LOMAC vs DCS: A10C

TDBONE1 · February 22, 2011

sup all?

I havent really played any of the addons since the original lockon.

the last time i played lockon was....whew probably 4-5years ago...gawd has it been that long...

anyhow just wondering if someone can tell me about graphic upgrades.....well really "engine" upgrades...

is it still using only DX9c?

i hope its not just some more new models and cockpits.

do we actually have any new engine performace upgrades?

thanks

Nate--IRL-- · February 22, 2011

Some reading for you :)

http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/series/warthog/

Nate

Sarge55 · February 22, 2011

Wow you have been gone for a while. Welcome back.

Yes, still DX9c but they are working on DX11. The difference between LOMAC and DCS is like Pong and COD:Black Ops.

It is still CPU heavy and pretty much only uses a single core, although the sound is run on a 2nd core.. A very good CPU is necessary as well as fairly up to date hardware.

DCS:Black Shark is available if you like helicopters and although it came out a couple of years ago it will benifit from the updates developed for DCS:A10C when they release the compatibility patch/upgrade for it.

Purg · February 22, 2011

The look and feel is similar in that you could probably tell DCS is an evolution of Lockon.. but the improvements made to both the visuals and fidelity between the two products is like night and day.

Thanks to DCS, I can't play Lockon anymore.. :(

TDBONE1 · February 22, 2011

i have a phenom II x4 955BE that overclock to 3.6ghz.

i am in the process of getting a 1090T (6 core) and get 4ghz out of it.

so still pretty much a single core eh?

no physx either probably.

i going to watch some videos and see.

$59.00 is alot of money....that price should be for a game with a brand new engine that use multi-threading and dx11 i would think.

i gonna do some reading and watch some youtube videos.

i hope its worth it.

genbrien · February 22, 2011

i hope its worth it.

it is well worth over 60$:thumbup:;)

Speed · February 22, 2011

I never played LOMAC. I only played LOMAC 3, AKA FC2, and I really didn't like it... it's gotta have a clickable pit or I ain't buyin it. So... if I didn't like FC2, and I love DCS: A-10C, what does that say about comparing the original LOMAC to DCS: A-10C?

Comparing LOMAC 1 to DCS A-10C is like comparing Richard Simmons to Chuck Norris.

Edited February 22, 2011 by Speed

Weta43 · February 22, 2011

i am in the process of getting a 1090T (6 core) and get 4ghz out of it.
...
$59.00 is alot of money....that price should be for a game with a brand new engine that use multi-threading and dx11 i would think.

I just don't get it - & maybe I'm tarring you with the wrong brush, but every time a new title is released, people who's sig shows that they've spent literally thousands of dollars on hardware to enjoy their simming experience complain about spending $50 or $60 on the software that makes it all possible...

GGTharos · February 22, 2011

The 'look and feel' are about the only thing they have in common, and even that is going away.

DCS is not an evolution of Lock On.

The look and feel is similar in that you could probably tell DCS is an evolution of Lockon.

GGTharos · February 22, 2011

i am in the process of getting a 1090T (6 core) and get 4ghz out of it.

so still pretty much a single core eh?
no physx either probably.

No, pretty much no longer 'a single core' eh ;)

And Physx is not particularly needed, either.

$59.00 is alot of money....that price should be for a game with a brand new engine that use multi-threading and dx11 i would think.

You're complaining about an averagely priced (for the gaming industry) high fidelity flight sim when you've spent who-knows-how-much on your 6core processor?

Speed · February 22, 2011

$59.00 is alot of money.

$60 is alot of money? REALLY? People waste $15 going to a movie theater show and that's only 2 hours. DCS is HUNDREDS or THOUSANDS of hours of the MOST REALISTIC combat jet simulator EVER developed for civilian use. $60 is POCKET CHANGE for what you get. This "game" is ridiculously underpriced... it should be $400, maybe $500, not a mere $60. Sh*t, complaining about buying DCS for $60 is like complaining about having to buy the gas for a brand new Lamborghini someone gave you for free.

that price should be for a game with a brand new engine that use multi-threading and dx11 i would think.

You are making this judgement having not played the "game" at all. Even calling it a game is a misrepresentation... it's a SIM. That you compare it to LOMAC shows you really don't understand yet the depth of this simulation. Like I said... Richard Simmons vs. Chuck Norris :)

It's also extremely tough to develop multithreaded applications. Despite this, a little of DCS has in fact been multithreaded, though. And why should ED use some third party physics package when their own is vastly superior for what they need it to do? And also, why should they multithread the application when it vastly increases the program's complexity, introduces new ways for bugs to crop up, and it already runs JUST FINE as a mostly-single-threaded application?

The real question is whether you can handle DCS: A-10C. Hardcore flight sims are not for everyone. You can't just go up there and blow stuff up all day without thinking. It takes alot of practice, and you have to use your brain. After all, pretty much everything is just like it is in the real A-10C.

Edited February 22, 2011 by Speed

wtfisgoingon · February 22, 2011

Agreed $60 is not only average for a game, its really a fair price. Considering the depth and options, I would have gladly paid more, and I'm a cheap mofo lol but $60... thats not expensive. Thats not even enough to go out to a dinner and a movie date rofl

Some people... :)

Zomba · February 22, 2011

Considering in Australia a game can cost anywhere from $80 - $100 then $60 is a steal.

Edited February 22, 2011 by Zomba
Spelling :(

ShadowVonChadwick · February 22, 2011

I just don't get it - & maybe I'm tarring you with the wrong brush, but every time a new title is released, people who's sig shows that they've spent literally thousands of dollars on hardware to enjoy their simming experience complain about spending $50 or $60 on the software that makes it all possible...

Totally agree & don't follow their reasoning. :doh:

I purchased FC2 with no intention of ever using it just to help keep things rolling.

If there's no income theres no product.

Edited February 22, 2011 by ShadowVonChadwick

fragged · February 22, 2011

60 USD was cheap compared to what I spent on flight gear last year; Saitek Rudder Pedals, HOTAS Warthog and Cougar MFD's. Oh and it's still cheap in the simulation category too, I spent 125 USD on Steel Beasts Pro PE and it was totally worth it.

I would like to get into arguing about the relation between LOMAC / FC2 / DCS engines, but what's the point..

Purg · February 22, 2011

i going to watch some videos and see.
$59.00 is alot of money....that price should be for a game with a brand new engine that use multi-threading and dx11 i would think.

I guess it's all about perspective.

Black Ops cost me $89.99 and is basically MW2 with dedicated servers, new maps and a few new gadgets. In comparison, DCS is as close as you're going to get A-10C simulator on PC. I know which one is much better value for my money.

Irregular programming · February 22, 2011

He he, calm down guys.

As to the OP, this game is as close to a military grade simulator that you're ever going to get. The last game I can recall that actually did something like this before was Steel beast pro, which had a price tag which was more than a hundred dollars.

As for the tech you listed.

DCS-A10 is multithreaded in that the sound engine runs parallel to everything else.

PhysX is good for neat effects that render on your GPU, nothing that you can rely on to make game critical calculations.

DX11 over DX9 is also not much to gain compared to the cost, at the end you'd get an easier way for the programmers to do neat effects, not something to spend a lot of time and money to port to if you already have an engine and your main selling point ain't those neat effects.

Boberro · February 22, 2011

$60 is alot of money? REALLY? People waste $15 going to a movie theater show and that's only 2 hours. DCS is HUNDREDS or THOUSANDS of hours of the MOST REALISTIC combat jet simulator EVER developed for civilian use. $60 is POCKET CHANGE for what you get. This "game" is ridiculously underpriced... it should be $400, maybe $500, not a mere $60. Sh*t, complaining about buying DCS for $60 is like complaining about having to buy the gas for a brand new Lamborghini someone gave you for free.

Don't forget for people who live example in USA, Canada, France, GB, Norway ect called "the West"must work only few hours to buy it. For people who live in *no offence* in poor countries like Bosnia, Kazachstan, Africa and Asia countries it can mean of month or two of hard work. Those who say it is a lot of money don't say it for jokes, they have reason of saying that.

Mirtma · February 22, 2011

Don't forget for people who live example in USA, Canada, France, GB, Norway ect called "the West"must work only few hours to buy it. For people who live in *no offence* in poor countries like Bosnia, Kazachstan, Africa and Asia countries it can mean of month or two of hard work. Those who say it is a lot of money don't say it for jokes, they have reason of saying that.

Yes, I believe it's not question if it's worth it (which it is). It's more like if can afford it.

mic1184 · February 22, 2011

$60 shouldn't be that hard to afford compared to the cost of a suitable rig, screen, a hotas, TIR and all that fancy hardware you need to enjoy the sim.

my 2 cents

Dudikoff · February 22, 2011

DCS-A10 is multithreaded in that the sound engine runs parallel to everything else.

That's insignificant enough as for the DCS:A-10 not to be classified as a multithreaded application.

PhysX is good for neat effects that render on your GPU, nothing that you can rely on to make game critical calculations.

This is just not true. The fact it's used only for neat effects on simple action games doesn't mean it can't be used for some real physics calculations (e.g. for a dynamic flight model?).

DX11 over DX9 is also not much to gain compared to the cost, at the end you'd get an easier way for the programmers to do neat effects, not something to spend a lot of time and money to port to if you already have an engine and your main selling point ain't those neat effects.

That's true, especially when you don't have a new engine, but are porting (what at its core is basically) an old engine and just adding DX11 eyecandy.

Edited February 22, 2011 by Dudikoff

Irregular programming · February 22, 2011

This is just not true. The fact it's used only for neat effects on simple action games doesn't mean it can't be used for some real physics calculations (e.g. for a dynamic flight model?).

And by so doing you have effectively limited your customer base to users running nVidia cards only. PhysX is a gimmick, a neat toy and also very straining for the GPU last I heard, so it's hardly certain that it would even provide a performance boost if you decide to just port the physics over and not do anything extra.

Edited February 22, 2011 by Irregular programming

Yo-Yo · February 22, 2011

This is just not true. The fact it's used only for neat effects on simple action games doesn't mean it can't be used for some real physics calculations (e.g. for a dynamic flight model?).

PhysX is the most useless tool for flight model. Amen.

martinistripes · February 22, 2011

$59.00 is alot of money....that price should be for a game with a brand new engine that use multi-threading and dx11 i would think.

I don't even want to fly the A-10C but I'm going to buy it anyway (on disc) just to support future development of the series.

And if you like the A-10 and Black Shark is anything to go by, you will probably cream your pants. :thumbup:

TDBONE1 · February 22, 2011

im not complaining about the price.

im complaining about the price of a rebagged game at a new $60.00 price.

if the original game engine hasnt been updated to support DX10 or DX11 and there is no PhysX added for a game that would LOVE PhysX acceleration then why would i pay $60.00?

if i wanted to play a dx9 game i would get rid of my win7 machine and my vista machine and step back to the days of winxp.....lets see that came out in 2001 or something didnt it?

well really dx9c came out in the days of win98 didnt it?

anyhow if im paying $60.00 the game engine should be a DX11 game and support PhysX.

im not trying to get anyone ticked off....im just speaking for myself.

is there a demo out so i can test it?

Sign In

LOMAC vs DCS: A10C

Recommended Posts

TDBONE1

Nate--IRL--

Sarge55

Purg

TDBONE1

genbrien

Speed

Weta43

GGTharos

GGTharos

Speed

wtfisgoingon

Zomba

ShadowVonChadwick

fragged

Purg

Irregular programming

Boberro

Mirtma

mic1184

Dudikoff

Irregular programming

Yo-Yo

martinistripes

TDBONE1

Recently Browsing 0 members