Truesky v4.3 video (not by TFS), shows how good the software TFS have access to, really is.

[Mysticpuma]

From recent information,  it appears TFS have access to the latest version of Truesky and full support from their development team.

While we wait for further news and updates from TFS, this video from 2-months-ago shows Truesky in action, and the latest version.looks very impressive!

 

 

 

Edited April 8, 2023 by Mysticpuma

[Dagwoodyt]

This video seems unrelated to the Cliffs "proprietary" game engine. Team confidants will undoubtedly thank you ?

[Mysticpuma]

53 minutes ago, Dagwoodyt said:

This video seems unrelated to the Cliffs "proprietary" game engine. Team confidants will undoubtedly thank you ?

Well, it's still the latest version so surely the same features/looks will be available?

Seems very similar to the released screenshots?

 

I know a while back Buzzsaw mentioned that (back in 2021) weather like rain, snow, thunder would follow after it was released?

I wonder with all this extra development time if rain, snow, storms will be released on day one?

Edited April 6, 2023 by Mysticpuma

[Dagwoodyt]

Do you mean for the VU release or for TF 6.0?

[Mysticpuma]

Visual update release. That's what I mean.2-years on, I wonder if all the extra time has allowed them to incorporate the weather functions?

[No.54_Reddog]

I think we know why it's taken 2 years+, because they don't know how. They announced it prematurely, and have run into problems delivering because of competency. They've clearly now resolved that issue and have made progress. Whether that translates to a release this year, well I'm sure there are plenty who will believe it's possible, plenty who will say it can come whenever, and plenty who have said, too long, I'll play something else.

[Dagwoodyt]

expected response: “not before TF 6.0”

Edited April 6, 2023 by Dagwoodyt

[Buzzsaw]

On 4/6/2023 at 12:02 PM, Mysticpuma said:

From recent information,  it appears TFS have access to the latest version of Truesky and full support from their development team.

While we wait for further news and updates from TFS, this video from 2-months-ago shows Truesky in action, and the latest version.looks very impressive!

 

 

 

P3D is not CLIFFS and CLIFFS is not P3D.

 

Different simulation engines, different intentions.

 

Lockheed Martin, the Billion dollar Aeronautics company own P3D... and they built it to help train pilots.

 

CLIFFS is a no budget group of enthusiasts who commit their time on spec.

 

What P3D did with their installation of trueSKY bears no relation to what TF is doing.

 

And regards the level of support we receive... nothing like what P3D received from Simul.

 

What you are looking at here is an enthusiast who is tweaking P3D's installation of trueSKY... he is fooling around with the shaders and other elements.  The fact that an enthusiast has to spend time tweaking a professional installation of trueSKY by P3D tells you that P3D didn't do a very good job, despite their resources and the fact they had direct access to Simul.

 

As far as our competency... we have the trueSKY software working within the game... (see the recent videos) we have made steady progress... as far as our limitations allow.  Our single programmer is doing the implementation in his spare time, just like everyone else in TF... which means around 10-20 hours a week.  Our access to trueSKY support is very basic... because we are not a big budget top tier license level customer, we are an independent, and therefore have a limited level of support.

 

So please don't make comparisons when you don't know the facts.

[Feldgrun]

5 hours ago, Buzzsaw said:

So please don't make comparisons when you don't know the facts.

 

We would love some facts. Please share what it is that we're waiting on, and when we can expect it.

Edited April 8, 2023 by Feldgrun

[Hoots]

5 hours ago, Buzzsaw said:

P3D is not CLIFFS and CLIFFS is not P3D.

 

Different simulation engines, different intentions.

 

Lockheed Martin, the Billion dollar Aeronautics company own P3D... and they built it to help train pilots.

 

CLIFFS is a no budget group of enthusiasts who commit their time on spec.

 

What P3D did with their installation of trueSKY bears no relation to what TF is doing.

 

And regards the level of support we receive... nothing like what P3D received from Simul.

 

What you are looking at here is an enthusiast who is tweaking P3D's installation of trueSKY... he is fooling around with the shaders and other elements.  The fact that an enthusiast has to spend time tweaking a professional installation of trueSKY by P3D tells you that P3D didn't do a very good job, despite their resources and the fact they had direct access to Simul.

 

As far as our competency... we have the trueSKY software working within the game... (see the recent videos) we have made steady progress... as far as our limitations allow.  Our single programmer is doing the implementation in his spare time, just like everyone else in TF... which means around 10-20 hours a week.  Our access to trueSKY support is very basic... because we are not a big budget top tier license level customer, we are an independent, and therefore have a limited level of support.

 

So please don't make comparisons when you don't know the facts.

You know, if you jumped in with actual development messages rather than to just stomp on people who you don’t like posts, TFS’s reputation may be slightly better. You are the figurehead of TFS and your approach speaks to that of the company. 

[No.54_Reddog]

Ah, ok. Thanks Buzz. I hadn't realised CLOD and P3D were entirely different, thanks for clearing that up. But it has to be said, if a billion dollar professional company with all the support in the world do a bad job, it doesn't bode well for a professional company with only one part time developer and no support one might guess? 

 

As for competency questions, I think you have rather proved that to be a futile path to argue. YOU made promises. YOU failed to meet them. Either the competency of the programmers is not capable of meeting the promises, OR the competency of the promise maker is not capable of accurately estimating the developers delivery. Which is it?

 

And yes, Hoots' post is spot on. 

Edited April 8, 2023 by No.54_Reddog
Words

[Mysticpuma]

7 hours ago, Buzzsaw said:

So please don't make comparisons when you don't know the facts.

I read my title again, maybe you could? 

"Truesky v5.3 video (not by TFS), shows how good the software TFS have access to, really is" 

 

So, am I incorrect in thinking you have access to the latest version v5. 3?

 

I have seen video of Clod with the shader sliders being used are you now saying TFS has no access to test shader options? 

 

I read my post again, I am actually being impressed by the software you have access to and yet, once again, of all the posts, across all the forum, oh look, here is Buzzsaw having a dig at a post by me for saying "look how good CloD may look when the update eventually comes". 

Regarding level of support from Truesky, it was posted that the team had bought a license that gave them 24/7 support, so I believe I was going from the facts presented, but happy to admit I must have misconstrued this. 

 

Have you ever thought about letting people see a video and think rather than smashing the positivity to pieces with a baseball bat, you may just say "While the video shows a different game engine at play, the tools available Truesky, as can be seen by the recent video By Gunfreak, should give us the opportunity of giving players a whole new experience in the flight sim. We are working hard at getting the best out of the software from Truesky and its incorporation with CloD, work continues, we look forward to hearing players feedback when if finally gets released". 

 

BTW, I know the video shows Truesky in a different software engine, I could have posted many videos in the Unreal 4 engine with rain, snow, storms, lightning, waves, wave levels, full liquid simulation (which Truesky has), but I chose to post a video showing clouds and heavy clouds and different times of day, using shader tools available in Truesky. 

 

I just wonder if you'll ever understand that all it appears you ever do is criticise what your product t can and will do. I honest don't understand why you constantly undermine your product. 

 

[354thFG_Leifr]

Hi Buzzsaw, welcome back.

How about posting some facts then so that future misconceptions can be avoided entirely?

Kinda difficult for any one to know what's happening, and to combat misinformation, when the developer(s) disappear for several months.

Edited April 8, 2023 by 86th_Leifr

[Buzzsaw]

We have posted many many videos from trueSKY.  (see the latest just yesterday)  And we have provided the facts... when they are relevant to our progress.

 

Regarding the version we are working with... it doesn't really matter except to say we are working with the latest version for our game engine.

 

There are multiple versions of trueSKY, depending on whether your game uses Unity or Unreal's software, or whether the game engine is unique Windows based software.  The version 5.3 is not Windows... not sure what version it is for.

 

Ours is Windows based and unique, so we use a less supported version of trueSKY's software.... (their focus is on Unity and Unreal games) we are currently working with version 4.3.93f73d202... which dropped just a few days ago... Simul patched up from previous version after TF pointed out a bug that was introduced by previous TrueSky version (4.3.7a4e8d5b1) dealing with reflection cubemap as you can see in following exciting comparative screenshots (notice reflection differences on river and on landing light glass).

 

https://i.ibb.co/qDT7tmm/before.jpg
https://i.ibb.co/KLWFpHw/after.jpg

 

If we were to post every single issue or bugfix we do on these forums, it would be endless... and we'd be jumped on or mocked, (we have never heard the end of the upside down tree shot from Speedtree... even though its been fixed for six months) because the software is very complex... and our programmer has higher priorities than spending his limited time putting up boring images like the above and posting long explanations... like fixing other bugs and getting the entire implementation completed.

 

Everyone who has been on these forums for while had the opportunity to join the VR Beta when it was open... (it was open for 6 months and nearly 300 players joined) those who did are able to see the changes themselves.

 

But we get these complaints about not getting enough announcements or detail.

 

As I have said many times... the Publisher, (used to be 1C, now its Fulqrum) makes all major game announcements... all TF can do is update what has already been announced.  That may change in the future... but a decision to change the process has not yet been arrived at yet.

[Trooper117]

Thanks Buzzsaw...

[No.54_Reddog]

22 minutes ago, Buzzsaw said:

Everyone who has been on these forums for while had the opportunity to join the VR Beta when it was open... (it was open for 6 months and nearly 300 players joined) those who did are able to see the changes themselves.

 

Sorry, that's utterly and factually incorrect. I do not own a VR headset and therefore I did categorically NOT have the opportunity to join the VR Beta. To say otherwise is entirely disingenuous. As to why it's the "VR Beta" and not the "Visual Update Beta" has never been explained but we are where we are. Maybe there's a hope or dream that a further wider beta will be announced at some point, only you know that of course. And saying that only the lucky ones who got to join the beta can see the changes for themselves? Are you really suggesting that the rest of us have no opportunity to see progress until it eventually arrives because we couldn't/didn't take part? 

 

27 minutes ago, Buzzsaw said:

We have posted many many videos from trueSKY.  (see the latest just yesterday)  And we have provided the facts... when they are relevant to our progress.

 

Regarding the version we are working with... it doesn't really matter except to say we are working with the latest version for our game engine.

 

There are multiple versions of trueSKY, depending on whether your game uses Unity or Unreal's software, or whether the game engine is unique Windows based software.  The version 5.3 is not Windows... not sure what version it is for.

 

Ours is Windows based and unique, so we use a less supported version of trueSKY's software.... (their focus is on Unity and Unreal games) we are currently working with version 4.3.93f73d202... which dropped just a few days ago... Simul patched up from previous version after TF pointed out a bug that was introduced by previous TrueSky version (4.3.7a4e8d5b1) dealing with reflection cubemap as you can see in following exciting comparative screenshots (notice reflection differences on river and on landing light glass).

 

https://i.ibb.co/qDT7tmm/before.jpg
https://i.ibb.co/KLWFpHw/after.jpg

Exciting? No. Illustrative? Yes. Useful? Yes. Transparent? Yes.

This constant and overbearing attitude that suggests that us paying customers are some sort of plebs that must just be ignored or squashed as we have not the mental capacity to cope with the concept that software development is complicated and that there are external intangibles that have to be dealt with is just laughable made worse by the equally ridiculous straw man argument you then put up...
 

30 minutes ago, Buzzsaw said:

If we were to post every single issue or bugfix we do on these forums, it would be endless... and we'd be jumped on or mocked, (we have never heard the end of the upside down tree shot from Speedtree... even though its been fixed for six months) because the software is very complex... and our programmer has higher priorities than spending his limited time putting up boring images like the above and posting long explanations... like fixing other bugs and getting the entire implementation completed.

No-one has suggested or requested that every single issue or bugfix be documented and fed to our voracious appetites so to make that comment is ridiculous at best and does nothing but diminish the work your team are actually doing. For example, I discovered this morning that every one of the bugs I'd raised on the bug tracker had been closed. This has been a personal bug bear of mine for YEARS, that bugs were raised on the bug tracker and then ignored by TF. Clearly that is not the case any more. This is fantastic and something that could quite easily have been communicated to the community in a regular or semi-regular fashion. "Since the last dev update, we've closed out xxx bugs on the bug tracker which have been released in patches to the community and another xxx bugs have been fixed but can only be released as part of the Visual Update because they have dependencies on other areas that cannot be released until then". You see how that sort of thing wouldn't take a huge amount of time from your developers? You see how that could help build trust and bridges back to the community? But instead you once again try to talk down to us instead.

 

As for being jumped on or mocked, I remember some light hearted ribbing about upside down trees a while back when first seen, since when we have had ZERO IIRC updates on speedtree despite repeated asking, so we are left in the position of having to assume that no progress has been made since then. Again, an update from TFS along the lines of "we're still struggling with speedtree due to having found multiple bugs in their software which require the vendor to fix before we can proceed, along with models having to be adjusted for our specific implementation due to having far too many poly's for performance given the numbers of trees we are using, as well as the dev working on this having IRL issues. We have however resolved the previously reported issue of trees being upside down you'll be pleased to hear!".

In a vacuum of information people are going to make their own conclusions, you must understand that? 

One last thought from me to you personally. I know that I and MP are probably your public enemy number 1 and 2 (not sure who is in first place these days ? ) and that others posting questions and criticisms here annoy you, that's plain to see. But remember why we're here (and not your imagined "to sabotage CLOD/TFS" reason). We're here because we believe in the product. I know of many who don't and many who did that have walked away and regardless of what you eventually release, will not come back. Some of those, I know for a fact, have done so directly as a result of your actions. Those are past and potential future paying customers your team will never see profit from, who ordinarily would have been a shoe-in to buy your product. Will that purchase be replaced by someone else? 

[Veteran66]

many Old Time IL2 CloD players have been banned from closed beta simply because they don't have VR, although many would have more experience than VR players who have only just come to CloD 

 

 

[OBT-Mikmak]

3 hours ago, Mysticpuma said:

I read my title again, maybe you could? 

"Truesky v5.3 video (not by TFS), shows how good the software TFS have access to, really is" 

 

So, am I incorrect in thinking you have access to the latest version v5. 3?

 

 

TrueSky v5.3 doesn't exist yet...

 

TrueSky latest version is 4.3.93f73d202.

 

v5.3 is the version of P3D (Prepar3D)

Edited April 8, 2023 by OBT-Mikmak

[Canvas25]

1 hour ago, No.54_Reddog said:

In a vacuum of information people are going to make their own conclusions, you must understand that? 

 

This whole forum summed up in one sentence.

[Mysticpuma]

1 hour ago, OBT-Mikmak said:

 

TrueSky v5.3 doesn't exist yet...

 

TrueSky latest version is 4.3.93f73d202.

 

v5.3 is the version of P3D (Prepar3D)

Thanks. I shall be mindful that when I use an illustrative build number, that is the take away from the comment rather than "TFS are using the latest version" ?

 

2 hours ago, Buzzsaw said:

 

If we were to post every single issue or bugfix we do on these forums, it would be endless... and we'd be jumped on or mocked, (we have never heard the end of the upside down tree shot from Speedtree... even though its been fixed for six months) because the software is very complex... and our programmer has higher priorities than spending his limited time putting up boring images like the above and posting long explanations... like fixing other bugs and getting the entire implementation completed.

You keep that standpoint but it's a ridiculous argument and completely self destructive. 

 

A simple picture showing the trees the correct way up takes SECONDS to capture, seconds to email and seconds to post. 

 

There is a developer diary thread that was created by TFS and has been completely abandoned. 

 

Simply put:

Speedtree programmer. 

Screenshot of trees fixed. 

 

Opens up 1C browser. 

"Hi guys, seems we solved the Stranger Things upside down world issue. Off to hunt some more demogorgon's, cheers TF" 

 

Add file

 

Upload file

 

Insert inline

 

Post

 

You are telling us that that small, tiny, brief moment in time will delay Speedtree by.... Hours, days, months!? 

 

No, the community don't need every bug fix reported to be posted about, but upside down trees was a post made by the team and to solve it 6 months ago and say nothing is beyond ridiculous. 

 

The lack of communication, even simple screenshots is incomprehensible at a time when word of mouth, social media and video is the easiest way of gaining traction and/or momentum. 

 

We know you are short staffed, we know it's part time, we know.... but sharing a screenshot is not the big time consuming sinkhole you often make it out to be, it is in fact one of the quickest and easiest things anyone in the team can do. 

Edited title to Truesky 4.3 ?

[Feldgrun]

[DD_Arthur]

Blimey. Now down to a twenty player average?

[Dagwoodyt]

On 4/6/2023 at 1:09 PM, Mysticpuma said:

Well, it's still the latest version so surely the same features/looks will be available?

Seems very similar to the released screenshots?

 

I know a while back Buzzsaw mentioned that (back in 2021) weather like rain, snow, thunder would follow after it was released?

I wonder with all this extra development time if rain, snow, storms will be released on day one?

"I know a while back Buzzsaw mentioned that (back in 2021) weather like rain, snow, thunder would follow after it was released?

I wonder with all this extra development time if rain, snow, storms will be released on day one?"

 

A way to avoid answering the question you were actually asked is to go into attack mode so that everyone forgets you failed to answer  ?

Edited April 8, 2023 by Dagwoodyt

[Dagwoodyt]

6 hours ago, Buzzsaw said:

....If we were to post every single issue or bugfix we do on these forums, it would be endless... and we'd be jumped on or mocked, (we have never heard the end of the upside down tree shot from Speedtree... even though its been fixed for six months) because the software is very complex... and our programmer has higher priorities than spending his limited time putting up boring images like the above and posting long explanations... like fixing other bugs and getting the entire implementation completed...

The relevant question is whether Speedtree 9.0 has been implemented in the VU beta. Also, if possible, please direct customers to posts explaining how the new Speedtree update will enhance Blitz gameplay. Thanks in advance!

Edited April 8, 2023 by Dagwoodyt

[Mysticpuma]

And will weather be available as suggested? 

[Mysticpuma]

On 4/6/2023 at 8:16 PM, Dagwoodyt said:

This video seems unrelated to the Cliffs "proprietary" game engine. Team confidants will undoubtedly thank you ?

Prophetic ?

[No.54_Reddog]

3 hours ago, DD_Arthur said:

Blimey. Now down to a twenty player average?

I'm sure tonights event will prove a real needle pusher.

[Buzzsaw]

3 hours ago, Dagwoodyt said:

"I know a while back Buzzsaw mentioned that (back in 2021) weather like rain, snow, thunder would follow after it was released?

I wonder with all this extra development time if rain, snow, storms will be released on day one?"

 

A way to avoid answering the question you were actually asked is to go into attack mode so that everyone forgets you failed to answer  ?

No, nothing has changed from the previous announcement, rain and snow will not be included on release... that requires animations for the windscreen, aircraft surfaces, and the terrain.  Not sure about lightning and thunder.

[Buzzsaw]

3 hours ago, Dagwoodyt said:

The relevant question is whether Speedtree 9.0 has been implemented in the VU beta. Also, if possible, please direct customers to posts explaining how the new Speedtree update will enhance Blitz gameplay. Thanks in advance!

 

No, in the release video the vegetation is still Speedtree 5.2.  We will notify the community when we release video/screenshots with Speedtree 8.0.

 

Speedtree 9.0 software was not completed when we started our work to implement the updated vegetation and trees.  So we have been working from Speedtree 8.0 and will continue to do so for the TF 6.0 release.

 

The good news is, a later update from Speedtree 8.0 to 9.0 is relatively simple... when compared to the complexity of updating from Speedtree 5.2, (release game current version) to Speedtree 8.0.

 

IDV/Speedtree has been bought out by Unity... and even more so than Simul and trueSKY with their focus on Unity/Unreal, IDV's priority is now on developing software for their owner's proprietary product Unity.  The good news is that TF has gotten under the gate and we have a license for both 8.0/9.0, (9.0 now almost complete for Windows) which should allow CLIFFS to be cutting edge in our vegetation for a long time.

[Dagwoodyt]

"We will notify the community when we release video/screenshots with Speedtree 8.0."

 

Hope Speedtree 8.0 can be entered into the beta in the near future and that the advantages it provides over the current version can be explained. Thanks!

Edited April 8, 2023 by Dagwoodyt

[Buzzsaw]

1 hour ago, Dagwoodyt said:

"We will notify the community when we release video/screenshots with Speedtree 8.0."

 

Hope Speedtree 8.0 can be entered into the beta in the near future and that the advantages it provides over the current version can be explained. Thanks!

The advantages of Speedtree 8.0 over existing Speedtree 5.2 are:

 

-  Better quality vegetation models

 

-  More variety in models... the Speedtree 8.0/9.0 libraries are quite large... including lots of smaller vegetation... bushes, flowers, etc.

 

-  Opportunity to replace the existing CLIFFS grass system with Speedtree's.

 

-  Opportunity to create custom vegetation models more easily with Speedtree tools.

 

-  Opportunity for tree/etc. movements due to wind from game's weather system.  (initially no effects from prop wash or slipstream)

 

Probably others I can't remember.

 

Please note:  If you go to Speedtree's site to look at their material... please be aware there are different versions of Speedtree.  For example, there is the version for Film... where the vegetation models are extremely detailed.  This is very different from the Speedtree for Games... where the models are not as detailed.  In a game, the PC is tracking millions of models and recreating them in real time... i.e. on the fly.  The models cannot be as complex.  In a Film, the animations for digital imagery can be created at very slow speeds during rendering, (far less than real time) then speeded up later for the actual image which is shown in the film.  So the vegetation models can be very complex and detailed.

[Dagwoodyt]

This is exactly the type of developer' input that is essential since we are dealing with a flight sim, not an FPS. Thanks!

[Buzzsaw]

I am happy to respond when we have material which can be shown and when I have time.

 

Right now there is some space since discussions with Fulqrum are temporarily paused while they consider our proposals.

 

But in addition, while I am here, I am not working on aircraft Flight or Damage Models, vehicle and ship weapons and damage, or dealing with TF's taxes, business requirements, licensing or hiring.  Everyone in TF has multiple functions and is stretched to the limit.

[Dagwoodyt]

Tough neighborhood and not likely to become less competitive!

[SCG_Schneemann]

And I can add about Speedtree, since I am the guy working the models. The previous shots are from a coding point of view, trying like hell to hammer the program into the CLoD engine. Artist has done a super job tracking things down, identifying problems and issues, and solving them. As Buzzsaw has mentioned, this is a state of the art foliage program NOT DESIGNED TO INTERFACE WITH OUR ENGINE. Now, we are seeing good results, and there is hope of getting that part in the game.

 

Also - don't get wrapped around the axle on ST9. We are upgrading to ST8 from 5.2. The models are more realistic looking, better texture atlases, etc. ST9 is still undeveloped and their library is pretty much a bunch of house plants. It will not serve our purpose until it gets developed a bit further. But, that said, I cannot see really any difference between ST8 and ST9. 

 

Essentially, if I understand correctly, we are attempting to incorporate ST INTO the CLoD engine, instead of just using ST generated static objects. If it works correctly, that hopefully means wind, seasonal colors based on date, etc. The ground cover should be enhanced (grasses, crops, etc.). It still needs more work obviously, since we just got the modeling license loaded, but I am very optimistic. The chore is making those ST FPS trees with 30,000+ tris look good at 600-1000 tris. I know we can come to a good compromise.

 

Also, don't bash Buzzsaw anymore on this Visual Update/VR/ST/Truesky thing. It is all related - you guys ought to see that. We can make awesome looking 4K ground, a lot of ground objects, make it look like you are really there, and as soon as you add TrueSky, frame rates go to about 4. Or we get it good in flatscreen, and it's unplayable in VR. Or we make hugely complex Speedtree foliage, and it looks good until you move your head, again framerate 4...

 

The point is, it's ALL RELATED. You can't have it all. It ALL has to be done concurrently, adn it would be foolish to release a part of it, if complete, without testing how it effects the other parts down the  road. It is a lot easier to up the graphics from low to higher, than to take something away from the community. We need to develop to a certain lowest level of performance, so most people can play the game. We have graduated levels of graphics built in, with draw distances, detail levels, etc. to fine tune. But you can't release one or two of these piecemeal. They all need to play nice together and it's a give and take. We are continuing to optimize things under the hood to make it more efficient, so we can up the graphics a bit in other areas.

[Buzzsaw]

1 hour ago, SCG_Schneemann said:

The point is, it's ALL RELATED. You can't have it all. It ALL has to be done concurrently, adn it would be foolish to release a part of it, if complete, without testing how it effects the other parts down the  road. It is a lot easier to up the graphics from low to higher, than to take something away from the community. We need to develop to a certain lowest level of performance, so most people can play the game. We have graduated levels of graphics built in, with draw distances, detail levels, etc. to fine tune. But you can't release one or two of these piecemeal. They all need to play nice together and it's a give and take. We are continuing to optimize things under the hood to make it more efficient, so we can up the graphics a bit in other areas.

As Schneemann explains, this is exactly is why the Beta must include VR as well as all the other new elements... we have to know we are not setting the bar too high in 2D... and then find the VR users are sh*t out of luck unless they have the absolute latest and greatest.

 

We have to provide the users with graduated options so they can tailor their settings.

 

Which is why the whole process is so involved and why it takes time.  We are evolving the entire graphics system, not just one element.

[Veteran66]

That still sounds like a lot of work, please don't forget the 2D testers, they can also help to get a good end product for all players.

[Mysticpuma]

@SCG_Schneemann

Thanks for the comprehensive reply. 

Can I ask about Speedtree and the new draw distance?

A longstanding bug bear of mine has been at ground level. 

11-years-ago Tinus put together a tank battle video which still hold up today, however something changed at ground level and grass only loads in square blocks. I believe a few years back a small fix was attempted which now fades those blocks as the next set of blocks load.... it isn't ideal. 

So in advance of "it's a flight sim" replies, yes, I know that, so is BoX and so is DCS, but ground assets are available and also as Buzzsaw replied earlier, views have now been fixed for player driven, so the expectation is, ground level is available and should look good too. 

 

So, back to the point, with the graphics update and new Speedtree v8, is grass available and part of it and if it is, is there any possibility of the graphics update (viewing distance), enabling the grass tiles to be visible much further, to eliminate the bare land tiles being visible and then magical grass fading in 30 feet in front of a vehicle? 

 

This would add greatly to the immersion and make land battles much more authentic. 

 

On a final related note, with trees now being able to break aircraft on collision, can Speedtree allow trees to have a damage model, so if shot they could break apart. Not necessary, just interested how deep its coding can go? 

 

BTW, here's the video Tinus posted and with the ground assets available, showing the fun that can be had. 

 

 

Edited April 9, 2023 by Mysticpuma

[Mysticpuma]

Final question (for now). It's obvious from what you say @Buzzsaw that TFS staffing is very low, so I am just wondering if there has been any recruitment considered by asking on these and other forums (Facebook, Reddit, Twitter, Youtube)? Maybe there are 5-6 players out there who have the skills required to help out who aren't aware TFS may benefit from their skills?

 

 

[Dagwoodyt]

My take on the new information provided by the Team is that the Visual Update is an experiment. Successful outcome is problematic. The private beta could still be needed for another year or more. This again raises the question of how those eager to enter the private beta can be accomodated in the interim. For a few it is certain that registering for ATAG access is a non-starter. What of others who have been promised access? Those are likely newcomers who are bias-free and whom CloD needs. Notice also that access to the private beta is NOT "free". It requires purchase of DW-T. Why applicants cannot be accepted while there is no active testing going on is a puzzlement.