A new product

[dryden]

There was a post about FC not being optimized enough and that perhaps BS would not be a hit product because of its hardware (CPU) requirements.

 

So, to satisfy curiosity and perhaps as a message to ED, how many would be willing to pay for a fps-increasing patch rather than BS? In this patch, code would be optimized to provide a concrete speed-up in game play, perhaps even incorporate multiple core support in some way.

 

Personally, I'd pay several tens of €s for a smoother game - I'd prefer this product over BS!

[Kuky]

Black Shark is already on my "to buy" list but seriously, and I believe almsot everyone shares my opinion, there's no point having all the fancy and super FM etc if you can't run it on available hardware, so I very much welcome Black Shark and any future add on, however game code optimisation is not to be neglected, I think... I know few people who like flight sims as muc as I do but they never bothered with lock-on becuase it's so hard on the hardware and just not very playable on average PC :music_whistling:

[dryden]

Right. Reading the other thread about how people are pissed off by low fps and the claim about ED not being motivated to improve the code because it doesn't bring economic gains, I though it would be interesting to know if there actually is an economic motivator for ED to improve fps - in other words, how many would be willing to pay for that compared to something that ED has already judged worth doing in economic terms (BS).

[A.S]

this is easy ..BOTH !!

[Shaman]

exactly, I'd vote for BOTH. You didn't provide that option :doh:

[FVMAD]

damn... I've picked wrong option... lol

yeah... Both would be cool

[dryden]

That's right, I didn't include the option for 'both' because the idea is to extract the knowledge about which one is more important to people! If we presume that ED is reading this forum (I don't know if they are) this will then give them an idea about which option is more close to the wallets of their customer base - that's as close as it comes to free marketing research for ED!

[A.S]

a cessna which flies is more effective then a JSF on ground...

For BS it will be a MUST to work on groundobject-performance...

What have so many people with very good specs already tuned and modified and it is still not how it can be. So.... Both.

 

thx and much fun improving our game ED :music_whistling: :smilewink:

[OutRurMind]

Both

 

Id pay for both but there is no option

[Ardillita]

Black Shark is already on my "to buy" list but seriously, and I believe almsot everyone shares my opinion, there's no point having all the fancy and super FM etc if you can't run it on available hardware, so I very much welcome Black Shark and any future add on, however game code optimisation is not to be neglected, I think... I know few people who like flight sims as muc as I do but they never bothered with lock-on becuase it's so hard on the hardware and just not very playable on average PC :music_whistling:

 

 

All the fancy???.... you don´t need a super computer to have AFM and things like than, you just need to have efficient code. There are other sims (orbiter for example) wich have far more complex calculations than FC, and they have far far lower requirements.

 

I don´t think there is much people thinking like you. For sure there are people waiting for BS, but a BS more efficient than the present FC, and forsure there is a hole much people expecting things to be improved in the actual FC.

 

I just would like to know that ED reads all the post about this topic (optimiceing) and improves sometjhings in BS.

 

I would pay for BS, but a BS that can give me better things than the present FC.

[Lixma 06]

I'd pay for AFM for all aircraft, and maybe for 3D cockpits....but not for just code optmisation alone.

[bflagg]

This question / issue has been hashed to death already in the past....