DCS World 2.0 and New Maps Discussion Thread

[Foul Ole Ron]

Atmospheric hazing can soften things even in real life. So while they are still dialling it in, viewing at a long distance isnt going to be crystal sharp all the time, especially in a simulation, I think you guys are putting unrealistic expectations up, name a sim that can view this far this good....

 

+1

 

Just look at the other two WW2 sims out in the market right now. There is a very distinct bubble of visibility after which ground textures become very blurred. Edge looks to be striking a nice balance to me given current consumer hardware limitations.

[eFirehawk]

That is your example of a "sim"? lol :D

 

Sure. It simulates aircraft made in the 80s with something way stronger than nanotubes to withstand the G stress, superhuman pilots that can support 20G turns forever and airbrakes that spawn an invisible space rocket engine in front of the aircraft. But the graphics engine is relevant :D

[NineLine]

Sure. It simulates aircraft made in the 80s with something way stronger than nanotubes to withstand the G stress, superhuman pilots that can support 20G turns forever and airbrakes that spawn an invisible space rocket engine in front of the aircraft. But the graphics engine is relevant :D

 

How big are the maps?

[karambiatos]

How big are the maps?

way smaller than nevada

 

id say between 20-50km^2, maybe even smaller

[outlawal2]

How big are the maps?

 

Another consideration is what is the overall load on system resources by the entire sim? Since I doubt in your example that the planes are modelled with anything even close to the fideilty as ED, you can provide better graphics since the system isn't using as many resources. EVERYTHING is a compromise and since we will NOT scrimp on our airframe fidelity (and no complaints on that front here!) this means that the remaining resources for graphics are reduced... Something has to give somewhere..

 

And that was a simple "In general" statement as I think the new screenshots look great.. Also considering the fact that nothing is set in stone at this point and WIP I think they are awesome...

 

:thumbup:

[OnlyforDCS]

Ace Combat: Assault Horizon is a good example. And it runs on consoles. :) You're right though, that still doesn't change the fact that our expectations for a small team like ED is way too high. What you see in the screenshot below had a massive budget.

 

 

Dont know about anyone else, but to me this screenshot doesnt hold a candle to anything we've seen from EDGE. For one thing, the detail is 'painted' on the textures, there are no real time shadows, and the visibility...hmmm, well you cant really judge from this angle. Also is this a shot of the same area of the desert as the ones in the recent NTTR? screens? I doubt it.

[NineLine]

way smaller than nevada

 

id say between 20-50km^2, maybe even smaller

 

Well, that is considerably smaller lol... anyways, I made this for myself one day, wasnt going to share it, its just reference for my own head, but I will today... its rough, and might not be precise, but gives a rough comparison of size....

[sobek]

How much water does that Altis map include?

[Eight Ball]

name a sim that can view this far this good....

FSX (with lots of pricey addons)

 

But it isn't a fair question.

No matter what we'll answer someone is going to say "yes but that sim doesn't handle this or that, etc"

 

So that means we first have to look at what is done in other games before expecting anything from DCS ? And as long as it won't be done in other sims it won't be done in DCS ?

Edited December 5, 2014 by Eight Ball

[NineLine]

Dont know about anyone else, but to me this screenshot doesnt hold a candle to anything we've seen from EDGE. For one thing, the detail is 'painted' on the textures, there are no real time shadows, and the visibility...hmmm, well you cant really judge from this angle. Also is this a shot of the same area of the desert as the ones in the recent NTTR? screens? I doubt it.

 

Yes, and the NTTR screenshots are still missing some shadowing and other details, so yes, heavy WIP progress images, but still pretty dang nice.

[NineLine]

FSX (with a lots of pricey addons)

 

But it isn't a fair question.

No matter what we'll answer someone is going to say "yes but that sim doesn't handle this or that, etc"

 

So that means we first have to look at what is done in other games before expecting anything from DCS ? And as long as it won't be done in other sims it won't be done in DCS ?

 

Well that was sort of my point, no one is really doing what DCS WOrld is trying to do, and I havent seen anything in FSX that looks nearly as good... but I dont want this to turn into a DCS vs thread, my point is, you need to judge DCS on what it is trying to do, not on what someone else is trying to do, which in most cases is vastly different goals...

Edited December 5, 2014 by NineLine

[eFirehawk]

How big are the maps?

 

I have no idea really. But from my past experience with the Playstation 2 games I'd say that with a plane capable of Mach 2 you can get from 1 corner to the map to the other in about 5 mins. :)

 

I understand that map size affects performance as well as a huge number of AIs and a single AFM in DCS, however, with modern day graphics engines LODs can be greatly optimized, whatever is far enough that you can't see can be replaced by simple placeholders and what you can see can switch to apropriate textures for the distance you are, not always some blurred in-betweens.

 

If you start to think, DCS is not as complex for a computer to handle as other games that achieved great graphics with a lot of stuff going on. Take a look at GTA V for example, even in the previous gen consoles. Look at everything that happens simultaneously in a GTA city and the graphics it has :) Does a single AFM + avionics and a bunch of SFM AIs and other land units require all THAT much computing power? I've loaded my DCS with a swarm of planes and tanks ( chaos missions are unrealistic but cool ) and the FPS hits were nowhere as close to graphical options settings even when flying solo. Again, I believe this is a matter of budget and manpower, with modern day computers you could have DCS with graphics that would leave us with very little to nitpick, however expecting it from ED is unrealistic. :)

 

To avoid misunderstandings I appreciate the screens and still love them. I believe certain things could be improved and are possible to do so ( and what we see is WIP as well, maybe that will improve ), but would require resources that are not available for ED. For what they are, what they are achieving is extraordinary :)

Edited December 5, 2014 by eFirehawk

[NineLine]

 

If you start to think, DCS is not as complex for a computer to handle as other games that achieved great graphics with a lot of stuff going on. Take a look at GTA V for example, even in the previous gen consoles. Look at everything that happens simultaneously in a GTA city and the graphics it has :) Does a single AFM + avionics and a bunch of SFM AIs and other land units require all THAT much computing power? I've loaded my DCS with a swarm of planes and tanks ( chaos missions are unrealistic but cool ) and the FPS hits were nowhere as close to graphical options settings even when flying solo. Again, I believe this is a matter of budget and manpower, with modern day computers you could have DCS with graphics that would leave us with very little to nitpick, however expecting it from ED is unrealistic. :)

 

I think GTA is a very poor example, I know they pull off the illusion that there is a lot going on, but its all within a bubble of the player, where as in DCS World if you put a tank battle on the other side of the map, its a tank battle going on on the other side of the map. GTA is fun, and impressive for being immersive and such, always has been cutting edge for interaction with the world, but its one city, again a small map in comparison to what ED is doing, and again, lots of trickery going on, with scripting and such I am sure...

 

So no, I dont think GTA has as much going on as DCS World can in a large mission.

Edited December 5, 2014 by NineLine

[Woogey]

Addressing the "Soft and Blurry" issue, I believe there is a Noise filter that causes this. Even the old caucuses map has Photoreal tiles, but the filter washes out the detail. I believe ED uses this to help even out the scenery for smooth blending and transitions. I'm not really sure of it's actual purpose. I think this is the key factor that needs to be tweaked in order to achieve the clarity we are used to in the other flight/Scenery sims. Any way you look at it, DCS 2.0 is a huge leap forward in capability, and I can't wait! -Woog

[Tumbleweed]

Well that was sort of my point, no one is really doing what DCS WOrld is trying to do, and I havent seen anything in FSX that looks nearly as good... but I dont want this to turn into a DCS vs thread, my point is, you need to judge DCS on what it is trying to do, not on what someone else is trying to do, which in most cases is vastly different goals...

 

 

I'm only a noob so my experience and opinions probably don't count for much around here but DCS is the only flight sim I've ever taken any real serious interest in. DCS is the complete package for me. It has reasonable graphics, good models and I can actually get immersed into my flights unlike other sims. I can jump in a bird and get lost for hours flying in DCS. I can't say I feel that excited with other flight sims / games.

 

I really can't put my finger on why but I far prefer DCS to all others I've tried. Every module I've purchased, whether I fly it regular or not feels special. Some of the aircraft I suck at but I'm still proud to own them and happy to support DCS and third party devs whenever I can.

 

Assuming DCS is still around in 20 years, I'll likely still be around myself and still blowing up the engine on my stang LOL

[NineLine]

I think this is the key factor that needs to be tweaked in order to achieve the clarity we are used to in the other flight/Scenery sims.

 

This is the point I am trying to make, nobody is really making maps the size of ED, while the shots we have seen will probably only get better, you also have to understand that these larger maps will have to make compromises for performance... mountains 100km away might look blurry and lower detail BUT the difference is that in DCS you will be able to fly to those mountains and chances are when you get closer they will look better...

[theGozr]

"within a bubble of the player"

Good and the new technology should be more focus on that.

 

"where as in DCS World if you put a tank battle on the other side of the map, its a tank battle going on on the other side of the map"

This is where improvements should be focus as well, Should have a way to ovoid calculating something that is way too far but giving just infos at a closer range

 

Those need to be seriously improved.. This is so bad that if you want to built a server to run DCS you will need a strong strong PC $$$ that run ONLY DCS.. This is absurd . So the bubble is practically something that should be seriously regarded

[NineLine]

"within a bubble of the player"

Good and the new technology should be more focus on that.

 

"where as in DCS World if you put a tank battle on the other side of the map, its a tank battle going on on the other side of the map"

This is where improvements should be focus as well, Should have a way to ovoid calculating something that is way too far but giving just infos at a closer range

 

Those need to be seriously improved.. This is so bad that if you want to built a server to run DCS you will need a strong strong PC $$$ that run ONLY DCS.. This is absurd . So the bubble is practically something that should be seriously regarded

 

Living in the bubble is so 90's....

[kontiuka]

"within a bubble of the player"

Good and the new technology should be more focus on that.

 

"where as in DCS World if you put a tank battle on the other side of the map, its a tank battle going on on the other side of the map"

This is where improvements should be focus as well, Should have a way to ovoid calculating something that is way too far but giving just infos at a closer range

If you're going to do that then you might as well not have the tank battle at all ... or even have those units in the mission.

[rcjonessnp175]

Must embrace life outside the box. Interesting chat, I think the screens look great. Yes looks like textures could use minor tweaking but no big deal. One I think Ed will square it away and second, if not to people's liking Dcs has some of the best modders in the business. Look forward to putting boots on ground in Nevada

[shagrat]

"within a bubble of the player"

Good and the new technology should be more focus on that.

 

"where as in DCS World if you put a tank battle on the other side of the map, its a tank battle going on on the other side of the map"

This is where improvements should be focus as well, Should have a way to ovoid calculating something that is way too far but giving just infos at a closer range

 

Those need to be seriously improved.. This is so bad that if you want to built a server to run DCS you will need a strong strong PC $$$ that run ONLY DCS.. This is absurd . So the bubble is practically something that should be seriously regarded

 

The problem with the bubble is that it can't really work in multiplayer.

If somebody is flying a fast jet some 90 nm into enemy airspace to prepare a SEAD strike and another flight prepares his planes for the strike mission we already need two bubbles. If the SEAD flight is supposed to work in unison with ground forces at the target location that bubble may need to coordinate data and comms with the strike package bubble... now add a complex battle to that and you basically have the current situation. Only improvement around the "bubble feature" will be graphics wise, as you need only render what objects are around an individual client.

The environment and units interacting still needs a good or better PC. The CPU will still be the limiting factor...

Edited December 5, 2014 by shagrat

[sorcer3r]

The problem with the bubble is that it can't really work in multiplayer.

 

I can testify that bubble can work in multiplayer.

[winz]

FSX (with lots of pricey addons)

 

But it isn't a fair question.

No matter what we'll answer someone is going to say "yes but that sim doesn't handle this or that, etc"

 

So that means we first have to look at what is done in other games before expecting anything from DCS ? And as long as it won't be done in other sims it won't be done in DCS ?

Sadly, yes, in a way. By looking at other software you can decide whether the features/performance ratio DCS has is an annomaly or if it follows the trend present in other games. And by looking at other games you can clearly see that it is not an anomaly.

 

Yes, FSX with lots of pricey addons can look great, in the right conditions (time, weather, alltitude), but in such cases it is a bigger resource hog than DCS. And that's without all the things that DCS has and FSX doesn't.

 

Or let's look on Arma 3. It looks gorgeous at infantry level, but 15+km visibility will butcher most systems.

 

Ace combat and HAWX use really cheap tricks to limit what is visible (i.e. by limiting flying height).

 

So yeah, there are allways compromises, and there will be for some time. The resources, cpu power, gpu power, vram available, bus bandwith, ammount of draw calls the api is able to handle... are still limited. If we want a sim, with advanced aerodynamic modeling, with deep system simulations, with AI, with ballistic simulation, with 150km+ visibility..., then we must sadly accept, that it will not look as good, or detailed, as games that offer fraction of that.

[Silver_Dragon]

folks that in no a continue battle ED / DCS: W vs "others", if you like the others use them, but dont put them a "mandatory ED you need use them NOW....."

[NoJoe]

I think the new screenshots look amazing. But not nearly as amazing as the clouds in the Bf-109 trailer video! That broken layer looks SO REAL, especially combined with the new lighting in EDGE, giving everything that bluish tint. I fly for a living, and that's strikingly similar to how the world looks on a sunny(ish) day down low.

 

I love it. Can't wait!