ED. Do you know how to fix the clouds?

[azzhat]

Not being rude but I want an update considering that they are unusable to me due to the jumping up and down. I will just install the stable DCS version for now if it is going to be a while. If you know what is wrong and a fix is just a couple weeks away I will keep the beta.  Any info on the progress would be appreciated.  Please don't fall back into the old ways of beta patches showing up at random and keeping us guessing. 

 

 

[joca133]

9 minutes ago, azzhat said:

Not being rude but I want an update considering that they are unusable to me due to the jumping up and down. I will just install the stable DCS version for now if it is going to be a while. If you know what is wrong and a fix is just a couple weeks away I will keep the beta.  Any info on the progress would be appreciated.  Please don't fall back into the old ways of beta patches showing up at random and keeping us guessing. 

 

 

 

It's not only the jumping, they look horrible for me on VR. Blurry.

[rrohde]

Keeping oneself informed with the patch notes, esp the Known Issues with the 2.7 release, might help manage expectations when no timeline is given: 

 

Edited April 30, 2021 by rrohde

[Dr. Anti-Vehicle]

I feel somewhat optimistic that they know how to fix it. But who knows when. I feel you bro, cuz I right now I can only fly in servers where no cloud is set. But if this is a priority, they should be able to fix it in a month. Now 2 weeks have passed, and I feel good about it.

With that being said, let's be patient. Maybe take a break from DCS and spend more time with family. It really helps managing expectation.

[Ironhand]

5 hours ago, azzhat said:

...I will just install the stable DCS version for now if it is going to be a while...

 

No need to change versions. Just select “None” (I think that’s the name for the no new clouds option in the ME) and set up the old clouds using the sliders as you did in the past.

[Hippo]

Quote

Just select “None” (I think that’s the name for the no new clouds option in the ME) and set up the old clouds using the sliders as you did in the past.

 

This should be ok for the most part, but there are certainly cases where the old clouds don't work as they used to:

 

 

[Ironhand]

1 hour ago, Hippo said:

 

This should be ok for the most part, but there are certainly cases where the old clouds don't work as they used to:

 

 

 

Hmmm... The old clouds work as they used to for me. Cloud base is as it was prior to 2.7. Your experience is interesting, though. Wonder why the difference.

Edited May 1, 2021 by Ironhand

[Pocket Kings]

At some point a software developer, and in EDs' case a relatively small one, has to jump into the pond and upgrade the new release. No software dev I know of has all the combinations of hardware revisions, software revisions and driver versions at hand. So bugs will surface certainly. That's expected.

 

Remember the first time you rode a bike? You didn't expect a smooth ride, did you?

 

Software is a highly dynamic and complex structure. To make matters worse, the developer (in this case ED) doesn't control all the moving parts, namely Windows, NVIDIA / AMD, user space software like those ugly suites that come with your flight stick and the list goes on.

 

I get the impression that people don't realize what BETA actually means, no offense intended.

[Irish79]

27 minutes ago, Pocket Kings said:

At some point a software developer, and in EDs' case a relatively small one, has to jump into the pond and upgrade the new release. No software dev I know of has all the combinations of hardware revisions, software revisions and driver versions at hand. So bugs will surface certainly. That's expected.

 

Remember the first time you rode a bike? You didn't expect a smooth ride, did you?

 

Software is a highly dynamic and complex structure. To make matters worse, the developer (in this case ED) doesn't control all the moving parts, namely Windows, NVIDIA / AMD, user space software like those ugly suites that come with your flight stick and the list goes on.

 

I get the impression that people don't realize what BETA actually means, no offense intended.

 

I agree on the Beta issue. The problem is that the majority of the MP community is on the BETA branch. I think this is a huge issue. The community treats the Beta branch as if it is release.

 

I would lobby ED to turn Open Beta into closed beta and actually have more rigour about pushing stuff into stable.

 

I am re-installing stable as we speak, just so I can at least play single player in VR.

 

Let's be clear about it. 2.7 was a terrible update for VR users. Even worse I play Warbirds and the Storm of War folks have had a hell of a time since 2.7 too.

 

Honestly I would be prepared to wait until something is worthy of being a stable product. I don't think the current setup helps with ED's community relations either.

 

Let's get the player base into 1 stable version of the game that has a high quality barrier for patch release.

 

I am not confident in the VR issues and am actually worried they will get pushed to the stable version too!

[Pocket Kings]

5 minutes ago, Irish79 said:

Let's get the player base into 1 stable version of the game that has a high quality barrier for patch release.

 

I am not confident in the VR issues and am actually worried they will get pushed to the stable version too!

 

1. I'm new to the community, but I heard the interview of Growling Sidewinder with Nick. I think it's about 10 months old. If just half of the ED crew has the same perspective on DCS and work ethic, I believe no one needs to worry about major bugs ingressing into the stable branch.

 

2. The ED dev team is relatively small for such a huge project (feature wise). I think the correct approach almost never is closed beta. On the contrary. In the Linux world we even use a more fine granulated scheme, namely four stages.

unstable, sid, testing, stable

Everybody can install and use every version of software for free and is encouraged to provoke bugs, and report them back obviously.

 

I think this would be the way to go. Don't lock out anybody. If someone with an old gaming rig wants to try the brand new clouds, good for us since we receive telemetry. If someone with a 4K $ VR Setup is brave enough to risk the headache in Beta, great. And so forth, you get the point.

 

In essence, three or four stages of releases, BIG WARNING SIGNS (you get what you pay for), and everybody can experiment to their liking... or not.

[Irish79]

I am not saying anyone doesn't work hard... I don't think anyone in this thread is suggesting that, not sure how that has emerged in this thread. So let's agree that the ED team work very hard indeed and drop that point.

 

The issue in my mind is that the majority of the MP player base is reliant on the performance of a beta branch. This is a self made player problem, I am not laying this at the feet of ED. They do offer a stable version of the game that server communities could (and a few do) use. They also generously offer everyone access to a beta version. Very few other games do that.

 

My point is that the usage of the Open Beta version is so widespread it might as well be considered the release version by the community (especially if you look at the forums).

 

I believe this is not productive for ED or the player base. It takes one more step away from them being able to "jump into the pond". Currently it just results in a lot of disappointed forum posts. To be clear the VR issues are affecting all headsets and all machine specs for example.

 

I would lobby ED that it is in the best interests of customers and ED if we could get the majority of players consolidated back on a more stable version of the game.

 

Suggesting this for debate is not ED bashing...

 

I am also very familiar with the Linux structure across many distro's. Debian testing for example can be used as your daily driver with not a huge degree of risk. I feel that DCS Open Beta is somewhere between unstable and SID.

 

 

[Silver_Dragon]

Open beta has none early, was release from 2.0 6 years ago. If some part of comunity continue thinking "Open Beta" has a release, they dont undertand the problem, and ED has very clear about has the open beta.

 

None plans to "close" the open beta.

[OG84]

2 hours ago, Irish79 said:

"2.7 was a terrible update for VR users."

 

 
I don't agree at all dude  I think you're shooting a little bit over the top. Except for the cloud jittering, for me this update is one of the best ones in a long time. (Valve Index)

Edited May 1, 2021 by OG84

[Irish79]

I suppose everyone has a different threshold for what they find acceptable.

 

e.g. for me I will take less visual clarity for rock solid FPS performance. I find myself very sensitive to dropped frames etc. So the cloud issue is like flying with some weird  FPS glitch. For me personally it is "terrible", I accept that others might be able to tolerate/overlook it. 

 

I also fly warbirds, so dogfighting in the clouds has become a graphical experience that I personally do not enjoy in 2.7.

 

I thought it might be possible to have a conversation about the merits of consolidating the player base on to a more stable release. It wasn't the OP'S topic either so apologies for diverting the thread.

 

Threads seem to go either bashing ED or defensive on ED. I genuinely wasn't trying to do either.  I respect it is a beta and understand what that means.

 

This patch has not been good for me/ For warbirds there is no good MP content on the stable release. So I am back to flying single player on DCS and multiplayer in another sim.

 

It is a niche hobby so these things are going to happen.

 

Back to the Op's original request which was a request for an update.

[Pocket Kings]

1 hour ago, Irish79 said:

The issue in my mind is that the majority of the MP player base is reliant on the performance of a beta branch. This is a self made player problem, I am not laying this at the feet of ED.

 

To be clear the VR issues are affecting all headsets and all machine specs for example.

 

I am also very familiar with the Linux structure across many distro's. Debian testing for example can be used as your daily driver with not a huge degree of risk. I feel that DCS Open Beta is somewhere between unstable and SID.

 

1. Because the MP community wants the new hot stuff. That's their impatience problem. I myself NEVER buy a new hardware platform. If Intel, AMD, Dell, Supermicro, whomever, releases another "quantum leap in computing power" I ask myself often who the hell falls for this trick anymore. My platforms are all at least two years old and yes, the computing power for 99% of customers is more than sufficient. I also don't run Windows Upbreaks the day they release, never.

 

2. No VR, sorry. Hope to hop on the bandwagon soon since I heard it's amazing.

 

3. Currently I'm in charge of ~ 50 physical linux clusters, probably 150 - 200 machines with thousands of VMs and CTs. The hosts run stable branch, of course. The VMs and CTs ALL, without exception, run testing. All Debian, some CentOS, rarely anything else like BSD. But hey, the Arch guys blame anybody who's running 5.4 kernels to be a dinosaur. Yet, why is it that under 5% of the linux universe runs Arch daily? Oh, wait, yes the answer is... Arch breaks ALL the time.

 

I believe the Debian scheme would REALLY improve expectation levels around here, seriously. You run sid or unstable, well you've been warned.

[BIGNEWY]

Discussed many times and the answer is the same. 

 

We already have a closed beta, and a closed beta team.

Open beta is a public test version and always will be ( your feedback and reports help us make DCS better )

Stable version as it sounds is the most stable version, it wont be bug free, we work with over 5 million lines of code, but it will hopefully have less show stoppers ( crashes ect. )

 

To answer the OP's question, the team are working hard on the clouds, we made it clear in the patch notes there were some issues. As soon as we make progress we will let you all know. 

 

 

thanks

[Irish79]

Just now, Pocket Kings said:

 

1. Because the MP community wants the new hot stuff. That's their impatience problem. I myself NEVER buy a new hardware platform. If Intel, AMD, Dell, Supermicro, whomever, releases another "quantum leap in computing power" I ask myself often who the hell falls for this trick anymore. My platforms are all at least two years old and yes, the computing power for 99% of customers is more than sufficient. I also don't run Windows Upbreaks the day they release, never.

 

2. No VR, sorry. Hope to hop on the bandwagon soon since I heard it's amazing.

 

3. Currently I'm in charge of ~ 50 physical linux clusters, probably 150 - 200 machines with thousands of VMs and CTs. The hosts run stable branch, of course. The VMs and CTs ALL, without exception, run testing. All Debian, some CentOS, rarely anything else like BSD. But hey, the Arch guys blame anybody who's running 5.4 kernels to be a dinosaur. Yet, why is it that under 5% of the linux universe runs Arch daily? Oh, wait, yes the answer is... Arch breaks ALL the time.

 

I believe the Debian scheme would REALLY improve expectation levels around here, seriously. You run sid or unstable, well you've been warned.

 

Agree with all of your points!

[Irish79]

3 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said:

Discussed many times and the answer is the same. 

 

We already have a closed beta, and a closed beta team.

Open beta is a public test version and always will be ( your feedback and reports help us make DCS better )

Stable version as it sounds is the most stable version, it wont be bug free, we work with over 5 million lines of code, but it will hopefully have less how stoppers ( crashes ect. )

 

To answer the OP's question, the team are working hard on the clouds, we made it clear in the patch notes there were some issues. As soon as we make progress we will let you all know. 

 

 

thanks

 

Thanks for the update.

 

It also clear that closed beta worked! By nature of the issue being listed in the patch notes. I suppose we therefore have to accept that it was not deemed a critical enough issue to hold back from an open beta release.

 

I would ask that ED consider it a critical enough issue to be held back from stable release though. I know my voice will carry little weight, but no harm in lobbying in a polite manner.

 

With regards Warbirds content there has been small chatter in the SoW discord of the possibility of it moving to the stable version of the game. It has only been chatter and I in no way represent the owners / admins of that community.

 

I hope they do consider it and more server communities also consider this option.

[Pocket Kings]

I believe we're not 15 year old kids here bashing each other, ED or the "stable players". I find this forum very civilized, for an internet forum. My intention at least is to bring concepts that work elsewhere over to other professions. I have almost zero professional cross section with anything graphical, be it animation, games, whatever. I'm an armchair quarterback when it comes to graphics dev.

 

Sorry to have diverted the thread away from OPs request. But I believe evolution diverts, that's the nature of progress.

 

One more idea: Maybe it's better for new modules not to rely on the beta version as a neccessity. I get that 2.7 altered the internals of the rendering scheme to use newer graphics architectures better. But for the future I wouldn't want a superb model perhaps like the Apache to be ruined by something unrelated, namely beta software. Most people don't make the distinction.

[fagulha]

On 5/1/2021 at 3:33 PM, OG84 said:

 

 
I don't agree at all dude  I think you're shooting a little bit over the top. Except for the cloud jittering, for me this update is one of the best ones in a long time. (Valve Index)

 

+1!  This update was awesome for me, visually and performance wise. The only problem to fully enjoy the experience it´s the jittering clouds in VR, and i know ED will fix the clouds as soon as they can. Let´s wait. (Valve Index user). 

 

Thank you ED for all the hard work.

F.

 

[schurem]

I wonder what today's update is gonna bring..

[dawgie79]

Don't think there will be an update today, but I could be mistaken. 

[5ephir0th]

7 minutes ago, dawgie79 said:

Don't think there will be an update today, but I could be mistaken. 

Theres a planned update for today (see Patch status post) but BigNewy has confirmed that no fix for cloud jittering yet

[71st_Mastiff]

Orthodox Easter. week, and May day was this last weekend. more than likely on holiday.

[dawgie79]

1 minute ago, 5ephir0th said:

Theres a planned update for today (see Patch status post) but BigNewy has confirmed that no fix for cloud jittering yet

Right, missed that, thanks! But it seems more like a bugfixing update, not so much a feature addition. Both are necessary, but we're in the 'Clouds' subforum, hence my initial response.