topdog

If you've messed with export.lua to add some control inputs from other devices / switches / etc., as commands then these don't get recorded into the track as regular input and it will cause the track to do some strange things. Might not be what happened here, but I figured if we want a shopping list of do's and don'ts to try and get a good track then we should include it :)

Yes, fisheye is probably the wrong term (but I suspected it'd be the most common term used to quickly describe it) and FOV probably has a part to play in it. Although it mostly concerns another product (softTH) than eyefinity, it may still give you some inspiration for some settings to tweak from this thread: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=51648

Might you be experiencing this: http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1501214 They refer to an app called Widescreen Fixer that could be used, but it sounds like that can produce some undesired artifacts of its own. More discussion: http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=173991 I don't have this setup myself by the way; this was just some quick picks from a google on 'eyefinity fisheye'

Edit: nm :)

I've checked there from time to time but never saw it at amazon.co.uk (last time I checked was about 24 hours ago!), I did notice that thrustmaster refers to them as a reseller for the UK but that's just general info nonsense and not specific to the product. I was guessing it may have appeared at other amazon.location sites since the stocks aren't always the same. Were your pre-orders cancelled? You should still have a link to the product page if it hasn't been.

You can even find it on amazon.co.uk?

The individual mission files can be examined in the mission editor to see what the conditions for success are. It's not exactly intuitive, but there's a button in the editor for objectives and they're usually associated with a series of goals and flags that when set, give a certain point value. It may be enough to just check those, or post a question to the campaign/mission author's thread. You could also post a track of the completed mission (as you see it), and it may be something that we can load up and check to see if something was missed or it should be complete. Your campaign status and progress is stored in your pilot's log book files, it is possible to edit this, but I would consider the other options first, and editing the file may mess things up so if you go looking for information on where to find and edit this file (use the forum search feature as there are topics on this), make a backup of it first.

Did he go back and land at the FARP at the end? If it continues to give trouble you may be able to post a link to the track file (or just add it to the post if it's not too big) so it can be looked at. Returning back to the base at the end looks to be set as a trigger for this mission (you can take a look at each one in the mission editor in the game to confirm, but I'd avoid doing that unless absolutely necessary since it's quite a spoiler).

No hostility intended, my opening there isn't an attack on Eddie, just trying to understand where he's coming from with his comments as I think they're speculative - but I could be wrong, I just assume he's a for-free tester rather than someone who would be accountable for saying those things. I don't think I've said anything that's uncalled for, but I do apologise if they were seen that way. My comments with respect to BlackShark are simply that 1.0.2 replaced some 9.0 compatible code with 9.0c compatible code and doesn't offer a backwards compatibility fallback, ergo, it's standing proof/evidence that its more than eye candy. For NVGs to work you NEED a DX9.0c compatible card and lower won't do without a hack, because there's no supporting code to allow it to work in this fallback state. So as a game it appears to 'run' (startup, fly around, etc.) but I don't consider a feature necessary to the gameplay (even if only at certain times, such as at night,) that does not work at all to be an example of backwards compatibility. You've been lucky with your game selections I think, or just had modern enough hardware not to really notice. It's different on the fringe.

Do you believe that this is just how DX works, or do you believe this was a decision made by the developers of those games who built in specific fallbacks to make sure everything in their game still worked properly in DX9 but could take advantage of DX10/11 stuff? Reason I ask is because the posted DCS A10 FAQ still states that system specs are still TBD, and I don't recall seeing something stated by ED on the matter to say otherwise (and I'm making an unquantified assumption that you aren't on ED's payroll or official spokesperson). So what assurances can you give that it will not require above DX9 to work properly (and by 9, let's assume for sake of argument we mean 9.0c since DCS:BS 1.0.2 itself doesn't work properly with vanilla 9.0)? So for now and until corrected otherwise, I stand by earlier statements that we have to wait and see what ED come up with and/or announce on the matter, and right now it looks like they're still evaluating.

All the files it unzips into that havoc folder just need to be moved to the C:\Program Files\Eagle Dynamics\Ka-50\Missions\Campaigns\bs\en (or equivalent on your system) folder. C:\Program Files\Eagle Dynamics\Ka-50\Missions\Campaigns\bs\en>dir ato.* Volume in drive C is bringit Volume Serial Number is C8EE-2179 Directory of C:\Program Files\Eagle Dynamics\Ka-50\Missions\Campaigns\bs\en 09/12/2009 10:35 PM 2,150,260 ATO.S1.1 Arrival.miz 09/12/2009 10:32 PM 2,208,671 ATO.S1.2 Evaluation.miz 09/12/2009 10:31 PM 1,195,106 ATO.S1.3 Border Escort.miz 09/12/2009 10:29 PM 878,509 ATO.S2.1 FARP Attack.miz 09/12/2009 10:28 PM 1,794,395 ATO.S2.2 Breaktrough.miz 09/12/2009 10:26 PM 1,669,725 ATO.S2.3 Going In!.miz 09/12/2009 10:25 PM 1,349,169 ATO.S3.1 Moving Deeper In.miz 08/12/2009 09:05 PM 1,459,656 ATO.S3.2 Fight Back.miz 09/12/2009 10:22 PM 2,175,484 ATO.S3.3 CSAR.miz 09/12/2009 10:18 PM 829,815 ATO.S4.1 Secret Mission.miz 09/12/2009 10:16 PM 1,137,717 ATO.S4.2 Anti Arty.miz 09/12/2009 09:26 PM 1,998,316 ATO.S4.3 Specnaz Rescue.miz 09/12/2009 09:52 PM 529,434 ATO.S5.1 Supplies Cut Off.miz 09/12/2009 09:48 PM 2,243,957 ATO.S5.2 Command Post Attack.miz 09/12/2009 10:19 PM 1,493,833 ATO.S5.3 Battle for Batumi.miz 15 File(s) 23,114,047 bytes 0 Dir(s) 12,793,454,592 bytes free C:\Program Files\Eagle Dynamics\Ka-50\Missions\Campaigns\bs\en>dir *havoc* Volume in drive C is bringit Volume Serial Number is C8EE-2179 Directory of C:\Program Files\Eagle Dynamics\Ka-50\Missions\Campaigns\bs\en 09/12/2009 11:37 PM 10,408 Georgian Havoc v1.0.cmp 09/12/2009 11:25 PM 35,510 Georgian Havoc.jpg 2 File(s) 45,918 bytes 0 Dir(s) 12,793,454,592 bytes free C:\Program Files\Eagle Dynamics\Ka-50\Missions\Campaigns\bs\en> It seems to show up and work fine on my install. If yours doesn't work, run the same commands I did and show the results (making sure we can see where the command was run from too).

Disc in the drive isn't required. Looks somewhat similar to the experience I am getting with multiplayer (the error code being of the access violation / uncaught exception varieties sporadically during play) but haven't tried this campaign since the patch. This happens even with the first mission of the campaign? Which one specifically too, Georgian Oil War, Oil War - Chapter 1, etc.?

The square-ish plate is said to be removable leaving you with a cylindrical device that can be more easily mounted cockpit style to the middle of your legs.

These 2 files are from my own "C:\Program Files\Eagle Dynamics\Ka-50\Missions\Campaigns\bs\en" location, after I made the changes to them as described above. Unzip them to the same path (just adjust if your blackshark install location is elsewhere). It should overwrite at least one file if not both. These changes were made to this download specifically: http://files.lockon.ru/ru/156/ I hope that does the trick. republic_mission02_englishname.zip

Both the following line in the .cmp file and the filename you see on disk have to be the same: file = "EnRes02 TankAttack.miz", I think this is necessary for English installations of BlackShark else it's getting confused in the game by trying to selectively converting cyrillic to english. I had to do both that change, and change the filename on disk from EnRes02 TankAttaßk.miz to EnRes02 TankAttack.miz and then it was OK. If they do both look OK, then erase and re-type the name in the .cmp file as the software being used may be displaying it wrong too.

I haven't yet heard of it, but I don't doubt it'll come unless MS get twitchy about using numbers and just call it a different name. Sometimes they do, and then you get things like 'XP' and 'Vista' before the twitchiness wears off again :)

Avoiding VirtualStore issues is done by simply installing to a location that you as a regular (non-admin) user have full control of. This can be an area outside of the Program Files directory, or if you want to use that one, then its best you create the folder for the game yourself in advance of performing the install to that location, and grant yourself full control and owner permissions. Setting Full Control for a specific user, and changing the Owner, is done under 2 different dialogs of the Security subpages of a folder's properties, you really need to do both for a hassle-free life whilst still retaining your usual OS security preferences.

Depends what the software asks for, and requires. If it requires feature 'X' and it's not available, then it's up to the software (not DX) to choose whether to provide some fallback capacity or not, it won't happen for you. Sometimes these missing features just get supressed and the software will carry on, albeit with some likely anomaly or glitch. This was evidenced recently in BS1.0.2 upgrading some of its code from being DirectX9.0 compatible, to DirectX9.0c, without a fall-back for an older card that isn't supporting all of its features. Until we're told (or find out) just what use of DX11 is going to be taken advantage of -and/or- required, it's just speculation for now though either way. Edit: I guess I should state, that the backwards compatibility that DX does (mostly) provide, and without ISV developer interventions, is that using DX11 and/or a card with these features, will still be able to play a DX9 game, because the DX9 interfaces will still be present and provided when the game asks for them. There was just a slight 'oops' in this area when Vista came out, and its own DX10 didn't have a FULL DX9.0c set of interfaces and needed patching. But still, that's the direction the backwards compatibility is provided in from MS/DX itself, it's not to let cards that are DX9 compatible 'work' with DX11 feature sets and software. That's entirely up to the ISV developer as mentioned, ED in this case.

You might want to close Opera before the next benchmark and screenshots too... :music_whistling:

Pilot #1: We miss one? Pilot #2: Didn't think so, let's swing back take a look. Pilot #1: Crap, we missed one.. I'm out, how about you? Pilot #2: Same here.. guess this one gets a reprieve.. heading back. Pilot #1: Last one to land is a cucumber.

Ok.. digression time.. though for the record I didn't bring OpenGL into this discussion :p I used to be a GL fanboy. Actually, I still adore the core design it delivered in the simple application of light and colour to objects down in the basics, it just screams genius when it begins to sink in how it all works when you're learning it. However, I feel in the availability and consumerism sense, it's fallen behind DirectX (as you could expect with MS force-feeding it constantly), so it doesn't get as much love from the driver writers, and the support for extensions can be very hit and miss whereas you tend to get a more rounded deal from attaining a level of DX compatibility. There's still many projects where I'd choose GL - science/research and business purposes it's ideal for, education too, just not in games and it's been that way for me since Quake3 Arena, after this is no longer had the edge (or that may have had more to do with the likes of Carmack receding from the scene to make mobile games and spaceships). DX now brings a heck of a lot to the table, and makes them accessible without having to be the best of the best gurus of 3D. The only thing that still cheeses me off is its dependency on C++, I'd like to see it properly come of age in the 'managed' code languages instead of the hacks for them that are produced. I'm sure that given enough time and effort, both APIs are capable of truly awe-inspiring results, but DX delivers more accessible 'out of the box' stuff that GL makes you work real hard for - at least for the time being, and all in my humble opinion. If anyone feels they could show me advances in OpenGL they think would blow me away, I'd gladly welcome them in my private message inbox; perhaps I'm just behind the times on the GL front?

Been a couple months since you last posted so unsure if you're still interested in possible solutions to your NVG problem under 1.0.2 still, but if the cause of the issue is your graphics card not supporting PixelShader 3.0 (DirectX 9.0c feature) and only goes up to PixelShader 2.0 (DirectX 9.0) then I may have something for you to try. Install 1.0.2 as normal, and then in your game's \Bazar\Effects\PostMotionEffects\NightVisionGoogle folder unzip the files I attached to this post: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=959451&postcount=27 I haven't had a confirmed test result yet against a card that doesn't support PS 3.0 because mine does, but I think from the feedback my changes were giving me when I was trying to reproduce and then fix this problem mean I've successfully downgraded the shader's code from 3.0 to 2.0 which will bring the NVG back to life on some older cards. The shader's code upgrading to 3.0 in the BS 1.0.2 patch was a very specific change that happened and seems to be affecting a few people. If that works for you, you should also note that if you're interested in DCS:A-10C then it is having DX11 features put in (as recently posted to its forum), and you'd need to upgrade before that will work as intended.

For anaglyphic filtering yes, but this isn't what I'm interested in as I mentioned - wouldn't consider it at all for home movies/games in fact. I don't even want to use polarised glasses, and in reviews these have suffered from head movements, angles, distance from the screen, though that may also be an individual thing. They don't compare to 3D glasses in theatres, these tend to do better. 3D without glasses I've actually yet to see for myself, but it seems to be important to position (and angle) yourself to be within specific 'zones' targetted by the 3D projectors, and as such, may not be all that compatible with head track motion for the near future.

Doesn't matter, if it's not looking likely in my lifetime there's always cryo! :D

Yep, and with that tip (to use Z or X) to fix a crazy rudder situation, I'd forget from there that Reset Trim even exists (I'm told it doesn't in the real heli anyway), and you'll be able to avoid the violent kickbacks it gives. Resetting Trim isn't even that useful on the ground, which is where I expect it gets its most use upon a touchdown.