-
Posts
2860 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by twistking
-
Official Nvidia marketing slides disagreee with that statement. First column shows DLSS 3 SR & DLAA running on all RTX cards. From a technical standpoint it wouldn't make a lot of sense any other way, would it? Maybe in some games it's integrated "wrongly" in a way that makes DLSS 3 synonymous with frame-gen, where upscaling only would be named (again: "wrongly") DLSS 2.0? Fact is, every RTX card can run upscaling, even if it's of the newer 3/3.5 iterations. This is based solely on Nvidia marketing, since i have no RTX card myself by the way.
-
This is not correct! And it's mentioned in nearly every thread about DLSS. DLSS encompasses differetn features, of which all need RTX cards, but not neccessarily the 4000 gen. The DLSS upscaler and DLAA, which are what we will be getting for DCS will not require 4000 gen but will run on every RTX card, even if they are from DLSS version 3.0/3.5. It's unfortunate that Nvidia chose that naming convention, which can be confusing, but it's not that difficult either: DLSS has different features, each feature has different hardware requirements. I assume we will get DLSS 2 instead of 3, simply because 3 is quite new and version 2 is what ED has been implementing and tuning the last months. I'm sure we will get newer versions eventually...
-
i see. thx!
-
Can someone explain what is shown at 0:20? Is that a FLIR image projected on the HUD? How is that possible with such old tech? I must be missing something... What sensor generates that image?
-
Thanks for the info. Looking forward to the update! Have skipped to some more videos and screenshots and also noticed that some weapons/pods could profit both from better textures/shaders and higher detail geometry. On the actual aircraft the geometry looks ok (to my eye... and only judging from videos/screenshots), but textures/shaders are underwhelming.
-
sure, i agree that research is progressing fast and that particular technique is super interesting, but i just don't expect it to ever be usable for real-time lighting. the thing is, it does not need to be usable for real-time lighting to be impressive, so i'm not arguing against the merits of gaussian splatting. but to be usable in modern games with a high degree of interactivity, you need to be able to (re)light the game objects and you need some form of geometry for physics and other interaction. Gaussian Splatting doe not provide for either (it's just a visualisation of a cloud), so i really really don't see that future. Especially now, that real-time-graphics are on the verge of being "solved" with path tracing and the likes.
-
When the F1 came out, i felt that the external model and textures weren't as good as other recently released DCS modules (i admit, that this is a high bar to clear). Since i haven't yet bought the module, this was mainly based on screenshots/youtube-videos and some users in the forums voicing similar concerns. Has there been additional art-passes in the meantime? Are there any planned for the future? When looking at screenshots now, i still feel the textures aren't perfect. They look a bit plasticky soemtimes and maybe a little bit too clean. Is it just me, or do you feel the same? Could the shaders need some tuning? Is the external art deemed to be complete at this point? Thanks!
-
For someone who is you are quite persevering. I have already tried to explain and i don't know what to add. Photogrammetry is already used in games and is already used in DCS. Maybe GS will allow artists to generate a mesh a little bit quicker. So what? The interesting aspect of GS is that you can visualize point clouds in a photorealistic way WITHOUT needing to create a mesh from it. But this way of rendering a pointcloud is utterly pointless (ha!) for DCS. It is cool, that GS may improve photogrammetry workflows by making it compute quicker, but in the end it's a tool that a dev can decide to utilize or not. And it would be utilized very early in the production pipeline. Wishing for GS in DCS is exactly the same as wishing for the newest version of photoshop, or blender or whatever in DCS. I would think that the devs will always choose the tools that are best suited for the problems they face. Displaying point clouds in DCS via Gaussian Splatting makes absolutely no sense and i can't see any scenario where it would make sense in the future.
-
It's not usable for DCS. Not at all. Gaussian Splatting is a neat way to view point clouds. You cannot relight it, you cannot interact with it, only move in/around it. If you want to use the point cloud data for interactive experiences, you have to extract meshes and texture data and with that you are back to the workflow that is already well established and already used by many DCS developers. You could use GS to explore spaces or objects in a VR headset for example, but you could only look at it or move through it. You cannot use it in the way you are probably thinking about. Currently there isn't really an alternative to using textured meshes for truly interactive experiences.
-
good! i'm a bit nervous about the jumpy, flickering clouds. especially the wobblyness, since it's not a common cg problem and therefore DLSS will not be trained for it. maybe DLSS wll free up hardware rescources that then allow the clouds to be rendered spatialy and temporarily more stable... so basically a higher clouds quality preset...
-
Interesting read! Good luck with the modding! You are right though. There is no reason why there should not be affordable ones at some point in the future. They are obviously more complex than non-motorized ones, but it's not rocket science either. Decent, affordable racing wheels are quite common and i don't see why a joystick should be more expensive to make. I agree with @=475FG= Dawger that the old microsoft sidewinders did not feel particularly great, but modern designs could surely improve.
-
thanks. will have a look at the thread! @MAXsenna why do you expect everyone having FFB in the future? i am aware that the patent protection regarding FBB for joysticks has expired, but i also haven't seen any developments in this regard apart from some hand-made/boutique hardware projects. maybe the big manufacturers are still working in secret on affordable FFB products?! i think the original FFB joysticks from microsoft (?) were quite affordable back in the day... so i guess there is hope!
-
What CM to best evade SA-19 / 2K22 Tunguska
twistking replied to twistking's topic in DCS: F-16C Viper
Do you know why the ceiling is "only" 12,000? Seems a bit low compared to the range of the system? Wikipedia says that the radar can track to only 12.000 ft altitude, but i think that makes no sense. Generally speaking, systems with similar range tend to have higher ceiling, no? -
i think that this is more of a steam problem. maybe it's best to ask the steam support, or ask in a steam forum/subreddit? the issue seems to be - and i have also noticed this - that steam always intercepts the execution of an executable that is assosciated with steam. steam then seems to launch the default executable for said program. if the problem cannot solved via steam/windows, maybe ED should make MT the (steam) default executable and have ST as a secondary option. "most" people seem to benefit from MT, so i do not see an issue with that approach. @BIGNEWY maybe you can look into that? i suspect that quite a few people are still unknowingly playing ST even though they start the MT-executable...
-
wow. that's quite a lot of feedback. thanks to all of you. i really appreciate it. Quick question about Linear / Nonlinear Joystick mode. On first test, they felt quite similar to me. How do they differ? What to concentrate on when comparing the two? How come the F-5 has this option, but other modules don't?
-
What CM to best evade SA-19 / 2K22 Tunguska
twistking replied to twistking's topic in DCS: F-16C Viper
just don't mention the war! -
fixed SON-9 ignores alarm state GREEN option
twistking replied to twistking's topic in Ground AI Bugs (Non-Combined Arms)
@NineLine mission provided (see above) -
What CM to best evade SA-19 / 2K22 Tunguska
twistking replied to twistking's topic in DCS: F-16C Viper
ok. i did not think of night vision. makes sense. thanks! -
Can We Have the F-105 Thunderchief?
twistking replied to Mike Force Team's topic in DCS Core Wish List
that would be a dream come true! -
What CM to best evade SA-19 / 2K22 Tunguska
twistking replied to twistking's topic in DCS: F-16C Viper
tested again at night and SA-19 behaviour seemed identical. wouldn't that mean that it does use radar augmentation for the SACLOS missiles? optically aimed systems generally suffer heavily at night in DCS - the SA-19 does not. wouldn't that then mean that countermeasures could have a real effect? -
@upyr1 last time i tested it, it just did not work most of the time. sometimes it flatout did not work at all, sometimes it kinda worked but produced buggy behaviour... infantry units going missing, or infantry AI being wonky after disembarkment... i did test with ground vehicles only. maybe it works better with helicopters? haven't tested it since.