Spotting is really bad

[Mr. Big.Biggs]

On 7/20/2021 at 12:47 PM, Ala13_ManOWar said:

Yeah, well, you can call it DCS fanboy talking community, you can call it I've been there trying to seek a small white GA aircraft in front of me in the traffic pattern, perhaps 2-3Km away, with me being at 125%+ eyesight and not being able to see it until after quite a time checking and when you see it's a barely traceable minuscule dot in the horizon. Your choice .

 

S!

Agreed and point taken. I’m referring to things like I will be flying along and out of the “corner “ of my eyes I see contrails. Now if I turn my head and look directly at them, they are nowhere to be found. Look away and they are in the corner of my vision again. Same thing with ships. Fly up the coast and see a ship to the right. Turn to look and its not there.  
I believe that is the behavior folks are referring to,  not what you are suggesting. 
Have a great day! 

[Ala13_ManOWar]

Yep, I believe already commented that, LODs can be hideous at times. Agreed. But even though it definitely affects spotting, that's not exactly a "spotting" problem.

 

S!

[Gunfreak]

My problem isn't so much spotting as identification,  even at real close range it's hard to tell a 190 from a spitfire.  Even trying to look at details like square vs rounded wings. 

And I run a G2 at 90% resolution. 

[Ala13_ManOWar]

You mean in VR? Low resolution in VR is definitely not a DCS problem but hardware related.

In a screen I can tell models from a distance without much trouble, I guess you have to get used to it. Anyway telling models and resulting friendly fire is a problem also in real life, so even that is realistic I guess .

 

S!

[Gunfreak]

2 minutes ago, Ala13_ManOWar said:

You mean in VR? Low resolution in VR is definitely not a DCS problem but hardware related.

In a screen I can tell models from a distance without much trouble, I guess you have to get used to it. Anyway telling models and resulting friendly fire is a problem also in real life, so even that is realistic I guess .

 

S!

 

90% of 4k isn't low resolution, it's far more than my 1440p monitor. 

[Ala13_ManOWar]

Re-scaled resolutions usually feature that kind of problems not working good enough when it comes to telling shapes one from another. It's not you, I don't use VR but I see people complaining about VR spotting at a distance and not telling the difference between models. That's what you pay for using VR I guess since the technology is still in it's infancy.

 

S!

[kablamoman]

10 hours ago, Gunfreak said:

 

90% of 4k isn't low resolution, it's far more than my 1440p monitor. 

 

 

This is a fundamental misunderstanding of how VR works.

 

That 4k is spread over a much greater field of view, and so pixel density per arc minute is still a lot lower than it is when you're looking at a flat monitor, even a monitor that's technically a lower resolution panel than the one(s) in your HMD.

Edited August 16, 2021 by kablamoman

[flygav]

The problem I have with it all is losing sight in a dogfight. If your opponent disappears from you in a dogfight you are DEAD. 
All I know is I wish they would fix the issue.  

[Peter5on]

In that other sim what i find out is that area above ground have something like fog/haze all around even on a clear day and its a lot easier to see moving black spot. Another thing is much less details like trees buildings, ground textures and their colors. I have no problem seeing tiny little black dots on the sky or cloud. The problem is when i start dogfighting, i loose sight for like 2 seconds and then im like completely lost but the enemy wast there just a moment ago... Glass reflections even make it worse. My solution is to lower textures on low, trees to minimum flat shadows or off every option will give you much better fps. But for single player go all the way up with graphical options. You know its like pro players lower resolution turn off everything that distracts them in FPS games.

[Docsnuggles]

On 9/7/2021 at 6:39 PM, Peter5on said:

In that other sim what i find out is that area above ground have something like fog/haze all around even on a clear day and its a lot easier to see moving black spot. Another thing is much less details like trees buildings, ground textures and their colors. I have no problem seeing tiny little black dots on the sky or cloud. The problem is when i start dogfighting, i loose sight for like 2 seconds and then im like completely lost but the enemy wast there just a moment ago... Glass reflections even make it worse. My solution is to lower textures on low, trees to minimum flat shadows or off every option will give you much better fps. But for single player go all the way up with graphical options. You know its like pro players lower resolution turn off everything that distracts them in FPS games.

Absolutely agree, but the problem is that ED ignores the fact that there are moments when objects IN SIGHT suddenly disappear, and fanboys will attack you and complain.

[OLD CROW]

On 9/7/2021 at 6:39 PM, Peter5on said:

... Glass reflections even make it worse

I asked them to increase the transparency  in that visual layer in the P-51, as it was some updates ago..... still waiting an official answer one week after and counting. IMAO models LOD's at mid visual ranges  should be "fake augmented" in WW2 small fighters silouetes. I understand they try to tend to be realistics in this point....but it also depends in other ingame points that help it to work properlly, and this is not the actual situation: 1 mile away or even in a close vertical dogfight a 109 is just another motionless pixel from the sea at most zoom out positions....if at least they were sparks....

[Harlikwin]

5 hours ago, OLD CROW said:

I asked them to increase the transparency  in that visual layer in the P-51, as it was some updates ago..... still waiting an official answer one week after and counting. IMAO models LOD's at mid visual ranges  should be "fake augmented" in WW2 small fighters silouetes. I understand they try to tend to be realistics in this point....but it also depends in other ingame points that help it to work properlly, and this is not the actual situation: 1 mile away or even in a close vertical dogfight a 109 is just another motionless pixel from the sea at most zoom out positions....if at least they were sparks....

 

Ah the glory days last year where every plane showed up as glowing white square... You knew right where everyone was. 

[OLD CROW]

35 minutes ago, Harlikwin said:

Ah the glory days last year where every plane showed up as glowing white square... You knew right where everyone was. 

Indeed. Maybe from a someone's diehard purist point of view ( I don't share it) it could be considered "visually with lack of realism", but when all your situational awareness fully relies in all what you can spot.... holly molly yeah old times rules!! At least it had a higher playable component than nowadays. From an "optimistic- sarcastic point of view now I got 2 variants in 1: a P-51 D with a teardrop glass but with the same rear visibility than a B/C version with the birdcage canopy ;)))).  

[kablamoman]

Game has some real issues with spotting that I hope they're able to address.

 

You can see contacts ridiculously easy over very large distances (pretty unrealistic), but as soon as they get into the radius where they actually render in they are very hard to pick out from the background. So you end up with this weird backwards situation where it's actually easier to spot targets at range than it is to see them when they're closer. It's also really hard to get a sense of just how far out a contact may be as there doesn't seem to be much difference in rendering 10 miles out compared to 40 (pretty silly you can even see the latter at all).

 

Regarding the closer-in stuff, I feel that the way the engine renders objects and blends them into the world tends to soften them a bit too much and get rid much needed contrast. I am not sure there is an obvious solution to this, but visual acquisition is a very big part of WW2 stuff at least, and that's what I play so I hope they are able to improve the situation going forward.

Edited September 12, 2021 by kablamoman

[Gunfreak]

Listening to Clostermanns book, he can give fantastic details of enemy planes,  the coloured noses, the engines doing their stuff. While in here in VR squinting try to tell a 109 or 190 from a spitfire.  I've lost count of how many times I've died in both SP and MP because I withhold fire as I just can't ID the plane in my sight and often by the time I'm relatively sure it's an enemy, another 109 has snuck up behind me and one-shot my plane with the 30mm.

[Ala13_ManOWar]

4 hours ago, Gunfreak said:

Listening to Clostermanns book, he can give fantastic details of enemy planes,  the coloured noses, the engines doing their stuff. While in here in VR squinting try to tell a 109 or 190 from a spitfire.  I've lost count of how many times I've died in both SP and MP because I withhold fire as I just can't ID the plane in my sight and often by the time I'm relatively sure it's an enemy, another 109 has snuck up behind me and one-shot my plane with the 30mm.

Bearing in mind Clostermann's memories are known to be mostly a novel with few real events to back him up don't take those words as real.

 

S!

[Scoll]

Look, some times ago, i've asked for moon size (2015) to be more realistic (it was an epic post with amazing replies...).

ED has some problems with visualisation (not new).

[OLD CROW]

Have you already found if there is any hidden CIA or KGB reasson to keep the ED moon in this side? : Some posts are so hilarious they can only be considered a product of the Blue Moon effect. 

So don not be surprised if sales are lower than expected on anything that does not equip a radar.

 

[Harlikwin]

5 hours ago, Scoll said:

Look, some times ago, i've asked for moon size (2015) to be more realistic (it was an epic post with amazing replies...).

ED has some problems with visualisation (not new).

 

LOL, I've totally noticed that and complained about it, the moon is too damn small. 

[Nealius]

On 9/13/2021 at 7:09 AM, Ala13_ManOWar said:

Bearing in mind Clostermann's memories are known to be mostly a novel with few real events to back him up don't take those words as real.

 

S!

 

Nearly every combat pilot from WW2 up through Desert Storm describes vividly remembering details of their opponent(s) during a scrap. Computer screens, whether monitor of VR, can not yet replicate the visual accuity of the human eye. Thus I use the smallest dot labels possible, with them only changing to red when within a reasonable distance like 5nm or so. 

[Harlikwin]

11 hours ago, Nealius said:

 

Nearly every combat pilot from WW2 up through Desert Storm describes vividly remembering details of their opponent(s) during a scrap. Computer screens, whether monitor of VR, can not yet replicate the visual accuity of the human eye. Thus I use the smallest dot labels possible, with them only changing to red when within a reasonable distance like 5nm or so. 

 

Yeah thats great for offline (which I do too), but the "hardcore" online servers, oh no....

[Digitalvole]

On 9/12/2021 at 6:44 PM, kablamoman said:

Game has some real issues with spotting that I hope they're able to address.

 

You can see contacts ridiculously easy over very large distances (pretty unrealistic), but as soon as they get into the radius where they actually render in they are very hard to pick out from the background. So you end up with this weird backwards situation where it's actually easier to spot targets at range than it is to see them when they're closer. It's also really hard to get a sense of just how far out a contact may be as there doesn't seem to be much difference in rendering 10 miles out compared to 40 (pretty silly you can even see the latter at all).

 

Regarding the closer-in stuff, I feel that the way the engine renders objects and blends them into the world tends to soften them a bit too much and get rid much needed contrast. I am not sure there is an obvious solution to this, but visual acquisition is a very big part of WW2 stuff at least, and that's what I play so I hope they are able to improve the situation going forward.

 

This is exactly what I’ve found, too easy from a distance then all of a sudden pretty much impossible to spot let alone id until there right up your chuffer flinging lead at you.

 

Tried the other sim last night just to see what it’s like in comparison, and though I prefer DCS, spotting and ID’ing planes was much easier and I didn’t have a zoom.

 

On 9/12/2021 at 11:09 PM, Ala13_ManOWar said:

Bearing in mind Clostermann's memories are known to be mostly a novel with few real events to back him up don't take those words as real.

 

S!

 

Ive heard this a few times now, I’m interested to know why this is so?

[Ala13_ManOWar]

2 hours ago, Digitalvole said:

Ive heard this a few times now, I’m interested to know why this is so?

Well, apparently he attributed himself with many achievements he didn't make but the book looks very shiny and appealing that way and it makes him look like a great ace which is something France didn't have in WWII for obvious reasons.

 

S!

[Jenkem Junkie]

Does anyone know a reliable way to get planes to disappear? I want to test if disabling reflections with a pure green or yellow roughtmet will fix the disappearing planes, but I've tried multiple settings in a test setting to get the plane to disappear but it won't disappear.

[flygav]

In addition to the close-up issues...

What gets my goat is... At least using a screen is you have no peripheral vision, compared to other sims. You have tunnel vision and have a hard time finding the plane you just merged with... and if you lose sight of the other plane in a dogfight you are pretty much dead. Maybe its better in VR but on a screen it really bits.