104th_Crunch Posted February 13, 2011 Posted February 13, 2011 Who played F-15 Strike Eagle II, EF2000 or even ADF/TAW, knows that we are light years distance from that. I have really good memories of DID's F22. Sorry, but the video you linked does not do it justice. Here is a nice one. I think if DID went more for realism after F-22, and stayed in business, they would have made some more great sims.
Conure Posted February 13, 2011 Posted February 13, 2011 I'd like to see the A-10 on the RoF engine...Mmm... Intel i7 6700k, Asus GTX1070, 16gb DDR4 @ 3200mhz, CH Fighterstick, CH Pro Throttle, CH Pro Rudder Pedals, Samsung Evo 850 SSD @ 500GB * 2, TrackIR 5 and 27" monitor running at 2560 * 1440, Windows 10.
Bucic Posted February 13, 2011 Posted February 13, 2011 (edited) From what I've seen the is a new fog and haze (without objects sticking out) implementation. Can anyone confirm? If so, there's a big leap forward in regard of visualization in DCS. Edited February 13, 2011 by Bucic F-5E simpit cockpit dimensions and flight controls Kill the Bloom - shader glow mod Poor audio Doppler effect in DCS [bug] Trees - huge performance hit especially up close
Apples Posted February 13, 2011 Posted February 13, 2011 Were are these explosion files??? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] 6 Monitors, 5 Video Cards, 90inch Flat Screen, Intel Bad Ass 2 @ 72.6Ghz, Atari Hotas!!!
Haukka81 Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 I'd like to see the A-10 on the RoF engine...Mmm... RoF engine is pice of sh*t, very heavy and planes are drawn only to 2.5km..not good for modern combat :doh: Oculus CV1, Odyssey, Pimax 5k+ (i5 8400, 24gb ddr4 3000mhz, 1080Ti OC ) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
LukeSky Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Who played F-15 Strike Eagle II, EF2000 or even ADF/TAW, knows that we are light years distance from that EF2000, was a really great sim, but, I'm sure that the graphics was better of what I found on youtube. I don't have that game anymore, :( so I cannot look if it's what I remember of it. Anyways, A10-C is the best of all for now, and graphics are really good. only airport need to be brought to life. (animated visible ground crew) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Windows 7 64bit, Core I7 950, Nvidia GTX 260, 6 gig RAM, TIR 5, Saitek Pro Flight Rudder Pedals, Logitech attack3 :(
Haukka81 Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 EF2000, was a really great sim, but, I'm sure that the graphics was better of what I found on youtube. I don't have that game anymore, :( so I cannot look if it's what I remember of it. Anyways, A10-C is the best of all for now, and graphics are really good. only airport need to be brought to life. (animated visible ground crew) bit better EF2000 video, I played EF2000 lot, with voodoo 2 it was great sim in it's time. And dynamic campaing was really good. :joystick: Radio com's were ahead of time too, much better than even DCS A-10. BTW.. EF2000 color palette is best i ever seen in sim, no donald duck colors. :thumbup: Oculus CV1, Odyssey, Pimax 5k+ (i5 8400, 24gb ddr4 3000mhz, 1080Ti OC ) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
evilnate Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 I hope better better explosions and eye candy happen with they impliment Dx11. EF2000 was a great game!
mic1184 Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 I would like better ground textures, flying low as you do with the hog I am always amazed how bad they look. the nevada screenshots looked promising... [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] MB: DFI Lanparty UT P35-T2R CPU: Core 2 Quad Q6600 G0 @ 3,6 GHz @ 1,328V VGA: MSI GTX460 HAWK @ 850/1700/1000 MHz MFCD: Eizo S2231 22" S-PVA RAM: A-Data Vitesta 2 x 2048 MB @ 960 MHz FLT EQPM: Saitek X-52 Pro, TrackIR 5
BKLronin Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 The terrain mesh resolution could be a bit higher and optonal the texture res. This should be doable without a new engine. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
element1108 Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Steel Beasts seem to have similar types of explosions..."low key" .. I think DCS explosions look much better no doubt. I only compare because SB is over $100 US and is a similar "combat training tool" to the DCS series. To me as long as they have some physical characteristics (damage model) of a real explosion I'm happy. Priorities are obviously different, but I'm usually seeing the explosions from a standoff range and the flame indicating kill is satisfaction enough. I'm not opposed to improvement, but I hardly think they suck. PEW PEW!!!
EtherealN Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Blown away as in having the shockwave move them? "Can"? Probably. But I would suspect that it requires a good bit of work for very little practical benefit. Also, it is hard to do it right - you can get the visual pleasure through some simple ragdoll physics pretty much (FPS style), but getting it right so that you avoid stuff like the good old Operation Flashpoint "Hummer golf" tournaments... More difficult. (And btw, Hole In One ftw! :D ) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Daniel "EtherealN" Agorander | Даниэль "эфирныйн" Агорандер Intel i7 2600K @ 4.4GHz, ASUS Sabertooth P67, 8GB Corsair Vengeance @ 1600MHz, ASUS GTX 560Ti DirectCU II 1GB, Samsung 830series 512GB SSD, Corsair AX850w, two BENQ screens and TM HOTAS Warthog DCS: A-10C Warthog FAQ | DCS: P-51D FAQ | Remember to read the Forum Rules | | | Life of a Game Tester
Distiler Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 (edited) Well, the use of advanced graphic features would be nice, like physx. Also more cpu multithreading. Not just because you can add more particles, do more realist stuff, do it quicker, etc. but because not doing it and relying in raw brute for of the cpu/gpu is a waste. We need to upgrade continuously our computers because some features of them aren't used, only brute force, only mhz. So in the end, we spend a ton of money in the pc and lots of circuits in it remain idle for years. Waste of money, waste of natural resources, etc. Not that ED is the only one of course. And users have a share of the culprit, we demand faster development and this can't ocurr if you have developers training constantly for new features. A real pita. But, anyway, throwing non obsolete stuff because software cant catch up makes me feel very stupid, environmentally, economically, socially, etc. And I'm not sure users will be able to continue spend at the same pace in this new economic FUBAR world, certainly not me (unfortunatelly). Edited February 14, 2011 by Distiler AMD Ryzen 1400 // 16 GB DDR4 2933Mhz // Nvidia 1060 6GB // W10 64bit // Microsoft Sidewinder Precision 2
Cibit Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Anyone dropped a bomb on an ammo bunker yet? I think the way it continues to spew out explosions for ages after is great. I also think the cluster bombs seen in Wags latest video(B6 presumably) look awesome. IMHO ED has got the mix of eye candy and hi-fi avionics etc just right. I still find it odd going from BS world to A10 world:) i5 8600k@5.2Ghz, Asus Prime A Z370, 32Gb DDR4 3000, GTX1080 SC, Oculus Rift CV1, Modded TM Warthog Modded X52 Collective, Jetseat, W10 Pro 64 [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Adding JTAC Guide //My Vid's//229th AHB
evilnate Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Nah, I'm more than satisfied with graphic we have now. better effects and high end terrain textures will make this sim unusable for me... Just curious here... If they improved the explosion effects and terrain textures to make them look more realistic, it would turn you off from the sim? Or are you saying this because your PC specs would have a harder time handling it?
LukeSky Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Nah, I'm more than satisfied with graphic we have now. better effects and high end terrain textures will make this sim unusable for me... It will only make you lower the screen resolution, and the quality effect unless it make you buy a new video card.(or processor and RAM). I don't care to upgrade my PC to be able to play that sim. I'll update it sooner or later anyways. What I want is to feel the most possible, if I was sat in that plane. If you cannot afford an upgrade to your pc, hmm, well, do some overtime at work. :P [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Windows 7 64bit, Core I7 950, Nvidia GTX 260, 6 gig RAM, TIR 5, Saitek Pro Flight Rudder Pedals, Logitech attack3 :(
jctrnacty Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 I like these particles..... [sigpic][/sigpic] MB MSI x570 Prestige Creation, RYzen 9 3900X, 32 Gb Ram 3333MHz, cooler Dark rock PRO 4, eVGA 1080Ti, 32 inch BenQ 32011pt, saitek X52Pro, HP Reverb, win 10 64bit
ArcticAge Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 I like these particles..... Yeah they rock:joystick:
LukeSky Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 I like these particles..... Cooool! :) ED don't have to worry about pc spec, they need to create the best effects they can, As I said, we are all updating our computer one day. It will only keep their engine last more longer (in time). For exemple, when microsft released FSX, almost no one was able to play with it at the best quality. Today, they are still able to sell that sim because it still has stunning graphics. So ED gang, don't worry too much about PC spec. and:thumbup: for your work. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Windows 7 64bit, Core I7 950, Nvidia GTX 260, 6 gig RAM, TIR 5, Saitek Pro Flight Rudder Pedals, Logitech attack3 :(
aaron886 Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 RoF engine is pice of sh*t, very heavy and planes are drawn only to 2.5km..not good for modern combat :doh: Really? :lol: It's a piece of shit? Aside from being hardware intensive (as groundbreaking engines often are) it is an excellent simulator engine. Also, get this... draw ranges are adjustable. (No way!) The fact that you tried to leverage that against the ROF engine tells us plenty. 1
Lonecrow66 Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 (edited) I have to sort of agree. As much time and effort that was spent on the actual simulation aspect of the product, I don't get a sense of satisfaction with the actual ordinance contacting objects. Call me spoiled but some other games out there has gotten us used to at least seeing maybe a tank's top half fly up into the ground, twisted metal flying. Buildings half broken. The whole crater effect is nice. The rising smoke is nice. But the actual destruction is not very satisfying. In real life there were always secondaries as well, and fires. Other than the avionics, and performance the last thing they need to improve before release would be the actual damage modeling of targets. Its like making a beautiful cake and then putting a piece of shit on the top.. Kinda ruins the experience. Then work on dynamic campaigns :) :) :) I would pay $100 for a sim that had all of that with cutting edge graphics and ran well. Edited February 14, 2011 by Lonecrow66 --- May your takeoffs equal your landings!
Haukka81 Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 (edited) Really? :lol: It's a piece of shit? Aside from being hardware intensive (as groundbreaking engines often are) it is an excellent simulator engine. Also, get this... draw ranges are adjustable. (No way!) The fact that you tried to leverage that against the ROF engine tells us plenty. For planes ? that is new for me ,Well..my first comment about engine was bit too harsh.. maybe i should try rof again, last time it was too slow in my sytem. Edited February 14, 2011 by Haukka81 Oculus CV1, Odyssey, Pimax 5k+ (i5 8400, 24gb ddr4 3000mhz, 1080Ti OC ) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
element1108 Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 For planes ? that is new for me ,Well..my first comment about engine was bit too harsh.. maybe i should try rof again, last time it was too slow in my sytem. Not sure when you first played it, but it's made LEAPS and BOUNDS from when I first put the disk in my drive. I don' t have a high end system so I keep the details down so I can keep really high FPS and I LOVE how it feels. Especially for a WWI sim, I'm not sure how things look at 35,000 feet, but the engine is pretty sweet for the WWI confines that's for sure.
Apples Posted February 18, 2011 Posted February 18, 2011 I'm not saying we need Hollywood type effects, but stock is just so bad. Something i cooked up in blender in like 10 minutes. If i could put in something like this for when a tank explodes>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fn6khqyOpLo [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] 6 Monitors, 5 Video Cards, 90inch Flat Screen, Intel Bad Ass 2 @ 72.6Ghz, Atari Hotas!!!
aaron886 Posted February 19, 2011 Posted February 19, 2011 I'm not saying we need Hollywood type effects, but stock is just so bad. Something i cooked up in blender in like 10 minutes. If i could put in something like this for when a tank explodes>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fn6khqyOpLo Meh... looks like a Lava Lamp to me. :D
Recommended Posts