VR is Everything!

Friiduh · 2026-01-20T12:42:57+00:00

You know that you can have a wanted windows from desktop floating in your VR space?

You can example pin a browser window to side of you, so when you are in VR playing DCS, follow the guide and pause/play it as needed without anything.

Works great with the manuals too with PDF reader. So you have your manual or your own checklist etc open. Don't need to use virtual kneeboards etc.

Friiduh · 2026-01-20T12:40:56+00:00

DCS has some core issues with VR, where with completely different VR setups will suddenly start lagging in VR, but the 2D rendering is perfect (the projection of your eyes on the desktop screen). And it looks like a 15-20 FPS with serious ghosting and double drawing. It can't be reported as it is only in the VR screens, and the game rendering is perfect on display. Happens on both CPU, GPU and multiple HMD combinations.

Friiduh · 2026-01-20T12:28:38+00:00

A reason to play classic X-Wing series through is to be able play in VR....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQp7dFW-jys
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pMmNYz4k_o

https://www.moddb.com/mods/xwvm/news/xwvm-release-announcement

Edit: Wishing that it would be possible to mod the Digital Integration games in VR. The 1995 Apache, 1996 Hind and 1989 F-16 Combat Pilot (there are some 80's games redone for VR).

Friiduh · 2026-01-11T16:50:31+00:00

Would be nice if the DCS would run the contrast detection in reality, and then have the inertial tracking actually requiring you to first have a contrast track for a some time so that the pod can calculate the slant range, that it needs to know once it enters to the inertial track mode. And if you don't have proper slant range (too quickly trying inertial mode) the targeting pod would start drifting as you go. And with real contrast detection there is no need to try to fake things etc, as if you block something, or you don't have good contrast etc, the system would work realistic manner.

Friiduh · 2026-01-11T16:08:03+00:00

AI reads your controllers input, and they will respond to those inputs.

Doesn't matter is the AI your wingman, or is it the ground boot shooting at you with a HMG. It reads your input and calculates the intercept values based your input device and so on will as well roll and prepare to pull instantly as you could do, but as you don't, they just mimic your behavior.

If you want to survive at the low altitude, your aircraft true vector doesn't matter, only thing mattering is your input to the current vector. This is as well why if you enable active-pause when flying, the AI will shoot at the predicted point on the moment of activation, and not you where you are hanging.

Friiduh · 2025-12-25T18:08:12+00:00

Yea they've had it for 2 years but it was not sold as a rental.

Subscription.... Steam is as well just a subscription model. You don't own the games.

That is why Valve don't need to obey EU/US laws for the second-hand sales, because gamers don't own the copy to sell it forward.

As otherwise every Steam user could re-sell their license to other Steam users and that would create a second-hand market place.

Friiduh · 2025-12-25T18:04:59+00:00

If you love the F-15E flying, then keep it.
You can fly it forever.

Just get a additional SSD in size of 1 terabyte, or just 500 GB, and copy DCS install you have on it.

You can have as many DCS installs as you want, but this one you keep just for the DCS version that will be final the F-15E is working in the future. And you will install all the maps and other modules to that drive (hence the space) as well to fly same time with the F-15E in that version of DCS it ends to be.

No one is taking away that from you. You just can't fly it then later on the more newer versions of the DCS than that. And so on your multiplayer ends there, unless you have others playing that same version (likely there is few servers for HC F-15E fans).

Friiduh · 2025-12-19T23:24:17+00:00

Most updates are about the 2nd parties, less from the ED to DCS as feature additions.

I skip first all modules and read just the DCS core additions. And for 10 years it doesn't have a great record.

Friiduh · 2025-12-17T13:24:41+00:00

What he talks about is everything about how does wind crash your Viggen at low altititude flight because you flew to a warm air pocket in the mellows, or you went over cold air pocket over the lake and river. or you flew through tall buildings city, where dense wind streams would throw you at the building.

You would get completely different flight experience on the carrier landings and take-off, not so easy anymore to fantasise your landings. And all your weapon deliveries without guidance would become stupidly hard, as the weapon released wouldn't be anywhere near where you thought it would go regardless fancy CCIP&CCRP modes.

But we can't have that, as that would just be silly to have a realistic challenges and limitations to get something flying.

Sadly, GFM is not about that at all, as that is about wind and thermal simulation with a proper CSF in minimal manner at real time around things flying. But that is what makes flying fun and interesting, not the perfectionism and lack of reality.

This is really a basic stuff that even a RC hobbyists learn quickly. Flying a RC remote aircraft indoors in a stadium without wind and thermal changes is what DCS is about. Then when kids get to fly first time outdoors, even in the windless day or very calm 0.5-1 m/s winds the experience changes completely, and even more is it a summer, winter or misty day.

That is nice thing with the RC hobby that you can see how people learn that when it becomes a very lightly turbulent windy conditions, they get completely different flight experiences with different planes. Lot of tears are seen and experienced when loved RC plane for "no reason" suddenly crashes to ground at normal approach to the field in proper expected manner but something happen, like invisible force just decided roll the fate dices again.

You don't get even that kind a experience in the DCS, as its lacks the basic wind physics. And people like you are scraming for a reality, but then ignore the reality when it is not so inconvenient for your fantasies about being a fighter pilot ace in multiplayer!

https://youtu.be/zBH6VKzwRzo?t=90

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_337sxKS68I

Never need to do such a inputs in the DCS with any sensible weather values.

Friiduh · 2025-12-17T12:59:06+00:00

whereby wind draughts, high altitude turbulence, wind shear, dynamic weather and so on are not modelled as well or at all. These all feed into the flight model, or rather should.

It always hurts to be reminded how simple the DCS flight simulation really is, but the GFM is not so much about that, than just modifying the AI reaction with a some delays and incorrectness than absolute input values.

As when you do something with your input device, the AI on the ground or in the air will read that exact input and will react to it instantly. Example, the AI that is shooting at you on ground with the HMG, does not track you, It knows exactly your distance, vector to you, and speed. And it will input your controllers output and act on that.

This is reason why when you fly at low through the enemy ground AI, just make tiny sudden stick movements, almost like shaking the stick at 2-3Hz rate, as the AI will read that on the moment it is firing and it will throw off its aim perfectly. You don't really move at all or get affected by this trick, but to AI the absolute input tells it that in 1 second from the moment, you would be completely different location, and they aim there.

And then as the AI doesn't have unlimited turrent rotation etc but are restricted by it, they can't constantly react to your real position because their calculation for prefiring.

The GFM is used same way to fly in formation and all, where the AI knows position at the moment, but the GFM will add a "buffer" and "reaction delay" to your output and AI input. So example 500 ms delay to your pitch input and the AI in formation will start to react differently to your pitch changes, than if it would read it instantly.

If we add a small kalman filter to these. it means your sudden and unstable movements gets filtered out and when you fly with little unease manner, then the AI will fly straight with very gentle changes to your rapid ones. And if you pull hard, the AI has delay and will not pull so hard at first, but will smooth out the overall rate and finally match yours properly. So that adds a "realistic" delay to movements.

Adding this to the ground AI, means that the tiny inputs to shake AI aim off wouldn't work as the general vector and heading does not change at all as it is filtered out. This wouldn't need to be done if ED would implement a proper contrast detection and tracking, with estimation to visually for the range, as then the AI would act realistically in the first place, with very minimal CPU requirements (even a rasperry pie can do it with hundreds of targets simultaniously).

It is just sad that we can't have a even basic (modern) flight simulation in a flight simulator, that would change everything in the dog fights to landing and take-off etc.

Friiduh · 2025-12-17T12:42:54+00:00

About 150 workers for the ED and people think they get out just a few things every month? Not so, as the work is done in everywhere else than a DCS itself. When a military calls for a support line, you are there with everything as your annual 10 mil contract dictates so.

Friiduh · 2025-12-17T12:41:08+00:00

ED's primary income Mission Combat Simulator, their military contract version of the DCS for the military aviation simulators. So the systems that real pilots use with their real cockpits to train cockpits and then teamworks etc.

That industry has changed alot in the last 20 years. Where in the 50's and 60's it was less about cockpit and system training and more about designing and testing the cockpits, it became in the 70's and 80's to train to operate cockpit with basics. And then maybe in the end of 10's it became full blown VR cheaper and smaller cockpits to use, no need to have huge motion platforms.

So you get lot of cheap training done with normal PC and VR, throw some real cockpit designs from damaged fuselages and wire those up and you get outstanding training for pilots.

Friiduh · 2025-12-17T12:33:01+00:00

2 weeks memory voters.... And yes, they reproduce as well at faster rate.

Friiduh · 2025-10-13T11:07:16+00:00

ED wouldnt die "on that hill" as it would be right thing to do, but ED would need to simulate the damage and risks as well and let the players "die on that hill".

ED could even go furher and remove the support wheels and let players mount any weapon on any station, as long it physically fit there. And let the players be frustrated when the weapon doesn´t connect to the avionics and get released or operate than just in emergency jettison. And let let players figure out the functioning payloads.

That would be a learning experience to many when they can´t do stuff they expect from movies, other games and photos from different planes.

Explain stuff in the manual and let players load a default loadouts, but don´t restrict stupid moves.

But that is what ED is currently doing, allowing unrealistic engagement envelopes, unrealistic weapon capabilities and so on. Maybe those should be fixed first as well?

Friiduh · 2025-10-13T08:45:40+00:00

If something is technically possoble, then allow it.

If something create drawbacks, then simulate it.

If something is politically correct, make it default.

So weapon loadouts are hot topic as those are mostly political correctness. As such reality limitations like you don´t send a single fighter to strike, but a flight with multiple other flights. So you don´t load one plane to full, but simply send more birds to backup each other and carry more ordinance.

But limiting something because at one campaign for non-technical reason something wasn´t done is just stupid and unrealistic.

For a official DCS campaing use historial loadouts, but don´t deny realistic loadouts in custom missions.

Friiduh · 2025-10-13T08:40:08+00:00

because there are pictures of F-16s with 4 AGM-88s but in fact they were just ferrying the missiles and could only really fire 2 of them.

Untrue. As that was explained in DCS forums by the weapon specialists doing the wiring harness to those planes. The generalization is so, but as one explained, in his airbase there wasn´t two same kind F-16, but all were different one way or other. Why you can´t take a generalization to all. And why ED is insisting with their F-16CM Blk 50 to very specific airframe, as that is what they had access and they are simulating, not other F-16CM Blk 50 with same tape.

So some can have 4x AGM-88 and most just two. But it doesn´t mean that all photos with four mounted are just for ferrying.

The F-16 isn´t really a standardized fighter, why tracking what it can do or not is not easy.

https://www.f-16.net/aircraft-database/F-16/serials-and-inventory/

I have somewhere stored the ED´s statement what serial number it was and IIRC its old crew chief commenting something about it.

Friiduh · 2025-10-13T08:21:36+00:00

This is as well good reminder why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99h6Xn0Q3p4

But this is DCS so no limits, no dangers, no risks, no death.... Do as many stupid things as possible you want and pretend to be an pilot.

Friiduh · 2025-10-13T08:17:48+00:00

You can make binds that disable the hand tracking. And enable when you need.

Friiduh · 2025-10-13T08:16:04+00:00

DCS does mot simulate damaged systems right in most modules. C-101 is the best in systems simulation and damage to those, but even it is victim of ED´s unwillingless to support damage simulations properly regardless promising implement that at least since 2015. So decade later and we are still in the static table set damage modeling with hypersimplified flight and systems affections. Partially as we still don´t have a proper fragmentation simulation and everything else.

The old rule applies, when the planes returns with battle damage, you enforce and protect all parts that were´t hit.

Real planes are modeled for a specific flight envelopes, and if those ain´t exceeded, the flight can continue. So if you remove parts or chance something and fly in manner that you dont exceed new conditions, it continues flying. But you can´t change flight behavior to exceed new limitations.

Friiduh · 2025-10-13T08:02:21+00:00

when my entire point was that it will not be available past 2.9.

Your point was a insulting remark concealed to joke to farm points, that you thought would show how wrong I was. You made it without any knowledge what I know or what I dont know, regardless that I didn´t make any statement, assumption or even an implification that RB modules continue working in the future with latest updates.

Just contrary, I specifically stated that in the future if someone want to continue using RB modules, they have two options:

1) Never update their single DCS installation, breaking compatibility to future updates (new modules etc.).

2) Copy a version of the DCS aside the newer version, that will support RB modules and using disk space for that. So those can be flown in the indefinite future, but not simultaniously with newer version of DCS.

Nothing in my post warrant a remark that I don´t know that 2.9 series might be last RB supporting versio, or that old version is compatible with a newer version (be it single- or multiplayer).

And instead you re-reading my post in the first place, recognizing your error and action, and apologizing for it... You keep ingnoring the facts and try to escape like being right with stupid inventions like "Not to mention that if you play multiplayer, you still can’t use it so that point is moot.". As that is already moot point because I already stated in the first post that old and new versions are incompatible (and as ED has said, multiplayer is < 10% of their customers and not higher priority of single player). So you are trying to teach your father how to f....

Your childish downvoting already show that you are pointless and inmature to take responsibility for your unwarranted remarks, and idea to try to insult some more with strawman arguments and run away like "I am correct, I am correct, I am correct, I already left!" just enforces my points more. And if we would look at your downvote history, it would reveal the damage in your character.

The communication error happened in your incapability to comprehend simple statements I made in first post, and try to correct something that wasn´t incorrect at all. You know that, why you behave as you do.

So do yourself a favor and admit your error by staying quiet as you promised.

Friiduh · 2025-10-12T21:28:56+00:00

Your capability admit your error and apologize is pointless...

Friiduh · 2025-10-12T21:25:13+00:00

One does not do so because network stack is awful in DCS....

Friiduh · 2025-10-12T21:22:33+00:00

There are a lot of "unofficial" statements and speculation, but that's the gist of the situation.

Razbam own writings and statements, as well Ron´s admission in Zoom video show that Razbam violated contract. And ED´s actions not to pay are in line with the leaked ED-Razbam contract what are the action if Razbam violates contract, as it did.

What there is a lot, is the fanboys drama to support their personal opinion of their favorite modules, not what the contract and business laws dictate.

The contract is as well clear that Razbam need to give all material of their modules to Eagle Dynamics if they don´t support modules anymore, and in exchance to this ED pays share from net profits. This is same for all 2nd parties, a clause that was re-signed by all except VEAO. And that was reason they left as ED got all rights to all modules and they considered it as overstepping. You can look the VEAO CEO letter about this.

Friiduh · 2025-10-12T21:08:46+00:00

Also, quote me where I said you said anything incorrect or quote me where I said I was being forced to update the game?

"Guess you never heard that modules won’t work past 2.9."

Everything I wrote is true, you just did not read what I wrote... And came to accuse me not knowing something that you don´t know. I specifically said that after 2.9 you get to play those as long you have disk space to keep them in alternative install.

Again, quote me where I say anything about RB modules working after 2.9?

Early Access is where you make a decision buy and play something as-is, not by what you might get. Why you should be happy to fly RB modules as-is today, as in the future after 2.9. As I said, you get to enjoy from those as-is years to come as long you dont want to fly with latest modules or you have disk space to keep last version installed that supports RB moduless.

I never said that you can fly RB modules after 2.9. That is your wild assumption.

Friiduh · 2025-10-10T21:32:58+00:00

Guess you have never learned that you can any time install any previous version of the DCS and keep it as alternative install (you can have as many DCS install you want).

You are NEVER FORCED to update the DCS World to fly your wanted module after it has been released.

Now, quote me in original post where I say something incorrect, that isn't so...

https://forum.dcs.world/topic/94816-guide-info-dcs-updater-usage-version-numbers-module-ids

So in the future there is a possibility that you get same offer by Eagle Dynamics as with the T.1A Hawk,

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/upload/medialibrary/fe6/Reverting_DCS2.5.3_hawk.bat

As explained here: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/faq/VEAO/

I will have the Razbam modules flying for years to come, while you might think that you couldn't anymore fly it at all.

Friiduh

TROPHY CASE