Jump to content

Memory Limit/Load Issues


NineLine

Recommended Posts

In addition there is the option to later extend the map to include more of the Persian Gulf... When everybody bought a new PC and the 1080ti and 32GB RAM are considered a mid-range PC.

 

Looking the actual specs for actual size of maps, i don´t think we will have 100% of the Persian Gulf in lot of years, sadly.

 

For me, calling Persian Gulf to Strait of Hormuz is misleading advertising, because they are selling 1/3 of the Persian Gulf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 210
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Looking the actual specs for actual size of maps, i don´t think we will have 100% of the Persian Gulf in lot of years, sadly.

 

For me, calling Persian Gulf to Strait of Hormuz is misleading advertising, because they are selling 1/3 of the Persian Gulf.

Well, they put a photo, videos and Text detailing the "Persian Gulf" Map and its size, etc. If you think this is misleading, because you can't be bothered with actually reading/looking at the stuff you buy, than you should be damn careful when you go shopping.

On the other hand, the Strait of Hormuz is just the sea area between Iran and Dubai, Bahrain, UAE... Not the Iranian countryside 150 nm to the north and 100nm UAE etc. to the south.

That is misleading, as well.

 

Anyway you are never forced to buy something, if you don't like it, or don't feel comfortable with it.

Shagrat

 

- Flying Sims since 1984 -:pilotfly:

Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 64GB | GeForce RTX 3090 - Asus VG34VQL1B  | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VIRPIL CM 50 Stick & Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Plus/Apache64 Grip | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | WW Top Gun MIP | a hand made AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there any way to make the memory issue better? I only have 8GB of RAM and the game is semi-unplayable. I can only join servers that have 4 people and the game crashes, a lot. Even in SP the game crashes frequently and its a real pain in the ass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there any way to make the memory issue better? I only have 8GB of RAM and the game is semi-unplayable. I can only join servers that have 4 people and the game crashes, a lot. Even in SP the game crashes frequently and its a real pain in the ass.

 

You can wait for the update that will unload items from the memory so you don't crash. Or reduce your textures and preload radius for now...that should help.

5900X - 32 GB 3600 RAM - 1080TI

My Twitch Channel

~Moo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What version of GeForce drivers do ED developers recommend for 2.5 release version?

51PVO Founding member (DEC2007-)

100KIAP Founding member (DEC2018-)

 

:: Shaman aka [100☭] Shamansky

tail# 44 or 444

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] 100KIAP Regiment Early Warning & Control officer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
What version of GeForce drivers do ED developers recommend for 2.5 release version?

 

they don't have a recommendation other than you should be using the latest ones available.

smallCATPILOT.PNG.04bbece1b27ff1b2c193b174ec410fc0.PNG

Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status

Windows 11, NVIDIA MSI RTX 3090, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 64GB DDR @3200, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, HP Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With people complaining about having to have more RAM already, you think this is going to be feasible?

 

Well, more units, bigger maps, with 256 GB RAM in an watercooled i7 @ 5GHz plus at least a 1080ti... Maybe around 30fps.***When everybody bought a new PC and the 1080ti and 32GB RAM are considered a mid-range PC.

Do you seriously believe that the only way to implement a bigger map is to demand more RAM? I can't express how wrong this approach is. Seriously, ATM ED have already hit the ceiling with their RAM demands. They need to seriously optimize the whole engine to make it fit. DCS is clunky enough for any newcomer these days (it was even in the old ones) without adding exaggerated demands for his rig. I just hope ED management understands (and intends to act on) this problem more clearly and deeply than those that brandish their super-rigs and proudly tell everyone around themselves that they have no problems.

 

By the way, that is more likely what you need, not necessarily DCS.

 

Others would argue, we need more and better campaigns for single player, others would prefer a focus on a dedicated server and network multiplayer in dual cockpits improved. Yet others would argue for better AI, damage model, more decent mission editor with 3D placement, and so on, and so forth.

 

All(!) of this would be great to have, but there are limited resources and possibilities to achieve this. That is why there is a priorization based on a lot of factors...

Let's use that vile stuff evil scientists use all the time. "Logic", they call it. If a game is the collection of concepts that envelop the following, you can quickly place the priority of the stuff discussed:

 

0. Game engine. A software has to "be" in order to provide anything to the user. This supports all the features of the software, including basis for any optimizations. Also it includes support for any flight models, ground movement models and such -- SFM, AFM, suspension model, terrain traction models, terrain deformation models, suspension models, etc etc etc.

1. Basic framework of the sim. Things to fly (aircraft, vehicles and so on), rules for these to fly (FM settings), places for these to fly (maps) and targets for these to shoot at. The richer this framework is, the more can be done at the later stages. Good damage model is a very good addition, but it's just an addition. For example, current DCS damage model is pretty basic, while it's ground vehicle DM is just a lifebar -- and that does not deter at least all of us who visit this forum. Of course, having a more advanced one would go a long way, but is by no means mandatory. AI, on the other hand, is pretty mandatory. If your enemy has just a couple of tricks and you learn to beat these soon, creating involving gameplay at a later stage will be a difficult thing.

 

2. The basic gameplay of the sim. Generally, this is the game itself. Single missions, campaigns and dynamic careers live here. This is what player will experience and this is what will keep him in the game (or deter him from playing), this is what makes a game... well, a game. Without these, there's nothing to play at. Practice shows that the game worlds that are complex, interactive, "realistic" (in a set of terms defined by both game and player's logic) and giving a player some sense of progression work best to keep players interested, curious and involved. Even static campaigns in such a dynamic world will have good replayability and generate more involvement than ones in static preset worlds. This is where game developers can show how good (or not) they are. One thing is to build an awesome feature-rich support layers, and the other is to actually make something awesome with it.

 

3. If the player wants to experience something new, he will try to use player-generated content, or create one himself. This is where public mission editor comes into play. Also, this is where Steam Workshop or m4t/lofiles appear. Having such service support integrated into a game will make such practices hassle-free and thus accessible.

 

4. Multiplayer. Co-op can bond tightly to 2, while PvP can differ a lot. Again, supporting this hassle-free can go a long way to promote the game, while making it as hard as it gets can significantly lower the myltiplaying numbers.

 

Now, based on this divine ancestral knowledge, we can get a nice summary.

Dynamic career and better campaigns for single player are not mutually exclusive. On the contrary, they use the same mechanisms, just in different fashion. Better AI and damage model complement this capacity, not conflict with it. All of that provides an environment for the player to get interested and involved in whatever gameplay you have in mind. This is the basis for any game except total indie sandboxes where the author just doesn't have the resources to implement these and he leaves it as it is.

If we agree in the sequence "having a game mode" > "making it entertaining", there's no dilemma in which priority to assign.

 

The next step is when people are trying to make missions for themselves and other people with mission editor. It can't precede the first step, when the player is just playing what the stock game offers. If he's uninvolved, he won't try and create a complex and interesting mission for himself, unless he's a total fan of the game (which he probably isn't since the game did not convince him to become one). If he is involved, ME being complex and clunky will deter some, but if he's involved enough, he will overcome it. Or at least will make a decent attempt at it.

Thus, anything concerning ME goes after the aforementioned "making entertaining game modes".

 

DServer and MP in general are the last, final step that most won't ever take. Not everyone is into competitive gaming, and if multiplayer seriously differs from the basic game world he finds himself in from the very beginning, it just may be not his cup of tea. If a player is engeaged so much that he's going here, he can take a lot of abuse if the game mode itself is playable. Thus, the priority of anything related is the lowest at least until the former, more important stuff is missing.

 

As you can see, there is absolutely no problem with setting up priorities when you come to it step by step.

They are not vulching... they are STRAFING!!! :smartass::thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you seriously believe that the only way to implement a bigger map is to demand more RAM? I can't express how wrong this approach is.

 

Then you can surely enlighten us?

I had the silly perception, that if you fly at 45.000 feet altitude with the horizon at about 220 NM and clear sky you need to render terrain in a patch of roughly 190 square miles, probably further when elevated terrain (mountains) is visible lurking up over the horizon. Now, from 45k ft the detail is probably different, but if you add a targeting pod that can magnify an area on the horizon so you need to blend in cities/buildings, forrests in addition, an additional FLIR "view" and at least the positions of all objects in/near your visibility bubble, to check if they are visible or not...

Then at least the next level of more detailed textures and terrain in case you transition lower.

 

All this needs to be stored somewhere.

 

If you have a method to achieve this without using up RAM, please tell us?

 

Maybe ED can implement it in their next generation graphics engine in the 2020ies?

Shagrat

 

- Flying Sims since 1984 -:pilotfly:

Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 64GB | GeForce RTX 3090 - Asus VG34VQL1B  | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VIRPIL CM 50 Stick & Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Plus/Apache64 Grip | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | WW Top Gun MIP | a hand made AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

SO at this point I will close this and we can wait for what ED brings.

 

I need to remind everyone about the rules as well:

 

1.15 Discussions of other game companies products are forbidden. While we allow news and updates to be posted in our Chit Chat section, we do not allow the discussion, reviewing of, or comparison of other software here. Abuse of other companies and/or anyone related to those companies will not be tolerated. ED also reserves the right to remove any thread or post about another game or company it deems doesn't comply with this rule.

 

ED is worried about their own game and goals, not what others are doing, its hard to compare to others when ED is simulating much larger maps, different types of sensors and terrain quality that is hard to match in any other sim. So discuss those other games on their forums.

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...