2024 and Beyond graphics settings

[OldFlyer]

The visuals in the 2024 and Beyond video are gorgeous, but sadly despite fiddling with the in game settings, I can’t reproduce that quality on my PC.

Could ED share the graphics settings used to capture those cinematics?

Is there any additional graphic enhancement in post production?

Thanks 

[AKULA_OPTIMUS]

For sure there are tweaks in lighting, color, contrast and many of those things to make it have a more cinematic look. But for me, the thing that makes it more realistic and different from the actual gameplay, are the camera movements. None of those are present in the game, specially the smooth shaking effects and the ilusion that the camera is operated by a human, in my opinion that has even more influence in how different it looks from the game than the graphical settings. I wish DCS had something like that, its not that hard to make.

 

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

1 hour ago, OldFlyer said:

I can’t reproduce that quality on my PC.

None of us can: check the disclaimer at the end of the video: "effects were added for cinematic purposes" etc...

[twistking]

1 hour ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

None of us can: check the disclaimer at the end of the video: "effects were added for cinematic purposes" etc...

those effects were the "old footage" WWII film effects and effects related to audio. i did not spot any other visual enhancement.

generally graphics quality should be archievable by everyone. of course the video was recorded on a dev built, so there might be some improvments to shading, weather etc., that haven't made it to the public release yet. obviously the new maps (iraq, afghanistan) that are used, are also not available to us.

Edited January 7 by twistking

[BIGNEWY]

17 hours ago, OldFlyer said:

The visuals in the 2024 and Beyond video are gorgeous, but sadly despite fiddling with the in game settings, I can’t reproduce that quality on my PC.

Could ED share the graphics settings used to capture those cinematics?

Is there any additional graphic enhancement in post production?

Thanks 

Just spoke with GA his settings for the videos are essentially maxed out DCS graphics, 2560x1440 res and using DLAA.

thanks

[Hiob]

Don't forget, that the youtube compression smoothes out some rough edges (although DLAA already does a decent job at this). But for the most part I agree with AKULA. The cinematic cut and camera does a lot for the visual impression.

[Northstar98]

16 hours ago, twistking said:

those effects were the "old footage" WWII film effects and effects related to audio. i did not spot any other visual enhancement.

What about the increased bloom from rocket exhausts, such those seen here?

EDIT: I'd also say the tracers, which in some shots looked quite different, but there are other shots where they looked the same as what we have now. Though that might be just a result of the film effects you mentioned (though perhaps just a more subtle version).

Edited January 8 by Northstar98

[Hiob]

32 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

What about the increased bloom from rocket exhausts, such those seen here?

EDIT: I'd also say the tracers, which in some shots looked quite different, but there are other shots where they looked the same as what we have now. Though that might be just a result of the film effects you mentioned (though perhaps just a more subtle version).

 

Obviously the build that GA used, was an internal dev build and contains features that are not in the beta-release yet. Like the blast effekt on vegetation as an obvious example (apart fromthe new maps). Perhaps they slid in some minor new effects as well.... But apart all of the above mentioned items, I'd say the overall graphics is pretty comparable to what I see in 4K with max settings and DLAA.

[Silver_Dragon]

4 minutes ago, Hiob said:

Obviously the build that GA used, was an internal dev build and contains features that are not in the beta-release yet. Like the blast effekt on vegetation as an obvious example (apart fromthe new maps). Perhaps they slid in some minor new effects as well.... But apart all of the above mentioned items, I'd say the overall graphics is pretty comparable to what I see in 4K with max settings and DLAA.

We see the plane directors on supercarrier... GA as Wags and other always work with internal dev builds.

[Czar66]

About Color Editing/Correcting:
Color correction makes a huge difference in visuals that are scene to scene based like in the editing of a live action movie. From low medium and high values to detail contrast. No game can make those edits on the fly, that's the part of the artistic expression. At that level, you can take the exact same clips to different human editors and have complete different color correction solutions in the end.

In DCS you have graphics that are functional to the extent of visibility and readability with a decent level of customization with the new color filters and a gamma slider.
On artistic game trailers you have graphics (color, movement, sounds, contrast) that are designed purely  to evoke emotions.

[Northstar98]

6 minutes ago, Hiob said:

Obviously the build that GA used, was an internal dev build and contains features that are not in the beta-release yet. Like the blast effekt on vegetation as an obvious example (apart fromthe new maps). Perhaps they slid in some minor new effects as well.... But apart all of the above mentioned items, I'd say the overall graphics is pretty comparable to what I see in 4K with max settings and DLAA.

The reason that makes me suspect visual effects is because it was inconsistent - it was only that particular example where I saw the effect in other examples it isn't there (though that doesn't necessarily mean it's a video editing enhancement - it's just something that stood out to me as odd).

[Miro]

In cfg file shadows=5 that's for sure,but with that shadows setings my 4090 got serious problems at dawn and dusk at low alt over forrests in 2k.

[twistking]

56 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

What about the increased bloom from rocket exhausts, such those seen here?

EDIT: I'd also say the tracers, which in some shots looked quite different, but there are other shots where they looked the same as what we have now. Though that might be just a result of the film effects you mentioned (though perhaps just a more subtle version).

 

Good catch. Both tracer and rocket exhaust bloom could very well be added in post. I would argue though, that these do not have a huge impact on perceived graphics quality.

[Keith Briscoe]

As a still new (3 months, 94 hours) DCS user, I'm very much learning 'what are the possibilities'.  The 2024 and Beyond video (and many others) amaze me with the visuals.  I'm assuming there must be many historic threads on graphics settings (very much unique to each user's system), so I will start digging into that.  My stuff seems to work and look good, but definitely interested in the list of subtle ways for improvement. 

Appreciate any direction to previous posts/threads.

[OldFlyer]

4 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

Just spoke with GA his settings for the videos are essentially maxed out DCS graphics, 2560x1440 res and using DLAA.

thanks

Thanks for asking, BIGNEWY!

[Hiob]

3 hours ago, Keith Briscoe said:

As a still new (3 months, 94 hours) DCS user, I'm very much learning 'what are the possibilities'.  The 2024 and Beyond video (and many others) amaze me with the visuals.  I'm assuming there must be many historic threads on graphics settings (very much unique to each user's system), so I will start digging into that.  My stuff seems to work and look good, but definitely interested in the list of subtle ways for improvement. 

Appreciate any direction to previous posts/threads.

Shadows are very important for nice looks, so you probably want to go as high as your system allows.

Don‘t underestimate the time of day also. Missions set in the late afternoon or early morning have nicer lighting and longer shadows. Stay below 2.0 with the gamma.

And when you have maxed out the gfx you can further refine the picture (sharpness, contrast colors etc.) with reshade.

[Art-J]

Even though Glowing used some new tracer, explosion effects and whatnot in this video (after all it WAS supposed to be a demonstrator of things to come), the fastest and easiest way to pimp up the visuals in any version of DCS (as actually shown in half of sequences in every friggin' promo vid released for it ) has always been:

a) adjust mission time to get the sun low'ish (DCS gfx engine responds very well to "golden hours");

b) add one of more polished/developed cloud presets.

As you would do in any PC game really.

That's it. Done.

 

 

[Hiob]

1 minute ago, Art-J said:

Even though Glowing used some new tracer, explosion effects and whatnot in this video (after all it WAS supposed to be a demonstrator of things to come), the fastest and easiest way to pimp up the visuals in any version of DCS (as actually shown in half of sequences in every friggin' promo vid released for it ) has always been:

a) adjust mission time to get the sun low'ish (DCS gfx engine responds very well to "golden hours");

b) add one of more polished/developed cloud presets.

As you would do in any PC game really.

That's it. Done.

 

 

other words, same thoughts

Fully agreed! 

[Northstar98]

17 hours ago, twistking said:

Good catch. Both tracer and rocket exhaust bloom could very well be added in post. I would argue though, that these do not have a huge impact on perceived graphics quality.

Bloom I agree with, it's a nice enhancement but probably makes for little impact on the overall perceived quality.

Tracers though? Personally, I think DCS' tracers are quite bad, even to the point of spoiling the experience (especially when seen up close), so that's more of a big deal for me.

[draconus]

On 1/7/2024 at 9:15 PM, OldFlyer said:

The visuals in the 2024 and Beyond video are gorgeous, but sadly despite fiddling with the in game settings, I can’t reproduce that quality on my PC.

Of course, try again this year or beyond

[mobile83]

For me, what's missing is the sensation of speed. Everything looks so calm at 700 knots and 100 feet off the ground that I could have my best nap ever. 

[draconus]

14 hours ago, mobile83 said:

For me, what's missing is the sensation of speed. Everything looks so calm at 700 knots and 100 feet off the ground that I could have my best nap ever. 

Then fly lower and set high fov. Aircraft are not race cars to feel the speed.

Edited January 11 by draconus

[MacEwan]

On 1/10/2024 at 11:26 AM, mobile83 said:

For me, what's missing is the sensation of speed. Everything looks so calm at 700 knots and 100 feet off the ground that I could have my best nap ever. 

 

On 1/10/2024 at 1:02 PM, draconus said:

Then fly lower and set high fov. Aircraft are not race cars to feel the speed.

 

This is mainly because of the small FOV, lack of world detail, and lack of colour variation in DCS.

 

In the real world your sense of speed comes mainly from peripheral vision. This is also magnified by the amount of stuff actually zipping by you in real life.

[Dragon1-1]

Also, on Caucasus at least, oversized trees. The foilage is huge on that map, you've got pines the size you normally find in old growth forest growing in the middle of a town. On newer, more detailed maps, the sense of speed is better.

[draconus]

20 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Also, on Caucasus at least, oversized trees. The foilage is huge on that map, you've got pines the size you normally find in old growth forest growing in the middle of a town.

The trees are that tall in the area, even in the cities, over 4-5 store high.