Let's talk "realism"...

[rayrayblues]

4 minutes ago, shagrat said:

Pilots explicitly used binoculars to spot stuff on the ground...

 

Explicitly, but not exclusively.

 

5 minutes ago, shagrat said:

Zoom as a way to simulate binos is definitely a thing.

 

Exactly my point.  

[Astronaut]

The owl-head / g-load restriction idea is absolutely terrible for one clear reason that you cannot fix. The fastest way to make someone sick in VR is have their view and their head/inner ear motion not be in agreement. We're not in fighter jets, our body thinks we can turn our head, but if what we see doesn't match we'll vomit. Want to know how to turn people off from a game and make them not want to invest in it, make them vomit when they play lol.

Edited July 28, 2021 by Astronaut

[Baltic Pirate]

7 hours ago, 5ephir0th said:

I fly on VR only and i can look 180º back, just move my body too, not head only, so no problem about realism here.

 

And about zoom, i only use it for in cockpit elements, dont like to use it outside

You can turn around with DCS sitting home in front of your computer. Try doing that strapped into a 5 point harness, wearing a helmet, mask and full kit while pulling G's. Not that easy. 180 view is not realistic in that sense.  That being said, DCS is a game, albeit a very very realistic one with great graphics, models etc. it is about as close you can get to flying while being home. Having flown since 1987 and professionally since 1996, I find the game a brilliant  sim. Does the ability to look back or zoom give an advantage, I do not think it does.  If it makes your experience more enjoyable and DCS mechanics provide for that, you should be free to use it as you see fit.

 

For me this is realistic enough. I've flown a few types in DCS in real life and use this game to keep current with excellent results. It is a huge money saver in that sense and also has kept me in the loop on types I have not been able to train on since COVID started. Adding VR (Reverb G2) makes the realism even greater.

[SharpeXB]

2 minutes ago, Baltic Pirate said:

Try doing that strapped into a 5 point harness, wearing a helmet, mask and full kit while pulling G's. Not that easy.

They are not strapped in like that… go back a page and watch  

 

[M1Combat]

Another thing about the owl head issue...

 

I can't move my eyes much in DCS VR before I lose clarity due to the lense type.  Look at the guy in the 109...  His eyes are doing a great deal of the angle work.  I have to turn my upper body just like the pilot in the vid but FURTHER in VR...  and I STILL can't get as good of a view as a real pilot.  IRL I can turn and look out my rear window as long as I care to back up...  No probs.

 

No need for BS limits there trust me.

 

Regarding the same issue on a flat screen...  I feel like it mostly makes up for the lack of vector awareness.  By that I mean it's easier in VR (IMO) to see where an opponent is going to be in a second.  Making it slightly easier for a monitor user (assuming TiR...) to keep track of where an opponent is currently AT, when they have a slight disadvantage in knowing exactly where they'll be, is a good trade IMO.

[SharpeXB]

It’s funny that only when VR came along did this myth start spreading that fighter pilots can’t see their 6:00 despite all the logic and evidence to the contrary. 
Why does the phrase “check six” exist?

Why did all these aircraft like the P-51 and P-47 and eventually the Spitfire change from bulkhead fuselage designs to blister canopies?

Why did pilots remove the armored headrest in the 109?
Why did the 109 introduce an armored glass headrest?

[bies]

Well, some exploits are due to limitations of average user hardware and they are compromises (like high magnification "telescope" in your eyes), but some could be ousted from the sim quite easily. I think each and every case should be treated and judged individually.

 

I.e. owl head - if you are under some only moderate G in real aircraft you can check your six if you have proper bubble canopy and purposely loosened straps. That's why some fighters have side handles inside the cockpit.

 

But obviously 180° degree owl head under extreme G loading would tear your neck muscles or even break your neck and possibly kill you if connected with some rapid roll maneuver in modern fighter helmet having significant mass.

 

Solution could be squeezing some extreme Gs virtual pilot's head should be required to face more or less straight by the user, based on the seat's headrest with only small movement, slightly more in vertical.

If you wouldn't do that and still pull 9G you would cripple your virtual pilot or lose consciousness way faster.

 

But it's only a game after all so who knows what would be better. Maybe it would be an interesting additional layer adding depth to close air combat? Or maybe it would be a hindrance?

Edited July 30, 2021 by bies

[Baltic Pirate]

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

They are not strapped in like that… go back a page and watch  

 

As I said, It is not that easy.

[SharpeXB]

15 minutes ago, Baltic Pirate said:

As I said, It is not that easy.

Yeah but the effort required to do this can’t be simulated in a PC game. 

30 minutes ago, bies said:

Solution could be squeezing some extreme Gs virtual pilot's head should be required to face more or less straight by the user

Again, that would make all the VR players

[Tippis]

1 minute ago, SharpeXB said:

Yeah but the effort required to do this can’t be simulated in a PC game. 

Of course it can. It's actually already being done in a number of ways.

 

1 minute ago, SharpeXB said:

Again, that would make all the VR players

That depends entirely on how it's implemented. You're assuming that this must absolutely be done in exactly one way: by moving the view point. Since that assumption is false, the conclusion is false as well.

[shagrat]

vor einer Stunde schrieb Baltic Pirate:

You can turn around with DCS sitting home in front of your computer. Try doing that strapped into a 5 point harness, wearing a helmet, mask and full kit while pulling G's. Not that easy. 180 view is not realistic in that sense.  That being said, DCS is a game, albeit a very very realistic one with great graphics, models etc. it is about as close you can get to flying while being home. Having flown since 1987 and professionally since 1996, I find the game a brilliant  sim. Does the ability to look back or zoom give an advantage, I do not think it does.  If it makes your experience more enjoyable and DCS mechanics provide for that, you should be free to use it as you see fit.

 

For me this is realistic enough. I've flown a few types in DCS in real life and use this game to keep current with excellent results. It is a huge money saver in that sense and also has kept me in the loop on types I have not been able to train on since COVID started. Adding VR (Reverb G2) makes the realism even greater.

Another difference between real life and VR, in real life the pilot can move his eyes and shift the look to the edge, so leaning forward (just watch a bit of YT footage to see how agile you need to be to keep eyes on a target) moving your head over your shoulder you then move the eyes to look behind you... isn't really possible in VR or with head tracking, as we don't have enough peripheral vision in VR (yet) and with 2D and head tracking a bit of exaggerating is necessary to really "check six".

On the other side is the physical effort and fight against Gs to do it in real life.

[Convexrook]

5 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

They don’t have this harness tightened during ACM. You can see it hanging loose from his shoulder and he even has to reposition it.  I don’t imagine any fighter pilot was strapped in like an astronaut or F1 driver. Sure that’s dangerous but so is being shot down.

 

It's funny watching him hustle to get everything under control WHILE trying to do BFM. I love it. I do the same thing in VR and my wife laughs at me all the time

 

[Coyote_One]

We should probably remove the pause screen too. Also the key binding page. Being able to bind a complex function to one button press is pretty unrealistic and unreasonable. Aircraft selection too is pretty unrealistic because there's no way you can be typed and current on 5 different jets at the same time in active duty.

 

Please keep those two cents in your wallet.

Edited July 29, 2021 by Coyote_One
Addition.

[draconus]

3 hours ago, Coyote_One said:

We should probably remove the pause screen too. Also the key binding page. Being able to bind a complex function to one button press is pretty unrealistic and unreasonable. Aircraft selection too is pretty unrealistic because there's no way you can be typed and current on 5 different jets at the same time in active duty.

I'll try to explain...

Pause screen stops the simulation, that's nothing more to it.

What complex function? Autostart? Yeah, it's a cheat. The bindings alone deals with our hardware limitation.

Simulation starts after you click Fly after aircraft selection, so it's a different simulation than it was with different aircraft and different pilot.

And yes, if die in a sim, you just start another simulation, which starts and ends whenever you like.

I hope you understand now.

[bies]

On 7/28/2021 at 7:23 PM, SharpeXB said:

Again, that would make all the VR players

 

Not really, as I said the player would be required to physically look more or less straight before squeeze extreme Gs, he would be free not to do that, but he would injure the virtual pilot or lose consciousness way faster.

But nothing would force his virtual head straight separating physical and virtual head movement.

 

(And separation of physical and virtual movement is what causes nausea in VR)

Edited July 30, 2021 by bies

[SharpeXB]

6 hours ago, bies said:

 

Not really, as I said the player would be required to physically look more or less straight before squeeze extreme Gs, he would be free not to do that, but he would injure the virtual pilot.

But nothing would force his virtual head straight separating physical and virtual head movement.

 

(And separation of physical and virtual movement is what causes nausea in VR)

Simulating physical exhaustion and it’s effect on G tolerance would be an interesting feature. But it would have to be modeled in the AI as well which gets complicated. You need to compete with the AI who already have an awareness advantage as far as I can tell. 

[Coyote_One]

8 hours ago, draconus said:

I'll try to explain...

Pause screen stops the simulation, that's nothing more to it.

What complex function? Autostart? Yeah, it's a cheat. The bindings alone deals with our hardware limitation.

Simulation starts after you click Fly after aircraft selection, so it's a different simulation than it was with different aircraft and different pilot.

And yes, if die in a sim, you just start another simulation, which starts and ends whenever you like.

I hope you understand now.

I think you missed the heavy sarcasm in that post.....

[draconus]

1 hour ago, Coyote_One said:

I think you missed the heavy sarcasm in that post.....

Yeah, totaly.

[Beirut]

Zoom is required. I'm not 21 anymore and my eyes need a bit of help at times, also, getting max eye candy is a must and zoom is a must for that.

 

 

[Dragon1-1]

We do not need artificial limits for VR. However, we do need better VR headsets.  I believe that will eventually come, 8K headsets are already a thing (if a rather expensive one), and they're working on increasing the sweet spot size. We also need optimization so that those 8K headsets can be used without two watercooled 3090s.

 

Zoom should definitely be there, and I wouldn't be against introducing explicitly modeled binoculars that one could look through.  

[Nealius]

The majority of "unrealistic" things in DCS, or flightsims in general, typically comes down to technology not able to sufficiently replicate real life (this includes visual acuity of the human eye in the real world vs. on a screen).

 

 

[Mars Exulte]

On 7/28/2021 at 3:26 AM, Doc3908 said:

For a game that prides itself (rightfully!) on creating super-realistic flight models and immersive environments, it really gets me that things like zoom and spinning your head 180 degrees (and keeping it their indefinitely) is allowed. Yes, it's a convenience

   No, it's a necessity. Screens range in size from 17'' to *insert giant TV of choice* and from presumably 1080p on the low end to 4k (or higher). That is a tremendous range of hardware. Also, you're NOT ''zooming in''. The default view is already zoomed OUT (relative to the size of your screen if it was a window). This means default FoV already have crap visibility compared to what you could really see if you were there. This becomes less of an issue the karger your screen, as the default FoV approaches something approximating real life and overall visibility improves.

 

On 7/28/2021 at 3:26 AM, Doc3908 said:

- zoom helps with aircraft id and aiming

  Yes, it does, because when you are at the default fish eye lens field of view, you can't see a damn thing.

 

On 7/28/2021 at 3:26 AM, Doc3908 said:

, and owl-head is great for checking your six every few seconds. But how realistic is that?

  Assuming you're not under a high g load, you can turn your head as much as you want in real life, and pretty fast... I have never heard anyone complaining about this before. ''You can turn your body around as far as you want and as fast as you want!''.... uh... yeah?

 

  If you're talking about TrackIR and people with high sensitivity settings, that's not optional. The tracking lights have to face forward and you can't turn your head very far or it loses signal. Restricting your ability to look around would make the entire thing moot.

 

On 7/28/2021 at 3:26 AM, Doc3908 said:

 Not to mention it gives the flat-screen players an unfair advantage over the VR crowd

  And me having a full scale pit with ultra high end controls gives me a huge advantage over somebody trying to use a gamepad or cheap all-in-one HOTAS. There's no way to balance hardware except to restrict the game to mouse and keyboard, 1080p, and it checks go make sure your screen isn't over 19'' in diameter @@ Just play the game and wuit worrying about what other people are using.

 

 

 

 

   The problem with this mentality is realism has nothing to do with any of this. Your complaining about random quality of life items that are in EVERY SIM EVER MADE SINCE THE 90s.

 

  Further, the hardware people uses varies tremendously, according to their budget and enthusiasm. There is no way to control that nor should anyone try. It's also a given that whatever controls you're using  there's a 99.9% chance they're nothing like what the ''real'' thing uses, nor do they feel the same, you're not subjected to physics etc etc. Hardware is an readily assumed ''none of this is right, but it's a video game and it doesn't matter.''

 

  I'm all for realism of game mechanics, and not compromising unnecessarily, but some people doth protest overmuch.

   

[shagrat]

Am 29.7.2021 um 08:57 schrieb bies:

 

Not really, as I said the player would be required to physically look more or less straight before squeeze extreme Gs, he would be free not to do that, but he would injure the virtual pilot or lose consciousness way faster.

But nothing would force his virtual head straight separating physical and virtual head movement.

 

(And separation of physical and virtual movement is what causes nausea in VR)

 

...we should discuss this AFTER we get either dome projection 280° setup for home use or VR with 210° horizontal and 140° (70 up plus 80 down) field of view.

Because only then we have eliminated at least one disadvantage for simpilots vs. real life. Next may be "haptic" feedback in VR so you can switch and operate stuff in the virtual cockpit without looking at it, simply by feel.

 

After these disadvantages have been rectified we could start looking at making it more difficult, again.

I'm really happy, that I can move my head quick enough to look at a switch, fight with the mouse cursor and click on it, and sometimes not lose sight of a bandit or ground target.

 

[Nealius]

Why not focus on more important realism factors, like better atmospheric modeling, turbulence (particularly in clouds), icing, canopy fogging, and other things that directly impact fundamental flying?

[Tank50us]

5 hours ago, Nealius said:

Why not focus on more important realism factors, like better atmospheric modeling, turbulence (particularly in clouds), icing, canopy fogging, and other things that directly impact fundamental flying?

 

And that's before we get into the weapons. How about proper anti-aircraft missile fusing? Or detection of a laser by LGBs? Or how about adding assets that are sorely needed like AT troops, more ships, more logistical options for air land and sea, as well as playable logistics options. There is far more in DCS that is needed and yet to be implemented without worrying about something as silly as a zoom feature.