[REPORTED] Model Visibility Issues

[captain_dalan]

The problem we are facing is that commercial developers think single-player is the most important aspect and that single players will be happy having icons turned on and all enemies showing on the map. CLOD only concentrated on fixing the visibility and adding sun-glints etc. because it was written by players who wanted to fly online with no icons. DCS has always had radar and smoke trails and live maps to fall back on and are not used to prop pilots wanting to fight online using just their Mk.1 eyeballs.

 

I must disagree, i am and plan to continue on being SP flyer (unless i find a new job that will allow me more free time to join a virtual squadron, and that F-14A finally hits the shelves), but i prefer flying with no labels as well. I had them on the first 2 weeks then started turning them off as i got more and more used to the graphics and the radar modes.

I play mostly SP with icons off. They spoil the graphics and the challenge.

This!

+1

 

 

 

I might be wrong, but I think in this day and age multiplayer is the thermometer of a combat flight simulator.

Precisely.

 

And just to add something, i know that auto acquisition modes make it a bit easier (WVR), but no matter what era are you flying, more authentic visibility is what i think we all want, modern jets, cold war or WW2 sticks included.

[Decibel dB]

i know that auto acquisition modes make it a bit easier (WVR), but no matter what era are you flying, more authentic visibility is what i think we all want, modern jets, cold war or WW2 sticks included.

 

What is this?

[QuiGon]

What is this?

 

A feature of certain modern radar equipped aircraft like the Mirage 2000 or the F-15 to automatically acquire targets without when using certain radar modes.

[Decibel dB]

Thank you Quigon, I got a bit confuse since for a while the debate is on WVR and how important the visibility is. Specially for the WW2 multiplayer environment, not as much for radar equip aircraft ;)

[OnlyforDCS]

Thank you Quigon, I got a bit confuse since for a while the debate is on WVR and how important the visibility is. Specially for the WW2 multiplayer environment, not as much for radar equip aircraft ;)

 

Now that Ive started flying almost exclusively online, I was surprised by how important the Mk1 Eyeball really is in modern jet combat. In the merge it is usually the pilot with the better SA that wins, all other things being equal that is. The best SA is seeing and knowing exactly where the enemy is.

[GGTharos]

AACQ modes are about WVR. They're used to quickly acquire an aircraft you see visually rather than staring down at the display and trying to fiddle with the controls in order to find a target. Trying to find the target on radar instead of visually within WVR (or even a bit beyond WVR) will result in not seeing the target and never acquiring it unless lucky - until you get an AESA radar, MSAs have a fairly slow angular search speed so at close ranges the target will fly itself out of your detection cone by the time the radar sweeps over it.

 

The assumption that correct visual detection is not important for radar equipped fighters is erroneous and silly.

 

Thank you Quigon, I got a bit confuse since for a while the debate is on WVR and how important the visibility is. Specially for the WW2 multiplayer environment, not as much for radar equip aircraft ;)

Edited March 30, 2017 by GGTharos

[ST0RM]

Indeed. Thanks for the heads up Sith.

 

What follows is a polite request intended for all owners of large(quality) monitors or rather players who prefer the current system:

 

I understand that you wish to keep the current system, and won't go into the reasons why. I will respect your wishes. Please understand that there are people who have serious issues with seeing enemy planes within visual range and at distance. These people may have hardware issues, play at lower resolution, or as is my case have vision problems and deteriorating eyesight due to medical problems.

 

If ED can at some point provide an optional solution for us, we would be happy.

 

My request is this, please don't use this thread to push for a "status quo" because you are happy with it as it is. All we are asking for is an option to enable some kind of visual aids (that don't feel like cheats, such as labels). Please respect our wishes just as we respect yours.

 

Thank you.

 

Nicely put. I see your point.

 

But higher res monitors actually hinder visability as the game renders the pixels really tight/small. So what my buddy sees at 15 miles (lower res), I'm barely seeing a dot (3440x1440) and have to zoom view.

 

The mindset that using zoom view is ok, but labels or enhanced pixels (impersonators) are unrealistic. The obsession with being "full real", clouds things. You cant zoom out your eyeballs...

 

In the RW air, I've been able to spot an orbiting KC-10 40 miles away using just my eyes. Fighter sized, 10-15 miles. Fast jet drivers acquire visually by looking for contrast and glints of sun. Currently, the sim only draws things out to a certain distance and doesnt use "glints". Still present, but not yet rendered. For lower res users, the fuzzy dot shows up sooner and the high res has to strain to see that same dot.

 

Hopefully the right people will work on this and come to a solution. But simply turning it all off, isnt it.

[OnlyforDCS]

Yeah, the biggest problam is losing visual within "visual range". There is something "off" about how DCS draws these models, a lot of it has to do with the color palette, lighting and contrast in the game.

 

I think that contrast and color gamut are probably even more important attributes than resolution for DCS World at this point.

 

Thats why my next hardware investment will be a quality LCD monitor with all the bells and whistles, regardless of how this issue is addressed in the future by Eagle Dynamics.

[SharpeXB]

You cant zoom out your eyeballs...

I probably posted this before here but it bears repeating...

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2561114&postcount=220

[ST0RM]

I probably posted this before here but it bears repeating...

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2561114&postcount=220

 

Great post SharpeXB.

 

Funny is that I fly 90% at the real position you described, not back for the full FOV. Lately, I've taken to zooming in to frame the HUD so I can see targets far off.

 

Time will tell where this goes.

[GGTharos]

They can just chop the range to 7nm, and that will be just fine. Sure, you can see a viper in a bank 12nm away IF you know where to look, but if you don't, you'll likely miss it.

 

And we've seen the 'dot wars' before and we see them now. There's no point in radars, BVR, ambush setups etc when you can just see everything.

 

Hopefully the right people will work on this and come to a solution. But simply turning it all off, isnt it.

[chihirobelmo]

Hi ST0RM,

So you have an experience of flying RW air!?

 

I recently have asked a question at F16AMA how things can be seen in SIM vs RL. The answer was "It depends on Atmospheric Condition" I agree it should be like that.

https://www.reddit.com/r/falconbms/comments/5xkfd3/askmeanything_with_a_real_life_viper_pilot/desn8va/

I also would like to hear more from others who sees aircraft daily in Real World and also is familiar with SIM too.

 

I assume that For 4K resolution, hFOV64 would be enough to get 20/20 eye vision equal Acuity(1dot=1min if not take Perspective Distortion into account). and for hFOV64 the monitor width*0.8 distance would be where you see things Real Size. The assumption is coming from following URLs.

 

http://webvision.med.utah.edu/book/part-viii-gabac-receptors/visual-acuity/

 

http://www.mathopenref.com/isosceles.html

 

Other than Acuity and Size, Contrast/Haze/Glints should affect visibility. So with above condition(4K/64hFOV/proper distance) how SIM is correctly representing those elements might be predictable. Could you give me how you feel SIM is different from your experiences?

[Why485]

But higher res monitors actually hinder visability as the game renders the pixels really tight/small. So what my buddy sees at 15 miles (lower res), I'm barely seeing a dot (3440x1440) and have to zoom view.

 

For the record, with the current system, resolution is an unintuitive tradeoff.

 

With a lower resolution you will have an advantage in spotting objects at distance because the physical distance at which they get reduced to a dot is smaller, and the dot is bigger on the screen. With a higher resolution, you will have an advantage WVR as with more pixels you'll be able to better discern the low contrast plane from its background, and the plane will in general just have more pixels drawn for it.

[BFBunny]

The crux of why I stopped playing this game is because of the lack of being able to see anything.

 

I am running a 32 inch screen @ 1920 x 1080 so I've no idea if I'm on the winning or loosing edge of the current system.

 

I only know that without labels I'm pretty much blind as a bat. For the most part I can spot that dirt spec if the lighting is right. Obviously not having TIR is a huge disadvantage in DCS as once you loose the target with the mouse it can be super hard to pick it back up in a quick enough time to have any output of the battle.

 

I don't know how hard it's supposed to be. I can track planes at an air show using binoculars and re-pick them up, but then they're in a fairly predictable pattern. It's hard to know for me if I'm just rubbish at spotting (probably) or if the correct way would even be any use for someone like myself.

 

I guess if you're rubbish at spotting it doesn't matter how good the game makes it hmmm.

[SharpeXB]

I assume that For 4K resolution, hFOV64 would be enough to get 20/20 eye vision equal Acuity(1dot=1min if not take Perspective Distortion into account). and for hFOV64 the monitor width*0.8 distance would be where you see things Real Size. The assumption is coming from following URLs.

Somewhere in the VR discussions is a post by Oculus on what it would take to replicate real 20/20 vision in the headsets and it's really high. Much higher than 4K

[chihirobelmo]

Somewhere in the VR discussions is a post by Oculus on what it would take to replicate real 20/20 vision in the headsets and it's really high. Much higher than 4K

 

It is medically defined that If you can see 1 min arc of a Landolt C or E chart gap you can say you have 20/20 eye vision.

 

http://webvision.med.utah.edu/book/part-viii-gabac-receptors/visual-acuity/

 

I guess it is because VR gears have 110 or higher horizontal FOV. For 110hFOV at least 6600 width resolution might be needed to achieve 1 dot for 1 min.

In such a wide FOV Perspective Distortion should be stronger and calculating 20/20 eye vision equal resolution, might not so easy.

At least the center of the image will have 20/20 eye vision by this simple calculation (hFOV * 60).

Edited April 1, 2017 by chihirobelmo

[OnlyforDCS]

Has anyone done any testing on how Antialiasing and Anisotropic filtering affect the visibility of planes, both at long range (dot contact) and within visual range?

 

Im having a hard time keeping a visual in WVR engagements and dogfights, and just looking for tips on how to increase my chances of doing so in any way possible. Keeping a nice visual on a target against the ground and over water is especially hard.

 

I've sort of managed to get a hang of spotting at range, by zooming out (lol) and seeing a dot contact. However when closing the contact frequently dissapers when entering WVR. Frequently I can see absolutely nothing even though I see tracer fire, and am looking in exactly the right direction.

 

Im not sure what I'm doing wrong, it almost feels like there is something wrong with my monitor.

 

Would lowering the resolution help? I would be willing to live with blurry gauges and airplanes if it means they would be easier to keep track of.

[sam777777]

Has anyone done any testing on how Antialiasing and Anisotropic filtering affect the visibility of planes, both at long range (dot contact) and within visual range?

 

 

This post is pretty sad, and right on the money. Just the other day I was watching F/A18s fly around as I was hiking. I could clearly see them (and acquire them if I looked away and then looked back later) from 20+km away (in very clear skies)

 

To answer your question: Anisotropic filtering will have no effect, turn it up to maximum and leave it there in every game. Almost 0 fps loss, better looking textures at an angle, no side effects.

 

Anti-aliasing. Leaving it off will be the best option. Don't ever supersample in DCS (alas, in VR we have to. It really sucks for spotting), Use your native monitor resolution. (Going lower may help, dunno. I never go lower than native)

[lemoen]

Somewhere in the VR discussions is a post by Oculus on what it would take to replicate real 20/20 vision in the headsets and it's really high. Much higher than 4K

 

This is because the screens are very close to your eyes. For monitors we need less (but still more than 4k).

[SharpeXB]

This is because the screens are very close to your eyes. For monitors we need less (but still more than 4k).

On a 28" UHD screen at desktop distance I can still discern pixels i.e. I still need to use antialiasing to smooth out jaggies. So 4K is still far short of 20/20 depending on how far you are from the screen. And then there's still the issue of FOV. Yes VR is life sized so the resolution needed there for 20/20 is huge. Apple figured their iMac needed a 27" 5K screen in order to make the pixels imperceptible. But the bigger the screen and FOV. The higher res you need.

So the only solution we will have for quite some time is to vary the FOV. I.e. Zoom view. You can't change your screen resolution so all you can do is magnify.

 

I was doing the M-2000C training mission and could see the target cargo plane at 20 miles. Not easily and only because I know where to look. But it's rendering and visible since it's dark against a light sky.

 

What would be great for flight sims to have is 4K HDR. Not the same thing as the current "HDR" in games but an expanded color space of about a billion colors instead of 16.7 million. It's already a standard for video and in some games currently as well. Size and contrast are the biggest aids to spotting things in sims and 4K by itself actually does nothing to help those. But higher contrast and an increased range of colors would.

[chihirobelmo]

Again, whether it is VR or Monitor the important idea to concern whether the image is providing 20/20 acuity, is whether the imagesize+headposition is providing enough resolution to define 1/60 of a degree for your real vision. At the same time, in-game resolution+FOV has to be enough to define 1/60 of a degree for an in-game image.

 

 

If pixel size is 0.078mm(iPhone4-5) seen from 26cm distance would be

0.000078(m)/0.00026(km)=0.3(mil) =1(minute) =1/60(degree).

 

If pixel size is 0.311mm(27inch 1920*1080 monitor approximately) seen from 1.04m distance would be

0.000311(m)/0.00104(km)=0.3(mil)

 

The human eye has a short-range vision and a long-range vision so even if you see a pixel when you close to the monitor that might be because your short-range vision is finer than 20/20 even if you are not so good at the long-range vision.

 

http://lookafteryoureyes.org/eye-conditions/short-and-long-sight/

 

Anyway concerning your head position to match in-game FOV is simpler than concerning your head position to match visual acuity for the monitor. As because if in-game FOV+Resolution matches 20/20 acuity then simply put your head position to match monitor FOV also matches 1-pixel size to seen 1/60 degree.

 

For VR monitor, the Device-HeadPosition FOV against In-game FOV is already matched and no need to concern your head position against the monitor size. Only a resolution against FOV would be a problem.

Edited April 11, 2017 by chihirobelmo

[SharpeXB]

If you place your head 1m away from a 27" 1080p screen, and then adjust the FOV for 1:1 scale, you're then looking at a very small angular view. That wouldn't be practical.

All the above is why there's a Zoom View feature in sims

[OnlyforDCS]

If you place your head 1m away from a 27" 1080p screen, and then adjust the FOV for 1:1 scale, you're then looking at a very small angular view. That wouldn't be practical.

All the above is why there's a Zoom View feature in sims

 

Zoom should not be mandatory for within visual range combat. It should not even be mandatory for spotting objects at a distance. Zoom is unfortunately necessary in sims, but ideally it should only be used after an object is already spotted, for discerning what it actually is, what its aspect is, etc.

 

The way that visual perception works in DCS at the moment it is completely messed up. I actually need to zoom out to spot distant contacts, and frequently zoom in at distances when objects should become discrenible without zoom. (And even that doesn't guarantee spotting the target, as you zoom in your FOV decreases and if you've looked just a few degrees in the wrong direction you will completely miss the bogey)

Edited April 11, 2017 by OnlyforDCS

[SharpeXB]

Zoom should not be mandatory for within visual range combat.

Well it depends on which era. The modern stuff, "within visual range" means up to ten miles. And not just spotting the target but identifying it. Ideally you can set the zoom on a slider to quickly look in and out.

[OnlyforDCS]

Well it depends on which era. The modern stuff, "within visual range" means up to ten miles. And not just spotting the target but identifying it. Ideally you can set the zoom on a slider to quickly look in and out.

 

The era is completely irrelevant. Only the relative size of the aircraft matters. Since DCS WWII is quickly becoming a "thing" lets take their sizes as an absolute minimum.

 

My point is this. The way Zoom is currently implemented in DCS is wrong. It's frequently a hindrance and not a help. Anyone who has ever flown online in this sim can confirm this. You should not be required to use Zoom below a certain FOV when engaged in a dogfight.

 

Why do you ask? Well because we are simulating an experience. We can't simulate 20/20 vision. We shouldn't have to.

 

It's not DCS: Opthalmology, its DCS: World. We don't fly real aircraft, from real cockpits. We use small screens to simulate an experience. That means introducing some sort of visual aids which will allow this to be possible, without putting extra workloads on the virtual pilots.