Remon

Am I the only Win 7 user with this problem? Using a Saitek x45, I reinstalled after the DLC, no controls even though it appears in the in game controllers list and it works in other games. I disconnected my gamepad and switched usb ports, it works for a day, then it stops working again. Has this even been acknowledged by BIS?

You're right. Just release the fucking features inside the DLCs for 30 bucks, because that makes more sense to sneakers.

On spying charges. http://news247.gr/eidiseis/koinonia/eglima/sullhpsh_tsexwn_sth_lhmno_gia_kataskopeia.1923532.html Can't find an english source. They caught them with video and photographs of military installation of Lemnos.

I was only expecting a JTAC from the Combined Arms, (very) pleasantly surprised.

Well, that's to be expected from a flight sim, we'll just have to wait and see how's the Nevada map and the EDGE engine that comes with it. Funny, seems like ED is pulling a reverse ARMA, with a high fidelity air unit sim blended with a lower fidelity ground units sim/RTS.

Haven't got one CTD from DCS World. Also, I don't get the no HDR option, as I have it on my install. And a last thing, this is a beta. The Su-25T wasn't the star of FC2, it just had an advanced flight model, instead of the basic one that the rest of the aircrafts had. DCS World is something like the main hub where all the DCS aircraft/combined arms/whatever-else-they're-modelling modules are going to get connected to. They released the beta, and I suppose they released the free Su-25T as a means to test DCS:W without having to buy the P-51 module, as the older modules haven't been patched for compatility with it yet. Ka-50 Black Shark 2 is one of those modules, along with A-10c, P-51, Su-21 and the unnamed american jet plane that's in development, that we currently have knowledge of their existence.

They've announced the first 3rd party add on for the DCS World, the Mig-21Bis. http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=87621

If you're talking about the way they've implemented autohover in TOH, then I can't argue with you as I don't have the game, but if it's the same as Arma II then yes, it's not realistic. On the other hand, auto hover is a feature of at least Ka-50 and the Apache, and a few other advanced helicopters. Of course there are limitations. In DCS, which is considered the most realistic simulation of a helicopter, you have to be travelling up to 10-20 kph to engage the autohover system. It won't magicaly bring you to a halt to the position you engaged it, like what pretty much happens to Arma 2,

Ok, about the olive trees, one thing that's been bugging me since the first screenshot I saw them in. They're totally wrong. They just seem unnatural, like they are inside out or something, and that's because the branches are probably set on the tree model the wrong way.

Not weird at all, as they're using Simul Weather, which in turn uses volumetric clouds. Volumetric clouds are notorious performance killers (if you remember the very begining of Crysis when you paradrop out of the airplane).

Much much better, the 210/310/510 and up to 230/330/430/530 Geforce models weren't meant for gaming, they were targetted at the OEM and Home Theater PC market. The entry level cards are the x50s and even those are considered slow, although adequate for most games.

Yeah, those aren't volumetric clouds. Volumetric clouds, by definition, have volume. 2d planes are one dimension short of doing the trick. These are volumetric clouds. C9CfhyajVjY Of course, those are pretty advanced and I'm sure that they can't be implemented on a game with the current technology, without bringing it to its knees. But they should look something like that.

On the topic of trim, is there anyone here with a FFB joystick here that can tell us if trim works with FFB?

None of the above. My solution would be to make the targetting system fully moddable. Vanilla working with a tab-targetting system etc. Buf if a modder wants to remove the tab-targetting, hard coded targetting rectangles, add a buddy lazing system etc, he should be able to do it. That could sort the problem with the different targetting systems of each platform. Actualy, the one "feature" I have the most problem with in Arma 2 is the rectangles. You can't turn them off, you just tab and see right where the target is and they don't feel integral to each vehicle. If we'll able to remove them, as they are in vanilla, and add them to each helo's/plane's/tank's HUD/targetting system, it would be a very big step forwared, in my opinion.

So, the community preview was released today, which is right now something like a mod for OA. First, can a modder get the flight model and other features from it and apply them on another helo? Second, a surprise, render-to-texture on RV 3. The mirror on the left side of the helo works as it should, dynamic, it is affected by draw distance and all.

Can't thank you enough. I saw the brake (analogue) option in the controlls but couldn't figure what it was.

It seems like it needs Arma OA to run. That is, they import the flight model and all that stuff to Arma OA.

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/e3-2011-arma-iii/716031 at 00:39, he points the commanche hmd at the road, there's a target id "Slammer M2A1"

The most probable use is mirrors, and flir/cameras, as they've already shown these in VBS.

UwMw3T_di6o Not saying it's the same exactly, but the turret looks like it is. Don't forget that both T-95 and the Commanche have been cancelled. It seems like the game is set in a more alternate reality. Or by 2020 and with a big war raging on all the armies have commisioned cancelled projects of the past, with some changes, along the new ones.

If this is legitimate, which I believe it is due to the picture Lonestar posted, then this tank isn't the Merkava, it's the T-95. Also, PeterBitt was talking about the type of ammo it used, as when it shoots the gun it leaves a weird wavey effect.

2x less details is still much more than vanilla FSX or DCS. But what makes those simulations, or any sim, visually adequate or good isn't the floor mesh detail. Ground textures, lighting, water and clouds are much more important.

Oh wow, this is the most inane arguement I've seen here. Did you read any of mine or other anti proponents of Physx arguements at all or are you just talking out of your ass? We're saying if you want to add physics to the engine, use a universal api that doesn't work only on one part of the market.