Would you seems pay for commercial add ons?

[SUBS17]

Aside from the fact that keeping the routines for that stuff would mean additional resources kept in memory and clocking CPU time that both could have been spent simulating things. ;)

 

Features always comes at a price, and you will typically only have to change those settings once or twice through the life of the product on your computer, so why waste your computer's resources on things that you will only have to tinker with once or twice?

 

Nope that is incorrect compared to other modern sims its quite backward to have to exit MP and start SP just to change a setting. It wouldn't make any difference in resources or clock speed so I don't get how you come up with that considering its the GUI we're talking about. Its good to bring these things up now so later it can be improved to make the sim better. I'd expect changes with the GUI when the A-10C is released or even FC2.0 perhaps they could add those features then. BTW as an IP I often have to talk people through changes to their controls etc online. Although it might be untouched for a person who plays SP to change the options on average we get new pilots every week(for DCS alone I have 6 new pilots to train up this week!) so it occurs quite often and the delay is quite annoying. Even just having the options in the MP menu is a big help but ideally as DCS evolves particularly when you have the A-10C and F-16 it is quite necessary to make changes to the controls to get them setup right so an ingame contol option is ideal and separate profiles would also be necessary.

[EtherealN]

It wouldn't make any difference in resources or clock speed so I don't get how you come up with that considering its the GUI we're talking about.

 

I didn't say it'll make a difference to clock speed.

I said "additional resources kept in memory and clocking CPU time".

 

The point of the separation is that the GUI won't be hogging memory - even if you don't see it when not in the GUI, it'll still be loaded in memory since it will be part of the process. Through the separation that memory is freed up (and remember that DCS is already touching on the limits of 32-bit systems) and the process doesn't have to include redundant features.

 

Now, I understand that you don't quite consider them redundant in this case, but never think that an added feature does not come at a cost. It'll cost computer resources even when you aren't using it simply through being in the process.

 

Whether it's bad enough to be a bother I don't know, since I haven't seen the code involved, but if my memory serves the separation was done precisely to save on memory resources.

Edited February 17, 2010 by EtherealN

[AlphaOneSix]

I don't think his main point has to do with the separation of the game itself and the GUI. Rather, it's the fact that if you are playing MP and wish to make changes to your options, you cannot do it via the MP GUI, you have to use the SP GUI.

[EtherealN]

Yeah, I understood that, but from my understanding this is a byproduct of that separation (since the MP loads directly to dcs.exe, which "lost" that capability when those things were separated for memory conservation).

 

Should be fairly easy for someone with enough coding skills to make a standalone (like DCSMax) that can do it as well, though it will of course not solve the fact that you have to exit the MP server.

[EvilBivol-1]

It's true that separating the GUI from the simulation engine frees up resources by unloading the GUI process out of memory. This is particularly useful if the mission is run out of the mission editor. Black Shark missions can easily gobble up 2 GB of RAM at runtime and it helps to have as much of that available as possible. But in any case the SP GUI is separate from the MP GUI and the runtime engine, because it is based on a new graphics API. In the future, the plan is to reunify the SP and MP GUI system and the game engine. One of the main reason for this will be to enhance the mission editor and allow it to display a "satellite view" from the actual game engine. This and hopefully other functions that can be introduced will make unit placement much easier and add other usefull possibilities.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=568712&postcount=8

Edited February 17, 2010 by EvilBivol-1

[amalahama]

I'd pay for new airplanes and of course for a DC if it's well-made. I wouldn't pay for anything else.

 

Regards!!

[SUBS17]

It's true that separating the GUI from the simulation engine frees up resources by unloading the GUI process out of memory. This is particularly useful if the mission is run out of the mission editor. Black Shark missions can easily gobble up 2 GB of RAM at runtime and it helps to have as much of that available as possible. But in any case the SP GUI is separate from the MP GUI and the runtime engine, because it is based on a new graphics API. In the future, the plan is to reunify the SP and MP GUI system and the game engine. One of the main reason for this will be to enhance the mission editor and allow it to display a "satellite view" from the actual game engine. This and hopefully other functions that can be introduced will make unit placement much easier and add other usefull possibilities.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=568712&postcount=8

 

:notworthy: