Jump to content

EDGE. At What Cost?


nhowell01

Recommended Posts

As the community eagerly awaits the release of EDGE, it has become apparent that many things in DCS World and its associated modules have fallen into a state of disrepair and neglect. Bugs from the AI, ATC, and all other modules have for the most part been ignored and still remain unfixed. Obvious game changing and breaking bugs across many facets of the sim.

(The fact that AI vehicles are unable to even cross bridges at this point is a big one)

(Want to record your flights in the logbook? Good luck).

 

At any time whenever the community brings these issues up, the response is always more or less the same, the developers have no time to fix them because they are working on EDGE.

I assume we all want EDGE and are looking forward to what it can provide, but at what cost to the current and future state of the series?

Will the release of EDGE fix these problems? When will EDGE be released anyway? Of course we will not get a response to these types of questions as for whatever reason ED feels that communicating to its customers is not an effective customer service strategy.

The fact that the community has been waiting in the dark for months and months regarding getting the game fixed is certainly frustrating. Knowing that many obvious annoying bugs in the sim will not be fixed at least until EDGE is released or even until some point after makes the situation worse.

 

It has been stated that we should not expect any bug fixes or repairs to the game until EDGE gets released. EDGE is not going to be released until closer to the end of the year if not later.

Is it time to just shelve DCS until EDGE comes out? Does any one else feel alienated by the current process?


Edited by nhowell01
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As someone in the software industry, trust me when I'm saying that fixing bugs will become easier once the engine overhaul is complete: DCS 2.0.0 seems to have many more changes as well and not just improved graphics engine.

 

There are huge amounts of functionality in a simulation engine as complex as DCS and considering how long it has been used and how much functionality has been added since beginning I would be surprised if the amount of bugs wasn't reduced by that overhaul alone.

 

In the meantime it may seem long wait and disheartening to see bugs accumulate, but instead of "putting out fires" constantly it's sometimes worth it to just use new method when possible instead of constantly repairing old one.

"I would have written a shorter post, but I did not have the time."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right now I have a i7 3930k and run around 25 fps on high settings with low gpu usage. I think AI vehicles can wait, I can't even have AI vehicles in a combat scenario before my frames tank.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Intel i7 3930K @ 4.7Ghz | 980ti | 32gb Ram | Windows 10 64 bit | 840 Pro SSD

Thrustmaster Warthog | VKB Gunfighter Pro | Slaw Device RX Viper | Acer Predator X34

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't played DCS for ages, mostly because I think nothing's really happening to the core gameplay. Sure, there have been many exciting aircraft to try out, but I am only flying them in the same dull gameplay environment as before. Exciting things that used to come regularly have stagnated and the excuse is EDGE. It's a good excuse, but until then, I have no joy in playing DCS.

Nice plane on that gun...

OS764 P930@4 MBUD3R M6GB G5870 SSDX25 CAntec1200 HTMHW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right now I have a i7 3930k and run around 25 fps on high settings with low gpu usage. I think AI vehicles can wait, I can't even have AI vehicles in a combat scenario before my frames tank.

 

That is true. It's hard to fix AI or other things when there's not enough CPU resources to run them correctly.. And in the meanwhile GPU is under utilized..

"I would have written a shorter post, but I did not have the time."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hard to deliver ?

 

third party beta testers are already testing as we speak, imo I would say ED are on track.

 

With "hard to deliver" i mean that the thousands of bugs that have been argued dead with "wait for EDGE" will most definetely not be fixed.

 

So yes, it will be extremly hard to deliver all that. I dont doubt DCS will be pretty. The rest however is nothing but speculation.

 

 

EDIT: Exactly what LostOblivion said.


Edited by ericoh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the sim community growing and more of us willing to spend money to use these products and third parties contributing i feel there is a real possibility of the overall quality of the simulation just getting better ...

 

but i'm a glass half full kinda guy ... so we shall see ! :D

 

lets stay optimistic and see what EDGE brings !

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given that War Thunder, for the brief 5 minutes I tried it, and Rise of Flight seemed work well on my PC that is at least 5 years old in terms of tech (AMD Phenom X4 955 BE + ATI 5870 1GB), and by that I mean good framerates, that's what I would like from Edge.

 

Bug fixing can come later. At the moment I find it difficult at times playing with the UH-1H module with about 9-15 fps at some FARPS/airports...

 

Whether that is what EDGE will give me I don't know, and I err on the side of "it won't", but hopefully it will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry nhowell01, but that's a bit overdramatic. While it is no fun to wait, and bugs are frustrating, a DCS major platform update and new graphic engine is a huge deal for a small team.

 

If the team just fixed other stuff, but not planned for bigger future changes, then they'd probably be even more complaints the other way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DCS world has come out 3years+, and its developers won't be survive at markets if they stick with the old engine, even some modules can't save them. So EDGE is quite nessesary to boost the sales of their modules.

 

Dunno if the EDGE contains other new theater map except the Nevada?

I'm kind of tired of the current black sea area, really expect a terrain of middle-east, covering Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Syria or even Israel and Palestine. Imagine you flying A-10C or F-18 to bombard those ground targets on the map...quite immersive

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also think that new game engine is a priority. Bugs are annoying, but I think they can wait. It is better to start with new engine and then correct bugs, than correcting them before and after new engine. Regardless of that a lot of them are not game engine related.

 

I assume that EDGE takes enormous amount of resources, and if done slowly it will be obsolete when released. I think that a lot of users really struggle with old engine and fps. It is not that hard for long time DCS user to justify hardware upgrade costs required with current engine, but that probably chased away a lot of new users.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right now I have a i7 3930k and run around 25 fps on high settings with low gpu usage. I think AI vehicles can wait, I can't even have AI vehicles in a combat scenario before my frames tank.

 

God knows what the difference is...

 

I have 4770K @4.5GHz

16GB RAM @2000MHz

SDD samsung 840 pro

770OC 4GB (clocked higher again cant remember what to)

 

get >60 FPS generally, CPU is not that much better so I don't really understand the FPS difference.

 

As for poor performance on aging machines, as I see a lot on this forum...

 

With Moores Law and all you can't expect good frames from a 5 year old machine on a simulator that is still in dev in 2014, despite its aging core engine. Not even going to get into the comparison in performance between DCS and War Thunder.... :doh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let EDGE comes first, the technical bugs I inured but of course they are also a priority for repair.

 

I sincerely hope that with EDGE first gone horribly ugly mountains with jagged edges, triangles, at all altitudes, ugly houses and buildings that are currently being wasted GPU resources. I expect nice cosmetic changes (this sim deserve it), but not to the detriment of performances. It is very disappointing when you look in the cockpit nicely done and then the view from the cockpit - I expect to saw a Popeye and Olive walk around my plane (no offense). I expect much better graphical environment and a big jump in performances. Without this EDGE is a fiasco, for me.

 

After this, we can start the elimination of technical issues (bugs) and lift the simulator to the next level.

 

I eagerly awaiting the EDGE, I'm relying on ED developers.


Edited by Falcon_S
Quote

Немој ништа силом, узми већи чекић!

MSI Tomahawk MAX | Ryzen 7 3700x | 32GB DDR4 3200MHz | RX 5700 XT OC Red Dragon 8GB | VPC Throttle CM3 + VPC Constellation ALPHA on VPC WarBRD Base | HP Reverb G2

 Youtube Follow Me on TWITCH! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moan moan moan. Pointless thread. As I was always brought up if you can't say anything constructive don't say anything:mad:

 

And do you consider your post constructive?

  • Like 1

Win10 x64 | SSDs | i5 2500K @ 4.4 GHz | 16 GB RAM | GTX 970 | TM Warthog HOTAS | Saitek pedals | TIR5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New engine should - and gladly is - a priority. DCS so far offers loooooow graphics compared to requirements, well reality of FPS. New engine should either boost FPS or keep them on the same level as they're now but largely upgrade visuals.

When it is achieved, bugs like stupid AI and so on ought to be resolved.

Reminder: Fighter pilots make movies. Bomber pilots make... HISTORY! :D | Also to be remembered: FRENCH TANKS HAVE ONE GEAR FORWARD AND FIVE BACKWARD :D

ಠ_ಠ



Link to comment
Share on other sites

And do you consider your post constructive?

 

No. Sorry but it really bugs me when a small development team works it's ass off to better the SIM we all love and gets grief for it's troubles. Imho there are enough threads pointing out the games alleged inadequacies without starting a new one. Everyone is entitled to an opinion I guess:doh:

i5 8600k@5.2Ghz, Asus Prime A Z370, 32Gb DDR4 3000, GTX1080 SC, Oculus Rift CV1, Modded TM Warthog Modded X52 Collective, Jetseat, W10 Pro 64

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New engine should - and gladly is - a priority. DCS so far offers loooooow graphics compared to requirements, well reality of FPS. New engine should either boost FPS or keep them on the same level as they're now but largely upgrade visuals.

When it is achieved, bugs like stupid AI and so on ought to be resolved.

 

The game runs and looks very nice for what it does. Considering the amount of physics simulated the game has at some point prioritize between making stuff look nice and having realistic physics. And it does it really well. The game looks great, amazing and it is up there with other high end games in terms of visuals where it matters, which is detailed cockpits, realistic clouds. Close to the ground objects look a bit less detailed and the ground itself is not as smooth up close but that is something I dont need so much. I prefer photorealistic clouds when flying into a sunset with a jet and flappy rotor blades when taking off with a helicopter.

 

Also people mistake the term "engine" for something it is not. And engine is just a pile of code that is or is not maintained and or updated. It is not a piece ot programming that fell from the sky at some point in time and cant be changed. So when people complain about the current "engine" being too "old" they are getting it all wrong.

 

I dont get all the complaining either, the game looks and feels amazing (feel is where all the CPU power is going btw)

 

 

So your statement is wrong, the game does actually offer very efficient graphics for what it demands from CPU and GPU. Consider all the systems on the aircraft you are flying which are simulated in real time. BF4, which is a nice game in its own right, is not a simulator of this depth so it can afford using extra horsepower on making the game look nicer.


Edited by stray cat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The game runs and looks very nice for what it does. Considering the amount of physics simulated the game has at some point prioritize between making stuff look nice and having realistic physics. And it does it really well. The game looks great, amazing and it is up there with other high end games in terms of visuals where it matters, which is detailed cockpits, realistic clouds. Close to the ground objects look a bit less detailed and the ground itself is not as smooth up close but that is something I dont need so much. I prefer photorealistic clouds when flying into a sunset with a jet and flappy rotor blades when taking off with a helicopter.

 

Also people mistake the term "engine" for something it is not. And engine is just a pile of code that is or is not maintained and or updated. It is not a piece ot programming that fell from the sky at some point in time and cant be changed. So when people complain about the current "engine" being too "old" they are getting it all wrong.

 

I dont get all the complaining either, the game looks and feels amazing (feel is where all the CPU power is going btw)

 

 

So your statement is wrong, the game does actually offer very efficient graphics for what it demands from CPU and GPU. Consider all the systems on the aircraft you are flying which are simulated in real time. BF4, which is a nice game in its own right, is not a simulator of this depth so it can afford using extra horsepower on making the game look nicer.

 

This guy gets it, basuically what I said if I could be bothered in the mornings :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not on the EDGE of my seat waiting. I play DCS as is and not in constant anticipation that it'll get better. If I don't like it anymore I'll stop playing, regardless if 2.0 is coming tomorrow or next year. I will never play a game now for what it might be tomorrow, unless in directly involved with developing it.

 

Are the flaws in DCS breaking your fun? Then why are you playing? Seriously.

 

As for "oh you should wait because it'll be good" is a load of crock. I refuse to allow myself to buy into the garbage spewed on these forums even to the point that I won't fully trust an official post speaking about a release date tomorrow. I'll take it as I come. News here is disinformation and the speculation is only a hair short of foolish.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

EDGE will be worth the wait I am sure, once the foundations are laid, I imagine will will see new features and aircraft more often and then everybody will be happy. DCS is by far the best flight sim on the market for me, I am happy to give ED all of the time they require to make it even better. There are of course alternatives to pass the time for those who don't feel the same. Have a break and come back when EDGE is ready.


Edited by Python

[sIGPIC]sigpic67951_1.gif[/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EDGE will be worth the wait I am sure, once the foundations are laid, I imagine will will see new features and aircraft more often...

 

I am curious how EDGE is going to change aircraft development schedules and timeframes?

 

Since we are likely to end up with four new aircraft in about two to three month time frame (Sabre, Dora, Mig & Hawk), how much more frequent do you think releases will get?

ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero, i7-6700K, Noctua NH-D14 Cooler, Crucial 32GB DDR4 2133, Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 256GB, Samsung EVO 250GB & 500GB SSD, 2TB Caviar Black, Zotac GTX 1080 AMP! Extreme 8GB, Corsair HX1000i, Phillips BDM4065UC 40" 4k monitor, VX2258 TouchScreen, TIR 5 w/ProClip, TM Warthog, VKB Gladiator Pro, Saitek X56, et. al., MFG Crosswind Pedals #1199, VolairSim Pit, Rift CV1 :thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am curious how EDGE is going to change aircraft development schedules and timeframes?

 

Since we are likely to end up with four new aircraft in about two to three month time frame (Sabre, Dora, Mig & Hawk), how much more frequent do you think releases will get?

 

 

I meant specifically from ED of course, not third parties. And it was just an assumption. The development of EDGE is no doubt taking up a lot of time their end, that time will no doubt be spent on other things once EDGE is complete.

[sIGPIC]sigpic67951_1.gif[/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...