Future of the NTTR map?

[Ghostrider142]

Maps will be separate purchases, aside from the bundle sales ED likes to have. SoH is meant to compliment the Hornet though. Will do the same for the Tomcat I imagine, but that is a 3rd Party module.

 

Cool :thumbup:

[VTJS17_Fire]

Yes, I think it was just my personal wish list thoughts duing an informal live stream one weekend.

Sorry, that I have to correct you, Wags.

 

You and Chizh mentioned the upcoming National Training Center in January 2016, in two different - but official - weekend news.

 

Source 1

DCS: NEVADA Test and Training Range Map Update

 

We continue working on improvements to the Nevada map that includes fixing bugs and implementing new features. The following will be available in the coming months:

 

- Add Tonopah Air Force Base

- Add additional casino/hotels to the Las Vegas strip

- Add additional airfields and landing strips to the central (detailed) portion of the map

- Add the National Training Center (NTC)

- Improved grass and ground clutter

- Other smaller improvements

 

When these additional features are added and the module is final, the cost of the map will likely increase. However, these new features will be free to those that already own the map.

There is no word, that you only think about it (loud).

 

Source 2

Map Modules

 

DCS: NEVADA Test and Training Range map is being enhanced with the addition of:

 

• Tonopah Air Force Base
  
• New casino/hotels in the Las Vegas strip
  
• A number of airfields and landing strips in the central (detailed) portion of the map
  
• The National Training Center (NTC)
  
• Improved grass and ground clutter
  
• Plus a host of minor improvements
  

 

Somewhere were mentioned, that the maps would also be expanded to the west and south. IIRC, this one was an unofficial statement. But the map is already extended in that directions, at least in the mission editor.

[Wags]

Nothing to correct, was referring to the addition of Fallon NAS.

[VTJS17_Fire]

Ah, ok. Sorry.

 

So the National Training Center will come? Maybe some other military/ civilian airports in that area?

[Wags]

While something we had hoped to do, and did some initial planning on, it's no longer in our plans. Hence, it was never listed on the product page.

 

We already added 13 new civilian and military airbases as a free update.

 

As Sith said, aside from bug fixes (like the clip map issue) and updating the map to take advantage of new engine tech, the map is complete.

 

Thanks

[VTJS17_Fire]

Thanks for your reply, Wags. :thumbup:

 

So, looking forward to the reworked Caucasus and the SOH map. :)

[nrgized]

As I pointed out a number of times elsewhere, there is a known clipmap issue causing texture quality to be lower than it should be.

 

Its fixed internally, so with that, and the new lighting that is seen with the Normandy Alpha I challenge anyone to show off a better looking Flight Sim map (besides Normandy as its just a nicer area than Vegas and all that sand) than that... That is rhetorical by the way, I know the answer...

 

 

Honestly they only time I have seen the moon looking that good is on the show Ancient Aliens.... you know with all the secret alien, nazi and CIA bases up there

 

NT bro... NT... 1.15.

 

You can't win a race when you're the only runner. That is pretty self serving.

 

Nevada is a very simple repeating color palette that is nothing like the real life geographic location. Even knowing about the mip map issue.

 

The color palette of NTTR can be summed up in the following 4 colors. Nothing like the wild variations of color found in Nevada.

 

 

You can see hints of real satellite photography throughout the map. Yet it looks like someone took the source and then using the color palette above colored the poop out of it and removed any sense of detail. It even looks like the bushes from the satellite photography are what became the brown noise in the land textures.

 

Missing is all the the beautiful rust, brown, grey, red, and white colored terrain.

 

Because of the very limited attempt at vegetation and its simple color palette this place is the moon.

 

And frankly how this map isn't just raw satellite photos in 2017 is beyond my understanding. I had more fun flying around Google VR getting these comparison photos then I ever have in NTTR.

 

 

 

[NineLine]

Couple things...

 

You are using screenshots from a version with known issues with textures correct? Also without new effects and such in.

 

You are comparing to Google VR, doesnt Google VR use real images? You have to balance performance with quality. At some point quality has to give way to performance. Surely you understand this right?

 

So just so I am getting what you want, you want life like, real visuals 2nd only to actually being there, but you want the performance that suits the average PC in the FS community... which you would be surprised is quite a bit lower than you might think...

 

Do I have that all right?

 

NTTR and Normandy are both joys to fly in, and the core graphics is still improving. I understand it might not be perfect for some, but I think they are great, and a joy to fly in. Sure I am biased, but its my personal money I invest in these, and I have no problem with what I got for that money. I have seen other sims, and they look plastic and colored like someone barfed colors everywhere. I am good with DCS.

[NineLine]

And if you have had more fun flying Google VR... well then you are DCSing wrong anyways.

[nrgized]

Couple things...

 

You are using screenshots from a version with known issues with textures correct? Also without new effects and such in.

 

You are comparing to Google VR, doesnt Google VR use real images? You have to balance performance with quality. At some point quality has to give way to performance. Surely you understand this right?

 

So just so I am getting what you want, you want life like, real visuals 2nd only to actually being there, but you want the performance that suits the average PC in the FS community... which you would be surprised is quite a bit lower than you might think....

 

The texture source plays no part in performance. A 1k texture is still a 1k texture. Yes some textures don't equally compare at the same resolutions. If your world texture is a hand drawn image or a satellite photo makes no difference though. So that being said and ignoring the mip map issue why do we have textures that look like the above and not satellite photos?

 

This performance argument most often cited here is a straw man. The distances drawn in DCS often accompany this argument. There is nothing complex in terms of rendering that DCS performs. PBR in Normandy will be the first modern feature to nullify that statement though.

 

With proper LOD, frustum culling, instancing, and other techniques there is little excuse for the lack of detail. Most aircraft have more geo density then half the world in front of the cockpit. Especially in NTTR.

[Raven68]

NTTR is great and I am enjoying the expansion to the new airfields. Anything extra to come (bug fixes, new lighting and additional graphic tech) will be extra icing on the cake!

[nrgized]

And if you have had more fun flying Google VR... well then you are DCSing wrong anyways.

 

Can't really DCS NTTR when theres like at most 15 people in MP. :cry:

[BIGNEWY]

Can't really DCS NTTR when theres like at most 15 people in MP. :cry:

 

You do not need multiplayer to enjoy it,

 

try single player, the majority do

[nrgized]

You do not need multiplayer to enjoy it,

 

try single player, the majority do

 

Thank you for the suggestion.

 

Unfortunately my enjoyment from this game is derived from flying with others and not single player PVE scenarios.

[rrohde]

And all I want is road bridges with support columns. I am a simple man. :)

[NineLine]

Can't really DCS NTTR when theres like at most 15 people in MP. :cry:

 

Not everyone buys into early access. The numbers will go up for NTTR MP when its merged. ANd honestly I have had a blast with 1 or two others in MP with a good mission, so I still think you are looking at it with a narrow view.

[NineLine]

The texture source plays no part in performance. A 1k texture is still a 1k texture. Yes some textures don't equally compare at the same resolutions. If your world texture is a hand drawn image or a satellite photo makes no difference though. So that being said and ignoring the mip map issue why do we have textures that look like the above and not satellite photos?

 

This performance argument most often cited here is a straw man. The distances drawn in DCS often accompany this argument. There is nothing complex in terms of rendering that DCS performs. PBR in Normandy will be the first modern feature to nullify that statement though.

 

With proper LOD, frustum culling, instancing, and other techniques there is little excuse for the lack of detail. Most aircraft have more geo density then half the world in front of the cockpit. Especially in NTTR.

 

I dont agree at all, otherwise we could just have the entire world done with real world imagery... but thats not the case, because again with the narrow view, part of that performance is how large the install is going to be, NTTR is already pretty huge, how big is acceptable?

 

But we are going to do the "straw man" thing... so I really dont need to try and fight this fight anymore, most people seem to like it, everything ever made has people that dont like it, I dont agree with much of what you have said, there has to be some give and take otherwise I wouldnt need to spend so much on a GPU.

 

As with everything ED does, its a process, this is better than what we had, and the future it will keep getting better as their map tech grows.