Dear ED - visibility

[Tippis]

Why are people not using the dot option in DCS for visibility issues, that really is not much different than some form of model enlargement and works really well, and doesn't get in the way like full labels? We did model enlargement and it didn't suit us, it caused as many issues as it might have helped.

A couple of reasons.

 

For one it is… well… ugly (sorry!). Yes, it makes spotting easier at longer distances, but in a way that really interferes with the visuals of the game. If you want that, you might as well go with a full custom label setup that offers better functionality for picking colours and shapes that make sense and that offer the kind of identification aid that was originally part of the purpose with Serfoss scaling.

 

For another, it sort of suffers the same issue as having no dot at all, in that it is harder to see the higher your resolution is. It achieves the goal of making the hard-to-see pixel easier to see, but that's rarely the problem people are having — indeed, as noted, it actually makes some BVR units visible when they really shouldn't be (being BVR and all). Again, if you want that, custom labels are just a better solution since you can tune the visibility range and size on screen to match your personal setup, and have it change in size depending on range.

 

But most commonly, it's because dots are still a type of label, and in MP all labels are often simply forced off on the server side along with things like enemy units on the map, or easy radios, or game flight mode, etc etc. Once again, if a server is set to allow labels (including dots) at all, chances are they'll run a custom label setup anyway. And then, of course, if the host is particularly ambitious in how labels are set up, that custom label file will redefine how dot labels work as well…

 

 

As a quick setting kind of thing, dot labels seem like a logical solution, but in practice, it is rarely as useful to solve whatever issue people are having as the custom-label option. Custom labels are a bit more work, sure, but also far more likely to solve the problem.

Edited July 27, 2019 by Tippis

[SharpeXB]

Apparently, this has been proven not to be the case by modders

Are you saying Wags is wrong?

[Tippis]

Are you saying Wags is wrong?

I'm saying that modders who have actually played around with RCS calculations (and conversed with the devs on the matter) have concluded that he's wrong. It also makes sense that he's wrong because it would be a pretty bad and easily exploitable implementation if he wasn't.

[SharpeXB]

From what others have reported, here and in other threads, the opposite seems to be true: the higher the resolution, the less realistic the distances at which you can see things — the 30km claim has shown up from multiple posters.

If DCS is using a single pixel sized sprite, then yes it’s more visible at 1080p than it is at 2160p

Last time I tested it out myself, distant aircraft were visible at crazy distances like you state above. That was the problem with Model Enlargement as well.

[SharpeXB]

I'm saying that modders who have actually played around with RCS calculations (and conversed with the devs on the matter) have concluded that he's wrong. It also makes sense that he's wrong because it would be a pretty bad and easily exploitable implementation if he wasn't.

Post link please.

 

The next statement by Wags was “it’s not a smart solution” He’s certainly correct about that.

That video was made 4 years ago so I doubt you’ll ever see scaling in DCS if you haven’t already. The bottom line is that it looks really horrible. If you think dot labels look ugly what about aircraft rendered at 2x their size?

Edited July 27, 2019 by SharpeXB

[NineLine]

Well sorry, but I don't agree at all, the dot system we have, while I will admit I would love to see some more custom options, works very well and is far from "ugly" I find oddly enlarged aircraft much more "ugly". The current dot works very nice, up close when you can see the model just fine, you barely notice it, and at greater distances, it does its job. The higher resolution is a user end issue, generally using too high a resolution on too small a monitor. I run 2880x1600 with no issues at all.

 

We can't account for servers that don't allow even the basic dot system, that is something to take up with the server owners. Also, we can't account for users unrealistic expectations for visibility either, at times, people expect to see a tiny little gray fighter at unreasonable distances, this has been verified by SME's that spotting isn't a given, it's a skill (remember the commander and chief of ED is up in WWII birds all the time). We do as much as we can and continue to look at ways to improve it, but if you disregard our efforts, like the improvement in dots that has been done so far, it makes for an unreachable bar.

 

A couple of reasons.

 

For one it is… well… ugly (sorry!). Yes, it makes spotting easier at longer distances, but in a way that really interferes with the visuals of the game. If you want that, you might as well go with a full custom label setup that offers better functionality for picking colours and shapes that make sense and that offer the kind of identification aid that was originally part of the purpose with Serfoss scaling.

 

For another, it sort of suffers the same issue as having no dot at all, in that it is harder to see the higher your resolution is. It achieves the goal of making the hard-to-see pixel easier to see, but that's rarely the problem people are having — indeed, as noted, it actually makes some BVR units visible when they really shouldn't be (being BVR and all). Again, if you want that, custom labels are just a better solution since you can tune the visibility range and size on screen to match your personal setup, and have it change in size depending on range.

 

But most commonly, it's because dots are still a type of label, and in MP all labels are often simply forced off on the server side along with things like enemy units on the map, or easy radios, or game flight mode, etc etc. Once again, if a server is set to allow labels (including dots) at all, chances are they'll run a custom label setup anyway. And then, of course, if the host is particularly ambitious in how labels are set up, that custom label file will redefine how dot labels work as well…

 

 

As a quick setting kind of thing, dot labels seem like a logical solution, but in practice, it is rarely as useful to solve whatever issue people are having as the custom-label option. Custom labels are a bit more work, sure, but also far more likely to solve the problem.

[Tippis]

Post link please. I really doubt ED themselves don’t understand how their own game works.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=244431

 

Well sorry, but I don't agree at all, the dot system we have, while I will admit I would love to see some more custom options, works very well and is far from "ugly" I find oddly enlarged aircraft much more "ugly". The current dot works very nice, up close when you can see the model just fine, you barely notice it, and at greater distances, it does its job. The higher resolution is a useful end issue, generally using too high a resolution on too small a monitor. I run 2880x1600 with no issues at all.

Just to clarify: I don't mean “ugly” as in the implementation — I mean aesthetically. It doesn't look good on screen. And you already have a more customisable option: creating your own labels file. That's why I mention that as an almost universally better option than the base dot setting. Doubly so since you can redefine how the dot labels look and work and thus offer two different layers of visibility.

 

It's a bit of work, sure, but in most respects, what you're wishing for there is actually already implemented. It's just not a preset delivered right out of the box, but that's what the user files section is for, right? ;)

 

We can't account for servers that don't allow even the basic dot system, that is something to take up with the server owners.

Don't worry — I don't expect you to. It was simply an explanation for why dot labels aren't used: in many situations where they'd be desirable, they're simply not an option.

 

 

e: Nightwolf's reasons below explains the logic why that is quite nicely.

Edited July 27, 2019 by Tippis

[Nightwolf]

The dot system and labels in general have other issues which have been reported, such as labels appearing through clouds, terrain, and cockpit panels. That means even if it gives better spotting ability in perfect conditions, it often gives very unrealistically good spotting abilities in poor conditions. AFAIK, it's for that reason most servers avoid the dots. Also,I think it requires some level of modification if you don't want it to show red or blue but just grey (so it doesn't IFF for you). All of these might be fine for SP or Coop multiplayer, but for any kind of PvP it really doesn't work

[NineLine]

The dot system and labels in general have other issues which have been reported, such as labels appearing through clouds, terrain, and cockpit panels. That means even if it gives better spotting ability in perfect conditions, it often gives very unrealistically good spotting abilities in poor conditions. AFAIK, it's for that reason most servers avoid the dots. Also,I think it requires some level of modification if you don't want it to show red or blue but just grey (so it doesn't IFF for you). All of these might be fine for SP or Coop multiplayer, but for any kind of PvP it really doesn't work

 

The dots by design were made to see through everything, it's one of the things I am asking/working on getting set to optional. But if you are formation flying, who cares? Also generally, the simply dot doesnt stand out as much as the full label, and isnt nearly as bad.

[Nightwolf]

The dots by design were made to see through everything, it's one of the things I am asking/working on getting set to optional. But if you are formation flying, who cares? Also generally, the simply dot doesnt stand out as much as the full label, and isnt nearly as bad.

 

I mean you asked for a reason why people don't use the dots. There you have one. Sure, for formation flying and aerobatics, relaxed flying you can use them all you want. It doesn't change the issues with them in PvP or the general non-realism of being able to see things through clouds or your own cockpit. The dot stands out plenty through gray cockpit panels and white clouds. We do appreciate you working toward changing it but for now it's just not viable for PvP or serious flying.

[SharpeXB]

I find oddly enlarged aircraft much more "ugly".

This. I’m sure most people agree. This sim is full of very realistic, detailed and nicely rendered objects and graphics where oddities like scaled up aircraft seen next to other unscaled objects would look really awful. Many players use large ultra high definition displays that would make the scaling oddity really apparent. Scaling is a solution from 16+ years ago, not something worth considering today.

[Tippis]

The dots by design were made to see through everything, it's one of the things I am asking/working on getting set to optional.

Oh my. Honestly, that — if it could be controlled via the labels.lua file (probably in addition to being a gameplay preference setting) — would solve so many issues with the current labels. It would pretty much reduce the whole scaling vs. label issue to one of pure aesthetics.

 

 

Do you have a patreon for… ehm… “convincing capital” to help you with the cause? :D

[SharpeXB]

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=244431

 

I agree with this conclusion

 

PS: You're not going to get smart scaling anyway. ED doesn't appear to want to implement it - they've tried with the 'imposters' system, and while smart scaling wouldn't be quite as ugly, it would still be ugly. I don't know if that is the primary reason, or if there is another, but that's what it is. Similarly, a lot of gains can be had by increasing contrast. There are threads and threads written about this stuff, but the one constant remains: You're not getting smart scaling any time soon AFAIK.

[Magic Zach]

I'm just going to point out that the Warbirds of Prey server has the best dot labels I've seen, and they're completely custom, unrelated to the dot labels provided by ED. And unlike the ones from ED, they don't instantly pop or vanish into existence, and they offer a good balance between players with 1080p, 4K, or VR. I think that server has set a good example of what dot labels should be.

[NineLine]

I'm just going to point out that the Warbirds of Prey server has the best dot labels I've seen, and they're completely custom, unrelated to the dot labels provided by ED. And unlike the ones from ED, they don't instantly pop or vanish into existence, and they offer a good balance between players with 1080p, 4K, or VR. I think that server has set a good example of what dot labels should be.

 

Yes, and that is what I want to see, a much more complex and customizable dot system. I think at the end of the day, it's the best answer.

[Tippis]

Yes, and that is what I want to see, a much more complex and customizable dot system. I think at the end of the day, it's the best answer.

Just a small UI utility to build and preview labels files would go a long way to making that a lot easier, especially if an object occlusion option could be implemented as well.

 

 

Off the top of my head, I can't really think of any other option or feature that's truly missing form the label customisation — it's more just the effort in putting it all together and testing it by constantly importing and reloading some mission with it. Maybe the text opacity, since that's currently an RGB value rather than RGBA (which is what shadows and blur use)? Or being able to set different fonts for different label types…

[Ignition]

We need to accept that the spotting in DCS will always be deficient and we will play with the zoom for ever, and someone said scaling was gameish LOL.

 

 

If zooming is not gameish I don't know what it is.

[The LT]

Smart scaling isn’t used in DCS because it would affect the RCS of the aircraft. It’s all been discussed before so use the search function.

 

Go to 1:45 to hear Wags explain it.

 

 

Please, spare us this nonsense. You people would buy any "explanation" thrown at you no matter how ridiculous it is.

[The LT]

This. I’m sure most people agree. This sim is full of very realistic, detailed and nicely rendered objects and graphics where oddities like scaled up aircraft seen next to other unscaled objects would look really awful. Many players use large ultra high definition displays that would make the scaling oddity really apparent. Scaling is a solution from 16+ years ago, not something worth considering today.

Except they don't. Most of you anti-smart scaling people didn't even read up on what it is or how it works.

[KTFBGB]

We need to accept that the spotting in DCS will always be deficient and we will play with the zoom for ever, and someone said scaling was gameish LOL.

 

 

If zooming is not gameish I don't know what it is.

 

I have seen many different explanations about in game zoom. The zoom level is a realistic representation of focusing a 2d screen like you would focus in a 3D world. The zoom levels basically represent a pilot leaning forward and focusing on a 2 degree patch of sky. It doesn’t magnify the vision per se. Imaging if you are just casually looking around at nothing outside in the yard. Then you hear an airplane coming. You turn and focus on a specific spot in the sky and you can see it. Where as if you continually just keep looking up and not focusing on any particular spot in the sky, the object has to be much closer before you just happen to see it.

[SharpeXB]

Except they don't. Most of you anti-smart scaling people didn't even read up on what it is or how it works.

Yeah we do, it’s been posted here like 900 times. :doh:

And ED isn’t going to do it so you can stop asking.

[Ignition]

I have seen many different explanations about in game zoom. The zoom level is a realistic representation of focusing a 2d screen like you would focus in a 3D world. The zoom levels basically represent a pilot leaning forward and focusing on a 2 degree patch of sky. It doesn’t magnify the vision per se. Imaging if you are just casually looking around at nothing outside in the yard. Then you hear an airplane coming. You turn and focus on a specific spot in the sky and you can see it. Where as if you continually just keep looking up and not focusing on any particular spot in the sky, the object has to be much closer before you just happen to see it.

 

 

 

 

I didnt know the DCS zoom was a perception simulator :megalol:

[SharpeXB]

If zooming is not gameish I don't know what it is.

Zoom view explained:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2561114&postcount=220

All flight sims have this feature for the same reason. It’s not unique to DCS

[Ignition]

Zoom view explained:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2561114&postcount=220

All flight sims have this feature for the same reason. It’s not unique to DCS

 

 

You quote out of context.

Using the zoom is gameish, theres no need to have so narrow FOV, but its there because in the game you can't see nothing without it and it would be impossible to dogfight or spot any aircraft at close distance.

The excessive zoom levels wouldn't be necessary if we had some scaling.

[The LT]

Yeah we do, it’s been posted here like 900 times. :doh:

 

And ED isn’t going to do it so you can stop asking.

Mister, go to the russian subforum thread and translate it. You are so full of it it's not even funny. Also, stop acting like you're a dev or a community manager. You are not and we do not need your 900 ridiculous posts predicting future events. You're not qualified to make any such claims.