DCS World 2.0 and New Maps Discussion Thread

[GeorgeLKMT]

To be precise, Georgia will stay and work under EDGE, but it's gonna look the same as it's made with old tools in old engine.

 

/I want an emoticon with a turtle, please.

[VincentLaw]

Do we know if Black Sea map will work on EDGE. As tired as I am of it I don't just want Nevada... Sorry if this has been asked numerous times...thanks.

There are not any announced official plans to upgrade the Black Sea to the new map format for EDGE, however, the Black Sea map is not being dropped. You will still be able to load the old map and all associated missions even with EDGE in place.

 

The Black Sea map is not going anywhere.

Subject to change™

Edited October 10, 2013 by VincentLaw

[sobek]

To be precise, Georgia will stay and work under EDGE, but it's gonna look the same as it's made with old tools in old engine.

 

That's the most plausible but definately not the only option.

[luckybob9]

That's the most plausible but definately not the only option.

 

Concurrent game engines is possible in this age. Halo CE Anniversary uses two engines running at the same time.

 

Also, since the GUI and simulator are separate programs, its entirely possible that the old engine will remain for Black Sea, and the GUI will launch the new engine for EDGE capable maps.

 

A wonderful mystery until something official is said.

[HungaroJET]

To be precise, Georgia will stay and work under EDGE, but it's gonna look the same as it's made with old tools in old engine.

 

Hopefully with the new EDGE tool Georgia will be updated ;) Maybe Crimean as well

[sobek]

Concurrent game engines is possible in this age.

 

But it is a pain in the butt and a waste of ressources. And a QA nightmare. Unless it compromises EDGE in a major way, if i were ED i'd opt strongly against it.

[luckybob9]

But it is a pain in the butt and a waste of ressources. And a QA nightmare. Unless it compromises EDGE in a major way, if i were ED i'd opt strongly against it.

 

Im against it too. I was throwing out all possibilities. My guess 343 did it for nostalgia reasons. and its wayyyyyy less demanding than a sim like this

[xaoslaad]

I like to be in control of my op-sys .. not controlled by it, by shiny squares and idiotic interface! :mad:

 

I don't 'just click an icon' I control my Win 7 as I want it! Same with my phone, custom op-sys, perfected for my needs, and modified by me, not any crap at all left on it.

 

But lets not derail this thread with operating system whining!

 

It's not derailing it. As you can see from the chatter here the new engine will take advantage on Windows 8 only/DirectX 11.1 functionality not available in Windows 7. You claim was strictly that Windows 8 was somehow an inferior gaming operating system when that simply is not the case. The interface might be reviled by many/most, but it still has nothing to do with game performance.

 

You're talking to someone who very literally only runs Windows for Arma and DCS. And If I had DCS on Linux I'd drop Arma out a window. For everything else (and all other gaming) I use Linux and I enjoy taking it to Microsoft any chance I can get with a valid argument, but there is nothing of substance to the implication that it is an inferior gaming OS compared to Windows 7 where you spend all your time NOT dealing with the new interface.

[Blaze]

Hopefully with the new EDGE tool Georgia will be updated ;) Maybe Crimean as well

 

The technology the old map is built with means that it would have to be completely thrown out and started again from scratch designed specifically for EDGE to benefit from it. Most likely it will run in EDGE but not use the new features, or both engines will be included. Who knows at this point. :)

[HungaroJET]

Who knows at this point. :)

 

Maybe with a smart terrain/map converter/updater tool ;)

 

BTW: if they already have source files they can "update" in 3DS MAX also

Hopefully Batou can as well (do not forget his WIP FC2 project) - or maybe he just already did it secretly for EDGE

http://forum.lockon.ru/showpost.php?p=878288&postcount=80

http://www.russiaair.net/video-videocategory1

http://www.russiaair.net/gallery-typesofsimulators

Edited October 10, 2013 by HungaroJET

[Feuerfalke]

1- DirectX 11 / DirectX 11 Windows 8 based.

 

Does that mean there are features that can only be taken advantage of while running Windows 8 vs. Windows 7?

 

DX11 is Windows Vista and Windows 7.

DX11.2 is Windows 8 "based".

 

Main difference of Windows 8 incorporated DirectX 11.2 is the ability to variably assign graphics memory (very superficially). Thus only needed textures are loaded and used, which increases maximum texture size and count tremendously. Seems like a nice feature for a flight-simulation.

 

So I guess to make the best use of your graphics card and the engine, Windows 8 would be recommendable.

[Rotorhead]

To be precise, Georgia will stay and work under EDGE, but it's gonna look the same as it's made with old tools in old engine.

 

OK, if it is true (which we are yet to find out), I'm curious about few things.

 

Logically, the map will still look the same - same old buildings, same old textures, same old pointy hills - until somebody decides to re-model it to Nevada standards (which I secretly hope for). But will it benefit from EDGE's technical advantages? Like SLI/CF support, DX11 features or the new clouds (which aren't technically part of the map).

 

Using common sense, I think it should be the case, since these things are engine-based, not map-based. But these are of course only my wild assumptions.

 

I don't expect an official reply from ED "until it's the right time", but I'd like to know anyway...

[LexiconG2]

OK, if it is true (which we are yet to find out), I'm curious about few things.

 

Logically, the map will still look the same - same old buildings, same old textures, same old pointy hills - until somebody decides to re-model it to Nevada standards (which I secretly hope for). But will it benefit from EDGE's technical advantages? Like SLI/CF support, DX11 features or the new clouds (which aren't technically part of the map).

 

Using common sense, I think it should be the case, since these things are engine-based, not map-based. But these are of course only my wild assumptions.

 

I don't expect an official reply from ED "until it's the right time", but I'd like to know anyway...

 

 

With the new engine world mapping is possible so the old map could be converted. It might however need to get some new textures. Other wise keep the old textures will stay but in reality I would think that with EDGE it will already look better because of DX11 and the overall design changes. It won't be the same unless the old engine stays installed and there are two existing engines in DCS: World I find this to be unlikely.

[Weta43]

Apologies for the long jump-back... (& my sad *rsed post)

Personally - purely from the logic of the language - I would take from the fact that the quote is "7- Option to project map on globe surface" not "Map projected on global surface" that the option is there, but not currently implemented in whatever map(s) E.D. might chose to release first.

 

This assumption does not follow logically. It purely means that it is possible, but not necessary for maps to be projected onto a globe.

 

An option that has been exercised is no longer an option.

 

If E.D. have never done it, but it is possible, they can say without qualification that this possibility exists as an option for all future and existing maps.

 

If E.D. have already done it, spherical maps exist as both an option in the future, and a realised project. There would then exist a class of maps that (because they are already projected onto a spherical surface,) would not be able to be 'optionally' projected onto a spherical surface, and the statement "Option to project map on globe surface" would no longer be globally true.

 

If a map with spherical projection had already been made in EDGE, it should read "option to project existing flat, & any future maps, onto a global surface" THEN it would be true.

Edited October 11, 2013 by Weta43

[EtherealN]

And this, good people, is a classic study of "how to overanalyze simple things"... ;)

[Weta43]

I know :)

 

Sorry, but I couldn't help it

[EtherealN]

:D

[RagnarDa]

Apologies for the long jump-back... (& my sad *rsed post)

 

 

 

 

An option that has been exercised is no longer an option.

 

If E.D. have never done it, but it is possible, they can say without qualification that this possibility exists as an option for all future and existing maps.

 

If E.D. have already done it, spherical maps exist as both an option in the future, and a realised project. There would then exist a class of maps that (because they are already projected onto a spherical surface,) would not be able to be 'optionally' projected onto a spherical surface, and the statement "Option to project map on globe surface" would no longer be globally true.

 

If a map with spherical projection had already been made in EDGE, it should read "option to project existing flat, & any future maps, onto a global surface" THEN it would be true.

Your assumption is that an "option" can only be used once? Why? There could for example be multiple projections on one map? You are also assuming the maker of the map is the one who decides wether to project it on the globe? The statement doesn't say who has this "option", it could be the maker of the map or the end-user or both or neither. You are also assuming that any flat map made for EDGE is also projectable and the statement by Wags says nothing about that.

 

 

:D

 

[flanker1]

we definitely need the black see region with edge. . .sorry, but air combat over nevada? not very realistic. . . and only drop training bombs and rockets the whole day. . . not my style. . . and desert until the horizon. . . boring. . .

 

i hope we get the crimea back.

[ALDEGA]

After more than a decade it's time to move out of the Black Sea area ...

[flanker1]

a cold war scenario in the 80ies would be great. . . former gdr and western gemany. . . warsaw pact against nato. i dream about it. . . perfect map. perfect scenario. all weapons usable with making sense. an multiplayer eldorado. :-)

[Flagrum]

sorry, but air combat over nevada? not very realistic. . . and only drop training bombs and rockets the whole day. . . not my style. . .

ARGH. :doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh:

Edited October 11, 2013 by Flagrum
shortened quote to the relevant part

[SyntaxError]

I know there is a new super duper secret map that will be released with EDGE (not Nevada).. I know it, i know it, i know it... god i hope this is true! :music_whistling:

 

(I feel the same as you about Nevada.. great to have but not as the main theatre.)

You been very secretive over there sir. Do you know things we do not? :huh:

[Exorcet]

Unlimited map size and projection to globe was all that I needed to hear. Hopefully this would mean that future maps are added to Nevada instead of being separate so that we have one large global map that will grow as DCS does.

[159th_Viper]

Well, with the intention of Nevada being a training, never mind operational, map for only 1 of the current 7 modules of DCS World then one would sincerely hope that EDGE comes packaged with more. That said, levelling Vegas will no doubt scratch some itches in the short-term :D