Some suggestions for improvements for the next versions -4.5 ?
-
@molnibalage said in Some suggestions for improvements for the next versions -4.5 ?:
@i-hawk said in Some suggestions for improvements for the next versions -4.5 ?:
@molnibalage said in Some suggestions for improvements for the next versions -4.5 ?:
Because the charm is BMS that you do not need a high end config for it.
Yes but don’t build on that for the future, we are actually going to trespass… regardless of ray tracing or not.
Am I understanding right?
Does this mean that the BMS will demand in the future a strong VGA and CPU?I just updated my rig to a 1660S but even this was quite expensive because of the lack of chips and ******* crypto miners…
It was 50% more expensive than it was years ago. Just after I bought it was raised with 45%. So today a 1660S is about 2.5 times (!!) more expensive than was 3 years ago. A totally outdated VGA which is 2 generation older than the latest.
What do you suggest then? that we should stay forever with 1KM res terrain, no VR and “flat” 3D models? Come on man! Chips prices are crazy indeed but we can’t forever support low-end HW.
And BTW, even my 4 year old laptop with 6700HQ and GTX-1050 mobile can run “heavy future version” on FHD with MSx2 and ~50 FPS in TE. So medium cards will still work assuming you stay on FHD and no VR.
-
As Mav-jp mention the blank spot occured in DBS1 and DBS2 A-G radar functions
it was implemented wrong right now in DCS
-
@i-hawk said in Some suggestions for improvements for the next versions -4.5 ?:
@molnibalage said in Some suggestions for improvements for the next versions -4.5 ?:
@i-hawk said in Some suggestions for improvements for the next versions -4.5 ?:
@molnibalage said in Some suggestions for improvements for the next versions -4.5 ?:
Because the charm is BMS that you do not need a high end config for it.
Yes but don’t build on that for the future, we are actually going to trespass… regardless of ray tracing or not.
Am I understanding right?
Does this mean that the BMS will demand in the future a strong VGA and CPU?I just updated my rig to a 1660S but even this was quite expensive because of the lack of chips and ******* crypto miners…
It was 50% more expensive than it was years ago. Just after I bought it was raised with 45%. So today a 1660S is about 2.5 times (!!) more expensive than was 3 years ago. A totally outdated VGA which is 2 generation older than the latest.
What do you suggest then? that we should stay forever with 1KM res terrain, no VR and “flat” 3D models? Come on man! Chips prices are crazy indeed but we can’t forever support low-end HW.
And BTW, even my 4 year old laptop with 6700HQ and GTX-1050 mobile can run “heavy future version” on FHD with MSx2 and ~50 FPS in TE. So medium cards will still work assuming you stay on FHD and no VR.
Nope, I’m on side of upgrading but I’m not on side which will lead that you can’t play in FHD without 2060 or higher card and 32GB+ memory.
If you check the Steam stats 66% of players are playing in FHD and the most widely used VGAs even today is the 960 and 1060 series.
-
@molnibalage a 1080 works fine so fardon’t worry…
-
@molnibalage
While it’s not a great time to buy any GPUs you can’t blame BMS for that.
Falcon, as most of the flightsims, always was demanding on hardware. Even BMS 4.3x in its early days was quite a challenge to the hardware available at that time.
It’s just devs went for fixing the performance more than adding new eyecandy.
BMS visual side is long overdue, esp low res terrain and cities made like it was still 1998.
Now where lots of perf/stability issues were worked out it’s time to tackle outdated GFX.So beefy CPU and GPU requirement is just the way it is.
-
@mav-jp I didn’t want to post the link for DCS out of fear of the point being missed… Just wanted to know what the SYM buttons on the Top-Right of the OSB casing does. Right now it’s not implemented in BMS. It’s not a big deal obviously.
-
@depapier Do the Raytracing reflex effects you talk about that are partially used apply in this image?
-
@molnibalage I don’t believe that BMS is always based on older CPU/GPU, I believe that BMS needs to exploit the most of the features of newer GPUs without losing performance, and it should have a solution like Warthunder that you choose OldGraphicCards Option and the features are older and older devices typically run at 60 fps.
-
There are differences in color of light and intensities of light rays according to Latitude and the time of year, below I’m putting a photo of today in Brazil (it’s spring here) more precisely 23° South and Nevada in summer . This change of color and intensity in different places at more or less the same time is very viable. A study of this is needed, and my Global Map idea was to compensate for this location agreement effect. If it can be done otherwise, then ok.
Tatui Town, São Paulo - Brazil
Nellis Air Base, Las Vegas, NV - USA
-
What you’re posting is mostly to do with PBR - physics based rendering. This means configuring materials for 3d models in such a way that different layers respond in a way that imitates physical materials. That would be a simple way of put it. Global illumination is simply a way to calculate lighting within the scene - it means using physically realistic sources of lighting (to an extent) instead of setting everything up manually (which is what lighting designers do in games and this is pretty complex). But global illumination does not solve every problem, so you’d still have to adjust lighting in closed volumes etc. There are different ways to calculate such a model and ray tracing is the most expensive (in terms of computation) and most precise one. Essentially ray traced global illumination can be noticed only through small details. So, in case modelling such a reflection on metallic body of aircraft as on this frame from a video you posted, there needs to be both a lighting model and metallic materials, and of course the actual graphic assets which are made appropriately. Then there are ray traced reflections, which are a different story altogether but essentially their point is to provide more precise calculation than screen space reflections. Again, this is noticeable mostly in details or in very large reflections.
But honestly, this is all just general statements about rendering tech. BMS devs above already responded in this topic where necessary regarding what is going on and where it is going and what is needed.
-
@gusva said in Some suggestions for improvements for the next versions -4.5 ?:
There are differences in color of light and intensities of light rays according to Latitude and the time of year, below I’m putting a photo of today in Brazil (it’s spring here) more precisely 23° South and Nevada in summer . This change of color and intensity in different places at more or less the same time is very viable. A study of this is needed, and my Global Map idea was to compensate for this location agreement effect. If it can be done otherwise, then ok.
Tatui Town, São Paulo - Brazil
Nellis Air Base, Las Vegas, NV - USA
Yes look of the scene can be affected by location, TOD and even stuff like seasons and date. Mav-Jp will add more on that topic…
And BTW, you can’t compare those 2 pictures, different cameras, different angles, different lighting, different everything
And yes the effect on the F-16 is (part of) what PBR is for, interesting timing of posting this
-
@i-hawk I think that viper shot is from a recent usaf reddit where people were making fun of navy growler slamming the jet down on landing while viper pilot did a good gentle landing.
-
@depapier Yes, this picture from the video you refered
-
I am a little ignorant of the current progress w terrain revamp, but it would be awesome to consider implementing these items in the future:
-
LIDAR and/or DEM-based heightmapping (e.g. using this type of data)
-
Generally improving terrain view distance, being at FL250 you can only see <10nm of earth around you
-
Not directly terrain-related, but a refactor of the TGP to take advantage of new terrain:
- Ground textures should not have IR signatures
- Classifying objects (vehicles, aircraft, certain structures) as HOT, COLD, etc.
-
-
@depapier said in Some suggestions for improvements for the next versions -4.5 ?:
@i-hawk I think that viper shot is from a recent usaf reddit where people were making fun of navy growler slamming the jet down on landing while viper pilot did a good gentle landing.
Yes, but general idea is something like this:
https://preview.redd.it/lpu1os4bb8x71.png?width=1483&format=png&auto=webp&s=5a00a9384294484c18228d12e108137279fc86e7 -
@jstnj said in Some suggestions for improvements for the next versions -4.5 ?:
I am a little ignorant of the current progress w terrain revamp, but it would be awesome to consider implementing these items in the future:
-
LIDAR and/or DEM-based heightmapping (e.g. using this type of data)
-
Generally improving terrain view distance, being at FL250 you can only see <10nm of earth around you
-
Not directly terrain-related, but a refactor of the TGP to take advantage of new terrain:
- Ground textures should not have IR signatures
- Classifying objects (vehicles, aircraft, certain structures) as HOT, COLD, etc.
The main problem with holding such high res data for elevation isn’t even a rendering resolution one (Today’s HW can digest a lot of triangles), but the fact that you need to keep the physics as well… In order to do that you must hold data in RAM, and don’t forget MP where the server need to keep data for ALL units, all players, everything. Let’s do the math…
Altitude value require at least 2 bytes right? Because you need values higher than 255. So 2 bytes (signed, because there are also negative values, so-32768 to 32767, that’s good enough for the entire planet):
A Falcon theater size is: 1024x1024 KM i.e 1024,000x1024,000 squared meters.
Let’s say you can have 10m resolution per DEM pixel
1024,000 / 10 = ~100K right?
Your DEM size is 100Kx100K in pixels.
100Kx100Kx2 bytes per pixel = ~20GBJust that is a crazy amount of data… and trust me, even if you will go as low as ~30m (31.25m to be exact ), you can get along with a 2GB DEM and still have VERY high res.
-
-
@i-hawk
Is some kind of LOD-like approach possible? Where terrain would be split into tiles, Hi-res elevation data would be used just in players/targets bubbles and lower res everywhere else.BTW I don’t care that much for so high definition lightining on external models (‘tho’ if reflections could make objects easier to spot it would make sense) but I’d love to see that in the pit. It would make it feel less flat, with better perception of depth (3d)
-
@xeno
LOD-like sure, you can’t practically render modern terrain with high details and no LODing (Too many verts, every GPU will come to a crowl with such numbers). But, there is HW tessellation in DX11Tiles you mean what? textures? Because all these aspects will change.
Sure 3D models need an upgrade for lighting and such similar stuff. Cockpit or not, that’ll upgrade the overall look and immersion of the sim
-
@i-hawk
I’m talking about elevation data used for physics, could it be split into tiles, and high resolution data being used in for tiles in the bubbles and lower res data for the rest. I’m wondering ho to avoid allocating multiple GBs of RAM for the things outside of players horizon. -
@xeno
Yes this can be done, easily, only problem --> MP