New canopy glass bug...

[NeilWillis]

Oh man!, so kind, you should not have bothered!...I just wanted to make devs to know it wasnt looking correctly yet, at least not as it was before the bug.

 

I have always told you that you make a nice job,..I have tested it and it looks AMAZING! you should use this one as the 4.0 ver, Im sure most people will like this one better :thumbup:

 

Now I wonder even more why ED/Razbam couldnt achieve what you did...anyway, great job, and again thanks a lot.:)

 

I think the devs got your message with the very first post, which was, to say the least, a little bit over the top. What you have to realise is that unlike you, the rest of us are mere mortals, and as such, we need to be talked to in a civil, and appropriate manner.

 

To have to include WTF!!! in a simple report of an effect that has been reduced a little more than you would like is bordering on the obsessive, wouldn't you agree? Frankly this whole thread has become an embarrassment. Make a report in civil terms, and then leave it! Trust me, the devs read everything here, and they also have feelings. Try to respect that.

[Ala12Rv-watermanpc]

Well, as always in these forums everything is taken as an immeasurable shame and the level of exaggeration is "over 9000"...

 

after months with this issue waiting patiently, which as we can see a member community can solve, I come here to make devs know it wasnt solved and just because I used "fxxking issue" to refer just to that, the ISSUE, because it still not working correctly (not because "an effect has been reduced a little more than you would like") and after apologize for my "extreme" languaje:chair: you say Im not reporting in "civil terms",that all are mortals except me, and Im not talking people in appropriate manner ...OMG!:huh:

 

you know what, unlike you, I didnt insult nor refer personally to anyone, and if you read the post, you will realize that I have been talking very kindly, as kindly as my humble limited english level allows me, so maybe you are the one "over the top" and exaggerating here.

Edited November 21, 2016 by watermanpc

[Conroy]

Now is fixed.:thumbup:

Edited November 21, 2016 by Conroy

[Starway]

Thanks, I apologize for my language, it was inapropiate.

 

Btw, I think the canopy glass was PERFECT before the issue:

 

 

The canopy you see on this picture is not a vanilla version. It is a personal tweaked version. I can publish it if you are interested.

 

Best,

SW

[Rlaxoxo]

The canopy you see on this picture is not a vanilla version. It is a personal tweaked version. I can publish it if you are interested.

 

Best,

SW

 

I would like to take a look at it if you don't mind uploading it

[Ala12Rv-watermanpc]

The canopy you see on this picture is not a vanilla version. It is a personal tweaked version. I can publish it if you are interested.

 

Best,

SW

 

OF COURSE! I would love it sir!!! it would be a pleasure in fact !!:thumbup:

 

Looks amazing!!, I think I will be playing with yours and Rlaxoxo one...one for 1.5 and the other for 2.0 and and vice versa :D...btw, I wonder if its possible to get a more reflective look but without the opacity behaviour, I mean, I know the more reflactive the surface the harder you can see whats behind but I think it shouldnt affect the opacity...but both, Rlaxoxo one and Starway one look great!!

 

Really apreciate your work guys!!

[Conroy]

The file .tga.dds posted by Rlaxoxo in very good. Finally we got it fixed.

It could be better but for Mirage 2000 is good enough looking at the pics, at least for now. May be we could try a bit more reflection, but it's very good.

[DonJosh]

Here you go ... Just for you "Special edition" Use it if you want

To clarify (This is the glass that Mirage used before they changed it to that super uber dark canopy glass (3/4/2016)

 

 

 

thank you!:thumbup:

[zaelu]

Here you go ... Just for you "Special edition" Use it if you want

To clarify (This is the glass that Mirage used before they changed it to that super uber dark canopy glass (3/4/2016)

 

 

 

:thumbup: Thanks!

 

The canopy you see on this picture is not a vanilla version. It is a personal tweaked version. I can publish it if you are interested.

 

Best,

SW

 

The more the merrier. Maybe RAZBAM chose one of these instead of the latest one that is too transparent.

[NeilWillis]

Well, as always in these forums everything is taken as an immeasurable shame and the level of exaggeration is "over 9000"...

 

after months with this issue waiting patiently, which as we can see a member community can solve, I come here to make devs know it wasnt solved and just because I used "fxxking issue" to refer just to that, the ISSUE, because it still not working correctly (not because "an effect has been reduced a little more than you would like") and after apologize for my "extreme" languaje:chair: you say Im not reporting in "civil terms",that all are mortals except me, and Im not talking people in appropriate manner ...OMG!:huh:

 

you know what, unlike you, I didnt insult nor refer personally to anyone, and if you read the post, you will realize that I have been talking very kindly, as kindly as my humble limited english level allows me, so maybe you are the one "over the top" and exaggerating here.

 

I stand by everything I have said. You are complaining about something that is purely cosmetic - the reflection from the cockpit canopy - in terms that I wouldn't use under ANY circumstances. You over state, and over react, and use phrases that would be inappropriate in any context.

 

As for being personal. If I'd called you an asshole, I could understand you taking offence. I haven't, and wouldn't ever do so. I have simply pointed out that you are totally over the top in your statements. To say that the module "isn't working" because the glass isn't quite shiny enough is frankly absurd. It is an effect, not a function, and to use any other terms for it is an absurdity.

 

Sit back, think again, and start to treat the people working hard on developing these projects with a little more respect sir. I suggest next time you are in a meeting at work, try dropping the phrase "What the F@@k" into the conversation, and see how well it goes down there!

[Ala12Rv-watermanpc]

I stand by everything I have said. You are complaining about something that is purely cosmetic - the reflection from the cockpit canopy - in terms that I wouldn't use under ANY circumstances. You over state, and over react, and use phrases that would be inappropriate in any context.

 

As for being personal. If I'd called you an asshole, I could understand you taking offence. I haven't, and wouldn't ever do so. I have simply pointed out that you are totally over the top in your statements. To say that the module "isn't working" because the glass isn't quite shiny enough is frankly absurd. It is an effect, not a function, and to use any other terms for it is an absurdity.

 

Sit back, think again, and start to treat the people working hard on developing these projects with a little more respect sir. I suggest next time you are in a meeting at work, try dropping the phrase "What the F@@k" into the conversation, and see how well it goes down there!

 

I think you should read again what I posted...then you might realize that when I said "isnt working" I meant the canopy glass and ONLY THE CANOPY GLASS,I think its quite obvious but maybe not for some...or maybe your rush to come and give me a reprimand have tricked you :thumbup:

 

Starway, are you finally releasing your canopy glass??...many thanks!!!:)

[NeilWillis]

I have read everything you have written watermanpc, and your idea of "not working" apopears to be very wide of the mark, and is frankly utterly the wrong phrase to use.

 

The function of the cockpit canopy is to keep out the wind, and in certain modules, to allow the pressurization of the cockpit. If it keeps out the wind, and the cockpit pressurizes, it is working as advertised.

 

If however you feel it isn't working because it looks totally transparent, then you need to express yourself better. My point is that even if it looks incorrect to you, you can still fly without any inconvenience. It may have slipped your notice that there are far far more important things for the developers to devote their limited resources to than just to satisfy your discernment when it comes to the external modelling. Just stay inside the cockpit and fly it rather than looking at it's external elegance, and the issue is instantly resolved.

 

It certainly doesn't warrant the kind of anguish we have seen here!

[Conroy]

This one is also very good for my opinion.

[Starway]

There you go. As the title says, this mod also contains a fix for the lights for the mirage. It is jsgme ready.

 

Best,

SW

M-2000C Lights & Window Fix.rar

[zaelu]

Many thanks Starway!

[firmek]

This one is also very good for my opinion.

Fully agree, Sabre has one of the best if not the best looking canopy out there. But not all of the planes probably are/have to be the same. Also there are probably a lot of more important things than the canopy ;)

[Ala12Rv-watermanpc]

I have read everything you have written watermanpc, and your idea of "not working" apopears to be very wide of the mark, and is frankly utterly the wrong phrase to use.

 

The function of the cockpit canopy is to keep out the wind, and in certain modules, to allow the pressurization of the cockpit. If it keeps out the wind, and the cockpit pressurizes, it is working as advertised.

 

If however you feel it isn't working because it looks totally transparent, then you need to express yourself better. My point is that even if it looks incorrect to you, you can still fly without any inconvenience. It may have slipped your notice that there are far far more important things for the developers to devote their limited resources to than just to satisfy your discernment when it comes to the external modelling. Just stay inside the cockpit and fly it rather than looking at it's external elegance, and the issue is instantly resolved.

 

It certainly doesn't warrant the kind of anguish we have seen here!

 

Last thing Im going to say about this...seems like everybody else understood what I meant no problem except you.

 

There you go. As the title says, this mod also contains a fix for the lights for the mirage. It is jsgme ready.

 

Best,

SW

 

Many thanks for this, looks amazing :thumbup::

 

 

[SkateZilla]

i just assumed when they cleaned up the code they windexed the glass tooo....

[Conroy]

Fully agree, Sabre has one of the best if not the best looking canopy out there. But not all of the planes probably are/have to be the same. Also there are probably a lot of more important things than the canopy ;)

 

Canopy is very important for the 3D as we can see in the F-86, that's a perfect module all around. When you have a so good FM, and a so good 3D......whoooooo, wonderfull. Mirage model deserves the same quality.

There are people involved in coding and others in modelling, everything is important in the same way. The same for lights, another critical "cosmetic" effect for a module. Actually, fo rmy opinion, only A-10C has a credible (realistic) lighting effect. Third parties should have to pay more attention to these details.

 

In a flight sim, the immersion is also provided by "cosmetic", so it's very important as well, a must for DCS.

 

Only my two cents off course.

 

I will check Starway mod asap. Thank you!

Edited November 23, 2016 by Conroy

[Voodooflies]

There you go. As the title says, this mod also contains a fix for the lights for the mirage. It is jsgme ready.

 

Best,

SW

 

Have you used my mod for the lights fix ?

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=170652&highlight=navigation+lights+fix

[NeilWillis]

Last thing Im going to say about this...seems like everybody else understood what I meant no problem except you.

 

Oh I understand precisely what you meant, I just think you were being highly insuting to RAZBAM in your way of saying it. Bearing in mind you want them to do something for you, this might not be the most effective of strategies - what do you think?

 

How about this as an alternative...

 

"Great module RAZBAM, but I find the cockpit canopy reflections have been reduced too much with the last update. I thought I'd mention it, so you could look at it again"

 

Subtle huh? The difference of course is I could use that attitude in a public bar, without losing my teeth! The general idea is to not use the internet as a shield to hide behind while you insult the world at large, instead use it to communicate politely and effectively - manners make a HUGE difference to how people will react to what you say. For example you could have saved yourself all this aggravation couldn't you.

 

Now, rather than assuming everyone agrees with me, and trying to justify the unjustifiable that way, I just let me comments stand on their own merit. And please note, I still haven't got personal at any point.

 

Satisfied? Or will you insist one last time in being pedantic, and insist on the last word, and pretend that this cockpit issue actually matters?

[Rlaxoxo]

Oh I understand precisely what you meant, I just think you were being highly insuting to RAZBAM in your way of saying it. Bearing in mind you want them to do something for you, this might not be the most effective of strategies - what do you think?

 

How about this as an alternative...

 

"Great module RAZBAM, but I find the cockpit canopy reflections have been reduced too much with the last update. I thought I'd mention it, so you could look at it again"

 

Subtle huh? The difference of course is I could use that attitude in a public bar, without losing my teeth! The general idea is to not use the internet as a shield to hide behind while you insult the world at large, instead use it to communicate politely and effectively - manners make a HUGE difference to how people will react to what you say. For example you could have saved yourself all this aggravation couldn't you.

 

Now, rather than assuming everyone agrees with me, and trying to justify the unjustifiable that way, I just let me comments stand on their own merit. And please note, I still haven't got personal at any point.

 

Satisfied? Or will you insist one last time in being pedantic, and insist on the last word, and pretend that this cockpit issue actually matters?

 

K dude we get it, everyone passed that ages ago don't be petty.

I know you have your views but understand that not everyone on this planet thinks the same way ... so they way others perceive things is different to everyone.

 

Everyone passed this point of his initial report as pointless to argue so you 2 do the same

[myHelljumper]

I do agree with Neil as the way he was writing was missleading with the use of strong words and heavy ponctuation.

 

No need to be agressive either Rlaxoxo, the OP was absolue in it's report, as "it is not right" over "it does not seams right".

 

As you said not everyone speak the same way.:thumbup:

[Conroy]

Just a question, why do you "feel" the canopy so dark? Some good shoots about the beauty. It does seem not dark at all.

 

[Rlaxoxo]

Just a question, why do you "feel" the canopy so dark? Some good shoots about the beauty. It does seem not dark at all.

 

Yea don't bother ... apparently that's not "Realistic"