Charly314159

For me at least ditching VR = ditching DCS.

Can someone from ED acknowledge all the interesting remarks made in the past few pages? (Probably one of the best: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4384188&postcount=400) Just to sum up simplistically: we are not interested in buying new modules on a dying core.

That's how it should be. But I am afraid that in the current situation a module is mainly funding the next early alpha module and nothing never gets finished not even speaking about core update...

I don't think so. That's what we have been witnessing for the past years : more on more early access less and less polish ( remember the f16 launch) and more and more broken core code that's discouraging new users to join and current user to invest or recommend DCS. This is a dangerous spiral

Totally agree

For sure I will be extremely patient before I buy anything DCS related again.

They have said a lot of things about VR (remember the 50% boost?) but things are getting worse more and more rapidly. Instead of saying things maybe it is time to take action. May I remind you that they said they were working on vulkan more than 2 years ago, where are we now? (Not that I am saying that it would solve everything)

Yes that's a good thing. If only it could be true for other issues... Like VR performance that have been unacceptable for nearly 6 months..

Not systematically, not with proper internal testing and not when you have some control over your code...

What would be "well done" is to have updates which are not constantly breaking things that were previously working...

The current stable version is the bugged OB we had one month ago. Are you going to argue that the it includes stable version of the bugs?

As somebody said on an other topic we should now call it "Stable Open Beta" because it is at least as borked as the real Beta but with stable bugs ;)

Is there VR performance optimisation in this build?

Maybe ED should start announcing performance dumps in the patch notes as well ;) Or is it implicit?

Agreed. That's what happens when a company incomes are so dependent on the release of early access products.

+1

Maybe we could ask a refund for all the purchased modules that we cannot use/enjoy anymore? ;-)

+1 ED has totally lost control over their code because they are focused on releasing paid modules to keep money flowing. I am pretty sure that performance improvement they are promising are based on community mods being integrated in the game (central only msaa from be shader mod for example). For me since the introduction 2.5.6 DCS is looking worse than before in VR (0.9 pd no msaa, pd1.3 msaa*2 on 2.5.5) and has never ran so poorly. I am really worried about it's future...

+1 even for non ED modules. ED has totally lost control over their code because they are focused on releasing paid modules to keep money flowing. I am pretty sure that performance improvement they are promising are based on community mods being integrated in the game (central only msaa from be shader mod for example). For me since 2.5.6 DCS has never looked so bad in VR (0.9 pd no msaa) and has never run so poorly. And I am really worried about it's future...

Lol that's not the mod that really needs to be updated that's this ******* Sim core so users don't need to be constantly modding it to have it run decently...

We are still far from 2.5.5 level of performance... we might never get back to it

I can't find the fix in the thread, do you have a link?

:book: No shadows? OK saw your settings . from my point of view shadows even at low settings are essential for immersion...

Nice to hear, so maybe in 3-4 months we will be back at the level of performance we had at the beginning of the year....

I have made that decision as well. I have never been complaining for the 3 years that I played DCS but since the f16 release and this 2.5.6 things have taken a terrible direction. DCS now looks like a ponzi scheme feeding on future promises that might never get correctly delivered. Buying EA means accepting that system.