Jump to content

HarryVoyager

Members
  • Content Count

    37
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

14 Neutral

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. When you calibrated the CH pedals, did you use the CH Control Manager software, or the default Windows interface? I'm wondering if what you are seeing is the game interpreting it -max to positive max, instead of a slider type mode. I don't have my pro pedals, so can't directly compar, but I was using them on my laptop earlier with MSFS, and because CH Manager didn't play nice, I was having to use the default USB device, which made the calibration and binding process a bit wonky, but it worked.
  2. If you go into Windows Control Panel and open up the Pro Pedals, does the X-Y axis respond when you move the toe brakes? If it does, then you are mapping things incorrectly in FS2020. If they do not, most likely the wire to one or the other toe brake has broken and you need to fix the physical wire.
  3. So, are there any references one could recommend on the FS2020 SDK and what parts of custom FSX models would need to be used? I've got a copy of an FSX plane that I'd really like to be able to fly in 2020, but it also included a large amount of external scripting for some of the advanced features, too, so I'm not even, off the cuff, sure where to begin. I'd assume it would be by identifying the core FSX modules.
  4. Ah very handy. Do you know if there is a way to use it without the hand controller? I'm thinking binding one of the joystick buttons to the pass through, if I could get it to simply do the center of the screen, rather than focusing on wherever the hand controllers are at.
  5. Very interesting. Do you know if the HP Reverb supports that? It does have front mounted cameras, but initial searches on a Reverb pass through mode tends to turn up mostly audio mixer techniques...
  6. @nickhod You mentioned that there are methods for pinning windows into a VR view in SteamVR and Occulus VR? Do those work in games running the WMVR for Steam? Can you pin multiple windows at different locations? What sort of performance hit to they incur? I've got some crazy ideas for VR flight sim stuff, but I'm thinking they'd require about three separate 2D windows to be open able in the cockpit space, and able to be positioned so they did not obstruct key things. And it would be good to be able to make at least one of them mostly transparent and oriented on one of the canopy panes.
  7. In the Il-2 GB flight sims, the Zen 2 and Sky Lake CPUs are at this point family equivalent. However, Zen 2 does not have AVX-512 support, only AVX2, so in applications that use AVX-512 it falls behind. Il-2 only uses AVX, and does not, as near as I can tell require AVX-512, so I'm wondering, do we know whether P3D is using AVX-512? That might explain the difference. Zen 2 also tends to have higher cache latency than the Sky Lake chips, but if you're running DDR 3600 memory that tends to help there. You'll need to check if XMP is on in your bios, however. You should be able to get DDR 3600 CAS 16 fairly economically if you look for the non-rgb versions. I think I got my 64gb quad pack for about $200.
  8. I ended up removing the headphones from my VRs headsets and wearing a headset over mine. That's party because I've got a very nice headset, and party because the voice recognition just worked a lot better with my headset than it did with the Rift CV1. I did not even try it with the Reverb, just went straight to the headset setup. I do wish there was a way to show the external view outside the headset though. I think that would improve the usability of VR in general of one could quickly loom outside the game without removing the visor. I wear glasses, so can't just slide the visor up, either; I have to pull it off from the back.
  9. Umm, that's a conference phone. What I'm wondering is, what exactly does the partnership mean? Is Icon just flight testing the aircraft in sim, or is there more to it than that? Harry Voyager
  10. I also find myself wondering if the clouds will be randomized, or seeded. I.e. if I start a new game session, at exactly the same game time, location and atmospheric settings, with the specific cloud formations be identical, or simply of the same type, and if they are the same type, can they be expected to progress the ways? I've had a long-standing interest in the ability to halt and restart game sessions mid-flight. I generally can't get more than about an hour of continuous game time, while a number of very interesting flights take considerably longer than that. While one can simply put together flights that have only the specific part of interest, via air-starts, time skips, and other things, I've always wanted the ability to simply capture the game-state in the middle of the mission, shut things down for a while, and then bring it back up where I left off later. While I'm looking at potentially doing that with a memory map grabbing tool, if the semi-random events, such as weather, are sufficiently deterministic, it may be possible to do that by capturing the relevant session parameters, and starting the new session using enough of the prior parameters to replicate the ending state of the prior session.
  11. There are some flight sims that, while they generate the same type of cloud cover for player sin the same region, do not have the clouds fully synchronized, such that, when in close formation you may be in a cloud bank, while your lead is in open air and wondering why you are inching way to close to him... I gather that dev team is working on it, but the synchronization of clouds apparently is apparently, does require a certain amount of planning and intent on the dev team.
  12. I wouldn't expect them to do one, but I'm of the opinion that a good, representative benchmark would be valuable for the brand. Right now very few reviewers include simulators in their benchmark suite because they are generally a real pain in the beep to do, and a good multi-threaded CPU heavy benchmark could be a valuable testing tool, and end up exposing people who wouldn't normally see MSFS 2020 to the game otherwise.
  13. @mesaba 116 Given that we're not entirely sure what the requirements will be, I'd lean towards the Ryzen CPUs right now. They're using a common socket for everything from the Zen1 chips from 2016 to next year's Zen3 chips, so you have a couple of options in the CPU side and on the motherboard side. On the motherboard side, you can go with a more budget oriented MSI B450 Tomahawk or Pro-Carbon, or if you prefer the features and simplicity, you can go with pretty much any of the X570 boards. Anandtech has a round up of the X570 boards and features here: https://www.anandtech.com/show/14161/the-amd-x570-motherboard-overview The MSI boards are the only B450 boards you want to go with if you go that route. The Voltage Regulators (VRM) end up being very important in Ryzen, since they range from dual core budget parts to sixteen core behemoths. In the B450 iteration, MSI was the only maker that put in good enough VRMs to handle the future processors. The tricky but is with a B450 board you may need to update the bios to use the Ryzen 3000 series chips. I believe the MSI B450 Tomahawk has a way to do that without a CPU. On the CPU the questions are Second Generation or Third gen Ryzen and six core or eight core. From what we know on project Scarlett, it sounds like it is going to be a slow, eight core, sixteen thread Ryzen 3000 type CPU: https://www.techradar.com/news/xbox-project-scarlett Weve heard its coming to Xbox, and we've also heard in interviews that it will be multi-threaded,so I'd try to get an eight core chip. That said, it's expected to be at a much lower clock speed than the desktop units, but they are also using ram and SSD tricks to boost the speed. On how the different generations perform: Given all of that and the current prices I'd say the safe bet is a Ryzen 3700X ($328) and the budget bet would be either the Ryzen 3600 ($194) or Ryzen 2700X ($190). I think I'd personally lean to the 3600 myself because it does better in the synthetic benchmarks, but the 2700X will be compatible with the B450 out of the box. For ram, probably 16Gb of DDR4-3600 CAS 16, or DDR4-3200 CAS 14 or 16 if you can get it significantly cheaper. Ryzen CPUs tend to be tied to ram performance due to the way the architecture was designed. 32Gb might be worth it too; flight sims have a tendency to be ram heavy. Since you've already got a 3D card that meets your current needs, until we know more, I'd recommend just carrying it over into the rebuild. GPU prices are still mostly completely jacked up at the moment due to the combination of the Bitcoin mining craze happening right when AMD had nothing that could challenge nVidia at most market points. That appears to be changing, and I would expect, if AMD is able to deliver a competitive high end card, GPU prices to have come down significantly by the time we know what it really needs. Of you want to get a card right now, from current leaks, Project Scarlett is running on a an AMD Navi based GPU that appears to be a newer generation than the Radeon RX 5700 XT 3D cards, and we're told that the most recent demo was being run at 4k, 60fps, on an RTX 2080 or 2080 Ti, so that puts an upper bound in minimum hardware. We also know MSFS 2020 does not use hardware Raytracing, so RTX is not required for best gralhics. Based all of that, I'm referencing these two videos for 2080 TI at 4k rescalled to 1080p: I would guess that a used Radeon RX 580 8Gb version is the minimum budget option, or an RX 5700 if you want to buy new. Flight sims tend to be heavy on textures, just die to the view range and texture variety, so I'd look for at minimum 6gb or video ram, and preferably 8gb. Used 8Gb RTX 580's are running around $100 due to miners converting their rigs away from GPUs, so they're artificially deflated at the moment. On new cards, the GTX 1650 Super performs better than the Radeon 580, until its texture memory gets filled up, and then has trouble. Since its got only 4GB, Id avoid it for flight sims. The 1660 Super performs as well as the 1660 Ti, and costs $50 less than the 5700, but their price to performance is similar, and flight sims have historically been much more texture heavy than most games, so the extra 2gb video ram would be beneficial. Still, I would strongly recommend hiding off on getting a GPU as long as possible. AMD should be releasing 2nd generation Navi next year, which is what's going into Project Scarlett as well. If it's competitive with nVidia's cards, that will drive prices down. Further nVidia is expected to release their next wave of Geforce cards next year, which will push their entire line up down the price point. If you need a new hard drive, it's the Intel 660p in the size you need. Basically it is the price/performance king, and for our use case is very nearly the performance king too. I'm referencing a lot of Tech Deals, mostly because he goes into the most detail by far, but the results from Linus Tech Tip, Gamer's Nexus and Anandtech have very similar results. Hope that wall of data helps (and is coherent given the gaps in writing it 😅). Good luck on the computer build. Harry Voyager
  14. Is the issue that you can't run Windows 10 on your current machine? Or that you can't get a transferable license? If you get a retail license and link it to your MS account, you should be able to transfer it to a rebuild machine at a later date. What are your current computer needs and current computer hardware? I ended up doing a rebuild earlier this month so I'm still fairly current on the trade space.
  15. I wonder if that is the differentiator here? I know my primary interest is in smaller aircraft, and I really have no personal interest in commercial airliners or heavy multi-crew aircraft, so I've been approaching this from the perspective of blasting down the Grand Canyon at 250kts+ indicated. That's a very different use case than operating a jet airliner. Thinking about the limited time I've use the Il-2 A-20, most of that was fairly heads-down in the cockpit, in which case your in a, what, 4 by 2 box monitoring gauges and clock times. Does anyone know what the relative fraction is of civilian flight simmers are who predominantly fly under pure Instrument Flight Rules? I'm thinking if your primary operating procedures involve taking notes, changing frequency, and tracking the center cluster, VR isn't going to do much for you that you wouldn't get from an external gauge cluster and a switch box. The big game changer is when you are trying to do that by looking at the ground and judge if you've got enough clearance to do the thing you're thinking about doing, or trying to see around the nose, or something that's hiding behind a canopy line, or anything involved in guessing distance and contact vector.
×
×
  • Create New...