Jump to content

stray cat

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by stray cat

  1. No one seeing what is wrong with this situation? I will use a metaphore. VEAO are offering their dishes (module) at a very expensive 5 star restaurant (DCS) and they let the intern new guy cook the food (texture) for which they charge the full price. I think it is very rude of VEAO to charge full price for releasing their module for DC effing S while at the same time the want to save some money by letting a guy handle the very important part of texturing who is not (yet) up to the task. To all who are not able to process the words I am writing: The texture work of the texture artist is not at the quality level it should be for a 40+ $ DCS module and as an end-user I come to DCS to buy high end modules and not to support a newbie artist to improve. After all, I am not blaming the smiladon for the situation, he was hired for a job for which he is way in over his head currently. And all things considered he deserves a high five for the way he handles the critizism. He could be a legendary artist in some time or maybe not, artistic skill is a trained skill, and right now at this point in time, that texture attempt is not up to standard for DCS. If VEAO wants to offer their stuff on DCS for full price they should invest so it is actually up to standard instead of trying to squeeze through with cost saving measures. And the idea of it eventually improving is a bit off to say the least. How about we get the hawk for 5$ and we might eventually pay the rest in parts?
  2. Ok just going to say it. The texturing attempt is very bad. Whoever is texturing that thing, is not a professional texture artist. He is struggling very hard with basic metal representation and the metal with supposedly slightly used metal looks like marble. My guess is VEAO did not even plan to get a professional artist and went for "hey I know how to use photoshop, Ill just read on some tutorials on how to make a base texture with render clouds!" It's a bit embarrassing for VEAO and for ED too because one would expect out of the box topshelf quality in texture as we are seeing from ED, BELSIMTEK and LEATHERNECK. Is there no quality assurance at ED to keep all 3rd party modules on a certain level of visual quality. The hawk texture is far below what I would consider a standard established in DCS. Also this is not about supporting a new developer. They are asking the same money like other developers (with 10$ off because of the flight model difference) so we can expect the same quality. Why do we get a mig21, or mig15 soon out of the box with topshelf texture quality, full flight model. Meanwhile from VEAO and to some extent aviodev we get "we are trying so hard but we are not done yet!" If your texture and flight model are not yet up to the expect quality level, THEN DONT OFFER the beta sale this early. And as for the hawk texture itself, it is not the cockpit being bland in real life, its the skill of the texture artist making it look this bad. Compare it to the sabre screenshot above, it has bland metal surfaces all over it,yet it is masterfully painted. What worries me is that VEAO is the 3rd party with a huge amount of modules announced, yet they are not able to deliver anything visually convincing. Belsimtek never talks on the forums, they just bring out new modules which are sort of on time and legendary in quality, texture, flight model. No excuses, no explanations how hard they try. So, I would like to suggest for VEAO to get their act together and hire a texture artist who knows what he is doing.
  3. How to turn off the engine (so that I can request a repair)? I have attempted turning off most systems, fuel pumps, AC/DC generators, main electrical switches. But the engine still keeps running even if the cockpit itself is without power. Is there a "kill engine" switch?
  4. I think there is a problem with the videos showing single hits tearing planes apart. Can you guess? These are only the "best" videos they had, not every dogfight of ww2 was recorded on a video and of those that got recorded they probably threw away those that show planes not being destroyed. You can bet there was a lot of situation where planes got hit by 50+ shots and still kept flying. That is a bit far-fetched, because if those rounds dont hit something important that is needed to keep the plane flying then it is just a hole somewhere on the plane. Planes dont have hitpoints in real life. And if you look at a plane from behind there is many very non perpendicular surfaces that increase the probability of a grazing hit + bullet losing a lot of kinetic energy before hitting + plane moving fast after detonation of HE
  5. Guys, I think you are leaving out a lot of things. It depends on where the shell hits, how fast it is when it hits, what the angle is and how strong the part of the plane is when it is hit. Most of the time the claims of guns being too weak are simply hits by bullets that lost a lot of kinetic energy before reaching the target and then they more often than not have to hit the plane at a flat angle. If you shoot at an enemy plane with a .50 at 500m distance with both planes having a lot of airspeed the bullet will have lost a lot of kinetic energy before it hits.Also the kinetic energy still matters even on an explosive round because it would be able to punch into the metal before detonating. And if it is an explosive round, a lot of the energy from the explosion is lost because the target is moving at high speed. That is why for example you can get away after being hit by 2 strela missiles in a F86 if you fly very fast. And as for structural damage, I dont think there is any bad modeling involved, sometimes the bullet hits just the right area to make a tail break off. The same happens when fly in a huey. If you get hammered by a 14.5mm gun you can often take many hits and the copter still being able to fly, and sometimes one single hit tears of your tail. And this very precise damage model is far better than "I hit the enemy plane with my powerful gun in a random spot, the plane DESERVES to explode/die because I earned the shot"
  6. What are the differences between the BF109, Dora, Pony? I read from several sources that the FW190 was a more modern and better combat plane than the BF109, but a quick look at wikipedia for performance statistics and the BF appears to be able to fly faster, climb faster and fly higher and carry larger weapons than the Dora. Also how does the pony compare to the other two?
  7. Yes you are wrong. the pregnant example is completely useless here. The more people and money are thrown at a task, the faster it will get done. Works for everything, skyscrapers, Call of Duty, DCS. Same if you connect more hamsters to more hamsterwheels you get more power
  8. The way it works is this: ED sells more copies, can hire more people so its not 5 guys in a basement coding and being slowed down by overseeing 3rd party modules. So more 3rd party stuff does not slow down the development, it accelerates it, because more modules, more sales, can hire more staff
  9. Landing gear is too brittle now. Take a look at the track. the vertical speed was near zero, still the gear instantly bends mig21.trk
  10. 2 questions about the su-27 1. On neutral trim it feels very hard to keep the plane level. It wants to pitch up unless the trim is set vertical to counter it very agressively. Is that normal or something being wrong with it? 2. What are the things that look like flaps on the front edges of the wings? How to control them? 3. Is it required to make use of the different autopilot settings to keep the plane steady (like on the KA-50) or is it just a matter of having a firm grip on the stick?
  11. Not downloading for me, ran the updater (non steam)
  12. How to take-off, fly and land with the mig21 like a pro. So the new players can learn from this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiKj8QbgM-Q&feature=youtu.be how to embed the video properly?
  13. 1. You are mixing up weathering and texture quality. We have the mig21 (very used) and F86 (very clean) and they both are superior in texture quality and have been so since the first preview screenshots. I highly doubt the hawk texture quality will make a jump in a months time 2. Out of all soon to be relased modules, the hawk looks the least convincing. Developers warn us of everything being so wip and even split up the flight model into 2 different packages. This whole "please dont get too excited attitude" is not really assuring, considering we pay the same amount of money for other modules which are in far better state on release. 3. Eye candy or simulation? It is 2014, and it is DCS. There is no excuse for that. The average belsimtek, leatherneck or ED module has both. Functional simulation and great cockpit textures. And please do not call belsimteks modules less complete because a manual might be incomplete or tiny features are missing. And considering the VEAR forum section you can see 9 aircraft announced which looks like quantity over quality to me. And also dont take "developer communication" as a quality factor. I dont care how much a developer posts on the forum. All that matters for me is that the module. belsimtek never says a word on the forum but the modules are awesome. I take that over daily updates that say "hey we will be on this or that airshow". Again, I have no intention to be mean towards veao, for me this is a simple customer developer relation. Textures dont look convincing to me so I will complain about that.
  14. 1. Is the cobra person on the polish forum the same person as on the DCS forums? (Nicolas dackard?) And why is he typing in polish? 2. Is that wip stuff made by dackard and/or leatherneck for FSX?
  15. The hawk cockpit textures are seriously behind compared to any other DCS module (except for some old FC cockpits). Whatever the VEAO texture artist is doing, he is struggling with basic material painting. Look at this F-86 screenshot. Look close at the areas that are nothing but clean paint. Then compare that to the Hawk. I can see the photoshop renderclouds and contrast filter in them + lack of definition. This is not because the hawk has a more simple cockpit, its the plain textures not being up to standard. my complaint is specifically about this. I never complained about the geometry of the cockpit, that looks great from what I can see. Even other 3rd party modules that are far less close to release like this mirage have already better textures and that is probalby months away. Dont take this as a personal attack. I am very convinced the flight model and the model geometry will be great, but the cockpit textures which are one of teh most important things in DCS for me are seriously below standard compared to other DCS modules. And since it already has a price tag on it and is almost out it does have to compare to an f-86 by belsimtek, which still is in beta officially but it came out with flawless textures. About the P40 plane, showing early wips without proper textures is fine, because that is clearly marked as in development. But the Hawk, it has to stack up against other modules because we fork the same money over to buy them. Also I think it would be better to have a highly visible part (cockpit textures) in better shape before releasing. Because having defend textures being still in wip on a 40$ module is not as good as having the thing look nice from the start. Again, dont take it the wrong way, for me this is a simple customer developer relationship, if I am going to make it rain for 40$-50$ I am going to complain about something I dont like.
  16. After looking at this topic: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=2209059#post2209059 The impression is actually quite disappointing texture-wise. I get it is probably in beta, but other modules in beta state had way better texture quality (F86, Huey, Mi-8) from the first public appearance. Why does the exterior look nice but the cockpit is in this ahem, basic state? The interior textures are far more important in DCS because you spend most of your time looking at the cockpit than looking at the plane from the outside. I think releasing it in a beta state this rough texture wise might hurt VEAOs reputation . Especially since there is 8 other modules being announced. Compare that to the much slower rate BELSIMTEK creates new modules which however are in much better shape texture wise. I rather have a module developer that never talks but when they release something its at a high standard than having a developer spend a lot of time doing customer relations and talking and having cockpit textures this bad.
  17. I have recorded a track. Same behaviour appears. to keep it level it needs and AOA of 8, but once it gets faster than 1800km/h the needed AOA for level flight is only 4-5 also the plane suddenly WANTS to climb and its hard to keep it level The speed I mention here is the one from the f2 camera in metrics which appears to be the TAS. mig21_drag1.trk
  18. I think the speed indicated in F2 camera is the actual speed at which you move above terrain. Which is not teh same as IAS. Also my units are in metric, so the altitude is 11 km No, it is a new flight
  19. Its 1700 actual speed (if you enlarge the screenshot it shows the speed at the bottom).
  • Create New...