What does the new Changelog and update post mean?

[sslechta]

I thought when the stable version is out it was supposed to update 2.2 to 2.5? Mine is not updating.

 

Check for updates on your 1.5.8 Release candidate. That's what was updated. That will update to 2.5.

 

The open beta was not updated.

[SkateZilla]

1.5 updates to 2.5 and 2.2 is the dead end.

 

However, I STRONGLY advise that you keep 2.2 for Normandy and NTTR for the time being. Far less bugs on 2.2 than the same maps on 2.5.

 

 

2.2 is Open Alpha Branch, This branch was discontinued,

 

There's Release 2.5 and Open Beta 2.5 now.

[fjacobsen]

2.2 is Open Alpha Branch, This branch was discontinued,

 

There's Release 2.5 and Open Beta 2.5 now.

 

 

 

As far as I know current 2.5 Release and 2.5 Open beat are the same filesets with the same bugs.

 

 

Why the urge killing 1.5.8 when 2.5 isn´t stable and ready to take over.

 

 

As much as I liked DCS, the current way looks lika de-route for me.

 

 

Memory leak is one thing, but the insane memory requirements are not rectified.

 

 

Othere sims withi the same genre also comes with swaying grass, collidable trees and huge maps and graphics that are on par, and even surpasig DCS (I know - personal perception), but running fluid and without stutters, even in single player and multiplayer missions with alot of units and AI.

 

 

I play alot of other games. While not calling them by name, they consist of various flightsims, racing sims, first person shooters and military sandbox most on high settings with fluid graphics and high framerates. None of these has the insae high memory demands that we see now with DCS 2.5. Some of the flightsims I use are with highly realsitic aircraft, weather, ATC and alot of othe background apps running.

 

 

I could understand if the cause for those high memory demands where du to outstanding graphics, AI, damage modelling and game mechanics, but that is not what we have right now with DCS 2.5. Damage modelling and AI seems like remnants from LOMAc or the Flanker series.

 

I have been a fond supporter of ED for many years - Flanker 1.5, Flanker 2.5, Lomac, Stand alone Blackshark, A-10C and then further to DCS 1.0 and up until now.

 

 

Even running 2.5 with Medium to High settings with MSAA and DS, I don´t find the performance cost is worth the graphical update compared to 1.5.8.

The only plus are the collidable trees, especially when flying helicopters.

 

 

I own every moduel, except the C-101, Hawk and some campaigns, but feel that developement on most of these simply are too slow and the time from early acces to release is too long. Take the M-2000C, which now has been in early acces for two years - thats simply not acceptable.

For me it seems like developers loose interest shortly after eraly acces release, probably because thats where most people buy it and income therafter on those modules quickly decline.

 

 

For me DCS 2.x has become a deja-vu to when FSX was released.

With FSX I used more time tweaking the sim to gt it to run smooth than actually flyings, and thats what I have been doing with DCS 2.x too until now. Its simply not fun anymore.

 

 

I see no point putting more money into new modules as long as the core sim isn´t better optimised.

You can tweak all day long, but most tweaks are placebo and canot be regarded as fixes, but merely just workarounds for a poorly optimised core sim.

 

 

For me DCS will be put on hold until I read feedback indicating that the sim has become smoother.

 

 

While I do understand that it isn´t efficient to maintain two versions (1.5.8 and 2.5), I´m still sad that it seems that the only smooth running version still is 1.5.8 and that support for that has seized, including for modules not out of early acces yet.

 

 

Sorry for this negative post, but it´s quite frustrating to see how performance just keeps degrading on a franchise in which I have put quite alot of money.

Edited April 6, 2018 by fjacobsen

[Esac_mirmidon]

With 8G of RAM and a 960 i understand where your problems are coming from.

 

My rig is not even close to "High end" level, i really think is medium low computer, and the perfomance boost of 2.5 is great for me.

 

I suggest if you can afford it, to buy 8G more RAM and at least a 1060

[fjacobsen]

With 8G of RAM and a 960 i understand where your problems are coming from.

 

My rig is not even close to "High end" level, i really think is medium low computer, and the perfomance boost of 2.5 is great for me.

 

I suggest if you can afford it, to buy 8G more RAM and at least a 1060

 

Why do I then see 40-60 fps if my 960 doesn´t cut it ?

 

 

FPS are high, but I see alot of stuttering, which isn´t caused by a underpowered GPU ?

 

 

If my GPU was underpowered, then setting all settings to low should definitly give much better performance. While FPS does increase doing so, the sim still stutters, which clearly indicates that it´s not my GPU that is poor.

 

 

Why should 8GB be necessary, when I have other sims as complex and better looking than DCS ?

While not mentioning the other sims, those I use have longer visisbility range, more trees, more objects, better damage modelling and AI, but still runs with high FPS and smooth.

 

 

"Tweaks" like having to add more Ram and run DCS from a SSD drive are not solutions, but merely workarounds for some badly optimised code.

 

 

Reading this forum it sounds as if the memory issue is something new to 2.5. But the insane memory consumption has been around and reported ever since 2.0 was released, like very long loading times of the sim and mission editor. Memory not properly released and for many unusable multiplayer sessions.

 

 

While my computer specs far from can be called cutting edge, it still runs all other games reasonable well, also much newer games with far better graphics and gamemechanics.

 

 

I´m sure that 2.5OB will evolve and that there still will be performance optimations, but I just don´t regard it as being ready to be called "Release version."

[Esac_mirmidon]

When DCS 2 was released i had only 8G of RAM, and a GTX 770 with 2G of RAM.

 

Caucasus was perfect for me in the old map, great performance, very good FPS and no stutters but Nevada was unplayable. The FPS where almost as good as in Caucasus, but the stutters were so heavy, intense and frequent, that was impossible to fly.

 

Then i bought another 8G of RAM first and all the stutters gone. Even with a HDD. The FPS in Nevada not so good but great flying experience. Then i bought the 1060 and my FPS are now rock solid with medium-high settings and stutters free.

 

I really recommend at least 8G more RAM. And OC to your K series. My 2500K is OC to 4.5. Makes wonders.

[fjacobsen]

Why do we then see people with 16GB+ also having stutters ?

[Esac_mirmidon]

VR?

 

4K-2K resolution?

 

Ultra Settings?

 

I dont know. I have a 1920x1080 screen with high settings and my experience is very good. 60 FPS solid, no stutters. But what is a fact for you is that 8G or RAM is not enough for a good experience.

 

From my own former situation when i had only 8G that is what i think.

[fjacobsen]

VR?

 

4K-2K resolution?

 

Ultra Settings?

 

I dont know. I have a 1920x1080 screen with high settings and my experience is very good. 60 FPS solid, no stutters. But what is a fact for you is that 8G or RAM is not enough for a good experience.

 

From my own former situation when i had only 8G that is what i think.

 

 

 

Normal monitor 1920x1080

Medium-High settings

FXAA + DS (MSAA Off)

40-60 fps (Locked at 60)

 

 

FPS are fine, but I got stutters.

 

 

I could put more RAM into my system, but won´t waste money as long as see those with 16GB+ also havings stutters.

 

 

Also I´m not going to upgrade or buy a new system "just" for getting DCS up running when everything else I got runs smooth with no need for better hardware.

 

 

I allready have put money into enough early acces modules that hardly gets required updates and fixes (M2000C, Normandy map, even the AV-8B as not been much updated lately).

[Silversmith]

Watch out. The updater makes a COPY of 1.5 on the c: drive before updating the original 1,5 install to 2.5, Once finished the EXTRA copy of 1.5 is left on the c: drive.. which can cause big problems if it is a small SSD. After the update has finished you have to MANUALLY delete the redundant extra copy of 1.5 from the c: drive (use the Windows Uninstall .. but strangely that says the extra 1.5 is only 7.5 Mb . Don't believe it it is a FULL size copy of 1.5. Running the uninstall will free up the full 32Gb from the C: Drive !!

[buzz1955]

fjacobsen you are right they should begin fixing things instead of always bringing new modules with new bugs, after all we tought we where all buying modules that would fonctionned and not early realease or beta one for ever.

 

Salutation

[louisv]

As far as I know current 2.5 Release and 2.5 Open beat are the same filesets with the same bugs.

 

 

Why the urge killing 1.5.8 when 2.5 isn´t stable and ready to take over.

 

 

As much as I liked DCS, the current way looks lika de-route for me.

 

 

Memory leak is one thing, but the insane memory requirements are not rectified.

 

 

Othere sims withi the same genre also comes with swaying grass, collidable trees and huge maps and graphics that are on par, and even surpasig DCS (I know - personal perception), but running fluid and without stutters, even in single player and multiplayer missions with alot of units and AI.

 

 

I play alot of other games. While not calling them by name, they consist of various flightsims, racing sims, first person shooters and military sandbox most on high settings with fluid graphics and high framerates. None of these has the insae high memory demands that we see now with DCS 2.5. Some of the flightsims I use are with highly realsitic aircraft, weather, ATC and alot of othe background apps running.

 

 

I could understand if the cause for those high memory demands where du to outstanding graphics, AI, damage modelling and game mechanics, but that is not what we have right now with DCS 2.5. Damage modelling and AI seems like remnants from LOMAc or the Flanker series.

 

I have been a fond supporter of ED for many years - Flanker 1.5, Flanker 2.5, Lomac, Stand alone Blackshark, A-10C and then further to DCS 1.0 and up until now.

 

 

Even running 2.5 with Medium to High settings with MSAA and DS, I don´t find the performance cost is worth the graphical update compared to 1.5.8.

The only plus are the collidable trees, especially when flying helicopters.

 

 

I own every moduel, except the C-101, Hawk and some campaigns, but feel that developement on most of these simply are too slow and the time from early acces to release is too long. Take the M-2000C, which now has been in early acces for two years - thats simply not acceptable.

For me it seems like developers loose interest shortly after eraly acces release, probably because thats where most people buy it and income therafter on those modules quickly decline.

 

 

For me DCS 2.x has become a deja-vu to when FSX was released.

With FSX I used more time tweaking the sim to gt it to run smooth than actually flyings, and thats what I have been doing with DCS 2.x too until now. Its simply not fun anymore.

 

 

I see no point putting more money into new modules as long as the core sim isn´t better optimised.

You can tweak all day long, but most tweaks are placebo and canot be regarded as fixes, but merely just workarounds for a poorly optimised core sim.

 

 

For me DCS will be put on hold until I read feedback indicating that the sim has become smoother.

 

 

While I do understand that it isn´t efficient to maintain two versions (1.5.8 and 2.5), I´m still sad that it seems that the only smooth running version still is 1.5.8 and that support for that has seized, including for modules not out of early acces yet.

 

 

Sorry for this negative post, but it´s quite frustrating to see how performance just keeps degrading on a franchise in which I have put quite alot of money.

 

You really really should upgrade your hardware...

[holimoli]

+ fjacobsen... They really should focus on the core rather than throwing out unfinished modules all over again.

[HiJack]

Sorry for this negative post, but it´s quite frustrating to see how performance just keeps degrading on a franchise in which I have put quite alot of money.

Your old CPU should now be replaced Jacobsen.

Released: April 2012

 

EDIT: And you are low on memory.

Edited April 6, 2018 by HiJack

[ked]

Yes, it's pretty badly optimised but you're far from recommanded configuration

[j0nx]

I run everything with medium to high settings in VR with a 6700, 16GB memory and a 1080 and have no stutters. Performance has dropped some since the update that fixed the Nevada buildings though but I am not attributing that to system memory. I just can't see updating to 32GB of memory for this sim. That seems wayyyy overboard for what it should require. Not to mention memory prices are absurd right now on par with video card prices.

[Shadow KT]

Your old CPU should now be replaced Jacobsen.

Released: April 2012

 

EDIT: And you are low on memory.

 

lol, nope.... CPU is perfectly fine. Can be a tad bit better with OC.

 

A lot of people here seems to misinterpret what "high" and "medium" end PCs look like.

 

His GPU, obviously won't run on maxed out everything, but it is more than enough to play on a medium-high settings @1080 (or at least medium)

 

Maybe you do need a bit more RAM tho, I am running 12 with no issues on the RAM side and got no issues on my CPU side either (3570K@4.4).

 

My only problem is my ancient GPU

[SkateZilla]

Your old CPU should now be replaced Jacobsen.

Released: April 2012

 

EDIT: And you are low on memory.

 

His hardware is sufficient,

 

I run DCS Smoothly on mine, and it's older.

[draconus]

Medium-High settings

FPS are fine, but I got stutters.

It is your fault for setting high-med while not having a good enough system for that. It takes some knowledge to know what settings affect what parts of system, ie. higher quality textures not only have a load on GPU but also take more RAM. Set things on low and see how it works for you. If it still stutters either ditch DCS or stay with 1.5. Your choice. Looks like 8GB of more memory would be far better investment for you than all those modules that you don't have fun of.

I have a really low spec rig and set almost all to low. DCS 2.5 provide me lots of fun, looks stunning, stutter a little, but I play exclusively SP so it's not a big problem. And I invested only $4.99 on one module ;) Makes me feel like stealing.

I can only be mad for things that got broken like damage model or night lightning.

+1 for idea of focusing more on bugs and getting already released modules fully functional but I guess this is not how software developing works today and we definitely do not want ED to go down.

And please stop comparing to other sims not to mention some fps games beacause there is nothing comparable at the moment.

[draconus]

His hardware is sufficient,

 

I run DCS Smoothly on mine, and it's older.

 

But you have 16GB.

[HiJack]

His hardware is sufficient,

 

I run DCS Smoothly on mine, and it's older.

No it is not.

 

So do you as Jacobsen have all games released last year installed. It sure sounds like Jacobsen have. All I know is that every shitty game you install will affect the overall performance.

[fjacobsen]

No it is not.

 

So do you as Jacobsen have all games released last year installed. It sure sounds like Jacobsen have. All I know is that every shitty game you install will affect the overall performance.

 

As it seems -I don´t have sufficient amount of RAM for DCS 2.5.

 

But I´m quite eager to meek my system clean.

 

Games are never installed in C:\Programs(x86)

Weekly deleiting content in various \Temp\ folders.

Weekly registry cleanuo

Monthly defragmentation and optimising of disk's

etc..

 

I also keep the number of background programs at a bare minimum and keep all drivers updated.

 

I don´t have all of last years games installed, but with proper settings I can run games and sims like P3D V4.2 with ORBX scenery, PMDG aircraft, Active sky, Pro ATC/X, Ezdok and some other programs running with very smooth performance. Same goes with IL-2 BOx, Project Cars 2, Assetto Corsa, Skyrim and First person shooters like, Arma 2 (Apex and all DLC's), Rain Bow 6 Siege, Siege, Ghost Recon Wildlands etc... etc.. most of those with 60+ FPS and no stuttering.

 

None of these games has been degraded because I installed the other games, so I don´t buy that theory. At least DCS 2.5 shouldn´t be more affected than the rest if so.

 

Offcourse none of those mentioned games are set on ultra all the way, but most of them in the range - Medium, High and Ultra.

 

I´m curious, but cautious with the newly announced "Dynamic texture unload manager" - time will tell if that will make things better.

 

Personaly I dont do much multiplaying, nor fly "heavy" missions, so I hope that things will become better and actually make my system adequet for type og flying I do in DCS.

 

But the performance issue is just one part of my overall frustration with DCS.

Whats also bad are the too long early acces periods we see with many modules. Beta or not, a early acces module should not take 2 years to complete like the M2000C, or being left unattended like the Normandy map.

 

Also far more important things should be looked into instead of of flushing out new modules. F.ex damage modeling simply makes the WW2 warbirds useless and far from fun to fly in dogfights.

 

Finn Jacobsen

[j0nx]

I threw my 1080ti in my VR machine yesterday and reinstalled a fresh copy of windows 10 so that nothing is on that PC but DCS, xplane 11 and FSX and the 1080ti didn’t make much of a difference in performance in DCS. Running task manager during a VR flight where I was getting 45fps the task manager showed 35% cpu usage and 60% gpu usage yet I am only getting 45fps. The sim is not using resources like it should. Xplane 11 was using a lot more cpu and gpu but even it still wasn’t using them maxed out. I’m going to test it out some more today and decide if I will keep the 1080ti in there instead of in my primary gaming pc which has a 4k monitor and is now borderline on performance with the 1080 that’s in there now. DCS doesn’t seem to perform any better between the 1080 and 1080ti for whatever reason...

 

Also another thing I have noticed is that after the patch that fixed the missing buildings, the mi8 is definitely the problem child with regard to performance. All of the other helicopters have very good performance but the mi8 is lagging really bad now comparatively. It didn’t used to be that way until very recently. I think there’s a problem there.

Edited April 7, 2018 by j0nx