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

[SharpeXB]

1 minute ago, DoorMouse said:

 

The human eye has better than 1080, 4k vision. The zoom is if anything the closest to your eyes actual ability to see, the default view would be like 20/200. The DCS pilot would be medically barred from flight status. 

When it’s necessary to explain this it’s apparent that many DCS players have very poor eyesight. They think their screens look like real life And we are stuck with these dots in the game because they won’t go see an eye doctor.

[Tippis]

10 minutes ago, DoorMouse said:

The human eye has better than 1080, 4k vision.

Not categorically stated like that, no. Also, what kind of weird setup is that?

A 4k display is fully capable of rendering smaller details than the eye can perceive. Technically, so can a 1080p display — it's just going to be a bit annoying to play on. It's not a function of pixel amount but of distance and dot pitch. It's a matter of ergonomics and workspace, not technical capability.

 

4 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

When it’s necessary to explain this it’s apparent that many DCS players have very poor eyesight.

Funny thing is, the one that need to have it explain to them are the ones who can't even judge how wide their field of view is, or count the number of pixels in a 4k display. And most ironically, they're the one who refuse to read the explanations provided to them why their assumptions about resolutions are wrong.

And then they blame the players rather than their own misapprehension of basic maths.

Edited November 3, 2024 by Tippis

[DoorMouse]

8 hours ago, Tippis said:

Not categorically stated like that, no. Also, what kind of weird setup is that?

A 4k display is fully capable of rendering smaller details than the eye can perceive. Technically, so can a 1080p display

 

That it categorically false. 'The human eye's resolution is estimated to be around 576 megapixels.'

The zoom function in the game, even if you had 8k resolution VR per eye, would still pale in comparison to the eyes ability to see.  

 

 

[Pillowcat]

49 minutes ago, DoorMouse said:

That it categorically false. 'The human eye's resolution is estimated to be around 576 megapixels.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fovea_centralis#Angular_size_of_foveal_cones

[Red_Dragon]

2 часа назад, Pillowcat сказал:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fovea_centralis#Angular_size_of_foveal_cones

What is distance? If it is 3 sm, I see any of pixels

[Tippis]

4 hours ago, DoorMouse said:

That it categorically false. 'The human eye's resolution is estimated to be around 576 megapixels.'

Across its entire field of view, maybe. If we completely misconstrue what a “pixel” is.
What we're actually talking about here is a roughly 170×170° FoV that can resolve 1 MoA details, for a total of 10,200 minutes along each axis or, 104,040,000 MoA² on the face of it (but in practice less since the angular resolution isn't nearly as good in the peripheries). But that is also subject to contrast differences that may further ruin or enhance what we can notice, if not necessarily distinguish.

But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about what we can see through the frustrum of the display we're using and whether that can adequately present details that are as small, or smaller, than what the eye can make it.

And it can. Because, again, it's a matter of distance and dot pitch, and whether those two combine to create a detail that is small than that 0.2909 mil angle.

So no, it's not categorically false. It's just basic maths.

But you're right in that zoom exists to compensate for the lacking pixel count of the display — it's just that it's in the opposite direction. What zoom does is that it lets you zoom out to see a wider FoV than what's natural for the display. It's not strictly necessary for showing details and zooming in could potentially be removed out entirely.

Edited November 4, 2024 by Tippis

[HansPeter1981]

8 hours ago, Tippis said:

... What zoom does is that it lets you zoom out to see a wider FoV than what's natural for the display....

 

I would even say ... wider FoV than what's natural...

That in combination with the "improved" Spotting Dots, turns this sim which strives to be as realistic as possible in to a simple game... in PVE this can be a nice option like lables but in a PVP it is a disaster.

 

Why use your most possible realistic Radar with all its carefully modelld flaws If you can just zoom all the way out and see those dots from over 20km all around you.

 

The dots dont change in size when you zoom out. The result is while you are looking straight out your cockpit you can't read any number on your instruments but you spot traffic on your 3 o'clock at 20 000' 20 km away

 

For that reason I prefer to disable the improved spotting dots, it totally breaks the immersion.

Of course hughe disadvantage in PVP but I just try to stay away from any of those servers for now.... 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 4, 2024 by HansPeter1981

[SWAR1]

Spotting is Junk again in VR with the pimax crystal. I can't see anything. It was perfect for me before the update. Higher-resolution VR needs bigger dots. Make a slider if you can't figure it out.

[SharpeXB]

17 minutes ago, SWAR1 said:

I can't see anything.

Can’t see what exactly? General comments like this don’t help. The development process already seems very unscientific as it is. Give us a screenshot or example of something you think you should be able to see but can’t. 

[SWAR1]

19 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Can’t see what exactly? General comments like this don’t help. The development process already seems very unscientific as it is. Give us a screenshot or example of something you think you should be able to see but can’t. 

Well, since the thread is about spotting dots I would assume I can not see the dots.  Do you think I was talking about the pizza shop down the street?  How much science do you want in not being able to see anything(the dots)?? I pretty much said it was perfect(the dots) before this last update. I really don't understand what more you need than that to figure out the dots are now too small or too transparent or whatever they changed was too much for high-resolution VR.

Edited November 4, 2024 by SWAR1

[SharpeXB]

2 minutes ago, SWAR1 said:

Well, since the thread is about spotting dots I would assume I can not see the dots.

Dots representing what? A nose-on Bf-109 12 miles away? Or a top view F-14 2 miles way?

[SWAR1]

Are you even serious right now?  The dots are basically invisible to me now, I don't care if it's Santa Clause in his slay drinking a 12 pack of beer 10 miles, 15 miles or right before the dot is supposed to turn into a slay. I basically can not see them without a lock. With a lock, they are transparent and too small to be useful.

 

Are you a programmer? Are you working on the dots?

Edited November 5, 2024 by SWAR1

[SharpeXB]

1 minute ago, SWAR1 said:

Are you even serious right now? 

Yes. Assuming we want visibility in DCS to be realistic there is a big difference between those examples. 

[SWAR1]

1 minute ago, SharpeXB said:

Yes. Assuming we want visibility in DCS to be realistic there is a big difference between those examples. 

So, you want different dots for different parts of the plane? and different planes?  I just want to be able to spot and as I have said these dots are pretty much non-existent in high Res VR.

 

You can tell the difference in the dots you are seeing?. ON your screen you can tell the type of plane, the distance, the aspect, and what the pilot had for dinner. I just see a dot or rather I no longer see the dot. I either want your PC or what you are smoking.

 

[SharpeXB]

15 minutes ago, SWAR1 said:

So, you want different dots for different parts of the plane? and different planes?

Well I can’t pretend that dots even work, they’re a terrible idea. They can’t convey all the things that affect visibility IRL like aspect and contrast etc.

17 minutes ago, SWAR1 said:

You can tell the difference in the dots you are seeing?. ON your screen you can tell the type of plane, the distance, the aspect, and what the pilot had for dinner. I just see a dot or rather I no longer see the dot. I either want your PC or what you are smoking.

I don’t need the dots at all to get realistic visibility, they’re turned off here:

 

 

[Tippis]

11 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

I don’t need the dots at all to get realistic visibility, they’re turned off here:

…and its not even remotely realistic, nor universal.

[draconus]

7 hours ago, SWAR1 said:

The dots are basically invisible to me now

Consider yourself lucky.

[MoleUK]

17 hours ago, SWAR1 said:

Are you even serious right now?  The dots are basically invisible to me now, I don't care if it's Santa Clause in his slay drinking a 12 pack of beer 10 miles, 15 miles or right before the dot is supposed to turn into a slay. I basically can not see them without a lock. With a lock, they are transparent and too small to be useful.

 

Are you a programmer? Are you working on the dots?

 

If they're not appearing, it's possibly because of this bug:

It doesn't take much to trigger it atm. If you're flying in a MP or SP mission with lots of ground units, dots may stop rendering.

Edited November 5, 2024 by MoleUK

[SWAR1]

thank you, maybe the issue

 

14 hours ago, draconus said:

Consider yourself lucky.

It's not lucky if you play multiplayer and one person can spot you 10 miles away and you have no idea where they are. If they can't figure it out get rid of all spotting dots then and even the playing field for everyone.

21 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Well I can’t pretend that dots even work, they’re a terrible idea. They can’t convey all the things that affect visibility IRL like aspect and contrast etc.

I don’t need the dots at all to get realistic visibility, they’re turned off here:

 

it's not even about being realistic to me, it's just an unfair advantage for some on a multiplayer server.

 

Edited November 5, 2024 by SWAR1

[sthompson]

18 hours ago, SWAR1 said:

It's not lucky if you play multiplayer and one person can spot you 10 miles away and you have no idea where they are. If they can't figure it out get rid of all spotting dots then and even the playing field for everyone.

Please consider that a lot of players are using 2D not VR and fly mostly SP missions. Better to make spotting dots a server setting so that competitive servers can turn if off for competitive PvP MP without killing it for everyone in every kind of mission. The AI will still have superior vision in SP and in PvE MP environments even if the dots are turned off.

Edited November 6, 2024 by sthompson

[Tippis]

1 hour ago, sthompson said:

Better to make spotting dots a server setting so that competitive servers can turn if off for competitive PvP MP without killing it for everyone in every kind of mission.

The problem is that this would have the exact opposite effect: the reason we're getting new dots is that the old ones are notorious for how completely uneven and random they are, ensuring that there is no chance of ever getting equitable results that are suitable for PvP.

Unlike labels (which are a UI layer that the player can pretty much arbitrarily redesign unless you jump through significant hoops to stop it), the whole point of spotting dots is to try to make as equitable a solution as possible. It might not be fully there yet for a number of reasons, but ultimately, there shouldn't be any setting at all.

Since the two are nothing alike, you can't treat them the same. It would be like if you could disable explosions on the logic that you can disable the BDA window and if you absolutely everything, you may come to the very nonsensical conclusion that they do the same thing. They don't, obviously, and that's why one can be a setting and the other one shouldn't be.

Edited November 6, 2024 by Tippis

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, sthompson said:

Better to make spotting dots a server setting so that competitive servers can turn if off for competitive PvP MP without killing it for everyone in every kind of mission.

Yes. For the same reason dot labels are a setting. And in many cases the spotting dots are larger and visible from farther away than labels. 

[Parkour]

Yes. I just want the ability to turn them OFF in VR. Once Eagle Dynamics does that, I can finally leave this message board and go back to actually playing DCS. 

[Bounti30]

2 hours ago, Parkour said:

Yes. I just want the ability to turn them OFF in VR. Once Eagle Dynamics does that, I can finally leave this message board and go back to actually playing DCS. 

You are wasting your time.
ED is in a logic in which our request is not part.
What's more, they don't even have the kindness to respond.

[Dangerzone]

10 hours ago, Bounti30 said:

What's more, they don't even have the kindness to respond.

To be fair - I think the only ones that frequent here have nothing else to add to the discussion. I suspect that whomever they talk to about issues in house - their requests also fall on deaf ears too - so they're stuck between a community that gets angry and takes things out on them, and ED who doesn't listen to what they're saying the community wants - plus having to walk a thin line as they're employed by ED to work for ED. I suspect on many occasions, agree with us but have to be very careful how to handle it.

I mean - if ED implemented the ability to turn these things off like we had 2 patches ago - there would be less contributors to this thread, and thus less reading and work for both BN and NL. So, I'm pretty sure they'd love to see that implemented. But it hasn't been, and there's zero they can do. And if they came back, and agreed with it but admit they're also not being listened too (seriously enough to bring it back) - they'd not only potentially have their employer to give an account to - but they'd have a number of others jumping on them complaining about how not having a dot would be 'cheating'. 

It erks me to no end to see actual bug reports submitted here, and not acknowledged, but in this particular thread I do have some level of understanding why contribution to this particular thread with over 50 pages is more on the light side.