twistking

Player AC, AI AC, ships, vehicles and generally all editor placeable objects definitely fall under "textures". I am not sure about bulldings, but would guess that they do too. "Terrain textures" obviously covers the ground textures. As mentioned above i'm not sure about buildings (and other preplaced map objects) but woudl guess that they do not fall under "terrain textures". Should be easy to test though... If you test texture settings, always restart DCS to make sure the different texture quality gets actually applied and ram/vram gets flushed before making any judgement about performance...

i'm not on open beta. can anyone have a look if AAA units now all have crew modelled? in the trailer there is a shot of a very high poly middle eastern dude manning a zsu-23-2 i think... i'm desperately waiting for AAA crew...

you are probably just experiencing windows file swapping. i guess you have 16gb of ram or less?

i agree with you. my assumption has always been that people wishing for "live" weather have never actually thought it through. maybe they also do not really differentiate between "live" and dynamic weather. simulated, dynamic weather would obviously be the best for dcs. another interesting feature could be "historic" weather to quickly set up well.. historicaly accurate missions. technically it's the same as "live" weather, onyl difference being that it is fed from historical weather data instead of live weather data.

Please don't mind SkateZilla's personal vendetta against DLSS. You are of course absolutely right that both DLSS and FSR would help with AA. I would dare to say that those upscaling technologies are in fact the future of anti aliasing. When DLSS was first shown, it was advertised as an anti aliasing technology. Some people are being triggered by DLSS only running on specific Nvidia hardware. This is a downside of course, but no reason to bend facts imho. Ideally DCS would implement both FSR and DLSS. I think neither of them are particularly complex to implement as they live pretty much at the end of the rendering pipeline...

relax, the tower is probably just WIP atm.

Nah, also make aircraft ext lighting visible at reasonable distances, then we are good!

have you tried putting your preload radius slider to a reasonable (read: low) value? for some reason there are still folks who crank that thing up to max... when you have dcs on a fast ssd you should get away with minimal preload in fact. if this helps with your excessive load times i don't know of course, but it is worth trying...

i agree. one thing is the base colour, which many have pointed out is a bit on the bright green side. i don't think it needs much, just a tiny little bit less green to mute it a little bit. the other thing is that the grass is very uniform, like a well maintained english garden. it would maybe help to have some rough patches mixed in. either brownish dirt areas, or at least some areas of less healthy grass (a dryer look.. again more yellow/brown i guess)... i think another important aspect to the uniformity is a lack of paths and dirt areas that are suitable for placing assets like fortifications (bunkers, radars etc). it looks very bad to place -for example- a german radar site on perfectly green grass, or a freshly plowed farmland. it needs some patches of roughed up earth, some dirt path or similar to make those scenes more believable. this was a big problem in normandy 1.0 so i hope that this can be improved for 2.0... (the god old caucassus map does this quite well actually. despite it's age and general lack of detail, it has random brown patches and dirt paths as part of the grass textures. far, far from perfect, but it helps a bit when placing units in the open...

it's sooo much better than before already. of course having the options for shadows would be nice, but we have to remember that those would probably come with a slight impact on performance. dcs uses deferred shading, so just having that many lightsources by itself should come more or less for free, but this does not include shadows per each light...

Thought so. I'd conclude that 2.8 has not any multithreading improvments. If you are running just a little bit hotter than before, i would not worry. Maybe the new weather is a bit more taxing for your systems. If you however see your CPU stuck at 100% utilization for longer than a few seconds while playing, then there is soemthing wrong on your end and you should investigate further. Seeing load on all cores is normal, but all cores running at 100% is not normal.

The first 2/3 of the graph look like pretty normal dcs behaviour to me (not multi-threading, but just the worklaod being shuffled around all cores for better heat management). The last third shows really high utilization though. I don't have 2.8 yet, so can't test for myself, but i still doubt that something significant has changed with multi-threading. If DCS could reliably load a modern CPU up to over 90%, people would have noticed significant performance increases. Do you feel that DCS is running better for you than before the update?

What you say is correct, however a single threaded app would then not show 100% CPU utilization. From the limited info the OP provided, i would have guessed that he is running an app that does indeed fully utilize his CPU. @janitha2 do you have the 100% utilization when actually playing the game, or is this maybe only when starting DCS, or when laoding into a mission? To answer your question: DCS is not supposed to have proper multi-threading yet, so your finding is a bit surprising. Even for a well optimized game 100% utilization without dips is highly unusual. I suspect that soemthing is wrong. How is you performance in DCS? Also check that it's actually DCS that's creating the load.

Hello, i've got on bit of criticism, which is a overabundance of "perfect" grass areas. This has two problems: Firstly it can look unrealsitic and make the map appear more like a model train set than a real landscape, secondly it makes it difficult for mission designers to place assets convincingly. Normandy 1.0 had a similar issue not with abundance of grass, but with abundance of farmland, where it was near impossible to build -f.e.- a radar site complex which looked "grounded", because everything would be placed on pristinely plowed fields (In this regard the channel map is a little bit better, because it has grassy areas with little food paths and brown "worn-out" areas, but still not enough imho). To remedy the problem, please consider to make industrial sites (picture below) look less green and more roughed up from vehicles (random paths and dirt patches) and maybe also make the remaining grass in these areas look less healthy (more brownish tones). Also consider adding some random brown spots and "roughed up" parts to the farmland areas and maybe even consider some fields laying completely idle (fallow land) to give good opportunities for setting up military sites.

Looks very, very good! Thanks for preview!

Have you used both FSR and DLSS in titles that are similar to DCS in that they require god detail reconstruction (spotting targets, reading isntruments etc.)? I could only compare the two in youtube videos, which is bad in itself, but it was with some generic action titles, where micro detail is less important and it's more about a temporarly stable and clean image. My biggest concern with FSR is that it might be worse than DLSS when it comes to those fine details... I would be interested in hearing your opinion on this. Or anyone's opinion who has already compared the two technologies in preferably sim-type-titles...

That would be a nice feature. Not only for switching during gameplay, but also for switching while in mission editor. Especially the ruler tool. Would like to have it in meters / kilometers without changing the whole of dcs to metric...

We were talkin about DLSS 2.0. not 3.0. I've not seen a single truly positive review of DLSS 3.0. It seems to be more of a gimmick at best. But that does not take anything away from the benefits that DLSS 2.0 brings. Nvidia would probably been better of calling DLSS 3.0 something else honestly...

i would find it plausible that DLSS VR can get away with higher upscaling ratios, because it could use two images (stereoscpic rendering) to reconstruct details from. this is just an educated guess though. i could not find any hard evidence for that.

You are talking 2d though, aren't you? From my understanding VR DLSS brings higher FPS gains comapred to pancake DLSS, because there is double the amount of pixels to save on. It's basically double DLSS with benefits.

I've done some reading on DLSS for VR and it seems to work really great, effectively doubling FPS without degrading the image quality noticeably. If you think about it, it makes sense that it works particularly good in VR: It has double the information to work with compared to pancake/2d. I think DLSS could effectively "solve" high resolution VR headsets for Nvidia users. Of course CPU bottlenecks would still apply for the moment. It sucks that it's vendor locked, but ED could maybe also implement AMD's and Intel's upscalers to offer something for everyone... (to be fair, i doubt that AMD's upscaler would work that well in DCS. It can produce pleasant image, but does so while not reconstructing finer details, so gives a less detailed image, which might hurt spotting in DCS)

yes, this would be a gamechanger. an environment like DCS should make it relatively easy for voice reckognition, since you can easily force players to adhere to certain predefined phrases to communicate with AI and there is no need for the AI to decipher colloquial speech or similar. i think there is a very good speech reckognition in windows that can be utilized by third party programms and i think it's free to use even...

With the moving clouds incoming, but with true dynamic weather still a bit further away, i'd be good to have some more presets that have both rain/overcast areas and clear/scattered parts in it, so we can have missions were weather (or at least cloud coverage) actually changes and it's not just tiny clear patches rolling through an otherwise overcast sky.

The trees did always sway in the wind a little bit, no? The shaking is just from the timelapse. Speedtrees so to say...