Opinions on this map?

[Aussie_Mantis]

People's opinions on South Atlantic seem to be gnerally negative and describe a general lack of polish. Is this really the case or is this a case of a vocal minority?

Edited April 4, 2023 by Aussie_Mantis

[Silver_Dragon]

21 minutes ago, Aussie_Mantis said:

People's opinions on South Atlantic seem to be gnerally negative and describe a general lack of polish. Is this really the case or is this a case of a vocal minority?

 

Map continue on WIP

[71st_AH Rob]

Everyone has their own opinion(s) about this map, based on their own expectations. 

Some people have unrealistic expectations. Do we really expect high detail in the middle of Patagonia where there are really no people. Who cares how detailed the wildlife trails are. At most you might see that for a few seconds between hitting the ground in your parachute and hitting the ESC key to select a new aircraft.

Almost every update the developers add several new airfields and they have a plan to complete the map published and are following it. Most of the complaints are whining.

I really see great potential once we have a few more critical AI and a period correct Mirage and Harrier.

[mmarques]

I think the map is fantastic, sure there are a few issues like some flickering grass, some lower than I'd like textures in some places and some parts are quite barren (as they should be mind you) but it is a fantastic map nonetheless with quite detailed airfields, looks amazing from higher up, makes for a nice change of scenery and the Devs are quite active in improving it.

 

Hopefully there will be a few more units to populate it soon.

[Steel Jaw]

Ah but how is the FPS?

[Minsky]

4 hours ago, Steel Jaw said:

Ah but how is the FPS?

The general consensus is that you have tons of them when flying high, less when flying low in populated areas (e.g. Ushuaia), and even less at most airfields.

The "less" part may vary from "can barely notice this without an FPS monitor" to "completely unplayable".

The jury is still out on whenever it is a core DCS issue or map's issue.

[GrEaSeLiTeNiN]

Low fps if you fly near trees like in an Apache. Up high it's ok and looks nice. The map seems rather unattended to and not that popular compared to say Syria or the upcoming Normandy 2.

[Mr_sukebe]

I really like the map.  Above all, feels completely different to the other maps we have and has some awesome valleys to play in.

The sheer size of it also allows the ability to build missions that need to use tankers to find/engage enemy groups.

[YoYo]

Yeah, I think the guys have moved forward since release. Maybe it's still not perfect and in terms of optimization Syria still performs better, but I can see progress on the SA map and it's been flying pretty well since I changed the graphics card. I think it's not bad at the moment, but I hope it's not the end of the work and the SA map will still be optimized. Certainly, of all the maps currently released, it is the most demanding for your CPU/GPU, but it's also a nice change for desert maps. 

They should give a trial period for this map in the current stage. It's always best to see for yourself.

[Temetre]

The map is apparently very unfinished?

This was a progress map from 10 months ago:

 

[Minsky]

3 hours ago, Temetre said:

The map is apparently very unfinished?

I wouldn't say very unfinished: just unfinished and unpolished. Nearly all paved aerodromes are already added. And the northern part, where the topmost arrow is pointing, is now mostly "orange/green".

At some point the map's boundaries are going to be expanded further north to include a couple new airfields.

But they still have a long way to go. Mostly by adding small details (roads, towns, farms, vegetation etc.) and retouching the satellite imagery.

[Temetre]

vor 38 Minuten schrieb Minsky:

I wouldn't say very unfinished: just unfinished and unpolished. Nearly all paved aerodromes are already added. And the northern part, where the topmost arrow is pointing, is now mostly "orange/green".

At some point the map's boundaries are going to be expanded further north to include a couple new airfields.

But they still have a long way to go. Mostly by adding small details (roads, towns, farms, vegetation etc.) and retouching the satellite imagery.

Idk, ive heard a lot of people be disappointed with the detail and progress on the map. Apparently its still got poor performance and very low detail if you go below 15k feet?

It obviously got the potential to be an amazing map, and Id love to see it reach a good state, but what Ive heard doesnt make me optimistic currently.

[Minsky]

40 minutes ago, Temetre said:

Idk, ive heard a lot of people be disappointed with the detail and progress on the map.

Some people might be unaware that most of the mainland is extremely rugged and desolated in the real life.

But yeah, there's a huge difference between being desolated and completely bald and featureless like we currently have it in DCS.

IMO the progress has been pretty decent for such a small team, as they created quite a lot of new locations since the release.

Having said that, I do hope that they will start polishing the map and adding details once the few remaining aerodromes will be completed.

[Razorback]

I agree,
For sure, a great job was already done, especially considering the limited team that worked on this map.
You really have to be passionate to have spent so many hours on this map.
I have been in contact with the Razbam team I can assure you that they are listening the DCS community to improve the visual rendering of the map.

Currently, the biggest concern is the size of the map. Unfortunately, they have to satisfy everyone and given its size, it is currently complicated to run the map correctly with higher details for small and medium PC configurations.

Personally, I think it's a shame that the map has been extended so much, the work is much more considerable and the final rendering at low altitude is sometimes below what can be expected in 2023.
Why not the idea of working on a part of the map with more details on the terrain (only on the Falklands)?
It is a fact that for helicopter flight, even if the map is 99% accurate, there is still a lack of details.
The Falklands are quite limited in terms of infrastructures and it's a shame to see that currently in these areas there is still a real lack of 3D modelling.

But as I said, I know that the team is working day after day to improve all this and we have already seen some very nice and big improvements.
We can only hope that this will continue in the future so that in a few months or years we will have a magnificent map that is atypical regarding the other maps already available in DCS.

[Zius]

I quite like the map. It's not without issues but it's a really nice change of scenery.

Most of the time, in my experience so far, the map is reasonably accurate to the point that you can navigate VFR using a satellite map on your tablet. Which does not mean that it's without problems, some details are missing etc.

But still, it's a great scenery to explore. In particular, taking off from Ushuaia and landing at Puerto Williams is a lot of fun. As is canyon flying in Torres del Paine.

Whether or not you should buy it, is up to you. Personally I prefer to spend money on scenery rather than on yet another aircraft.

[Beirut]

22 hours ago, Zius said:

I quite like the map. It's not without issues but it's a really nice change of scenery.

Most of the time, in my experience so far, the map is reasonably accurate to the point that you can navigate VFR using a satellite map on your tablet. Which does not mean that it's without problems, some details are missing etc.

But still, it's a great scenery to explore. In particular, taking off from Ushuaia and landing at Puerto Williams is a lot of fun. As is canyon flying in Torres del Paine.

Whether or not you should buy it, is up to you. Personally I prefer to spend money on scenery rather than on yet another aircraft.

 

+1 

 

it's a good map with, as you said, a really nice change of scenery. The whole idea of a flight simulator is going from here to there, and this map definitely offers a lot of "there". It offers a great change of pace from the desert and big cities of other maps. If you just want to fly and feel alone and quiet in a big world, this is a great map for it.

 

Fire up your jet, bring some extra gas, and just enjoy a flight for the pleasure of flying. 

[GrEaSeLiTeNiN]

This maps has the sense of being neglected. But I came across this. 

[Ebphoto]

Personally I’m enjoying the heck out of the South Atlantic map! It was my go to map for a long time until Sinai. There’s just so much really beautiful stuff to see in the SA map. I think people that want a 100% or close visual map shouldn’t purchase things in early access. Early Access means it’s not finished & there will be parts that don’t look the best. Over time those things will be added and corrected until they get up to the 100% finished and polished map for a final Released product. I don’t understand why someone purchases something in Early Access and then complains about it not being complete or up to the standards of some other maps. It’s a work in progress!

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

I think the map has huge potential, but I experience quite bad performance (VR), and I think there's an issue with LODs for mountain textures. Mountains look eye-watering beautiful when you fly straight over them, but as soon as you look at them from an angle (especially from a few miles away) it looks like the mountain textures jump from 4k (or whatever it is) to 240p - quite a bit worse than even the Caucasus map. You can even see that in the development screenshots that were released today: the foreground looks great, but the mountains in the background... well...
If the terrain textures get polished up before the end of EA, it will be one of my favourite maps to fly over. Until then, I'll pick something else instead...