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

[Why485]

3 hours ago, nuNce said:

Agreed. Seems like the biggest issues are related to VR, and it's gonna be just a matter of time before this gets balanced the right way. The opinion of a small minority of very vocal users shouldn't be the benchmark for the whole community regarding spotting issues that have plagued the game for years.

The Improved Spotting Mod poll was a landslide victory in terms of how positively the community viewed the changes, and is way more representative of the positive reception of this new version. 

Definitely. I do get the impression that if it weren't for VR not working well, the changes this patch would have been seen extremely positively. Here's hoping that ED chooses to improve upon this step in the right direction, and doesn't delete it entirely in 6 months.

I said it before, but I think it's worth saying again. ED being transparent with what their goals with these changes are would go a long way in steering the conversation in a useful direction. Right now there's a lot of disagreement and straw mans circulating through this discussion on what the end result should look like.

Edited October 29, 2023 by Why485

[shazam253]

Also from a less heated point:

I fly a Georgian hammer mission today and I was able to make out ground units that were behind trees. After seeing the SPI in the HUD and then slewing the TGP to it, I only see trees. So in my opinion the dots shouldn't do this, but I can see that it requires more computional effort.

As for spotting in general, I'm also using a G2 and have the issue that the dots are larger at a distance than when the airplane starts to be resolved. My proposed solution to this: don't make the dots larger than the aircraft. Also, the rough color should match, not just a dark dot.

I can replicate the issue easily when going to F2 view and zooming out. At some point the aircraft becomes a larger big spot than it was when still resolved. Different LOD settings didn't have an effect. Interestingly enough, in the Syria hot start with the Apache, I can zoom out and see the Apache and F16s as large dots, while the static cargo aircraftb already disappeared.

[Tippis]

40 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

In every other realm DCS strives for realism but in this aspect it seems like it’s trying to pander to an audience.

No, in this aspect they're striving for realism by starting to getting rid of the ridiculous and nonsensical spotting limitations and the equally ridiculous ease with which things can be spotted at long distances. If they were pandering to an audience, they'd listen to the people who want those unrealistic advantages to remain.

40 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

The same logic should apply here.

It does.

They didn't ask players to vote. They attempt to make the sim match reality. The data says that the spotting distances we used to be able to achieve were ridiculous, and that closer in, it is actually easier to identify cues for what other planes are doing than simple trigonometry would suggest. All of this has been brewing for quite some time, and ED have been quite open about that something needed to, and was going to, be done about it. And here we are — they're starting to shed those unrealistic aspects of spotting and working towards making it match the data more.

40 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Perhaps the most realistic result would be achieved by simply getting rid of spotting dots altogether and leave them as a label option, which already exists

No, that would not be the most realistic result. We already know that because we already have that and it is not realistic. Everyone and anyone without an agenda to protect their precious precious advantages knows this.

You can try your usual “but muh realism” argument here, but you need to realise that in doing so, you are arguing for the thing you are against. Put it to rest because it will not serve you well in your quest to keep DCS from improving.

40 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

There was a time when DCS did not have spotting dots afaik, I can recall playing this game in 1080p back in about 2012-2016 and not seeing distant aircraft at 40+ miles.

You recall incorrectly. They were a thing back then — they just went by a different name. Then they briefly went away and were brought gradually brought back in a couple of different ways because of how bad it was without them. Now we're getting a better version — not the best solution out there, because for a while, ED pandered to the audience and made a firm commitment to not go for tried and tested and scientifically backed solutions because some people in the community disliked it for no coherently explained reason.

 

  

15 minutes ago, shazam253 said:

I can replicate the issue easily when going to F2 view and zooming out. At some point the aircraft becomes a larger big spot than it was when still resolved. Different LOD settings didn't have an effect. Interestingly enough, in the Syria hot start with the Apache, I can zoom out and see the Apache and F16s as large dots, while the static cargo aircraftb already disappeared.

Now that you mention it, that's a pretty clever methodology for figuring out sensible upper limits.

Statics and decorations are treated very differently than actual live units, but should for spotting purposes yield very similar results. One problem might occur depending on your graphics settings where decorations are culled sooner because they depend on detail settings that don't apply (at all, or to the same extent) to real units.

Edited October 29, 2023 by Tippis

[PeevishMonkey]

I'll leave aside for now the obvious oddities of this new system, like this (all 12 dots at the same distance)

 

and the visibility of ground units, which is also not exciting...

It seems to me that the problem is mainly that the ability to detect the aircraft varies unevenly. At “long” distances - OK, at “medium”, when these points appear - excellent (even too much, as it seems to me), but then “close” everything becomes dramatically worse.  Until you fit the enemy into your sights (for WWII), here everithing is OK :). This is not logical.

On the other hand, at distance “close” the the monitor size + FOV plays a role... But any way, it's strange...

And yes, I would reduce the visibility range to made it a little bit more close to reality, but this is not my simulator.

 

 

Edited October 29, 2023 by PeevishMonkey

[James DeSouza]

4 hours ago, Johan4668 said:

Version 2.8 on 4k or high ppd vr the spotting is hard.

Spotting is supposed to be hard.  It's why sensor suits, radars, JTAC'S, AWACS, etc exist.  

[James DeSouza]

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

In every other realm DCS strives for realism but in this aspect it seems like it’s trying to pander to an audience.

They have to pander to their audience to have a product.  And this isn't the first time.  Remember when the Jeff came out with missile models that are actually realistic and so just effortlessly killed everyone and people wanted it nerfed?

I just want an option to toggle this awful system off, that's all.

 

Though I am deeply curious what the day to day life of people saying giant black blocks in the sky are realistic is like.  How do they see things?  What is their vision like?  Is their vision better or worse than the norm?  How does it effect their daily lives.

Edited October 29, 2023 by James DeSouza

[rob10]

1 hour ago, James DeSouza said:

Though I am deeply curious what the day to day life of people saying giant black blocks in the sky are realistic is like.

People need to realize that just because they are seeing giant black blocks in the sky doesn't mean that those who are happier with the new system vs the old are seeing giant black blocks in the sky.  I don't see many (if anyone) saying that giant black blocks are realistic, but those seeing them seem to think everyone is seeing it that way and those in favour of the new system want to keep that (and most if not all who like the new system realize/agree that it needs tweaking for those who have giant black blocks).  VR seems to be generally a worse experience from what I read, but in 2-D I am really happy with the changes.  That suggests that it needs to be tweaked, not thrown out.

Options are great, but people also forget that every option, no matter how small, has a performance cost (if only a tiny one) and eventually that adds up to something meaningful.

Edited October 29, 2023 by rob10

[SharpeXB]

2 hours ago, James DeSouza said:

I just want an option to toggle this awful system off, that's all.

And this option already exists in the form of dot labels in 2.8. I don’t see why that’s a bad system. 

[James DeSouza]

57 minutes ago, rob10 said:

People need to realize that just because they are seeing giant black blocks in the sky doesn't mean that those who are happier with the new system vs the old are seeing giant black blocks in the sky.  I don't see many (if anyone) saying that giant black blocks are realistic, but those seeing them seem to think everyone is seeing it that way and those in favour of the new system want to keep that (and most if not all who like the new system realize/agree that it needs tweaking for those who have giant black blocks).  VR seems to be generally a worse experience from what I read, but in 2-D I am really happy with the changes.  That suggests that it needs to be tweaked, not thrown out.

Options are great, but people also forget that every option, no matter how small, has a performance cost (if only a tiny one) and eventually that adds up to something meaningful.

 

Everyone has giant black blocks.  That's the whole point.  VR players have GINORMOUS black blocks, but even flat screen players have giant black boxes because it's just the dot label setting.  Hell this thread is full of screenshots of it.

So when you look up into the sky to see overflying aircraft, do you see the jets 40,000 feet up as giant black blocks?

22 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

And this option already exists in the form of dot labels in 2.8. I don’t see why that’s a bad system. 

Because that way turning it on means it was your choice to do it, so you don't have an excuse.  If you have to turn the label on then you can't pretend to yourself that you're doing it "realistic", but if you dont have the option then it's the game forcing it on you.

[Tippis]

41 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

And this option already exists in the form of dot labels in 2.8. I don’t see why that’s a bad system. 

Because dot labels are UI element and are handled as such.

Of course, this new feature also has the option to toggle them off so it's a moot point. And at least it's client-authoritative so you have a say in the matter.

 

  

19 minutes ago, James DeSouza said:

Everyone has giant black blocks. 

Only the ones who haven't turned it off.

Oh, and turning labels on or off isn't always your choice, btw… And while it takes a lot of work, it's entirely possible to make dot labels far more realistic than any of the pre-2.9 spotting mechanics.

Edited October 29, 2023 by Tippis

[James DeSouza]

2 minutes ago, Tippis said:

Of course, this new feature also has the option to toggle them off so it's a moot point.

It doesn't.  That's one of its many problems.  The thing you put in your autoexec that is supposed to disable it doesn't work.

Hopefully at some point it will, who knows.

[SharpeXB]

27 minutes ago, James DeSouza said:

Because that way turning it on means it was your choice to do it, so you don't have an excuse.  If you have to turn the label on then you can't pretend to yourself that you're doing it "realistic", but if you dont have the option then it's the game forcing it on you.

The new system is labels for people who think labels are cheating

9 minutes ago, James DeSouza said:

It doesn't.  That's one of its many problems.  The thing you put in your autoexec that is supposed to disable it doesn't work.

Hopefully at some point it will, who knows.

The “realistic” default spotting shouldn’t have an on/off button. Again because labels already have that. I’m sure it only has that now because it’s a WIP

Edited October 29, 2023 by SharpeXB

[James DeSouza]

1 minute ago, SharpeXB said:

The new system is labels for people who think labels are cheating

Only thing that makes sense to me too, since it is just the dot labels but forced on.  Either way as long as I can disable it personally I don't care.  It'll put me at a disadvantage but my <profanity> eyesight already did that :D.

5 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

The “realistic” default spotting shouldn’t have an on/off button. Again because labels already have that. I’m sure it only has that now because it’s a WIP.

If they permanently force it on then hopefully I can get some refunds.  I bought a flight sim, not a game where you fight the damned borg.

[SharpeXB]

7 minutes ago, James DeSouza said:

If they permanently force it on then hopefully I can get some refunds.  I bought a flight sim, not a game where you fight the damned borg.

Well the last time they tried to put in giant blobs with the Model Enlargement, it flopped. So…

I can’t figure why every time this is attempted it gets overdone.

[James DeSouza]

11 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

I can’t figure why every time this is attempted it gets overdone.

Flight sims are played by older and less healthy people, both of those tend to have bad eyesight, any attempt to make things easily visible for those with bad eyesight will lead to them being ridiculous to those with good or okay eyesight.  Or at least that'd be my guess.  Look at the amount of people on this thread who say they do not see giant black dots on flat screen.  They do, because everyone does, it's what the renderer spits out, but the filter is their own individual eyesight.

[Why485]

4 hours ago, PeevishMonkey said:

It seems to me that the problem is mainly that the ability to detect the aircraft varies unevenly. At “long” distances - OK, at “medium”, when these points appear - excellent (even too much, as it seems to me), but then “close” everything becomes dramatically worse.  Until you fit the enemy into your sights (for WWII), here everithing is OK :). This is not logical.

On the other hand, at distance “close” the the monitor size + FOV plays a role... But any way, it's strange...

And yes, I would reduce the visibility range to made it a little bit more close to reality, but this is not my simulator.

Issues like this are almost inherent to any kind of dot or pixel based system. It's why I'm not a fan of the approach, and never was, even when I made the dot mod. A dot won't give you a silhouette to determine something like aspect to help identify and track a fighter during a dogfight.

To prevent the issue of close range planes becoming suddenly "invisible", the square dot would have to basically always be drawn, which means at short ranges it could obscure the plane in such a way that its silhouette and type aren't clear at ranges it should be.

Edited October 29, 2023 by Why485

[ataribaby]

As VR user I like new spotting. Maybe it can be finetuned to be little bit smaller, only little bit. Finally I am able spot something in VR. Thanks!

[SharpeXB]

17 minutes ago, James DeSouza said:

Flight sims are played by older and less healthy people, both of those tend to have bad eyesight

That includes me, my solution is just a bigger screen I wouldn’t expect the game to cater to my attributes. It’s up to me to adapt accordingly. 

[Tippis]

22 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

I wouldn’t expect the game to cater to my attributes. It’s up to me to adapt accordingly. 

You should expect it, because no, it's not up to you.

This isn't the 1980s – competent software makers cater to the client, because anything else is self-defeating folly.

[BIGNEWY]

folks, again please keep it civil and to the rules, if you have given feedback maybe take a break. 

thanks

 

[Matt Glover]

On 10/20/2023 at 12:02 AM, Licenceless said:

• In order to disable new “spotting dots” and revert to previous logic user can put “DotRendererExperiment = False” in autoexec.cfg file located in \Saved Games\DCS.openbeta\Config\ 
  If you don't have the file, you have to make one

   

   

 

Done this and it seems too do nothing.

[KoN]

17 hours ago, James DeSouza said:

They have to pander to their audience to have a product.  And this isn't the first time.  Remember when the Jeff came out with missile models that are actually realistic and so just effortlessly killed everyone and people wanted it nerfed?

I just want an option to toggle this awful system off, that's all.

 

Though I am deeply curious what the day to day life of people saying giant black blocks in the sky are realistic is like.  How do they see things?  What is their vision like?  Is their vision better or worse than the norm?  How does it effect their daily lives.

 

No one is saying its realistic . It needs Tweaking . 

WWII RAF pilots could see across the coast forming up formations , @ 22miles . 

F18 pilots spotting @ 20miles . but this is real life . 

Coming into land in cessna @ 10mils . 

But the human eye can catch things moving and track , at different ranges , light conditions , colour , ect . 

There are different flight sims to try all have a technical ways to LOD on screen and in VR . 

DCS just needs to tweak things in flat screen and VR and also have a on-off button for you to enjoy .  

[SharpeXB]

3 hours ago, KoN said:

WWII RAF pilots could see across the coast forming up formations , @ 22miles . 

Realize of course that they were seeing entire flights of larger bombers and such. In 2.8 you can see flights of B-17s from quite a great distance. Part of the trouble people have in these flight sims is that they’re looking for lone small fighter aircraft in multiplayer. That’s not a very realistic situation since real world combat aircraft hardly ever travel alone. 

[James DeSouza]

3 hours ago, KoN said:

No one is saying its realistic . It needs Tweaking . 

WWII RAF pilots could see across the coast forming up formations , @ 22miles . 

F18 pilots spotting @ 20miles . but this is real life . 

Coming into land in cessna @ 10mils . 

But the human eye can catch things moving and track , at different ranges , light conditions , colour , ect . 

There are different flight sims to try all have a technical ways to LOD on screen and in VR . 

DCS just needs to tweak things in flat screen and VR and also have a on-off button for you to enjoy .  

I have personally never heard of an RAF pilot seeing a formation on the other side of the channel (which would likely be more than 20 miles as an aside, the channel is only 20 miles at its absolute narrowest point), that wouldn't have been the norm.  There is this thing called "chain home", which was the early warning radar system.  They also had swarms of ground observers using telescopes and an audible equivalent of a telescope that I do not remember the name off right now, all hooked up to a landline network.  And this was to spot raids specifically coming over the channel.

If you could just see it, none of that would have been necessary.  Especially considering they had to create an entire second Chain Home (Low) system after the germans realized they could just fly lower than ~200 feet to bypass the radar.  What value would bypassing the radar have if guys could just see you.  Remember, almost all of the blitz was daylight bombing (for accuracy), they only switched to night bombing towards the end of it to lower losses.  And remember, Chain Home had a maximum ideal range of 100 miles, but it was practically lower than that (like always) and had a positional accuracy of ~10 miles.  What value does that have when you can just use your eyeballs?

Maybe in rare situations RAF pilots really could spot things at 22 miles, entire formations of bombers by the by, but it obviously is not the norm.

[ACS_Dev]

This new spotting system, at least for VR users (Quest 2, 1.0 resolution, MSAA 4X, no DLSS/FSR) is extremely overdone and downright comical in some situations.

To preface, I have had the privilege of countless opportunities to observe the F-1, 5 (T-38), 15, 16, 18, 22, 35, A-10, UH-60, CH-47, AH-64, KC-135, C-130, C-17, C-5 etc. etc. both in daytime and (attempts) at night in overcast, clear or foggy weather from all ranges, both with my (admittedly imperfect) eyes, with corrective lenses and through 8x binoculars.

If you want to get an idea of the realism of spotting distances at different ranges and you live in a 1st world country you can use ADSB exchange (free flight tracking website) in concert with Google Earth (also free) to identify ranges at which you spot approaching civilian airliners. For best results, focus on aircraft close in size to the KC-135 or E-3, then compare those results to what you get in game at the same range. If you want to make it easier on yourself and you live near an active airport you can go to it and see how far away you 'tally' landing aircraft or conversely how long you can maintain 'tally' on departing ones. You can also try this with static landmarks such as water towers, cell towers or tall buildings visible from your home, again using google maps/earth to find out how far away they are. It is likely that everyone reading this has the resources to test out for themselves how far they would be able to see at least tanker-sized aircraft in real life as opposed to VR.

For me, at least for fighters like 35 and 16, short of the rare reflections on a sunny day it is basically impossible to see them beyond 15 miles at the furthest, even with 8x binoculars. I have tried to follow them from the end of their runway into the sky and I inevitably lose them far closer than they would be lost in DCS. In VR I can see targets much further away, with larger aircraft being easily seen 20-30 miles out, even at night. Ground targets are similar, if not worse as about 10-15 miles out they bloom to massive white dots. The dots themselves aren't consistent either, popping in and out.

Essentially I'd like to see at least an option to force this system off in missions, if not a drastic reduction in effective spotting range.