panton41

I have Voice Attack and ViaCom, I just rarely use it. I can't wear the VR headset and bulky over-ear headphone for very long without getting a headache; take one or the other away and I'm fine. I generally either earbuds or simply use PC speakers, depending on how much isolation and privacy I want while under VR. The Viacom features are nice when I can remember the exact wording to use. Is it terribly difficult to map and train other things? My biggest concerns are things you need right now when you can't take your hands off the HOTAS, like landing gear or ejection. I have a Windows Mixed Reality headset and I don't think PointCTRL would work all that well with it. I don't feel like trying to get the fiddly mounting setup on them. I like the idea in theory, but in reality I think hand/finger tracking the new Oculus has is the future for that. Can I get a link for one of the Trackpad apps? I think the other thing I'm going to end up doing is setting aside a portion of my computer room as a VR simpit area that's set away from the main computer desk so I can keep things set up without them getting in the way. I've done it off and on for a while and it makes vehicle sims easier (I also play Euro/American Truck Simulator in VR) but other VR stuff a little more awkward, but I think I have a layout now that'll solve that problem.

How do others manipulate the cockpit in VR? I've found either using a mouse or trackball in my hand or mapping a couple HOTAS buttons to mouse clicks and using the centered pointer with head movement to works the best without getting into any kinds of single-purpose add-ons. I tried the VR hand controllers but can't stand to use them in any software or game, much less the hand-twisting awkwardness you have to do in DCS World. Are there options I haven't considered yet, or am I going down the right path so far? I know I've mentioned putting down lots on money on controllers on other threads, but those are about as far as I can go for expensive new toys for the time being.

Looks like my mind is made up, I just needed enough people to help me justify the price. I actually don't play DCS World that often and it's partly because my current controllers are such crap that it's simply not fun trying to operate a complex aircraft and fight your own funky controllers in the process.

If the game pisses you off so badly then stop frikin' playing. You spent money? Fine. Then get used to the concept of the "sunken cost fallacy." There's plenty of other flight sims out there you can play. Heck, there's one that was released in 1998, had its source code leaked and has spent 20+ years being crowdsourced into a pretty impressive simulator. Surely it's bug free by now... Oh, wait, it still has a list of bugs a mile long... Huh, it's almost like it's hard to write modern flight sims.

I love it when someone who obviously knows nothing about software development demands a software developer to "fix the bugs and stop releasing new stuff" and not understanding that the Venn Diagram for the "fix the bugs" team and the "make new stuff team" barely touch. (For some companies they aren't even in the same country.) I especially love it when they can barely form a coherent sentence and come across as a spoiled 12-year-old even if they're middle-aged. TL/DR: The Dunning-Kruger is strong with this one...

From what I understand a lot of the work for ground mapping radar should easily transfer to the F-16 and I'd imagine there'd be some parallel feature release for it. And the work going into rewriting the terrain to work with physically simulated radar is likely to include the information needed to improve the IR model, which was the goal before they wanted to work on ATFLIR. (Once you have someone touching every asset you might as well make all the changes you have planned.) As for voting on features, I'd agree for the features that can stand alone in the work that's needed to be done. Tt's not uncommon for one feature to depend on the work that goes into a different feature (like the GM radar and ATFLIR depending on updating assets) so I'd imagine the list you'd be able to vote on, versus those features that depend on the completeness of other features, would probably not be all that exciting. Personally, I'd rather see the features that can improve other modules completed first, as opposed to those that only affect a single module.

I'm in the process of upgrading my flight sim controllers and I've run into a problem with the rudder pedals. I currently have a set of Thrustmaster T-Flight Pedals and they're just a hot mess of cheap plastic that are so small my feet practically touch while I'm using them. I was looking at the Logitech G Rudder Pedals, but apparently no one wants to sell them to me. (Everyone's out of stock or taking months to ship.) So doing some more digging I discovered that the MFG Crosswind are (at a stretch) within my price range (US$300 maximum) and I've seen nothing but glowing reviews. I'm most likely going to get them, but I'd love to hear from people on this board before I put down the money. I can tell you that I can't justify the price on the Thrustmaster TPR and reviews tend to bear that out. The VPC ACES-II Pedals are out of my price range as well, but close enough I might consider them.

Admittedly, AMD's work on Mantle was practically copy/pasted in order to make Vulcan. For that matter, DirectX 12 is basically AMD Mantle with the named of methods and calls changed to fit DirectX standards. Broadly speaking both are functionally identical other than the names and a tiny handful of corner cases, which round themselves out the next time one or the other has an update. For that matter, expect DirectX 11 (and even 9.0) to be around for a long time. Vulcan and DX12 are difficult, expensive and time-consuming to work with for companies that develop their own graphics engines and don't need absolute maximum performance it's not worth the effort. (Though the support in a lot of middleware game engines is a big help, but not everyone uses them.) To give you an idea American/Euro Truck Simulator just updated to DirectX 11 for the performance increase.

Nothing to do with the fact it's the newest map and only just left early access a few months ago...

I finally bit the bullet and purchased a Thrustmaster Warthog and I'm looking to sell my old HOTAS kit. I have: CH Products Fighterstick CH Products Pro Throttle Both are in good shape, but I won them on an eBay auction so I can't vouch for how old they are. For what it's worth CH Products devices are built like tanks and they sell repair parts. Saitek X-55 Rhino Throttle / Stick Both are in decent shape other than being a little dirty from age. According to Amazon I purchased them on January 3, 2015. The throttle had a problem with an overly sticky lubricant (ironic, huh?) and I removed the part that was sticking, so there's very little stiffness to the throttle. The mouse-stick on the throttle has a large dead-zone (and frankly isn't very useful because of how it maps in software). Apparently both the lubricant and mouse-stick are known-issues with this product line and not wear and tear. I'd rather sell the HOTAS as a matched set, but I'm willing to take offers breaking the sets.

Apparently, after Googling the issue more, the proper amount of pagefile is open to lively discussion but in general you want to have one and have it fairly close to, if not higher, than your system RAM. I think the "rule of thumb" I listed above was for older systems with far less RAM than a typical modern gaming system

Your page file is way, way too small. The general rule of thumb is 1) Just let Windows manage it and 2) Set it between 1.5x to 4x your system RAM (as in the upper and lower bounds on the settings page, which for you is between 48G and 128GB) with option 1 preferred for a vast majority of use cases for obvious reasons (lettings Windows manage it uses less). The easiest way to put it is that the pagefile does quite a bit more than simply act as old-school virtual memory, though that is part of its use, and it's best to simply let the hivemind at Microsoft who wrote the operating system to determine what's best. Even if you have a lot of chip RAM, you'll lose performance by skimping on the pagefile. Besides that, is your C-drive the SSD or the spinning rust? Ideally, you install Windows itself to the SSD simply because that'll give you by far better performance for literally everything you do on the computer. (And that's been common advice ever since SSDs came into existence.) If not, then you've installed your operating system, and all of the files and caches it needs to run everything (including your games) on a technology that is, frankly, utterly obsolete in every category except price (and a handful of extremely niche archival purposes gamers won't care about). Simply put, if Windows itself is installed to the spinning rust drive the single best thing you can do for overall performance is reinstall Windows onto the SSD. There's a good chance Windows itself is loading and caching files related to the game (or other things) onto the boot/system drive, which is orders of magnitude slower than the SSD.

It's a joke, boy. A funny. A knee-slapper. You're supposed to laugh. Kids these days, I tell ya. No sense of humor.

I've got it, too. I'm thinking it's some kind of low level programming error. "main" and "static" have meanings (which I forget other than "main" is typically the primary program loop) in C-syntax languages.

FWIW, the FAS article dates BRU-55/A to 1999, though it lists it as in development and that whole site is pretty well out of date by decades. Having said that, ED has an odd policy of including out-of-scope equipment if it's 1) Conceivable for that unit and 2) They have non-classified info for it with #2 having a much higher priority. For example, the Walleye was really retired alongside the A-7D Corsair II in the 1990s, but since the Hornet could theoretically carry it they included it because the info was there to implement it.

It's more than fast enough. While DCS is harder on CPU than most games, high end 3D video games in general are GPU bound more than anything else. When I had a Core i7-4770K (which came out in 2013) I rarely had problems with DCS World.

I'd love to help you. I live in the US Eastern Time Zone. I don't consider myself terribly experienced (only about 79 hours in game over several years) and I've been looking for someone to play with one-on-one as well to help improve my skills.

It wasn't a Warthog, but I had a Thrustmaster steering wheel have weird behaviors when plugged into a hub. Maybe it's something similar.

nVidia's pricing is solely due to their position as the monopoly producer of high end graphics cards. AMD is finally getting into a position to compete again and Intel's been pretty vocal about their own high end discrete card, but both will undoubtedly have a while before they're competing on nVidia's level. I'll just say that I'm giving Intel the benefit of the doubt about making a decent discrete graphics card. Their integrated GPUs really aren't terrible giving the limitation they work under (sharing thermals, power and memory bandwidth with the CPU is an overwhelming problem that AMD's VPUs have shown). I think putting an improved design onto a stand-alone card, with dedicated cooling, power and proper graphics memory and letting them draw 150+ watts by themselves could improve their capabilities quite a bit. Not to mention Intel has been paying more attention to their video drivers lately, probably for this exact reason.

Most likely not: 1) It's only for the F-15E. 2) It's more for recce than anything else. 3) It's so heavily classified the USAF won't even publicly say how many they have.

I left Facebook in December 2018 after yet more news about them giving out personal user data (chat logs, IIRC) to third-parties. Best decision I've made in a long time. I ended up convincing my mother to do it as well.

I prefer Nevada if only because my skills are so rusty that I prefer to pretend to be doing training flights. Persian Gulf is better if you'd rather simulate actual warfare as opposed to training missions. I will say that there's more paid campaigns set in NTTR than the Persian Gulf.

I would just pick an airfield, declare it OPFOR and practice bombing there.

On the ArsTechnica article about the Top Gun II trailer someone posted this: [Youtube]335GdTqtyLs

Part of what I love about Cold War history is the crazy stuff like this.