1.5.1.46722.87 Model Visibility removal

[JawsMa]

"Basic Example of a LOD system for a typical object

LOD0 is a normal size high poly geometry for 0m-30m

LOD1 is a normal size low poly geometry for 30m-3000m

LOD2 is a box geometry 50% larger than normal for 3000m-10000m

LOD3 is a box geometry 100% larger than normal for 10000m-50000m"

 

This is mainly how "another" sim is using lods to compensate.

 

Distances is set to produce visibility of an f16 high aspect, same altitude at aprox 4 nm WITHOUT binos. That has proven to be enough for me.

 

They use lods that has an airplaneshape, with less and less polygons, with unchanged scale. Ontop of that there is a scale up at certain distances that use x-times the normal. I have flown Falcon alot and have never seen any problem exept ofc that you can force a lod to load with ZOOM. I personally do not use binoculars when I fly the F16 and at those moments when visibility of an aircraft is life or death, I strongly believe that would be counterproductive. :

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2j-yE2pUUZI[/ame]

 

I dont care about what technic is used or if someone likes and wants to use binos when they fly. If zoom is important for alot of peps. Fine. Its not the most realistic way of compensation imo but I dont care if it stays. What is tested in 1.5.1 is definitly on the right track though insanely overdone on the scale-up. Its a test and will shurely be corrected. All I would like to have is enough visibility in wvr as in rl. To get visibility as in rl, sims needs to compensate enough in some way. That was NOT the case in 1.2. I am now for the first time enjoying fastmovers and bfm/acm in DCS.

 

Have a nice day!

Edited November 24, 2015 by JawsMa

[zaelu]

I entered online on a WW2 dogfight server with the setting on maximum... by accident... and I had a revelation!

 

Seriously. This is how a space simulator might look. The fighters were huge and because they were bigger than the distance they would travel in few seconds they appeared to move in slow motion but the quicker events (like shooting and explosions... debris) were happening a bit faster.

 

For a second I thought I am in something like Star Citizen (I don't have the game, I just imagine how it might be) and I see distant space ships fighting beyond the solar system boundaries.

 

Awesome.... but the feature needs working. Especially a way to enforce it by server in one of the levels including off and a better correlation with resolution and AA AF levels... if possible.

[vicx]

Bottom line: in DCS 1.2 the player never perceives the LOD models looking odd or out of scale

 

Let me scoop that up for you. In future whenever you say "the player" just put "I".

 

Bottom line: in DCS 1.2 "I" never perceive the LOD models looking odd or out of scale

 

See how I just took your statement and made it reflect reality. Do not assume to speak for everyone when you only speak for yourself.

 

===

 

This is mainly how "another" sim is using lods to compensate.

 

Distances is set to produce visibility of an f16 high aspect, same altitude at aprox 4 nm WITHOUT binos. That has proven to be enough for me.

 

Jaws, this is also how it works in DCS 1.2.xx and DCS 1.5.xx EXCEPT

• the LOD system was might not be very well tuned for visual range aircraft spotting.
  
• the LOD system might be tuned more for the A10-C TGP than anything else.
  
• the LOD system performs randomly under different resolutions and zoom levels
  

 

An answer (and not the only possibility) would be to have a billboard system that actually works well. The billboard system gives the renderer a resolution dependent and zoom dependent layer. This would be a technical layer for the renderer that can be tuned for simulating visual spotting ranges independently of the underlying system.

Edited November 24, 2015 by vicx

[vicx]

Awesome.... but the feature needs working.

 

Yes it is ... Yes it does.

 

I feel that a highly tuned version of this BETA feature could become the default renderer in a future version of DCS. It could be tuned to offer the most accurate visual representation possible ... far exceeding what has been achieved with the old system.

 

This is part of what the upgrade to directx11 unlocks.

[SharpeXB]

Let me scoop that up for you. In future whenever you say "the player" just put "I".

In DCSW 1.2 "the player" never see tanks rendered the size of skyscrapers. That's not just my personal opinion either, it can't be since I've not installed 1.5. I'm making that statement based upon other people's screenshots. So I'm not the only one who sees that.

 

the LOD system might be tuned more for the A10-C TGP than anything else.

Could you explain what you mean by that? The LOD model has nothing to do with the TGP in the A-10 unless by that you mean that the game needs to model far away objects since many planes have the means of seeing them at great range.

Edited November 24, 2015 by SharpeXB

[vicx]

The point of my post was to show that there aleady exists a system in DCS 1.2.xx with many problems.

 

You attack features in 1.5.xx BETA for problems that I have shown are directly related to OLD PROBLEMS in the legacy engine. Fix the old problems and you may very well fix the new problems with sprites.

 

Are you against fixing old problems in the engine?

 

 

===

 

And I don't know what you think the solution is since you can't change the LOD models. They're tied into the performance of the game.

And the reason DCS draws objects 100km away is that there's radar which can detect them. The games radar "sees" the models which is a reason they can't get scaled up and why there's an imposter used.

 

:huh:

 

How do you do that Sharpe? There is almost an intelligent comment in there. The intelligent comment buried in the poop is that oversized LOD models "MIGHT" be required for non-visual aspects of the game. The rest of the statement is pure nonsense.

 

Separation of the visual system and non-visual system is a good idea. Again I see the sprite/billboard system as ED's first tentative steps in this direction. I'm assume they will take this further over the next few years.

Edited November 24, 2015 by vicx

[SharpeXB]

Distances is set to produce visibility of an f16 high aspect, same altitude at aprox 4 nm WITHOUT binos.

The trouble with the system proposed in 1.5 is that it renders an aircraft at 6 miles the same size as one at 12 miles. And the beta feedback has resulted in the effect being made so large it compromises the realism of the sim.

Right now in DCSW 1.2 another fighter would be visible at that range even at the wide FOV.

 

Also if by "binos" you mean the zoom view, that's not what the command is for. Here's an explaination. There are no binoculars simulated in DCS

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2561114&postcount=221

[vicx]

Wags explains that in his video which described the initial MV feature. DCS cannot literally scale up the models since that would affect their radar cross section.

 

Great quote because it supports all my arguments :) WAGS explains why DCS needs a sprite/billboard system going forward. ED can't "scale up the models" but they also can't "scale down the models" when they are too big. For visual purposes in the DCS 1.2.xx sometimes the LOD models are too small and sometimes they are too big. That is actually the core of the problem. We got a solution being developed to answer that ... it's in BETA at the moment.

[AMEDooley]

To all who are interested in making MV work for DCS. Stop paying attention and responding to Sharpe in this thread. He refuses to be a beta tester, can't or refuses to understand that the zoom feature is just as unrealistic as the current version of MV, and as such his opinions are non sensical. Just ignore the guy and post what you think the developers should do to fix the current version of MV so that we may get a better product. Any time spent on trying to educate Sharpe is really just a waste of time and energy as he neither wants to educate himself nor does he want to be constructive.

[blkspade]

The 1.2 system is still terribly broken. Not only in providing poor visibility where you should have it, but also where models go transparent at certain angles. For instance, try to dogfight a F-16 in 1.2 and maintain visual. You'll definitely lose him in the merge, while never breaking sight. I'm on a 27" 1440p screen. Ultimately the new system has even greater importance for WW2 aircraft where you would almost never see them without some sort of aid along with zoom.

[SharpeXB]

the zoom feature is just as unrealistic as the current version of MV

Actually it is not.

This explaination should help understand why

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2561114&postcount=221

 

And this feature is used in every flight sim game, not just DCS

 

The 1.2 system is still terribly broken. Not only in providing poor visibility where you should have it, but also where models go transparent at certain angles. For instance, try to dogfight a F-16 in 1.2 and maintain visual. You'll definitely lose him in the merge, while never breaking sight. I'm on a 27" 1440p screen. Ultimately the new system has even greater importance for WW2 aircraft where you would almost never see them without some sort of aid along with zoom.

If you're losing sight of another aircraft at such close range then the Enlarged Model setting will not help. The difficulty seeing objects has more to do with contrast, not size. At that range they're probably above the size of the sprite.

Edited November 24, 2015 by SharpeXB

[vicx]

To all who are interested in making MV work for DCS. Stop paying attention and responding to Sharpe in this thread. He refuses to be a beta tester ... Any time spent on trying to educate Sharpe is really just a waste of time and energy as he neither wants to educate himself nor does he want to be constructive.

 

AMEDooley. I can't disagree. I'll adopt this approach just for this thread and this subject. He just isn't participating in good faith.

[Ultra]

Isn't the end goal to be able to have our screens as close to natural FOV as is enjoyable but still be able to see far away objects even in this 'zoomed out' state?

 

Wouldn't the best case scenario be the lack of need for traditional zoom? With maybe just the inclusion of a true binoculars ability. Such as your pilot actually taking out a pair.

 

I personally don't use zoom. I find it distracting.

Edited November 24, 2015 by Ultra

[SharpeXB]

Isn't the end goal to be able to have our screens as close to natural FOV as is enjoyable but still be able to see far away objects even in this 'zoomed out' state?

That's not possible without rendering objects out of scale. And since the view you see on a desktop sized monitor is already smaller than reality you will always need to zoom to see everything 1:1 scale.

 

Look at this explaination again.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2561114&postcount=221

 

If you aren't willing to use the zoom command in these sims you will have an extremely difficult time. Even with the MV setting.

Edited November 24, 2015 by SharpeXB

[AMEDooley]

Isn't the end goal to be able to have our screens as close to natural FOV as is enjoyable but still be able to see far away objects even in this 'zoomed out' state?

 

Wouldn't the best case scenario be the lack of need for traditional zoom? With maybe just the inclusion of a true binoculars ability. Such as your pilot actually taking out a pair.

 

I personally don't use zoom. I find it distracting.

 

That's exactly what this feature is trying to do. I'm with you I hate zooming. This feature could very well bridge the gap from computer to a more life like experience.

 

My opinion is that zooming isn't how it's done in real life. I mentioned that I don't know any pilots that took binoculars with them on any sortie. Now I've only worked on fighters, so maybe A-10 pilots do use binoculars. But this isn't just an A-10 simulation. I think zooming is just as much a "game aid" as this is. Meaning the devs are just trying to compensate for this being a computer. Now with the way it's implemented right now it's too much. The ground objects are far to big and stick out very weirdly. It's too obvious. And that is on the smallest setting. So I'd hate to see what the largest setting would be lol. In my opinion I think there next tweak should be spitting the difference between the first settings and this current version.

[Ultra]

That's not possible without rendering objects out of scale. And since the view you see on a desktop sized monitor is already smaller than reality you will always need to zoom to see everything 1:1 scale.

 

Look at this explaination again.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2561114&postcount=221

 

If you aren't willing to use the zoom command in these sims you will have an extremely difficult time. Even with the MV setting.

 

Yes, I understand the concept (even before you posted it 4 times ;))

I'm in favor of scaling vs zooming.

 

That's exactly what this feature is trying to do. I'm with you I hate zooming. This feature could very well bridge the gap from computer to a more life like experience.

 

My opinion is that zooming isn't how it's done in real life. I mentioned that I don't know any pilots that took binoculars with them on any sortie. Now I've only worked on fighters, so maybe A-10 pilots do use binoculars. But this isn't just an A-10 simulation. I think zooming is just as much a "game aid" as this is. Meaning the devs are just trying to compensate for this being a computer. Now with the way it's implemented right now it's too much. The ground objects are far to big and stick out very weirdly. It's too obvious. And that is on the smallest setting. So I'd hate to see what the largest setting would be lol. In my opinion I think there next tweak should be spitting the difference between the first settings and this current version.

 

I agree.

[SharpeXB]

Yes, I understand the concept (even before you posted it 4 times ;))

I'm in favor of scaling vs zooming.

Well right now DCS 1.5 has this scaling feature which does exactly what you're asking for. But to alleviate the need for the zoom view it is set at such a large range of sizes that it compromises realism. Therefore it's necessary to make it a "Gameplay Aid". In its current state it can't be used on "full real" servers.

Edited November 24, 2015 by SharpeXB

[Ultra]

Well right now DCS 1.5 has this scaling feature which does exactly what you're asking for. But to alleviate the need for the zoom view it is set at such a large range of sizes that it compromises realism. Therefore it's necessary to make it a "Gameplay Aid". In its current state it can't be used on "full real" servers.

 

No this scaling is rediculous. If it's toned down a lot, it could work well and be realistic.

[SharpeXB]

My opinion is that zooming isn't how it's done in real life. I mentioned that I don't know any pilots that took binoculars with them on any sortie. Now I've only worked on fighters, so maybe A-10 pilots do use binoculars. But this isn't just an A-10 simulation.

A-10 pilots do in fact carry boniculars but that's not simulated in DCS

Those would magnify objects even larger than the zoom view. The zoom view only makes things a little bit larger than life sized. Binocs are many times more powerful than that. You sound as if you've never used binoculars.

[vicx]

Wouldn't the best case scenario be the lack of need for traditional zoom? With maybe just the inclusion of a true binoculars ability. Such as your pilot actually taking out a pair.

 

I'm not totally against a zoom feature but I don't think there should be 15 levels of zoom which is what we have now. It is too many levels and the maximum zoom is too strong.

 

I think two levels of zoom would be enough. A default view which would be a wide view for "tracking" and then a narrow view could be an "identify" view.

 

The rendering engine could use directx11 rendering tech to provide the most realistic representation of the object based on the resolution of your monitor, the range to the object, and the view you are currently in.

 

I wouldn't totally get rid of the old way. If it was possible, I would keep it in DCS as a "retro" gameplay feature.

[Ultra]

I'm not totally against a zoom feature but I don't think there should be 15 levels of zoom which is what we have now. It is too many levels and the maximum zoom is too strong.

 

I think two levels of zoom would be enough. A default view which would be a wide view for "tracking" and then a narrow view could be an "identify" view.

 

The rendering engine could use directx11 rendering tech to provide the most realistic representation of the object based on the resolution of your monitor, the range to the object, and the view you are currently in.

 

I wouldn't totally get rid of the old way. If it was possible, I would keep it in DCS as a "retro" gameplay feature.

 

I wouldn't be opposed to that.

[SharpeXB]

I'm not totally against a zoom feature but I don't think there should be 15 levels of zoom which is what we have now. It is too many levels and the maximum zoom is too strong.

 

I think two levels of zoom would be enough. A default view which would be a wide view for "tracking" and then a narrow view could be an "identify" view.

 

The rendering engine could use directx11 rendering tech to provide the most realistic representation of the object based on the resolution of your monitor, the range to the object, and the view you are currently in.

 

I wouldn't totally get rid of the old way. If it was possible, I would keep it in DCS as a "retro" gameplay feature.

The game can't regulate the zoom based upon your monitor because the game doesn't know what size your screen is. Or how far away you're sitting. It only knows the resolution. And the zoom feature is self regulating in any case since you're balancing the advantage of detail with the disadvantage of a narrow view.

 

Some people prefer a snap in and out view, personally I think a smooth transition is better since it's easier to track that way. It's easy to lose targets snapping in and out.

 

This "retro" feature will always be necessary as long as people play on monitors.

Edited November 24, 2015 by SharpeXB

[xXNightEagleXx]

The game can't regulate the zoom based upon your monitor because the game doesn't know what size your screen is. Or how far away you're sitting. It only knows the resolution. And the zoom feature is self regulating in any case since you're balancing the advantage of detail with the disadvantage of a narrow view.

 

Some people prefer a snap in and out view, personally I think a smooth transition is better since it's easier to track that way. It's easy to lose targets snapping in and out.

 

This "retro" feature will always be necessary as long as people play on monitors.

 

Another pearl of knowledge from SharpeXB based on his beliefs on nothing, there is indeed a way to know the screen size via software, a very stupid way that works perfectly......

Just because ED doesn't use it, doesn't mean that it can't be done.... Why keep talking about things that you just don't have any clue? Moreover using it as facts to support your vision? :doh:

Edited November 25, 2015 by xXNightEagleXx

[vicx]

there is indeed a way to know the screen size via software

Just off the top of my head I was guessing EDID information ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_Display_Identification_Data

Bytes 21 and 22

 

But whatever I don't think it is neccssary to know the physical screen size. That is a red herring just the resolution would suffice for rendering purposes.

Edited November 25, 2015 by vicx

[theGozr]

For VR everything has to be reset and tuned.. no zoom will be necessary and banned on VR .. all at 1:1 ratio All aircraft will have to be re-adjusted " like the MiG21 and others that make your eyes glued to your seat.. Drive me nuts.