Spotting Distance... again

Yeah, but it's not 3D, it's a 2D representation on a monitor. And then you also would need to set the FOV to true 1:1 scale, if you would want to compare with/translate from 3D.

Edited March 17, 2019 by dawgie79

The solution is to scale based on resolution so contacts are rendered at the same relative size regardless of resolution.

No because then you’re encouraging players to lower their monitor resolution in order to make targets bigger.

 

Yeah, but it's not 3D, it's a 2D representation on a monitor. And then you also would need to set the FOV to true 1:1 scale, if you would want to compare with/translate from 3D.

That’s why there is a zoom view command in the game so you can vary your FOV

All flight sims have this feature for this same reason.

Edited March 17, 2019 by SharpeXB

No because then you’re encouraging players to lower their monitor resolution in order to make targets bigger.

 

 

That’s why there is a zoom view command in the game so you can vary your FOV

All flight sims have this feature for this same reason.

Yes of course, but that narrows your sight, sort of like a monocular effect if you will, so, still the same problem, hard to spot (moving) targets. Unless you fly on a beamer with a 120" projection on 16K or something (didn't calculate how big you actually would need for life size FOV).

Edited March 17, 2019 by dawgie79

No because then you’re encouraging players to lower their monitor resolution in order to make targets bigger.

 

 

That’s why there is a zoom view command in the game so you can vary your FOV

All flight sims have this feature for this same reason.

 

 

 

How does scaling so the size is the same regardless of resolution encourage players to run lower res? Resolution is irrelevant if the size is the same at every res.

 

You do realize players are already lowering res just to see anything at all today (or running VR which is a lower effective res than most monitors for the same end result).

 

For example I am running 1600x900 on a 32” 2k monitor with no AA, not because I want to, but because contacts are all but invisible at my native res.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is not real life. This is a simulator. A game. In real life, pilots usually have a perfect vision and don't see all the world around in a screen with limited resolution, framerate and refresh rate. They also have preriferic vision, something that a screen doesn't allow. ED shouldn't try to copy the reality, since it's imposible. ED should try to do a simulation that FEELS real. And that ilusion of reality usually requires unrealistic "tricks" or "cheats", as the colums of the Partenon that look stright because they are slighty bended. DCS should make you feel like a real pilot even if you wear glases and you don't have a huge 4K screen. If that means unrealistic "tricks" or even "cheats" like the planes looking bigger than actually are in the distance to make them easier to spot, or something like that, it's OK for me.

 

You sir, have hit the nail squarely on the head.

 

There are two potential issues when simulating spotting. The first is not being able to spot when you should, if you looked at the correct area for a target but couldn't see it. The second is being able to see targets in the sim that would be impossible to see in real life.

 

So, if it HAS to be one or the other, which problem is worse?

 

I fly for a living and while I had 20-10 eyesight for much of my youth, it's not that good anymore. I can still spot a large fighter at up to 10 miles. For example, not that long ago I spotted two F-15s on an intercept at 9 miles beam aspect to me. They were easy to spot because they were descending to engage a target so there was a lot of relative movement. From this distance I could even recognize the type as soon as they rolled into a steep bank. If ATC hadn't given me a vector I probably would have never scanned my 3 o'clock so closely and spotted them.

 

20-20 vision is way below average for fighter pilots. I remember seeing an interview of an Israeli ace who explained part of his success in being able to spot enemy fighters at up to 25 miles, when most of his fellow pilots would't see the same aircraft until 10 miles. He probably had 20-6 or better vision.

 

I personally think the problem of not being able to see stuff that should be obvious to a fighter pilot's eyes that are in fact looking in the correct direction - remains a huge issue in DCS. It's clearly a problem to many here, and trying to explain it away as "spotting is difficult" doesn't do it justice.

 

Sim pilots face enough difficulties with the man to machine interface, like trying to hold a mouse cursor over a knob and spin it while flying the airfraft with a stick that feels nothing like the real thing and usually offers no feedback. It's generally easier in a real cockpit, minus the weather, physical demands, and other risks. Flying sims well is enough of a challenge with controls that

can never approximate the feel of the real thing. Given these challenges, it's a little unfair to make spotting so much harder than it is in RL. it would be better to make sure "simmers" see everything a virtual Chuck Yeager would have seen than to make it impossible for a large segment of our base to struggle so much. "Tricks or cheats" really are the lesser of two evils. So, if Jester says, MiG-21 2 o'oclock high and you look in the right section of sky, it SHOULD BE somewhat easy to spot it when you look in that area.

 

In RL, aircraft to be spotted are IN FACT VISIBLE whenever the atmosphere and weather do not obstruct them. The question is individual, are your eyes good enough to acquire it? Nineline is right in saying that spotting aircraft is hard in RL. It isn't impossible though, I know what my 20-20 vision in real life can spot. How does DCS compare? I'd say in RL I can spot stuff at four times the distance I can in DCS, so flying DCS makes me feel like I have 20-80 or 20-100 vision. Not the feeling I want.

 

The thing that sparked this thread was the F-14 air to air training. I did these missions on my somewhat high end system with RIFT. I had jester start a STT on a MiG23 and visually acquired the MiG in the HUD diamond at something like 8 or 9 miles. After closing passed something like six miles, the MiG vanished (without changing aspect) from inside the diamond, only to reappear around two miles. This is silly and completely diminished the experience. The F-5s were almost impossible to spot, despite Jester telling me they were dead ahead. Any trick or cheat would be vastly superior to this. I love the RIFT, but man, it's hard to see another fighter taking taxiing onto the runway from the same airport at less than half a mile away......

 

I think our DCS programmers are talented enough to come up with a solution that makes everyone happy. It just needs to be made a high priority.

Edited March 17, 2019 by Cake

That’s why there is a zoom view command in the game so you can vary your FOV

All flight sims have this feature for this same reason.

Varying the FOV doesn't always help find planes effectively. It can help, that's undeniable but I can tell you that on a 1440p screen and without labels I have to go to max FOV far too often to try to find planes that I believe should be more visible given the situation (lighting, etc) at the time. And once I go max FOV the portion of sky I'm looking at is very small so if I'm slightly off with my guess on where the target is then I'm in trouble... So the use of max FOV has major flaws in itself.

 

On a side note, there have been some brave assumptions in other posts that people aren't using FOV correctly in their spotting. I suspect the use of appropriate zoom is actually alive and well.

As an amusing and somewhat ironic aside, it struck me as odd that there's been so much comment from F-14 pilots on spotting planes since module release. Well now we know might why:

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3843492#post3843492

 

Pilots that would have relied on labels - even if just DOT labels - are finding it hard or impossible to spot targets without them. It's not unexpected that pilots who rely on labels would be unpracticed in spotting planes without labels, but the sheer volume of comments on other forums back up the point about the balance being off that I've been making since the beginning.

Well summed up cake

No because then you’re encouraging players to lower their monitor resolution in order to make targets bigger.

 

What?! No, that's the exact opposite of making targets appear the same size on all resolutions would do. Why — or better yet how — would you lower your resolution to increase the target size if target size was the same irrespective of resolution?

 

You understand that monitors know what resolution they're running at, right, and you can figure out the DPI with pretty much a single API call.

 

What you're describing is what's already happening because of how distance rendering works, and we're trying to get away from that being a viable and paradoxically sensible solution.

 

That’s why there is a zoom view command in the game so you can vary your FOV

…except that varying the FoV should not make any difference in terms of how large units are in relation to the resolution. They should still remain (as near as possible) exactly the same irrespective of resolution. If one person must zoom in further to make a unit appear a size that another player would get at a lower zoom level, then both the unit sizing and the zoom is fundamentally broken. Edited March 17, 2019 by Tippis

Hate to put it this way but if you all can’t figure out how to play a 3D game on a 2D screen then perhaps flight sims aren’t for you. .

 

This is not an argument, this is an insult. If you don't have a proper argument to make then maybe refrain from posting.

No it’s really simple. A truck is 25’ long in the 3D world so it stays 25’ long no matter how far away you are from it.

Einstein would like to have a word with you…

 

But again, the physical size is not the only definition of size, and definitely not the one that actually matters when you want to simulate perception. Size is not fixed — not even physical size — and to make it look realistic you actually have to do some things that seem counterintuitive because that is simply the nature of perception.

 

You can refuse to accept it as much as you like, but the fact remains that there are entire fields of study (yes, in plural) that categorically prove you wrong on this. Almost all of them are relevant to make it look right. “Look” is the operative word here, which means that physical size must take a second or even third seat, because it's far less relevant than you'd think.

 

If everything else shrinks in perspective except the truck, eventually the truck is rendered the size of a battleship.

…which, as mentioned, you won't see because that's not what a proper implementation of scaling does (nor would you be able to see a truck at that distance to begin with).

 

 

Again: just because DCS at some point used a bad solution does not mean you must forever be stuck without any solution at all, or that you can't use a good solution instead. You're arguing against a reimplementation of something that didn't work, which is an argument no-one is even making to begin with.

Edited March 17, 2019 by Tippis

What?! No, that's the exact opposite of making targets appear the same size on all resolutions would do. Why — or better yet how — would you lower your resolution to increase the target size if target size was the same irrespective of resolution?

 

You understand that monitors know what resolution they're running at, right, and you can figure out the DPI with pretty much a single API call.

 

What you're describing is what's already happening because of how distance rendering works, and we're trying to get away from that being a viable and paradoxically sensible solution.

 

…except that varying the FoV should not make any difference in terms of how large units are in relation to the resolution. They should still remain (as near as possible) exactly the same irrespective of resolution. If one person must zoom in further to make a unit appear a size that another player would get at a lower zoom level, then both the unit sizing and the zoom is fundamentally broken.

 

Very well said. However you won't convince people who believe there are absolutely no problems with spotting.

 

There is no point in debating with someone who won't even acknowledge the subject of the debate. You won't change their minds if they believe themselves to be right, and you to have no case.

 

In my opinion I find spotting to be OKAY at extreme WVR. So within 5-10nm it works okay. But i have a large 1080p monitor, which gives me a pretty big advantage in those conditions. However where spotting really breaks down is in ACM ranges. So really close ranges, between 1-2nm, I have lost countless targets due to them blending into the ground or water, or even sky inexplicably. At these ranges this should not be happening.

 

I think giving units a more defined contrast, and better light reflectivness at those ranges would absolutely make the biggest difference but Im not sure if that is even possible to implement in DCS.

Edited March 17, 2019 by OnlyforDCS

How does scaling so the size is the same regardless of resolution encourage players to run lower res? Resolution is irrelevant if the size is the same at every res

Because the sprite is set to appear as a certain number of pixels, that’s how the size on the monitor is determined. The game doesn’t know what your monitor specs are, only what you enter as the resolution. It would depend on what kind of sprite or imposter is used

The same apparent size multi-pixel sprite (like the previous Model Enlargement) on two different monitors would be:

1080p = 3 pixels

2160p = 12 pixels

So by entering a higher resolution, regardless of your actual display, in this case you could cheat the setting to get a 4x sized sprite. And the problem with giving any “size” at all to distant targets is that even 3 pixels is gigantic for something far away. This method was already tried and abandoned in DCS

If the sprites are single pixels, it would be the reverse. You’d tell DCS you have a 1080 x 1920 resolution on an actual 4K and you’ll get a 4 pixel sized sprite. You’re not gaining any advantage by that but you’re being forced to wreck the appearance of the game to do this.

 

You do realize players are already lowering res just to see anything at all today (or running VR which is a lower effective res than most monitors for the same end result).

res

That’s one of the user error problem which actually makes this worse. Lowering resolution does not help you “see anything at all”. Assuming DCS uses this single pixel dot for distant contacts, yeah that would appear larger. But you’re sacrificing everything else with regard to visibity. Higher resolution is better for targets that are larger than a single dot, that should be obvious. Also upscaling tends to muddy all the color contrast and depth which is an important quality in seeing other objects.

 

For example I am running 1600x900 on a 32” 2k monitor with no AA, not because I want to, but because contacts are all but invisible at my native res.

Again in my experience this is a mistake as well. When you say “all but invisible” are you referring to realistic distance or the ability to see fighters 50km away?

First the game just looks awful. Next, without anti aliasing you can lose entire pieces of distant aircraft, wings especially if they end up near a single pixel in size and the screen just aliases them invisible. Whole aircraft or pieces of them can just flicker in and out of view. The profile of another aircraft will be an indiscernible jagged blob instead of a clear shape.

You need AA to smooth the transitions between colors so these small bits will actually appear. Setting AA as high as possible, not turning it off.

 

In my opinion I find spotting to be OKAY at extreme WVR. So within 5-10nm it works okay.

And that’s the max range you should be able to see other aircraft at. My opinion is that this is ok as well.

 

I think giving units a more defined contrast, and better light reflectivness at those ranges would absolutely make the biggest difference but Im not sure if that is even possible to implement in DCS.

 

I don’t see why this is not possible for DCS. Nineline just mentioned this is the type of thing they are working on

We are looking at other visual cues, such as reflections, better draw distances on certain effects, ect.

Edited March 17, 2019 by SharpeXB

Because the sprite is set to appear as a certain number of pixels, that’s how the size on the monitor is determined. The game doesn’t know what your monitor specs are, only what you enter as the resolution.

If it doesn't know it's because it hasn't asked. It's a standard function call on anything built this millennium.

 

Compensating for pixel size is trivial.

 

That’s one of the user error problem which actually makes this worse. Lowering resolution does not help you “see anything at all”.

It does. That's kind of the problem. Lower resolutions means distant objects show up more clearly than they would at higher resolutions. Likewise, less smoothing make them (unsurprisingly) show up more distinctly than with fancy graphics filters applied. There's also a lot of evidence to suggest that lower resolutions makes EO sensors (and possibly even radars) pick up and lock targets at longer ranges.

 

Aesthetics will always take a back-seat to functionality, especially in a competitive environment, so losing out an insignificant bit of wing is a more than worth-while trade-off for having the aircraft as a whole be aliased in with the background. That's another part of the whole backwards:ism of how better hardware yields worse visibility.

Can the dot label option be made to flicker from white to black to add a bit more ease in use?

If it doesn't know it's because it hasn't asked. It's a standard function call on anything built this millennium.

Having the game lock it’s resolution to your hardware and not be adjustable? Maybe it’s possible but I’ve never seen any game where you didn’t select the resolution manually. Really you shouldn’t want to run anything but your native resolution. But can you imagine the screaming from players if they weren’t allowed to adjust this?

 

Lower resolutions means distant objects show up more clearly than they would at higher resolutions.

No it doesn’t. Maybe in your opinion but it really doesn’t. If you personally like this that’s fine but it makes the game look like garbage. I wouldn’t recommend this to anyone. Stuff like lowering your resolution and then complaining about spotting is where much of the “problem” comes from.

Players creating their own problems is something ED can’t fix.

Players creating their own problems is something ED can’t fix.

 

Whaaa??? Nooooo! It couldn't be self inflicted, it must be something something render engine something other games do it =)

First, its not as easy it might seem, even solutions in games made 20 years ago aren't necessarily going to work right now. 20 years ago, the type of hardware out there and the difference from one person to the next was a lot less. The person playing with a 4k resolution playing on a 24 inch monitor vs the same resolution on a 42 inch isn't seeing the same thing.

 

So one solution for User A might not be right for user B, and now you will say, make it optional, but there are many many more users than A & B, and there are many more variables, VR, monitor size, graphics cards, personal vision ability.

 

And let's also remember that spotting shouldn't be easy, in the sense that you should be able to pick up a fighter 5 miles under any condition. It's just not true. You can cherry pick a scenario where you can spot a place farther than that, but there are also scenarios where you could lose sight of an aircraft in combat when you are within 1 mile of them. Spotting is a trained skill, as well, don't mistake spotting for identifying because that is a whole other thing.

 

Things like contrails and other such indicators can be improved as well, but the balance has to be performance. Its why things like Vulcan are being investigated, to give more overhead to allow more information to be passed, because even beyond the eye-candy, DCS is moving a lot of code at any given time, more so than anything you want to compare it to, but that is why we love DCS, because of all that stuff it gives us beyond anything we played before. We are looking at other visual cues, such as reflections, better draw distances on certain effects, ect. But again... there is such little wiggle room from making a sim playable to turning it into a slide show short of the newest hardware on the market.

 

LODs are important and need to be consistent, that can use some work in some cases. The label system has seen some work, and could still be better, but if you haven't tried the labels just using the dots, then you really need to. ED is working at improving visuals at distances but within the constraints of simulating real life and taking into account all variables.

 

Final word, stop fighting with each other, this thread highlights what I have said, there are many different people with different setups and abilities here, and finding solutions to cover all of that, again isn't as easy as it might seem. What seems like the right answer to you doesn't mean it is the right answer to the next guy, that doesn't mean either of you is wrong.

 

Thanks, Nineline! :thumbup:

No it doesn’t. Maybe in your opinion but it really doesn’t.

 

We obviously don't play the same game. The vast majority of the players can witness this behavior and it has been aknowledged by ED in a previous video (I wish I had time to find the source, I'll try later), but sure you hold the one and only thruth.

 

Oh, just one more thing. People are still waiting for your sreenshots backing your claim on the 4K topic in the Bugs and Problems section. Or at least share your secret to spot aicrafts at 15nm on a 4K monitor.

Having the game lock it’s resolution to your hardware and not be adjustable?

No. Asking for the actual physical pixel size given the current resolution and include that in the normalisation of the size drawn on screen.

 

No it doesn’t. Maybe in your opinion but it really doesn’t.

Yes it does. This is not an opinion — it's quite simply how the game works. It is trivial to test and observe and you should do it yourself if you don't want to look at what others have presented to you. The reason you wouldn't recommend it is because you are not aware of the simple fact that it absolutely works like that. You should then re-evaluate your condescending tone towards people who have actually tried and tested the things you refuse to accept.

 

Stuff like lowering your resolution and then complaining about spotting is where much of the “problem” comes from.

That's pretty much the exact opposite of what's happening. Lowering your resolution makes it easier to spot units at longer distances. It also makes sensors pick up targets more easily. People complain because this is not how things should work. Wilfully ignoring the problem does not make it a non-problem, nor does it change how the game actually renders things on-screen.

 

Even ED knows it's a problem, so you can insist on trying to blame players as much as you like, but that just becomes downright insulting after a while. It is something they can are are (supposedly) trying to fix.

Edited March 17, 2019 by Tippis

Oh, just one more thing. People are still waiting for your sreenshots backing your claim on the 4K topic in the Bugs and Problems section. Or at least share your secret to spot aicrafts at 15nm on a 4K monitor.

Screenshots here

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3844651&postcount=11

Edited March 17, 2019 by SharpeXB

Lowering your resolution makes it easier to spot units at longer distances.

What type of units? What about ground targets?

It doesn’t matter because if I had to look at an image like that I’d just quit playing cause it looks like crap. Suit yourself.

What type of units? What about ground targets?

It doesn’t matter because if I had to look at an image like that I’d just quit playing cause it looks like crap. Suit yourself.

 

With many 3D silulations we are stuck with choosing between quality and performance. The old sacrifice of frame rate for eye candy.

 

I think since LOMAC, the strategy is that eye candy sells and other things play second fiddle. In this case, a key ingredient of combat success, namely situational awareness, is lost in the translation because what should be visually observed often isn’t.

 

There are so many things right with DCS. The flight models, the systems, the feel. The visual representation of other aircraft at anything but very close range may be DCS’s weakest point.

What type of units?

All of them.

 

 

It doesn’t matter because if I had to look at an image like that I’d just quit playing cause it looks like crap. Suit yourself.

 

It matters because your aesthetic preferences are not particularly relevant to game balance or realistic simulation of perception.

...

 

If you think 5-10 miles is the maximum distance to see aircraft IRL, then i can't take you seriously. DCS is completely playable at low resolution, the only problem there is that you are not capable of it yourself, it doesn't really affect the playability at all (other than not looking as nice). You don't even have to go to less than 1080 to see a difference when comparing to 4k.

 

You've posted the same stuff for roughly 13 pages now, with pretty much nothing backing you up while others come with legit counterpoints and show the problems that are referenced to.

 

I'd like you to show me how your UHD screen shows aircraft better than some lower resolution monitor. Because i don't see how you can believe this unless you've not actually tried it. If anything better hardware has absolutely minimal impact on spotting in this case, and probably in favor of lower resolution.