jtmedina

HEHEHE, that was a good one. :D DCS World has a engine as old as FSX. Changing the name won't make it look any better. The competition is out there and they can make simulators that run better than yours, wake up, fix the problem, stop blaming us. It's amazing you still have the balls to say It's my system that can't hadle it. When the DCS engine is more than 5 years old....unbelievable. No It is not below system requirements http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-2010/compare,2426.html?prod%5B4417%5D=on&prod%5B4428%5D=on http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/index.php?end_pos=135&scr=products&lang=en Unfortunately gaming on PC is not regulated. If ED sells a game that doesn't work on my system despite my PC meets the system requirements there is nothing I can do. From now on I won't buy a DCS game ever unless I am completely sure it runs on my system. No more free money for them, when the only thing I get is frustrations and tons of tweaking. I am done with this story, you can make up the rest.

No, it's not the console generation affecting me. I can run Flight, FSX, FALCON, IL2 CLOD, Rise of Flight, Wings of Prey. Most of them almost maxed out @ 1980x1080, except FSX which I have to tweak a bit and all of them running in average at 30-40 fps. DCS is the only one I can not properly run.

Congratulations for your new hardware. :thumbup: That's proof DCS can't properly be played on an average computer.

So?. I was referring to the level of detail you can see in relatively new games like Flight or world of Planes compared to DCS. The level of detail of towns/cities in DCS is very low compared to other recent sims. So please don't tell me, it's because of how accurate the flight model in DCS is. If a top line hardware is not needed. Why can't I run DCS properly with a Quad Core @2.50, 4GB, ATI 5770 1GB???. DCS flight model is at the same level as CLOD or any recent sim. Flight model is not what's affecting that low performance. The only Fact here is that DCS has to improve for the average gamer, Obviously you work for them so there is no way you will agree with me. You can stick on your arguments but eventually sales are the most important factor and most of the people don't have a high end computer. I have no idea how much ED sells but I can't believe it can be so much because clearly this sim can't be played on an average computer, unless someone could possibly enjoy playing it at 20 frames. Selling for just a few is not very wise.

Hmmm disagree. It's all about the people who designed the engine and when they did it. See games like Flight, World of Planes, they are not as complex in terms of flight procedures as DCS is but AI( not in flight) and flight model in those two sims is as good as in DCS and still these two games take advantage of multicore cpu and other things that make the hardware requirements less demanding keeping a great performance and incredible graphics. If the same amount of detail was in DCS the "computer would simply stop". Another example is Cliffs of Dover. It requires a powerful rig get the best of it, but despite it I am able to play Cliff of Dover at med settings with average frame rate of 40 in most of the cases. Tried to fly near any town with just a few building in DCS and the computer struggles. So the problem here is how the ED guys designed the engine in the first place. Everything is about code and how the engine is designed.

So, you are showing us the target hardware we need to run DCS flawlessly. One thing I have noticed. That bloom effect I haven't been able to activate it in my DCS World installation. Changed HDR but nothing happened and there is no bloom option. One thing ED should do is show on the recommended hardware requirements that to be able to run DCS we need at least an i5 2500k and I wouldn't be here complaining. See... It doesn't say you need more than 3 GHz. When it's so important.

Taken from the DCS website... What I have: - Quad Core 2 @2.50 - 4GB RAM - ATI 5770 1GB RECOMMENDED SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS Meaning that anyone who meets these recommended system requirements should be able to run the game properly which IS NOT the case. They are lucky because we users are unprotected. They post these hardware requirements when they are not true at all. The only thing I am gonna do for now on is not to buy it and people who have mid range computers should do the same thing. And about you, Do you actually feel some pleasure sneaking on my profile to check out how many times I have complained?. WOW I am not in my best moment but definitely your life must be really boring to waste your time doing that.

Didn't remember the proper English word. I was guessing it'd be that.

Yes, I do understand all of that. But I have tried making a mission with no AI, No planes in the air, no trees(yes to heard it right), changed affinity to 4, 3, 2 Cores!!, a flat dead landscape. No change in the framerate. Removed most of the buildings(low settings) and when flying very low near any town, there is performance problems even when there are no buildings at all!!. It's not just what you mention, there is something else in the code that is making the computer struggle almost all the time.

4 Cores running @2.50 and a ATI 5770 is below a minimum???!!. Seriously. Seriously!! My CPU is half as powerful as the i5 2500k. Ok it's not high end. But the graphical quality of DCS is not that high after all. The game is running using "brute force" and anyone with some knowledge should be able to see it.

Ok, but it wont help to increase sales unless you people fix performance. See what's on the website... That comment you made was in reference to me?.

Do you see any demo on their website?.

What?! Are you asking that to me?

No, that's not true. I can play most of the games. And Lockon is one of the few I can not. Graphically speaking, I don't think the REAL specs requirements of DCS are according with the quality you get. Yes it has deep flight sytems, but I don't think the poor performance has any thing to do with that I have run the game from low to high, disabled services, background apps, updated drivers, any thing that you could think might be slowing down my PC. Nothing worked. Seems somehow ED has been unable to improve performance, I guess it'd take too much time or maybe the tweaks required would have required to start the whole engine from scratch??. Whatever is going on under the hood is giving people even with powerful systems low framerates. That's undeniable. I have only two choices, not buy the next DCS that comes out or upgrade my PC and it's clear the second option wont' be possible any time soon. This is simply fighting against a wall. Then they complain for piracy, my god.

You have no clue what you are talking about.

The problem with these forums is. We buy the product but we are not allowed to complained. It seems no matter what hardware you have, unless you get a 4Ghz CPU there is no way to get decent performance.

For what's worth wasting my time and energy with you. I have bought Lock on, Flaming Cliffs, Black Shark and DCS A-10C. During that time I have had different PCs and I have always had performance problems and never really been able to enjoy the game maxed out. I think I am not asking anything hard to understand considering that graphics are not that good for the hardware requirements and I am able to run most of the games very decently. By the way. These comments you just made were really, really nasty and rude.

You are very dishonest.

Believe me I have already tried all of that. It's not the drivers or background apps or services because I have even shut down almost any thing including desktop themes. When the game is running I have +1 GB free and the game itself occupies 1.5GB on ram, so that's not the problem. Trackir is using the 3 core and with my Quad Core 2 TrackIR only uses less than 25% of it. Besides, the problem here is that the DCS engine is not optimized. There is no way there can barely be a difference in performance with settings in low to med, high settings are possible if you are the one happy playing it at 20 frames on runway. Also, If you are saying you drop a CBU and it can bring your computer to a halt then, there is no way the DCS engine is optimized. I think I'll have to wait until I have some money to upgrade my PC. I guess developers think we all have money to spend in upgrades. Lucky they must be.

I have set it to application preference. I am aware that forcing antialiasing or anisotropic can in some cases decrease performance. That was one of the things I checked.

RAM is just fine. I checked and DCS doesn't take more than 1.5-1.7 of ram even less. CPU is the bottle neck, but the problem in part is in the DCS engine itself. There is no way I can get so low fps even at low settings when the whole map looks like a desert. Sorry if I give you bad news.

DCS engine is as old as my hardware. They are running it using "brute force". I don't think the CPU and GPU requirements are according to the eye candy of DCS. I guess until I have enough money to upgrade, I am out. To be honest, since the first time I bought Lockon, I have never fully enjoyed any DCS or previous versions, It's a complete struggle every time I buy a new version and give it a new chance to find bad performance most of the time, flying over any town brings the computer to its knees. When I have enough money to upgrade my hardware, performance will be horrible again. There is no way I can keep up. Just be clear I love DCS but it's simply I can't continue buying it when most of the time I end up uninstalling it because I can't properly run the sim and the extra money on hardware doesn't really pay off for the eye candy.

I just downloaded DCS World hoping to get better performance than on FC and DCS A-10. Unfortunately it seems nothing has changed. I tried changing graphics settings from low to high, keeping textures always high and strangely I get similar performance no matter the settings. As in previous versions flying over any town or city is mission impossible getting less than 20 fps when I leave towns no more than 30. I know that DCS series are hardcore simulation but with my rig I was expecting at least 40 fps in medium settings. I have latest drivers and I know my system is not the problem. That's for sure. Having said that, I don't think I'll buy the next coming addon or any other DCS addon. I really love the DCS series but I think overall performance is horrible and doesn't allow me to have a good simulation experience. I haven't been able to completely enjoy any of the DCS sims because having any kind of gameplay is almost impossible and after learning the flight systems of the A-10 I just quit playing it because of that. I guess we pay for a software and that's all, if it doesn't work just shut my mouth up or upgrade computer. For people like me having to upgrade my PC is just a luxury. If I just could enjoy the sims I love without having to ruin my precarious economy I'll appreciate it. My Computer Specs: - Quad Core 2 @2.50 - 4 GB RAM - ATI 5770 1 GB

If DCS P-51D is as realistic as DCS A-10 I think I'll definitely buy it. I just wonder if they'll add new WWII AI planes to have decent dogfights.

I had no problem before the patch using same graphics details. The stutter is not decreasing my framerate it only freezes the game for one second and it only happens when I increase the tree distance higher than 7000 m. I have enough ram so it can't be the problem. Anyway the most taxing settings are scenes and visibility range and with 4X AA I only see a reduction of 4 frames on my system and no stuttering when they are activated. Shadows, water or MFD frame no noticeable hit in the framerate. So there has to be something wrong with the tree distance setting.