Jump to content

3D pilot models - black and females


nickos86

Recommended Posts

This is ridiculous

 

The people on the forums who object in principle - well for the most part they just seem scared of change.

 

I have objected in the past to what I saw as SJW preening, however simply requesting models and/or textures is not such a thing, nor would this take much in the way of time or resources. While I agree ingame you generally won't be able to tell, so what? People on here whine about all kinds of minor details that boils down to anal retentive nitpicking and they act like it's a betrayal of humanity and personal slight against them.

 

And the context of fighter pilots, there IS pretext for it, btw. Not in Joan of Arc ''a chick that wore armor so female knights'' kind of way, but in a ''WWII Soviet Union deployed entire groups of women in combat in the air and on the ground'' kind of way. In a ''there are active duty pilots all over the world'' kind of way. So it's far from fantasy.

 

The guys kneejerking about resources, time, and ''diversity'' are ignorant (like they know anything about game development), they're just making empty excuses, and the kind of ''gamer'' that gives gamers a bad name because they really ARE sexist assholes trying to justify/hide it behind a veneer of disdain for political correctness. Saying ''even if it only took a day away from something else it's still too much'' is just a lame mentality considering, as mentioned above, these same people are the ones that will throw a right bitchfit about incorrectly spaced rivets.

  • Like 1

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Meanwhile...

 

  • B-52H
  • CH-53E
  • F-117A
  • MiG-23
  • MiG-25
  • MiG-27
  • S-3
  • SH-60B
  • Su-17M4
  • Su-30
  • Tornado
  • Tu-95MS
  • Tu-142
  • S-300PS
  • SA-6

 

To name a few.

 

Then there's weapons, ED's new weapons (primarily for the Hornet) look absolutely fantastic (which doesn't even get close to doing them justice, the AIM-7s, the AIM-120s, the GBUs, the Mk-80s, as well as a few others, they look better than perfect)

 

 

Couldn't agree more :thumbup:

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously, the comments about "Big Boobs", long hair etc.??? I thought DCS had a more mature audience, apparently not. Very disappointing to see 10 year old nonsense (complete with poor spelling).

 

 

As far as the change, an easy thing to do, either personally with skins/liveries or for DCS to do. All the arguments to and fro about helmets, gloves, clothing covering up identities is pointless and not relevant. The point is, like with many modern games, for someone to be ABLE to go into a menu setting, and select an entry for their skin type, and sex. Period, the act of checking the box, and seeing yourself, however small a snippet in the mirror, reflecting your chosen persona is what matters. Simple change, can be done, not a drag on current resources. DCS will probably do it, but it is up to them, in the meantime all the extrapolation is just vapor.

 

 

 

Me, I am just a middle aged, white dude who is tired of the constant forum blathering over things that are a simple, one and done decisions on the part of developers. There is no coherent argument that can justify not doing this. IT is more a matter of choice, than of some glaring visual representation. The choices themselves are accurate, there are plenty of pilots male/female who are not Caucasian today, thousands upon thousands, tens of thousands. A no brainer as far as I am concerned, without all the controversy. Give folks the choice to render themselves by ethnicity and gender. Why is this even controversial?

Pointy end hurt! Fire burn!!
JTF-191 25th Draggins - Hawg Main. Black Shark 2, A10C, A10CII, F-16, F/A-18, F-86, Mig-15, Mig-19, Mig-21, P-51, F-15, Su-27, Su-33, Mig-29, FW-190 Dora, Anton, BF 109, Mossie, Normandy, Caucasus, NTTR, Persian Gulf, Channel, Syria, Marianas, WWII Assets, CA. (WWII backer picked aircraft ME-262, P-47D).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

. . .

 

 

 

The guys kneejerking about resources, time, and ''diversity'' are ignorant (like they know anything about game development), they're just making empty excuses, and the kind of ''gamer'' that gives gamers a bad name because they really ARE sexist assholes trying to justify/hide it behind a veneer of disdain for political correctness. Saying ''even if it only took a day away from something else it's still too much'' is just a lame mentality considering, as mentioned above, these same people are the ones that will throw a right bitchfit about incorrectly spaced rivets.

 

 

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

Pointy end hurt! Fire burn!!
JTF-191 25th Draggins - Hawg Main. Black Shark 2, A10C, A10CII, F-16, F/A-18, F-86, Mig-15, Mig-19, Mig-21, P-51, F-15, Su-27, Su-33, Mig-29, FW-190 Dora, Anton, BF 109, Mossie, Normandy, Caucasus, NTTR, Persian Gulf, Channel, Syria, Marianas, WWII Assets, CA. (WWII backer picked aircraft ME-262, P-47D).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have objected in the past to what I saw as SJW preening, however simply requesting models and/or textures is not such a thing, nor would this take much in the way of time or resources. While I agree ingame you generally won't be able to tell, so what?

 

Because then it's a wasted effort, in the face of a considerable number of 3D models and textures long overdue for upgrade; planes, weapons, vehicles, ships and statics. I can only speak for myself but surely these take precedent over something barely noticeable, that most people AFAIK turn off... If the change is basically imperceptible what's the point making it?

 

I mean the S-3 is on that list, the only carrier capable tanker we have at the moment, as is the SH-60B and CH-53E the only USN naval helicopters we have.

 

Yeah fine, people whine about minor details, so what? When you mark up a sim to be the most realistic rendition of combat aviation to come to a PC that's just what happens, in fact it's not even that, it's something you find in anything calling itself a simulator.

 

If any developer 'diversified' DCS pilots I couldn't care less, not I don't care, I can't care. I am physically unable to care about something that is such a non-issue to me, I mean if you ask me seeing a pilot that doesn't look like I do is probably a plus, and there aren't any who look or sound remotely like I do, but then I have my own pilot body turned off, which it seems most people do as well as far as I can tell.

 

The other issue is how would you make that change? We have some responses that basically boil down to immature stuff that could easily be perceived as just as sexist.

 

And look at the pilot bodies for the F-18 and F-14, how are you going to make to make them look female? I mean making them black is trivial, but female? How exactly are we going to implement these changes?

 

For me it's a priority issue like with pretty much everything else, we have models literally decades old that when compared up with more recent work don't just look awful, they look wrong. Go into the model viewer, compare the AGM-65F and the Kh-29L, or the Merkava IV and the M60A3. So I strongly feel that in the 3D department, the focus should be on getting everything up to the same standard, I mean I'd pay for that.

 

I mean didn't this exact same thing happen when we got super-duper new trains? Like the EXACT same debate?

 

 

If you want to add female pilots fine go for it, I think, seeing as it's currently WIP, the best place to do it is probably over comms, with female pilots, GCIs, ATCs, JTACs etc. As far as I can see it, the more different voices we get, the more immersive the experience is, the closer to reality the experience is and hearing 20 different voices is better than the same 3-4. Diversity here would be a welcome edition, it's noticeable, it's definitely something ED should do when it comes to comms. We're already seeing ED do this in a limited way anyway (looking at one of Wags' videos). This same concept worked wonders for Heatblur's Jester, this is a similar thing just the other way round (many voices saying similar things, as opposed to one voice saying many things).

 

The same can be said for ground crew, and other personnel units, like infantry which atm is very much attack of the clones. We can clearly see their faces if you wanted to add more variety then diversity is the perfect place, again, already being done looking at WIP screenshots. Here diversity and variety will go into making the sim more realistic, and it will be a change that will actually be noticeable and therefore a more worthwhile one.

 

As far as the change, an easy thing to do, either personally with skins/liveries or for DCS to do. All the arguments to and fro about helmets, gloves, clothing covering up identities is pointless and not relevant.

 

What?

 

 

eeec8b9f38c5aba7f7bd99b21db63233_unnewsfighter-pilot-breaks-fighter-pilot_515-327.jpeg

 

Sex? Skin colour?

 

maxresdefault.jpg

 

Sex? Skin colour?

 

What are you going to change about these 2 images to change their skin colour or their sex? Now these are only 2, fine there are examples in DCS where you probably can, but to say it's not relevant? If we can't see the change, and what's the point making it?

 

 

 

As for personalisation, fine, go for it, if you want to be able to select your gender, ethnicity in say the logbook and have that reflected, fine - but then the best place to do that is over comms with pilot voices, which again, I've said many times already that ED should do that, they should try and get as many different voice actors as possible to do comms, as that way the experience is not only more immersive, but is the perfect place for diversity. But we should be focusing on what's most in need of change, again if ED adds more diverse pilots I'm physically incapable of caring, I just think there are more pressing issues. Comms is a completely, as comms have been relatively lackluster across the board for ages.


Edited by Northstar98

Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AV-8B N/A, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, WWII Assets, CA, NS430, Hawk.

Terrains I own: South Atlantic, Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas.

System:

GIGABYTE B650 AORUS ELITE AX, AMD Ryzen 5 7600, Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 32 GB, Western Digital Black SN850X 1 TB (DCS dedicated) & 2 TB NVMe SSDs, Corsair RM850X 850 W, NZXT H7 Flow, MSI G274CV.

Peripherals: VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the only important Russian female pilot in the world that I could find and she SVETLANA KAPANINA. but she's not a military pilot.

 

 

 

It does not seem possible to me that Russia has not enrolled female pilots in the air force.

 

are we in 2019 possible that Russia in the military sphere has remained culturally backward?

 

 

from what I see I have noticed that Russia is returning and is enlisting new female pilots.

 


Edited by Xilon_x
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Originally Posted by SmirkingGerbil viewpost.gif

As far as the change, an easy thing to do, either personally with skins/liveries or for DCS to do. All the arguments to and fro about helmets, gloves, clothing covering up identities is pointless and not relevant.

 

 

 

What?

 

 

eeec8b9f38c5aba7f7bd99b21db63233_unnewsfighter-pilot-breaks-fighter-pilot_515-327.jpeg

 

Sex? Skin colour?

 

maxresdefault.jpg

 

Sex? Skin colour?

 

What are you going to change about these 2 images to change their skin colour or their sex? Now these are only 2, fine there are examples in DCS where you probably can, but to say it's not relevant? If we can't see the change, what's the point making it?

 

 

 

First, a classic snippet, taking my entire sentence out of context. I go on to explain (which you removed), it is not what you can see, it is the point of giving someone the choice to do so. Cutting out part of my sentence, and framing it with your own dialogue out of context doesn't make your point more relevant or salient than mine.

Pointy end hurt! Fire burn!!
JTF-191 25th Draggins - Hawg Main. Black Shark 2, A10C, A10CII, F-16, F/A-18, F-86, Mig-15, Mig-19, Mig-21, P-51, F-15, Su-27, Su-33, Mig-29, FW-190 Dora, Anton, BF 109, Mossie, Normandy, Caucasus, NTTR, Persian Gulf, Channel, Syria, Marianas, WWII Assets, CA. (WWII backer picked aircraft ME-262, P-47D).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, a classic snippet, taking my entire sentence out of context. I go on to explain (which you removed), it is not what you can see, it is the point of giving someone the choice to do so. Cutting out part of my sentence, and framing it with your own dialogue out of context doesn't make your point more relevant or salient than mine.

 

You completely miss the point

 

Plus what's this then...

 

and seeing yourself, however small a snippet in the mirror, reflecting your chosen persona is what matters.
As far as I understand it most of your point centres on having the 'choice' to do so, which okay fine, while completely forgoing the means, how are you going to practically implement "seeing yourself" in DCS? And is it a worthwhile change assuming such a change would be noticed when it seems the majority of pilots have their pilot bodies turned off...

 

If by seeing yourself you mean:

 

A: a 3D model/textured rendition of you, then I guess not so out of context, my point is what would you change to accommodate said change, even if you were going to. If you have a fully covered pilot what are you going to change - which is why the matter isn't so irrelevant. And that's if you even turn on your pilot body, which as far as I can see, most don't... Making the seeing yourself thing even more fruitless...

 

B: a picture in the logbook, which you can already do... I mean there are other things in the logbook that could be implemented, based on your points, which if so I even agree with you on. If ED upgrade the logbook to make it more personable then fine, it's certainly a more appropriate way of going about diversification than the pilot models.

 

C: Comms/Radio, then you already agree with me... This aspect is the best place for diversity and is still WIP, it makes the most amount of sense to add diversity here as it will tangibly improve communications.

 

D: Greater logbook personalisation, see B

 

Anyways if anything is

pointless and not relevant
it's this right here, my position should be clear by now - I think there are more pressing artwork/3D modelling issues that for me are far more of an issue than something barely noticeable if not borderline imperceptible. If ED make changes to the pilot bodies I probably won't notice and even if I did I wouldn't have the capacity to care about it.

 

This isn't an argument of what should or shouldn't be present it's a matter of say it with me now, prioritisation. On the one hand we have 2018/2019 standard of 3D modelling and textures, very well done, almost too well done with some of the updated weapons and on the other hand we have models, in considerable numbers that are at a conservative estimate, at least a decade old, we're talking something you'd expect to see in that nostalgic WWII flight simulator from Ubisoft.

 

It's not that I don't agree with the reasoning behind this request, I agree with it, the reasoning is perfectly sound. The issue is as I've discussed over and over again is implementation, for 3D work it'll most likely be barely noticeable, if not imperceptible and there are plenty of assets, some quite important too, that are desperately in need of a new 3D model and textures. Coupled with the fact that there are other areas in DCS where diversification just makes way more sense, will actually be noticeable, and tangibly improve the experience in realism and immersion and would therefore be almost infinitely more worthwhile.


Edited by Northstar98

Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AV-8B N/A, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, WWII Assets, CA, NS430, Hawk.

Terrains I own: South Atlantic, Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas.

System:

GIGABYTE B650 AORUS ELITE AX, AMD Ryzen 5 7600, Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 32 GB, Western Digital Black SN850X 1 TB (DCS dedicated) & 2 TB NVMe SSDs, Corsair RM850X 850 W, NZXT H7 Flow, MSI G274CV.

Peripherals: VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DCS Team,

 

I think this is a great idea and would require minimal effort. For anyone who objects to this idea, if you're offended by this you have some serious self esteem issues. We have skins to represents various countries, it isn't a stretch to add skins to represent various genders and races. BTW, it's not "social justice" in any way, and to make such an issue out of a simple request shows you're bias unfortunately.

 

Please add as soon as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And that's if you even turn on your pilot body, which as far as I can see, most don't...

Do you have some stats on that since you keep repeating that assumption? I see a lot of people begging for pilot body for the modules that don't have them yet. And why would making the existing 3d models better be any more priority than making new 3d models of things that don't exist yet?

 

 

And missiles... I'd be fine with 10 polys models. That's how important are its visuals when you seat in the cockpit.


Edited by draconus

🖥️ Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX3060   🥽 Rift S   🕹️ T16000M HOTAS   ✈️ FC3, F-14A/B, F-15E   ⚙️ CA   🚢 SC   🌐 NTTR, PG, Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you have some stats on that since you keep repeating that assumption?

 

Seriously, just look around on Youtube... Ralfidude, Grim Reapers, Maverick, Jabbers, Growling Sidewinder, Red Kite, Hellreign82, Laobi, Bunyap Sims, CorvusCorp... heck even Matt Wagner and Eagle Dynamics: Digital Combat Simulator... (I know right!?) The number of videos I can find with the pilot bodies on seems pretty damn rare, as is looking at screenshots on this forum.

 

Plus even IF you have it on, what can you see? Some legs, some arms, probably fully covered, if you look in the mirror you can probably see a visor and a helmet. So this begs the question you've seemed to miss: What are we going to change to implement this? Both in cockpit and out, okay this isn't so for the helicopters and warbirds but they seem to have bigger issues right now (checking the forums).

 

So with the model, it's a fruitless effort, you're hard pressed to tell the difference even IF you turn it on. And for 3rd time already, I play DCS to pretend to fly things I can't, if you're spending $60 to look in the mirror, you're probably not being very wise with your money.

 

I see a lot of people begging for pilot body for the modules that don't have them yet.

 

You see a lot eh? Asking no "begging" (love the melodrama) for pilot bodies, well checking the forums seems to tell a different tale... Just going on prevalent requests and bug reports. I mean I see more people asking for the Viggen's RAT than I do it's pilot body...

 

And why would making the existing 3d models better be any more priority than making new 3d models of things that don't exist yet?

 

Well clearly ED of all people do, seeing that's what they're doing amongst other things. I mean last weeks newsletter, the old model for the eastern fire truck is getting replaced, as is the APA-5D, before that we saw the Ural-375 get a facelift... I mean we recently(-ish) got a brand new Su-34, I know mad right, in a flight simulator of all things... So clearly ED has it on there to do list, seeing as they're doing it. And again, do some digging, posts asking for upgraded units to get everything up to standard seem to be more prevalent... Feel free to prove me wrong.

 

Plus we have a 2019 simulator, with modern graphics and a modern graphics engine, so does it make sense having the stunning F/A-18 or F-14 refuelling from a god-awful looking S-3 (been brought up a fair few times)? I mean it's pretty inconsistent, when a fair few AI assets look so much better (Su-34, Tu-22M3, Su-24, MiG-31). I'm sorry but when you mix and match the fantastic graphics of some aircraft with those that look like they were taken from IL-2 Sturmovik (nearly 2 decades old) or even HL1 (not even last century graphics, last millennium graphics), it doesn't just look poor, it looks wrong, and lets not forget the S-3 is the only carrier capable tanker we have, the SH-60B and CH-53E are the only western naval helicopters we have... So fantastic carrier aircraft modules, fantastic carrier and then to top it off... an awful looking SH-60B, S-3 and CH-53E

 

Now you have your opinion, just as I have mine, there are plenty of posts asking for old stuff to be upgraded, you just have to look for it, and it's not hard to find.

 

As for new pilot models, for the last freaking time what are you going to change? Your discernible features looking in the mirror are next to none, see for yourself and ask yourself, if I assume nothing, what is the sex of my pilot just by looking at it.

 

 

I mean, I've said that the reasons behind this wish are perfectly fine and reasonable, heck I even agree with the reasoning behind it, but I'm not attacking the reasoning, I think that making changes that probably won't be noticed, if they're even perceptible at all is a wasted effort. What isn't a wasted effort are pilot voices and radio comms, ED should (and are) adding female voices, so far we only have the 1 female Russian ATC and how many ATC voices are there? Like 4 or something? At least another is being added for the new Nimitz class, I think if ED really wanted to improve radio communications then diversity goes hand in hand, it goes not only as far as making the experience more realistic, but more immersive and to me at least would be a far more worthwhile investment than pilot bodies. Taking a step further having more personalised logbook and the ability to select a voice for your pilot, be it from whatever nationality or sex or whatever is a good idea, it will improve the experience for everyone, at least those who care about the communications in DCS

 

 

Now you mentioned weapons, that's fine, you're entitled to your own opinion, I like to use the F6 camera a lot and when I see beautiful models I'm drawn to them like a moth to a flame, I'm sorry that's just me...


Edited by Northstar98

Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AV-8B N/A, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, WWII Assets, CA, NS430, Hawk.

Terrains I own: South Atlantic, Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas.

System:

GIGABYTE B650 AORUS ELITE AX, AMD Ryzen 5 7600, Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 32 GB, Western Digital Black SN850X 1 TB (DCS dedicated) & 2 TB NVMe SSDs, Corsair RM850X 850 W, NZXT H7 Flow, MSI G274CV.

Peripherals: VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, I've said that the reasons behind this wish are perfectly fine and reasonable, heck I even agree with the reasoning behind it, but I'm not attacking the reasoning, I think that making changes that probably won't be noticed, if they're even perceptible at all is a wasted effort. What isn't a wasted effort are pilot voices and radio comms, ED should (and are) adding female voices, so far we only have the 1 female Russian ATC, but at least another is being added for the new Nimitz class, I think if ED really wanted to improve radio communications then diversity goes hand in hand, it goes not only as far as making the experience more realistic, but more immersive and to me at least would be a far more worthwhile investment than pilot bodies. Taking a step further having more personalised logbook and the ability to select a voice for your pilot, be it from whatever nationality or sex or whatever is a good idea, it will improve the experience for everyone, at least those who care about the communications in DCS

Look, I'm not especially interested in making changes to current pilot bodies. I'm rather into adding ones that are missing in many modules first. The reason I took a discussion with you is to show how much effort you put into fighting with someone's wishes and try to go out with your own instead. That's kinda funny if you think about it - you could literally write all this same in every one of the wishlist threads. That's not how wishlist works, so please, respect other people's wishes.

 

 

 

You constantly ask what could be possibly changed in the model to suit the gender/race? I'll try to answer:

 

The obvious is the chest and this only for the jets (just to make them different, not that all look that different from man's chest). Skin color is easy to change wherever it's not covered. For helis there's also face. Nothing more is needed in this matter.

 

 

btw: It's rare to see pilot bodies in the videos because the pilot bodies are rare in the modules too and also they rarely look down into cockpits. Nevertheless I found a few in Ralfidude's and Jabbers'.

🖥️ Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX3060   🥽 Rift S   🕹️ T16000M HOTAS   ✈️ FC3, F-14A/B, F-15E   ⚙️ CA   🚢 SC   🌐 NTTR, PG, Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for new pilot models, for the last freaking time what are you going to change? You're discernible features looking in the mirror are next to none, see for yourself and ask yourself, if I assume nothing, what is the sex of my pilot just by looking at it.

 

Same opinion here. The rare times I had the opportunity to see female or colored pilots in a jet, I had to wait till they removed their gear to see who they were.

 

To all those who are whining about there not being pilot models / textures matching their gender / ethnicity, please just make a mod for it and leave us all alone. Let the ED team spend their very limited ressources on things that actually matter in a flight sim. They already seem sufficiently overwhelmed by their current workload. You've got to understand this. Jesus...


Edited by Nooch

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look, I'm not especially interested in making changes to current pilot bodies. I'm rather into adding ones that are missing in many modules first. The reason I took a discussion with you is to show how much effort you put into fighting with someone's wishes and try to go out with your own instead. That's kinda funny if you think about it - you could literally write all this same in every one of the wishlist threads. That's not how wishlist works, so please, respect other people's wishes.

 

What! discourse in a DCS wishlist thread? Colour me shocked, shocked I tell you! Okay arsery aside... But come on, I mean, we have polls on wishlist threads... There are plenty out there with users going further or suggesting something else. As for respect, I agree with the reasoning I disagree with the implementation.

 

The argument so far goes is that people in favour of this either want A.) More realism (female pilots, GCIs, JTACs, ATC exist, so they should be in DCS) which I agree with and/or B.) a more personable experience (which okay, I'm not super interested, but I can get behind why someone would)

 

Now changing the 3D modelling the pilots, just seems to be a misdirected way of implementing this, if you turn it off then you'll never notice and even if it's on you're hard pressed to notice (without messing with the camera), you have to be looking in the right place - you've already said yourself that people "rarely" look down into their cockpits, meaning it's even more of a fruitless effort. Not only does it seem that most turn off their pilot, not only is the change going to be so small that I'm betting hardly anyone would notice, but now it seems it'll be rare to even look in the right direction to see the change. The odds really aren't favourable for this...

 

A much better way IMO would be communications - this is an area that already needs a lot of improvements, is currently WIP and so long as you use a radio in DCS ever you will be hard pressed not to notice. So we have a feature that's longing for an upgrade, it's a feature much requested and seeing as they're already working on it, it makes even more sense to add diversity, it's more realistic, it's more immersive and it greatly improves a feature that desperately needs it, that I'm confident almost everyone would notice and benefit from.

 

You constantly ask what could be possibly changed in the model to suit the gender/race? I'll try to answer:

 

The obvious is the chest and this only for the jets (just to make them different, not that all look that different from man's chest). Skin color is easy to change wherever it's not covered. For helis there's also face. Nothing more is needed in this matter.

Fine, but again, with the chest you'd probably only notice if you were explicitly looking for it and again see above, you said yourself that players rarely look deep into their cockpits. All of which begs the question what's the point? The skin colour makes sense, and is trivial to change, we already have black pilots for the Red Tails P-51D, the stinger MANPAD in black, as are a couple of the new deck crew members.
Edited by Northstar98

Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AV-8B N/A, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, WWII Assets, CA, NS430, Hawk.

Terrains I own: South Atlantic, Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas.

System:

GIGABYTE B650 AORUS ELITE AX, AMD Ryzen 5 7600, Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 32 GB, Western Digital Black SN850X 1 TB (DCS dedicated) & 2 TB NVMe SSDs, Corsair RM850X 850 W, NZXT H7 Flow, MSI G274CV.

Peripherals: VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a fairly simple change, and I think E.D. could do it in a blink

 

This shows how extremely little you know about app dev, particularly in a sim like this.

 

Hey, ED, this *IS* something reasonable.

 

Please put it on the priority list right under reasonable AI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would rather see tons of objects in the game being redone (like the new firetruck) instead of wasting time on this thing.

 

Many objects are way outdated and are overdue for a refresh. Nice 3D design / texturing is quite time consuming. Assuming otherwise is just a lack of knowledge on the subject.

 

Not saying it should not be done, but the ED 3D / texturing people should refresh everything before even thinking about doing this.

 

So okay, but at the bottom of the objects refresh list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same opinion here. The rare times I had the opportunity to see female or colored pilots in a jet, I had to wait till they removed their gear to see who they were.

 

To all those who are whining about there not being pilot models / textures matching their gender / ethnicity, please just make a mod for it and leave us all alone. Let the ED team spend their very limited ressources on things that actually matter in a flight sim. They already seem sufficiently overwhelmed by their current workload. You've got to understand this. Jesus...

 

 

I suspect the instant you heard their voices on the radio you knew they were women.

 

Even if nothing was done with the models (though it's an order of magnitude smaller job than upgrading the model for a truck), having the option of the pilot speaking with a male voice or a female voice would let women stop feeling like they only exist in 'service' roles, and that they don't have to play 'in drag'.

 

Also

Don't you think it's weird how many white men think it's a waste of time giving representation to women and minorities, while women and minorities think it's a good idea.

I wonder why it is that the two groups have such different opinions about it.

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't you think it's weird how many white men think it's a waste of time giving representation to women and minorities, while women and minorities think it's a good idea.

I wonder why it is that the two groups have such different opinions about it.

 

This white man already committed to playing as Tracy Chapman until they fix the much more important shortcomings of the...you know...combat flight sim. That's how little I care about gender / racial identity in a game: I don't need the game to change to reflect me, I need the sim to be REALISTIC about it's subject matter.

 

As to giving representation to CUSTOMERS, I think it's always a great idea. And that feature requests should always be weighted where they'll do the most good for the most folks in the least time with the least effort.

 

A quick Google shows only about 6% of pilots are female. I'd say it's reasonable to posit that the percentage of female DCS pilots is even lower (happy to hear any facts around this).

 

So let us, indeed, represent the wishes of the paying customers in proportion to their desires.

 

Isn't that fair and equitable; y'know, like a democracy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A quick Google shows only about 6% of pilots are female

 

And both Saudi Arabia, and Australia each have less than 0.5 % of the world's population, but both have had time and resources devoted to creating skins for them.

 

by your numbers, there are 15 times more women pilots per head of the world's population than pilots from Saudi Arabia or Australia, but while they can fly as an Australian or a Saudi, women can't fly as women in DCS

 

Another fun fact - seeing as you find 6% a figure not worthy of representation - less than 5% of the world's population are native English speakers...

 

Should we port the game to Mandarin ?

There's a lot more chines speakers than English speakers - wouldn't that be fair and equitable; y'know, like a democracy?

 

Edit - Also - you ever consider that maybe the reason that only 6% of the worlds pilots are women is that they get the same reception in the real world when they ask for their place as they do here ?


Edited by Weta43

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And both Saudi Arabia, and Australia each have less than 0.5 % of the world's population, but both have had time and resources devoted to creating skins for them.

 

by your numbers, there are 15 times more women pilots per head of the world's population than pilots from Saudi Arabia or Australia, but while they can fly as an Australian or a Saudi, women can't fly as women in DCS

 

Another fun fact - seeing as you find 6% a figure not worthy of representation - less than 5% of the world's population are native English speakers...

 

Should we port the game to Mandarin ?

There's a lot more chines speakers than English speakers - wouldn't that be fair and equitable; y'know, like a democracy?

 

Edit - Also - you ever consider that maybe the reason that only 6% of the worlds pilots are women is that they get the same reception in the real world when they ask for their place as they do here ?

 

Skins? you mean functionality that already exists in the game? Next.

 

Never said 6% was "unworthy" - stop lying. I said time and resources should go where they're most desired by the paying customers.

 

Same story for the primary language of the game (not to mention that English, or rather, American, is THE language of aviation IRL).

 

Women (at least the ones blessed to have been born into first world western democracies) do as they please. Those that are strong enough and talented enough and determined enough to become pilots...do. Same thing applies to men.

Women simply overwhelmingly choose to do other things with their careers and lives.

 

Want to be able to skin your character by sex or race? I already stated I have no problem with that - to the point that I would be fine playing as the opposite of my IRL self if that meant the true priorities of the game were addressed.

So get your like minded folks together and take it up with ED. They'll go where the money is, just like any smart business does.


Edited by coduster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if nothing was done with the models (though it's an order of magnitude smaller job than upgrading the model for a truck), having the option of the pilot speaking with a male voice or a female voice would let women stop feeling like they only exist in 'service' roles, and that they don't have to play 'in drag'.
Yes, which is exactly what it should be - radio comms need improvement, the more voices present in communications, the less of an attack of the clones vibe everyone gets and the experience will probably be markedly better as a result, so.... it's the perfect place for diversity, and yes ED should implement radio communications from a diverse range of voice actors, because it'll be more realistic, more immersive and so long as you use a radio in DCS, you WILL notice the difference, plus the bonus of diversity - it makes far more sense and far more worthwhile by comparison to a feature that even when turned on, you're probably hard pressed to notice. Plus if my pilot is white I don't care, if it's black I don't care, if it's male I don't care, noticing a pattern yet? If it's female I don't care, if it's *insert race/gender/nationality/whatever* here I don't care. In fact that's a lie, it's not that I don't care, I can't care. As in I'm a physically incapable of bringing myself to caring in the most remote sense of the word about what exactly my pilot is and that's if I was desperately trying to, it's probably one of the most irrelevant things I can think of. I usually care way more about that trail of smoke heading my way accompanied by that nerve jangling beeping noise.

 

I don't think I've ever played a game where the character I was playing as looked or sounded even remotely like I do... I mean Portal much? But again, if I want to look in the mirror there's one in the bathroom, I play a game... To play a game, sure being able to identify with the characters has a level of importance, but most of the time (for me at least) it's through actions and story telling - not by accurately depicting the player, again see the start of this sentence.

 

Now why don't I care about it, why would that be? It's not like DCS is predominantly a military focused flight simulator, and not a mirror... If you're buying modules than can cost as much as $70 to look in the mirror you're probably better off looking elsewhere. But getting back to DCS, I don't know what it is, I do this really barbaric thing where I use a flight simulator... as a flight simulator. I know shocking right? I mean of all things?

 

Also don't you think it's weird how many white men think it's a waste of time giving representation to women and minorities, while women and minorities think it's a good idea.

I wonder why it is that the two groups have such different opinions about it.

 

00c.gif

 

Oh really captain definitely not straw manning the argument? And no I don't, and I think this was just a fairly asinine, cop out of an argument designed to start a stupid flame war (lets face it I'm pretty sure of what you were hinting at).

 

I mean it's not like there are hundreds and hundreds of threads asking for something that the majority of the player base doesn't feel should be prioritised at the moment, who think there are other things they want to see added or fixed first (seriously does nobody remember what happened when all we were seeing were trainers, people seemed as though they were running around flailing their arms in the air, screeching "the sky is falling" at the top of their voices? Or god forbid anyone suggest anything that isn't armed...)

 

But no this absolutely can't be the same thing at all, oh no, absolutely not, this is totally different and there's definitely no-one here talking about priorities or things they'd rather see instead or hell, even suggesting where this would be better suited to, even if they agree with the sentiment behind it. No, anyone who suggests otherwise must be those damned biased*, low self esteem* sexist, racist white men, after all they were all screaming when they saw that Wags video showcasing case III comms, y'know that video with a 98% approval rating? Oh wait... What about the stinger MANPAD unit?, they were furious at that, right? Right!? And what about those WIP deck crew models? I swear I thought WWIII had kicked off when all those white men saw those, oh wait, hang on...

 

Look adding new 3D models to pilots, as trivial the request is, probably won't be noticed, and that's even if the pilot body is turned on and if you can discern their features by looking at it. As far as I can tell, the only way you'll notice is if you were explicitly looking for said features - something I really imagine most people in DCS use DCS for... And to put the cherry on top you have to mess with the camera to even see your face (it's not like you can see much in the mirrors). So despite the ease in making the change, if it isn't going to be noticed, if it isn't going to make much of a difference, and there are things higher up the ladder for the 3D modellers to do then what's the point?

 

Meanwhile there are plenty of long outdated models, that are complained about comparatively more about than this. You pair up a gorgeous Tomcat/Hornet with the ONLY carrier capable tanker we have and it doesn't just look bad, it looks wrong, as there are other purely AI assets that look far more up to standard. Sure, something like that is going to be far more difficult than this, but I'm guessing it would be a more wished for item than this, (evidently) putting it higher on the priority list. I mean the current M60A3 looks like it was ported straight from the original Half-Life, meanwhile the Merkava IV looks way better, the consistency just gets nuked when you put them together. Ultimately ED are upgrading old models with new, so clearly they think it's a priority too...

 

*

Yes, these have actually been said about people who think otherwise in this very thread

 


Edited by Northstar98

Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AV-8B N/A, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, WWII Assets, CA, NS430, Hawk.

Terrains I own: South Atlantic, Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas.

System:

GIGABYTE B650 AORUS ELITE AX, AMD Ryzen 5 7600, Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 32 GB, Western Digital Black SN850X 1 TB (DCS dedicated) & 2 TB NVMe SSDs, Corsair RM850X 850 W, NZXT H7 Flow, MSI G274CV.

Peripherals: VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...