and hellofa job well done on the Tomcat!