Note from Wags regarding VR in 2.1

[Kayos]

I am hoping we see an update today with the introduction of the gamma slider.

 

Ya, that's too bad. They could have just added that in on the patch.

[hansangb]

Nobody said right now! Since a long time no performance optimizations have taken place in DCS. I can name some 4 updates where performance became worse than back in next update! I havent seen a single update where performance would come up! An thats in few years time! 1.5 and 2.0. So read carefully. Dcs as a whole need performance optimizations! Ok not now but someday... some 2 years gone nothing:/ so 2.1 that everyone hoped again nothing.

 

 

So you've seen no improvements in performance in DCS from when it supported DK2 days? That's what you're saying? Because I have.

 

 

And that overly appriciation thing... lirycs. Dcs is business. We pay for it. You lirycs will not get you modules or feed devs. Playing such sim on single screen is barely acceptable so multiscreen or vr is only way but in both scenarios it is performing poor. Take stock su-25t campaign, first mission take schval... thats it stutter party, take nevada vegas, take normandy... and thats with no shadows traffic etc off. Set shadows and trafic and i want to see you happy lirycs. Developer makes money- simple.

 

 

 

My 3 monitor 1920x1200 (pre Rift) rocked with everything maxed out. So I'm not sure why you're having so many issues. I have zero Mig modules (not at all interested in them) so I can't tell you what those instant missions are like. As for the lyrics, lighten up Francis, it's a joke.

[Verde]

Su-25T comes stock with DCS.

 

"Rocked everything maxed out" - rlyyyyyyyy?

 

Everyone has it`s OWN opinion on what is fluent. DCS forums already did quite an investigation on the matter. As long as you don`t have numbers with FPS and settings its lyrics again.

 

As you can see in picture below framerates dip nearly two times no matter what resolution, and in 3 FOV mode or VR things get MUCH worse. No need to prove anything as it has been done before.

 

Settings:

 

 

The whole topic on performance on 1.5.6

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=157374

[rajdary]

Guys, I miss the days of my Commodore VIC-20 and the games I had to program myself by entering in lines of code from a manual.

 

+1 , it was awesome, i remember the emotion of getting a new game just spending a few hours with my brother taking turns to type in the code!

[FragBum]

Guys, I miss the days of my Commodore VIC-20 and the games I had to program myself by entering in lines of code from a manual.

 

 

 

 

+1 , it was awesome, i remember the emotion of getting a new game just spending a few hours with my brother taking turns to type in the code!

 

Could you imagine doing that with DCS. :cry:

[Boris]

Could you imagine doing that with DCS. :cry:

 

Haha, just imagine entering 25gb worth of code manually... :lol:

[Roblex]

I am not sure what the point of the graph is. It proves that some things put more strain on the card than others. Is that really news? Do the latest cards with the latest games just run at a constant 120fps? Maybe it is to show that even with a good card it might drop the framerate to 50fps briefly? <gasp!> I seriously doubt any gamer would see any difference between running at a constant 50fps and a constant 120fps if he did not have something displaying the numbers for him. It is like looking at an A4 size photo taken with a 10 megapixel & a 50 megapixel camera; you would not see any difference.

[FragBum]

 

"Rocked everything maxed out" - rlyyyyyyyy?

 

 

Settings:

 

 

I found turning most of the settings down even some to low seems to equate to better or equal performance so far with 2.1.x compared to 2.0.x.

 

Some patience and the optimisations will come, so to the enhancements. :thumbup:

[FragBum]

Haha, just imagine entering 25gb worth of code manually... :lol:

 

Thankfully we have embraced change, we have file storage and the internet. :thumbup:

[Verde]

Graph shows that even single screen isnt the optimised one but if you looked all the article in the link i gave you would see that VR performance is simply... not very good to say the least. Why guys with top of the line hardware should scramble whole forum for lua file editing to customise visibiluty ranges, why We should play without shadows traffic and turn 1/2 the options and even than get dips below asw 45 fps. For those who are ok with the performance good for you just do not tell others that performance is ok as it is. Yes flying loneley plane looking to the horizon yes. But not real multiplayer or campaign missions. As i said the main message from me... devs should look into performance optimisations as a priority.

[Verde]

Of course we will wait and see whats comming, because we have no other choice and because there is always tomorrow. But really i just wanted to remind the problem. I am ok with waiting but we waited alot and i would even be ok to wait as much if in the end it would be sorted out, but i have a bad feeling about it. Lets see whats comming in the future i really hope we get better performance.

[Goblin]

As you can see in picture below framerates dip nearly two times no matter what resolution

 

This illustrates my post about how good sims are today, vs. years ago.

 

I started flightsimming in single digit FPS. 1-3 FPS or so, back in the 80ies.

Not long ago FPS in the 20ies was considered great.

You showing a graph of a flightsim reaching above 120, dipping down into the 50ies tells me that you have no idea what I'm talking about, or that you will never understand why I think DCS rocks, even in Early Access.

 

I'm not writing this as some sort of personal attack on you. I really don't. You are absolutely entitled to your own opinion. It's just that I, and others, probably have a totally different background and experience when it comes to flightsims and the development thereof. We look at that graph and think "Whoa! That's awesome" :)

 

In DCS I see a flightsim that has had multiple improvements in graphics, content and otherwise. That comes at a cost. Sure, performance has been degraded in some updates, and increased again in subsequent updates. It's not like ED doesn't care about performance in DCS.

 

It just comes down to personal expectations. My expectations are met, yours are not.

[Wolf8312]

People get frustrated because its so tantalizingly close to perfect but just annoying enough to be not quite there performance wise and as a result we cant go back to monitor DCS and yet in VR large parts of the game are closed off.

 

I would get a new PC but its obvious from the GTX 108ti reviews that it dosent seem to matter how much GPU/CPU one throws at the problem it doesent seem to matter. This is very difficult for people to understand as we are all used to computer upgrades automatically entailing better performance. With DCS/VR this doesnt seem to work out like that so people are naturally taking this to assume something is wrong with the game. Myself I dont know enough about computers or VR to make to much of a comment.

 

I think many rushed out and upgraded expecting big results only to find that for whatever reason DCS in VR dosent seem to much improve and even with the latest hardware one must rely on reprojection.

 

Personnally I am happy on the whole, but there are things that never get fixed that I worry never will get fixed as they are such glaring problems I am not sure why after all this time they have not been addressed. For me massive fps drops with certain explosions (certain missilies or bombs) is the biggest problem this game has, a long with clouds. But I can live without clouds, but there is no way to tweak explosions.

 

That said you just gotta enjoy what there is, create your own missions and just enjoy flying and fighting. I think people who demand competitive multiplayer will be the most frustrated.

Edited June 15, 2017 by Wolf8312

[ram0506]

It`s not a problem of DCS in general handling better hardware not adequately.

I upgraded my PC from a GTX980Ti to a 1080Ti two month ago. The performance gain in version 2.0 was very good (don`t want to speak of tremendous:D). Generally speaking about 30 to 40%.

So it`s obviously a problem of the current 2.1 alpha version handling VR. Performance on monitor is still good, but who wants to go back to 2D after playing (flying) in VR.:smilewink:

But I don`t want to complain, just put DCS aside for now and waiting for optimizations that surely will come.

[hansangb]

Su-25T comes stock with DCS.

 

"Rocked everything maxed out" - rlyyyyyyyy?

Everyone has it`s OWN opinion on what is fluent. DCS forums already did quite an investigation on the matter. As long as you don`t have numbers with FPS and settings its lyrics again.

 

As you can see in picture below framerates dip nearly two times no matter what resolution, and in 3 FOV mode or VR things get MUCH worse. No need to prove anything as it has been done before.

 

 

Settings:

The whole topic on performance on 1.5.6

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=157374

 

 

No I made it all up just to annoy you. Again, don't confuse VR performance with 3 monitor performance. But you're pissed about performance. You feel entitled to it. I get it. Your opinion just as valid as mine. Let's agree to disagree and move on.

[Verde]

Already done;)