1.5.1.46722.87 Model Visibility removal

[Custard]

Just some more evidence of the problem, since I think there obviously is one.

 

Model Enlargement Setting: Small !!

 

Resolution: 1920x1080

 

Pic1: confirmed distance of 65km away, those blurry dots are vehicles. They are slightly easier to see in-game than in the pictures.

 

Pic2: confirmed distance of 36km away.

Wow, those seem sensible compared to mine. My ground units look like Ace Combat superweapons from 60km away on 2560x1080.

[Ultra]

Wow, those seem sensible compared to mine. My ground units look like Ace Combat superweapons from 60km away on 2560x1080.

 

I'm so sorry, that sounds aweful. :D

[SharpeXB]

On the contrary, DCS is very much in the minority when it comes to distant spotting. Until 1.5, it was pretty much the only combat flight sim out there without some kind of system to aid in spotting targets at a distance.

I'm sure other flight sims have methods to finesse their graphics for this purpose. But none are as obtrusive as what's being tested now in DCS. As I was pointing out above, it's possible to spot targets in DCS farther away than it is in IL2-BoS. The issue with DCS 1.2 has to do with colors and contrast, not size. Under conditions with good contrast it's possible to see targets very far away, as far as a real pilot would be able to.

[xXNightEagleXx]

Under conditions with good contrast it's possible to see targets very far away, as far as a real pilot would be able to.

 

Please explain me how a monitor at 1080p, even 4k, can offer the same visibility as in real life, because that's what you wrote. Who cares if even professional simulators make use of scaling techniques that come from researches, they all must have done all wrong until today.

[majapahit]

my

MODEL ENLARGEMENTS

box is empty / just a white rectangle

 

just upgraded via dcs_upgrade

 

It's in the options.lua?

anyone care to post their options.lua for me

know a fix?

 

?

[xXNightEagleXx]

my

MODEL ENLARGEMENTS

box is empty / just a white rectangle

 

just upgraded via dcs_upgrade

 

It's in the options.lua?

anyone care to post their options.lua for me

know a fix?

 

?

 

options = {

["difficulty"] = {

["birds"] = 0,

["cockpitVisualRM"] = false,

["easyCommunication"] = false,

["easyFlight"] = false,

["easyRadar"] = false,

["externalViews"] = true,

["fuel"] = false,

["geffect"] = "realistic",

["iconsTheme"] = "nato",

["immortal"] = false,

["impostors"] = "medium",

["labels"] = false,

["map"] = true,

["miniHUD"] = false,

["optionsView"] = "optview_all",

["padlock"] = false,

["permitCrash"] = false,

["radio"] = false,

["reports"] = true,

["setGlobal"] = true,

["tips"] = true,

["units"] = "imperial",

["userSnapView"] = true,

["weapons"] = false,

},

["graphics"] = {

["DOF"] = 0,

["HDR"] = 1,

["LensEffects"] = 3,

["MSAA"] = 3,

["OculusRift"] = false,

["TranspSSAA"] = false,

["anisotropy"] = 4,

["aspect"] = 1.7777777777778,

["civTraffic"] = "",

["clouds"] = 2,

["clutterMaxDistance"] = 1500,

["disableAero"] = false,

["effects"] = 3,

["flatTerrainShadows"] = 1,

["fullScreen"] = true,

["heatBlr"] = 2,

["height"] = 1080,

["lights"] = 2,

["multiMonitorSetup"] = "1camera",

["preloadRadius"] = 150000,

["shadowTree"] = false,

["shadows"] = 5,

["sync"] = true,

["terrainTextures"] = "max",

["textures"] = 2,

["treesVisibility"] = 25000,

["visibRange"] = "Ultra",

["water"] = 2,

["width"] = 1920,

},

["miscellaneous"] = {

["Coordinate_Display"] = "Lat Long",

["F2_view_effects"] = 1,

["accidental_failures"] = false,

["f10_awacs"] = true,

["f11_free_camera"] = true,

["f5_nearest_ac"] = true,

["force_feedback_enabled"] = false,

["headmove"] = false,

["show_pilot_body"] = false,

["synchronize_controls"] = true,

},

["plugins"] = {

["A-10C"] = {

["CPLocalList"] = "default",

},

["CA"] = {

["ground_aim_helper"] = true,

["ground_automatic"] = true,

["ground_platform_shake"] = false,

["ground_target_info"] = true,

["kompass_options"] = 1,

},

["F-86F"] = {

["CPLocalList"] = "default",

["gunCamera"] = 0,

["landSeatAdjustF86"] = true,

},

["FC3"] = {

["CPLocalList_A-10A"] = "default",

["CPLocalList_F-15C"] = "default",

["CPLocalList_MiG-29A"] = "default",

["CPLocalList_MiG-29G"] = "default",

["CPLocalList_MiG-29S"] = "default",

["CPLocalList_Su-25"] = "default",

["CPLocalList_Su-27"] = "default",

["CPLocalList_Su-33"] = "default",

},

["Ka-50"] = {

["CPLocalList"] = "english",

["Ka50RudderTrimmer"] = false,

["altTrimmingMethod"] = false,

},

["Mi-8MTV2"] = {

["CPLocalList"] = "default",

["Mi8AutopilotAdjustment"] = false,

["Mi8FOV"] = 120,

["Mi8RudderTrimmer"] = false,

["altMi8TrimmingMethod"] = true,

["controlHelperMi8"] = false,

["weapTooltipsMi8"] = true,

},

["MiG-21Bis"] = {

["CustomCockpit"] = true,

["Engine"] = false,

["Freeze"] = false,

["Reticle"] = false,

["Shake"] = 100,

},

["Su-25T"] = {

["CPLocalList"] = "default",

},

["TF-51D"] = {

["CPLocalList"] = "default",

["assistance"] = 100,

["autoRudder"] = false,

},

["UH-1H"] = {

["UHRudderTrimmer"] = false,

["UHTrackIRAiming"] = true,

["altUHTrimmingMethod"] = true,

["autoPilot"] = true,

["weapTooltips"] = true,

},

},

["sound"] = {

["GBreathEffect"] = true,

["cockpit"] = 0,

["gui"] = 0,

["headphones"] = 0,

["music"] = -100,

["radioSpeech"] = true,

["subtitles"] = true,

["volume"] = 0,

["world"] = 0,

},

["views"] = {

["cockpit"] = {

["avionics"] = 1,

["mirrors"] = false,

["reflections"] = false,

["russianHud"] = false,

},

},

}

[vicx]

FYI, zooming in on a sprite does not make the sprite bigger on your screen. It's actually the opposite and makes the apparent size of the sprite smaller.

 

This clearly shows that Zooming and the Visibility feature are incompatible. You should be able to choose one or the other but not BOTH.

 

Then you can join a server that has the style you want. In almost 100% of cases the WW2 and Korean fight guys will choose the Visibility Feature over Zooming.

 

IF you don't like the Visibility Feature you get to choose Zoom and never have to see a Visibility Sprite ever again. You can also play on a server that doesn't have them.

 

This way everyone gets what they want.

[vicx]

majapahit, what video card do you have?

 

Sounds like a DX9/DX10 card trying to render a DX11 feature.

[SharpeXB]

Please explain me how a monitor at 1080p, even 4k, can offer the same visibility as in real life, because that's what you wrote. Who cares if even professional simulators make use of scaling techniques that come from researches, they all must have done all wrong until today.

There's an Su-27 at 10 miles, which is the range they appear as a black speck, either in 4K or 1080p I think that's literally 3x 4K pixels. This is the same range I could see them at 1080p, 4K doesn't increase this distance. By accounts that about as far as a good fighter pilot could hope to see another aircraft. I can't upload the .bmp since it's too large so this is a compressed .jpg again

That's a really small target and you can't hope to see something like that easily. The problem with using sprites is there's actually four of these bad guys, but I see the leader first since he's larger, with MV on they'd all look the same size. Making a bandit which is this far away easier to see is just not realistic, yes you could see this IRL but you'd really have to look hard.

 

Then you can join a server that has the style you want. In almost 100% of cases the WW2 and Korean fight guys will choose the Visibility Feature over Zooming.

No they wouldn't because even with those sprites you can't identify another aircraft without narrowing the FOV. Most WWII combat happens at a range where the sprites wouldn't even come into play.

Edited November 13, 2015 by SharpeXB

[majapahit]

majapahit, what video card do you have?

 

Sounds like a DX9/DX10 card trying to render a DX11 feature.

 

SAPPHIRE HD 7970 3GB GDDR5 11197-01-40G

 

I should reinstall dx11 maybe/you think? (how do you that?)

 

this sprite thing is a DX11 feature?

 

(EDIT: BTW the posted options.lue isnt diffeent frmo mine / so where is MODEL ENLARGEMENTS stored?)

 

wow

i found a DirectX2010 file on my drive

 

installed >> MODEL ENLARGEMENTS now shows

 

how weird is that, THX vicx

Edited November 13, 2015 by majapahit

[Decibel dB]

There are other combat flight sims which feature multiplayer and have a range of gameplay options such as icons. They are still niche games as well. But the majority of players in other sims are also able to function online without icons or enlarged models, so why does DCS need to be different? Adding more server options just divides up the player base and WWII in DCS is sparse to begin with so I don't thing splitting up that base is a good idea.

 

 

Nobody talking about Icon we want to enjoy a sim as real as it can possibly be. That include being able to see other aircraft at more then 2 miles. I rarely go online because after a long preparation the start up, taxi, takeoff and climb I hate being bounce by a barely visible plane that disappear after 2 or 3 miles on my monitor when actually I can easily spot them at 10+ and depending of the light and altitude at sometime at 20 miles at work. We all have different rig's and simulating how it is in real life is not an easy task, they are trying to improve it, I thank them for that. Because as for now I, like many others, flying blind.

 

The new model visibility implement doesn't work with crossfire so I can't say if it's good or not yet. But gent's let give them the time to tweak it is a WIP

Edited November 13, 2015 by Decibel dB

[Deano87]

Ok here are my 2 cents on this matter.

 

I fly exclusively VR, Track-IR gives me motion sickness for some reason but the Rift doesn't, and I much prefer the immersion it provides. I would agree that the current 'Large' setting is too large, especially for ground units... but overall I like model enlargement and it makes it actually playable for me online.

 

I'm worried that if this becomes a server option all the decent servers will disable it and that will make me essentially blind in multiplayer.

 

What we really need are two separate options for Model Enlargement.

 

Model Enlargement: which is the current setting for monitors only.

Model Enlargement VR: which is for VR headsets.

 

Hopefully the settings for these two could be tuned as such to not give anybody a massive advantage. And servers could disable Model Enlargement for Monitor users but allow 'small' or 'medium' for VR so we aren't completely blind.

 

Monitor users have the ability to zoom where as we don't which gives you a huge advantage, model visibility redresses that imbalance somewhat for VR users.. Either that or give VR users Zoom as well.. although I'm not sure how that would work.

[SharpeXB]

What we really need are two separate options for Model Enlargement.

 

Model Enlargement: which is the current setting for monitors only.

Model Enlargement VR: which is for VR headsets.

That's a really good idea. Perhaps Model Enlargement is available only for VR

And yes the trouble with the current settings is that it will certainly be disabled in MP as a cheat and therefore VR users will effectively be shut out of MP. And I don't think there are enough VR users to go off on their own server.

 

The problem is that if you allow any player, VR or not, easily see targets beyond 10 miles, it wrecks the modern air combat tactics and methods which are really the main focus of DCS.

Edited November 13, 2015 by SharpeXB

[Why485]

Ok here are my 2 cents on this matter.

 

I fly exclusively VR, Track-IR gives me motion sickness for some reason but the Rift doesn't, and I much prefer the immersion it provides. I would agree that the current 'Large' setting is too large, especially for ground units... but overall I like model enlargement and it makes it actually playable for me online.

 

I'm worried that if this becomes a server option all the decent servers will disable it and that will make me essentially blind in multiplayer.

 

What we really need are two separate options for Model Enlargement.

 

Model Enlargement: which is the current setting for monitors only.

Model Enlargement VR: which is for VR headsets.

 

Hopefully the settings for these two could be tuned as such to not give anybody a massive advantage. And servers could disable Model Enlargement for Monitor users but allow 'small' or 'medium' for VR so we aren't completely blind.

 

Monitor users have the ability to zoom where as we don't which gives you a huge advantage, model visibility redresses that imbalance somewhat for VR users.. Either that or give VR users Zoom as well.. although I'm not sure how that would work.

 

Honestly, I would be fine if ED were to bring back the alphaExp transparency (so you can't see ground targets 50km away), and then just remove the current large setting and make it exclusive to VR. This leaves the realistic looking small and medium settings for monitor users. However, and I know I sound like a broken record, but the resolution dependency really should be addressed so that small = small regardless of the resolution. The current small and medium settings are very realistic looking depending on your resolution.

 

It's actually possible that since VR hardware and specs are completely known, that you have a specific model visibility setting override whatever is set in options whenever you have a VR headset active.

 

That's a really good idea. Perhaps Model Enlargement is available only for VR

 

Separating them is a good idea. Removing the feature completely is absurd, and frankly your crusade on this much needed feature, one which you have not even seen or tested yourself, is ridiculous.

 

The current values for large aren't realistic. Most everybody agrees with that. I'd like to remind you that nobody was complaining about seeing dots of tanks 50km away with the first release of the feature. The current values needs tweaking and it will very likely be toned down or modified in upcoming patches to bring it more in line with reality. We've gone from one extreme to another, and in the future ED will probably settle on a middle ground between the two.

 

However, to dismiss the feature as a whole just because the current values are strange is tremendously short-sighted. It benefits nobody but yourself as "I can see just fine" appears to you a valid excuse to remove a feature that has been highly requested since the Lock On days, and pretty much every combat flight simulator out there, including industry and military ones, uses in one form or another because it is more realistic to have than not.

Edited November 13, 2015 by Why485

[dburne]

However, to dismiss the feature as a whole just because the current values are strange is tremendously short-sighted. It benefits nobody but yourself as "I can see just fine" appears to you a valid excuse to remove a feature that has been highly requested since the Lock On days, and pretty much every combat flight simulator out there, including industry and military ones, uses in one form or another because it is more realistic to have than not.

 

Agree completely.

I think some people maybe forget the fact this is in beta, being tested, and tweaked as has been evidenced by previous builds.

 

Maybe even easier to forget this if they don't actually even try the beta product... but just comment on it.

[SharpeXB]

frankly your crusade on this much needed feature, one which you have not even seen or tested yourself, is ridiculous.

Every concern I have expressed about this feature in the past is now vindicated by this screenshot

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2552967&postcount=73

 

I'm certainly not alone in the opinion that this is just looks astonishingly bad

Edited November 13, 2015 by SharpeXB

[Why485]

Every concern I have stated about this feature in the past is now confirmed in this screenshot

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2552967&postcount=73

 

I'm certainly not alone in the opinion that this is just looks astonishingly bad

 

What makes you think that this is how it's always going to look and that model visibility should be removed on this basis alone?

 

It needs tweaking of course, and I would be surprised if in a future patch it's not toned down, but do you really believe that on this basis alone, on what happens to be the current settings, the entire feature should be removed forever? Keep in mind, this did not happen previously with the original, much more conservative settings. The original settings made use of the alphaExp setting, which made distant objects transparent, and particularly in the case of ground units, it prevented exactly what you're seeing in that picture. Currently, that setting is completely disabled because I guess ED wanted to see what the other extreme looked like.

 

As I've said repeatedly, and even in the very post that you quoted, I don't think the current values are perfect. I think the system itself needs tweaking. However, I do not think that it warrants the complete removal of such an essential feature that will be improved with time, and whose end result will be more realistic than what we had before 1.5.

Edited November 13, 2015 by Why485

[dburne]

Every concern I have stated about this feature in the past is now confirmed in this screenshot

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2552967&postcount=73

 

Actually no, there is nothing confirmed in that screenshot. It is beta, and just how that particular ground model visibility appears in that particular build in that particular screen shot...

[SharpeXB]

What makes you think that this is how it's always going to look and that model visibility should be removed on this basis alone?

 

It needs tweaking of course, and I would be surprised if in a future patch it's not toned down, but do you really believe that on this basis alone, on what happens to be the current settings, the entire feature should be removed forever? Keep in mind, this did not happen previously with the original, much more conservative settings. The original settings made use of the alphaExp setting, which made distant objects transparent, and particularly in the case of ground units, it prevented exactly what you're seeing in that picture. Currently, that setting is completely disabled because I guess ED wanted to see what the other extreme looked like.

 

As I've said repeatedly, and even in the very post that you quoted, I don't think the current values are perfect. I think the system itself needs tweaking. However, I do not think that it warrants the complete removal of such an essential feature that will be improved with time, and whose end result will be more realistic than what we had before 1.5.

Something this bad shouldn't even be put out in Beta. The problem with going down this whole path is that it precludes doing something better. There are better solutions than the really simplistic scaling concept that seems like it's from some 1980's wire frame game.

[Ultra]

Every concern I have stated about this feature in the past is now confirmed in this screenshot

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2552967&postcount=73

 

As I've said repeatedly, and even in the very post that you quoted, I don't think the current values are perfect. I think the system itself needs tweaking. However, I do not think that it warrants the complete removal of such an essential feature that will be improved with time, and whose end result will be more realistic than what we had before 1.5.

 

I actually agree with both you. I think in its current for the setting is bad, period. But I liked the previous version like Why485 does. I think there needs to be some kind of imposter or scaling system to correct the current 1.2 visibility problems.

[msalama]

Guys, a hotfix is imminent it seems; check the beta changelog thread. Maybe it fixes this too? We shall see ;)

[Ultra]

I did see that. There's always hope. :D

[Why485]

I just checked the latest patch. No changes to the imposter presets or system as a whole.

[Ultra]

:(

[dburne]

I would not be too concerned at this point guys.

Obviously with this being a new feature they are testing and trying different things.