Let's talk "realism"...

[Doc3908]

I'm a bit hesitant to post this since I know everyone and their uncle will jump on me, but... let's talk about the realism of things like zoom and "owl-head". 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 - zoom helps with aircraft id and aiming, and owl-head is great for checking your six every few seconds. But how realistic is that?? Not to mention it gives the flat-screen players an unfair advantage over the VR crowd (I know, I know, VR has its own advantages...). Personally, I'd rather see the zoom feature go the way of labels - make it optional and have it disabled on MP servers that strive for realism. As for owl-head, perhaps instead of 180degrees, it can be tweaked to something like 150-160deg and set on a timer - after 4-5 seconds it should reset to forward view automatically. Just thinking out loud - I'm sure people can suggest other solutions (though I know many don't consider these two issues to be a problem).  Anyway, just my 2 cents...

[Gambit21]

I find zoom extremely useful for in-cockpit viewing of various things...little use for it outside the cockpit.

I'm certainly grateful for the feature. 

Edited July 28, 2021 by Gambit21

[Dangerzone]

There's a point where realism and enjoyment peak - and continuing after realism after that will come at the cost of enjoyment for many. As a commercial business - this can cost sales.

 

Let's go to a possible futuristic conclusion and one day we'd get to a point where only young fit people could play simulators because we have G-Force simulated and the rest of us would have a heart attack flying fighters and be restricted to non-combat aircraft.   And this could use the same justification that people without G-force enforced would have an unfair advantage so it should be enforced too. Realism is a double edge sword.

 

That being said - I have no problems with you wanting it as a configurable option within the mission/server settings. Thinking future - if there was a server that forced g-suits to be used - that would be fine too - provided people had other options to go to. I always think more choices are better as no 2 people's circumstances are unique.

 

However - as I mentioned on another thread - DCS are running behind on many things at this stage. Performance, Bugs, Development, etc.  The question that really needs to be asked is less about realism and more about priorities. Is this worth delaying performance improvements, or pushing some bug fixes to the side again to accommodate this? How many people would really benefit from this feature vs other outstanding tasks or items on the wish list.  Each new function seems to bring it's fair share of bugs (understandably). I'd like to see what we have get bedded down further first. 

 

I'm not jumping on you.  I think discussion is great and progress only comes with throwing ideas in the ring and having them open for fair and respectful debate. I just think like most things in life, it comes down to priorities - and different people having different priorities, I think you'll struggle to find a large number of people who would agree with you that this is one of the higher priorities. That doesn't mean it's not a bad idea - just that it's not as high a priority. However I've been known to be wrong before. (Plenty of times according to my wife).

Edited July 28, 2021 by Dangerzone

[SharpeXB]

2 hours ago, Doc3908 said:

and owl-head is great for checking your six

Yes it sure is. 

 

Edited July 28, 2021 by SharpeXB

[SharpeXB]

2 hours ago, Doc3908 said:

zoom helps with aircraft id and aiming

The zoom view is there to make up for the lack of size and resolution of monitors and even VR needs a zoom view to make up for lack of resolution. Given the size of the average monitor, zoomed in is actually more like life-sized. But that would result in an awkwardly narrow FOV. There is no (affordable) display technology which can replicate both real world 20/20 acuity and FOV simultaneously. Without adequate vision a flight sim would be unplayable, learning to play well inherently means learning to use the zoom. Without it you wouldn’t even be able to read your own instruments. 
There is no need to regulate the zoom view because you are simply trading one advantage (FOV) for another (acuity) Many games have an adjustable FOV and none that I’m aware of regulate it. Zoom view is not unique to DCS many other games and all other flight sims have this feature for the same reason. 

Edited July 28, 2021 by SharpeXB

[wilbur81]

Zoom view is an important compromise for a lack of realism that will always exist in DCS: namely YOU'RE NOT IN A REAL AIRCRAFT.

 

Even VR doesn't "put you in the jet." It just presents pixels to your eyes in a novel (albeit amazing) way. I can see clarity and distances in real life that I cannot in 4K DCS because DCS is not real; throw in the currently terrible VR-clarity-to-performance ratio...

Edited July 28, 2021 by wilbur81

[Tank50us]

The only people who don't need a 'zoom' function in DCS are those people who can afford to put not just a sim-pit in their homes, but a full sim-dome, which is incredibly expensive to do. I've seen normal Sim-Pits range in price from about 10-30 thousand USD, possibly more depending on the aircraft being simulated (this does include the computer and the appropriate DCS Modules btw), and while I'm sure people have made them for less than that, the moment you try to add in the dome, the costs go up even more. At that point, you can even reliably rely on human vision, and not a zoom function.

[=DROOPY=]

I think it should be optional... just like the IFLOLS overlay. I'm currently playing on a 1040p 42in flat screen, with a 900 series GPU...(!!) For a point of reference, I'm still learning the switchology of the F-14 and because of the text on the side panels, (and this is absolutely NOT a complaint! ) I cant even find what I need without zooming in when IMC or at night. Alternatively though, I have opted to not use labels when going into the merge, so that when I do upgrade to VR, I'm hoping that eyeballing the badguy will be so much easier..

Edited July 28, 2021 by =DROOPY=

[Tippis]

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

There is no (affordable) display technology which can replicate both real world 20/20 acuity and FOV simultaneously.

Yes there is. Chances are you already have it in your pocket. We've had this discussion before. It's just a matter of distance, and any old monitor will suffice if placed correctly.

 

For it to replicate real-world 20/20 acuity, you want to achieve something in the region of 1 MoA, or 0.2-0.3 mils per pixel. At a regular monitor distance (~80cm), a bog-standard 27" (60cm wide) monitor covers at most .75 radians with its 2560 pixels, which gives a pixel size of 0.29 mils. In other words, it's already right at the edge of where 20/20 vision can resolve two different points. To get below that threshold, move the monitor back a decimetre or two...

 

Now you just have to pack in the amount of monitor you feel is needed for good coverage, add in some headtracking, and you've got everything you need.

 

 

Being able to disable zoom as an realism option makes a fair amount of sense. The problem is that for this to actually work in any reasonable way, there would have to be a universal calibration to reach 1:1 display size parity, which requires knowing the distance between the player and the monitor, which in turn (unless we rely on some pretty vendor-specific and largely obscure hardware) has to be done manually, and that in turns opens up the ability to enter all kinds of silly values to circumvent the whole effort.

Edited July 28, 2021 by Tippis

[randomTOTEN]

9 minutes ago, Tippis said:

Now you just have to pack in the amount of monitor you feel is needed for good coverage,

120° Horizontal, 60° Vertical according to Wiki.

So 72"x36" 6826x3413 wrap around. And that barely gets you over 20/20.

 

And anybody that doesn't have this monitor has a broken simulation control interface (including VR users) because some VR people can't cope.

[Exorcet]

I don't have problems with the things you mentioned. For the most part we're at a disadvantage vs real life. I still want DCS to revert to completely unrestricted head movement. I don't find the limits on head movement particularly helpful in any form. If you have VR they don't apply to you as far as I know. If you're using a hat switch to view as I do, they prevent you from quickly switching view from over one shoulder to the other. While unrestricted camera could allow some silly camera positions, I feel like the end result was actually more realistic.

 

As far as zoom goes, don't expect that to go away until we have 96k monitors and RTX800000000000 GPU's. It's the only way to have realistic resolution and FoV, although not at the same time.

[Auditor]

You're never going to get anyone to budge on this because all of us use different monitor setups, field of views, and equipment to look around the cockpit of our virtual aircraft, and limiting them may result in serious drawbacks. 

It also isn't universal for every aircraft. A Hornet Pilot may be restricted to only what his head can turn and see thanks to his harness, but a Huey pilot absolutely can pivot around and look behind him. 

[draconus]

7 hours ago, Doc3908 said:

...it really gets me that things like zoom and spinning your head 180 degrees (and keeping it their indefinitely) is allowed.

Adding to the great responses above you forget that the pilot view is not restricted only by head movement but also can move his eyes and body. Depending on the canopy, harness and helmet it can be easily over 180 IRL when sum up the angles. What is not implemented is the restriction of this moves under high G load.

Somebody could chime in on how restrictive a helmets can be on a fov.

Zoom is currently unsolvable problem and not feasible to fix in any reasonable way in near future so the realism of it stays to the discretion of the user.

[5ephir0th]

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

[Dragon1-1]

TBH, I'd be fine with not using zoom in VR if letters were readable. I'm convinced that this is a problem with the way things are rendered in VR, not with the resolution. Unfortunately, DCS wasn't quite made for VR, I hope that introducing Vulkan will also be an opportunity to review the rendering paradigm for VR.

 

Zoom is certainly incredibly useful for 2D, compensating for flying on a small screen.

[draconus]

18 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

TBH, I'd be fine with not using zoom in VR if letters were readable. I'm convinced that this is a problem with the way things are rendered in VR, not with the resolution.

What other "way" can you render a letter? Only resolution is the problem.

[bkthunder]

The "owl head" should be connected to g-load. 

It's not an issue (although requires some effort) to look almost 180 degrees back at 1g. 

It's a totally different thing to do it while pulling 7g, and that's where I would also appreciate more realism.

 

This has ramifications that change the way people fly and fight, especially in a dogfight. IRL if you have somebody on your 6, you don't fly all the time looking back and pulling off amazing high-g evasive maneuvers, as most people do in DCS. If looking back was somewhat restricted I believe we'd see more realistic engagements.

 

About zoom, well, it's just needed unless you have a replica cockpit and a massive dome projection. 

[SharpeXB]

2 hours ago, bkthunder said:

The "owl head" should be connected to g-load. 

Indeed. DCS should incorporate force-feedback VR headsets…

[sirrah]

11 hours ago, Doc3908 said:

I'm a bit hesitant to post this since I know everyone and their uncle will jump on me, but... let's talk about the realism of things like zoom and "owl-head". 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 - zoom helps with aircraft id and aiming, and owl-head is great for checking your six every few seconds. But how realistic is that?? Not to mention it gives the flat-screen players an unfair advantage over the VR crowd (I know, I know, VR has its own advantages...). Personally, I'd rather see the zoom feature go the way of labels - make it optional and have it disabled on MP servers that strive for realism. As for owl-head, perhaps instead of 180degrees, it can be tweaked to something like 150-160deg and set on a timer - after 4-5 seconds it should reset to forward view automatically. Just thinking out loud - I'm sure people can suggest other solutions (though I know many don't consider these two issues to be a problem).  Anyway, just my 2 cents...

 

Sorry, I didn't read all replies so maybe this was said before, but I assume that you ask this because you'd like to see some more balance in MP, right?

 

Personally, I think DCS (ED) should not aim too much on trying to create a well balanced MP platform.

• First of all because, as you kinda already mentioned, there will always be a massive difference in what hardware people are using. Not only in terms of VR vs 2D, but also 4K head tracking vs 1080p, expensive HOTAS setups vs keyboard only users (yes, they exist), very powerful hi-end rigs vs high strained 15-fps systems. Obviously DCS isn't some XboX first person shooter, where everyone has about the same hardware and (in)conveniences. Therefor, you'll never be able to get things properly balanced.
• Secondly (and some might probably argue me on this), if you want realism.. In real life, air combat is probably never completely "fair" (as in both sides being exactly equal in strength and capabilities)

[SharpeXB]

7 hours ago, Auditor said:

A Hornet Pilot may be restricted to only what his head can turn and see thanks to his harness

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.

 

[Northstar98]

So firstly the zoom:

 

While it could be made an option, as Tippis rightly said, you'd have to have a universal calibration between display size and how far players are sitting from it, and even then, that only accounts for FOV, you've still got resolution and dpi to contend with.

 

At that point you'll might as well force players to all play on a screen with a specific size, and resolution, which is honestly completely ridiculous, even if it was enforceable.

 

I for instance am stuck playing DCS on a laptop, this laptop has a 15.6", 1080p screen, I really can't do without the zoom - it's not even unrealistic to have the ability to zoom in, because without, my screen would utterly fail at representing what I would see IRL, and this is coming from someone who (at least when I was last professionally checked, which was admittedly quite some time ago), had pretty decent vision.

 

As for the owl head thing, it's not impossible to look 180° (maybe a bit more) behind, as the real images show - it might be difficult but it's not impossible, though maybe they can tweak it with g-loading or something.

Edited July 30, 2021 by Northstar98

[SharpeXB]

Also DCS does not have an “owl head” anymore. That was fixed a long time ago. It used to be possible to look “up” and see the tail of your aircraft and swivel your view 180 etc. The current head turn is modeled more accurately and has you looking over your shoulder and around the headrest. 

[DD_Fenrir]

The "Zoom is Unrealistic!" argument again... *shakes head*

 

Lets say a 24" screen. Given the recommended distance a monitor of from user for that size, super-impose that set-upon a cockpit and in most cases you'll be lucky to see more than the HUD of most of the aircraft in DCS.

 

If you want to fly around locked in such a soda straw view then be my guest, I look forward to dogfighting you in multiplayer as your WVR SA will be horrrendous.

 

Short version; having no peripheral vision is as unrealistic as having super soda straw telescopic view. Having both wide and narrow FoVs imitate the eyes ability to have focused clarity and a wide field of view at the same time ... just in DCS you can only have one, the other or a compromise between the two at any time. 

 

 

[rayrayblues]

12 hours ago, wilbur81 said:

Zoom view is an important compromise for a lack of realism that will always exist in DCS: namely YOU'RE NOT IN A REAL AIRCRAFT.

 

Halleluiah Brother.

 

Soldiers do it, sailors do it, why not pilots?

 

   

 

Do you mean to tell me that in all of aviation history no pilot ever brought binoculars along and that modern aviation has no enhanced vision???

 

OOPS, MY BAD!

 

   

 

.............so tell me, what is so unrealistic about zoom again?????

[shagrat]

vor 2 Minuten schrieb rayrayblues:

 

Halleluiah Brother.

 

Soldiers do it, sailors do it, why not pilots?

 

   

 

Do you mean to tell me that in all of aviation history no pilot ever brought binoculars along and that modern aviation has no enhanced vision???

 

OOPS, MY BAD!

 

   

 

.............so tell me, what is so unrealistic about zoom again?????

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

Read "A-10Cs over Kosovo" if a source is required. So yes, Zoom as a way to simulate binos is definitely a thing.