RADICAL CHANGE WISH!

[onib89]

We need a radical change in DCS: WORLD'. it is unacceptable to fall as much fps in such simple graphics

To tell you the truth, I'm afraid to create mlrs (and generally a lot of units),

to not lag so much that...(I'm playing BF3, MW3, crysis 2 at ultra specs for God's name! it is lame what's happenin' in dcs's engine)

i hope everything is going to change.... SOON!!!!

I live for the day when I can see the version 1.3.0 for DCS WORLD!

MY SPECS:

Syncmaster P2370HD(23''), Intel i7 860(overcloacked at 3,70ghz with coolermaster V8), MBoard Intel DP55SB, GTX560 1gb DDR5 Twin froz ii, G-skill 8gb ram, 64-bit OS Win7, 1st) Seagate 320gb, 2nd) Seagate 1T, 3rd) seagate 500gb, Power 680W.

 

 

my english :( sry

 

my thanks !!!!!!!!!

Edited March 13, 2013 by onib89

[BigfootMSR]

The current engine is taxed and outdated. They are currently working on creating a brand new engine from the ground up called EDGE. Its coming but its going to take some time and we must be patient.

[tute]

well, i've been more than a year patient, but when it comes to pay for a game

that is pretty quick...

enough of this slideshow...

[G-Lock91]

Can't tell ya how many threads there are of this.. all with the same response.. Edge is coming, be patient. Enjoy BMS or pick up a new hobby in the meantime :)

[Weta43]

We need a radical change in DCS: WORLD'. it is unacceptable to fall as much fps in such simple graphics

To tell you the truth, I'm afraid to create mlrs (and generally a lot of units),

to not lag so much that...(I'm playing BF3, MW3, crysis 2 at ultra specs for God's name! it is lame what's happenin' in dcs's engine)

i hope everything is going to change.... SOON!!!!

I live for the day when I can see the version 1.3.0 for DCS WORLD!

MY SPECS:

Syncmaster P2370HD(23''), Intel i7 860(overcloacked at 3,70ghz with coolermaster V8), MBoard Intel DP55SB, GTX560 1gb DDR5 Twin froz ii, G-skill 8gb ram, 64-bit OS Win7, 1st) Seagate 320gb, 2nd) Seagate 1T, 3rd) seagate 500gb, Power 680W.

 

 

my english :( sry

 

my thanks !!!!!!!!!

BF3 user :

 

 

Enlisted: 2011-10-24

 

 

2012-01-31 18:16

 

The setting you need to change is Mesh

 

I play with ...

High mesh (mesh determines the quality and distance at which objects are rendered.. Ie infantry, I'd play on ultra mesh but it costs me ~15fps so not worth it)

 

I never have a problem seeing enemies out to 1200m with a sniper scope, can pick out infantry on the ground from a couple hundred meters away

 

This has been gone over before, but...

 

Take BF3 - on 'ultra' - you can see objects at maybe 1 or 2 km tops, the environment for maybe 4 or 5km.

Arma 2 - seems huge - the entire maps are only 10km across, and you can only see maybe 5km before even the terrain has disappeared into the haze.

 

DCS you can see 100km without any trouble - 150km is the max tree visibility range on the presets (from memory)

 

a 5km radius gives you 78.5km^2 viewable area.

150km gives you 70,856km^2 viewable area.

That's 900 times more area to draw.

[Quirkitized]

Take every single map for bf3, make it into a single map, add all the units, make the visibility 100x greater and LOD 50x greater and I wouldn't be surprised if it crashed let a lone gave single digit fps.

 

But ya, just like everybody else, we're all waiting for EDGE.

Edited March 13, 2013 by Quirkitized

[whitehot]

dont forget the whole directx9/11 affair. Directx are the main responsible for the exploitation of the hardware you have. We are running a version which was designed in like 2003, with the hardware of that time in mind. devs need to move on from this dinosaur. Ofc, training personnel to program directx 11 costs money and time. A friend of mine bought the arma 3 alpha and i could see it running on a directx 11 system. I can guarantee that it has astonishing graphics and actually runs much better than arma 2

[locoidal]

BF3 user :

 

This has been gone over before, but...

 

Take BF3 - on 'ultra' - you can see objects at maybe 1 or 2 km tops, the environment for maybe 4 or 5km.

Arma 2 - seems huge - the entire maps are only 10km across, and you can only see maybe 5km before even the terrain has disappeared into the haze.

 

DCS you can see 100km without any trouble - 150km is the max tree visibility range on the presets (from memory)

 

a 5km radius gives you 78.5km^2 viewable area.

150km gives you 70,856km^2 viewable area.

That's 900 times more area to draw.

 

I have heard you are currently moving the gfx engine to a new thread..this could be a big help for fps. Also the fixing of some edm models (port cranes, containers and so on) that are unoptimized in the current engine.. do you know when we could see those changes?.. do we must pay (another time) for this?

 

THX

[Feuerfalke]

The BF3 Engine has a different bias. And to be honest: even in its speciality - combat under 1km distance - the performance is pretty bad. Flickering textures are common and with a 8x or 12x scope, clipping errors are common, especially when moving view. Not to mention smoje that some players can see through, while it blocks the visiob of others completely. And physics... well... realism... er......

 

So BF3 is not really an engine worth wishing for in a simulation like this.

[SkateZilla]

Frostbite and TFCSE are not in the same league, let alone the same sport.

 

Comparing DCS to BF3 is like Comparing a 2013 Gen 6 Chevy SS Stock Car to a 2 Stroke RC.

 

 

Further more, TFCSE was researched and developed during the DX8/9 Reign in the early 2000's, in which GPU's Contained both Shader Units, and Geometry Cores.

 

Fast Forward to 2010-Present, GPUs are Exclusively General Purpose Shader Units now, used for Geometry, Shaders, Physics Calculations, Video Transcoding Etc, thanks to DirectCompute and CUDA.

 

DirectX has also moved on to a Shader Driven SDK, Then DirectX11 adds Tessellation etc.

 

Having a New Engine that Properly uses today's Assets (Shaders and Tessellation, etc) would solve a majority of the problems.

Edited March 13, 2013 by SkateZilla

[mjeh]

That said, the OP has a point when it comes to cluster munitions :)

[SkateZilla]

Heavy Particle Effects kill FPS in nearly every game.

[mjeh]

Oh absolutely, and smoke in particular has always been a show stopper.

 

But still, there is always room for improvement. And these improvements are surely coming, 1.2.3 made MLRS useable for me again (yay) for instance, even if it still slows my system considerably. But until such a time as the spectacular cluster munitions effects can be shown without too much FPS drop on an average DCS-user rig, I can't help but think that maybe the effects should be a little less spectacular and a little more FPS-friendly.

 

EDIT: With the option of full on spectacularity for those that have the rig to pull it off, of course :v: