Labels not working?

[amyandpeteb]

I apologize for the multiple posts.

 

This is a grrreeaaaat campaign. Nice job.

 

I have not been able to use labels. Any tips, or is this a bug?

[Ranger79]

Please do not double post, labels are currently forced off in the campaign.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

[tintifaxl]

Out of interest, why do you enforce this in the campaign? Is it because of technical mission design (so maybe de- and spawning of elements are not blatantly noticeable) or because else you feel the missions would become too easy?

Edited October 7, 2016 by tintifaxl

[NeilWillis]

Perhaps. like the majority of us, he feels that labels are a cheat, and as such shouldn't play a part in good campaigns.

[MegOhm_SD]

Perhaps. like the majority of us, he feels that labels are a cheat, and as such shouldn't play a part in good campaigns.

 

This... labels are an immersion killer

[Johnny Dioxin]

So what about people whose eyesight isn't 100%?

 

You know, like disabled people. I don't use labels - although my sight is far from perfect due to health issues, but from the issues I often have, I can understand how frustrating it could be for such a person.

 

Your campaign, your choice - but anyone saying it is cheating is very inconsiderate.

[MegOhm_SD]

There is a nice modification you can do to the labels lua that makes the labels a dot or other symbol you choose.

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2203010&postcount=4

 

Maybe that would be a nice decluttered alternative for those that need some visual help.

 

But, that doesn't address the campaign setting issue. So yeah for those that need it, I guess they need that option.

Edited October 7, 2016 by MegOhm_SD

[Ranger79]

Labels are currently forced off due to making the campaign somewhat a challenge. I will be looking at not enforcing that option and enlargement issue for players with VR in the future.

[tintifaxl]

I always feel it would be better left to the customers to decide if they want to use labels. I doesn't hurt anyone, does it?

Edited October 9, 2016 by tintifaxl

[cichlidfan]

Labels are currently forced off due to making the campaign somewhat a challenge. I will be looking at not enforcing that option and enlargement issue for players with VR in the future.

 

Mission makers should not be deciding what 'game' restrictions are put on their missions. The customer should be able to turn on/off any gameplay options that they desire, regardless what the designer thinks would make for the best game play.

[Redglyph]

Mission makers should not be deciding what 'game' restrictions are put on their missions. The customer should be able to turn on/off any gameplay options that they desire, regardless what the designer thinks would make for the best game play.

 

All game designers have that prerogative, why not DCS campaign designers? I think it's fair to say authors get the right to have their mission seen as they were meant to, especially without any "cheat".

 

The real debate is whether DCS should have a difficulty level feature in missions, to overcome those cheating features. Not only there are enforced options, but also the skill of adversaries, their number, the success criteria, and possibly many other factors that could be adapted. Wouldn't that be better if missions were accessible to people of different skills that way?

[tintifaxl]

All game designers have that prerogative, why not DCS campaign designers? I think it's fair to say authors get the right to have their mission seen as they were meant to, especially without any "cheat".

 

Of course. It's just that you could lose customers this way and on the other hand gain none. In the case of labels: like some of the VR users out there, or a collegue of mine who does play with customized labels.

 

And most of the time you find these restrictions after you bought the campaign so I would encourage to list the restrictions on the shop page.

[shagrat]

All game designers have that prerogative, why not DCS campaign designers? I think it's fair to say authors get the right to have their mission seen as they were meant to, especially without any "cheat".

 

The real debate is whether DCS should have a difficulty level feature in missions, to overcome those cheating features. Not only there are enforced options, but also the skill of adversaries, their number, the success criteria, and possibly many other factors that could be adapted. Wouldn't that be better if missions were accessible to people of different skills that way?

 

As DCS advertises as adjusting these to players liking

quote: (...)"DCS World allows both realistic game play and more relaxed game play to suit the player."(...)

and even offers an arcade like style of playing

quote: (...)"You also have the option to play Warthog in "Game" mode for a casual game experience."(...),

I would consider not to block or enforce this options. The minimum is to warn the customer, that these gameplay modes are "restricted"!

 

Imagine someone bought DCS: A-10C Warthog for his 10 Year old who plays it "casual" in "Game Mode" with an Xbox-Controller, labels etc. to have fun.

 

Now he wastes $9,90 on a product that doesn't work as advertised... it doesn't really matter if people on these forums do never use game mode, or the majority find it abhorrent.

 

Imagine something like Battlefield getting an Add-On "Campaign" that disables the UI with its pointers, infos etc. ?

 

As we do not talk about multiplayer and cheating basically means the customer is cheating himself aka having less fun/challenge enjoying his product, I would recommend to leave the settings to the customer, but advise to use realistic settings.

 

Something like "Best experience is expected with sim mode, labels off and F10 Map set to Coalition only/own Aircraft only" or the like.

 

Just my two cent.

Edited October 27, 2016 by shagrat

[Redglyph]

I'm just saying that the author has the right to decide, in answer to another statement saying he should not. Perhaps he has a surprise and does not want it to be spoiled by people seeing things they should not, perhaps he wants the missions he designed to be difficult so that the player feels more rewarded, and this could lead to an increased success for the next campaign.

 

What if people want to compare their scores? And yes, what in case of multiplayer missions?

 

If a bad choice sells fewer copies, that's the author's problem, he will adjust next time, or patch what is wrong if necessary. On the other hand, if you don't provide the authors enough tools to let them build the missions they like, they won't, and there will be less offer. You don't dictate someone how they write a novel, whether all the character should be revealed from the beginning, whether that could be read by anyone lacking some level of knowledge, because that's part of their motivation to create something. Here it's the same.

 

It's a funny request because I remember a thread discussing whether the Mirage 2000 should have an INS alignment delay that could not be shortened, even by an option. Apparently most people reacted very strongly to any suggestion of an option "because it was not real", so denying the option to others even though it wouldn't be a problem for them.

 

So this is nothing new, old debate. Different people have different skills, that's why I think that a difficulty level option is the correct solution, where a simple cheat is not. Such a level can be used for comparison, for server enforcement on multiplayer sessions, and to adjust other parameters than just cheats like label/enemy sight/map positions/...

 

And to come back to the original problem, and to the current situation: if that's really unbearable, you can still run the mission from the Mission Editor ;)

Edited October 27, 2016 by Redglyph

[shagrat]

I'm just saying that the author has the right to decide, in answer to another statement saying he should not. Perhaps he has a surprise and does not want it to be spoiled by people seeing things they should not, perhaps he wants the missions he designed to be difficult so that the player feels more rewarded, and this could lead to an increased success for the next campaign.

 

What if people want to compare their scores? And yes, what in case of multiplayer missions?

He may decide what he wants, but he needs to inform the customer before he clicks the "buy" button?

This is a DLC campaign. Multiplayer community missions is a totally different thing, you don't pay for these...

 

If a bad choice sells fewer copies, that's the author's problem, he will adjust next time, or patch what is wrong if necessary.

 

It isn't about the choice he made, but the lack of information, not even pointing customers at the "disabled" features!

I personally fly full realistic, as well, yet Eagle Dynamics advertises DCS World with "Game Mode" and the Warthog with "more relaxed game play to suit the player."

 

Now if you bought both the Warthog AND the campaign to have a "relaxed gameplay" we may venture into customer legal isssues...

 

We talk about a business, producing products, that deactivates advertised features without any info to the customer..

 

It's a funny request

Ehm, no for the reason I mentioned above. Worst case you pay roundabout $50 for Warthog plus campaign and the product has features disabled without any hint or obvious notification.

 

That is the real problem, not the forced "labels off".:huh:

Edited October 29, 2016 by shagrat

[Redglyph]

I don't mean "funny" literally, of course, there was a drop if irony in it :)

 

An indication this is a serious or even difficult campaign that doesn't allow some of the aid features could be mentioned, for sure.

 

I don't think any legal action could be tempted though, licence terms generally protect the vendor against misconceptions on the buyer's part, after all it's always possible to ask in case of doubt. And I wouldn't be surprised if a refund was granted, should someone buy both modules, or just the campaign, sincerely believing a "simplified" mode is supported. There was recently similar confusion on the Relic Campaign and the requirement on the Sabre and the Mig-15, not sure whether a refund was asked or not, but it shows those little misunderstandings do happen.

 

The campaign does look difficult, and it does say that it is testing the user's skills, so I wouldn't expect anything easy or casual about it by reading the description. But, you're right, actual requirements and constraints could be indicated, especially if they're not common.

[Ranger79]

Guys,

 

Submitted an updated campaign pack to allow use of labels to the user in the campaign. Thanks to everyone for the feedback.