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

[Bounti30]

28 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said:

I get you want it to work for you and your preferences, what you have to understand is it isn't just about how you want it, others have different expectations or preferences, there are also many devices, settings and configurations to consider that all affect how the dots look and it is making it more difficult than it really needed to be. But as mentioned the team are working on a way to try and make the majority of people happy, we just need to continue to be patient. 

thanks 

Bignewy, I don't believe I'm only thinking about myself.
It seems to me that I am not the only one who wants to be able to disable spotting dots and
many have different configurations than mine.
But once again I'm not about the conflict, I'm thinking about a transitional solution.
 And as I said above I will be the first happy when it works.
But for the moment no choice.
And it's this choice that you don't want to grant and I don't know why.
If it's impossible for x reason then say so.
As I said in an old post I prefer to hear the truth even if I don't like it.
thank you for listening

Edited November 17, 2024 by Bounti30

[Parkour]

4 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

"...there are also many devices, settings and configurations to consider that all affect how the dots look and it is making it more difficult than it really needed to be.."

This is the sad part. We just want the ability to turn them OFF in VR. That's it. Figure out all the rest later since its more difficult than it really needs to be. Just the ability to turn them OFF in VR.

[BIGNEWY]

Just now, Parkour said:

This is the sad part. We just want the ability to turn them OFF in VR. That's it. Figure out all the rest later since its more difficult than it really needs to be. Just the ability to turn them OFF in VR.

Yes and hopefully that will come, again just need to be patient. 

thank you 

[Wild_Child]

4 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

I get you want it to work for you and your preferences, what you have to understand is it isn't just about how you want it, others have different expectations or preferences, there are also many devices, settings and configurations to consider that all affect how the dots look and it is making it more difficult than it really needed to be. But as mentioned the team are working on a way to try and make the majority of people happy, we just need to continue to be patient. 

thanks 

This is EXACTLY why we should be able to turn it off. That way you are accommodating more people's preferences, instead of forcing players to play how YOU think their preferences should be. I can't play DCS right now, it is the Best Sim in the world IMO and now with these stupid dots it has turned into an arcade game.  Please hurry on the fix, I miss flying! 

Edited November 17, 2024 by Wild_Child

[Turbonix]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb Wild_Child:

This is EXACTLY why we should be able to turn it off. That way you are accommodating more people's preferences, instead of forcing players to play how YOU think their preferences should be. I can't play DCS right now, it is the Best Sim in the world IMO and now with these stupid dots it has turned into an arcade game.  Please hurry on the fix, I miss flying! 

exactly the same for me!

I‘m out of DCS since October 2nd and i really miss it too.

Hopefully we don’t have to be „patient“ to have a true off option to until 2026 or so..

 

[TFS]

In just a short break from this thread, I am now over a dozen pages behind. So just my $.02, dots after update in VR on Quest 3 is so much better now. My interest would be if there's an option to have off/on... this can be the on. Kinda barely even noticeable in current state.

[Zakson85]

Uninstalling the world's best bugged simulator in eternal early access phase gives more happiness than. My patience after a year of waiting is over. New fog for 8500 man-hours. I wish you a bright future. Bye

[BIGNEWY]

4 minutes ago, Zakson85 said:

Uninstalling the world's best bugged simulator in eternal early access phase gives more happiness than. My patience after a year of waiting is over. New fog for 8500 man-hours. I wish you a bright future. Bye

Sorry to see you go, and we hope you return eventually. 

Best regards

---------------------

 

Folks please stick to the spotting topic here, posts that derail will be removed. 

[Bounti30]

4 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

Folks please stick to the spotting topic here, posts that derail will be removed. 

You are right.
There is nothing more to say, unfortunately

[Turbonix]

I wonder how the new volumetric fog and dust will affect spotting dots.
Will they still be visible from 3nm up to 30nm+?
Will AI still be able to keep track?

Will spotting dots even be a subject to be changed in the upcoming patch at all?

 

[Why485]

It would be very funny and on brand for the fog to make dots visible from 50 miles away.

[KoN]

I hope the AI can't see you through the new fog effects. 

Has the gunnery AI been updated. 

Or is it still the all seeing eye . 

[Tippis]

Getting the AI to not see through the airframe and terrain was a major milestone. Fog and cloud is… aspirational, let's call it.

[Richrach]

I have been sorely disappointed with the Phantom F-4E module because I cannot see threat aircraft.  When I cannot even tell the orientation of another aircraft at one mile there is a serious disconnect between reality and the DCS model.  Trying to fix this with a "spotting bug" or dot is silly.

Falcon 3.0 and Falcon 4.0 solved this problem by allowing the user to adjust the size of other units (aircraft and ground units) to user preference.  I found setting the size to x2 on my screens gave nearly the exact same visual presentation as I saw in actual ACM.  Since another sim has solved this problem, what is the reason DCS cannot adapt the same solution?  Is this a pride thing?  Is it a legal issue?  Falcon 4.0 has been gone for decades now.

The issue manifests itself when trying to see vehicles on the ground as well, but it is nowhere near as bad.

My eyes are average, my vision neither excellent nor poor.  When I flew at NSAWC on staff I could see the direction, aspect, and maneuvering of an F-16, F-18, or F-14 at three to four miles routinely, five miles on a bright day.  I will not buy any more modules that focus on air to air until this is fixed because it is so frustrating.

***It is my strongest suggestion all the DCS programmers actually go flying and see what the real world looks like, then make the game match what they saw.***  This does not have to be in fast movers.  One can get the same impressions flying light civil aircraft.  Again, from personal experience, I can see more details of a Cessna or Piper at two miles in real life than I can see a transport/tanker sized aircraft in DCS at one mile.

 

Richrach

[SharpeXB]

First of all you should be aware of rule 1.15 regarding the discussion about other games, keep the topic on DCS

Secondly it would be good to know if you’re using VR or a monitor. What sort of display do you have? Aircraft at the realistic ranges you mention are very easy to see on a screen. Possibly you aren’t making use of the zoom view? That’s the solution in DCS for resolving small or distant objects. Simply enlarging the target and having everything else remain smaller looks exceedingly awkward. ED has stated many times they have no interest in “smart scaling”

[Richrach]

SharpeXB,

Yes I run DCS in VR, a Pimax headset.

Understood about other games, however:

1. The game in question has been "off the market" for 20 years.  Shockingly, their solution to the problem of seeing other units was/is better than anything DCS has offered.  Regarding the "exceedingly awkward" comment, did you ever see the solution applied by the other sim-which-shall-not-be-named?  It worked great.

2. If DCS is not going to utilize corporate "best practices" no wonder they have issues that do not get resolved.

3. Zoom view in VR is idiotic and a bandaide solution for a sucking chest wound.  I flew actual combat missions with a set of USSR binoculars back in the 90s.  The experience was so funny my squadron made jokes about it.  Totally useless.

4. That ED does not want to use "smart scaling" is acknowledgement they have a problem and they are not going to fix it.  This validates my suggestion that the programmers really need to fly in actual aircraft and get some real world experience.

My observation of DCS is they are more about the shiny new toy (new airframes/terrains) than fixing things in the background of existing products that make for a great experience.  Eventually this method of operation collapses under its own weight as the underlying support structure is weak.  This is akin to building a skyscraper with no foundation.

DCS is a good product.  Good is bad in the world of combat, however.

Every flight I took in uniform had a debrief afterward where we broke things down into two categories, good and bad.  Bads were things that needed attention and improvement.  Without that critical review of every mission we would have ended up like every other banana republic's military, flashy but a joke.  DCS needs to become more introspective of their products and how to improve them instead of trying to roll out more and more new items.  Taking good ideas from others and using them is far more cost effective and logical than trying to create the wheel from scratch every time one needs to transport something.

Eventually, someone in the market who is willing to do think outside the box will overtake DCS and it will end up in the dustbin.

ShareXP,

Respectfully, I did forget another point.  A spotting dot does not give one the aspect and attitude of other aircraft.  Without that information no tactically sound decision can be made on how to respond to a threat or even if it is a threat as one does not know if it is hot, cold, maneuvering, etc.

Richrach

[SharpeXB]

I don’t know what sort of solution could work for VR because bottom line is that it doesn’t have enough resolution to equal real world 20/20 eyesight. Therefore some level of zoom view will be necessary for the same reason it is on a monitor. And yes I get it that this is probably much more awkward or disorienting in VR. 
This person seems to do a very good job in VR and you can see this zoom view being utilized without apparent difficulty. 

”Smart Scaling” isn’t workable in DCS for two primary reasons:
- The first is that it simply will look ugly. Like the screenshot below. Players would be forced to look at scenes like this or be at a disadvantage in multiplayer.

- Secondly there is absolutely no way for the devs to determine what level of this is realistic or practical. And leaving it up to the player as a setting means it would just be exploited online.

”Smart scaling” is hardly a “best practice” afaik it’s only used in one other game. The universal solution for this dilemma in flight sims is the zoom view. It’s not meant to simulate binoculars, it’s meant to make up for the small size and low resolutions inherent to displays  

Edited November 24, 2024 by SharpeXB

[KoN]

2 hours ago, Richrach said:

I have been sorely disappointed with the Phantom F-4E module because I cannot see threat aircraft.  When I cannot even tell the orientation of another aircraft at one mile there is a serious disconnect between reality and the DCS model.  Trying to fix this with a "spotting bug" or dot is silly.

Falcon 3.0 and Falcon 4.0 solved this problem by allowing the user to adjust the size of other units (aircraft and ground units) to user preference.  I found setting the size to x2 on my screens gave nearly the exact same visual presentation as I saw in actual ACM.  Since another sim has solved this problem, what is the reason DCS cannot adapt the same solution?  Is this a pride thing?  Is it a legal issue?  Falcon 4.0 has been gone for decades now.

The issue manifests itself when trying to see vehicles on the ground as well, but it is nowhere near as bad.

My eyes are average, my vision neither excellent nor poor.  When I flew at NSAWC on staff I could see the direction, aspect, and maneuvering of an F-16, F-18, or F-14 at three to four miles routinely, five miles on a bright day.  I will not buy any more modules that focus on air to air until this is fixed because it is so frustrating.

***It is my strongest suggestion all the DCS programmers actually go flying and see what the real world looks like, then make the game match what they saw.***  This does not have to be in fast movers.  One can get the same impressions flying light civil aircraft.  Again, from personal experience, I can see more details of a Cessna or Piper at two miles in real life than I can see a transport/tanker sized aircraft in DCS at one mile.

 

Richrach

People have been saying it for years,  ED , don't listen or they can't replicate the Falcon 4 experience.

Or they are actually working on something similar . We shall see .

No longer support DCS until bug fixes stay fixed and this spotting bug gets a fix . 

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

First of all you should be aware of rule 1.15 regarding the discussion about other games, keep the topic on DCS

Secondly it would be good to know if you’re using VR or a monitor. What sort of display do you have? Aircraft at the realistic ranges you mention are very easy to see on a screen. Possibly you aren’t making use of the zoom view? That’s the solution in DCS for resolving small or distant objects. Simply enlarging the target and having everything else remain smaller looks exceedingly awkward. ED has stated many times they have no interest in “smart scaling”

Your replying to a real combat pilot Mr sharp . 

Edited November 24, 2024 by KoN

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, KoN said:

Your replying to a real combat pilot Mr sharp . 

That really has nothing to do with the topic. Nearly everyone in the world has flown in an airplane and looked out the window. It’s funny to imply the Devs don’t have this experience. And the world is full of real pilots who don’t seem to understand computer games. 

Edited November 24, 2024 by SharpeXB

[Richrach]

3 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

That really has nothing to do with the topic. Nearly everyone in the world has flown in an airplane and looked out the window. It’s funny to imply the Devs don’t have this experience. And the world is full of real pilots who don’t seem to understand computer games. 

Elon Musk just caught a rocket ship with a giant pair of tweezers but DCS cannot solve a problem that was solved by another set of programmers two decades ago?  I see you are running a state of the art computer, graphics card, and gear.  What is the point of all that hardware when the game is not even up to half of what that system can do?  Nothing can make a game more immersive in 2-d unless one goes the full cockpit and display dome route.  Is that what DCS thinks is the best way forward?

So the answer is, "We just do not want to do it."

Your screen shot of larger aircraft in your reply shows it can be done, in fact DCS has done it, but the "Devs" do not want to apply it.  Your argument the aircraft on the carrier look out of place is a strawman.  I can think of several solutions for the carrier scale issue sitting at my bench right now.  I cannot think of a solution to motivate "Devs" other than logic... and that is clearly not working.

Eventually DCS will be eclipsed by a group of programmers who think outside the box DCS built for itself.

 

Sorry one more thought: You stated in your response that a scale up for VR would be "exploited" in multi-player?  Another strawman.  There does not already exist an advantage for 2-d players against VR players now by forcing the VR player to look through a soda straw to see the other side's aircraft?  You admit this in your rebuttal.  This statement in indefensible on its face, so we are back to, "We just do not want to do it."

You have to step away from the problem as someone defending the status quo and actually analyze what you are saying.  Stovepipe thinking is deadly in actual combat.  I have personally experienced guys getting shot down in real life because they would not adapt to the threat at hand.  Every day DCS refuses to see outside its box brings it that much closer to its demise.  Personally, I would prefer not to see that but acknowledge I cannot stop it if they will not listen.

[SharpeXB]

39 minutes ago, Richrach said:

Your screen shot of larger aircraft in your reply shows it can be done

That image was certainly created by a “cut and paste” method as DCS has never had smart scaling. So it doesn’t demonstrate anything. What’s amusing is that it was created by a proponent of such scaling and I guess this person thought it was agreeable. I think most players would find it ridiculous to look at. This subject has been discussed many times and if you search for it you’ll find ED stating on many occasions that they have no interest in it. It’s not a very good solution at all. 

46 minutes ago, Richrach said:

There does not already exist an advantage for 2-d players against VR players now by forcing the VR player to look through a soda straw to see the other side's aircraft? 

Exploits in the game wouldn’t necessarily be 2D vs VR. If the scaling value was player selectable then anyone could just dial this up to an excessive degree. VR players could exploit it against other VR players.  

I see you’ve been playing DCS for just about a year. You should search this topic and inform yourself about all the other tried and failed solutions to this dilemma. Smart Scaling has been discussed much along with a past feature called Model Enlargement which was very similar to Smart Scaling. This proved unsuccessful as well. The egregious size besides looking terrible simply destroys any realism in the game. The feature would end up being disabled by servers etc. There’s no point in revisiting Model Enlargement by another name. 
 

[Richrach]

So, we are back to the fact Elon Musk did the impossible, catching a burning rocket ship mid-air with giant tweezers.

Impossible is what a group of people think until another person outside the group goes ahead and does it anyway.

I have said my piece.  Thank you for your efforts on behalf of DCS to explain their position.

[SharpeXB]

14 minutes ago, Richrach said:

So, we are back to the fact Elon Musk did the impossible, catching a burning rocket ship mid-air with giant tweezers.

If you want to imagine what technology might accomplish then imagine VR headsets that can replicate 20/20 eyesight. That’s not so farfetched. 

[=475FG= Dawger]

29 minutes ago, Richrach said:

So, we are back to the fact Elon Musk did the impossible, catching a burning rocket ship mid-air with giant tweezers.

Impossible is what a group of people think until another person outside the group goes ahead and does it anyway.

I have said my piece.  Thank you for your efforts on behalf of DCS to explain their position.

The reason 2x makes aircraft look “correct” is that any sort of  approximation of a wide field of view results in “zooming out” essentially making what you are looking at farther away. 
 

ED has been captured by a subset of players and, possibly, employees who are not interested in making appropriate allowances for the limits of simulation. 
 

They actually believe they can create and inhabit a perfect replica of reality and cannot imagine any deviation from that ideal. 
 

It is frustrating.

You say that someday there will be an alternative. Personally, I doubt that very much. 
 

I think air combat simulation is dying just as technology is making it exciting. 
 

My recommendation is to enjoy what you can, while you can. 
 

This is probably much nearer to the end than anyone realizes. 
 

And attempting any sort of discussion with SharpeXB is time wasted you will never get back. 

[Bounti30]

Almost December.
drum roll....
Will we finally have a nice surprise, fingers crossed.