DD today?

[=gRiJ=Roman-]

I can see the forum on my smartphone but my dumb PC refuses to do so .... Weird!!!

Edited March 2, 2018 by PA_Spartan-

[Jade_Monkey]

 

4 minutes ago, PA_Spartan- said:

I can ser the forum on my smartphone but my dumb PC refuses to do so .... Weird!!!

 Try clearing cache

[Asgar]

still hope we'll get a DD today

[Voidhunger]

its too late...tooooo late for DD

[Asgar]

no it's not

[Ribbon]

Mid March 3.001 release aim posted on facebook is best DD in my opinion.

Beta testing in advanced mode.

"Two weeks"

Edited March 2, 2018 by EAF_Ribbon

[=SqSq=switch201]

Dang,

This is a much larger delay than I expected back when Jason announced the delay back in December, but it is what it is, and if they needed that extra time, so be it. Still it would be interesting to be a fly on the wall when they are figuring all this stuff out. Like what kinda shape was the update in in December? It would be interesting to watch the game progress and get better. Obviously we will see soon enough, but that's not the full development picture so to speak.

Edited March 2, 2018 by =SqSq=switch201

[Oubaas]

As I've said several times before, March 16th. That's just the way it is. You can't argue with mathematics or coffee grounds.

I miss the pretty red shoes.

[Voidhunger]

March 16th? Thats great man, thats great !

what are we supposed to do? We´re are in some real pretty sh.. now, man!

 

[Livai]

No DD, No badges, No 3.001 - Is that a bug or a feature?

So March 16th something to expect - ok let's see if it is worth the waiting

[JG1_Shadepiece]

I remember them saying initially that the planned release was at the end of Winter, so as far as I'm concerned they're still on track to hit that goal. Would love to see it soon though. Like everyone else, I am super excited!!

[Feathered_IV]

Thanks voidhunger.  You just made my day.  

[Pail]

The forum is giving my eyes cancer

 

[RAY-EU]

 

[1./KG4_OldJames]

Ok, I have just changed my mind.

 Now I am hoping for a later release date, as my PC has just crashed and burned for the last time.

 I am hoping it is a psu problem, and i can get an ebay-replacement soonest.

 So feel free to push the release date back a few weeks, if you so desire!

[Trooper117]

No it isn't... would you give money to someone who doesn't care if others have to wait as well, just because 'he' has problems?

Stone him I say  ''STONE HIM''... LOL!

[Uufflakke]

On 3-3-2018 at 2:38 AM, Pail said:

The forum is giving my eyes cancer

 

 

 

 

Edited March 4, 2018 by Uufflakke

[[APAF]VR_Spartan85]

I’m wondering with the new update coming how performance will be affected... I’m sure there are many optimizations being made, but a lot of tech has been introduced as well... 

 

im just worried that my rig won’t be up to par.... it’s coal fed....

[OrLoK]

1 minute ago, spartan85 said:

I’m wondering with the new update coming how performance will be affected... I’m sure there are many optimizations being made, but a lot of tech has been introduced as well... 

 

im just worried that my rig won’t be up to par.... it’s coal fed....

 

As an edumacated guess, I don't think they are going to push out a patch that would cut off a significant portion of their user base without some warning.

 

Like most flightsims, you might simply need to do some tweaking to get your FPS.

 

Obviously, having a PC which can *just* run sim X or Y is always a dicey experience. YMMV.

 

Once the patch hits you always have all of us here to assist you if you have difficulties!

[SJ_Butcher]

5 minutes ago, spartan85 said:

I’m wondering with the new update coming how performance will be affected... I’m sure there are many optimizations being made, but a lot of tech has been introduced as well... 

 

im just worried that my rig won’t be up to par.... it’s coal fed....

 

game should keep improving and not stuck because some users, this is a expensive terrain we are playing and if you are not willing to pay for hardware updates you picked the wrong genere. I like the progress and always like to run my games full graphics, and if I cant maintain 120fps @ultra I will upgrade my rig xD 

[[APAF]VR_Spartan85]

4 minutes ago, OrLoK said:

 

As an edumacated guess, I don't think they are going to push out a patch that would cut off a significant portion of their user base without some warning.

 

Like most flightsims, you might simply need to do some tweaking to get your FPS.

 

Obviously, having a PC which can *just* run sim X or Y is always a dicey experience. YMMV.

 

Once the patch hits you always have all of us here to assist you if you have difficulties!

 yes it’s always coming down to tweaking for FPS but it’s gunning nicely now, and thank you!

2 minutes ago, SJ_Butcher said:

 

game should keep improving and not stuck because some users, this is a expensive terrain we are playing and if you are not willing to pay for hardware updates you picked the wrong genere. I like the progress and always like to run my games full graphics, and if I cant maintain 120fps @ultra I will upgrade my rig xD 

I fully agree that the aim should always improve, I dislike that I may be one of the culprits for slowing down that process.  

Right now I’m running at ultra and getting around 50fps which is fine for me now, 

the new pc will be perchased down the line if this sim becomes uninhabitable for my pc lol

[SJ_Butcher]

1 minute ago, spartan85 said:

 yes it’s always coming down to tweaking for FPS but it’s gunning nicely now, and thank you!

I fully agree that the aim should always improve, I dislike that I may be one of the culprits for slowing down that process.  

Right now I’m running at ultra and getting around 50fps which is fine for me now, 

the new pc will be perchased down the line if this sim becomes uninhabitable for my pc lol

 

50 FPS for all ultra is not that bad, if the game became more demanding you can always run at high and maintain or improve even more the FPS

[Trooper117]

10 minutes ago, spartan85 said:

im just worried that my rig won’t be up to par.... it’s coal fed....

 

Then throw more coal on the fire... lol!

I'm a great believer in the Dev's advancing the technology to get the best  performance out of the game engine.

Having said that, my computer set up is well over 4 years old and I have an older graphics card, so I run into problems on a regular basis.

I am no longer working, and replacing parts on the pc, as well as new flight sim gear is something I can no longer do with ease...

 

That said, I still would not expect them to make exceptions just because of people in the same position as myself.

 

[CanadaOne]

5 minutes ago, spartan85 said:

 yes it’s always coming down to tweaking for FPS but it’s gunning nicely now, and thank you!

I fully agree that the aim should always improve, I dislike that I may be one of the culprits for slowing down that process.  

Right now I’m running at ultra and getting around 50fps which is fine for me now, 

the new pc will be perchased down the line if this sim becomes uninhabitable for my pc lol

 

Do you fly with a lot of planes in the air?

 

[[APAF]VR_Spartan85]

Well I only really play online, soooo I guess not lol.

if there’s a single player mission loaded with planes the game goes to slow-mo....

 

[CanadaOne]

Online only? I'll have to go up so you can shoot me down.

 

I'm pretty sure if I keep the plane numbers down I can keep the graphics up pretty high. I'm happy to go with very few planes if it means I get all that sweet eye candy. Right now I have pretty much everything maxed and it just locks at 60FPS, but not too much air action going on. I tried running the game at 4K on my TV. Killed my FPS by a ton. Looked nice, though.

[Oubaas]

A movie at the cinema runs at 27 FPS. Thus far, I haven't heard of anyone refusing to watch a movie because it didn't run at 120 FPS. I read all sorts of comments about the necessity of 60 FPS or 120 FPS, or the game or sim is supposedly unplayable. I can only laugh. Nobody's eyes can detect the difference between, say, 50 FPS and 60 FPS. Anyone who contends that they can see a difference is imagining things.

[Pupo]

1 hour ago, Oubaas said:

A movie at the cinema runs at 27 FPS. Thus far, I haven't heard of anyone refusing to watch a movie because it didn't run at 120 FPS. I read all sorts of comments about the necessity of 60 FPS or 120 FPS, or the game or sim is supposedly unplayable. I can only laugh. Nobody's eyes can detect the difference between, say, 50 FPS and 60 FPS. Anyone who contends that they can see a difference is imagining things.

 

Movies use well established, mostly slow moving shots and actively avoid captures where only having 27 FPS's would result in a poor movie experience. Effects like motion blur are used to combat these limitations. We do not have that luxury in games. You often have fast moving objects, or quick swipes of in-game FOV, that feel clunky when  happening at low FPS.

 

Furthermore, there are at least 2 good reasons to run a game at 60+ FPS, even if you have a 60hz monitor:

 

1. It greatly reduces the chances of the game dipping below the monitor refresh rate. Although most humans can't distinguish  netween a stable 60FPS and a 50 FPS sequence, a sequence with oscillating FPS's is easily noticeable. 

2. It reduces the delay between user input and in-game reaction. If you run at 60 FPS, it will take 1/60 of a second for an input you make, to be reflected in the screen. At 120 FPS that time is halved to 1/120 of a second. Even if you are using a 60hz monitor. This is arguably irrelevant in a game such as IL-2, but if you play reflex shooters, you can definitely feel the difference.

 

I found that I can only play the game at low settings with my current machine. And even then, I will experience 50FPS slowdowns in the Kuban map when close to the ground. Under less stressful circumstance I have around 90-100 FPS.

[SJ_Butcher]

2 hours ago, Oubaas said:

A movie at the cinema runs at 27 FPS. Thus far, I haven't heard of anyone refusing to watch a movie because it didn't run at 120 FPS. I read all sorts of comments about the necessity of 60 FPS or 120 FPS, or the game or sim is supposedly unplayable. I can only laugh. Nobody's eyes can detect the difference between, say, 50 FPS and 60 FPS. Anyone who contends that they can see a difference is imagining things.

 

wahahaha what a bunch of crap, some fighter pilots can see over 180 fps and thats a fact, if you haven't even played in a 120hz screen you are imagining things.

Edited March 5, 2018 by SJ_Butcher

[=EXPEND=Tripwire]

2 hours ago, Oubaas said:

A movie at the cinema runs at 27 FPS. Thus far, I haven't heard of anyone refusing to watch a movie because it didn't run at 120 FPS. I read all sorts of comments about the necessity of 60 FPS or 120 FPS, or the game or sim is supposedly unplayable. I can only laugh. Nobody's eyes can detect the difference between, say, 50 FPS and 60 FPS. Anyone who contends that they can see a difference is imagining things.

 

Wait till you try VR and see the effect running under 90fps makes without re-projection on your viewing pleasure.

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

2 hours ago, Oubaas said:

A movie at the cinema runs at 27 FPS. Thus far, I haven't heard of anyone refusing to watch a movie because it didn't run at 120 FPS. I read all sorts of comments about the necessity of 60 FPS or 120 FPS, or the game or sim is supposedly unplayable. I can only laugh. Nobody's eyes can detect the difference between, say, 50 FPS and 60 FPS. Anyone who contends that they can see a difference is imagining things.

You can adapt to frame rates below 30 fps. Console players do it quite frequently. However, there is no going back once you see something better. 

 

After using a 144 Hz panel, going back to 60 Hz feels awful.

[E69_Chipi]

2 hours ago, Oubaas said:

A movie at the cinema runs at 27 FPS. Thus far, I haven't heard of anyone refusing to watch a movie because it didn't run at 120 FPS. I read all sorts of comments about the necessity of 60 FPS or 120 FPS, or the game or sim is supposedly unplayable. I can only laugh. Nobody's eyes can detect the difference between, say, 50 FPS and 60 FPS. Anyone who contends that they can see a difference is imagining things.

I probably can't tell the difference between 50 and 60, but I for sure can tell between 27 and 60. And no one is going to tell me what I can see and what I cannot.

 

In games, specially in those with rapid camera direction changes like FPS or flight Sims played with track IR, there is a huge difference.

 

I wished I could not see the difference,  because I would be able to save some money in hardware.

 

I have heard so many times the argument about the cinema FPS...

But a lie (or in this case I would say a misconception because I am sure there is no lying intention) told one thousand times, does not become the truth.

[E69_Chipi]

24 minutes ago, Pupo said:

 

Movies use well established, mostly slow moving shots and actively avoid captures where only having 27 FPS's would result in a poor movie experience. Effects like motion blur are used to combat these limitations. We do not have that luxury in games. You often have fast moving objects, or quick swipes of in-game FOV, that feel clunky when  happening at low FPS.

 

Furthermore, there are at least 2 good reasons to run a game at 60+ FPS, even if you have a 60hz monitor:

 

1. It greatly reduces the chances of the game dipping below the monitor refresh rate. Although most humans can't distinguish  netween a stable 60FPS and a 50 FPS sequence, a sequence with oscillating FPS's is easily noticeable. 

2. It reduces the delay between user input and in-game reaction. If you run at 60 FPS, it will take 1/60 of a second for an input you make, to be reflected in the screen. At 120 FPS that time is halved to 1/120 of a second. Even if you are using a 60hz monitor. This is arguably irrelevant in a game such as IL-2, but if you play reflex shooters, you can definitely feel the difference.

 

I found that I can only play the game at low settings with my current machine. And even then, I will experience 50FPS slowdowns in the Kuban map when close to the ground. Under less stressful circumstance I have around 90-100 FPS.

The problem of running a game over 60fps on a 60hz monitor is that sometimes you get screen tearing, and that's pretty annoying too.

[SJ_Butcher]

1 hour ago, Chipi said:

The problem of running a game over 60fps on a 60hz monitor is that sometimes you get screen tearing, and that's pretty annoying too.

 

G-sync or FreeSync solves the problem, I have G-Syn and absolutely love it, even below 40 fps feels smooth

[CanadaOne]

1 hour ago, Mitthrawnuruodo said:

You can adapt to frame rates below 30 fps. Console players do it quite frequently. However, there is no going back once you see something better. 

 

After using a 144 Hz panel, going back to 60 Hz feels awful.

 

144Hz will required a few more paychecks.

 

144Hz at 1440p  will require several more. You need a 1080 for that, no?

[Myscion]

A gtx 1080 works for me but I never hit the full 144 Hz at 1440p. It stays between 90-120 fps most of the time. I'm happy with it but if you want the full 144Hz a 1080 ti would likely do the trick.

 

120 Fps is way nicer than 60 fps especially with fast head movements combined with track ir. I find the higher refresh only really maters in flight sims and twitch shooters such as RB6.

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

42 minutes ago, CanadaOne said:

144Hz at 1440p  will require several more. You need a 1080 for that, no?

 

Constant 144 Hz is difficult to achieve in Il-2. At 1440p, it usually fluctuates around 100 fps. With G-Sync, this is perfectly adequate for me. 

 

 

Edited March 5, 2018 by Mitthrawnuruodo

[CanadaOne]

I'd be happy with that.

 

But it would still take a 1080, wouldn't it?

[1./KG4_OldJames]

My oculus allows  (allowed) me to seek 45 fps, which for me is ample, but when I put the hud on it drops to 25-30 fps  and I,  and my stomach really notice the difference.(all figures dependant on server)

[[APAF]VR_Spartan85]

29 minutes ago, 1./KG4_OldJames said:

My oculus allows  (allowed) me to seek 45 fps, which for me is ample, but when I put the hud on it drops to 25-30 fps  and I,  and my stomach really notice the difference.(all figures dependant on server)

Yes that his is quite the hitter isn’t it??  

The 45-50 FPS I achieve is with his off. If I turn it on while on a busy server FPS dips down to 20fps...