Jump to content

DCS World Patch Notes Discussion Thread


BIGNEWY

Recommended Posts

Subscription model would not work. If you want to support ED. Buy some 50 modules and start distributing them to your friends. So you help ED, but do it every month.

 

I don't think so. That's what we have been witnessing for the past years : more on more early access less and less polish ( remember the f16 launch) and more and more broken core code that's discouraging new users to join and current user to invest or recommend DCS. This is a dangerous spiral

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just subjective gut feeling that VR performance has been improving with the two latest updates. Nice to see we are now on right track, hopefully developers can squeeze more FPS in coming updates also.

 

There are still occasional stutters, which may be AI computations or something not graphics related.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Subscription model would not work. If you want to support ED. Buy some 50 modules and start distributing them to your friends. So you help ED, but do it every month.

 

Lets say I do that. I buy all my friends the modules they dont have yet, like the viper and F18 and super carrier modules. What am I doing exactly then? Im sending Ed a signal that I want new modules, even when buggy and unfinished, even if they require users to run a beta version that gets broken regularly. The reality is I want them to do the exact opposite. I want them to concentrate on fixing stuff, improving underlying code, not releasing new content and new modules and introducing new problems. Im not going to subsidize the very thing I dont want them to do!

 

So FWIW, I did just buy the Ka-50. I havent flown it yet, I may not for a long time if ever; but ED going through the trouble of updating an old model and giving it a new cockpit even though that most likely will not generate meaningful new sales has to be applauded. Its the closest thing I can do to voting with my wallet for the things I want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Subscription method is not the solution, buy the modules or other related products. Maybe ED is committed to making modules more attractive for the future and I'll show you how people buy them. It is not easy, but if they define those already released and put the new modules in the works with more optimized times, perhaps everything is resolved.

 

Firma DCS.png

CPU: 12th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-12700K   3.60 GHz - DDR4 32,0 GB - MSI RTX3080ti - Win 11 64bit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that a beta would even require any hotfixes and that users demand it, because everyone uses the beta. A beta release is supposed to be for testing. Raise your hand if you start DCS open beta with the goal of actually finding bugs and reporting them? I bet close to no one does. Instead we use the beta as if it where the regular version. Because we dont want to wait for the super carrier. Or our early access module. Or that feature that we have been waiting 6 months for. Or in some cases because the stable version has some major issue that is fixed in the OB, but that is much rarer and those are the only things that would warrant hot fixes.

 

This is the reason why I made my post. But I could have worded it better as some understood it I was for having no testing at all. It's all about how much testing is to be done. I don't know if ED does it like this, but when I was a dev still, I would test everything I put in there just right then and double check thrice constantly if it works. Then, when a build to be released was done, I went over all the things again to see if some spaghetti happened. Before the thing went live. We didn't have beta testers though. But here it's the job of inhouse or closed beta testers to go a bit deeper down the rabbit hole and see if strange things happen or not. After that, the thing moves out to open beta. That is us in this very case.

 

Now in the last two updates (w/o the today's hotfix), testing done was absolutely minimal or even hasn't been done before putting things to OB, due to time constraints. This has been confirmed by 9L even on hoggit. That wasn't a good move TBH and that's not what I've been wanting for. I wanted to express that the OB is there for thorough testing. Things like the almost invisible HUDs or nearly invincible A/C shouldn't slip into a build being released. But well, things happen and luckily we can update again today, becaue ED cares.

 

What I could imagine as a inhouse testing scenario which would be great to have is gathering a list of modules, features and things to test and either using specific instant action scenarios and missions to test these or create excplicit test missions just for that. With every item assigned to a person. For example one could go check the Hornet A/A in Caucasus, the next one does F-16 A/G in the Gulf etc. The hard work here lies in distributing the tasks so that the whole testing becomes efficient. Once that is done, it's a matter of maybe 10-15 minutes or even half an hour (something like the CASE I or a complete startup in the Tomcat does take time) for the whole team to check these many things - just to see if those do still work as they did in the dev branch. If major issues (like the HUDs or DM) pop up, well, delay the thing. If they're minor (some taxi light not working for instance), possibly decide to unleash the thing anyway. My whole point was that they shouldn't delay a release because of 2-3 days inhouse testing. One reason would be the delay itself, the other being the devs being chained to the testing instead of fixing bugs or coding/baking new stuff.

 

But in real life we can use our hands to cast shadows smilewink.gif

 

In DCS VR we have hands that don't rdlaugh.png

 

Exactly!

 

Hotfix has already been announced for today

 

And aside from that.. reading through these forums would almost make one think that DCS is a total wreck. Which is definitely NOT true. Some of us (myself included) have always been able to enjoy DCS. Sure, sometimes things that worked before, get broken after a patch. But in the end more things get improved and added, than things get broken.

 

Maybe some people here are only flying one specific aircraft, but for those that own more modules, there's always stuff to enjoy.

 

"Oh dear... Stuff in the Viper isn't working after this patch... the hornet radar isn't working..."

 

Really... Just get over it and enjoy any of the other modules.. there's always plenty that still work great. I flew the hornet yesterday and had a blast. Hmm radar not working? Ah well, let's do some air to ground then

 

120% this... fighter pilots tend to get stuck in target fixation though dealwithit.png

 

Yes that's a good thing. If only it could be true for other issues... Like VR performance that have been unacceptable for nearly 6 months..

 

Well, the announced performance increase of up to 50% for 2.5.5 about a year ago still hasn't hit yet, instead it went almost that much in the other direction...

 

Is it just me or does spotting feel better in the new build ?

 

This is a E3 and two F/A-18C escorts @ 18 Nm

 

 

 

KUZV7oH.jpg

 

 

 

... I like that the aircraft while being small specks, have a dark contrast against the background.

 

They'd still be almost invisible if it wasn't for the contrails/knowing where to look/zoom in.

 

Wow, that is amazing... may I finally be able to see things without dot labels? applejackshocked.png

dcsdashie-hb-ed.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even after the hotfix today i still cant get locks in any mode other than bore sight close in to target. Most of the time the radar still shows nothing to begin with. Slewing to targets that do show up in radar and depressing TDC makes the radar center on that target and the B sweep rapidly scans it but no lock ever happens in RWS or TWS modes.

System Specs: 13900K, Strix Z790 Gaming E, MSI 4090 Sprim Liquid X  OC'd, 64gb Gskill Trident Z DDR5, Samsung 980 PRO M.2 SSD,. Winwing throttle, Winwing panels/MIPs and VKB GF3/MCGU stick, MFG Crosswind V2, HP REVERB G2.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My frames are down in the 20s again, even with Tacview disabled and the shaders mod in. If this is ever going to perform at all? Probably just disregard...

 

Edit: Well, they're low in the Edge which I tried first, for whatever reason... had 45 in the 51 and even more than that when looking up.

 

And I just thought the control setups got messed up again, but in the end it was just Windows 10 acting up, as always (playing the typical Russian Roulette on my input devices). That is what you get when running Early Access pre-alphas rdlaugh.png

 

Microsoft really shells out a mess regularly, compared to yesterday's DCS release... never had so many issues with Windows, and I did run ME for probably a year or so and Vista for five even... icon_question.gif

 

If Oculus hadn't forced me to switch, I'd probably still run Windows on Stable branch... icon_redface.gif


Edited by Eldur

dcsdashie-hb-ed.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with most of the stuff mentioned above. Me as a very dedicated and thankful user would be ok with a higher fixed price or a subscription-based amount for DCS to be a polished, finished and optimized program. Actually, you can see dcs as a pseudo professional program. But probably under funded to reach these professional status and expectations. A lot of its users expect professional quality given the nature of the branch and the complexities it goes with this. A lot of professional software is (sometimes insanely!) expensive (protools, Cubase, final cut, premiere, photoshop.... prepar3D). Not saying I want insanely expensive software but just saying I would pay a lot more to have my beloved software with equal and linear expectations. Wether that is good for the business or a reachable goal given the niche branche it is remains another question. But man, what I would pay to have DCS with:

 

- optimized (engine)- new engine?

- finished (modules)

- finished/realistic assets

- finished/improved weather and clouds

- bug free (or 97% at least)

- dynamic campaign

- polished in all aspects

- ...

 

That would be worth so much! I’d pay hundreds for that!

 

However, still enjoying DCS a lot and thankfull it exists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with most of the stuff mentioned above. Me as a very dedicated and thankful user would be ok with a higher fixed price or a subscription-based amount for DCS to be a polished, finished and optimized program. Actually, you can see dcs as a pseudo professional program. But probably under funded to reach these professional status and expectations. A lot of its users expect professional quality given the nature of the branch and the complexities it goes with this. A lot of professional software is (sometimes insanely!) expensive (protools, Cubase, final cut, premiere, photoshop.... prepar3D). Not saying I want insanely expensive software but just saying I would pay a lot more to have my beloved software with equal and linear expectations. Wether that is good for the business or a reachable goal given the niche branche it is remains another question. But man, what I would pay to have DCS with:

 

- optimized (engine)- new engine?

- finished (modules)

- finished/realistic assets

- finished/improved weather and clouds

- bug free (or 97% at least)

- dynamic campaign

- polished in all aspects

- ...

 

That would be worth so much! I’d pay hundreds for that!

 

However, still enjoying DCS a lot and thankfull it exists.

 

+ 100.000

I9 12900k@ 5 GHz | 32 GB DDR4 | Asus ROG  Strix Z690-A Gaming Wifi d4| RTX 3090 | 6 TB SSD + 8 TB HDD | 4K Samsung Q90R 55" | VKB MK III PRO L | Virpil Throttle MONGOOST-50 | MFG Crosswind | TrackIR5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess this talk about subscription models in this thread is a bit offtopic, so I am risking to participate, sorry about that.

 

It is good to keep in mind that some things just cannot be hurried by throwing more money at them. Of course greater resources help, but it is nowhere linear gain in production speed. I am not so sure that the lack of funding is even the problem here. Some things you just have to wait and enjoy what you have right now.


Edited by Unclezam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

VR performance has significantly improved with the last couple of updates. I run SteamVR SS at 170 now, before it was 130-ish, every setting left the same as before. FPS is the same or even better.

 

For the guys talking about seeing planes out at 18 nm...man, in real life it's hard to spot another airliner (like a 737 or A320) at 10+ miles! There is no way you can easily see a fighter jet that far out. Use your radar/datalink to get an idea of where you expect to see the other aircraft then use your eyes to scan that patch of sky to spot him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm feeling a bit left out now :( Sadly, my VR performance dropped, especially in multiplayer.

 

I've had to drop from 90 to 60 Hz, and from high to low terrain textures.

ROG Z690 Hero ● i9-12900K 5.5GHz ● Giggy RTX 3090 OC ● 32GB 4800MHz ● Firecuda M.2s ● Reverb G2 ● Win11Pro //// A10CII ● AH64D ● AJS37 ● AV8BNA ● C101 ● CEII ● F16C ● F5EII ● F86F ● FA18C ● FC3 ● I16 ● KA50 ● M2000C ● MI8 ● P47D ● SA342 ● SPIT ● UH1H ● Y52

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm feeling a bit left out now :( Sadly, my VR performance dropped, especially in multiplayer.

 

 

 

I've had to drop from 90 to 60 Hz, and from high to low terrain textures.

That's a huge drop, doesn't sound normal. Have you tried deleting fxo and metashaders2 from Saved Games?

The vCVW-17 is looking for Hornet and Tomcat pilots and RIOs. Join the vCVW-17 Discord.

CVW-17_Profile_Background_VFA-34.png

F/A-18C, F-15E, AV-8B, F-16C, JF-17, A-10C/CII, M-2000C, F-14, AH-64D, BS2, UH-1H, P-51D, Sptifire, FC3
-
i9-13900K, 64GB @6400MHz RAM, 4090 Strix OC, Samsung 990 Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a huge drop, doesn't sound normal. Have you tried deleting fxo and metashaders2 from Saved Games?

 

I did; repaired DCS (via steam), removed shader files from both directories, and checked/refreshed nVidia/SteamVR settings.

 

I can still run with high terrain textures in most single player missions, at least the ones not too heavy with weather and smoke.

 

60Hz is a lot better than it used to be though; only the trees and clouds are rendered in different positions now giving the silver effect, mountains are solid again.

 

I'm saving for a new motherboard and cpu. I think DCS may well get more processor intensive as more core features are added/enhanced.

ROG Z690 Hero ● i9-12900K 5.5GHz ● Giggy RTX 3090 OC ● 32GB 4800MHz ● Firecuda M.2s ● Reverb G2 ● Win11Pro //// A10CII ● AH64D ● AJS37 ● AV8BNA ● C101 ● CEII ● F16C ● F5EII ● F86F ● FA18C ● FC3 ● I16 ● KA50 ● M2000C ● MI8 ● P47D ● SA342 ● SPIT ● UH1H ● Y52

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm feeling a bit left out now :( Sadly, my VR performance dropped, especially in multiplayer.

 

I've had to drop from 90 to 60 Hz, and from high to low terrain textures.

 

Damn, that sucks dude! I wonder why it would have dropped. Especially with your 2080ti. Which Nvidia drivers are you running? I rolled those back to an older one because the newer one gave me perf issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damn, that sucks dude! I wonder why it would have dropped. Especially with your 2080ti. Which Nvidia drivers are you running? I rolled those back to an older one because the newer one gave me perf issues.

 

I have the 1080ti which is doing a good job. My bottleneck appears to be CPU which is already overlocked.

 

I did manage to claw some CPU back by disabling a number of exports (withcraft, tacview, viacom) so have added low shadows back. 60Hz is not too bad and low terrain textures are ok.

ROG Z690 Hero ● i9-12900K 5.5GHz ● Giggy RTX 3090 OC ● 32GB 4800MHz ● Firecuda M.2s ● Reverb G2 ● Win11Pro //// A10CII ● AH64D ● AJS37 ● AV8BNA ● C101 ● CEII ● F16C ● F5EII ● F86F ● FA18C ● FC3 ● I16 ● KA50 ● M2000C ● MI8 ● P47D ● SA342 ● SPIT ● UH1H ● Y52

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the guys talking about seeing planes out at 18 nm...man, in real life it's hard to spot another airliner (like a 737 or A320) at 10+ miles!

 

Sorry to say that but this statement is absolute bollocks. I can even differentiate a conning (for the flat earthers: putting chemtrails) airliner with two engines from another that has 4, at angles of 25-30° above horizon. Those are 20+km away (easy sin maths here) which is more than 10 miles. And my eyes totally suck (I can't even read a car plate from more than 10m), yet I still can do that. Although I have to admit I'm having extra issues actually spotting things thanks to the loss of peripheral vision.

 

I've had to drop from 90 to 60 Hz, and from high to low terrain textures.

 

That hurts... I wish I had half of that though. DCS: Multiplayer has always been a powerpoint for me...

dcsdashie-hb-ed.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to say that but this statement is absolute bollocks. I can even differentiate a conning (for the flat earthers: putting chemtrails) airliner with two engines from another that has 4, at angles of 25-30° above horizon. Those are 20+km away (easy sin maths here) which is more than 10 miles. And my eyes totally suck (I can't even read a car plate from more than 10m), yet I still can do that. Although I have to admit I'm having extra issues actually spotting things thanks to the loss of peripheral vision.

 

 

 

That hurts... I wish I had half of that though. DCS: Multiplayer has always been a powerpoint for me...

 

Bollocks? Ok dude, do you fly in real life? I've been flying for 17 years and I can guarantee you that seeing an airliner from over 10 miles away is not easy. I'm not talking about contrails, of course those are easy to see but seeing the actual aircraft is not. I'm not saying it's impossible. Anyhow, this thread is about the patch. PM me if you want to discuss this further.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with most of the stuff mentioned above. Me as a very dedicated and thankful user would be ok with a higher fixed price or a subscription-based amount for DCS to be a polished, finished and optimized program. Actually, you can see dcs as a pseudo professional program. But probably under funded to reach these professional status and expectations. A lot of its users expect professional quality given the nature of the branch and the complexities it goes with this. A lot of professional software is (sometimes insanely!) expensive (protools, Cubase, final cut, premiere, photoshop.... prepar3D). Not saying I want insanely expensive software but just saying I would pay a lot more to have my beloved software with equal and linear expectations. Wether that is good for the business or a reachable goal given the niche branche it is remains another question. But man, what I would pay to have DCS with:

 

- optimized (engine)- new engine?

- finished (modules)

- finished/realistic assets

- finished/improved weather and clouds

- bug free (or 97% at least)

- dynamic campaign

- polished in all aspects

- ...

 

That would be worth so much! I’d pay hundreds for that!

 

However, still enjoying DCS a lot and thankfull it exists.

 

Just be careful what you wish for mate. You might end up with a more expensive version of the same thing. What I mean to say is, it is very clear that ED has some talented developers and they have the capability to create great things. What is desperately missing is proper project management, which has let to an over commit and poor QA. The point being, you can throw all the money you want to solve the problem, but unless that gets resolved, the problem will just grow exponentially as they go even wider.

 

20 years of software development in telecom building real-time 99.999% highly available products, I can tell you we had some of the best developers in the world, but that had nothing to do with the reliability of the product. Our quality assurance team pounding the absolute hell out of the product, and even with some of the best engineers on the market, the internal bug tracking list was frequently pages long... it just never left the door until it was right, and that's what made it a quality product. Heros of a thankless job sadly. Proper project management took this into account so we would only make promises on what could be delivered and QA ensures we looked good, being provided enough time and budget to do their job.

 

When bugs make it out the door, don't blame the goal keeper, it made it through 5-10 (depending on the sport) people before it got to them, but they are the most crucial element, and not having one or a poor one is honestly usually the difference between the annual trophy or not. Devs are focused on the piece they are working on, and generally unit test and feature test that component. Its QA's job (hopefully with the help of automation) to ensure it didn't sneak out and break something else.

 

TL;DR; You should only invest in companies that can properly manage their business with the funds they have. If they miss manage that, throwing more money at them isn't going to solve the problem, even if money is in fact the problem. They should understand what their capabilities are both technical and financial, and work effectively with what they have. If you do a great job, you get more... that's how it works. Try walking into a bank and securing a loan suggesting that money will solve a planing and management issue.


Edited by Vanguard
spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just be careful what you wish for mate. You might end up with a more expensive version of the same thing. What I mean to say is, it is very clear that ED has some talented developers and they have the capability to create great things. What is desperately missing is proper project management, which has let to an over commit and poor QA. The point being, you can throw all the money you want to solve the problem, but unless that gets resolved, the problem will just grow exponentially as they go even wider.

.

 

I think you are too quick to conclude the main problem is QA. I think its more likely their main problem is an old game engine that is being held together with spit and glue, and that is constantly being urgently updated to accommodate all the new content, but no one can afford the time to fundamentally rewrite parts that need rewriting. Some else called recently called it "code debt" and this exactly that it is.

 

Ive seen similar problems too often. I once got hired as a project manager in a company making point of sale software. In that company customers literally had a direct phone line to developers (I kid you not) who where constantly asked to add features urgently. Features that the base layer often had no provisions for and that had to be shoe horned in under extreme time pressure. The software base layer was neglected and abused for 10 years because no customer ever asks to upgrade the database engine and API layer to something that is more robust and more manageable. Even an army of testers would not provide bug free stable releases in that scenario.

 

The only solution was to stop devs answering the phone, have sales reps stop promising customers new features that weren't already in there , and lock up a team of devs in a basement with no phone and rewrite the db and APIs.

 

I didnt manage to convince the company owners of that, they said it would hurt sales and be far too costly. They wanted to be able to bill almost every hour that their devs worked. So I left. And a few years later the company went bankrupt.

 

ED risks getting in to a similar situation. code debt is piling up The problem isnt just QA or project management, its the business model that only benefits from adding new content that may break the core or require urgent changes, and almost nothing from improving the underlying core. As long as business is good, proper management may allocate the required resources to maintaining that core. But the moment it starts going wrong, the business model forces them to focus on what generates short term revenue, even if that means adding substantially to their long term (code) debt. It becomes a viscous cycle thats extremely difficult to get out of.


Edited by Vertigo72
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...