Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Skybird03

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  • Birthday 02/14/1967

Personal Information

  • Location
  1. Wargames

    Hear hear!
  2. Wargames

    Oh, thanks for the memories! I played these ones excessively back in those years, beside Assault series , Gulf Strike, Aegean Strike, 2nd Fleet, 6th Fleet, and Flight Leader. Still have them, though stored away in the basement. It were good times back then. And many things indeed felt better. And we were younger.
  3. Virtual Reality support?

    I recently tested X-Plane 11 in VR, which has its VR in an early demonstration included (they consider it to be pre-Beta). To my surprise, it worked much better than I imagined. In small planes with a limited amount of buttons workload, it works better than in a big airliner, however. There is good potential - but also the limitations are clearly shown. Some of the current ergonomic deficits however are already confirmed to be adressed. If somebody thinks about the pros and cons of VR in SBP, X-Plane is a good demonstrator to test one's expectations. By concept, their handling philosophy is brilliant. I provide a link to an explaining text that may give you a first impression of how it works. They base on that no other hardware than the two VR controllers should be used, and I tell you - this way it indeed works best, better than mouse better than joystick, better than HOTAS. The typical vulnerabilties of VR when needing to handle a complex, button rich environment, can only be ergonomically avoided by going all the way. And that means in SBP this would need FULLY interavtive onboard stations in tanks. Every button that is needed for sim funcionality, must be fully functional in the graphical interface. A redesign of so many, many vehicles, that means. Plenty of work. Also, X Plane demonstrates better by experiencing it in VR than a thousand words what prevents VR in SBP the most. CPU power. While the small, simple planes run smooth in VR, a Boeing 737, not even on the complexity level of PMDG's, brings even my brandnew very fast system - an i7 8700K with Asus 1080TI-OC, to its knees in frames. The Cessna flies with medium settings in grapohics options, the 737 even with lowest settings does not really give joy to fly. With the many LOS calculations needed in SBP, I think with present technology you simply can forget VR in SBP. Not even mentioning once again the distance-blurriness problem and the lacking resolution. Technically it currently is not possible, I think, not in the private consumer market segment. It would be way to expensive. Just increasing the resolution in headsets does not help either - you need the platform power to support these many more pixels in resolution. I think some people here underestimate that. Anyhow, here is the text on how complex cockpit handling in VR must be done, at least imo: https://developer.x-plane.com/2018/01/interacting-with-x-plane-in-vr/ And here, the paragraph on "Controls and Manipulators", especially where the explain how their yoke works. http://www.x-plane.com/kb/x-plane-11-20-vr-beta-instructions/ It makes an awful lot of sense of how they do it. The only other way that is reasonable is to have limited cockpit controls and then having them all on your external game controller you use. That is why racing sims with a hardware wheel are the genre of choice for VR, no other major simulation genre works better in VR, not counting exotic, brilliantly working gems like Eleven Table Tennis or such that have no cockpit needs at all.
  4. Extraordinarily bad bug in Intel CPU memory management

    Gaming seems to be mostly unaffected, and desktop users probably mostly have little to fear. It is server centres that may face headaches over performance drops, and certain desktop productivity tasks. I want Intel getting sued for releasing their brandnew 8th generation CPU although knowing since many months that it is affected by this hardware misdesign as well. It is not a continuation of an old product line, but opening a brandnew one although knowing it is porked. The only valid option would have been to delay the release and rework the hardware design. Kick their balls for this betrayal. I read that at least one CEO of Intel has sold all his Intel stocks except the legal minimum already in early November.
  5. Oh. Credits to you. Woody's site?
  6. https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/ A fundamental design flaw (a Kernel memory vulnerability) in Intel chips of the past ten years has caused a security vulnerability at the very lowest, most basic and most hidden level of the architecture that Intel cannot fix by themselves. The workaround is that operation systems, both Windows and Linux, need to apply rewrites for the Kernel that will soon be distributed via the OS' usual patch distribution channels. The fix comes at a hefty cost for some, older Intel chips may be threatened to lose up to 30% of performance, with newer chips said to get away with lower losses, as low as 5% - but a loss nevertheless. The Linux fix seems to also adress AMD chips, but it is unclear to me whether that is due to a newly revealed weakness in AMD chips as well, or is just a precautionary measure. If in the coming weeks you observe a loss in performance in your systems, this likely is the explanation. A reply to my warning in another forum claims the issue affects producitvity work more than gaming.
  7. Virtual Reality support?

    Demands coming form their military customers, can be pricetagged by eSim accordingly (as long as they have not already been covered by past contracts). This then would allow eSim to assess whether they have the capacity to carry out the order or to refuse it, or what it would cost them to enable themselves to cvarry out the task. We gamers probably cannot offer than ammount of financial incentive. Our share in their income is most probably too low.
  8. Virtual Reality support?

    As Ssnake said: it won't happen. He may change his mind one day, but I think that time is still several years away. Many years, most likely. If ever. Just saying. Just to motivate you to control your enthusiasm. eSim is no game developer, the focus and contract obligations that really pay for their bills demand them to set different priorities. Small expectations - small disappointments. Big expectations - big disappointments. No expectations - no disappointments: just the cozy feeling of having been right.
  9. Virtual Reality support?

    As Ssnake himself already said, they would need to redo all the interiors - and this for a studio of their size. Quite a task. While technically it is possible to be done, I do not really wait for it to happen.
  10. Virtual Reality support?

    Rumours say 4k displays could come to VR in late 2018 already, both HTC and Pimax seem to work on them. What that would mean for image quality imporvmeent you can see in the second (anmated) illustration in this text, pretty much at the top. https://vr-world.com/htc-vive-2-neue-virtual-reality-brille-2018-4k-display-samsung/ There would be a clear improvement, if this illustration is real, and still, at large distances it still would prevent you from seeing as tiny details as you are used to pay attention to in SBP when triyng to scan for the enemy. Already zoomed in by binos or tele-optics may work, but the bare eye trying to spot the turret of a IFV hiding between trees 1800 meters away? No way. I am not convinced that games will be the driving force behind the future success of VR, but its possible, and I am quziote certain that VR this time has come to stay for sure. Eventually display and lens technology will have advanced that much that the issues SBP now would have with it, will be no more issues at all. But we are not yet there. Two years minimum, I guess. Since the industry' course for better displays seems to be certain, i recommend to go with cheaper VR sets now if now is the time you want to dive into it, namely Oculus. It costs 450 Euros, compared to 700 Euros for HTC's base pack. That way your loss is smaller if you go with a later headset again in two or three years, depending on when 4K will be available for the price of today'S Oculus. Becasue now that I hgave one set, I have no intention to spend more money on a new one then what I have spend right now: 450-500 Euros. IMO Oculus also has the better image quality over HTC. In how far PC specs will be tackled by higher resolution VR sets, remains to be seen. I expect to see that the minimum specs for gfx boards needed will rise and minimum cards that now work will no longer work with the new ones. Probably only today'S higher end cards will be sufficient.
  11. Virtual Reality support?

    Adding to why current VR is no suitable for SBP: VR images are blurry, compared to monitor picture quality. The deeper you look into the distance of the virtual space, the blurrier it gets. I just have started with VR, and for the purposes I use it for, I LOVE-LOVE-LOVE it. But VR does not work with just everything in games, simulations, software. A TC standing in the turret and looking at the landscape trying to see an enemy 1 km away hiding in the forest, most likely will see nothing there, just a green blurriness. With today's consumer VR technology and displays and used fresnel lenses, VR in SBP simpy will not work well. You will see sufficient detail in the imminent vicinity of the tank, and at 10-15 meters you maybe even will be able to read written letters on signs, if they are big enough. Planes in IL2-Battle for Stalingrad stand out from the blue background of empty sky, but are so featureless at ranges beyond 100m that you could not identify them, and at a kilometer they start to dissolve almost, still - IL2 and VR works well if you switch on labels. But a tank at 1 km, and not having contrasting background behind him, but the cluttered green and and brown and shadows of the ground - no way to play this reasonably. The resolution of the displays would be okay, its is the fresnel lenses that widen the perceived field of view and also move the virtual image "away" from the eyes that do the damage here. The display sits two cm or so before your eyes, but the lenses project it in such a way that the focus the eyes adapt to is roughly an arm's length away. As long as you need to do this by Fresnel lenses, I see no escape from the tradeoffs in image quality. You could do it by prisms or such things, I assume, but that would increase the size of the box on your face, and its weight. Beyond that, if you have a beefy system, try VR. Used with the right software stuff, it is a BLAST and a real game changer like there has been none in the past 20 years or so. Racing sims are not what they used to be to ma anymore. Google Earth VR is a wonder of beauty and amazement. The free demos Air Car and Robo Recall show what is possible to trigger in physical reactions in people. That I start to sweat and breath a bit heavier when playing table tennis with natural movements shows how convincing the illusion can be (I even suffer the same mistakes I did in reality). And what amazes me most is: they managed to have almost zero latency times. No latency you could notice. How they did that really would interest me. I never had a computer - including my new and extremely fast current one - with such low latency times, not a single racing sim where there is not a minor, unobstrusive, but perceivable delay between movement of the FFB wheel, and the virtual wheel in the game. In Oculus, moving the paddle or racket or golf club: zero latency that would be perceivable to my eyes.
  12. Worrying security issue

    A general warning that I currently set up on the three or four forums I frequently read and use. We all may have heard of the possibility to install malware and snoops already in factory, in ROM-stored drivers for HDDs and so forth. Any scanner you later install , would not be able to detect it. This scenario here, that seems to have turned real now, is a privacy and security nightmare. Worse it cannot get. Say hello to Minix. https://www.networkworld.com/article/3236064/servers/minix-the-most-popular-os-in-the-world-thanks-to-intel.html One may be tempted to assume that one is safe if buying AMD instead. But who said that those who set this up for Intel, have forgotten that there is AMD as well...? ;) ;) ;) But they want to kill cash money and force us all to set up our wealth and "money" in digital format. Yeah, they want that. Think about that next time you get your plastic card out. And learn to get some doubt on that you really act so clever when doing it. You compromise much more than just cash money.
  13. CPU-type for SBP?

    I expect delivery of my new system in 10-14 days. It will be an i7 8700K and 1080TI, due to VR preparations for some other titles. The thread on a benchmark scenario is from summer 2016, is this still actual, is feedback still wanted? I could provide some data in 3-4 weeks on these specs then. "Es froit sich wer." :)
  14. CPU-type for SBP?

    To be clear, I did not disagree with your described outlook - and desired outcome/trend -, it all makes pretty much sense to me what you said. Regarding these future trends, you probably are right, I tend to think in the same direction. I only disagreed a bit due to the fact that game developers since years have not even made use of multiple core architectures that as a matter of fact already were available. And that leaves me wondering how long this new trend will take to realize in material, in software outcomes on a wide front so that it indeed becomes "mainstream". I do not believe that now that Threadripper is coming, they all start to do simulators for 16 threads only. It could very well be that the full transition until a new "mainstream standard" will take the full technical lifespan of a computer rig: several, and not few, years. And yes, Win X cannot be avoided on new hardware, I tried to install test installations of W7 on two different Sky Lake notebooks, using those usual recipes of how to inject USB code into the installer medium to get it even starting the installation properly, and two or three other things to bypass non-recognition of hardware, but I failed in both attempts. That is in parts due to technical incompatabilities or non-recognitions, in parts due to MS having formed alliances with hardware producers to have them building in needless hurdles to prevent old Windows being installed on new platforms. Like Intel now demands new chipsets Z370 for the 8th generation of intel of CPUs (they use the same old socket 1151...), with the Z370 only unlocking a >>needless<< block to run with the new CPUs, because the Z370 else is nothing else but a Z270 - but Asus and others can sell new mainboards for this reason. The really new chipset unlocking the CPU in full will not be available until second half next year: the Z390. I think dual systems or dual boot is the way to go these days: one Linux system for emailing, browsing, shopping, work, text writing, photo editing, database storage, and one WinX system as game launcher where nothing personal and private is being done with or stored on, with the options set tight and privacy options being shut down as much as possible. (Even then you still can get knocked out or negatively affected by the shabby KB updates Microsoft has started to force-infest people'S property with, which Microsoft now acts with as if it is not peoples' property, but Microsoft's property: they do not accept users' "No" as a No anymore). All privacy cannot be protected with WinX, even a totally sealed Enterprise version of W10 still extracts almost 2000 variables that in one way or the other compromise the safety of private data and try to profile the user, and phones them home. But a "game console" cannot reveal more about me than my steam account (I even buy stuff for steam or load up the wallet via Linux), and what games I play. Any profiling beyond that is not possible, when I do not use that system for anything more than launching a game. I still do not like W10 for principle reasons and the foul policies of MS, but I can deny them the intended full scale of their wanted intrusion. Its not all good in Linux land, there are problem like hardware and driver incompatabilities, but still - it is so much better, safer, faster and stable than Windows ever has been - or will be. Certain software I principally avoid, for privacy and safety reasons: Google, Adobe, Microsoft, Facebook, Twitter, Java, and the likes. There is this nice quote by Snowden, and he has it very right: "Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say." Thanks for the replies, I appreciate that you took the time.
  15. CPU-type for SBP?

    Thanks again for taking the time. I do not know the CPU business landscape, but I followed the controversy around Microsoft's porked Get Windows X (GWX) campaign and the loss of competence in their ability to maintain Windows functionally in a technical manner closely since over two years, it led me to turn all non-gaming computer activities to a second system with Linux, and run Windows 7 only as a game launcher, not having updated Win7 since two years. If Microsoft can run such foul, rotten business practices, then why not others like Intel as well. But, lets face it, quadcores are around since longer. Your argument was that because Intel hindered the release of multicores, developers saw no reason to develop for multicores. Still, quadcores are available since years - and still the overwhelming majority of developers, especially sim developers, do not make best use of them, if they even use more than one car at all. Intel'S policies cannot have anything to do with that, or not? Its more that developers shied away from the increased workload, or had no idea how to make use of the additional potential of 2 or 3 other cores. Finally, you said "x CPUs x2", to refer to Hyperthreading. I think that is a bit misleading. Its not as if by magic and miracle the number of cores get multiplied by two. That would be like claiming a CPU capable of multitasking, could multiply the workload it can get done in a given time. It doesn't. As I understand it, HT compares to a desk worker on a swivel chair, and sitting between two desktops. He works on one, until he interrupts work on that table because he needs to wait for a form coming in, or waits for a telephone call. Where a normal CPU now would just stop and wait, he turns around on this swivel chair and starts working on the other desktop, until either he gets called back to the first one, or sees his work on the second desktop interrupted by some needs he has to wait for, he then swings back to the first. As I understand it, the gains are not that he does twice as much work, but that he does not waste time anymore with needing to wait repeatedly within the workflow - instead, when he gets interrupted with the task at hand, he then simply does something different so that that task gets completed earlier as well. Isn't that the net gain of HT? This also explains why HT can even slow down work with software that is not optimized for HT. It is as if the guy on his swivel chair spends more time with turning back and forth, than it would have consumed in time if he would only have sit at desktop 1 and waited until the event he waited for actually has happened.