DCS World 1.5 and 2 Discussion

See the mention of no cpu multi-threading bothers me because it has potentially 2 different meanings. Especially when you factor in "Higher object counts". As that could be from the benefits better DX 11 instancing, but really means rendering a lot more of the exact same object (probably a given anyway). If we're talking unique objects granted explicitly by multi-threaded object calls natively supported in the API, then that's great. Though they could be choosing the single threaded code path, meaning where getting more trees. Now they could just be talking about the core engine remaining single-threaded, but they didn't specify.

A lot of people like to throw around buzzwords like MULTICORE or THE CLOUD and such without understanding the meaning behind these 'magic' performance enhancers.

 

First of all there is no magic. Writing a program as complex as DCS World is hard enough to do in a standard single-thread format, trying to do so to make use of multiple CPU's or rather 'threads' is something that can quickly become so complicated and convulted that performance can actually be lost instead of gained.

 

Anyone with a background in computer programming will tell you that its not as simple as just seperating tasks to work on different threads. What happens when the two (or 4, or 8!!) threads need to communicate data between each other? How do you handle the different speeds at which concurrent tasks are completed? How do you handle memory access?

 

Parallel programming is HARD. The more complex the program the harder it is to parralelize it.

 

You have to remember that most games are relatively simple compared to the complex calculations that DCS needs to do on the fly AND Its entirely possible that there could be no performance benefits depending on the algorithms that are being used in the code.

 

I would advise everyone to keep these things in mind before lamenting the lack of multicore support.

The higher object count is achieved in part by the fact that your GPU will be playing a bigger part in running the sim, freeing the CPU for more things like added objects...

Looks Like my GTX770 4gig will have it's work cut out...

The higher object count is achieved in part by the fact that your GPU will be playing a bigger part in running the sim, freeing the CPU for more things like added objects...

When I was thinking of what ways that could realistically be achieved (in vendor agnostic fashion) I remembered DirectCompute. While most uses of it are still to provide some graphical effect, offloading physics is a very realistic option. AI has only ever been mentioned as a theoretical capability of DirectCompute, with zero examples implementation so far. That said there are examples of DX11 games, that do way less than DCS, that scale up in performance with more cores. Multithreaded rendering is basically already provided by the API, and does what it needs to do as far as rendering. I'd be amazed if they opted out of using it if they managed to leverage DirectCompute that much.

As will be destroyed buildings and other structures - bridges, dams ,?

would be nice to get a open beta version this year, even with bugs. If it's stable enough to make advertisment videos with, it should be stable enough to make a public test before you launch a RC

would be nice to get a open beta version this year, even with bugs. If it's stable enough to make advertisment videos with, it should be stable enough to make a public test before you launch a RC

The vids are obviously cherry picked. Some smaller areas remain that end users would prolly be quite unhappy with.

The vids are obviously cherry picked. Some smaller areas remain that end users would prolly be quite unhappy with.

i think the end user that uses the open beta is well known that it's not the final product and it will be far away from perfect.

Take GalCiv 3 for example, they published the prealpha, the alpha and beta version to the enduser in states which are far away from finished, perfect or polished, but they where very glad about the constructive feedback.

Like the GalCiv3 Community the flightsim community is also very mature, i think ED should give more trust in their community on points like that.

That is my opinion.

would be nice to get a open beta version this year, even with bugs. If it's stable enough to make advertisment videos with, it should be stable enough to make a public test before you launch a RC

When ED belive their creation is ready for release then they will...

IF they are looking for some extra testers for EDGE before they release it.....:thumbup:

I would not mind to test EDGE on my Rig this year, I mean, I would love it, even with those smaller bad areas

i think the end user that uses the open beta is well known that it's not the final product and it will be far away from perfect.

I think you're mistaken. The complaining won't stop (even after release) and will just sour the mood around here. It only takes a few to spoil the anticipation...

Let them take the time to release a working product.

When I see the size of the last two update patch. I think dev have began to upload some edge parts ... to be ready on D-day.

I hope i'm true.

When I see the size of the last two update patch. I think dev have began to upload some edge parts ... to be ready on D-day.

What would be the advantage of doing that?

What would be the advantage of doing that?

They already upgraded flares.

They already upgraded flares.

So. If that were a part of EDGE, it would not work right now.

i think the end user that uses the open beta is well known that it's not the final product and it will be far away from perfect.

You are wrong. :);)

You are wrong. :);)

Prove it, sir. :pilotfly:

Prove it, sir. :pilotfly:

Search the forum, you lazy bum. :)

GA should do an Official DCSW 2.0 Launch Trailer. Just sayin' :-)

I agree :D

and Cato should make an NTTR trailer/teaser as well :bounce:

the music is ready ;)

After looking at Mig 15bis teaser it is clear to me that ED has made a lot of progress with Edge and our wait is nearly over. As a A10C beta owner I can hardly wait to test out my new Crosswind rudder pedals that are scheduled for arrive in January 2015.

I think the new map will make me fall in love with the A10-C for a 2nd time

#can'twait;)

would be nice to get a open beta version this year, even with bugs. If it's stable enough to make advertisment videos with, it should be stable enough to make a public test before you launch a RC

I think you're missing the point.

What's the reason for a Beta release?

The developers want to test the product on a broad range of hardware and software environments to find problems they didn't know about so that they can say with some certainty that the product is ready for release once the newly found bugs are fixed.

That means the Beta is a great way for the developer to get feedback, and as a customer, I can use the product before others can, at the cost of running into problems. And of course it would make a lot of sense for Beta testers to then take the time, search the Knowldge Base or the Bug Reporting System or the Forum if that bug is already known and if not file a detailed bug report. If I'm not willing to do that, I shouldn't use the Beta (or at least not complain about any bugs in it).

Now, if there are known bugs and problems in the current version, it makes exactly no sense at all to release it to Beta testers, because they will surely find these problems and start reporting them, wasting everyone's time. It's always like this, even when there's a huge disclaimer taped in bright red tape all over it.

Like the guy asking what EDGE was a few days ago. I understand why one wouldn't want to read through 100+ posts, but the opening post details the whole story, and yet, someone asks about it. The same thing would happen if a Beta is released with known bugs. And since most Beta are released with known bugs, I'm sure it will happen. I just assume that right now there are too many and/or too severe issues so that releasing it now would create more problems than it would solve.