Feedback Thread F-14 Tomcat - Update 10th March 2023

[draconus]

12 hours ago, JeffreyC said:

However, having to edit a file is not giving a proper option of control to users.

You want to modify original game. DCS allows it but doesn't support it directly. It's always have been like that with mods.

[IronMike]

Our apologies for the delay, but the FM update thread is finally up. Thank you for your feedback in advance!
 

 

[MStewart40]

Definitely not a fan of the worn-out cockpit switches & buttons! Would much rather they were clean, clear and easy to read, if you want to have a download available with worn out controls that's fine just don't think it should be sold like that. 

[Dannyvandelft]

Definitely not a fan of the worn-out cockpit switches & buttons! Would much rather they were clean, clear and easy to read, if you want to have a download available with worn out controls that's fine just don't think it should be sold like that. 

It's ok Martha, you'll be able to deactivate it soon.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[DSplayer]

45 minutes ago, Dannyvandelft said:

It's ok Martha, you'll be able to deactivate it soon.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 

IIRC weathering will not be something changed with FORGE. Creating a clean cockpit is a huge undertaking.

[MStewart40]

10 hours ago, DSplayer said:

IIRC weathering will not be something changed with FORGE. Creating a clean cockpit is a huge undertaking.

Yes, I'm sure it is, and I really don't expect it to be done unfortunately. It was just a minor complaint on a really cool plane, sure hope the F4 cockpit does look like it's age, or we'll be guessing what the buttons are for!

[Callsign JoNay]

10 hours ago, DSplayer said:

IIRC weathering will not be something changed with FORGE. Creating a clean cockpit is a huge undertaking.

I think by clean cockpit, most users mean clean stenciling, not necessarily dirt and grime free, so I don't think it would be a huge undertaking. (And of course people want the removal of FORGE elements which is a separate issue, and we know is going to be an option down the road anyway).

Aren't you already nearly done your clean stenciling mod? HB should consider implementing it as an option. I personally don't care, because I'm indifferent on the FORGE elements and  weathered stenciling, and I know the cockpit by memory now anyway, but I will say as an observer on these forums and reddit, I see far more complaints about the FORGE elements and weathered stenciling than I see praise for them. Maybe it's just the vocal minority, but if HB just slapped your clean stenciling mod into the game as an option, it would probably make a lot of people happy. Maybe making Tomcat users happy is not HB's priority, I can't speak for them. I understand the desire to make things realistic, but it should also be considered that not everyone who plays DCS has 20/20 vision like most pilots do in real life, not to mention FOV and resolution limitations, or enough time committed to the simulator to memorize the cockpit like real life pilots.

[draconus]

3 hours ago, Callsign JoNay said:

but it should also be considered that  not everyone who plays DCS has 20/20 vision like most pilots do in real life, not to mention FOV and resolution limitations

There's no limit when you can zoom in but you're right. If the sim is trying to be realistic the 20/20 vision should be advantage over the poor vision. The mods look terrible btw.

[Clunk1001]

On 4/5/2023 at 8:33 PM, MStewart40 said:

Definitely not a fan of the worn-out cockpit switches & buttons! Would much rather they were clean, clear and easy to read, if you want to have a download available with worn out controls that's fine just don't think it should be sold like that. 

I’m the opposite.  I love the authenticity of the worn cockpit.  You know what the button does by its shape/colour/position, any factory text wore off years ago, and the Dymo label stuck next to it by maintenance is now barely readable.

I spent some time flying a brand new aircraft, I was literally like the 6th person in the cockpit. It was like a new BMW fresh out of the showroom. Within 6 months it was a complete mess; Knobs and dials had been bent and broken by pilots clumsily climbing in and out, canopy was scratched from items/headgear placed in places they shouldn’t be, unidentifiable stains on the switches, the floor,  the seats.  
 

Come to think about it, Pilots are disgusting .

This is just how planes are (at least in my experience). 

Edited April 6, 2023 by Clunk1001

[DSplayer]

4 hours ago, Callsign JoNay said:

Aren't you already nearly done your clean stenciling mod? HB should consider implementing it as an option.

I didn't want to toot my own horn but yeah my clean cockpit mod is going smoothly. A couple more panels and then I have the massive undertaking of going over the minutia of each panel.

[LanceCriminal86]

1 hour ago, Clunk1001 said:

I’m the opposite.  I love the authenticity of the worn cockpit.  You know what the button does by its shape/colour/position, any factory text wore off years ago, and the Dymo label stuck next to it by maintenance is now barely readable.

I spent some time flying a brand new aircraft, I was literally like the 6th person in the cockpit. It was like a new BMW fresh out of the showroom. Within 6 months it was a complete mess; Knobs and dials had been bent and broken by pilots clumsily climbing in and out, canopy was scratched from items/headgear placed in places they shouldn’t be, unidentifiable stains on the switches, the floor,  the seats.  
 

Come to think about it, Pilots are disgusting .

This is just how planes are (at least in my experience). 

 

And Navy aircraft aboard a carrier add not just the exposure to salty air and sea spray, rain, and sun, but a high operating tempo. It's like those car, deck, or truck bed coating tests where they do exposure and wear testing but sped up 1000% by just salt blasting the part for days and days on end or have a robot opening and slamming a door 500 times a minute. Talking to corrosion control guys and maintainers of all sorts it was an around the clock job to keep the squadron's jets up, and not every squadron, air wing, or ship had the same success depending on leadership and supply.

One could maybe expect Air Force aircraft to at least have a gentler service life or maybe not as aggressive wear outside of heavy SEA combat rotations in the 60s and 70s. Of course we've had more than a few AF maintainers come through with "we'd never let our jets look like that!" but they also had a different set of circumstances, time, budget, and motivation to work off of.

 

[RustBelt]

This is an important point. Because also onboard, there’s only so many airframes you have room for, so they get much more continuous use than Land Base operations where you have more reserve you can rotate out with to give the plane enough detail level attention. And you only have so much room for the techs to work and live so they’re also a limiting resource factor on the ship. You can’t have 3 shifts of non-military Contract specialists to swarm over a NAVY plane like some “other” services enjoy the luxury of.

Edited April 6, 2023 by RustBelt

[freehand]

Some times realistic does not work in a game stroke simulator don't want to offed anyone lol.

I can give you a good example if you wish.

Edited April 12, 2023 by freehand

[draconus]

25 minutes ago, freehand said:

Some times realistic does not work in a game stroke simulator don't want to offed anyone lol.

I can give you a good example if you wish.

Bring it on.

[freehand]

9 hours ago, draconus said:

Bring it on.

ok dokey I live in UK & have been riding motorcycles for over 30+ years I do not own a car so my bikes are for work and pleasure winter summer all weather blb bla bla

If anyone tried to emulate the bumping wobbling dipping head blowing all over place e.t.c sitting in front of a monitor it would be a awful experience and laughable, roll the setting back a little would be more realistic because my brain would fill in the gaps.  

 

 

[RustBelt]

There’s deeper Fidelity vs Usability issues with Flight Sims. Especially when your main player base is using Spring Centered dead Joysticks on desks. At too high a fidelity of pitch response you’ll NEVER trim the plane. Ever. Between recentering as trim comes in, dead space at the center, discrete input resolution, and the poor ergonomics of desk top joysticks. Not to mention the subtle acceleration or deceleration cues you feel in a real plane to make tiny 10kt and/or 50 Foot adjustments, just can’t exist, and even in Level D sims can get kind of uncanny while turning.   
 

So sim’s need to fudge in some unrealistic dampening to make the sim “behave” more like reality, by reducing true Fidelity. 
 

You’ll only ever have true Fidelity in the actual plane or if Holodecks ever get invented. Everything else is a design compromise of Fidelity vs. Utility. 

[draconus]

So you both didn't convince me. Whatever can be simulated, should be, and that will be most realistic as far as technology allows. That is mainly vision, sounds and touch/vibrations/moving platform. Even smell and taste is quite possible in the future. The G feeling though has to wait for some BCI. The quality of the simulation relies both on the sim and user hardware.

[IronMike]

6 hours ago, draconus said:

So you both didn't convince me. Whatever can be simulated, should be, and that will be most realistic as far as technology allows. That is mainly vision, sounds and touch/vibrations/moving platform. Even smell and taste is quite possible in the future. The G feeling though has to wait for some BCI. The quality of the simulation relies both on the sim and user hardware.

They are not wrong as such. It needs to also translate to the screen. In the future maybe a lot of that can be translated into the physical world, as partially is already with simshaker, buttkicker, etc - but until then as devs we have to marry both realism and immersive elements together to a certain degree. While video games and sims are not technically part of the performing arts, in a way one could argue they are, and as such some of the same rules apply. On screen often you have to either tone up or down certain things, as the translation would make a 100% real "setting" make look downright unreal or also "too real."

Edited April 13, 2023 by IronMike

[TAIPAN_]

13 hours ago, draconus said:

 Whatever can be simulated, should be, and that will be most realistic as far as technology allows. That is mainly vision, sounds and touch/vibrations/moving platform. Even smell and taste is quite possible in the future. 

Even pilot damage from bullets or pilot death? I wouldn't want to require bandages after flying in the sim.. 

If something is said to be an explicit truth always, test it to the extremes. 

Another example is VR, many people say it is more realistic. To me it is just a replacement for trackir and the monitor, and it makes the sim less enjoyable and less realistic to not be able to see my hardware (throttle, gear lever etc) 

[RustBelt]

2 hours ago, TAIPAN_ said:

Even pilot damage from bullets or pilot death? I wouldn't want to require bandages after flying in the sim.. 

If something is said to be an explicit truth always, test it to the extremes. 

Another example is VR, many people say it is more realistic. To me it is just a replacement for trackir and the monitor, and it makes the sim less enjoyable and less realistic to not be able to see my hardware (throttle, gear lever etc) 

I have to say, although I still hate the limitations of VR, my situational awareness is WAY higher than using TrackIR. Knowing something is literally over your shoulder is a lot easier than the translation in your head you have to do to connect a 10 degree head turn to the idea of how much you have to turn to line up with it.

[unlikely_spider]

2 hours ago, TAIPAN_ said:

Another example is VR, many people say it is more realistic. To me it is just a replacement for trackir and the monitor, and it makes the sim less enjoyable and less realistic to not be able to see my hardware (throttle, gear lever etc) 

Why do you need to look at those when you're flying?

[RustBelt]

3 hours ago, unlikely_spider said:

Why do you need to look at those when you're flying?

Because you need to look at things to touch them. Especially when you want to be positive what you're reaching for. There's a lot of fumbling involved with VR combined with real controls. To say nothing of the knuckle bashing.

[unlikely_spider]

7 hours ago, RustBelt said:

Because you need to look at things to touch them.

Well that's certainly not true! Otherwise I'd be a complete failure in VR.

[draconus]

14 hours ago, TAIPAN_ said:

Another example is VR, many people say it is more realistic. To me it is just a replacement for trackir and the monitor, and it makes the sim less enjoyable and less realistic to not be able to see my hardware (throttle, gear lever etc)

Even if you have only one eye, totally getting rid of the feeling of depth, it still gives you better tracking and 1:1 scale undistorted vision. And you're supposed to see the virtual cockpit, not your own, so you better have your hardware in the right places to easily find and feel it.

Edited April 14, 2023 by draconus

[Cab]

14 hours ago, TAIPAN_ said:

Another example is VR, many people say it is more realistic. To me it is just a replacement for trackir and the monitor, and it makes the sim less enjoyable and less realistic to not be able to see my hardware (throttle, gear lever etc) 

PointCTRL solves this problem (for me, anyway). VR would be a lot less enjoyable without it.