another nail in the coffin of the sim industry

[Speed]

Personally.. I think this game COULD have been more efficiently programmed. To not say so is to claim that this is a perfect product. The water is present everywhere under the terrain! This is the only game I've ever played where turning the water graphics down to their lowest setting would nearly double my frame rate while flying over a mountain range. I think we should at least admit that the sim could have been better programmed, though I think very few of us would have been able to do a better job. To kiss up to ED and pretend everything is perfect doesn't help to inspire improvements on their part.

 

All that said, the flight model and systems modelling is the very best I have ever seen, and that is what sets this game above others. In those catagories, this sim is the best ever among combat flight sims, without a doubt. Chrome, you must understand that this is a game that requires WEEKS to become decent in, MONTHS to master, and that is only if you are a fast learner and good at flight sims.

[Grimes]

I'd say GTA4 is a sim. Its a simulated depiction of New York City. Yah the physics are over the top and its not exactly a replica of the city, but when you are driving through town you FEEL like you are in NYC. Its got a certain atmosphere about it that I believe is lacking in BS/FC2 even though the map is physically accurate.

 

But GTA4 and all cross platform/PC games FPS performance on consoles vs PC can be understood by a simple fact. Xbox 360, PS3, and Wii all have a unified codebase behind them. If you make a game for PS3 it will work on all PS3s. Thus they can focus and make the code as optimized as possible. If you make a game for PC, you have to consider the wide variety of hardware and software that can be used by the player base.

[Glowing_Amraam]

I'd say GTA4 is a sim. Its a simulated depiction of New York City. Yah the physics are over the top and its not exactly a replica of the city, but when you are driving through town you FEEL like you are in NYC. Its got a certain atmosphere about it that I believe is lacking in BS/FC2 even though the map is physically accurate.

 

"Simulating" an environment, creating an Atmosphere, does not make the game a sim. Look at Bad Company 2/COD 4 ... The atmosphere in both these titles are REALLY good at certain locations etc, with battles going on all around you etc, but is it a sim? No.

 

Doest Black Shark/FC 2 lack certain atmosphere etc? Yes..

Is A-10C trying to do something about that? Yes.

 

Are we moving forward: Hell yes! :)

[Lio]

Personally.. I think this game COULD have been more efficiently programmed. To not say so is to claim that this is a perfect product. The water is present everywhere under the terrain! This is the only game I've ever played where turning the water graphics down to their lowest setting would nearly double my frame rate while flying over a mountain range. I think we should at least admit that the sim could have been better programmed, though I think very few of us would have been able to do a better job. To kiss up to ED and pretend everything is perfect doesn't help to inspire improvements on their part.

 

The sim aint perfect but very little in life is. But to try and make this game sound like its poor or badly executed is crazy.

[JaNk0]

Can we(ED) make the sims better?

 

Edited August 9, 2010 by JaNk0

[aairon]

Well I for one, am all for introducing the Real Black Shark Ka-50 to NYC and the thrill of dodging Pimps and hookers with shoulder launched stingers. Get right on it ED, drop that A-10c thingy and put all efforts into this please.:megalol: Oh almost forgot, Please don't forget multi player Coop where one or more players can be hookers and pimps and such. There could be a pseudo para military application for this idea, I mean there must be pimps who need to practice their skills with the stinger for possible real life situations?.

Edited August 9, 2010 by aairon

[beers]

I don't know about the pimpin' bit, but a map of NYC would simply ROCK. Helo-2-Helo dog fights amongst the sky scrapers!! But it wouldn't be all that much fun for the fast movers, so it's probably a no-go. :(

[ChromeWasp]

"After all, in your last track you were seen to be manipulating the throttle in flight"

ha ha ha

I was doing that to show somebody I had followed their advice

I knew everybody would jump on it

Anyway the AP control authority during autohover is INCREDIBLY weak

 

look the autohover can't even overcome a 5 kph drift - if the AP followed the directors advice it would hold with only 1% or 2% authority

But there is NO REACTION at all - it doesn't try and fail - it doesn't even try

I have read all these posts about it and I understand perfectly well the relationship between trim and the auto pilots authority

and the fact you can have this situation:

 

|---------0-----------|

^

 

holding at edge of authority - all seems ok until a tiny gust requires this:

 

|---------0-----------|

^

 

and it runs out

 

but that is NOT what is happening here

 

I understand perfectly well the relationship between the FD and the AP

and the collective position and the control authority

 

You are all treating me like a total noob and not realising I am a PILOT

and have been flight simming for DECADES

 

and I know when something is broken

 

to put it to rest - I know somebody who works with "real" apache simulators and someone else who is apache engineer - I will show them this and see what they say - if they tell me attack helicopters handle like paper bags blowing in the wind and their APs have control authority of a budgie I will accept it!

[Grimes]

"Simulating" an environment, creating an Atmosphere, does not make the game a sim. Look at Bad Company 2/COD 4 ... The atmosphere in both these titles are REALLY good at certain locations etc, with battles going on all around you etc, but is it a sim? No.

 

IMO, it depends on how you play the game and how its setup to begin with. Sure GTA games arn't exactly complex switchology games, nor are their physics usually accurate, but I still say it and many other games out there are more of a sim than what many choose to admit. You bring up COD as an example of not a sim, but something that has a look and feel done extremely well. Yeah, you are right about that, but the difference is the world of COD is heavily scripted and designed to feel alive, GTA4 IS alive. Google some stories players have posted of them "stalking" a virtual person in GTA4. You will realize that it spawns people with lives, who go shopping, meet with a friend, or sit on a park bench watching the sunset. I admit they aren't ever present personalities that exist throughout the game, instead they spawn in close proximity of the player on the fly. Yet they still exist and simulate life. The best story I read regarding a GTA game was one a father wrote about him letting his young child play GTA San Andreas. He didn't tell the kid what to do, yet the kid did everything properly. He drove like you would in the real world, he parked cars neatly, he didn't try to kill anyone, he effectively simulated daily life in a game who's intent is everything but. Its all down to implementation and the players interpretation.

 

If a game came out that had half the realism and switchology of DCS Black Shark but more accurately simulated the life of the pilot and world you fly in... I'd have a hard time deciding which is a more accurate "sim."

[EtherealN]

to put it to rest - I know somebody who works with "real" apache simulators and someone else who is apache engineer

 

And ED knows people who fly the Ka-50, as well as the engineers that built the thing and technicians that maintain it and similar equipment, since Kamov were involved in development. I believe ED wins this particular e-peen competition. ;)

 

(Look under "Subject Matter Experts" in the credits list and you'll find people that compare the simulator to the real thing. Also, do remember that the company you are talking about here makes military simulators as well - for example every US pilot that converts to the Charlie Hog will use software developed by TFC and ED.)

 

Basically sir, the reason why we believe you to be doing "something wrong" is that the behaviours you are describing are very typical for people who are just starting out, while people who have studied the helicopter for a while pretty much never have any of those things you describe happen to them. If the simulator itself was at fault, it would happen to us vets as well, but it isn't. That should tell you something.

 

Again though, I'd really like to know what your computer setup is, since there may be ways to improve performance. A DxDiag would be perfect. (Start -> Run -> DxDiag -> Save to file -> upload to forum.)

 

You are all treating me like a total noob and not realising I am a PILOT and have been flight simming for DECADES

 

I am also a pilot IRL, and I have also been simming for decades. Learning to use this particular piece of equipment is still a long road and a humble attitude towards the learning curve is not only advantageous - it is nigh on a requirement. For all intents and purposes you are "noob", since you are new to the simulator. Nothing wrong in that - we've all been there.

 

Also, realize that when you start talking about GTA as a Simulator, people will end up saying nasty things. It's just the study sim culture: we get angry enough when something like HAWX gets listed as a "sim" in store shelves, so people are liable to interpret the notion that GTA is somehow a sim and something to compare to as a pretty big middle finger. ;) (That's why people accused you of being a troll: the things you said are exactly the right things to say if you want to insult the study simulator hobby and it's afficionados.)

Edited August 9, 2010 by EtherealN

[MTFDarkEagle]

+1 EtherealN

[monsterZER0]

Dude, you STILL haven't posted your system specs either. Are you attempting to run it on your laptop with the integrated graphics you mentioned earlier? If so no wonder... :joystick:

 

I've gotta say, however, this is by far the most entertaining thread I've read on here yet, and I've been lurking for years, lol...

Edited August 9, 2010 by monsterZER0

[Nose Nuggets]

we get angry enough when something like HAWX gets listed as a "sim" in store shelves...

 

I just died a little inside.

[ChromeWasp]

so I double checked my system health and specs

health is A OK

all my components are well above spec except my weedy cpu

so I am a noob with a rubbish pc - that would explain alot

[Nose Nuggets]

so I double checked my system health and specs

health is A OK

all my components are well above spec except my weedy cpu

so I am a noob with a rubbish pc - that would explain alot

 

firstly, windows' determination of system health is irrelevant. its less then relevant in fact and can be counter productive if used to assess system health.

 

secondly, saying everything meets reqs except the CPU means you dont meet reqs. the CPU is debatably the most important part. you could have a quad SLI system but its all worthless if the CPU cant crunch the numbers fast enough.

 

lastly, even with proper and minimum req gear drivers have the potential to cause all kinds of havoc.

 

DXDIAG or bust.

[aairon]

so I double checked my system health and specs

health is A OK

all my components are well above spec except my weedy cpu

so I am a noob with a rubbish pc - that would explain alot

 

Yes it would.;)

 

A real DX Diag would be an eye opener. as posted above.

Edited August 10, 2010 by aairon

[CAT_101st]

so I double checked my system health and specs

health is A OK

all my components are well above spec except my weedy cpu

so I am a noob with a rubbish pc - that would explain alot

We would still like to see what you have. Tell us what we want to know or we will :bash: you darn it. :D By posting your system specs We might be able to tell you what you need or can tweak to get your system faster and BS smother. I know I have a few tricks up my pant leag :music_whistling:

[AlphaOneSix]

I spent several years as an Apache engineer. I also spent a bit of time "flying" the AH-64A CMS (combat mission simulator). I give DCS:Black Shark my Internet Seal of Approval, yay!

[slug88]

to put it to rest - I know somebody who works with "real" apache simulators and someone else who is apache engineer - I will show them this and see what they say - if they tell me attack helicopters handle like paper bags blowing in the wind and their APs have control authority of a budgie I will accept it!

 

As mentioned by Ethereal and others, you're definitely not the only RL pilot on these boards, nor are you the only one who knows people in the AH field. In fact, speaking of Apache experts, a certain famous British pilot had quite a few nice things to say about this sim. If you're not familiar with Ed Macy, a google search will inform you that he is a highly accomplished British Apache pilot, and after a forum search you'll find some of the positive things he's had to say on this very forum. Furthermore it seems Mr. Macy was impressed enough with the sim to lend his knowledge and talents to the Leading Edge Training project for DCS: Black Shark. Along those lines, a current active duty Mi-24 pilot has also had very positive things to say about the sim, and is easily one of the most prolific and valued 3rd party contributors to the English DCS community.

 

Now, I bet not a single person in this thread will claim that this sim is 100% perfect. In fact I recall the posts of another subject matter expert, an Mi-17 crew chief who I believe is currently flying missions in Afghanistan, who has criticized some of the finer details of the sim's autopilot implementation. And guess what, there was not a single inflamed response to his criticisms, not a single accusation of "troll" or "noob." There are three reasons for this difference, in order of ascending importance:

 

1. Being an Mi-17 crew chief, he is intimately familiar with many of the components that are on the Ka-50 (the engines, for example, are very similiar between the BS and Mi-17).

 

2. Unlike you, he has quite a bit of stick time behind the DCS: Ka-50, and is familiar enough with the sim to be able to tell the difference between a bug or incorrect implementation, and user error. (See my last post explaining how AFAIK noone with reasonable stick time has any problems whatsoever with autohover.)

 

3. Despite the fact that he's easily one of the most qualified subject matter experts on this board, not once did he display the arrogant know-it-all attitude that infects your every post. This is an extremely detailed and complicated sim, and yet after less than a week of flying in realism mode (as can be deduced from your post history), you've got it in your mind that you know better than everyone else in this thread, and that you're competent enough to know with absolute certainty that your piloting skills are not at fault for the erroneous behaviors you describe. Basically, you started on a low point by naming this thread what you did, and amazingly each post has been going further downhill.

 

If you want to redeem yourself (and from what I've seen this community truly believes in forgiveness, and will embrace you as soon as you learn a bit of humility), your first step should be to stop asserting your opinions as facts and acknowledge, at least for now, that they may be uninformed opinions. The second step from there will be to post more tracks showing the perceived issues in the sim. From there, we can proceed on a constructive discussion and get to the bottom of your issues. Either you're doing something wrong, in which case we'll be very happy to offer assistance, or there truly is a problem in the sim, in which case we can present the issue to the developers. If you decide on this course of action, I would recommend to let this thread die, and to start a new one with tracks attached and with a better thread title.

Edited August 10, 2010 by slug88

[joey45]

..............

if I need to buy a new pc that means BS is no longer $40 but $2040

and my pc has ample power to run a helicopter simulator ... if the sim is designed with the right approach

 

so I double checked my system health and specs

health is A OK

all my components are well above spec except my weedy cpu

so I am a noob with a rubbish pc - that would explain alot

 

if all you have is a weak CPU all you have to do is upgrade the CPU not the complete system... It's alot cheaper... upgreade as you go.

[slug88]

I spent several years as an Apache engineer. I also spent a bit of time "flying" the AH-64A CMS (combat mission simulator). I give DCS:Black Shark my Internet Seal of Approval, yay!

 

Hmm, well now that you're in this thread yourself, my indirect references seem a bit superfluous :). Hope you don't mind, and hope it didn't read too much like I was speaking on your behalf or putting words in your mouth. And also hope that I remembered right regarding some of your previous posts!

[Steel Jaw]

`this community truly believes in forgiveness

 

Oh I can vouch or that if Im still around here. :D

 

I was one of the most out spoken critics of LOMAC in the past and here I am flying FC2 (in addition to OF 4.7) whilst awaiting the new BMS and DCS A10.

[element1108]

How about in your next post, you do us all favor and post your system specs. Be honest and lets get it out already. You claim bad FPS but you fail to give us any indication as to what is causing the problem, just your vague "word for it."

 

I'm also surprised you're a "pilot" part of being a pilot is ground school and that requires some patience. Flying is all about lists and numbers and communication...all of which I'm not seeing as a strength by your posts.

 

Is english your native language? I'm asking because it's tough for some english as a second language people to communicate appropriately.

[aairon]

I've been doing some foot work to track down his exact CPU.

Here are some of the more common Cpu's that are possible candidates.

 

Some popular Intel cpu's

 

Wolfdale

Yorkfield

Westmere

Willamette

 

Some amd's

 

Winchester

Newcastle

Clawhammer

Toledo

 

But as much effort as I put into it, I still am at a loss which is a weedy, I can't even get any info on whether it's a AMD or Intel Code name. My guess is since Intel likes to name them after west coast towns and landmarks it could be intel and it could be named for Weed California. but no weedy on any list I checked.:smilewink:

[ZaltysZ]

it isn't a trimmed-to-the-edge-of-20-percent issue as I can see the trim point in the red box - and it is fine

 

Red box only shows where your controls are, it does not show where your controls should be for hover. You can't know if controls are within 20% zone just from red box, because this zone is not absolute, it is relative and depends on your aircraft attitude and forces (like wind) acting on your helo. The only way to know if controls are within that zone, is to know exactly where controls should be for hover, but if you are constantly drifting, you obviously don't know where they should be (don't worry, most of us don't know in advance). You need to trim helo so that there was no vector line on hud, and only then engage the hover mode. Hover mode is not supposed to remove the drift, it is supposed to prevent the drift (this is not word play, it is important). If you can't get rid of tiny vector line, hit trim button a few times after engaging hover mode - it should settle the helo.

Edited August 10, 2010 by ZaltysZ