DCS World 2.0 and New Maps Discussion Thread

[Rocky49]

Video is available here:

 

http://dcs-uvp.cz/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=509

 

Thanks:thumbup:

[NineLine]

Whomever made that site is gonna hurt LB's feelings:

 

Oh and all credit goes to Luckybob for the graphic showing his name isnt included ;)

Edited March 3, 2014 by NineLine
Luckybob is very sensitive.

[Cmelakobecny]

This is the translation of this article. Corrected.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=121146

[NineLine]

This is the translation of this article

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=121146

 

I just moved the info into a sticky, most of it was collected and organized by Luckybob, with Wags and me adding here and there...

[KaspeR32]

I've always been confused about something. We've had these video's of other maps created for EDGE, and in some of them, you can see an Mi-8 flying around. How is it that such an early version of EDGE is already working in some random engine? And, since this engine is capable of having the Mi-8 fly around, would it not be safe to say that it is based off of some part of DCS? Or is the Mi-8 we're looking at in these videos a different piece of software completely than the Mi-8 Belsimtek has created? Or does nobody know? lol.

 

If it is a different engine completely, these videos wouldn't even show what EDGE is capable of. What I mean is, DCS: World could handle EDGE in a much different way.

 

Seems these other companies really got the hang of using and implementing edge, it's amazing the company that wrote the IG in the first place is so far behind.

[Flagrum]

I've always been confused about something. We've had these video's of other maps created for EDGE, and in some of them, you can see an Mi-8 flying around. How is it that such an early version of EDGE is already working in some random engine? And, since this engine is capable of having the Mi-8 fly around, would it not be safe to say that it is based off of some part of DCS? Or is the Mi-8 we're looking at in these videos a different piece of software completely than the Mi-8 Belsimtek has created? Or does nobody know? lol.

 

If it is a different engine completely, these videos wouldn't even show what EDGE is capable of. What I mean is, DCS: World could handle EDGE in a much different way.

 

Seems these other companies really got the hang of using and implementing edge, it's amazing the company that wrote the IG in the first place is so far behind.

 

This is pure speculation now on my part, but I think it goes like this:

ED does not only make DCS, but also - perhaps even mainly - an simulation system for business customers. That system seems to be using EDGE already - in one of RRGs videos Ilya was talking about that they were working with the EDGE engine in version 4.something when he showed the progress on the map design. So, EDGE is already running in an "DCS like" environment for certain customers.

 

BST developed our Mi-8 and IF that is somehow related to the Mi-17s that we've seen in those videos, then my guess would be, that BST is doing something similar to what ED does: selling a Hip Simulation environment to business customers. I suspect even that this is the reason why ED and BST are so close knit - it is some kind of joint venture to sell together a Hip simulator for business customers.

[NineLine]

I am not sure what is hard to understand about all this, but a couple things, these are commercial projects that we know little to nothing about, clever members of this community found these with a little help from the WWII Kickstarter that hinted at them. We have no idea what is running these simulators, but I am pretty sure they are probably running on machines much greater than your average homer users PC.

 

What does that mean? Well it wasnt created for the DCS World environment, not created for multi-player, not created to have the options we are used to, customization, different mods, from other aircraft to vehicle control, the maps might be quite small to quite large. Really we just dont know. So its not as simple as copying the files into DCS World, hitting your Staples easy button and blowing up the Las Vegas Strip. Basically huge amounts of optimizing so that we can continue to do the things we love to do in DCS World.

 

There are so many factors and variables its like comparing apples to oranges, to be honest, if you cant handle looking at their commercial ventures and realizing that is a different market and different system, then its best just to ignore when people post these.

 

If you think there is some sort of conspiracy to withhold EDGE and new maps from us, well... you dont understand the ED Team, because I am pretty sure they are just as eager to get all this going as we are, if not more...

 

Bottom line is we just dont know, what do I do, enjoy the videos knowing that ED has made some pretty impressive commercial products and feel better about what they want us to have in the near future.

 

I've always been confused about something. We've had these video's of other maps created for EDGE, and in some of them, you can see an Mi-8 flying around. How is it that such an early version of EDGE is already working in some random engine? And, since this engine is capable of having the Mi-8 fly around, would it not be safe to say that it is based off of some part of DCS? Or is the Mi-8 we're looking at in these videos a different piece of software completely than the Mi-8 Belsimtek has created? Or does nobody know? lol.

 

If it is a different engine completely, these videos wouldn't even show what EDGE is capable of. What I mean is, DCS: World could handle EDGE in a much different way.

 

Seems these other companies really got the hang of using and implementing edge, it's amazing the company that wrote the IG in the first place is so far behind.

[EtherealN]

Seems these other companies really got the hang of using and implementing edge, it's amazing the company that wrote the IG in the first place is so far behind.

 

It's amazing what happens when people make assumptions. :)

 

I'll pose some rethorical questions for you to consider:

 

1) What hardware was used to run those sessions that are being posted around? Unknown.

2) Was the software hardware-agnostic, or purpose-built? Unknown.

3) What other components are running? Unknown.

4) Is that using a "PC" setup, or a cluster? Unknown.

5) Is that built for DTS, or full-motion simulation? Unknown.

 

Basically, your definition of being "behind" is... weird... since it would require that you know the answers to these questions. Do you?

 

Something I could pose as a scenario (and honestly, I don't know if this is "correct", I have no involvement with those kinds of projects): we have seen some interesting pits used with the Mi-8 (remember the one showing the "clack-clack" of the trimmers in russian helos?). We've seen youtube vids with fullsize cockpits associated to those devs. Considering the development cost of said pit, my personal guess is that they're running something completely different for physics (or perhaps something that the Mi8 physics was derived from later, who knows), and had a rendering cluster to run the dome around the fullsize pit.

 

...as I am sure you'll understand, building software towards running a rendering cluster on very specific hardware is a TAD different to making the same software run on PC's that not only can have any of a wild assortments of GPU's, they might even have any of several different operating systems... :P It's a completely different ballgame. People underestimate how HARD it is to make something run well on the "PC" compared to homogenous, purpose-built, platforms.

Edited March 4, 2014 by EtherealN

[VincentLaw]

[...]the WWII Kickstarter that hinted at them.

That would be a big mistake.... except there is this statement regarding those kickstarter images of Corsica, a map which can be seen in the Altwolf videos:

[...]those two images are from an unannounced map that is in development.

Unannounced implies they plan on announcing it to us at some point, from which you can infer they hope to make it available to us eventually... Either that or they just made mistakes on mistakes.

1) What hardware was used to run those sessions that are being posted around?

And that right there is probably why we don't have any new maps yet.

[NineLine]

That would be a big mistake.... except there is this statement regarding those kickstarter images of Corsica, a map which can be seen in the Altwolf videos:

 

Unannounced implies they plan on announcing it to us at some point, from which you can infer they hope to make it available to us eventually... Either that or they just made mistakes on mistakes.

And that right there is probably why we don't have any new maps yet.

 

 

At the time and to this day they dont know that those maps will every be allowed to be ported to DCS World. It would be safe to assume that they wont as they were for a commercial project. SO save yourself some stress and assume they wont be, maybe we will get a surprise and they will down the road...

[EtherealN]

And that right there is probably why we don't have any new maps yet.

 

Who knows, but don't carry that too far.

What worked well in a purpose-build, can be brought back in a general build. It just probably entails a LOT of troubleshooting and adaptation. After all, most developers start their code in one environment, and then gradually test the code against more and more permutations. It's usually a case of there being different kinds of "tricks" you can use in those different situations, though.

 

The point being, if you made it run on, say, triple GTX 480, it might still be eminently possible to make it run just fine on a single GTX 780. But perhaps you used a lot of special stuff in your previous code that was specifically meant to work around having three 480's (perhaps because you wanted so much more screen real estate), and to get the same code running on just the one card and on one "PC" you have to rip those parts out and replace them with "PC oriented" code.

 

Basically, who knows. Just don't assume "hardware" on everything. There is also the variable of which hardware the CODE was written for. After all, if you write code in 68k assembler to make it run REALLY well on a Motorola-based computer (read: Amiga), your massively overpowered PC will still have problems understanding what to do with it. So it's not even necessarily a matter of hardware capability. Could simply be a case of "different hardware", full stop.

[EtherealN]

At the time and to this day they dont know that those maps will every be allowed to be ported to DCS World. It would be safe to assume that they wont as they were for a commercial project. SO save yourself some stress and assume they wont be, maybe we will get a surprise and they will down the road...

 

Also the question of whether the maps in question would even be practical in DCS World. Depending on the purpose they were built for, they might simply be too small. They might completely lack damage models (and thus have a huge chunk of dev work left that, considering other factors, just isn't worth it), etcetera etcetera etcetera.

 

So yeah... Unless it's got a DCS Press Release about it, try not to read much into it.

 

That said, I would love to have them. But there's lots of things I'd love to have. :)

[VincentLaw]

At the time and to this day they dont know that those maps will every be allowed to be ported to DCS World. It would be safe to assume that they wont as they were for a commercial project.

If that is what it takes to keep a product line like DCS afloat, then I can't complain (others can and will of course). The Nevada screens all have similar level of quality, so these videos at least demonstrate the potential of what EDGE maps could be like in the future.

 

In any case, we know we have NTTR and Normandy in development, which should keep me entertained for a while, and since I contributed to the RRG kickstarter I should have access to the EDGE SDK. That is enough for me.

[upupandaway]

Also the question of whether the maps in question would even be practical in DCS World. Depending on the purpose they were built for, they might simply be too small.

 

There may be too much dev work left before they are usable in DCS, but if it´s just about size I think they might even have an advantage. Sure, they shouldn´t be too small, but what you can observe online on the VA-server with the current map is that especially helos just tend to stay at or around a specific airfield where they do their stuff. A huge map means lots of wasted resources in ths case, so why not have something like this as a MP training/freestyle map? You could have several of those with less effort and thus more variation in terrain/gameplay etc. Interestingly, this seems to be the most popular server currently. The distribtion pattern of helo-wreckage clearly concentrates around the parking area of Batumi.

[TaliG]

1) What hardware was used to run those sessions that are being posted around? Unknown.

 

NVIDIA Quadro K5000

 

from here:

 

http://www.matrox.com/graphics/en/press/releases/2012/hpc_video_wall/exxact_corporation/mura_mpx/avio_f120/maevex/i_itsec_2012/

 

EDIT: and here

Edited March 4, 2014 by TaliG

[Silver_Dragon]

The facts are:

 

- Last video NTTR / EDGE: November 22 2013 (4 mouth ago)

- Last info NTTR / EDGE Progress: January 11 2014 (2 month ago)

- Last EDGE update info: June 2013 (9 months ago)

 

Before 2 weeks EDGE / NTTR updates, now 2 mouth on silence :( that's normal if a "external no EDGE" video has show, the community jump to get them expected something of info / hype, etc.

[Boberro]

If Nevada comes with same quality as this Azerbejdan it will be OK, if not there won't :P

ED could buy this terrain or make this maker to sell them for some price :)

[Cobra847]

Keep in mind that terrain fidelity and overall graphical impression is dictated to a great deal by the skill of the artist and environmental artists building it (and the assets).

Like any other artistical endeavour, rules of visual composition and color still apply, regardless of trying to emulate reality or not.

 

With regards to performance -- terrain with this level of fidelity is fully achievable today on consumer level hardware.

[mhe]

What bothers me a bit is that Wags himself said in November that it's "that last 10%" that. Perhaps I'm reading a bit too much into it, but it would indicate to me that it is at least close to be complete (whether this means feature complete, release complete, ready for alpha/beta/whatever I do not know), but it is little things like this that make the long wait all the more painful.

 

Since I didn't have the Warthog Beta, I'm not entitled to anything regarding the terrain in question, but I would gladly throw money at ED for that new map and a more modern IG. And I don't even demand they make it cheap. The price of a full DCS fidelity module would be completely justified for an area the size of Nevada. I think the price level in the flight simulation world for scenery is pretty reasonable most of the time. The Hog and the civilian PMDG planes for FSX/P3D are on par with each other detail-wise, the PMDG stuff costs twice as much, just saying.

 

If anything, I might argue that if we'd pay higher prices for that stuff, ED might have more staff/resources to bring us the stuff we want quicker. As Sobek's signature correctly states: "Cheap. Fast. Good. Choose two." Since we get great products an we get them cheap, demanding to get them fast on top of that seems a bit drastic to me.

 

So ED, bring it on. My wallet is ready.

[NineLine]

What bothers me a bit is that Wags himself said in November that it's "that last 10%" that. Perhaps I'm reading a bit too much into it, but it would indicate to me that it is at least close to be complete (whether this means feature complete, release complete, ready for alpha/beta/whatever I do not know), but it is little things like this that make the long wait all the more painful.

 

I may be thinking of something else, but I thought that 10% was changes and updates to the Nevada map itself (still within the map builder), and not related to integration into the DCS World engine.

[VincentLaw]

I may be thinking of something else, but I thought that 10% was changes and updates to the Nevada map itself (still within the map builder), and not related to integration into the DCS World engine.

I'm pretty sure he meant integration of EDGE and DCS too. There is even a Wikipedia article on it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninety-ninety_rule

[NineLine]

I'm pretty sure he meant integration of EDGE and DCS too. There is even a Wikipedia article on it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninety-ninety_rule

 

Hmmm, I dont think so, but I could be wrong....

[Raven68]

I'm pretty sure he meant integration of EDGE and DCS too. There is even a Wikipedia article on it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninety-ninety_rule

 

That was my interpretation also, but in fairness to ED I'm sure there were and will be some unknowns that will create some stumbling blocks. I'm sure they are close, but the silence is painful! :)

[VincentLaw]

Hmmm, I dont think so, but I could be wrong....

Here:

It's always that last 10%...

 

Over the last few months, the team has made tremendous progress on both the NTTR art assets and getting EDGE working in DCS. Although we had hoped to have this wrapped up by the end of the year (never promised), I don't see that happening. There are half a dozen art issues that need to be resolved, EDGE integration into DCS will probably not be completed until Mid-December, and beta testing of the map within DCS has of course not been able to start yet.

 

Nevertheless, progress is being made... just not as fast as we all would like.

Art assets is the last 10% of the NTTR map, EDGE integration is the last 10% of integration, and beta testing is the next 180% of both.

 

(And "probably not until Mid-December" probably means early 2014.)

[NineLine]

Here:

Art assets is the last 10% of the NTTR map, EDGE integration is the last 10% of integration, and beta testing is the next 180% of both.

 

(And "probably not until Mid-December" probably means early 2014.)

 

Yeah, I see what you were talking about now... its tough, using a percentage is kinda like using a date with a flight sim community... its now etched in stone :)

 

I can read his statement a couple different ways, but at the end of the day, its not ready yet... but work continues...