Graphics configuration wizard

[upyr1]

I thought it would be cool if we had a bench test wizard to set the best graphics settings for our systems.

[Tank50us]

17 hours ago, upyr1 said:

I thought it would be cool if we had a bench test wizard to set the best graphics settings for our systems.

While we're at it, how about a control setup wizard as well for all the 'common' commands? After all, when someone changes to a new system or new control setup, having *something* to make it easier to set up the dozen or so planes, while also making sure everything else is good to go would be freaking awesome. Heck, if a more arcady sim from that company with a snail as its logo can pull it off, I'm sure ED could add it to DCS

[SharpeXB]

There’s no definition of “best” that would suit everyone. Just browse through the VR forums and that becomes obvious. 

[upyr1]

1 hour ago, Tank50us said:

While we're at it, how about a control setup wizard as well for all the 'common' commands? After all, when someone changes to a new system or new control setup, having *something* to make it easier to set up the dozen or so planes, while also making sure everything else is good to go would be freaking awesome. Heck, if a more arcady sim from that company with a snail as its logo can pull it off, I'm sure ED could add it to DCS

On the issue of controls I have suggested that we should have a profile called generic helicopter and generic airplane where you could set the most common settings then fine tune them in the aircraft specic menu.  However, people keep screaming that not having to remap your throttle for every mod would somehow ruin the game 

[_Hoss]

1 hour ago, Tank50us said:

While we're at it, how about a control setup wizard as well for all the 'common' commands? After all, when someone changes to a new system or new control setup, having *something* to make it easier to set up the dozen or so planes, while also making sure everything else is good to go would be freaking awesome. Heck, if a more arcady sim from that company with a snail as its logo can pull it off, I'm sure ED could add it to DCS

Check out Grim Reapers YouTube channel, there is an app for that, they show you where to download, install and set up.

Edited December 12, 2021 by 352nd_Hoss

[upyr1]

9 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

There’s no definition of “best” that would suit everyone. Just browse through the VR forums and that becomes obvious. 

If you are trying to argue against the wizard, you haven't really done a good job.  I would argue the definition of "the best" would be what comes the closest to maxing out your system and maintain a reasonable frame rate. So leave the ability to manually configure the graphics so if someone disagrees with the wizard they can alter things to according to their taste 

[SharpeXB]

23 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

I have suggested that we should have a profile called generic helicopter and generic airplane where you could set the most common settings

The trouble is that beyond common axis assignments like pitch, roll and yaw, these are all different. So it wouldn’t help very much. 

10 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

so if someone disagrees with the wizard they can alter things to according to their taste 

That will be literally everyone so why bother?

[upyr1]

8 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

The trouble is that beyond common axis assignments like pitch, roll and yaw, these are all different. So it wouldn’t help very much. 

18 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

It would help us skip some steps so you would be able to fly a new module as soon as you get it.

 

13 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

That will be literally everyone so why bother?

If would provide you a starting point and if you turn DCS into a slide show, you could run the wizard 

[SharpeXB]

17 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

If would provide you a starting point and if you turn DCS into a slide show, you could run the wizard 

Wishful thinking. That you could just solve things like this with just the click of a button…

 

20 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

so you would be able to fly a new module as soon as you get it.

Then there’s just that 600 page manual to read…

[upyr1]

29 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

AsWishful thinking. That you could just solve things like this with just the click of a button…

As I said, earlier the button would launch bench mark software which would run tests where it alters graphics settings and monitors your frame rates. Right now we are basically guessing.

29 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Then there’s just that 600 page manual to read…

You don't need the manual to start the free flight or the training missions. So right now we have to manually configure all the controls before the free flight

[SharpeXB]

1 minute ago, upyr1 said:

So right now we have to manually configure all the controls before the free flight

There are about four controls common to all these aircraft. Pitch, roll, yaw and the gun trigger… and that’s about it. Assigning these isn’t a big deal. So what benefit is a common control scheme?

[upyr1]

1 minute ago, SharpeXB said:

There are about four controls common to all these aircraft. Pitch, roll, yaw and the gun trigger… and that’s about it. Assigning these isn’t a big deal. So what benefit is a common control scheme?

Don't forget trim, flaps, gear, brakes (If a plane has toe brakes I use my pedals and if it has a hand brake that is the same button) and I tend to use the same axis for all my targeting cursers. As I said it would just be one less step to setting up your controls. 

[SharpeXB]

5 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

the button would launch bench mark software which would run tests where it alters graphics settings and monitors your frame rates

Some games will read your hardware and apply optimum settings. But they don’t launch a benchmark to do this. I think the active AI and flight models in DCS prevent a benchmark from being feasible. 
I believe Nvidia GF Experience samples other players data to arrive at its optimum recommendations. This is probably too much work for ED to be troubled with. The “performance troubles” are usually people just setting graphics too high and being obsessive-compulsive. There’s no solution for that. 

2 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

Don't forget trim, flaps, gear, brakes (If a plane has toe brakes I use my pedals and if it has a hand brake that is the same button) and I tend to use the same axis for all my targeting cursers. As I said it would just be one less step to setting up your controls. 

But players don’t typically assign these to the same controls so they can’t be standardized. Only the basic stick and rudder controls fit within a preset. Not even the rudder really since some players use twist sticks. 

[upyr1]

15 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Some games will read your hardware and apply optimum settings. But they don’t launch a benchmark to do this. I think the active AI and flight models in DCS prevent a benchmark from being feasible. 
I believe Nvidia GF Experience samples other players data to arrive at its optimum recommendations. This is probably too much work for ED to be troubled with. The “performance troubles” are usually people just setting graphics too high and being obsessive-compulsive. There’s no solution for that. 

Wizards won't fix PBKAC errors but they will at least provide people with starting points. The reason for the bench mark suggestion is reading hardware will require maintianing a database though if something is user based there won't be an issue.

 

17 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

But players don’t typically assign these to the same controls so they can’t be standardized. Only the basic stick and rudder controls fit within a preset. Not even the rudder really since some players use twist sticks

 

You have missed a key word in the suggestion

2 hours ago, upyr1 said:

we should have a profile called generic helicopter and generic airplane where you could set the most common settings then fine tune them in the aircraft specic menu.  However, people keep screaming that not having to remap your throttle for every mod would somehow ruin the game 

The idea is not to create a default profile that is intended work for everyone regardless of hardware, Eagle tries to do that now it doesn't work that well. The idea is to have a profile called generic air plane or helicopter where you can set the controls that you use the most. So if you have a twist stick then you assign that as your rudder if you have pedals you assign that as your rudder. If you have two throttles you assign them accordingly if you have one you set that up.  Unless you honestly believe most players assign a different had for trim for each plane- I know I don't do that.

 

[SharpeXB]

8 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

So if you have a twist stick then you assign that as your rudder if you have pedals you assign that as your rudder. If you have two throttles you assign them accordingly if you have one you set that up.

Yeah but there aren’t that many common controls to deal with. So it wouldn’t be much help. It only takes a few minutes to assign these. 

[upyr1]

3 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Yeah but there aren’t that many common controls to deal with. So it wouldn’t be much help. It only takes a few minutes to assign these. 

I just listed a bunch of common controls  

flight axis, trim, throttle, target curser 

I get it you like to configure controls manually 

[SharpeXB]

10 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

The reason for the bench mark suggestion is reading hardware will require maintianing a database though if something is user based there won't be an issue.

A benchmark is a logical enough thing to have. If it was that easy DCS would already have one. It’s easy enough to figure out graphic settings for yourself though. The people who are flummoxed by this are obsessive compulsive types who rebuild their machines searching for 2-4 more FPS. There’s no helping them. And then there’s VR which again there’s no help for. DCS is too demanding for VR period. 

Just now, upyr1 said:

I just listed a bunch of common controls  

flight axis, trim, throttle, target curser 

I get it you like to configure controls manually 

But again those are easily set up in a few minutes. And it’s not very often you buy a new module in DCS. There is a “save profile” and “load profile” function but it doesn’t seem to do this.

[upyr1]

11 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

A benchmark is a logical enough thing to have. If it was that easy DCS would already have one. It’s easy enough to figure out graphic settings for yourself though. The people who are flummoxed by this are obsessive compulsive types who rebuild their machines searching for 2-4 more FPS. There’s no helping them. And then there’s VR which again there’s no help for. DCS is too demanding for VR period. 

I really don't care to help the OCD types I just want an easy way to configure the settings for my computer. 

 

32 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

But again those are easily set up in a few minutes. And it’s not very often you buy a new module in DCS. There is a “save profile” and “load profile” function but it doesn’t seem to do this.

It's an annoying few minutes which could be spent flying

[SharpeXB]

9 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

It's an annoying few minutes which could be spent flying

Isn’t this what “save” and “load” profile does?

11 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

I just want an easy way to configure the settings for my computer. 

All PC games require you to adjust graphic settings. DCS is no different. People who don’t want to be bothered with this play on consoles. 
The only way to make PC graphics easy is just own an extreme system where you can just set everything to the max and go.

[Tippis]

2 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

There are about four controls common to all these aircraft. Pitch, roll, yaw and the gun trigger… and that’s about it. Assigning these isn’t a big deal. So what benefit is a common control scheme?

The benefit is that you set them once, and they apply everywhere. That saves time every time you get a new module and every time you want to tweak one of the basic settings. They're common for a reason, and as such, all that little time quickly adds up.

52 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Isn’t this what “save” and “load” profile does?

No. Because the controls aren't common so loading one module's profile into a different module will cause all kinds of funny business and — if it doesn't just break outright — will increase the amount of time spent. So once again, you're just trolling around here trying to keep improvements to the game from happening, and your laughable and utterly pathetic attempt (and abysmal failure) at an argument is entirely based on a profound ignorance of how the game works, both in general and in the specifics related to the suggestion at hand.

[upyr1]

3 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

All PC games require you to adjust graphic settings. DCS is no different. People who don’t want to be bothered with this play on consoles. 
The only way to make PC graphics easy is just own an extreme system where you can just set everything to the max and go.

I know that PC games require you to adjust your settings, however a lot of PC games have a built in utility that will look at your hardware and set your graphics automatically based on a file. I don't see why DCS shouldn't have something like that.  The bench mark utility might be a bit extreme but it would not require a database. I really don't get why you and other trolls have to crap on every suggestion to make setting up DCS easier.  Your initial argument was we shouldn't have one because some people will not be happy with the settings which is an utterly stupid argument. 

 

 

Edited December 13, 2021 by upyr1

[SharpeXB]

20 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

I know that PC games require you to adjust your settings, however a lot of PC games have a built in utility that will look at your hardware and set your graphics automatically based on a file. I don't see why DCS shouldn't have something like that at the minimum. I get making it a bench mark idea might be extreme. but we should have at least something. I really don't get why people crap on ideas that should make setting DCS up easier. You try to say we shouldn't have any sort of an autoconfig utility because some people will never be happy, which isn't a good argument against it. As I am sure a lot of people would also be happy if we had one. Same thing with the controls configuration. I keep seeing people basically argue against it because some how remapping everything increases their enjoyment if DCS.  

Although a benchmark seems like a great idea. Just consider all the reasons this won’t be feasible in DCS

1. The track replay system doesn’t work. It can’t replay tracks featuring AI consistently (which are a source of CPU load) they’ll do something different every time. 
2. Live gameplay is probably more demanding than a recorded track. It’s not possible to confirm this due to #1 above.

Which scenario or map would the track use? It would have to be the free Caucuses map yet the new ones are all more demanding. How many units? Which ones? It would have to use the two free planes. New modules are more demanding than the free aircraft There’s such a variety of situations in the sandbox that DCS is, it’s hard to describe a “typical” gameplay episode. 
So it’s not as simple as just running a standardized replay track. Otherwise that would likely be in the game already. And a benchmark won’t assist in determining graphic settings because performance can vary widely between GPU and CPU-limited situations. Without understanding that, determining what to set can be confusing. There are third-party utilities which can probably tell you this. Knowing which settings affect your GPU or CPU is necessary in order to choose what works best  

Setting graphics and mapping controls are the least of the challenges in DCS. I’d rather see ED work on actual game improvements instead of handholding. 

[Tippis]

4 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Although a benchmark seems like a great idea. Just consider all the reasons this won’t be feasible in DCS

1. The track replay system doesn’t work. It can’t replay tracks featuring AI consistently (which are a source of CPU load) they’ll do something different every time. 
2. Live gameplay is probably more demanding than a recorded track. It’s not possible to confirm this due to #1 above.

The track replay system works just fine as long as you record it properly — doubly so if you record it with very controlled circumstances, and for a benchmark, you want circumstances to be very controlled indeed so that pretty much solves itself. The “reason” here is your universal unfamiliarity with how DCS works.

Live gameplay is not a factor. It wouldn't be a sane, sensible, or working benchmark if that kind of uncontrolled chaos were to be included. The point is that you run through the benchmark to get a specific score on a known scale, and then (auto)adjust settings depending on where on that scale you end up. It doesn't matter if live gameplay is more demanding — that is factored in when you construct the benchmark and create a correlation between the benchmark score and what the corresponding settings will be. It does not produce a specific frame rate in a live setting, but rather a suggested set of settings that will ensure a suitably smooth experience as defined by the empirical testing that generates the correlation data., Of course, at that point you will immediately disagree with what the devs qualify as “suitably”, “smooth”, and “experience”. The “reason” here is actually backwards to how a benchmark inherently needs to work in order to be an actual benchmark.

So “all the reasons” amount to zero so far.

 

4 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Which scenario or map would the track use?

Doesn't matter. What matters is that enough of a graphics and system processing workload is forced onto the game to test its various bottlenecks — this is trivial to do.

4 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

How many units? Which ones? It would have to use the two free planes. New modules are more demanding than the free aircraft

The modules don't matter. Again, we absolutely do not want to test a live setting, but a highly scripted one, and as such, it will be all AI all the time to have a specific known quantity. For the same reason, the unit pick simply comes down to one of experimentation: are there any specifically taxing ones from a processing standpoint? Are there any that can be added en masse, where they will just add graphics workload. You pick and choose.

4 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

So it’s not as simple as just running a standardized replay track.

Actually, that is exactly what it is. Well, standardized with a few extra scripting tricks that most player-made tracks never use because they're made by… well… players, and not generated by a scripting system. And no, it does not follow that it would already be in the game. There are quite a few reasons (that you love to use as arguments against improvements to the game) why they would not have bothered, and any one of those could have kept it from happening.

Of course, there are indeed a few benchmark tracks out there if you go look for them — they are used to test things already, after all…

4 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

And a benchmark won’t assist in determining graphic settings because performance can vary widely between GPU and CPU-limited situations.

Ehm… that is exactly what benchmarks help with: if properly constructed, they can specifically target those situations and give you a good idea of where there problem is and what measures need to be taken (if any) to ameliorate those issues. The whole point is that the game is a fixed, known, and closed set of options with known effects — the “outcome space” is a known entity.  You are not meant to determine anything; the tool does it for you, which is easier than usual if it's something that is built into the very software you're tweaking. The require knowledge needed is encapsulated within the tool itself.

[BIGNEWY]

A benchmark is something we discuss often internally, but I have no news to share sorry. 

I would be in favour of having a benchmark in DCS 

thanks

[upyr1]

9 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Which scenario or map would the track use? It would have to be the free Caucuses map yet the new ones are all more demanding. How many units? Which ones? It would have to use the two free planes. New modules are more demanding than the free aircraft There’s such a variety of situations in the sandbox that DCS is, it’s hard to describe a “typical” gameplay episode. 

The Su-25T in the Marinas would work

9 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

 

So it’s not as simple as just running a standardized replay track. Otherwise that would likely be in the game already. And a benchmark won’t assist in determining graphic settings because performance can vary widely between GPU and CPU-limited situations. Without understanding that, determining what to set can be confusing. There are third-party utilities which can probably tell you this. Knowing which settings affect your GPU or CPU is necessary in order to choose what works best  

You would need the tools to monitor system performance, and as stated before the fact performance can vary widely is exactly what I am asking for a benchmark tool to help with the graphics As the entire point of the tool would be to test under different conditions