Today's patch added the entire shaders folder to IC, effectively blocking every quality of life mod that accessed that folder

[SteelPig]

Some people should revisit the difference between an analogy and a comparison. 

[SharpeXB]

2 minutes ago, Spartan105 said:

You're trying to conflate people using the dot mod with cheating by getting an unfair advantage.

Mod users are getting an unfair advantage over someone else who isn’t using it or who aren’t even aware it exists. That’s called cheating. 

3 minutes ago, Spartan105 said:

I'm at least encouraged that ED is evaluating the mod as a potential solution.

That could be a good solution. I’m not saying the mod is bad, but it needs to be included as a feature in the game itself in order to be fair to everyone. 

[Why485]

17 minutes ago, Spartan105 said:

I'm sure it made perfect sense to use a single pixel dot; even 1080p monitors were either a rarity or didn't even exist yet.

The dots DCS currently uses were implemented in 2016 as a replacement for the briefly lived Model Visibility impostor system. They have been unchanged since then.

Before the impostors (which were around only between Sept 2015 and July 2016), DCS had no form of dots, scaling, or anything to more accurately model aircraft visibility on home computer hardware. 

Edited May 20, 2023 by Why485

[DD_fruitbat]

12 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Doping in sports is available to every athlete. Does that mean it shouldn’t be considered cheating?

Every player in baseball has pine tar available to them. Should that not be considered cheating as well?

Take as long as you like…

 

Question for you,  is it cheating to have an expensive high fidelity hotas?

Or should we all have to have the same potato computer and fly with the cheapest joystick on the market?

I have read so many threads over the last 20 years on flight sim forums, about how multiplayer has to be the perfect homogeneous 'fair' experience,  but it never has been and never will be due to hardware anyway.

I've always been happily aware of the consequences to have more eye candy, not see dots as much as a result than the amusing individuals that run lower resolutions, min/max video settings to have that extra advantage. 

I guess some people just cry themselves to sleep if they're not the online reincarnation Hans-Joachim Marseille.

 

[SharpeXB]

1 minute ago, Why485 said:

The dots DCS currently uses were implemented in 2017 as a replacement for the briefly lived Model Visibility impostor system. They have been unchanged since then.

And I think most people, if they understood the issue, would agree they’re not a very good solution. 

[Spartan105]

8 minutes ago, Why485 said:

The dots DCS currently uses were implemented in 2016 as a replacement for the briefly lived Model Visibility impostor system. They have been unchanged since then.

Before the impostors (which were around only between Sept 2015 and July 2016), DCS had no form of dots, scaling, or anything to more accurately model aircraft visibility on home computer hardware. 

 

Then that is truly... discouraging.

[SharpeXB]

43 minutes ago, DD_fruitbat said:

Question for you,  is it cheating to have an expensive high fidelity hotas?

Simple answer, In DCS no. There are no hardware restrictions in this game. 
In other games or for arguments sake, it depends. Rules need to be enforceable to be valid. An unenforceable rule obviously can’t be valid. Controlling players hardware can be unenforceable or infeasible. How would you regulate a HOTAS. Define HOTAS? Define “high fidelity”?
Some flight sim and racing games do regulate the use of mice or gamepads and to that extent, circumventing that rule, like using a mouse on a joystick-only server, would be cheating. 

Edited May 20, 2023 by SharpeXB

[okopanja]

The change is good only it needs to come from ED.

Btw, stop behaving like a lynch mob.

[DD_fruitbat]

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

Simple answer, In DCS no. There are no hardware restrictions in this game. 

 

So having more money, a better computer and hotas is an acceptable advantage, because as you rightly say,  there are no hardware restrictions in this game, is your opinion?

 

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

In other games or for arguments sake, it depends. Rules need to be enforceable to be valid. An unenforceable rule obviously can’t be valid. Controlling players hardware can be unenforceable or infeasible. How would you regulate a HOTAS. Define HOTAS? Define “high fidelity”?
Some flight sim and racing games do regulate the use of mice or gamepads and to that extent, circumventing that rule, like using a mouse on a joystick-only server, would be cheating. 

 

But at the same time you rightly and obviously point out, my observation is unenforceable and infeasible, re hardware. So is that why it is valid?

While I'm not being completely earnest in my point, i am however gently pointing out the obvious ridiculousness of pretending software alone creates a level playing field....

[Blackhawk NC]

This dot mod made DCS much more playable for me at a resolution of 1440. I don't think it gave me any advantage over the 1080p player or the VR players. If anything it leveled our spotting capabilities and eliminated an advantage that they had over me. As a player that has a higher resolution monitor, it is VERY difficult for me to spot aircraft in DCS, and it is totally DCS's fault. This has been a known problem for ages. They give an advantage to lower resolution players whether they admit it or not. A player at 1080 can see targets more clearly and farther away than a 1440p player. The size of the single dot that is rendered gives them a HUGE advantage. ED should either fix the scaling/resolution equation or allow the dot mod to pass IC. Sorry for the rant.........

[Blackhawk NC]

If the 1080p player can see a big old black dot at 5 miles, then a 1440 player should see a black dot of exactly the same size at 5 miles even if it means rendering several dots to make it equal size. ED should incorporate this mod into the game code.

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, DD_fruitbat said:

So having more money, a better computer and hotas is an acceptable advantage, because as you rightly say,  there are no hardware restrictions in this game, is your opinion?

I didn’t say it wasn’t an advantage. Your question was “is it cheating”? The obvious and simple answer is no. DCS does not have any restrictions like that. That’s not an opinion, it’s a fact. There are other games with such rules but not DCS. 

1 hour ago, DD_fruitbat said:

But at the same time you rightly and obviously point out, my observation is unenforceable and infeasible, re hardware. So is that why it is valid?

If a game were to have such restrictions they’d need to be clearly definable and enforceable. For example limiting mouse control (vs joystick) is enforceable because it’s an actual control scheme in the game. But how would a game actually define a HOTAS in a way that’s enforceable. What’s a HOTAS exactly? A throttle with more than 4 buttons? Is any separate stick and throttle a HOTAS? Define “expensive”? 

1 hour ago, DD_fruitbat said:

i am however gently pointing out the obvious ridiculousness of pretending software alone creates a level playing field....

Software is the game. So of course software will attempt to create a fair game which players expect. Rules built into the software are obviously enforceable and therefore legit. 

57 minutes ago, Blackhawk NC said:

If the 1080p player can see a big old black dot at 5 miles, then a 1440 player should see a black dot of exactly the same size at 5 miles even if it means rendering several dots to make it equal size. ED should incorporate this mod into the game code.

Or remove the dot altogether. That’s also fair. 

Edited May 21, 2023 by SharpeXB

[MadKreator]

Ahh man , I love the clear canopy mod.. not to make it perfectly clear but just to dull down the overdone baked on scratches and things ( av8b is one of the worst offenders). I like it to still look like there’s a canopy there but just a newer canopy lol I mean if you want a clear canopy that passes IC, just take off with the canopy open it’ll be more clear than its ever been  ( I personally would rather have all these aircraft textures factory fresh and not used and abused). In some cases such as the av8b I can see an “unfair advantage” as its canopy is very difficult to see out of at certain viewing and lighting angles, but you’re not really hunting air targets and dogfighting  in a harrier either( most people). And for pve, no one probably cares one bit anyway. I also use helios and export all sorts of viewports and I really don’t care to fly without it, so I fly servers that don’t care. There’s plenty of servers that don’t have strict IC

Edited May 21, 2023 by MadKreator

[too-cool]

Why don't ED do like IL2 GB, allow mods to be turned on or completely off. Now if you don't want to have mods enabled because you feel it give and unfair advantage to your opponent then don't enable them. But wait, then the complaint will be something like this, it's not fair that I can only play a limited number of servers while those with mods enable have more server to choose from. Get the point? How about those who use a game controller ie; PS 2 game pad and those who use let say a Winwing Super Tarus, that's not fair because Winwing has more functions that can be applied to the throttle then my game pad. The list goes on and on. You can't please everyone so consider the IL2 GB way of dealing with mods but you know some mod creator will make a mod to use where no mods are allowed so we are back to square one.  TC

Edited May 21, 2023 by too-cool

[Dangerzone]

Guys, you're being trolled. You can't reason a troll and you're just wasting time. Your responses are just feeding more of the same. 

To ignore - move your mouse and hover (don't click) over the name to the left of the post. A dialog will appear which you can click an IGNORE button.

As for the IC check - I believe this might also destroys all Taz's wonderful work that allows many in VR to get the performance they need with optimized textures, etc, so I really hope that ED's response to this isn't just to fix the 'dot' visibility. 

[Oceandar]

Something bothered me is why ED restrict the mod while they don't have the fix (yet). Give us a fix or solution first then restrict the mod.

[Blackhawk NC]

Removing the dot is an option. If you remove the dot completely, as SharpeXB  suggested, it would level the playing field, but would make the game unplayable for some and so unpleasant for many that it would affect DCS's bottom line. DCS should just make the fully rendered aircraft appear out of thin air at 1/4 mile from you. SURPRISE,  here I am! Only kidding but DCS has made no effort to solve this problem in the 7 or 8 years I have been playing it and people have been complaining about it for well over 7 or 8 years. I suspect they could care less about fixing it now. Since DCS has no real peer competition, I thinks it can do what it wants and what it wants is to sell more modules, which we buy even if they are very incomplete and after years still are not finished. No, DCS is not gonna fix this distance/resolution scaling issue simply because it doesn't have too. If there was true peer competition to DCS, they would fix more problems and produce more complete modules. They would also do more to offer a balance to REDFOR. They can simulate an su-35 in AI but cant model an effective R-77-1.  What DCS needs is a newer BLUFOR aircraft...Maybe a Eurofighter with satellite guided meteor missiles or maybe lasers, only partially complete of course, on presale now at 30% off. sorry for the rant....

[Dogmanbird]

i doubt there's a right or wrong answer to using mods, but it sure is difficult enough just learning to fly the aircraft without having to learn about mods that i need to keep up with the jones' in multiplayer

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, Dogmanbird said:

i doubt there's a right or wrong answer to using mods, but it sure is difficult enough just learning to fly the aircraft without having to learn about mods that i need to keep up with the jones' in multiplayer

Mods add another level of insanity to an already complex game. DCS is perfectly good without them. I have owned this game for 11 years and never touched them.

[Hotdognz]

Jez this guy SharpenXB is the reason we host our own servers and allow players to play how ever they want on them (we have no IC checks), we allow players to make the choice not ED as the choice's ED makes cant take years to implement unfortunately.

Its is a shame though that ED are allowing the 4% to rule what the other 96% can do.

Mods are simple to use , we have 10 years old using them easily enough with out issues.
 

[zildac]

Mods add another level of insanity to an already complex game. DCS is perfectly good without them. I have owned this game for 11 years and never touched them.

That's utter nonsense....

[NineLine]

39 minutes ago, Hotdognz said:

Jez this guy SharpenXB is the reason we host our own servers and allow players to play how ever they want on them (we have no IC checks), we allow players to make the choice not ED as the choice's ED makes cant take years to implement unfortunately.

Its is a shame though that ED are allowing the 4% to rule what the other 96% can do.

Mods are simple to use , we have 10 years old using them easily enough with out issues.
 

Sorry not sure I understand this, yes we blocked the raw mod from working in DCS, but we are working on (and have the first version for testing internally) adding the mod plus some additional fixes to DCS, and hopefully in a meaningful way that players and server owners can control. 

Everyone needs to calm down a bit, including Sharp, please. 

[Hotdognz]

1 minute ago, NineLine said:

Sorry not sure I understand this, yes we blocked the raw mod from working in DCS, but we are working on (and have the first version for testing internally) adding the mod plus some additional fixes to DCS, and hopefully in a meaningful way that players and server owners can control. 

Everyone needs to calm down a bit, including Sharp, please. 

Thing is NineLine, ED blocked the entire shader folder not just one mod, that stops a lot of really good mods working that make the game much more enjoyable due to loads of inconsistences in the quality of the modules, the clear glass mod is a good example of that, newer modules are better but older modules the baked on textures on the glass are horrible, it was that hammer approach that has caused an uproar.
 

[NineLine]

3 minutes ago, Hotdognz said:

Thing is NineLine, ED blocked the entire shader folder not just one mod, that stops a lot of really good mods working that make the game much more enjoyable due to loads of inconsistences in the quality of the modules, the clear glass mod is a good example of that, newer modules are better but older modules the baked on textures on the glass are horrible, it was that hammer approach that has caused an uproar.
 

I am looking into the clear glass thing, but realistically, this shouldn't be a mod but a user option like it is on some modules. 

[Hotdognz]

1 hour ago, NineLine said:

I am looking into the clear glass thing, but realistically, this shouldn't be a mod but a user option like it is on some modules. 

User options are always a better way, thanks for looking