Because the DCS concept was for a modular sim system and we have already paid for it
You've already paid for what? Nevada?
Nate
Because the DCS concept was for a modular sim system and we have already paid for it
I can see both sides to the argument on that one.
I'm interested though, Nate. What sort of capability does the UH-1 offer? If I was to purchase it, I would be looking at what it brings to the table in MP, infantry transport, for example.
Multiplayer coop mode for crew members of the same helicopter under development for a later update.
You've already paid for what? Nevada?
Nate
They make a ton of money selling the addon aircraft, improvements to the sim engine should be free.
It is probably a difficult concept for you to understand as some of us are
actual paying customers not minions of Eagle Dynamics who get it all for free
and who spend their time going around internet forums trying to suppress the
opinions of paying customers.
I see where you are misinterpreting things. The New Graphics engine is what is behind the Nevada Terrain module (Hence the wait). It doesn't apply to anything other than Nevada (and future terrains).
Nevada is a module you have to purchase, A-10 beta users bought it already, why should it be free?
Nate
I think Nate the comments were in relation to your sentence that said that Nevada would possibly be released with a new graphics engine - its this latter part that seemed to spark concerns
Ah, so this new engine is only for the Nevada map then ? bit of a weird decision
question is though - will future expansion packs etc - rely on owning Nevada rather than the current DCS World ?
ah ok - fair enough
as long as all new aircraft work in the "old" DCS World - then all good
Not really when you consider why it is being redone. The Current map and graphics engine was designed (and then extended) with the limitations of 32bit address spaces in mind. This is a limiting factor in how much stuff you can fit in a given area. This also has a limiting factor on the amount vertices you can attribute to stuff like the terrain mesh and other objects in the game world.
Currently the Black sea map/terrain engine is at the very limit of it's capabilities. There isn't any more address space to fit stuff in.
To simply plonk the Black sea into the new engine would yield little benefit, it would look much the same. In order to truly benefit, the terrain that will use the engine has to built from scratch. As there will be (effectively) no limitations, the terrain can be any size and be exponentially more detailed.
The only real limitation is memory space. This also the reason why all DCS will be moving to 64bit only in the near future.
Originally the Nevada terrain was a 3rd party project that failed. ED took it over and restarted it from from scratch, but it could never be done in time for the A-10 release, so it was used as a test bed for the new engine.
I hope that makes thing clearer.
Nate
ah ok - fair enough
as long as all new aircraft work in the "old" DCS World - then all good
ahahahaha, you know they won't do that.
excellent that they are moving to 64bit only
Does this now mean that the retarded excuse that they could not allow you
to change key settings in game (because they have never figured out dynamic link libraries) is now done away with and we can now look forward to being able to change key binding in game
(as every other game since the dawn of time has been able to do so?)
Not sure Key bindings have anything to do with going 64bit.
Nate
Hadn't heard that before, I do know that reintegrating everything (Ala Lock ON 1) is a long term goal. So maybe key bindings will move from the current options menu. I really don't know.
Nate