I think thirdwire fans should see this for DCS

[+Stary 2,427]

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/378083-beczl-mods/

 

From Beczl... I'm more and more thinking about moving from Thirdwire on to DCS World guys, as sorry as it sounds

[Lazarus1177 164]

Been following this mod for a long time.Thirdwire sims are good for Quick play but,they definitely cannot be used for a High Fidelity simulation.

[+Stary 2,427]

it's the insane amount of detail that wins for me compared to good old ladies

[MAKO69 186]

Why waste time on something thats just gonna just get a bomb dropped on it, just kidding looks great. He must not have a wife and kidds.

Edited July 19, 2012 by MAKO69

[Slartibartfast 153]

I have only had DCS A-10C for a week and I am trying to learn how to fly the thing... correction flying the A-10 and firing the gun is simple its all the other stuff... that I need to figure out...

[+Brain32 265]

Sure looks nice but...with that amount of polys I'd need a 5000$ PC to run it at even at low fps, probably number one reason why I just can't see myself in the DCS - yet.

Also what is the use of such detailed objects in regards to todays computers, those models will be specks for a player blowing by at 900-1000kmh if not more...the only way to notice that details on objects like that would be to pull some kind of external view on it...

I mean check the SA-2 launcher, with a good texture and some smart bump you could pull out details that would be more than enough for a flight sim, some of theese objects are IMO too much even for a Helicopter sim and are actually more fitting for first person shooters.

 

Don't get me wrong I love the fact something like this exists and it does look EPIC, it's just not for me YET, maybe in like 2015 or something...

[+SkateZilla 49]

ED also announced (well, said on a forum),

 

Once the Nevada Terrain is Done (Once they update DCS World Core and release the Nevada DLC), that the engine will Allow Terrain Modules.

 

 

So,

Individual Aircraft Modules (P-51D, A-10C, SU-25T[FREE], KA-50, with dozens more on the way).

Grouped Aircraft Modules (Flaming Cliffs 3).

Grouped Ground Vehicle Modules (Combined Arms).

Grouped Operation Mode Modules (Combined Arms).

 

Ground Terrain/Theatre Modules (Nevada)

 

 

3rd Party Non Certified Mods (F-16, F-15e[not IRIS's], etc).

 

 

I started to make the switch back in Feb. When i got A-10C for $12, then with the announcement of DCS World and 3rd Party Modules.

not to mention the direction TW is taking, and the responses to members (though some of the members provoked him.).

[+Stary 2,427]

5000$ PC? Looks similarily to current DCS fidelity level -also I think he'll bake the details into lower poly models from these

The "I won't see those blowing by 900 km/f" thingy -if so we'd be still having Falcon 3.0/Mig-29/Hornet 3.0 era objects in every sim, right? I DO like to use other views apart from cockpit one too and when what I see is more and more complex each new title/hardware era the more I feel I'm in the game so to speak. By the way those are excellent models in themselves, imagine them running in complex environment

[+SkateZilla 49]

Sure looks nice but...with that amount of polys I'd need a 5000$ PC to run it at even at low fps, probably number one reason why I just can't see myself in the DCS - yet.

Also what is the use of such detailed objects in regards to todays computers, those models will be specks for a player blowing by at 900-1000kmh if not more...the only way to notice that details on objects like that would be to pull some kind of external view on it...

I mean check the SA-2 launcher, with a good texture and some smart bump you could pull out details that would be more than enough for a flight sim, some of theese objects are IMO too much even for a Helicopter sim and are actually more fitting for first person shooters.

 

Don't get me wrong I love the fact something like this exists and it does look EPIC, it's just not for me YET, maybe in like 2015 or something...

 

 

DCS A-10C Ran fine on my Old system (AthlonX2 6000+, eVGA8800GTS/640, 2GB of Ram, Win7) on Low with decent Fr/PS.

 

DCS World runs smoother than A-10C does, on my new system I get a 35-40% increase in Fr/PS between running DCSA-10C 1.1.1.1 and DCS World w/ A-10C module (Same mission.)

[+SkateZilla 49]

Sure looks nice but...with that amount of polys I'd need a 5000$ PC to run it at even at low fps, probably number one reason why I just can't see myself in the DCS - yet.

Also what is the use of such detailed objects in regards to todays computers, those models will be specks for a player blowing by at 900-1000kmh if not more...the only way to notice that details on objects like that would be to pull some kind of external view on it...

I mean check the SA-2 launcher, with a good texture and some smart bump you could pull out details that would be more than enough for a flight sim, some of theese objects are IMO too much even for a Helicopter sim and are actually more fitting for first person shooters.

 

Don't get me wrong I love the fact something like this exists and it does look EPIC, it's just not for me YET, maybe in like 2015 or something...

 

 

My PC was only $2800 and I run DCS World across 3 Screens on HIGH, w/ head motion tracking, smoothly,

 

actually with the GPU and CPU prices going down, you can prolly build an identical system for $2400.

[+Stary 2,427]

not to mention the direction TW is taking, and the responses to members (though some of the members provoked him.).

 

that would be me :yes: but 1) I want the man to see he's not the only one for his loyal customers 2) giving a s**t about some obvious flaws pointed out for years is getting kinda rude (sic!) 3) he could have alot more customers, even years-long afficionados IF he made few decisions (or didn't made some)

[+SkateZilla 49]

Not to Even Mention MP, with Human JATCS and Ground Forces Marking and Calling out Targets.

 

I wouldnt be the least bit surprised if ED put out an "AWACS" module lol.

 

that would be me :yes: but 1) I want the man to see he's not the only one for his loyal customers 2) giving a s**t about some obvious flaws pointed out for years is getting kinda rude (sic!) 3) he could have alot more customers, even years-long afficionados IF he made few decisions (or didn't made some)

 

nah, someone else pushed him over the edge... i dont think he's allowed to post here.

[+malibu43 142]

I've said it before - the only reason I even bough WoE back in the day was because my laptop couldn't run LOMAC and I wanted to fly the A-10. Once I finally got something that could run newer games, I was already up to my ears in the TW world and happy with it. But I could see things swinging in the other direction shortly.

 

I don't have time for anything more complex than FC2/3 in terms of avionics, so I haven't made any moves yet. I've been thinking that once FC3 comes out, I might really shift where I spend my time. But the latest changes to SAM and missile behavior might lead me to re-install FC2 and start getting to know those controls in advance of FC3 (which I understand is still a way off). Or maybe get to know the free SU-25T in DCS World...

 

The recent announcements of all the DCS modules in the works totally caught me off guard and are very exciting and promising.

Edited July 19, 2012 by malibu43

[+malibu43 142]

Not to Even Mention MP, with Human JATCS and Ground Forces Marking and Calling out Targets.

 

...

 

Exactly. That, for me, could make up for the lack of dynamic campaigns. As long as it's quick and easy to join MP games...

[+Brain32 265]

5000$ PC?

 

Ofcourse I was exaggerating a bit but seriously the most I spent on a PC was about 1000$ and I don't plan and currently can't imagine spending that much money on PC, heck best paycheck I ever had was slightly above 1000$ and those were the good times back in 2008...

 

The "I won't see those blowing by 900 km/f" thingy -if so we'd be still having Falcon 3.0/Mig-29/Hornet 3.0 era objects in every sim, right?

Sure but some balance needs to be find, I honestly see no point in having every screw below the ramp of an SA-2 modeled in thousands of polys as something reasonable, that's 3D art for HD renders, possibly movie production etc. but still not for games IMO.

 

I DO like to use other views apart from cockpit one too and when what I see is more and more complex each new title/hardware era the more I feel I'm in the game so to speak. By the way those are excellent models in themselves, imagine them running in complex environment

Absolutely, I agree that more detailed and complex environment can make you feel more "in the game", but like I said, I still think it has to be reasonable...

 

Anyway I'm under impression you guys viewed my comment as a jab on DCS, this is not so, I just don't see myself jumping on that bandwagon yet...

[JediMaster 451]

Two words: Combined Arms.

 

Being able to control ground units in first/3rd person and not just "flying by at Mach .9" is a great reason for that detail. Imagine how those things would look thru the zoomed sight of an M1A2 before you blast it!

[+Brain32 265]

Well if DCS will include in the future full support for ground operations like Il-2 guys promised then it might be ok, this model is still IMO a bit too detailed but I generally like that idea...

[RogerSmith 72]

I think SF2 (and other TW games) were just meant to be something that anyone can play without the need for super-computers. I actually like SF2 Full Mission Builder over IL-2's because it's easier to use and feels ergonomically correct

[+Stary 2,427]

can be dumbed down (haven't tried) but yeah I concur, something in the line of FC2 (also 3?) and I'm sold

 

Brain, I don't take your posts as jabbing at DCS, I just think we're too evolved as hardware/software goes not to use the technology... in a nice optimized way

 

Only thing about DCS is the amount of time needed to generate 3rd party terrain -from what I understand very similar to TW's "Stutterland engine" (copyright by Stary!)

[+Stary 2,427]

Also please note that it is confirmed not all DCS modules will be of A-10C fidelity -which is excellent news for me because making such detailed addon takes like forever (ask FSX Hornet guys, what it is now, 6 years?) and I don't need that level of complexity for say 3rd party DCS Fagot, Sturmovik, Skyraider, Panther... damn I start to see a pattern here

[+Gepard 11,303]

I dont think, that DCS will have the moddability of TK's sims.

[+Stary 2,427]

will see, I come from the "the more various moddable titles the better"* part of the world, peace

 

*as long as these are TW titles with DCS level of graphics, I haven't specified my planet I came from

[+SkateZilla 49]

F-15E, F-18E and a few others will be A-10C Fidelity if not more complex.

F-14D will be somewhere in the middle of A-10 and SU-25T.

 

F-22, I have no clue as most of the data is still classified, But Im sure there are F-22 Pilots with nothing to do that wouldnt mind helping.

 

 

There's a bunch of 3rd party mods that will be barely above SF2 standards, they will NOT be released as modules through DCS Store though,

The developer/artist/modder/studio doesnt have a license agreement with E.D.

 

ED has already stated, that there is a Certain level of requirements in order for the Addon Module to be Approved and Added to the E-Store.

 

Flaming Cliffs 3 will be a DCS World Module, But will require LoMAC FC2 to be installed.

Edited July 19, 2012 by SkateZilla

[+SkateZilla 49]

I dont think, that DCS will have the moddability of TK's sims.

 

Im pretty sure the core will stay locked up, as they want to maintain Multiplayer compatibility.

[+malibu43 142]

F-15E, F-18E and a few others will be A-10C Fidelity if not more complex.

F-14D will be somewhere in the middle of A-10 and SU-25T.

 

F-22, I have no clue as most of the data is still classified, But Im sure there are F-22 Pilots with nothing to do that wouldnt mind helping.

 

 

There's a bunch of 3rd party mods that will be barely above SF2 standards, they will NOT be released as modules through DCS Store though,

The developer/artist/modder/studio doesnt have a license agreement with E.D.

 

ED has already stated, that there is a Certain level of requirements in order for the Addon Module to be Approved and Added to the E-Store.

 

Flaming Cliffs 3 will be a DCS World Module, But will require LoMAC FC2 to be installed.

 

Will it require LOMAC or LOMAC and FC2? I thought it was just going to require LOMAC.