DCS vs A.C.6 graphics!!!

[Yami Nemesis]

Hi, the DCS will have better graphics than ACE COMBAT 6 and HAWX when the new engine is ready???

Will better realism than FALCON 4.0 AF???

 

Sorry but my english is no good :cry:

 

Greetings :thumbup:

[Pilotasso]

I doubt DCS will have better graphics but both HAWX and AC6 will be owned in everything else except of course if your only interested in arcade mode.

 

Any serious simmer with a degree of passion will rather prefer DCS over graphics 1000X anytime of the day. ;)

[SuperKungFu]

Black Shark is still based on the Lock On engine but with a few dx9 upgrade. Of course this may change over time as the other DCS series comes out.

 

If you like real simulators, DCS is the best pick hands-down. AC6 and HAWX are both arcade games. Besides, AC6 is a console game, far different that pc games. For pc, we are running on only 32 bit. They could design a computer with a higher bit rate but then most softwares needs to be rewritten. console games on the other hand, could be running as high as 360 bit (hence the name X-box 360). Although their graphics card may not be as good, it still packs a lot of process power and could render a lot of eye-candy shots. But like Pilotasso said, i prefer DCS over graphics anytime of the day.

 

And with that being said, yes DCS series will be very very realistic. Personally i say a bit more than falcon 4.0 AF with the advance flight model, 6dof, clickable buttons and many more.

Edited July 1, 2008 by SuperKungFu

[159th_Viper]

Will better realism than FALCON 4.0 AF???

 

Oh Hell Yeah!

[Yami Nemesis]

Black Shark is still based on the Lock On engine but with a few dx9 upgrade. Of course this may change over time as the other DCS series comes out.

 

If you like real simulators, DCS is the best pick hands-down. AC6 and HAWX are both arcade games. Besides, AC6 is a console game, far different that pc games. For pc, we are running on only 32 bit. They could design a computer with a higher bit rate but then most softwares needs to be rewritten. console games on the other hand, could be running as high as 360 bit (hence the name X-box 360). Although their graphics card may not be as good, it still packs a lot of process power and could render a lot of eye-candy shots. But like Pilotasso said, i prefer DCS over graphics anytime of the day.

 

And with that being said, yes DCS series will be very very realistic. Personally i say a bit more than falcon 4.0 AF with the advance flight model, 6dof, clickable buttons and many more.

 

Hi, but... now the new PC'S run in the plataform of 64 bits :joystick:!!!

DCS must adjust when the new engine is ready, also improve in all aspects (especially graphics) for the new plataform.

 

Greetings :D

[Glowing_Amraam]

Look at it this way:

 

When Lock On was released, it was the best looking flight sim on the market.

DCS: Black Shark uses this very same engine, although tweaked, and very high res textures.

 

Now, Take a look at all these highly detailed new ground models, as well as all the new helicopter models.

Think a few years ahead when DCS has evolved even more, using more advanced graphics engine.. :)

 

Get my drift? :D

[SuperKungFu]

Hi, but... now the new PC'S run in the plataform of 64 bits :joystick:!!!

DCS must adjust when the new engine is ready, also improve in all aspects (especially graphics) for the new plataform.

 

Greetings :D

 

 

I in no way represent DCS. But DCS still offers the best "realistic" graphic in ANY flight sim genre. Its terrain is mapped out to exactly what it is of the real black sea area, even right down to the soccer fields. Its new models with its realism and damage model beats any other flight sim genre, including AC6. And besides, its a lot easier said than done by saying create a new graphics engine. It takes months and years to develop a good game engine. In addition, you have to think about their point of view. Its a supply and demand market out there. there's a wide variety of PCs out there, so its a lot harder for PC industry since not everyone is running on the same specs like the console games. Not everyone can spend a couple grand to buy the best computers to run games. So if a game developer create a very very graphic intensive game, only a few percentage of the population could play it. and if that happens, the company would go backrupt because no one could or would play. So its not wise for a company to push too hard on graphics. What makes a game great is its gameplay, not graphics ;)

[Yami Nemesis]

I in no way represent DCS. But DCS still offers the best "realistic" graphic in ANY flight sim genre. Its terrain is mapped out to exactly what it is of the real black sea area, even right down to the soccer fields. Its new models with its realism and damage model beats any other flight sim genre, including AC6. And besides, its a lot easier said than done by saying create a new graphics engine. It takes months and years to develop a good game engine. In addition, you have to think about their point of view. Its a supply and demand market out there. there's a wide variety of PCs out there, so its a lot harder for PC industry since not everyone is running on the same specs like the console games. Not everyone can spend a couple grand to buy the best computers to run games. So if a game developer create a very very graphic intensive game, only a few percentage of the population could play it. and if that happens, the company would go backrupt because no one could or would play. So its not wise for a company to push too hard on graphics. What makes a game great is its gameplay, not graphics ;)

Hi, then ... what will happen with those with platform of 64 bits?

 

I think it is logical that over time, launched an updated version with specific improvements to maximize the advantages of platforms of 64 bits, besides making new models, which have increasingly improved graphics and other improvements, it also time will depend on which launched the new engine!

 

It may be that the new engine is a huge technological leap in all aspects, or simply an adaptation and improvement of the old engine with new computer technologies (processor multi-cores, graphics cards, video cards, etc.).

 

 

What you think about it?

 

Greetings ^^

[SuperKungFu]

it doesn't matter for people who have 64 bit, most games are still in 32 bit format. If a company made it for 64 bit computers only, that would be extremely stupid since only the 64 bit people could play.

[Boberro]

it doesn't matter for people who have 64 bit, most games are still in 32 bit format. If a company made it for 64 bit computers only, that would be extremely stupid since only the 64 bit people could play.

 

But finally would be progress of entering into 64 bits... ;]

[Vekkinho]

Did U guys play Blue Max back in '80s?!

 

What a game!!!

[Shaman]

I think DCS is really missing is terrain self-shadow...

[Yami Nemesis]

Graphics are a very important part of realism, that's out of question. But good graphics (technically speaking) and realistic graphics aren't the same thing, a game can use the latest DX10 features with tons of effects, higher texture resolutions and poly counts etc. pp. but still have an unrealistic outlook and fail to model important environmental effects that affect realistic gameplay. I don't say this is true for HAWX/AC6 because I didn't look at them, it's just something to keep in mind. And from what I can see on the vids/screenshots BS will still have the best (now technically speaking) graphics available in any combat flight simulation currently available.

 

Hi everyone, I understood the differences between the realistic graphics and good graphics, and even differences AC6 and HAWX giving effects film but do not go with reality. :pilotfly:

 

Moreover we know that every 9 months to launch new models ... to my way of thinking is fine for the first 3 models, but for the following to be more advanced and complex, should be adequate time, at least 1 year. :smilewink::lol::joystick:

 

Finally, because not updated the homepage of DCS?:(

 

Greetings :D