Note from Wags regarding VR in 2.1

[SkateZilla]

DCS is Constantly Evolving, and Pushing New Boundaries.

Both Core Aspects and 3rd Party/Partner Assets.

 

The Graphics Options have increased through this evolution along with graphical details and lighting etc etc.

 

What was Considered HIGH Settings before is likely closer to MED/LOW Settings now.

 

W/ the Introduction of PBR/Deferred Shading, Everything Changes, what you have as a "Settings Sweet Spot" for 2.0/1.5.6 will not be the same for 2.1.x.

[Verde]

You didnt cach the point. No hardware can run thing in multimonitor or VR on high settings.

[Goblin]

Thats not answer! Thats question!

 

Indeed it was. :)

 

My point was that DCS is a very complex piece of software. It's scope is enormous. Level of detail is staggering.

It goes without saying that project DCS is resource intensive and challenging.

 

If there were two or more developers of competing products you could compare them and say that one is better than the other. At present there isn't one, other than ED.

So how can anyone say the development of DCS could be better..?

 

DCS 2 is a test environment. It's where ED test their product by code updates. That doesn't mean every update has got to be an improvement in every aspect. Features are added, removed or tweaked. This last update saw some new graphical features. You can't expect that performance will increase as well.

Software development is often a case of taking two steps forward and one step back.

 

There are a number of settings you can reduce in order to increase performance. Since I got a Oculus Rift I learned that DCS looks quite nice on low settings :)

[Coxy_99]

You didnt cach the point. No hardware can run thing in multimonitor or VR on high settings.

 

Because its alpha, Un-finished, Pretty sure 1.5.6 runs triple monitor and VR fine.

[hansangb]

As far as i know there is no system that does 90FPS in normal battle scenario not some free flight with one plane. Take some su-25T stoack campaign first mission and you will see much worse results. I have done many procesors AMD and nvidia cards etc Even my 5.1ghz 7700 is not giving you stable 90 fps in every scenario.

 

That reminds me. A few months back, someone posted that doing a local server/client multi-user setup significantly improves performance and in VR particularly. Having the server burden of traffic etc. seemed to be the key. I'll see if I can dig it up. I bought some additional license of Normandy to test with (the drawback to this approach - needing duplicate licenses)

[Verde]

Because its alpha, Un-finished, Pretty sure 1.5.6 runs triple monitor and VR fine.

 

With shadows? With traffic? With battle situations? With clouds? I agree in certion situation- yes. But not all round thats quite obvious.

[DayGlow]

I simply don't buy the alpha argument anymore. I've paid more than $200 in this game - I feel that 'entitles' me to expect a playable game. And they don't make any progress, they just announce new projects every couple of months and they never actually launch any (apart from early access/alpha, which is supposed to release them from any claims).

 

I've pretty much given up on DCS, just checking back from time to time - only to find the same sad state of affairs.

 

Btw, i've been talking about 2.0 performance, but 1.5 was pretty similar. I don't want to install yet another 25-40 gigs just to test that - which is another joke and should be one of their top priorities to finally merge versions.

 

No progress? When you actually look at the timeline it is pretty impressive

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=116893

Edited June 12, 2017 by DayGlow

[hansangb]

Well Wags, if you're still reading this, I for one am grateful for all the work that ED/DCS has put into the sim. Sure, there are always things that could be better. But every time I fly around in my Huey, Mustang, Sptifire, or A10C, I marvel at the attention to detail. And with VR it's unimaginably awesome. So let the folks working on the code that I appreciate the hard work. Oh and get busy on the Hornet! :)

[AMEDooley]

So here's my take. I love this game and think it can be awesome. There are times when it's the most fun I have in my day. But here's the thing, to just say "It's in Alpha, your expectations are too high" does a disservice to us. Almost all of us understand what an alpha means. The problem is that ED keeps pushing more modules or more content vs really focusing on the gameplay itself. And when you get an update but it makes the game worse, it feels as if no one bothered to test it before they released it. I am not expecting a perfect game, but I do expect the company I've paid for a product to not belittle the customer, address the issues, fix them, and for them to keep the customer updated with information. Razbam has done a great job in this aspect. With this 2.1 release it seemed like they tried to push new content before the current content was read to move forward causing problems. Now I will say that with the post Wags made it feels like they were doing their part acknowledging the problems. So that's a positive. And they've talked about what some of the fixes are going to be. So that's a positive. But they need to continue with that feedback and updates. It'll help hem long turn as almost all of us will stay on board warts and all. But most important, they and the moderators shouldn't be saying things like it's in alpha lower your expectations. So that's my thoughts. Having said that, I'm looking forward to more fixes and the gamma slider I believe will be a big game changer in VR. So keep up the hard work gentlemen and ladies I'm cheering you on!

Edited June 13, 2017 by AMEDooley
Spelling and sentence structure.

[awjudge]

"And when you get an update but it makes the game worse, it feels as if no one bothered to test it before they released it."

 

It's Alpha code.

 

Not sure how many times this needs to be reiterated before people understand it.

[VampireNZ]

 

Something something... VR, something something... Windows Creator, Game mode..:huh:

 

But hey - any opportunity for a little Dev bromance-feels, right hansangb?

 

Well Wags, if you're still reading this, I for one am grateful for all the work that ED/DCS has put into the sim. ... :)

 

:megalol:

[AMEDooley]

"And when you get an update but it makes the game worse, it feels as if no one bothered to test it before they released it."

 

It's Alpha code.

 

Not sure how many times this needs to be reiterated before people understand it.

 

You just kind of just made my point. Just saying it's alpha code get over it isn't a decent answer to legitimate problems and concerns. But like I said, I wouldn't go anywhere else. This is THE sim. It is just frustrating to have the game get fixed and then go back, and then get fixed, and then go back, and then get fixed, and then go back, and then add new content go even further back, and then get fixed. It is a legitimate frustration. And just saying it's Alpha is hardly an answer.

[awjudge]

It's clear that you don't understand what an Alpha is.

[AMEDooley]

I know exactly what an alpha is. I'm not complaining so much about the bugs. I'm expecting bugs and limited features. Like not every airport in NTTR when it first came out. What is the criticism for me is a lack of communication, and what seems to be a push for more/new content and features before the bugs on what currently is released are fixed. VR has been far too bright at night since CV1 came out. It took this long to get a slider for gamma. Game works well in VR and then it's updated and it's virtually unplayable. It's these things that becomes problematic 3, or is it four, years into an alpha. Again, I am loving this game, and I appreciate the hard work put into it. But "it's an alpha code" isn't an answer it's an excuse.

[awjudge]

You don't seem to know what an Alpha is. If you expect that every release will improve on the last, you're simply wrong.

[33-DFTC]

Please, stop with this "It's Alpha code". The vast majority of the player base is perfectly aware that we're playing a game being built piece by piece. This does not mean we have to accept the current development policy without highlighting our concerns and actual problems.

 

The main problem is that there is no significant progress in the base game. How many planes can you actually buy without the beta label ? I'm afraid not much ; you're going to stick with the FC3 planes for a very long time. The absolute priority should be to finalize the current planes and add them to the core game. I did not buy a single module as I'm waiting from them to leave beta status, I can assure you I'm more than ready to support ED or some of the 3rd parties further ; once they have done their homework. I'm really looking forward a RC of the 2.5 version of the game.

 

Regarding VR, I really don't know at the moment if the lack of stability and performance is due to the game engine or time dedicated to its integration by ED. The fact is, others sims without VR at launch had made it available since and run as a charm. I'd be perfectly happy if ED would tell me tomorrow that their engine is not suitable for VR and requires too much work and ressources that they can not afford ; at least I'd be set.

[awjudge]

@33-DTFC

 

In principle I agree with you, it can be frustrating waiting for things to get out of beta.

 

What I have little time for, are people who sign up for the alpha and then complain about its stability or progress.

 

I think these are two separate issues.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Verde]

Alfa alfa... the existing beta 1.5.6 isnt running good as well!! Whats problem? Oh yes is beta... lets read betta is unfinished product. So basicly nothing is good and finished and nothing can be asked? Are you serious?:D You can call it whatever you want but developer should get things going on performance part! I dont say in alfa or beta... just show me some progress.

Edited June 13, 2017 by Verde

[Verde]

Simply it is quite strange that performance part may take several years. We live in 2017 it is not acceptable to wait 5 years for fps to come up... be real take your time but make progress on matter! Or all guys sayin alfa is alfa saying that in principal it is ok to take money for alfa and let people wait 2-3 years for fps performance upgrade? As fps itself is the basic part of game itself. Waiting for efects, clouds, other planes airfields ok but not fps... Fps should be urgent matter.

Edited June 13, 2017 by Verde

[hansangb]

 

Something something... VR, something something... Windows Creator, Game mode..:huh:

 

But hey - any opportunity for a little Dev bromance-feels, right hansangb?

 

 

:megalol:

 

 

Just showing my appreciation as a happy customer. Not bitter, bitchin, gotta have everything RIGHT-DAMN-NOW-'CAUSE-I-PAID-FOR-ALPHA

 

Nothing wrong with that is there? /* cue What the world needs now...is ... */

[Verde]

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.

[Verde]

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.

[dburne]

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

[Verde]

Yep that would be great!

[Baggy MacDouche]

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.