Why wont DCS listen to us the customers

[BigDuke6ixx]

How can tracking possibly work in a pit with the controllers down low in such positions?

 

And still no answer

[Hippo]

How can tracking possibly work in a pit with the controllers down low in such positions?

 

 

It probably can't, but then, there is no requirement or expectation for it do so.

[Hippo]

They do. And sometimes, not so much.

 

A small example.

 

Not all will agree, but for me labels are an essential in VR. In fact, I have spent a lot of time tweaking a labels.lua, so that labels would fade in and out just so at such and such a distance, etc.

 

Well, some months ago in an update, labels no longer fade as they did. They're now only solid or invisible. Several people have raised this, and so far? Nothing. No reply, no fix, not even an acknowledgment. This is INFURIATING. Especially as it just (supposedly) requires undoing whatever was done to break it.

 

 

Come on, BIGNEWY / NineLine, impress me with an informative response RE label transparency.

[BigDuke6ixx]

It probably can't, but then, there is no requirement or expectation for it do so.

 

Who is this feature for then? Every serious flightsimmer is going to own physical controls, so it's not for them. Last I checked, DSC was a serious flight sim for people who are really into accurate simulations.

[BIGNEWY]

Come on, BIGNEWY / NineLine, impress me with an informative response RE label transparency.

 

All I can say is it is reported and on the list.

[Hippo]

Who is this feature for then? Every serious flightsimmer is going to own physical controls, so it's not for them. Last I checked, DSC was a serious flight sim for people who are really into accurate simulations.

 

I would've thought the target group is casual simmers (esp WW2), who have a VR setup, but no HOTAS kit. DCS has options for the not so hard-core.

 

I would assume pit builders, especially, would insist on a proper HOTAS, so wouldn't expect this to be for them.

Edited July 14, 2019 by Hippo

[Hippo]

All I can say is it is reported and on the list.

 

 

Thank you for that, good to hear. Suggestion to ED: consider prominently publishing "the list". Hopefully it has % progress and ETA columns.

[BIGNEWY]

Thank you for that, good to hear. Suggestion to ED: consider prominently publishing "the list". Hopefully it has % progress and ETA columns.

 

Sorry the list is for internal use only.

[Hippo]

Sorry the list is for internal use only.

 

Pity. Think how many of these:

Bright-eyed simmer: "Come on ED, where's my feature?"

ED: "We're working on it. Be patient"

 

threads we could all be spared.

Edited July 14, 2019 by Hippo

[BIGNEWY]

Pity. Think how many of these:

Bright-eyed simmer: "Come ED where's my feature?"

ED: "We're working on it. Be patient"

 

threads we could all be spared.

 

That would only ruin my morning routine of checking the forum before starting the day ;):)

[Wolf8312]

They do. And sometimes, not so much.

 

A small example.

 

Not all will agree, but for me labels are an essential in VR. In fact, I have spent a lot of time tweaking a labels.lua, so that labels would fade in and out just so at such and such a distance, etc.

 

Well, some months ago in an update, labels no longer fade as they did. They're now only solid or invisible. Several people have raised this, and so far? Nothing. No reply, no fix, not even an acknowledgment. This is INFURIATING. Especially as it just (supposedly) requires undoing whatever was done to break it.

 

 

I do also want better labels. Actually it isn't lables I want exactly I just want the dots to be magnified and devoid of any color (just black) so I can see at a distance where everything is without it being so immersion breaking. They should I think try to resemble the general shape of an AC as oppose to a square block or arrow.

 

Would also be great if allies could be shaded slightly darker, than axis or vice versa!

 

Lables are horrible to use in VR and when turned on they also accentuate reprojections slight stuttery effect from time to time.

[Wolf8312]

Just so you know, jetseat has absolutely nothing to do with ED, software is based on export function script and actually a lot of it is missing making for some discrepancies (e.g. engine rumble linked to rpm gauge rather than actual rpm).

 

All of this Ork is attributed to f410 & Andre

 

Sent from my VTR-L09 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

I dunno man. All I know is this sim has support for the jetseat, whereas an other sims developers steadfastly refuse to support it, or it's developers.

[Hippo]

I do also want better labels. Actually it isn't lables I want exactly I just want the dots to be magnified and devoid of any color (just black) so I can see at a distance where everything is without it being so immersion breaking. They should I think try to resemble the general shape of an AC as oppose to a square block or arrow.

 

Would also be great if allies could be shaded slightly darker, than axis or vice versa!

 

Lables are horrible to use in VR and when turned on they also accentuate reprojections slight stuttery effect from time to time.

 

Don't get me started on improvements that I'd wish to be made to labels ;) Labels leave a lot be desired, so it's extremely frustrating that an update made things WORSE.

 

I used the example I did because all I was requesting was for ED to fix what they broke. IMHO, it shouldn't even have made it through openbeta and into stable.

 

This was months ago, so, when the OP writes "Why wont DCS listen to us the customers", well, it could be argued he has a bit of a point, at least.

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=230253&highlight=labels

 

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=172861&highlight=labels

Edited July 14, 2019 by Hippo

[Steel Jaw]

VR complaints tire me, given its so expensive there can't be that many users.

[Hippo]

VR complaints tire me

 

 

Good.

[BigDuke6ixx]

VR complaints tire me, given its so expensive there can't be that many users.

 

It’s cheap. I can’t drive or fly with monitors now, the flatness makes no sense to my brain anymore.

Edited July 14, 2019 by BigDuke6ixx

[javelina1]

It’s cheap. I can’t drive or fly with monitors now, the flatness makes no sense to my brain anymore.

I'm with you brother. I can't ever go back.

[Sierra99]

Five senses are used in Real World Flying...Sight, Hearing, Touch and to a lesser extent Smell and Taste. (Do I smell hydraulic Fluid...Do I have enough Coffee)

 

It seems to me VR advocates want to the Game optimized for One sense at the expense of others. Graphics are awesome...But holding a Wii controller in my hand or NOTHING in my hand and calling it an F-18C Stick because that's what I see on screen runs counter intuitive to what you seem to be demanding.

 

You are ignoring a very critical sense. The sense of Touch.

Edited July 14, 2019 by Sierra99

[BigDuke6ixx]

Five senses are used in Real World Flying...Sight, Hearing, Touch and to a lesser extent Smell and Taste. (Do I smell hydraulic Fluid...Do I have enough Coffee)

 

It seems to me VR advocates want to the Game optimized for One sense at the expense of others. Graphics are awesome...But holding a Wii controller in my hand or NOTHING in my hand and calling it an F-18C Stick because that's what I see on screen runs counter intuitive to what you seem to be demanding.

 

You are ignoring a very critical sense. The sense of Touch.

 

Only one VR user in this thread wants it.

[eaglecash867]

Only one VR user in this thread wants it.

 

Yup. There seems to be only one guy in this thread that wants that, so applying his wants to all of us under the label of "VR advocates" is erroneous.

 

Given the fact that most manufacturers of VR gear now seem to be headed in the direction of WMR headsets with inside-out tracking, that presents a major problem with implementing this call for making it so you can use VR hand controllers to "grab" phantom flight controls. WMR headsets all seem to have the problem of losing sight of the hand controllers if those controllers are behind the headset. So, if you're flying in DCS and have to crank around to look behind you, tracking of the hand controllers will be lost. Not a very good thing to have happen if you're in a dogfight or trying to evade a missile shot. That seems like reason enough for the DCS team to back-burner this kind of improvement, because its only going to work with HMDs that have external tracking. I can see it now. They implement this improvement, and the people who want that feature will then complain because it doesn't work with their WMR headset, so they'll demand that they make it so the phantom controls can float in the cockpit to follow their hands. Then they'll complain that the fix isn't coming fast enough. :doh:

[Rosebud47]

... ahhh, now I understood what this thread is about :-)

 

Am now since one and half year with DCS -not so long than most others, but did not ever sit in a DCS cockpit without VR and HOTAS ... can´t imagine missing any of these.

[Pac-Man]

When are DCS going to listen to us the customers, I am becoming increasingly frustrated with being told something is w.i.p. and it takes time but will happen sometime. Not good enough DCS.

Other flight sims etc. have the ability to take hold of throttle and stick for a couple of years now and you seem no nearer implementing it, why not, you do not even give a straight answer when asked, just w.i.p. .

I have requested along with others to have this implementation for a couple of years now and its still nowhere to be seen and DCS do not keep us up to date on progress, do they not want to give it to us. Maybe they need to fix some of the things they have taken our money for before bringing out new planes etc to take even more of our cash.

What do you think ?

I appreciate it is difficult to implement but if other programers can do it I am sure the team at DCS with all their expertise can do it as well.

Look forward to hearing comments

:mad:

 

I feel like once a month someone posts something ignorant like this.

 

What other programmers? Show me a SIM with all the functionality of DCS from the aircraft, to the environment, to the AI, to the communication, to the Mission Editor, to the Input/Output support. Please, tell me which one you're talking about that offers all that DCS does. I'm a flight SIM freak!! I would love to test out another one like DCS!!

 

1. Stop comparing other flights sims to DCS World. You can't do it because there are no other flights SIMs like DCS. Yes, there are other complex sims like Xplane and Prepared and even BFM. However, let's take a look at that for a minute. I have hundreds invested into Prepar3d and XPlane 11 and they're awesome. Yes, in Xplane you can use VR controllers to take command of the cockpt. However, VR support still has a long way to go for it. Let's also take a look at the Aircraft that come with XPLANE11 NOT the aircraft from 3rd party developers... They're crap! They are extremely lacking in functionality and quality. Most of the quality in BOTH scenery and aircraft come from either 3rd party or private development. That is just scratching the surface. Even BFM - sure it's a pretty darn good sim.. but severely lacking in the graphics quality that DCS offers. If, you're going to compare apples, it should be against another same type of apple.

2. You act as though DCS is a simple line of text and code that one who is skilled can whip out in a moment and boom you have what you want. Well then hell, we should have the F-16 tomorrow. Get ready guys! Give it a rest! You have no idea or understanding how this all comes together to make a fully functional, 3d, immersive, dynamic, high study level sim with complex systems, flight models, terrain, WEAPONS, targeting systems, drag and environment impact. While, offering full customization to all of the above without breaking the hell out of it.

3. You speak of VR as if it is a static technology. Just last night my CONTROLLERS for the Rift S had a firmware update. Which could have impacted many 3rd party sims or games that would be able to take use of the controllers.

 

I work in IT and closely with software development. So, I have an understanding of how truly difficult software development is. Sorry, to go on a rant. I'm not trying to discredit your frustration. However, address it appropriately and understand truly what you're asking before you comment as though it's as simple as changing the batteries in the tv remote. It's extremely disrespectful to their time and effort.

 

On a final note, do you realize how much functionality you would lose trying to use VR controllers over a traditional HOTAS? Really, sit down and ask yourself could you effectively combat the aircraft without them? Factor in, flaps, landing gear, trim, comms, slewing, armament controls, weapon employment, lights... The whole point of the introduction of HOTAS in real aircraft was to limit the amount of time a pilot had his/her hands of the controls. Just a thought...

Edited July 14, 2019 by Pac-Man

[BigDuke6ixx]

^ well said.

[Hippo]

I feel like once a month someone posts something ignorant like this. ...

 

Your rant is a collection of straw men, and misrepresentations of what the OP wrote.

 

Have you missed that ED has already promised stated as goals the features that he refers to?

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3977841&postcount=33

Edited July 14, 2019 by Hippo
Keeping pedants happy

[Svsmokey]

Your rant is a collection of straw men, and misrepresentations of what the OP wrote.

 

Have you missed that ED has already promised the features that he refers to?

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3977841&postcount=33

 

ED never-ever-"promises" anything . They only state goals-as they should , because they never know what problems they are going to encounter implementing features-like wmr cameras limited view losing the controllers for example . Or cv1 cameras being blocked by the desk , or the difficulties involved in hotas-less combat .

And yes , goals are occasionally abandoned upon further analysis of the practicality and cost/benefit ratio , or difficulties in coding .

Edited July 14, 2019 by Svsmokey