2020 upcoming releases

Would think Vulkan will also bring much improvement in shaders, so hopefully better looking foliage etc. That might need a large rework of all art assets, mind you.

Vulkan is for GPU ... not for cpu

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not true. The Vulcan API uses multi-core much better than other APIs, it also results in less calls to the CPU.

From wikipedia: "Compared to OpenGL and Direct3D 11, and like Direct3D 12 and Metal, Vulkan is intended to offer higher performance and more balanced CPU/GPU usage. Other major differences from Direct3D 11 (and prior) and OpenGL are Vulkan being a considerably lower-level API and offering parallel tasking. Vulkan also has the ability to render 2D graphics applications.[11] In addition to its lower CPU usage, Vulkan is also able to better distribute work among multiple CPU cores.[12]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulkan_(API)

however flight sims are tightly time dependent (think FM etc) so there are real limits on re-integrating processes from different procs. You could however probably offload stuff like AI

The FM isn't really CPU latency dependent at all.

The AI, and specifically how hits are calculated from one unit to another and that sort of stuff... is.

Basically... some things in the simulation interact with other things in the simulation. Anything that is a child process of a parent so to speak (like the FM of an aircraft) isn't really latency dependent as far as how it relates to it's parent. Only how it relates to interacting with other entities. but FM's don't interact with anything other than their parent object. bullets do. And they're fired from wither other player entities or AI entities.

I have a theory which could be utter rubbish but I'm wondering if this new map is being built with a view to allowing better frame rates when the Supercarrier gets released. I'm also speculating that they may be trying some new elements of the new engine.

Fully expecting to be debunked, just putting it out there anyway.

Is Vulcan another rewrite of the system? As a novice this sounds like we wont see this until perhaps 2021. Look how long 2.x took to come out. Am I wrong on this? Ah this system can run cross platform ie Linux.

i hopelessly hope they somewhat announce Apache in the near future

Not just the Apache. It has to be the AH-64D Longbow or none at all...don't want the watered-down version

Apache , A model please. Orginal cold war ;)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Is Vulcan another rewrite of the system? As a novice this sounds like we wont see this until perhaps 2021. Look how long 2.x took to come out. Am I wrong on this? Ah this system can run cross platform ie Linux.

Not a re-write, mostly straight forward porting it to new API from what i have seen wuth other sims but alot of bug squashing required before it will hit stable version i reckon.

I think it is safe to assume that this year the OB release will have alot more Beta content being tested out.

Personally, i am more than fine with that. The prospect of smoothed out jaggies and silky shadows running at 60+ FPS is just too much to deny ;)

Not a re-write, mostly straight forward porting it to new API

That's never as straight forward as anyone thinks it will be.

That's never as straight forward as anyone thinks it will be.

Nothing ever is :)

So many things needs to be done...

Years pass and we still have a very primitive AI (air and ground), mission editor, 20yr old assets, very little ammount of ships, a bad dynamic weather, a broken FLIR and no ground radar, no ATC.

I love DCS but when I stop and think about it, I get very sad. Even ARMA 3 feels better in most of these aspects. DCS needs more "game" features and less early access aircrafts.

So many things needs to be done...

Years pass and we still have a very primitive AI (air and ground), mission editor, 20yr old assets, very little ammount of ships, a bad dynamic weather, a broken FLIR and no ground radar, no ATC.

 

 

I love DCS but when I stop and think about it, I get very sad. Even ARMA 3 feels better in most of these aspects. DCS needs more "game" features and less early access aircrafts.

Already been discussed and ED is well aware of the lack of core features. Hopefully this week's newsletter speaks on this.

introducing a new graphics engine including vulkan api should be kind of a gamechanger , I can't wait and really hope we will have it soon

So many things needs to be done...

Years pass and we still have a very primitive AI (air and ground), mission editor, 20yr old assets, very little ammount of ships, a bad dynamic weather, a broken FLIR and no ground radar, no ATC.

 

 

I love DCS but when I stop and think about it, I get very sad. Even ARMA 3 feels better in most of these aspects. DCS needs more "game" features and less early access aircrafts.

I don't even get excited about buying fighter jets anymore. There are already enough planes to do many things. DCS lacks resources. A transport plane is missing. I hope that will change in the future. :bye_2:

I agree. Big transport or bomber aircraft would be amazing, even with FC3 modeling. But the

Mi-24P and MiG-23MLA are interesting modules on the horizon.

Already been discussed and ED is well aware of the lack of core features. Hopefully this week's newsletter speaks on this.

ED was aware of this for years..its not like these are sudden, newly discovered deficiencies. Still these issues languished.

Also very interested in the next newsletter. But then again announcing things has always been a strength of ED, I would appreciate instead tangible progress in A.I. amongst other core issues instead of nice-sounding newsletters

Sorry for sounding somewhat negative, but based on past experience I‘m not getting my hopes up.

Before anyone says the usual : „ some ppl will complain no matter what, unappreciative,negative nancy, bla bla...“

No, its just different ppl have different tastes/preferences and while its cool that we get a new map free of charge, I‘d rather have much improved A.I. and skip the map.

Regards,

Snappy

If I need to be honest, I will say that I dont need new modules (except carrier module). I just want ED to finish EA modules ASAP. Especially the Hornet! :)

At the end of the day, ED is a business, and if we want to see any improvements, they need to have resources (money) to do so. I'm 1000% sure that they are aware of everything you have suggested and then some. They will improve core game features, but it has to be supported by putting out modules to keep the cash coming.

Just be patient.

At the end of the day, ED is a business, and if we want to see any improvements, they need to have resources (money) to do so. I'm 1000% sure that they are aware of everything you have suggested and then some. They will improve core game features, but it has to be supported by putting out modules to keep the cash coming.

Just be patient.

It's a bit of a catch-22. To fix the issues requires manpower and money, but the problems reduce sales, which limits the manpower and money available to make the fixes. The most practical solution would be an outside investor, but that is unlikely in such a niche market, so the cycle continues.

The addition of 3rd party module developers helps a little by giving them additional manpower at lower cost to them, but it isn't going to be enough to break the cycle, and has created it's own problems.

The situation is complicated even further by the continual evolution of computer technology and the resulting higher performance and feature expectations of their customers.

ED is a small company in a very limited market, and IIRC the PC market was, at least initially, a side venture for them to begin with.

I admit to being frustrated at times, but compared to what flight sims used to be, we have come a long way. If something like DCS had been shown to us back in the 90's we would have been stunned.

I feel the biggest problem ED has is in communication. They often over-promise, but I think they honestly believe they are going to reach the goals they publicly set for themselves at the time they make the statements, but lack the transparency needed when they fall behind schedule. They have yet to learn that it's better to under-promise and over-deliver, especially in this age of social media.

It's a bit of a catch-22. To fix the issues requires manpower and money, but the problems reduce sales, which limits the manpower and money available to make the fixes. The most practical solution would be an outside investor, but that is unlikely in such a niche market, so the cycle continues......

-----You'r right.After all ED is not a big company, with limited manpower. So I constantly bouht some modules to support them, though some I might never touch seriously。

ED was aware of this for years..its not like these are sudden, newly discovered deficiencies. Still these issues languished.

 

 

Also very interested in the next newsletter. But then again announcing things has always been a strength of ED, I would appreciate instead tangible progress in A.I. amongst other core issues instead of nice-sounding newsletters

 

 

Sorry for sounding somewhat negative, but based on past experience I‘m not getting my hopes up.

 

Before anyone says the usual : „ some ppl will complain no matter what, unappreciative,negative nancy, bla bla...“

No, its just different ppl have different tastes/preferences and while its cool that we get a new map free of charge, I‘d rather have much improved A.I. and skip the map.

 

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

Snappy

Let me start by saying I agree.

But you also have to realize the art guys arent writing code. Or at least you "really really" dont want them too. Otherwise the AI is gonna be like andy warhol on crack. I can post that gif for you but you probably can paint that picture in your head.

The better argument might be map vs improved visual AC models or ships etc.

Code wise similar issue, you probably dont want the FM guy doint AI or vice versa. But they are probably light on coders. Much like ol razbam.

well… i agree with the majority of posts here.

in fact i'm waaay more negative than most of people here, because to me its clear that the commercial logic has taken over ...so… working on already sold modules (read: F-18 ) will just not bring more money.

i'm still deeply disappointed but not surprised by years-old bugs not being addressed.

that said, i would happily pay another full price (50-60€) for a finished F18 module.

if the work is made and is quality work, i would pay >>>happily<<<, supporting ED again.

to my eyes that can be a satisfactory solution for everyone,ED get more cash (for a quality work, so its fine), customers finally get what they pay for, many years ago.

actual politic seem to just make a lot of unhappy people, and the "more modules" logic will just make all worse, there's no escape from Early Access.

so, again, i suggest ED to rethink theyr politic, i'm sure many Others will be happy to pay for a good quality work to complete a module, instead to dump cash into incomplete modules that will struggle for years, or worse do like me and never buy a DCS product of any kind until my favourite module will be 100% complete and bug-free.

hope they will think on that, even if probably they will not even read this.

sorry to contradict you but two years is way more than the normal pre release time.

A normal pre release is more six months mostly three.

But we the customers have the power, the power of credit card!

I won't buy any more modules that are not fully finished, i will buy the supercarrier module because i'm weak!

Just take example of 3rd parties who deliver more finished products than you seem capable.

Why ED don't make DCS pay and focus on the DCS Core, and make it the huge wonderfull sim it's meant to be, and let 3rd parties do the modules.

Make pay updates of DCS adding to it new functionalities and improvements.

Maybe in last resort i may accept to pay some fees anually to help ED, but only if they keep the good work.

sorry to contradict you but two years is way more than the normal pre release time.

Well, the Hornet is a way more complex module than normal, so 2.5 years seems absolutely fine to me.

But we the customers have the power, the power of credit card!

I won't buy any more modules that are not fully finished, i will buy the supercarrier module because i'm weak!

I'll happily buy another ED module as the Early Access process for the Hornet and Viper is moving along very well, unlike with many of the 3rd party modules.

Just take example of 3rd parties who deliver more finished products than you seem capable.

Which 3rd party dev has delivered more finished products than ED?

Out of my head I can't even think of many finished 3rd party module at all. There's the MiG-21 which is officially finished and the Mirage 2000C, although the Mirage is in a worse state than ever currently. All other 3rd party modules are still in Early Access as far as I can see...

But it doesn't matter anyways who does more modules. I rather have quality than quantity and EDs modules are of much higher quality than most 3rd party modules.

Make pay updates of DCS adding to it new functionalities and improvements.

And what about the people that are not willing/able to constantly pay for updates? They would stick with the outdated versions of DCS which is a horror for multiplayer and the community... No thanks! DCS is working fine as it is.