Enforced Graphics settings for Multiplayer

[Mr_Blastman]

Apparently players are exploiting graphics settings to give them an extreme visibility edge on multiplayer servers:

 

 

It would be great if ED would add an option for server admins to enforce certain graphics settings to remedy this.

 

Edit:  Or improve general visibility overall so such settings aren't needed for some players to see targets well.  Neutral dots is one proposed solution if they were not visible through cockpits/clouds/sun.

Edited April 10, 2023 by Mr_Blastman

[SharpeXB]

This is something that’s probably been true of PC games since the dawn of time. There’s no good way to prevent this sort of exploit since shadows have a performance impact. Maybe the boost given by MT could justify locking the setting but I’m sure that would lead to many complaints. 

[Mars Exulte]

Are you new to gaming or something? It's 2023. People have been doing that since at least the 90s turning down graphic settings to increase FPS (and response times) as well as improving visibility by removing grass and trees. You choose eye candy at a cost, it has always been that way and always will. Guess what else? The guy that spent $4,000 on a high end PC, head tracking, and pro controls ALSO has a significant advantage literally paying to win!

Just play your damn video game and stop obsessing over minmaxing nonsense. Speaking from 30 years of online experience, that ain't what gets you killed 95% of the time.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

8 hours ago, Mr_Blastman said:

It would be great if ED would add an option for server admins to enforce certain graphics settings to remedy this.

 

 

 

This never goes over well.

[SharpeXB]

Me, I’d rather die than see an ugly game

46 minutes ago, Mars Exulte said:

The guy that spent $4,000 on a high end PC, head tracking

Well head tracking can be free, so…

[Mars Exulte]

15 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Me, I’d rather die than see an ugly game

 Yeah, me, too. I didn't build this damn thing to play with Minecraft visuals! Play Arma a lot, I already know online 95% of people turn everything as low as they can. It occasionally results in an obvious ''preventable death'' but the majority of the time it's not likely to have been a factor.

15 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Well head tracking can be free, so…

 True, but point is person with it has a big advantage over person without it (easier to do while multi-tasking, usually frees up a couple hats, etc). It's probably even more useful than decent controls as far as being a ''game changer'' goes, it's hard to over emphasise as long as you stick with it through the initial clumsy acclimation.

[Mr_Blastman]

16 hours ago, Mars Exulte said:

Just play your damn video game and stop obsessing over minmaxing nonsense. Speaking from 30 years of online experience, that ain't what gets you killed 95% of the time.

Folks have been doing this since early FPS games.  Point is, however, that DCS is a SIM first, and if players choose camo/flight routes to take advantage of terrain masking to minimize MK I eyeball detection and something as simple as a game setting nullifies their efforts, part of the sim experience is defeated.

 

Console games enforce settings, so I see no reason why not to here as well.  Yeah, I know, PC!  But in a competitive environment some equalization is important.

 

Otherwise, by your logic, why don't server admins have labels and padlock enabled by default?  Let's all fly around using padlock...  Sounds like fun, right?

No, we aren't going to take Track IR and HOTAS away--that would turn DCS into a dumpster fire, fast.  This isn't War Thunder.    But keeping the actual game environment visually similar at least means that one Quake player isn't seeing everyone running around in a brightly lit hallway while everyone else sees dark corridors with inky black shadows to hide in.

[Furiz]

16 minutes ago, Mr_Blastman said:

But in a competitive environment

And there is your misconception, ED is not aiming for competitive enviroment.

You got shot down, but instead of using those setting to your advantage you want to enforce settings on people.

Enforcing stuff on people will just make them go away, just like they go away from those nice countries that like to enforce stuff on people.

[Mr_Blastman]

There's a difference between enforcing and ruining gameplay and leveling the playing environment.

 

You can't have one player who sees everything because the room is brightly lit while everyone else is fumbling around in the dark.  There has to be a common ground at least with the room itself.

[Furiz]

1 hour ago, Mr_Blastman said:

You can't have one player who sees everything because the room is brightly lit while everyone else is fumbling around in the dark.  There has to be a common ground at least with the room itself.

You have the same options as he does, so turn on the light?

[TonyRS]

On 4/10/2023 at 5:07 PM, Mr_Blastman said:

Apparently players are exploiting graphics settings to give them an extreme visibility edge on multiplayer servers:

 

 

It would be great if ED would add an option for server admins to enforce certain graphics settings to remedy this.

 

Edit:  Or improve general visibility overall so such settings aren't needed for some players to see targets well.  Neutral dots is one proposed solution if they were not visible through cockpits/clouds/sun.

 

Force settings? No, already too much of that!
That is life I’m afraid. I’m in the same boat; spent a fortune building my PC to play in 2D 4K resolution. Often get blown out of the sky by others who clearly see me well before I can see them. However, I’m now a much better parachutist than they are!!!
There is, of course, nothing stopping you ‘turning down’ your settings and doing likewise but playing in 4K is a delight so I will not turn my settings down.
Your best ‘defense’ against this (if you have high settings & resolution) is to NOT fly alone. Join a group, fly as 2,3,4 ship flight. After all, 8 eyes are better than 2. Find a server with CGI so you can be vectored to targets, maybe!
It is also a fact that some aircraft simply have much better all round visibility, and mirrors, than others.
Enjoy what we have. It is, without doubt, brilliant.

[Mr_Blastman]

41 minutes ago, Furiz said:

You have the same options as he does, so turn on the light?

That should be for the server admin to decide.

 

I would rather the world be realistic and include clouds, while someone else may not.  What we need is a feature that will allow admins to decide for the players what environment they will all share.

[Furiz]

3 minutes ago, Mr_Blastman said:

That should be for the server admin to decide.

It really shouldn't.

4 minutes ago, Mr_Blastman said:

I would rather the world be realistic and include clouds, while someone else may not.

That's not true, I'm sure everyone is looking forward to realistic clouds.

 

4 minutes ago, Mr_Blastman said:

What we need is a feature that will allow admins to decide for the players what environment they will all share.

The truth is only you are asking for this and absolutely no one else.

 

Have you even thought this through? How would you enforce it?

Upon clicking join - list the graphic setting of a server? cause players should know what they are joining right.

Then what if players cant handle some setting, or should we all play at 4k? or 2k? with MSAA? or with SSAA? whatever the admin wants right? what if their computers cant handle that, they are then unable to play on that server,

then what happens is that you are limiting the player base.

That's why those settings are never limited in any other game, they are all free to choose their own settings on any tournament.

 

[SharpeXB]

Everyone could be limited to 600x400 and the low graphics preset. That should be fair. 

[Mars Exulte]

7 hours ago, Mr_Blastman said:

Folks have been doing this since early FPS games.

 Yes.

7 hours ago, Mr_Blastman said:

Point is, however, that DCS is a SIM first

 It isn't anything ''first''. What it IS is a video game, full stop. Specifically it is a PC video game, and as opposed to the highly uniform world of consoles, every PC is different, necessitating configurable settings. No amount of Mountain Dew consumed, regardless of flavor, will change the fact this is a video game. You cannot log the hours, it is by every definition a game.

7 hours ago, Mr_Blastman said:

and if players choose camo/flight routes to take advantage of terrain masking to minimize MK I eyeball detection and something as simple as a game setting nullifies their efforts, part of the sim experience is defeated.

 *clutches pearls* Then play offline or join a clan. Mixing with the unwashed hordes on a public server you will, shockingly, find a variety of people with a variety of machines and mindsets.

7 hours ago, Mr_Blastman said:

Console games enforce settings

 Console games don't HAVE settings, because they're already optimised for their universal platform. PCs, as previously mentioned, are far from universal.

7 hours ago, Mr_Blastman said:

so I see no reason why not to here as well.  Yeah, I know, PC!  But in a competitive environment some equalization is important.

 If you want a rigidly controlled environment, join a clan or a tournament tailored for a specific theme.

 

7 hours ago, Mr_Blastman said:

Otherwise, by your logic, why don't server admins have labels and padlock enabled by default?  Let's all fly around using padlock...  Sounds like fun, right?

 I consider this equally as dumb, yes.

7 hours ago, Mr_Blastman said:

No, we aren't going to take Track IR and HOTAS away--that would turn DCS into a dumpster fire, fast.  This isn't War Thunder.

 So shortcuts and external aides are fine as long as they're ''Blastman approved!'' @@ 

7 hours ago, Mr_Blastman said:

But keeping the actual game environment visually similar at least means that one Quake player isn't seeing everyone running around in a brightly lit hallway while everyone else sees dark corridors with inky black shadows to hide in.

  Good thing absolutely nothing is that drastic then, huh? Labels are the closest thing to an actually relevant aide. I can at least understand the objection there. But ''MUH IMMERZION'' because of somebody being able to change their settings? Ffs

Edited April 12, 2023 by Mars Exulte

[Mr_Blastman]

What I find most humorous about the whining against this on here is the amount of excuses being made up to negate a server admin decision.

 

Too bad.

 

You got a problem with this functionality being added?  Make a server of your own.

 

ED it would be very nice if this functionality were added.

Edited April 12, 2023 by Mr_Blastman

[SharpeXB]

1 minute ago, Mr_Blastman said:

What I find most humorous about the whining against this on here is the amount of excuses being made up to negate a server admin decision.

 

Too bad.

 

You got a problem with this functionality being added?  Make a server of your own.

 

ED it would be very nice if this functionality were added.

 

You seem unfamiliar with PC gaming… no game does this sort of thing because it would be completely infeasible as explained above. 

[Mr_Blastman]

DCS is a high end sim.  If a server admin wants only high end players, then so be it.  Their decision.

 

All I see is excuses to "use muh cheatz!!!!!111111"

Edited April 12, 2023 by Mr_Blastman

[Dangerzone]

I'm intrigued why shadows have become a big issue.  VR is an advantage over 2D with it's 1:1 tracking - especially in dogfights... I'm sure the user with multiple monitors has a better advantage too over single monitor players. We don't have enforcement settings for these, or are you suggesting we should for these too?

There's also an advantage by reducing the forestry count - much easier to see units with less tree's around. Same goes for detail factors, and even grass. Should we have enforcement for minimum limits on these implemented too? 

It's already been said - and I agree - if you want a more level playing field - the only real solution is to get a console. PC gaming has always had variety - and with that there has always been the compromise of some with advantages over others. 

Edited April 12, 2023 by Dangerzone

[Bosun]

I feel like modern game development for sims does not need to trip over the same issues gaming had 15/20 years ago.  Imagine a solid wall getting a door, but instead of using it, someone just kept walking straight into the wall for no reason other than, "it's always been a solid wall...since forever." The logic behind the "it's always been that way" argument is a side slip in the debate made by folks who themselves are frustrated at something about the topic, but have completely missed the point the poster was making. 

I may be naive - but I would think that modern technology in simulation recreation has progressed past the 90s?  I mean, correct me if I'm wrong here, but folks saying "It's been that way forever" as an excuse to still have games that are coded to have this kind of wider discrepency, ignore the last 20 years of game development. The point is not to argue that things have never been this way before.  The point is to wonder why they still are, given the progress we've made in graphics over the last decades.  

If no one ever changed anything for the better when they were able too due to it 'always being that way', we'd never have computers.  Someone thought an electronic computer could solve a computation faster and someone, somewhere with a sliderule, said, "Meh, math is slow. It's always been that way" as an attempt to dismiss the argument.  I suppose folks should start tossing out their computers and going back to caves if they're going to throw that argument around.  It adds nothing to the debate discourse, as it fails to address the original point behind the ponderance.

Will variation in graphical ability of machines always exist and need to be accounted for?  Yes.  Literally no one made the claim it won't, or hasn't. Read the original post.
Does it need to be as wide a discrepency as is coded in this game, currently? Absolutely not, by modern standards.  It could be tightened up, while still allowing for gaps in performance across many machines.

There are plenty of titles for PC out there, that do not have the variability of options that this game does, for changing its rendering.  We can all appreciate the depths that the developers are going to, to keep older systems in the game while still understanding the need to have a more uniform experience.  You can understand and empathize with both of these at the same time.

Believe it or not - there are ways to code things so that: 
- Shadows and Fog are more universally experienced
- Distant LOD objects take up the same physical space on the monitor, whether Standard, High, or Ultra Def. 

The developers have chosen not to pursue these items, either due to lack of knowledge in how, or lack of monetary need or justification to do so.  

And you'll likely not see this addressed any time in the near future, as their work on a new engine progresses, making any significant updates to this one rather a waste.  The new engine is several years away, so hang in there, and perhaps the new engine will solve some of this.  We all can hope that the last 20 years of technological progress hasn't been for naught. 

For myself - it is frustrating to buy a super-machine for 4k play, only to have the developers continue to promote 1080p as the ideal play resolution, especially in the 20s here, where we're about to be overtaken by 8k resolution cards.  I say 'promote', because, as stated, it's entirely possible to make the ideal resolution to play be 4k, or 2k AND 4k, but that is a choice the studio has to make, and then act on.  They've not done that yet, and that represents a choice.  I believe it's due to the new engine coming, and I believe that new engine may solve some of those problems.  

[Furiz]

1 hour ago, Mr_Blastman said:

All I see is excuses to "use muh cheatz!!!!!111111"

One more of many misconceptions, It is not cheat, it is graphic setting,

The other misconception you have I'm 100% sure,

is that you are the best pilot out there and you are in wonder how on earth you got shot down so you found what you think is an issue and now you are on it, cause there is no way that you got shot down, after all you are the best.

Then to counter that you want to enforce rules on everybody. Cause no one can beat the best pilot.

Other sim pilots out here, when they get shot down, they start from themselves asking why I got shot down and how I can do better. That's what you need to do and not this, asking for limitations.

Humility is a virtue that can get you long way.

[Mr_Blastman]

More excuses.  Can't have a server admin taking your stuff away.  Continue to humor me, however.  This is amusing.

Edited April 12, 2023 by Mr_Blastman

[cfrag]

2 hours ago, Mr_Blastman said:

DCS is a high end sim.  If a server admin wants only high end players, then so be it.  Their decision.

Ture. And they already can: just ban players that you don't like or deem unworthy hardware-wise. It's not up to ED, it's up to you, the server admin. If someone is cheating, ban them. There are cheaters, yes. That being said, this talk about possible exploits is IMHO childish. Yes, there is is the possibility that someone cheated. BUT: If you have been beat, don't look for excuses, and deal with it. This is a game. If you encounter someone whom you suspect of cheating, don't play with them again if you can't resolve your issues amicably. This is a human issue - we don't need technical solutions to prevent kids from cheating on the playground, and we don't need them here among adults either. If winning means that much to you, you may want to re-evaluate what you are doing, or restrict your play group to like-minded people.

From a technical standpoint, giving the server authority over a client's graphics settings is of course possible, but I doubt that ED would invest in that. First, MP is (lamentably) a tiny fraction of the total pie, so this investment would not recoup much. Worse, since a lot of people obsess over their video settings to optimize their experience (especially in VR), the expected backlash over such a feature would conceivably create more negative feedback than positive, so the financial return is for this feature is likely to be negative.

As a server admin myself I've heard the discussion, and read the reports. Fact is that if you want your server to be popular, you need to have a very careful touch on what you, as a server admin, force other people to do (that's the active phrasing of applying server options). I wrote a script that prevents people from taking off taxiways. It was helpful in one very specific instance, but universally hated in all others. I believe that server admins should respect their players. Enforcing options is not doing that, it's telling your players that you don't trust them. That might be helpful if your server population is very, very young. If you are dealing with adults, treat them as as such. Don't enforce, but keep a dialog. If that doesn't work, well, you ban. It's your server after all. Just don't be surprised if your server's popularity falls off a cliff.

[draconus]

1 hour ago, Bosun said:

I feel like modern game development for sims does not need to trip over the same issues gaming had 15/20 years ago.

I don't care for the OP wish but, yeah, I don't get how modern games still allow turning off the shadows. Managing the quality and quantity for performance, ok, but turning off altogether is reversing years of computer graphics development. If you can run DCS, you can run with simple shadows too.

There are already things you can't turn off in settings like clouds, fog, min. of 30% trees visibility or collision with objects and ground.

[Furiz]

1 hour ago, Mr_Blastman said:

More excuses.  Can't have a server admin taking your stuff away.  Continue to humor me, however.  This is amusing.

 

Can't accept defeat, bad trait for fighter pilot ;)