DCS: FPS

[jmod]

FPS has two meanings, First Person Shooter, and Frame Per Second.

 

With the announcement of DCS: Combined Arms, DCS shows that it has the capability of being FPS (First Person Shooter), so it needs ARMA like terrain!

But what about another FPS (Frame Per Second), or performance?

 

Once upon a time, when Eagle Dynamics was going to implement Su-27 Flanker, conditions were simple:

1) Solo product

2) No intent to have ARMA like terrain

3) Single core CPU

4) Simple GPU

 

But, nowadays conditions have changed:

1) Modular system

2) FPS capability of DCS World, and need to have ARMA like terrain

3) Multi core CPU

4) Sophisticated GPU

 

Should ED consider redesigning TFCSE from ground up (in parallel to new DCS titles)?

Edited June 23, 2012 by jmod

[jp203000]

You are right , ED have to change all of them if they want DCSW to be sustainable development . The problem is not if but when . I know it will take a lot of effort but I think people would like to pay for the second upgrade for more realstic graphics and better performance.

[sobek]

Now for the umptienth time, poll option number one would culminate in the demise of Eagle Dynamics, what part of that don't you two understand?

[metalnwood]

I dont know whats the best way forward but I really look forward to the day where a flight sim, not flying game, is released supporting multi GPU.

 

I know I am in the minority but with triple screens it's always a money game trying to get the FPS up and the available solutions like xfire dont work - in any real sim for that matter.

 

I dont think getting the frames up will be a priority but hopefully the adoption of newer tech to give other improvements means the frames will come.

[winz]

Yes, they should develop a new engine from scratch.

It should have the on-foot freedom of Arma III,

the in-flight terrain fidelity of outerra,

the scenery complexity of the FSX custom sceneries,

it should keep the DCS level fidelity of fly and system modeling,

should have the penetration and armor engine of steelbeast pro,

adaptable AI,

the boom effect of crytek3,

dynamic campaign,

full working ATC,

should perform well on 4years old CPUs,

and use all the modern hocus-pocus APIs available today,

and shouldn't take 10years and ED going bankrupt to develop

 

And maybe I should just replied 'not this kind of thread again' but naah.

[Boomer]

If they were to drop everything and make a new engine from the ground up, they would become another microprose, only this time there will be no one left to step up, and we will be playing hawx for the next decade or two.

[jp203000]

Yes, they should develop a new engine from scratch.

It should have the on-foot freedom of Arma III,

the in-flight terrain fidelity of outerra,

the scenery complexity of the FSX custom sceneries,

it should keep the DCS level fidelity of fly and system modeling,

should have the penetration and armor engine of steelbeast pro,

adaptable AI,

the boom effect of crytek3,

dynamic campaign,

full working ATC,

should perform well on 4years old CPUs,

and use all the modern hocus-pocus APIs available today,

and shouldn't take 10years and ED going bankrupt to develop

 

And maybe I should just replied 'not this kind of thread again' but naah.

Are you talking about fighterops?:D just a joke, hope DCSW would have all that feature in 2020.

LOL:thumbup:

[PeterP]

A poll about FPS - great!

 

I just want to drag you attention on the still in development new E.D.G.E. terrain engine.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=1476617#post1476617

 

I think the Devs done this to add more detail closer to a "FPS" in mind and also to higher the performance.

Edited June 7, 2012 by PeterP

[element1108]

high fidelity vehicle combat land sea and air is now seeming a reality with ED, given it's primarily a flight sim environment I really don't see any place for a controllable (first person) infantry. The strategic control of them (strategy game) suffices for me. ARMA satisfies the ground combat aspect, was built for ground combat and the vehicles obviously suffer because of this.

 

I doubt a complete redesign of the engine from the ground up to satisfy the FPS would be commercially viable. Not when we could concentrate on where DCS really shines which is primarily AIR POWER (not to discredit the vehicles/armor...LOVE) I really never thought that would be made available to us.

 

That's just MY HUMBLE OPINION, I'm more than satisfied with the direction ED have taken the series!

[Kuky]

Read before you post, at least a little, to get familiarised what's been talked about a millionth time

[Daniel M]

...

should perform well on 4years old CPUs,

 

priceless!:megalol:

[Cedaway]

[159th_Falcon]

There's a poll option missing;

Let ED figure out the best course of action and enjoy current products in the meantime.

 

~S~

[PhoenixBvo]

^^ Exactly! Nuf said

[asparagin]

There's a poll option missing;

Let ED figure out the best course of action and enjoy current products in the meantime.

 

Like excluding that option changes the course of history..

Be quick to vote until midnight because ED is counting and waiting to take a decision :D

[PeterP]

[still shocking head..]

 

seems even the Mods declared this thread as dead space- otherwise They would have shown up !;)

 

Give the OP a slag!

[Pikey]

It cannot be restarted now. I'm quite sure the idea of scalability and expansion is absolutely the guiding principle of development right now. Keeping out of locking into restrictive technology is vital. The very fact it was started as a challenging and perhaps risky technical application shows that's how its set out to be.

[KillarZ]

IMHO I don't know what EDGE will offer but things are looking good in EDs future but the engine their using now seems like their downfall. Looking at Outerra (even though its not complete and hasn't been tested in a real flight sim) it seems like ED is far behind as far as terrain engines. If ED were to make a new engine after they finish US Fixed Wing, DCS World and let 3rd party's that are approved by them take over, they would may be able to pull it off. Of course it would still take time. But I think it is time to start thinking of what DCS will need 10 years from now. Pretty much everything they're doing now but on an overall better terrain engine that models the world, with the same level of physics, a better sound engine, multi GPU/CPU support, etc.

You guys keep saying itll kill ED if they tried to start from scratch but TBH they should have done that in the first place and you gotta start sometime somewhere.

[Blaze]

Keep in mind that ED is not a huge company with hundreds and hundreds of employees like EA or Activision, they are a relatively small group of people, and re-working TFCSE from the ground up would take entirely too long to be worth it. I believe that with the introduction of EDGE with Nevada (which will be only for the new map, not the existing terrain) we will hopefully see future theaters of war use this engine as well taking full advantage of the new features it will have.

[kokoweems]

singlecore forever?

[leafer]

I feel a separate core for sound is a good start.

[Sierra99]

OK, the question is: Should ED consider redesigning TFCSE from ground up (in parallel to new DCS titles), or evolving TFCSE would be enough?

 

To be honest, I have no idea what you are talking about... Id be willing to bet MOST people on here dont. To be even more honest, I don't care. I'm gonna go out on a limb here and guess DCS considered these things (and probably a few you didn't) before making a decision.

 

In my opinion DCS is doing a pretty damn good job. 20 years ago a friend and I sat in his basement with our computers hooked up across from each other with a null modem cable trying to fly Falcon together... IT NEVER WORKED... Last night I flew formation with him RELIABLY... For over 30 minutes without a hitch. For now I'm happy with what we have and I see things only getting better.

 

In short, people need to quit posting polls trying to tell DCS how to do their job. If you cant stand to do that, start your own company and do it your way. good Luck to ya if ya try.

 

If youre not willing to or able to, do THAT...

 

The coloring books are on the bottom shelf next to the crayons.

Edited June 8, 2012 by Sierra99
Spell chucker fail...

[cichlidfan]

Luckily, the folks at ED don't have to read all this stuff. The mods and testers can tell them if there is anything useful out here. Which, in the case of polls, there usually is not!;)

[leafer]

I'd love FPS in dcs world.

[Blaze]

I'd love more FPS in DCS World. But that's really more on my end, time for a hardware update. :D