SharpeXB Posted May 16, 2024 Posted May 16, 2024 3 hours ago, TAIPAN_ said: The last thing we want is to go back to the old days where people used to reduce their resolution to 1080p to get an advantage in PvP and have an expensive graphics card sitting there wasted. Realize that’s still the case now as v2.8 can still be enabled by selecting Spotting Dots: Off. Again part of the trouble here is that this was supposed to be a WIP feature you could turn off but there’s really not a true off function. 3 i9-14900KS | ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z790 HERO | 64GB DDR5 5600MHz | iCUE H150i Liquid CPU Cooler | ASUS TUF GeForce RTX 4090 OC | Windows 11 Home | 2TB Samsung 980 PRO NVMe | Corsair RM1000x | LG 48GQ900-B 4K OLED Monitor | CH Fighterstick | Ch Pro Throttle | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR 5
mytai01 Posted May 16, 2024 Posted May 16, 2024 (edited) The thing is, I have the advantage of looking at radar and aircraft all day. I can see what real aircraft look like at different ranges and sky conditions. It appears the dots appear at about 20 miles in VR. Even the C-5 would be difficult to see @ 20 miles. Anything smaller would never be visible that far away. However, it occurs to me that another part of the problem is that the contrast of the dot is too much. It needs to blend into the background much more. It should be difficult to see. As it is now, the dot functions better than short-range radar... Edited May 16, 2024 by mytai01 4 MS Win7 Pro x64, Intel i7-6700K 4.0Ghz, Corsair RAM 16Gb,EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FTW GAMING ACX 3.0, w/ Adjustable RGB LED Graphics Card 08G-P4-6286-KR, Creative Labs SB X-FI Titanium Fatal1ty Champ PCIe Sound Card, Corsair Neutron XTI 1TB SSD, TM Warthog Throttle & Stick, TM TPR Pedels, Oculus Rift VR Headset CV1, Klipsch Promedia 4.1 Speakers...
Tippis Posted May 16, 2024 Posted May 16, 2024 (edited) 12 hours ago, draconus said: The whole idea of fake dots is a fail. It should be a job of a 3D graphic engine to either render the object with proper angular size on the screen using 1 or more pixels, or render 1 pixel fading into background until disappearing when reaching range far enough. How to tell if it's 1 pixel or more? Basic math taking resolution vs fov vs object angular size - gfx engine's job. This way purposely lowering the resolution would be disadvatageous because you'll worsen your spotting - the 4K would still show a faint pixel while FullHD will lose the sight entirely at the same fov & range. It can't correlate well with RL spotting since we also have different sizes of monitors and can change fov on the fly. Yes? That's exactly what this dot system is trying to achieve: a minimum-size dot that fades into the background at extreme ranges, and a 3D model that takes over at closer ones. It tries to be resolution-agnostic so that the size is the same across resolutions, which is why higher resolutions get larger dots (in terms of pixel count). Whether it achieves this goal is a slightly different matter, but that's why the feedback thread exist one forum over, and the part where it transitions from dot to 3D model is particularly… iffy. But that's a matter of implementation, not of the idea being wrong. The problem is that there needs to be a third state that bridges the gap between the two, but a very vocal contingent of forum posters have argued ferociously against ED ever implementing the known and working solution to this, and have unfortunately convinced ED to go along. Until they change their minds, the gap is likely to remain. 8 hours ago, SharpeXB said: This has all been discussed to death with not much new to add. But again the idea of having artificial dots is a fail. For the following reasons: - It’s not realistic to easily see distant aircraft. - Dots cannot portray target aspect so a nose-on MiG-21 looks the same as a top view F-14. - The system is exploitable by players online. - The Spotting Dots largely duplicate the Dot Labels which are already a feature. The reasons you list are exactly why having a dot system is a necessity. Well, except for the last one which is objectively false. We have dots because it's the only way to reliably set a universal cap on how far out you can see aircraft. Making it a matter of pure trigonometry means they will show up at absurd ranges depending on your settings, while also making it trivial to exploit by players online. Dots being dots is just a tautology. They're not meant to portray aspects, so their inability to do so is somewhere between wholly irrelevant and proof that they're doing exactly what they should. At the ranges where you just see “a contact”, that is all the information you are meant to get. If they could portray aspect, they would have failed at the one thing they're meant to do. The system is vastly less exploitable than the old one. I suppose this is why some want the old one to return… The only commonality between spotting dots and dot labels is that, by default (but not by necessity), they are are dots. That is all. There is no duplication between the two in how they work and what can be done with them. ED can solve this if given useful feedback rather than foot-stomping and wishes to go back to a previous more exploitable state. But accept that dots is the way forward because there is literally no other solution to the problem that's being addressed. Also accept that they aren't, and indeed can't be, the solution to a different set of spotting problems that ED could also solve if people didn't get all up in arms over the game being made more realistic. 7 hours ago, SharpeXB said: Realize that’s still the case now as v2.8 can still be enabled by selecting Spotting Dots: Off. Again part of the trouble here is that this was supposed to be a WIP feature you could turn off but there’s really not a true off function. It is a WIP feature that you can turn off. There is no “supposed” about it, and a “true off” would be an even worse solution than going back to the old flawed one. If you want it to progress further, provide constructive feedback. “Do not want” is not constructive. Edited May 16, 2024 by Tippis ❧ ❧ Inside you are two wolves. One cannot land; the other shoots friendlies. You are a Goon. ❧ ❧
KoN Posted May 16, 2024 Posted May 16, 2024 On 5/15/2024 at 9:35 PM, YoYo said: But the worst thing in current system is probably this. Target about 10 km from me (large box), target about 7.5 km from me (different LOD loaded) - the dot got much smaller. What's the point? 10km: Target about 7km: It should be the other way around if anything ... This has been a DCS problem for many years , and has been untouched and left to rot until Now. With bigger and fast PC computers we can get photo realistic graphics now . I wish DCS had the same scale system as BMS, or il2 great battles , their VR scaling is what we need . I'm bringing up other sims as an example. DCS leads the way in sheer volume and attention to detail. But yet still struggling with the basics. I went VR about a year ago and I find it amazing when it runs smoothly , Spends hours flying here . Just hope DCS can do the right thing and bring the community what it craves. The F4 is coming and that's close range combat . Gigabyte - X570UD ~ Ryzen - 5600X @ 4.7 - RTX-4070 SUPER - XPG 32:GB @ 3200 - VKB - Gunfighter 4 - STECs - Throttle - Crosswinds Rudders - Trackir 5 . I'm a dot . Pico Nero 3 link VR . @ 4k Win 11 Pro 64Bit . No longer Supporting DCS .
draconus Posted May 17, 2024 Posted May 17, 2024 (edited) 7 hours ago, Tippis said: It tries to be resolution-agnostic so that the size is the same across resolutions, which is why higher resolutions get larger dots (in terms of pixel count). That's why I said - failed idea from the start. Higher resolution is supposed to get you better image, better spotting, not worse and not wrong size objects, fake dots. The display device is a mean to display the correct image. And correct means correct object angular sizes independent of resolution - just the fov vs monitor size. The resolution will be a factor in calculating how many pixels will be filled. If one FullHD monitor depicts an aircraft as 1 black pixel it means the same size 4K monitor should display more pixels for the same aircraft. As the range increases the FullHD will eventually show no pixel while 4K one will still show 1 pixel. Further away both will lose the sight. And even that one pixel should not be always black - it should take into account the color, light/glints and aircraft size/aspect. That's how it should work in DCS. 7 hours ago, Tippis said: a very vocal contingent of forum posters have argued ferociously against ED ever implementing the known and working solution to this It's not a solution - it's another bad idea. 6 hours ago, KoN said: With bigger and fast PC computers we can get photo realistic graphics now . I wish DCS had the same scale system as BMS, or il2 great battles , their VR scaling is what we need . You're contradicting yourself. Scaling would make graphic unrealistic. Edited May 17, 2024 by draconus 2 Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX4070S Quest 3 T16000M VPC CDT-VMAX TFRP FC3 F-14A/B F-15E CA SC NTTR PG Syria
KoN Posted May 17, 2024 Posted May 17, 2024 (edited) 5 hours ago, draconus said: That's why I said - failed idea from the start. Higher resolution is supposed to get you better image, better spotting, not worse and not wrong size objects, fake dots. The display device is a mean to display the correct image. And correct means correct object angular sizes independent of resolution - just the fov vs monitor size. The resolution will be a factor in calculating how many pixels will be filled. If one FullHD monitor depicts an aircraft as 1 black pixel it means the same size 4K monitor should display more pixels for the same aircraft. As the range increases the FullHD will eventually show no pixel while 4K one will still show 1 pixel. Further away both will lose the sight. And even that one pixel should not be always black - it should take into account the color, light/glints and aircraft size/aspect. That's how it should work in DCS. It's not a solution - it's another bad idea. You're contradicting yourself. Scaling would make graphic unrealistic. Maybe you misunderstood my meaning. Have you tried the other SIMs? I'm sure you have, Please correct my meaning. As I'm sure, you know what I mean. The other SIMs have got it right, so why can't DCS, Because they have never changed things until now. And this is because there has been a push for better spotting lately, and a mod was used for spotting in the WWII servers which bypassed the integrity check. The problem I see is in VR not flat screen fly in 4K, and it looks amazing, and the spotting looks decent. I've tested this. Fly in VR and you get big black Blobs. Edited May 17, 2024 by KoN Gigabyte - X570UD ~ Ryzen - 5600X @ 4.7 - RTX-4070 SUPER - XPG 32:GB @ 3200 - VKB - Gunfighter 4 - STECs - Throttle - Crosswinds Rudders - Trackir 5 . I'm a dot . Pico Nero 3 link VR . @ 4k Win 11 Pro 64Bit . No longer Supporting DCS .
Tippis Posted May 17, 2024 Posted May 17, 2024 (edited) 7 hours ago, draconus said: That's why I said - failed idea from the start. Higher resolution is supposed to get you better image, better spotting, not worse and not wrong size objects, fake dots. No and no, in that order. No, it's not a failed idea because no, higher resolution is absolutely and categorically not supposed to give you better spotting. If it does, the spotting is fundamentally broken. Spotting should as far as possible be wholly hardware-agnostic and as well as it ever can yield the exact same result regardless of resolution and display system. If it doesn't do that, then it has truly failed. The only way to achieve this reliably in the edge-of-visibility realm is with a resolution-countering dot system. Now, as it happened, the previous dot system was so poorly implemented that it gave rise to that kind of failure: different contact sizes depending on hardware, even though its foundation was one where that could be solved. The new system attempts — and to some degree actually succeeds — to give everyone the same target size. It is just a bit… ehm… naive, let's call it, about what display systems are used and how that translates pixel size in to visual size. So yes, higher resolution should indeed see larger dots. No, that is not a failed idea. In fact, it is the only viable idea. No, that doesn't mean dots is inherently correct, but correct dots are more correct than any other solution can even hope for. We are not there yet, so yes, more tweaking is needed, but no, that doesn't mean we have to discard the whole idea. Indeed, it's just a matter of tweaking. And providing constructive feedback for those tweaks. Eg. at what distance should the dots be fully faded into the background. At what distance should the dots be overwritten by 3D models. On what display time should those cross-over points translate into what size dot. And how do we solve the middle-distance problem where we should have be able to identify aspect to a much higher degree? 7 hours ago, draconus said: It's not a solution - it's another bad idea. No. it's not just a solution, but a complementary one, and the best one available. 7 hours ago, draconus said: Scaling would make graphic unrealistic. The whole point and purpose of scaling is that, counter-intuitively, it makes it more realistic. Cognition is not pure trigonometry, as it turns out, and to make it realistic, it is cognition that needs to be simulated. Edited May 17, 2024 by Tippis 2 ❧ ❧ Inside you are two wolves. One cannot land; the other shoots friendlies. You are a Goon. ❧ ❧
draconus Posted May 17, 2024 Posted May 17, 2024 2 hours ago, Tippis said: Spotting should as far as possible be wholly hardware-agnostic and as well as it ever can yield the exact same result regardless of resolution and display system. If it doesn't do that, then it has truly failed. You're wrong. Sim is supposed to simulate pilot vision and show us the world as best as our display hardware allows. Naturally the better device, the higher resolution, the more detailed image, thus better spotting. This is the way. Not fake balancing contact sizes, unrealistic scaling, nonsensical dots and squares. 2 Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX4070S Quest 3 T16000M VPC CDT-VMAX TFRP FC3 F-14A/B F-15E CA SC NTTR PG Syria
SharpeXB Posted May 17, 2024 Posted May 17, 2024 8 minutes ago, draconus said: Naturally the better device, the higher resolution, the more detailed image, thus better spotting. Yes, arguably it would be better for the game to favor better hardware because the reverse is illogical. Having players down-res their screens to get an advantage is ludicrous. 1 i9-14900KS | ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z790 HERO | 64GB DDR5 5600MHz | iCUE H150i Liquid CPU Cooler | ASUS TUF GeForce RTX 4090 OC | Windows 11 Home | 2TB Samsung 980 PRO NVMe | Corsair RM1000x | LG 48GQ900-B 4K OLED Monitor | CH Fighterstick | Ch Pro Throttle | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR 5
ricktoberfest Posted May 17, 2024 Posted May 17, 2024 (edited) 4 minutes ago, SharpeXB said: Yes, arguably it would be better for the game to favor better hardware because the reverse is illogical. Having players down-res their screens to get an advantage is ludicrous. So then it turns into pay to win. Those who can afford the newest monitor or highest resolution VR have an immense advantage over those with “medium” hardware. Edited May 17, 2024 by ricktoberfest
SharpeXB Posted May 17, 2024 Posted May 17, 2024 (edited) 6 minutes ago, ricktoberfest said: So then it turns into pay to win. Those who can afford the newest monitor or highest resolution VR have an immense advantage over those with “medium” hardware. So punishing high end hardware makes more sense? Encouraging players to make the game look like garbage so they can unrealistically see opponents 20 miles away? That makes no sense at all. Besides every other activity in life is “pay to win” why should gaming be different Edited May 17, 2024 by SharpeXB i9-14900KS | ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z790 HERO | 64GB DDR5 5600MHz | iCUE H150i Liquid CPU Cooler | ASUS TUF GeForce RTX 4090 OC | Windows 11 Home | 2TB Samsung 980 PRO NVMe | Corsair RM1000x | LG 48GQ900-B 4K OLED Monitor | CH Fighterstick | Ch Pro Throttle | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR 5
Tippis Posted May 17, 2024 Posted May 17, 2024 (edited) 38 minutes ago, draconus said: You're wrong. Sim is supposed to simulate pilot vision I.e. perception. A cognitive process. 38 minutes ago, draconus said: Naturally the better device, the higher resolution, the more detailed image, thus better spotting No. The better the device, the higher the resolution, the more detailed the image. Period. If it affects spotting — i.e. the pilot's vision — then it is is introducing a meta-game component into the game that shouldn't be there because you are letting hardware influence the simulated world. You might as well suggest that your weapon effectiveness should be FPS-dependent because higher FPS means it can show more fragments, and more fragments means more damage. But that is obviously nonsense. The damage should be the damage should be the damage — if your hardware is suddenly a factor, you have long since ceased to simulate the damage effect. You're letting an irrelevant and disconnected out-of-game variable affect the in-game world and how it is being simulated. Same with spotting. What you can see should be what you can see should be what you can see. There is a limit to how small a detail you can see. That limit should be simulated and graphics hardware should ultimately not be a factor. It might let you squeeze more pixels out of the same observable area, but the limit is the limit and it categorically must be the same for everyone. It can under no circumstances change it so that you can see things that others can't because (or not see something others can) just because you fiddle with some settings, because then we have ceased to simulate the perception of the pilot — in this case their vision — and instead let a wholly irrelevant out-of-game variable change the in-game behaviour of the world. If you can come up with any other solution that removes hardware as a factor — and it must be removed as a factor for the simulation to be correct and be realistic — that isn't relying on a normalised dot, then I'd be glad to hear it. But no-one has ever been able to figure one out, so good luck. 38 minutes ago, draconus said: This is the way. It is the way to cheat, yes. That is why some are so in favour of it: because it lets them have the game show a different world to them than it does to others. That is no longer a simulation. Edited May 17, 2024 by Tippis ❧ ❧ Inside you are two wolves. One cannot land; the other shoots friendlies. You are a Goon. ❧ ❧
ricktoberfest Posted May 17, 2024 Posted May 17, 2024 1 hour ago, SharpeXB said: So punishing high end hardware makes more sense? Encouraging players to make the game look like garbage so they can unrealistically see opponents 20 miles away? That makes no sense at all. Besides every other activity in life is “pay to win” why should gaming be different There are plenty of advantages to having high end hardware- spotting difference shouldn’t be one. I am against pay to win in any situation, just because you can do it elsewhere doesn’t mean it should be done here. you obviously are mad that throwing money at a problem doesn’t make you better than others. This is a problem with you, not the game.
SharpeXB Posted May 17, 2024 Posted May 17, 2024 (edited) 32 minutes ago, ricktoberfest said: There are plenty of advantages to having high end hardware- spotting difference shouldn’t be one What about a player with a 60” TV vs one on a laptop? Life just isn’t fair sometimes. 32 minutes ago, ricktoberfest said: I am against pay to win in any situation, just because you can do it elsewhere doesn’t mean it should be done here. You picked the wrong hobby if you don’t want money to be a factor Edited May 17, 2024 by SharpeXB 1 i9-14900KS | ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z790 HERO | 64GB DDR5 5600MHz | iCUE H150i Liquid CPU Cooler | ASUS TUF GeForce RTX 4090 OC | Windows 11 Home | 2TB Samsung 980 PRO NVMe | Corsair RM1000x | LG 48GQ900-B 4K OLED Monitor | CH Fighterstick | Ch Pro Throttle | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR 5
ricktoberfest Posted May 17, 2024 Posted May 17, 2024 41 minutes ago, SharpeXB said: What about a player with a 60” TV vs one on a laptop? Life just isn’t fair sometimes. You picked the wrong hobby if you don’t want money to be a factor You’re assuming I have poor hardware. Just because I want a level playing field doesn’t mean I don’t enjoy (or have) good hardware.
SharpeXB Posted May 17, 2024 Posted May 17, 2024 Just now, ricktoberfest said: You’re assuming I have poor hardware. Just because I want a level playing field doesn’t mean I don’t enjoy (or have) good hardware. There’s never going to be a completely level playing field in gaming like this. Sure, to the extent it’s possible the game should try to be fair in this regard. But biasing towards poor hardware or settings is going the wrong direction. 1 i9-14900KS | ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z790 HERO | 64GB DDR5 5600MHz | iCUE H150i Liquid CPU Cooler | ASUS TUF GeForce RTX 4090 OC | Windows 11 Home | 2TB Samsung 980 PRO NVMe | Corsair RM1000x | LG 48GQ900-B 4K OLED Monitor | CH Fighterstick | Ch Pro Throttle | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR 5
Tippis Posted May 17, 2024 Posted May 17, 2024 (edited) 1 hour ago, SharpeXB said: There’s never going to be a completely level playing field in gaming like this. That is no justification for deliberately making it worse. 1 hour ago, SharpeXB said: But biasing towards poor hardware or settings is going the wrong direction. Good news: no-one is arguing for that (except you), and the end goal is to get away from exactly that situation. Just because you would benefit from making the game more unfair doesn't mean the game should be made more unfair. Quite the opposite. Especially since the benefits you imagine yourself reaping would be used against you so you'd actually suffer from getting what you wish… You know, like what happened with the old dots? Edited May 17, 2024 by Tippis ❧ ❧ Inside you are two wolves. One cannot land; the other shoots friendlies. You are a Goon. ❧ ❧
TAIPAN_ Posted May 18, 2024 Posted May 18, 2024 7 hours ago, ricktoberfest said: There are plenty of advantages to having high end hardware- spotting difference shouldn’t be one. I am against pay to win in any situation, just because you can do it elsewhere doesn’t mean it should be done here. Hey this is not war thunder here, spotting shouldn't be gimped to handicap people that have more expensive hardware in the name of "PvP Fairness". That's exactly the situation we were unintentionally in with people reducing resolution to 1080p just so that they could play PvP because the dot system stupidly used to favour lower resolutions. Next minute be asking to reduce FPS for those that get over 100fps because it's not fair to those that have poorer PCs, or to reduce gun performance for those with accurate VKB sticks because it's not fair to those with an Xbox controller. Currently you're kind of getting what you want, because high resolution VR headsets that use the latest eye tracking technology really have a much smaller dot and sometimes very hard to even notice. It's either supersampling, quadviews/dfr or some other setting that does it combined with having 4000x5000 resolution per eye (and running 200% supersampling on that). Since we see lower res headsets complain the dot is too big, yeah it may need to be shifted in favour of high resolutions. Maybe by making it smaller only for those on lower resolution, or as I'd suggested giving them a slider to make it optional because one thing is for certain: people are sure to have some combination of settings that makes the change not work as expected. On 5/16/2024 at 9:40 PM, draconus said: DCS does the proper scaling already but at some range the model disappears and the "dot" is put in place instead. No matter the resolution there's always some range that the aircraft becomes 1 pixel or smaller. The point is to handle it well by gfx engine and depict it realistically - this should be priority, not some impossible PvP balance where everybody have different display size, resolution and fov. Agree on all points, and at some stage they improved that transition between the dot and the scaling (it used to be quite jarring when the dot disappeared the model was too small to see so there was a medium range blindspot) 1 Pimax Crystal VR & Simpit User | Ryzen CPU & Nvidia RTX GPU | Some of my mods
SharpeXB Posted May 18, 2024 Posted May 18, 2024 (edited) 1 hour ago, TAIPAN_ said: That's exactly the situation we were unintentionally in with people reducing resolution to 1080p just so that they could play PvP because the dot system stupidly used to favour lower resolutions. That system still exists. Again it’s possible to use that by selecting Spotting Dots: Off. That doesn’t turn the dots off, it just reverts the setting to the 2.8 system. 1080p players can still see you as a giant dot at crazy distances. Edited May 18, 2024 by SharpeXB 2 i9-14900KS | ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z790 HERO | 64GB DDR5 5600MHz | iCUE H150i Liquid CPU Cooler | ASUS TUF GeForce RTX 4090 OC | Windows 11 Home | 2TB Samsung 980 PRO NVMe | Corsair RM1000x | LG 48GQ900-B 4K OLED Monitor | CH Fighterstick | Ch Pro Throttle | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR 5
Tippis Posted May 18, 2024 Posted May 18, 2024 (edited) 6 hours ago, TAIPAN_ said: Hey this is not war thunder here, spotting shouldn't be gimped to handicap people that have more expensive hardware in the name of "PvP Fairness". That's exactly the situation we were unintentionally in with people reducing resolution to 1080p just so that they could play PvP because the dot system stupidly used to favour lower resolutions. Quite. And that works in the other direction as well: spotting shouldn't be gimped to give a handicap (in the golf sense) to people who have more expensive hardware in the name of deliberate PvP unfairness. P2W schemes may plague other games, but it has absolutely no place here. The goal should always be that you can spot targets equally well at equal distances no matter any external factors. The pilot's physical limitations should be simulated the same as the plane's limitations — imagine the furore if my hardware choice let my missiles fly farther, track better, and be more resistant to countermeasures There are some naive assumptions with the new dots as far as size as a function of resolutions, and those need to be tweaked, but on the whole, that old business of making in-world limits vary with out-of-game settings was just nonsense and had to go. Just because some people are losing their precious artificial advantages under this new scheme is no reason to get rid of it. Quite the opposite. It's exactly why it should be kept and further evolved. 6 hours ago, TAIPAN_ said: Agree on all points, and at some stage they improved that transition between the dot and the scaling (it used to be quite jarring when the dot disappeared the model was too small to see so there was a medium range blindspot) Yes. It's really these transition points and the expected visibility when it happens that needs to drilled into to get both the dot fade and the 3D model LoD and scaling parameters adjusted to where it all meshes together as seamlessly as possible. 4 hours ago, SharpeXB said: That system still exists. Again it’s possible to use that by selecting Spotting Dots: Off. That doesn’t turn the dots off, it just reverts the setting to the 2.8 system. 1080p players can still see you as a giant dot at crazy distances. They really can't. They can see you as a 1px dot at lower distances. But others can also see them as a 1px dot at much longer distances. The problem is that those two distances differ, where higher resolution sees farther, and that the physical size of that single pixel also differs, where lower resolutions makes it easier to see. The new dot system removes both of those issues. Rather than each side getting their own particular brand of nonsensical advantage, neither get any. Of course, people who want to be able to see farther than they should will be against their own advantage being removed but no-one cares about that nonsensical opinion. Edited May 18, 2024 by Tippis 1 ❧ ❧ Inside you are two wolves. One cannot land; the other shoots friendlies. You are a Goon. ❧ ❧
TAIPAN_ Posted May 18, 2024 Posted May 18, 2024 7 minutes ago, Tippis said: Quite. And that works in the other direction as well: spotting shouldn't be gimped to give a handicap (in the golf sense) to people who have more expensive hardware in the name of deliberate PvP unfairness. P2W schemes may plague other games, but it has absolutely no place here. The goal should always be that you can spot targets equally well at equal distances no matter any external factors. Agree, in fact the game should never even need to give a handicap to people with better hardware. By definition their image should be clearer and easier to see the detail of the small aircraft. When it comes to dots though, that's not about detail and is really about sizing/contrast. An ideal situation would have the contacts appear reasonably the same size to the human eye between high res and low res, but unavoidably the high res image would be have more detail. I.e. if it's a scaled model then the high res image would be able to make it out as a jet whereas the low res might not be able to tell the difference between a jet and a P51. 7 minutes ago, Tippis said: There are some naive assumptions with the new dots as far as size as a function of resolutions, and those need to be tweaked, but on the whole, that old business of making in-world limits vary with out-of-game settings was just nonsense and had to go. Exactly, in my case a perfect example - DCS simply sees the massive resolution of 200% supersampling in the small portion of the screen that eye tracking is looking at and assumes that to be resolution when in fact it's more than double the resolution of the actual pixels in the lense. I can test this by looking away from the target and noticing when it goes outside the supersampling portion the dot becomes 4x bigger (I can't actually see it other than peripheral then because I'm not looking at it, but recording in OBS I can notice it there afterwards). 7 minutes ago, Tippis said: Just because some people are losing their precious artificial advantages under this new scheme is no reason to get rid of it. Quite the opposite. It's exactly why it should be kept and further evolved. Agree, even though my dot is smaller than others I feel it is at a good workable/realistic level and really don't want to see this broken after waiting for this solution to get to this stage after so long. That's why any reduction should be optional, because I don't have confidence that all hardware can be catered for unless ED increase their testing process. Pimax Crystal VR & Simpit User | Ryzen CPU & Nvidia RTX GPU | Some of my mods
Tippis Posted May 18, 2024 Posted May 18, 2024 5 minutes ago, TAIPAN_ said: Agree, in fact the game should never even need to give a handicap to people with better hardware. By definition their image should be clearer and easier to see the detail of the small aircraft. When it comes to dots though, that's not about detail and is really about sizing/contrast. Yeah, I think that's where the aggravation sets in: sure, higher res = more detail, but dots are dots. They should have no detail. They should just be seen or not (or some gradient inbetween where they fade into the background). And they should go away the same no matter what. The intuition for what better graphics should give you breaks down at that point. Once the transition to 3D model happens, we have a whole different ballgame. And there's also the tricky bit where settings may have to adjust where that happens so you don't get what happens now for many people, where you go from clear dot to indistinct 3D model mush. 10 minutes ago, TAIPAN_ said: DCS simply sees the massive resolution of 200% supersampling in the small portion of the screen that eye tracking is looking at and assumes that to be resolution when in fact it's more than double the resolution of the actual pixels in the lense. I can test this by looking away from the target and noticing when it goes outside the supersampling portion the dot becomes 4x bigger (I can't actually see it other than peripheral then because I'm not looking at it, but recording in OBS I can notice it there afterwards). There is only one solution. Stop hardware progress. But seriously, yes, one of the big hurdles right now seems to be that so many solutions are showing up — specially in VR — to let the player dial in their perfect preferred balance between quality and performance, and almost all of those need some kind of special-case handling for spotting. I almost sympathise with ED for what a mess it must be to keep up and try to figure what will be stable and long-lasting enough a solution to warrant trying to support. 1 ❧ ❧ Inside you are two wolves. One cannot land; the other shoots friendlies. You are a Goon. ❧ ❧
mytai01 Posted May 18, 2024 Posted May 18, 2024 I think there's an expectation bias in this discussion. Everyone may have different ideas about how far away they should be able to see objects. Obviously, there are many factors that affect the distance an object is visible, individual eye sight, haze, and angle of the sun have the greatest effect in clear skies. Even in perfectly clear weather with zero haze controllers and pilots have to search the sky to see aircraft that is only 3-5 miles away. The best situation is when the sun is reflecting light back at the tower. The problem with the dot system in DCS is that the dots standout 20 miles away no matter the size of the aircraft, or the angle of the sun, or the haze level. This is completely unbelievable. There's a reason radar detection exists, but the dot system completely undermines the need for radar as a means of detecting aircraft. In clear skies, you might see a fighter sized aircraft if it turns in a 90 degree bank. If you want compensations, then either turn on labels, or make the dots an option. Multiplayer Servers can control that feature like every thing else. 2 MS Win7 Pro x64, Intel i7-6700K 4.0Ghz, Corsair RAM 16Gb,EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FTW GAMING ACX 3.0, w/ Adjustable RGB LED Graphics Card 08G-P4-6286-KR, Creative Labs SB X-FI Titanium Fatal1ty Champ PCIe Sound Card, Corsair Neutron XTI 1TB SSD, TM Warthog Throttle & Stick, TM TPR Pedels, Oculus Rift VR Headset CV1, Klipsch Promedia 4.1 Speakers...
SharpeXB Posted May 18, 2024 Posted May 18, 2024 (edited) 36 minutes ago, mytai01 said: Everyone may have different ideas about how far away they should be able to see objects. The problem is that video games, particularly older ones, through the use of dots and labels and such have convinced players for decades that aircraft should be easily seen at great distances. Because seeing the enemy planes in a video game is “fun”. If a sim tried to actually have realistic visibility where you struggled to see something 3-5 miles away they’d howl. Edited May 18, 2024 by SharpeXB 2 i9-14900KS | ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z790 HERO | 64GB DDR5 5600MHz | iCUE H150i Liquid CPU Cooler | ASUS TUF GeForce RTX 4090 OC | Windows 11 Home | 2TB Samsung 980 PRO NVMe | Corsair RM1000x | LG 48GQ900-B 4K OLED Monitor | CH Fighterstick | Ch Pro Throttle | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR 5
Tippis Posted May 18, 2024 Posted May 18, 2024 48 minutes ago, SharpeXB said: The problem is that video games, particularly older ones, through the use of dots and labels and such have convinced players for decades that aircraft should be easily seen at great distances. Because seeing the enemy planes in a video game is “fun”. If a sim tried to actually have realistic visibility where you struggled to see something 3-5 miles away they’d howl. Just witness the upset when the old dots went away, and with them the absurd ranges at which planes could be spotted previously, causing people to demand that the old dots were retained as an option. Not to mention those who are now clamouring for the removal of dots entirely, to allow for infinite range, limited only by video resolution and the game's max simulation distance. Coincidentally, no, that's not a problem with old games, and as such can't have convinced players of anything. Dots are a pretty new entry since up until recently, this kind of long distance spotting wasn't a problem — the hardware wasn't there to make it one. Now that we have to put hard caps on how far out the hardware renders things, and to create a method for letting contacts fade in, spotting has arisen as pretty much the only viable solution to that. ❧ ❧ Inside you are two wolves. One cannot land; the other shoots friendlies. You are a Goon. ❧ ❧
Recommended Posts