For VR: aircraft 25% larger when 2-5 miles away

[SharpeXB]

It's also a truly trivial thing to apply — scaling a model is such a basic thing in any rendering pipeline that it's usually just a single line that needs to be altered.

Not in DCS according to Wags. Scaling up the LOD affects the radar cross section and other problems with “fusing” (not sure what that means). That’s why this sim can’t use it.

To quote the video linked earlier; “We really don’t actually consider that a smart option”

 

I saw somewhere that BMS scales up the models as much as 1.5x within 5 miles. Isn’t that noticeable and awkward looking? Especially if you see an aircraft in relation to a non scaled object like terrain?

Edited May 18, 2018 by SharpeXB

[Tippis]

Not in DCS according to Wags. Scaling up the LOD affects the radar cross section and other problems with “fusing” (not sure what that means). That’s why this sim can’t use it.

To quote the video linked earlier; “We really don’t actually consider that a smart option”

I know what he said, but if he actually meant that, then that needs to be fixed because it's a fundamentally broken implementation.

 

Draw scale should not — must not — contaminate anything outside of the rendering pipeline. It makes no sense to ever do it like that since that would mean slowing down and interfering with graphics for no sane, sensible, or useful reason.Just because you tell the renderer to draw a shape bigger does not mean you have to do anything with the LOD — all you have to do is exactly that: draw it bigger. LOD is not even a factor in that.

 

So no. It's trivial. If it's not, then they need to fix their rendering path and make it trivial. This would also massively improve performance if what they're suggesting is actually what's happening.

 

I saw somewhere that BMS scales up the models as much as 1.5x within 5 miles. Isn’t that noticeable and awkward looking? Especially if you see an aircraft in relation to a non scaled object like terrain?

No. Anything distance where a plane is close enough that you see enough detail to actually be able to tell that its' scaled up, the scale is so small that you don't actually notice. Farther away, and the model remains so small, even with the scaling, that you also don't notice. Also, at those distances, you won't have any good way of judging it size against any non-scaled models because you won't be able to judge the distance well enough to determine that it breaks the “true” perspective of the scene.

 

What it does is that, rather than show a scene the way it “truly is”, it shows the scene the way it is perceived, which funnily enough ends up being much more realistic than a pure representation of reality would be. :P

 

Size works as a stand-in for all the other cues that would make the plane easy to detect at the same distance — things like glinting or parallax and movement or sharpness of the shape and so on.

[SharpeXB]

I know what he said, but if he actually meant that, then that needs to be fixed because it's a fundamentally broken implementation.

It doesn’t do any good to keep grasping at straws when the Dev tells you straight up why this won’t work.

[Tippis]

It doesn’t do any good to keep grasping at straws when the Dev tells you straight up why this won’t work.

 

They didn't, though — that's the thing.

 

They gave a confusing answer that didn't actually explain anything and that, if taken literally, says that the game is fundamentally broken and open to exploits on an unprecedented scale. It's not a straw — it's a fact. Drawing a model to a different scale is trivial. Any developer who says otherwise is flat out wrong, and there are no two ways about it.

 

So you have to pick one of these two:

• Either he was confused about what smart scaling actually does, which means his answer is not applicable,

• or a pretty critical part of the game engine is very incompetently made and must be rewritten.

 

Of the two, the former seems vastly more sense. It's really that simple.

Edited May 19, 2018 by Tippis

[Whisper]

Not in DCS according to Wags. Scaling up the LOD affects the radar cross section and other problems with “fusing” (not sure what that means). That’s why this sim can’t use it.

To quote the video linked earlier; “We really don’t actually consider that a smart option”

 

I saw somewhere that BMS scales up the models as much as 1.5x within 5 miles. Isn’t that noticeable and awkward looking? Especially if you see an aircraft in relation to a non scaled object like terrain?

 

First, I really hope that is not the technical reason for ditching visibility LOD scaling.

Engines as old as Operation Flashpoint back in 2001 used different LODs for different functions, so that changing the LOD responsible for building 3D objects in the world does not affect the LOD responsible for Damage Model or Physical interaction. I see no reason why a visibility LOD must be used as RCS LOD.

 

Second, much blabla here but I've not see any argument stating why VR users are limited by ED to a lower max zoom level than flat screen users, by a VERY significant margin. This is the core of the issue. Not that Flat screen users max zoom is too high, or if zom is inhenrently needed. That's not the point of the OP. Question remains : Why the max zoom is even different for both population?

[SharpeXB]

• Either he was confused about what smart scaling actually does, which means his answer is not applicable,

• or a pretty critical part of the game engine is very incompetently made and must be rewritten.

He knows exactly what “smart scaling” does, he said so. Also he said “we don’t consider it smart”

And since it took six years to rewrite the engine last time, don’t hold your breath asking for them to do it again.

It’s clear from Wags answer that they don’t consider smart scaling a very good solution. If it was and if it was so easy to implement it would be there already.

[Tippis]

He knows exactly what “smart scaling” does, he said so.

Well, let's just be clear here: saying something doesn't necessarily make it so.

 

It’s clear from Wags answer that they don’t consider smart scaling a very good solution.

Sure, but the reason cited for why it's not smart makes no sense. As in, the explanation he gives — the supposedly limiting factor — is not actually a factor in how scaling works. It's akin to asking “why does the sun rise” and getting the answer “I had coffee this morning.” Both may have some vague connection to the beginning of the day, but one does not explain the other.

 

You can keep repeating “wags says”, but it still doesn't get around this very fundamental problem. What he says is not a limiting factor in having smart, or indeed any, scaling, no matter how often you say that he said this unrelated thing. And as others have pointed out, it is completely irrelevant to the actual issue at hand.

Edited May 19, 2018 by Tippis

[SharpeXB]

What he says is not a limiting factor in having smart, or indeed any, scaling

Well actually it is because he’s in charge of making DCS.

[Tippis]

Well actually it is because he’s in charge of making DCS.

No. His position does not change how computer graphics hardware and software works.

[SharpeXB]

No. His position does not change how computer graphics hardware and software works.

He knows more about how this engine works than you do.

[Tippis]

He knows more about how this engine works than you do.

 

Which is not actually relevant to the question at hand. Also, there's a reason why appeal to authority is a fallacy.

[draconus]

Size works as a stand-in for all the other cues that would make the plane easy to detect at the same distance — things like glinting or parallax and movement or sharpness of the shape and so on.

IMO they should not change calculations and play with object sizes at different ranges. That would be simply wrong way of fixing. If you want additional visual effects make your own wish thread and I will +1 beacause they are needed indeed, ie. black dot should turn white or even flash halo when deflecting sunshine.

Now just adding the option to allow the same zoom level for VR will do.