resolved New spotting is great / New spotting is overcooked feedback thread

[Tippis]

7 minutes ago, Branimir76 said:

I dont care if ED want to implement new spotting dot, but make it work first, and only then implement it.

They made it work. Now they're tweaking it.

The problem is more that they got rid of the beta client, ostensibly because everyone was using it as the de-facto live client without providing feedback, so now they only have their live environment to get mass-test data.

1 minute ago, Branimir76 said:

We already test it before and it was not good.
Then, they added an option to turn it off.
Now, they took that option away, while giving us the thing we already know it's bad.

Could you please post a screen shot of your options screen?

I ask because taking something away is very different from breaking it. If you turned it off and wasn't part of the testing group, then I certainly understand that being forced back into testing is frustrating, but let's be clear about what's going on here. If it was not good before, the unfortunate reality of the matter is that it's best improved by keeping it on and providing data. In particular, it is important to have points of comparison where you can point to before and after, and what got better or worse between each iteration.

5 minutes ago, Branimir76 said:

Thousands of people cannot fly missions right now, because air and ground targets are ugly black blobs seen from miles away.

Sure they can. They may prefer not to, but that's a rather different grammatical mood than “can”.

[Robi Hobby]

 

.... Thousands of people cannot fly missions right now, because air and ground targets are ugly black blobs seen from miles away.     Me too ! 

 

The feeling of flying is completely ruined! I can't fly in VR like this. I'm over 55 years old and have Prescription Lenses in my Quest 3.
It now looks like Lego Bricks are flying around! Absolute catastrophe. Really bad! 

 

I would be in favor of being able to adjust the spotting dots in increments of 10.   100% normal size for people who are half blind. down to 0% and OFF! 

That's why I'm not buying anything anymore, not even the Iraq Map. 

 

Edited October 19, 2024 by Robi Hobby

[Thamiel]

1 hour ago, Tippis said:

They made it work. Now they're tweaking it.

You forgot to add "... again.".

Edited October 19, 2024 by Thamiel

[SharpeXB]

11 hours ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

The very old issue of invisible airplanes between 3-5 miles is mostly gone.

That’s puzzling because aircraft at this range are easy to see. You shouldn’t need dots at this distance. Perhaps you need to document that with some screenshots. Although the trouble with the spotting dots being forced on is you can’t do any On/Off tests. This was the last time I was able to test this myself. You can see the 3D models clearly visible here at normal zoom levels. This is on a monitor.

 

2 hours ago, sandpatch said:

A reasonable distance feels like it would be 10 NM maximum, and a very visible plane at 2 NM.

Again you shouldn’t need dots at this range. The visibility should be dependent on size, aspect, contrast etc. A dot cannot convey any of these factors.

Edited October 19, 2024 by SharpeXB

[Tippis]

4 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Again you shouldn’t need dots at this range. The visibility should be dependent on size, aspect, contrast etc. A dot cannot convey any of these factors.

He didn't say dots, now did he?

And you should definitely need them at 10nm — you need to let go of your dreams of 40nm visibility.

[Cab]

42 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

That’s puzzling because aircraft at this range are easy to see. You shouldn’t need dots at this distance. Perhaps you need to document that with some screenshots. Although the trouble with the spotting dots being forced on is you can’t do any On/Off tests. This was the last time I was able to test this myself. You can see the 3D models clearly visible here at normal zoom levels. This is on a monitor..

 

Exactly. On a monitor. But Dawger specifically wrote, "in VR." 

Just for once, push the I Believe button. Aircraft visibility in VR is completely different to that on a monitor. The two cannot be compared.

[SharpeXB]

2 minutes ago, Cab said:

Exactly. On a monitor. But Dawger specifically wrote, "in VR." 

Just for once, push the I Believe button. Aircraft visibility in VR is completely different to that on a monitor. The two cannot be compared.

I’m curious why that is. My guess is the stereoscopic convergence just isn’t perfect like your real eyesight is, resulting in blur. Because otherwise the resolution is certainly adequate. But phenomenon like “disappearing aircraft” need to be documented by screenshots showing a 3mi label over empty space. Otherwise it could simply be the users perception and not the game. 

[Cab]

32 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Otherwise it could simply be the users perception and not the game. 

Sort of like a mass delusion? VR players only think the aircraft disappears before their eyes, but it is, in fact, really there the whole time.

It would be interesting to hear from VR players who don't suffer from this.

Edit: Or better yet, it would be most interesting to hear from those ED employees who use VR themselves.

Edited October 19, 2024 by Cab

[Tippis]

6 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

I’m curious why that is.

Funny how you miss things if you don't read them. This has been explained before, no guesswork required.

7 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

My guess is

…not consistent with how VR works. That's why you shouldn't guess.

We know it's the game. You know it's the game because this is an ancient issue that has plagued 2D as well. in fact, if you remember, it was this very issue that made you post your 40nm screenshots to try to prove that spotting was fine, actually, and it was just players not being able to see things. You know, that post that finally tipped the edge and made it abundantly clear that spotting was broken and exploitable, because you had just tried to use that state of affairs to utterly fail at your intention to demonstrate how realistic and functional it was.

Then, like now, you didn't read what people actually told and showed you, and rather than disproving them, you accidentally showed that it was just as broken at the other end of the spectrum, thereby driving the final nail in the coffin of the exploit you wanted to keep around.

Then, like now, you tried to support your self-defeating argument with guesswork and reality-defying assumptions because it had to be reality that was wrong, not your unfounded speculations.

[some1]

33 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

But phenomenon like “disappearing aircraft” need to be documented by screenshots showing a 3mi label over empty space. Otherwise it could simply be the users perception and not the game. 

It's been been documented. A year ago: https://forum.dcs.world/topic/335325-spotting-dot-bugs-in-vr/?do=findComment&comment=5308848

 

ED decided to ignore all the feedback and roll the same version again. Isn't that the definition of insanity, repeating the same thing expecting different outcomes?

[=475FG= Dawger]

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

That’s puzzling because aircraft at this range are easy to see. You shouldn’t need dots at this distance. Perhaps you need to document that with some screenshots. Although the trouble with the spotting dots being forced on is you can’t do any On/Off tests. This was the last time I was able to test this myself. You can see the 3D models clearly visible here at normal zoom levels. This is on a monitor.

 

Its incredible that you spend so much time and effort expounding on something you are absolutely clueless about.

The emphasis was added above to point to your cluelessness.

You are certainly tiresome.

[rob10]

1 hour ago, Tippis said:

Funny how you miss things if you don't read them. This has been explained before, no guesswork required.

…not consistent with how VR works. That's why you shouldn't guess.

We know it's the game. You know it's the game because this is an ancient issue that has plagued 2D as well. in fact, if you remember, it was this very issue that made you post your 40nm screenshots to try to prove that spotting was fine, actually, and it was just players not being able to see things. You know, that post that finally tipped the edge and made it abundantly clear that spotting was broken and exploitable, because you had just tried to use that state of affairs to utterly fail at your intention to demonstrate how realistic and functional it was.

Then, like now, you didn't read what people actually told and showed you, and rather than disproving them, you accidentally showed that it was just as broken at the other end of the spectrum, thereby driving the final nail in the coffin of the exploit you wanted to keep around.

Then, like now, you tried to support your self-defeating argument with guesswork and reality-defying assumptions because it had to be reality that was wrong, not your unfounded speculations.

Seriously, he has you blocked.  I know you like to get a rise out of him, but responding to him every time is just cluttering the thread up.

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, Cab said:

Sort of like a mass delusion? VR players only think the aircraft disappears before their eyes, but it is, in fact, really there the whole time.

Why not? This happens all the time. But it’s a matter of just losing track of the bandit not the aircraft model literally vanishing. Why do you think they say “lose sight lose the fight”. I’ve never seen an aircraft model literally disappear aside from server connection problems etc  

54 minutes ago, some1 said:

It's been been documented. A year ago: https://forum.dcs.world/topic/335325-spotting-dot-bugs-in-vr/?do=findComment&comment=5308848

 

ED decided to ignore all the feedback and roll the same version again. Isn't that the definition of insanity, repeating the same thing expecting different outcomes?

It’s important to get the terminology clear. Those are spotting dots vanishing not aircraft models. You shouldn’t need spotting dots to see an aircraft at 3-5 miles although again that could vary based upon size, aspect and contrast which dots can’t simulate. 

43 minutes ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

It’s incredible that you spend so much time and effort expounding on something you are absolutely clueless about.

Well since all these unsubstantiated accounts about “vanishing planes” have led ED to wreck the game for the majority of players I think you owe everyone a detailed report. Show us an aircraft model literally vanishing in the game please. 

Edited October 19, 2024 by SharpeXB

[Cab]

6 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Why not? This happens all the time. But it’s a matter of just losing track of the bandit not the aircraft model literally vanishing. Why do you think they say “lose sight lose the fight”. I’ve never seen an aircraft model literally disappear aside from server connection problems etc  

With no recent first hand experience in VR, your conclusion is everyone else is crazy. This just proves to me you’re here to amuse yourself.

Nothing to see here (pun intended). I’m moving on unless Bignewy or someone else from ED weighs in on they’re VR experience.

[Tippis]

26 minutes ago, rob10 said:

Seriously, he has you blocked.  I know you like to get a rise out of him, but responding to him every time is just cluttering the thread up.

It's not really for his benefit, but for people who might believe anything he says has any connection any know reality.

15 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Well since all these unsubstantiated accounts about “vanishing planes” have led ED to wreck the game for the majority of players I think you owe everyone a detailed report.

Citation needed.

And he showed you exactly what you asked for. You just moved the goalposts because reality once again did not align with your assumptions. And what you're asking for now has also been shown — you just choose to ignore it and try to blame the players for what the game is showing.

Edited October 19, 2024 by Tippis

[Branimir76]

4 hours ago, Tippis said:

They made it work. Now they're tweaking it.

The problem is more that they got rid of the beta client, ostensibly because everyone was using it as the de-facto live client without providing feedback, so now they only have their live environment to get mass-test data.

Could you please post a screen shot of your options screen?

I ask because taking something away is very different from breaking it. If you turned it off and wasn't part of the testing group, then I certainly understand that being forced back into testing is frustrating, but let's be clear about what's going on here. If it was not good before, the unfortunate reality of the matter is that it's best improved by keeping it on and providing data. In particular, it is important to have points of comparison where you can point to before and after, and what got better or worse between each iteration.

Sure they can. They may prefer not to, but that's a rather different grammatical mood than “can”.

We can also play Ace Combat, but we only prefer not to.... 
That was a vary bad argument.

[Tippis]

Just now, Branimir76 said:

We can also play Ace Combat, but we only prefer not to.... 
That was a vary bad argument.

That goes both ways. It was appropriate for the exaggeration.

[Branimir76]

Just now, Tippis said:

That goes both ways. It was appropriate for the exaggeration.

Word playing doesn't serve us any good. 
DCS is unusable for most players because of a mistake we used to have, corrected it, than have it again.
Dont tell me I should ignore going CAS mission and seeing every target behind any cover from a distance as big black blobs the size of a 12 story building.

[SharpeXB]

17 minutes ago, Cab said:

With no recent first hand experience in VR, your conclusion is everyone else is crazy. This just proves to me you’re here to amuse yourself.

Document this for the rest of us then with a video, screenshot or something. Without that it’s left for us to belive players simply aren’t good at visually tracking targets or have bad eyesight or something. Or they’ve got unrealistic expectations. And it’s wrecking the game for everyone else. It’s not a given that you’d see an aircraft at 3-5 miles. A top view F-14 is much easier to see than a nose-on 109. Yes both are shown equally as flying bricks. That’s just not a simulation. And you shouldn’t use the non-falsifiable argument that it’s not possible to show VR or that everyone needs to go buy a $1,000 headset in order to understand. Plenty of VR players have documented the giant bricks. Why can’t you support your observation on the same level?
You owe the devs and the community actual documentation of these things because it affects everyone. Personally I’ve taken a hiatus from DCS until this is resolved. Plenty of other games out there to keep me busy. 

Edited October 19, 2024 by SharpeXB

[Tippis]

1 minute ago, Branimir76 said:

Word playing doesn't serve us any good. 
DCS is unusable for most players because of a mistake we used to have, corrected it, than have it again.

Neither do exaggerations. DCS is fully usable. Whatever small sample size you used does not qualify as “most players”.

3 minutes ago, Branimir76 said:

Dont tell me I should ignore going CAS mission and seeing every target behind any cover from a distance as big black blobs the size of a 12 story building.

That sounds a lot like you are having issues with a very different gameplay option, not with spotting dots.

 

4 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

You owe the devs and the community actual documentation of these things because it affects everyone. 

No, it doesn't. That's the problem with all your blame-shifting: you think that if it works one way for one person it must by necessity work that way for everyone, so if someone says something else, it must be a problem with the person, not the game. In spite of having been shown (which shouldn't even be necessary if you understood how computers work) these differences, you cling to that ridiculous notion.

[=475FG= Dawger]

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

 

Well since all these unsubstantiated accounts about “vanishing planes” have led ED to wreck the game for the majority of players I think you owe everyone a detailed report. Show us an aircraft model literally vanishing in the game please. 

 

This is why you look like an low IQ fresh water fish. How do you propose someone in VR show folks who are on flat screen what they see in the HMD?

Edited October 19, 2024 by =475FG= Dawger

[SharpeXB]

8 minutes ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

This is why you look like an low IQ fresh water fish. How do you propose someone in VR show folks who are on flat screen what they see in the HMD?

 

There’s plenty of documentation here from VR players. If they can show what they’re seeing why can’t you?
https://forum.dcs.world/topic/335325-spotting-dot-bugs-in-vr/

And trying to report a bug which can be documented is pretty much a waste of time. 

Edited October 19, 2024 by SharpeXB

[=475FG= Dawger]

3 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

There’s plenty of documentation here from VR players. If they can show what they’re seeing why can’t you?
https://forum.dcs.world/topic/335325-spotting-dot-bugs-in-vr/

And trying to report a bug which can be documented is pretty much a waste of time. 

 

That's the Mirror on the flat screen, not what you actually see in VR.

 

[SharpeXB]

26 minutes ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

That's the Mirror on the flat screen, not what you actually see in VR.

It’s not possible to convey exactly what I see on a monitor either. Screenshots and videos are compressed and it would require a 4K display to see exactly what I’m seeing. But this sort of info can be enough for others to try and duplicate the problem. It’s the normal requirement for making a bug report. All it would take to document a “vanishing” aircraft model is a track and a screenshot of empty space with a label where the aircraft should be. 

Edited October 19, 2024 by SharpeXB

[=475FG= Dawger]

2 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

It’s not possible to convey exactly what I see on a monitor either. Screenshots and videos are compressed and it would require a 4K display to see exactly what I’m seeing. But this sort of info can be enough for others to try and duplicate the problem. It’s the normal requirement for making a bug report. All it would take to document a “vanishing” aircraft model is a track and a screenshot of empty space with a label where the aircraft should be. 

 

What is a big part of the fun engaging with you is that you cannot even conceive of being wrong and absolutely must respond.