ALDEGA

Let's not forget ED had a military contract to create an A-10C simulator, which could mean some work is already done ;)

Most likely the latter, same as with IL2:FB+. The former implies infinite possibilities ;)

The same is true for Windows, but Windows Vista still contains a lot of really old code and some really old bugs ;) Obviously, it's not realistic to redo all the code at once (even a company like Microsoft can't dream of this). Most of the new code is (most likely) present in new components.

Or at the top of this page.

The movies were engineered to impress. They do not show raw gameplay footage.

Hmm, not sure what you mean by "DCS core" (sounds like a marketing gimmick). I'm pretty certain the DCS executable and libraries contain code from way back (down to Flanker 2.x) ... :D Back on topic, ED does seem to have the ability now to make (relatively) frequent releases which introduce a new, detailed flyable at a time, as they can now focus on implementing a flyable, instead of having to develop supporting components (like AFM, clickable cockpit...). Time will tell how it works out.

No need to panic, it seems to be working fine. We should migrate some more users from this forum though ;)

I agree about ED finally "getting rid" of UBI with DCS. Remember that UBI would only allow ED to make up to 2 add-ons for LockOn. After that it would be over, or they'd have to renegotiate with UBI...

When you're flying low (with the helo's) then you can't see very far, so the detail can be increased up close and the viewdistance of objects can be decreased. Moreover, it wouldn't be ... normal ... that we got the same terrain in 2008 (??) as we got in 2003 ... Surely some evolution must be possible. Not all the performance problems are related to insufficient hardware resources ...

And we all know what happens to treaties in times of war... (in general) Btw, you don't really care about this, do you?

Personally, I don't want them to spend much time on a demo. Development of the product itself is taking long enough. I'll happily buy BS without a demo. Some reviews from trusted sites would be good though.

Lol, knowing the people in these forums ... I would be surprised if they said that!

If they had to comment on all the speculation in these forums ...

I'm still betting on a 2008 release ...

You have no proof this is real!!! ED need documentation and real pictures... ;)

Apparently the exhibition is in two weeks so we may not have to guess much longer. ;)

This is public information. Nothing wrong with that.

What does this have to do with the post which I replied to?

It may be dull, but the clouds are quite good ... (you may need to crank up the graphics settings and change the weather to "ferocious" :D )

A rolling pencil!

Ahem, MSFS 2004+?

Same as in Operation Flashpoint. Surely you must have played it ;)

Interesting point which could be implemented in a (dynamic) campaign system. Right now, you only have failures if you specifically configure them in the mission.

I'd like to have less generic terrain objects. For instance, all the airports look exactly the same (except for the layout of course).

So true. An Su-25T model has many more polygons than the entire visible terrain. This is ok when you're flying at a certain altitude, but it's painfully visible at lower altitudes ... especially helo-altitude :D Supposedly, the terrain mesh resolution has been increased, but I haven't seen any pictures to show this.