Toxe

Ich kann auch nur Bittorrent empfehlen, und das hat dann auch noch den Vorteil daß man sich sicher sein kann, die Datei korrekt empfangen zu haben, da Bittorrent intern schon Prüfsummen berechnet und die Daten prüft.

Ich denke schon daß sie konkret an irgendetwas arbeiten, aber ich könnte mir vorstellen daß sie diese Arbeiten in den letzten Wochen und Monaten etwas reduziert haben, um erstmal DCS World auf den rechten Weg zu bringen und eine gute Umgebung zu schaffen, um besser mit ihren Partnern zusammenzuarbeiten, die mit der Entwicklung neuer Flugzeuge begonnen haben. Und das wäre in meinen Augen auch durchaus clever. Wenn sie mit World ein gutes und stabiles Fundament schaffen, können sie selbst und andere besser darauf aufbauen, ohne ständig irgendwas über den Haufen zu werfen oder kaputtzumachen. Das ist dann vielleicht auch der Grund, weswegen es in letzter Zeit so wenig Fortschrittsberichte gab: Weil halt auch einfach gar nicht so viel sehenswertes passiert ist und die Community nur ausflippen würde wenn dies irgendwie bekannt würde. Ist aber auch nur eine Theorie.

Ist zwar ziemlich abgespeckt, macht aber trotzdem Spaß die Su-25T zu fliegen. Finde ich zumindest. :) Immerhin gibt es ein dezentes 6DOF Cockpit, wenn auch lange nicht so schön wie in den "echten" DCS Modulen.

Oh sweet, I have been waiting for an Elite successor for a long time. Played the original with my brother on his Atari ST. Now let's hope that David Braben will make the space flight more similar to the original Elite and not like Elite 2, because that totally sucked.

Two F-15E's?

Well, FPS is highly subjective. Some people want it to be as high as possible while others are contempt with lower FPS. And this is usually when the fighting starts and people say "you don't need more than X" or "the human eye can't perceive more than Y" and so on. :) My personal opinion: In general I try to get at least 30 FPS, and if possible 60 FPS (which is the frequency of most monitors nowadays). Excellent FPS would be more than 60 FPS all of the time, because then I can enable VSync. As for your graphics card: If you plan on flying FSX / Prepar3D or X-Plane as well then I highly suggest buying a graphics card with at least 2 GB of RAM, 3 GB would be even better. If not and you want to fly mostly DCS then the general rule of thumb is: The faster your CPU the better. Your graphics card doesn't impact FPS that much. You can read more about FPS in DCS in this thread: Comparable FPS results In the first two posts on that page you can see how my FPS increased when I switched my graphics card and when I OC'ed my CPU a bit more. The faster CPU gave the biggest increase.

I think that the director circle in the Su-25T is quite an elegant solution. Anyways, I don't see where all this fighting here is coming from. You can fly perfectly fine without an FPM, yet still it has its moments where it's very usefull.

It's back up again.

I think the cheaper version only covers a smaller part of the world, but I don't know the exact details. Yeah that's true. A lot of the default airports are just runways with one or two ugly buildings slapped next to them. But there is a ton of free airports, built by the community. BTW, a nice site to keep up with X-Plane scenery and airplane developement, releases and reviews is: http://xsimreviews.com/ And while we are on the top of airports, this one looks pretty nice. :) http://xsimreviews.com/2012/11/03/xsimreviews-efhf-helsinki-malmi-truscenery/

Maybe their domain registration expired or something like that.

I thought that bouncy bouncy Yoda fight was kind of silly and more of a facepalm moment.

Personally I like the flight model in X-Plane way better than in FSX. Both have their strength and weaknesses, but I would go for X-Plane. Some of the reasons for that: X-Plane, like DCS, is in active and quite open development, with developers who talk with their customers. FSX on the other hand, as a plattform, is dead and dated. Prepar3D looks promising but only the future will tell. There is a lot of momentum going with 3rd party development for X-Plane at the moment, which I personally find quite exciting. That is just a short answer, a real comparison would be quite long. Neither FSX nor X-Plane are perfect, in the end it's all personal preference and on what planes or sceneries are available on what platform.

While we are on the subject of Star Wars going down the drain... Angry Birds Star Wars ^^^ WTF?! :no_sad:

The startup procedure is in the manual, simply start there and look for the Leading Edge video.

So very true.

Who already butchered Star Trek? No thanks. :mad: My vote goes to Joss Whedon. http://entertainment.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3219637&cid=41822635 But that will probably never happen.

Well it's pretty hard to get worse then Episode 1-3, so maybe there is still a bit of hope.

And I suppose Microsoft should give Windows 8 away for free, to everyone who bought a Windows before? After all it's just a new coat of paint for the same operating system they sell since Windows 95, right?

Epic! :megalol:

Take a look at this: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1448485&postcount=46 Not a clicky cockpit but at least 6DOF. Oh and don't copy the whole file, just the line(s) relevant to the Su-25T.

A DCS: Su-25T (or more modern version) would be great.

Well, it's Log!

Because no other plane can fly so elegant through the terrain?

Personally I don't care much about the posted news, so I won't comment on it. But on a side note it would be a win if the power consumption of certain hardware would be reduced. Let's face it: CPUs and GPUs are fast enough for most people and applications nowadays, it would be nice if hardware developers could concentrate on reducing power consumption for a change.

Wow, those pictures are beautiful!