Ver 1.2.3 News

[Revelation]

I think not create new content is a distraction, on the contrary, if you do not create new content would be losing a significant amount of resources that ED can not afford. This must be a planning, and go creating new functionality, although this remains secluded by requirements or problems. The day we stop making something ED pair DCS: W, this will be closed forever.

 

No one is saying that ED has stopped creating any content. What is being said is ED is not adding more content to 1.2.3. Anything being created today gets added in a later patch.

[tflash]

Hé, weren't we waiting for a patch lately? I almost forgot all about it!

[Hamblue]

What I don't understand -- they're talking about netcode is delaying the update, however, why does this affect the delay of the new content, such as the SU-27, etc? To me, the underlying netcode should not affect the additional new content that most offline flyers are so eagerly awaiting...

Because adding more code makes it that much harder to find the cause. This was discussed a few versions ago and those that pushed for all to stop and fix the bugs first were ignored and even given warnings. Since then additional releases have burried the problem deeper. They have to dig back to the original cause and then work out from there. It will take time and I hope that whoever is running the show takes notice for the next time around. These kind of things can make or break any product.

So stand back and let them fix it right. :thumbup:

[Silver_Dragon]

You can add new content, and integrate them on testing and debug procedure, If fail you save time modification them and retest and debug, you not need find deep, if no has stable, can hold them, no include on a version and move them to a future version.

[Mr_Burns]

Those were just my assumptions/observations, as I'm not a beta tester or dev with access to that info.

So my post is not an Official or Validated explanation.

 

I know you arent official but you made sense, what if you added DCS: a ship.

 

Would there heaps more netcode, ie. another level of technology and scripting or do you merely replace the Ship AI netcode that exists?

 

I think I understand essentially adding new aircraft within the same parameters of the Shark and the A-10 doesnt cause that many issues but a ship....

 

I think we will be OK with DCS: Train though.

 

Im only musing too, Im not expecing a fleet just yet.

Edited February 6, 2013 by Mr_Burns

[Ensi Ferrum]

Is there any chance to get the fixes for the G940 bug(s) anytime soon??

[JorgeIII]

I have a doubt.

ED is actually working so hard since the last month in multiplayer stability issues we are suffering with versión 1.2.2 or with newer and worst issues that appeared with 1.2.3 internal testing?

 

Many seem to be certain that they are working in our current problems and that 1.2.3 will be THE solution for MP. I hope so.

 

As far as I recall, when 1.2.3 was first anounced, MP stability enhacement was only a tiny line between many other improvements: "Fixed client crash in MP". Quite unspecific.

 

1.2.3 was then delayed because: "During the course of version 1.2.3 testing, we found a significant technical problem with multiplayer". So new problems appeared that they have to work on and fix before releasing 1.2.3.

 

I hope they are actually working in the new MP inestability issues that apeared with 1.2.3 internal testing AND the problems we are having right now with public 1.2.2

Edited February 6, 2013 by JorgeIII

[Dejjvid]

I can assure you ED is solving ALL MP related bugs they can find. They are probably as pissed as we are and want to put a stop into this so they can focus on developing the product.

 

And don't worry about delaying the new modules. They work in parallell and eg. sound, flight model and graphics engineers still continue to work on their projects. It's only the "DCS engine" people who work on the MP problems.

[Flia]

Pls make a F/A-18C as your top priority :)

[jctrnacty]

My guess is that they want to make 1.2.3 MP as stable as possible so that they have a stable platform to build upon it.

[rrohde]

Again, that netcode vs content thing to me sounds as if someone told me "Hey, you can't have your shiny new car until we fix the highway". You know, don't worry about the road I take, I don't use the highway, I take the by-roads. Just let me have my car first and fix the highway separately. :)

[Boberro]

I can assure you ED is solving ALL MP related bugs they can find. They are probably as pissed as we are and want to put a stop into this so they can focus on developing the product.

 

And don't worry about delaying the new modules. They work in parallell and eg. sound, flight model and graphics engineers still continue to work on their projects. It's only the "DCS engine" people who work on the MP problems.

 

Well they wouldn't be so pissed off if they made good net code earlier.

Multiplayer issues belong even to LO1.

[c0ff]

Well they wouldn't be so pissed off if they made good net code earlier.

Multiplayer issues belong even to LO1.

 

Why modern airplanes are jets, instead of being just bigger biplanes with bigger propellers?

 

 

DCS (and LO) setting requires unique (for the game industry, at least) solutions for many of its areas. Network is one of them.

 

And all of this with an extremely small team.

[BRooDJeRo]

But...but.. you have a huge-long hallway in moscow with doors leading to any place in the world..

[locoidal]

If the ED guys are checking the netcode....

Would be great that:

-All the net code --> in one or more threads

-The civ traffic --> in another thread

-The sound --> in another thread (this is already done)

-The AI --> another thread

-namely ... Multi-Thread ;)

 

Come on guys!

[BRooDJeRo]

I guess its best to let them do the planning etc. themselves...

[Azraeil]

Sins of a Solar Empire and Cities Xl are excellent examples of games, which despite the numerous increases in content, no longer hold my interest due to the extremely poor performance on modern systems. All because they failed to develop an engine which could handle the level of detail which their game sought to simulate.

 

Despite the growing pains and the somewhat questionable implementation of DCS world, the move to 64bit in my eyes has ensured the future of the DCS franchise. If they continue to add engine and network optimisations, as priority, that will ensure that content increases are delivered in an environment which they are able to be fully enjoyed. Honestly, nothing would make me happier in this game right now then to see both my gpu's hit 100% load, while my cpu chugs along on all four cores with 30 other players in the server. I would consider sacrificing content for this, but unfortunately you can't sell optimisations on a free platform.

 

tl;dr As much as I want DCS Fighter, Nothing will make me play it if I have to go through the tedium of CTD's.

[SkateZilla]

If the ED guys are checking the netcode....

Would be great that:

-All the net code --> in one or more threads

-The civ traffic --> in another thread

-The sound --> in another thread (this is already done)

-The AI --> another thread

-namely ... Multi-Thread ;)

 

Come on guys!

 

Debugging the netcode and splitting up the engine into separate computation threads are two completely different things.

 

if the engine wasnt written for multi-threads to begin with, then it would require a complete re-write to achieve it.

[locoidal]

Debugging the netcode and splitting up the engine into separate computation threads are two completely different things.

I know .. I Know. Fighting with "fork" is different of "hey!!... what was wrong" :)

if the engine wasnt written for multi-threads to begin with, then it would require a complete re-write to achieve it.

Wish they are changing code with multi-thread in mind ... if not .. more and more patches will come for only hiding the truth: A very very complex LOOP in wich, if you insert a single var --> performance on the floor (this, of course, is an exaggeration.. but.....)

:cry:

[Raven68]

Debugging the netcode and splitting up the engine into separate computation threads are two completely different things.

 

if the engine wasnt written for multi-threads to begin with, then it would require a complete re-write to achieve it.

 

Is it possible that ED has a new engine in the works (DCSW 2.x.x) to replace DCSW 1.x.x??

 

EDIT: Of course I am thinking waaaayyyyyy down the road.

Edited February 6, 2013 by Raven68

[joey45]

disclaimer -I have no knowledge of code

 

Maybe a Dedicated Server would be more inline????

[SkateZilla]

Is it possible that ED has a new engine in the works (DCSW 2.x.x) to replace DCSW 1.x.x??

 

EDIT: Of course I am thinking waaaayyyyyy down the road.

 

Eagle

Dynamics

Graphics

Engine

[Dejjvid]

EDGE is required for the dedicated server.

[Boberro]

I hope that new thing will be truly multi core capability engine which will bring really nice graphics.

[Raven68]

Eagle

Dynamics

Graphics

Engine

 

:doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh: If it was a snake it would have bit me!! Massive brain fart on my part Skates!!

 

Can I get a hug??