DCS World 2.0 and New Maps Discussion Thread

[Luzifer]

Is it hard to change the cities names, e.g. to change Las Vegas to Baghdad? :)

 

That's gonna be the flashiest Baghdad of all time.

[Bucic]

Following this logic, let's rename A-10C to F/A-18C. Profit! :thumbup:

 

:lol:

You misunderstood my post. It was a genuine question, not 'why don't you, guys, just rename the cities, whalha!'. If it's easy though, then it can >facilitate creating limited non-US scenarios<. This is 'my logic' and my point.

[SkateZilla]

dont, lol..

 

wasnt a 3rd party working on an Afghanistan Map? But stopped to wait for EDGE

[Silver_Dragon]

expected all stooped teams working on maps can rejoin that work (Afghanistan / Vladivostok / etc) and coming new battleground in the future.

[sobek]

wasnt a 3rd party working on an Afghanistan Map? But stopped to wait for EDGE

 

Yes, Batou. I hope he's still up for it and can get access to the SDK.

[Mainstay]

That's gonna be the flashiest Baghdad of all time.

 

Las Baghas

[LexiconG2]

DCS: EDGE Integration REC Requirments.

 

With Edge coming out soon I am wondering what kind of performance we will be getting? Nevada and especially Las Vegas is a decent size major city not to mention that the ground objects look pretty high in detail. I am meeting the REC REQ's for the release of the new engine but often I find that min = it will run at low settings and at recommended requirements = you can run it good with med/high settings then there is room to improve for the future. Since Edqe runs on servers for real life/commercial simulation this often means 196GB ram multi SLI capable 4 usually is is max in current technology out of the box. Not only this at least in a Microsoft Enterprise Data-center environment is about 64 CPU's. This is based on a VDI from the server interface thats usually porting into simulator environments. Some of these even in the past like what NASA use to have really had stiff requirements. What do you expect from ED/DCS on what EDGE should offer in terms of product cost which is already $250+ for mods. in a mostly enthusiast type of home simulation enviroment.

 

 

I just find to be able to enjoy this sim FPS on all of the map is really needed to get the effect of flying.

 

Also will there be N Vision or 3d support at all?

Edited October 20, 2013 by LexiconG2

[Hamblue]

If you have a decent video card you'll probably be fine. The graphics of EDGE probably won't be any better than current first person shooters.

 

Expect a lot of bugs to start as it will probably be the open beta that was mentioned a couple of months ago. I would also expect the current version will be active along side EDGE during the Beta period.

[Rotorhead]

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1913780&postcount=6

 

A little update:

 

A couple of weeks ago myself and the other producers got access to the current build of the map within the terrain viewer (hence the new images recently). In the process, we were able to identify half a dozen areas that did not meet our visual quality goals. We are now in the process adjusting the visual quality, while balancing it with file size and game performance. Once these improvement efforts have been completed, I will post some new images.

 

Matt

 

Nice to hear, keep up your effort ED, and thank you Wags for your post! :thumbup:

[Raven68]

Thanks for the update Matt. I sincerely appreciate it. I know things are subject to change here, but *NERVOUS GULP* how do you feel about being on track for release by end of this year? :pilotfly:

[*Rage*]

Thanks for update:)

[Pyroflash]

Thanks for the update Matt. I sincerely appreciate it. I know things are subject to change here, but *NERVOUS GULP* how do you feel about being on track for release by end of this year? :pilotfly:

 

I think the key words here in this announcement are that "There are a half-dozen areas" that need improvement. Only a half-dozen, out of how many is the real question. If they are relatively small areas, then a release could be just around the corner barring other technology relevant issues. If, however, they are bigger areas, then, *shrug*.

[Wags]

Areas in regards to map content (textures, elevation mesh, etc.), not geographic areas.

[NRG-Vampire]

A little update:

 

A couple of weeks ago myself and the other producers got access to the current build of the map within the terrain viewer (hence the new images recently). In the process, we were able to identify half a dozen areas that did not meet our visual quality goals. We are now in the process adjusting the visual quality, while balancing it with file size and game performance. Once these improvement efforts have been completed, I will post some new images.

 

Matt

 

Matt please do not decrease the visual quality for the performance (higher FPS)

I mean: just think about future gfx cards - more stronger will come

so just please make/add more graphics ingame options as ultra high and extreme for textures, scenes, water, visibility range etc. :thumbup:

[Raven68]

Areas in regards to map content (textures, elevation mesh, etc.), not geographic areas.

 

Thanks for chiming in again Matt for that tidbit. Always good to see your post. :thumbup:

[zaelu]

Thanks for news Matt!

[Boberro]

Matt please do not decrease the visual quality for the performance (higher FPS)

I mean: just think about future gfx cards - more stronger will come

so just please make/add more graphics ingame options as ultra high and extreme for textures, scenes, water, visibility range etc. :thumbup:

 

It should be user's decision either better FPS or better fireworks, but if it is not possible to implement they must balance it.

They can upgrade GFX when time goes by, while people will get pissed off getting low FPS and hearing a bit weird excuses "it is for future GFX cards O_o).

 

Their last main patch 1.2.6 in terms of performance (compared to the 1.2.5 IIRC) is disaster, personally I completely stopped playing, however I am too lazy to bring back cool 1.2.5 though :D)

Edited October 24, 2013 by Boberro

[NineLine]

Matt please do not decrease the visual quality for the performance (higher FPS)

I mean: just think about future gfx cards - more stronger will come

so just please make/add more graphics ingame options as ultra high and extreme for textures, scenes, water, visibility range etc. :thumbup:

 

 

I really didnt read it as they were decreasing the quality, if anything it sounds like the changes were to improve quality in these areas.... of course I am only giving my opinion on how I read it as you are :)

[Alireza.kh]

does edge support physx and DirectX 11.1 ?

[cichlidfan]

does edge support physx and DirectX 11.1 ?

 

No mention of Physix, don't see that we need it, but here is what Matt has told us.

 

Now that we are getting very close to integrating EDGE into DCS, I can share a few more details.

 

1- DirectX 11 / DirectX 11 Windows 8 based.

2- Can support up to four GPU (either SLI or CF).

3- Uses clip maps.

4- Two cloud layers can be created with options for none, cumulous, cumulous nimbus, and stratus.

5- Terrain shadow projection is supported.

6- World can be as large as the designer wishes them to be, it is more of a question of development time / map detail.

7- Option to project map on globe surface.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1900652&postcount=3

[Phantom88]

I really Appreciate the updates on EDGE......Even when it's something I don't want to hear[Delay's].....So Thank You for keeping us informed.

[SkateZilla]

why are people so obsessed with PhysX?, Nothing in the PhysX Library would be useful in flight sims.... except maybe parachutes blowing in the wind after you bail and touch ground.

[EAKMotorsports]

[VincentLaw]

why are people so obsessed with PhysX?

Because marketing works. Turns out money can buy people.

 

Does EDGE have SkyActiv technology? Is EDGE gluten free? Is EDGE in "the cloud"? etc.

[*Rage*]

Matt/ED...Can you give us some indication of how well Edge scales with xfire and sli. There are some really great deals to be had on older gen graphics card currently and it would be great to capitalise.