Aircraft Visibility

[Sabre-TLA]

I use a 47" LG running 1920x1080 and it's great! You can spot targets much easier including ground targets.

 

Once you go to a big monitor you'll never go back.

[lmp]

I know I will garner some hate for this, but I still cannot get away from using labels to locate and destroy targets.

 

I say don't let anybody tell you how to play the game "the right way" :).

 

More so the ground targets I just simply cannot see them. Half the time I can't even see them when using the labels either. Say the first mission for the SU-25t How does anyone see the ground targets? They literally blend in with the scenery. Unless your flying really low and slow I just can't seem to pick them out.

 

I am also running the game maxed out graphics wise at 1920x1080, would using a bigger screen or lowering my resolution to make things bigger help? How do you guys spot targets?

 

I run the game in 1080p on a 21 inch screen and spotting targets can indeed be a problem. What really helps though is some good planning. Before a flight I spend a bit of time in the mission planner learning the geography of the target area. Stuff like, say, there are two towns and a hill, and the target group is in the middle, but a little bit closer to town A. Then once you reach your IP, you look for the big landmarks first then narrow down the search area to something more manageable. This tactic works for me in the vanilla Su-25.

[grimm862]

I say don't let anybody tell you how to play the game "the right way" :).

 

 

 

I run the game in 1080p on a 21 inch screen and spotting targets can indeed be a problem. What really helps though is some good planning. Before a flight I spend a bit of time in the mission planner learning the geography of the target area. Stuff like, say, there are two towns and a hill, and the target group is in the middle, but a little bit closer to town A. Then once you reach your IP, you look for the big landmarks first then narrow down the search area to something more manageable. This tactic works for me in the vanilla Su-25.

 

I agree with the first comment!

 

And I will give that a try, I usually do give the mission planner a look usually to change my munitions.

[PFunk1606688187]

Guys Spotting Targets has been a problem for Humans sense Jet Fighting was created. Read A10s Over Kosovo and how they needed Binoculars to see anything down there. Even the Facs in Vietnam had to have Binocs. This isn't a fault of the Sim. it is a Human Fault we all live with. Changing things wouldn't make the Sim. Immersive, it would take away the integrity that DCS hoped you would consider a "Must Have" when deciding on a Sim. to purchase.

 

I guess is everyone does it, it would become the norm. Something I hope will not happen. Speaking for myself of course. But maybe an option in a latter ver. of this great and immersive Sim. we all know and love.

 

Its more complicated than that. The ability of a person to spot an object on the ground at X altitude unassisted by binoculars far exceeds what a default FOV pilot in DCS can spot. What we get when we use a narrower FOV is probably more like giving us natural human sight more than even binocular level zoom.

 

There is a reason that many other sims have used the "dot" concept to assist virtual pilots with spotting. This is because without that, using standard resolution monitors, you're seeing LESS than a real pilot does. So if that real pilot has a job thats considered really difficult for the human eye, the virtual pilot is suffering far worse than he is.

 

This is before we even get into things like the contrast and colour representation in the sim versus real life, or the lack of peripheral vision, or the fact that terrain is so much less distinct in sims than in real life.

 

Simply saying that the sim has integrity in its realistic fidelity because it doesn't give us an assist is false logic. It has no more integrity for not assisting us than it would if it did. The integrity of its simulation is based on whether it adequately represents real world functionality in a believable way. Not being able to see aircraft or ground targets at ranges similar to real life at default FOV is not what you'd call the pinnacle of realism.

 

I love me some DCS but lets not pretend its immaculate. The A-10C's lights for instance are not bright enough to be considered realistic. At night they are pretty inadequate compared to what a real airplane looks like. You can be in <1nm formation and hardly feel saddled. Nav lights are too dim and the strobe is just a joke.

 

Funny thing is the lighting on other aircraft in DCS is better. Apparently the Hawk's is pretty darned good.

[ralfidude]

What P Funk said.

 

A combat pilot told me that it is ridiculously difficult for tv screens to show you what you would really see with a human eye several thousand feet in the air. When the conditions are good, you are really able to make things out from a good distance away. Computers just can't replicate that right now.

 

I concur with what he said. When we did Air Combat USA, I had absolutely no trouble keeping track of my target even when we were separated by a few thousand feet unlike Flaming Cliffs or DCS. Even more so, when my instructor was pointing things out on the ground when we were 8 thousand feet in the air it was as clear as daylight. You just can't get that in DCS. There are the occasional fuzzy images you see based on cloud shadows on the ground and some other obstructions here or there, but generally speaking, you can make out objects and vehicles without much effort at that height.

Edited April 13, 2014 by ralfidude

[Cali]

What P Funk said.

 

A combat pilot told me that it is ridiculously difficult for tv screens to show you what you would really see with a human eye several thousand feet in the air. When the conditions are good, you are really able to make things out from a good distance away. Computers just can't replicate that right now.

 

I concur with what he said. When we did Air Combat USA, I had absolutely no trouble keeping track of my target even when we were separated by a few thousand feet unlike Flaming Cliffs or DCS. Even more so, when my instructor was pointing things out on the ground when we were 8 thousand feet in the air it was as clear as daylight. You just can't get that in DCS. There are the occasional fuzzy images you see based on cloud shadows on the ground and some other obstructions here or there, but generally speaking, you can make out objects and vehicles without much effort at that height.

 

Same when I had my 16 flight a few years back. The human eyes compared to what we see on our screens is no match. Anyone that has been in a airplane will tell you they can see cars driving around and other things from 15,000+ feet with ease.

[sorcer3r]

That's why I like flying CAS missions on desert maps. Nice contrast and easy spotting on my screen. ;)

 

 

ps: smart scaling ftw! :smartass:

[Slazi]

I'd like to see someone try and mod in some visual assists. Frame rates are a huge issue for me with TrackIR right now. 120fps would make me happy. <18 is a slideshow. Crew should also assist with spotting targets. Flying with RL wingmen is good, but rare.

[Suchacz]

For a better spotting of the targets you can try this "Labels" setting: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1983127&postcount=12

[MBot]

Guys Spotting Targets has been a problem for Humans sense Jet Fighting was created. Read A10s Over Kosovo and how they needed Binoculars to see anything down there. Even the Facs in Vietnam had to have Binocs. This isn't a fault of the Sim. it is a Human Fault we all live with. Changing things wouldn't make the Sim. Immersive, it would take away the integrity that DCS hoped you would consider a "Must Have" when deciding on a Sim. to purchase.

 

Within our multiplayer group, we have big toubles to see each other when flying in tactical formation. If this would be such a problem in real life, surely the history and tactics of air combat would have been a lot different.

[AtaliaA1]

Within our multiplayer group, we have big toubles to see each other when flying in tactical formation. If this would be such a problem in real life, surely the history and tactics of air combat would have been a lot different.

 

 

 

Guys you are going Way to Far with this. My point is with the Tech. limits of our genre and their devices used to represent such, We can only enjoy a "Glass half full" mentality or we are desiring Technology of the future as things are they do fall short.

 

So as things are in the GPU and Monitor Technological World we are limited to things as they are until progress is made. So I equate it to the "Glass being Half Full" not "Empty".

[MBot]

Guys you are going Way to Far with this. My point is with the Tech. limits of our genre and their devices used to represent such, We can only enjoy a "Glass half full" mentality or we are desiring Technology of the future as things are they do fall short.

 

So as things are in the GPU and Monitor Technological World we are limited to things as they are until progress is made. So I equate it to the "Glass being Half Full" not "Empty".

 

I would say that a sim needs to be designed to overcome technological limitations of the medium it runs on.

[Python]

Guys you are going Way to Far with this. My point is with the Tech. limits of our genre and their devices used to represent such, We can only enjoy a "Glass half full" mentality or we are desiring Technology of the future as things are they do fall short

 

I'm not sure this is correct, games of the past have had less of a problem with this. I'm sure something could be done with our current tech, even if it is just a bright reflective dot in daylight... anything would help really.

[PFunk1606688187]

I would say that a sim needs to be designed to overcome technological limitations of the medium it runs on.

 

^

I needn't bother replying when someone has already put it in better words.

[Wolf Rider]

" ~ overcome technological limitations of the medium it runs on "

yes, they have... its called "labels" - either that or have flashing neon arrows pointing to target (even then though, some still wouldn't be able to find them)

 

Atalia has put it the best and clearest

[AtaliaA1]

" ~ overcome technological limitations of the medium it runs on "

yes, they have... its called "labels" - either that or have flashing neon arrows pointing to target (even then though, some still wouldn't be able to find them)

 

Atalia has put it the best and clearest

 

 

 

 

Thanx Wolf. I guess I am just having so much fun with the Sim. I just can't see what other see as flaws. I ask no more than what has been offered to me. I even like the limitation that add to the complicated flight "Missions and Tactics" wise. Having trouble seeing my wingmen as the flights that left for Iraq did IRL. gets me pumped to continue playing this great "Work of Art" DCS has allowed me to purchase.

 

I feel privileged and blessed to be able to afford and find time to use this title. How can I ask this small group of guys to even attempt to model their offering like a "Major Corporation" (referencing other complaints not this one) and ask them to forgive anyone who does.

 

Ask not what this Sim. can do for you. Ask what it has already done.

[MBot]

" ~ overcome technological limitations of the medium it runs on "

yes, they have... its called "labels" - either that or have flashing neon arrows pointing to target (even then though, some still wouldn't be able to find them)

 

Atalia has put it the best and clearest

 

Labels are not satisfactory. They display through the cockpit framing, the airframe and clouds. And even when reduced to a small character, they are still too obvious compared to a well done dot-system. I am surprised I even have to write this, as I consider a dot-system to be industry standard.

 

I have no problem with visual search being hard and sometimes having the situation of loosing sight. Spotting and situation awareness is the most basic element of air combat and should be difficult. But we should have roughly the same spotting capabilities as a real fighter pilot, when playing a 90° in-game FOV on a monitor that covers only about 30° of our own field of vision (so stuff is 3 times smaller), with a monitor resolution that can not match the resolution of the human eye.

[Angbor]

I don't think this was addressed yet, but don't lower your resolution to make things easier to see. That's working the wrong direction. Getting a larger screen will help if your dots per inch is too high on your current screen, but ultimately this is a resolution problem. There is a point where a bigger screen of the same resolution won't have added benefits. If you really want to make that little tank easier to spot on the ground you'll need to upgrade from 1080p.

 

The main problem is that as the tank approaches a size smaller than the pixels on your screen, all the parts of him that occupy a fraction of a pixel will be blended with everything around it, removing that contrast that we use to make out different objects. Barring higher resolution screen, smart scaling and labels are a great way to fix that problem, but introduce their own problems, which has been discussed here a lot already.

 

Another thing worth trying is perhaps disabling anti-aliasing. I haven't experimented with this in DCS, but I've noticed in other games that too much AA can cause things to look blurry, killing off the contrast between objects. Which can make a tank the size of a handful of pixels disappear into the background.

[9.JG27 DavidRed]

I would say that a sim needs to be designed to overcome technological limitations of the medium it runs on.

 

+1!

:thumbup:

[=Pedro=]

Guys you are going Way to Far with this. My point is with the Tech. limits of our genre and their devices used to represent such, We can only enjoy a "Glass half full" mentality or we are desiring Technology of the future as things are they do fall short.

 

So as things are in the GPU and Monitor Technological World we are limited to things as they are until progress is made. So I equate it to the "Glass being Half Full" not "Empty".

 

Well said Sir!

[Wolf Rider]

@Mbot...

 

Yes, the labels bleeding through is a bug which could be well worth the fixing and the FoV/ resolution thing has been gone over and over so many times... 3 x monitors with a 20degree FoV on each (not 60degrees over the three, treating the three as one monitor) would be on the way to a partial solution but that solution leads to set of whole new problems

[MBot]

Of course better hardware is a great solution for those that can afford it. But the sim needs to accommodate for what I would call common hardware. It's not like that is some kind of voodoo magic. Il-2 had an excellent view (dot) system for example that was challenging and also well playable.

[Wolf Rider]

and that was dependent on what resolution/ monitor size was being run (also ran a, iirc, slightly different FoV value) and that sim also had more than it's fair share of "can't spot the dot" complaints

[PFunk1606688187]

and that was dependent on what resolution/ monitor size was being run (also ran a, iirc, slightly different FoV value) and that sim also had more than it's fair share of "can't spot the dot" complaints

 

Right, so that solution isn't 100% effective ergo its not better than having nothing at all?

 

Even if you stuck gamers into a holodeck they'd probably complain about not seeing things, but that doesn't mean that it has anything to do with the merits of the solution either.

[Wolf Rider]

~ Even if you stuck gamers into a holodeck they'd probably complain about not seeing things, ~

 

 

lol, you're probably on the mark there... :)

 

as for the rest... please don't put words into people's mouths