Jump to content

SharpeXB

Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

    3532
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

811 Excellent

About SharpeXB

  • Rank
    Founder

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Dallas, TX
  • Interests
    Fencing, RoF, DCS, CloD, X-Plane

Recent Profile Visitors

1268 profile views
  1. “Model Enlargement” in DCS produced a nearly similar effect as Alternate Visibility. There were three levels to choose from or to turn it off. It caused the same problems online but they were even worse in modern combat where aircraft can engage each other at those ranges and simply looking for dots made radar unnecessary. So hardly any server had it set on. It was only present in the Stable Version of the game for a short time, mostly it was running in the Open Beta. After a short time in Stable it was removed.
  2. This topic has been discussed to death over there. Who cares if anyone understands it? We don’t develop these games. Don’t have the time or energy anymore. This whole topic is a waste of time. Like the endless flight model arguments.
  3. Just go and read on the topic there yourself.
  4. The reason I didn’t get a TV recently has nothing to do with the quality. The particular model I was looking at seems great. Good inout lag, great picture. Even FreeSync computable. Very nice. I’m honestly holding out because I have a really good new monitor that’s also great. If I upgrade it might be for a 2160p 21:9 (don’t see any of those out yet) or an 8K TV which are now appearing. There are very good gaming TVs and I’m sure a lot of flight sim players use them.
  5. Because ED wrestles with the same issues. And 1CGS unfortunately just made the same mistake they did with creating a user-adjustable visibility system that gives players excessive (unrealistic) enlargement. ED gets asked for this “smart scaling” more because BMS players are probably more attracted to DCS So ED has already been down this path. Just like every flight sim there is a subset of players in DCS who cannot seem to grasp visibility. Much of the trouble is again from the players themselves. A chief reason being that many are BMS players who have been coddled over the years with targets rendered 2x the size of what they see in DCS. That’s not ED’s fault. And it’s not 1CGS fault either.
  6. I wouldn’t choose OLED for gaming due to burn-in potential. And high cost. I did consider a TV recently as an upgrade but decided to wait on it. The monitor I have now is very good. I don’t consider VR to be worthwhile yet. What is your question exactly? Do I agree with AnP? Yes he’s more informed than I am so I trust his judgement on this issue.
  7. You can find out here https://displaylag.com/best-low-input-lag-tvs-gaming-by-gamers/ From the link in my post. They will be https://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/microsoft-flight-simulator And it will be in 4K UltraHD HDR. His opinion is more informed than yours is. He’s also designing the game.
  8. Statements by the developers themselves: Posted by Sneaksie, October 4 “Dear friends, Having observed very differrent responses to the visibility change yesterday which returned to more realistic values, we have decided to add a new difficulty option called 'Alternate visibility'.” AnPetrovich “I understand that many players like to see airplanes in the game at distances more than 20 - 30 km because in this case it is easier to play, and it is more interesting to see many other planes around you, not so boring or something. I got it. I just want these players to understand and accept the fact that this is far away from the real life, and this is not about the 'simulator' or 'historical reconstruction' because it breaks proper tactics of air combat.” Because BMS style smart scaling isn’t “slightly out of proportion”. It’s a factor of something like 2x at 3 miles. And the fact that this factor is only applied to the aircraft and not their surroundings. It would look just plain awful. Devs are all aware of this feature and have heard this thousands of times. ED for example thinks it’s just plain ugly. I’m sure 1CGS would agree.
  9. It would be interesting to know that figure. My guess is that HDR monitors are rare because TVs have replaced them for gaming 30-40% Of US households (biggest game market) have a 4K TV (all 4K TVs are also HDR unless they’re quite old) so it’s a safe assumption that this same % of console gamers use them at least. https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/talkingtech/2018/12/30/4-k-tv-video-movies-shows-watch/2420546002/ The Steam Hardware survey shows 1080x1920 used by 63% and the next most common resolution as1366x768 at 12% 2160 is at 2% Of course that’s just a survey of everyone who has Steam installed and maybe not indicative of enthusiasts. I think PC doesn’t have the incentive to go for 2160p because PCs are capable of very high graphic settings that honestly look better and perform better than just having extra pixels. A game looks and runs better at ultra graphics 1080p than medium settings at 2160p. Graphics cards which can do Ultra 2160p/60 are still quite expensive. List of PC games that support HDR https://pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/List_of_games_that_support_high_dynamic_range_display_(HDR) There are logical reasons why HDR hasn’t found its way into titles like this. Which is too bad because it would be a big help with the visibility issues. 4K+HDR will though eventually become the norm for video just like 1080p is today.
  10. Clearly Devs think his solution is “wrong” for their games because none of the current flight sims use it. The only one I’m only aware of which does is BMS ED won’t use it and neither had 1CGS. I doubt they ever will. Mostly because it’s just ugly looking.
  11. Many mainstream games (PC and console) support HDR. And the current consoles Xbox One and PS4 All newer 4K UHDTVs support HDR
  12. Good for him. This study of his was related to Air Force simulators with a specific fixed projection system. It would be terribly problematic to implement in an entertainment product like IL-2 where everyone has different hardware and setups. Furthermore it’s visual effects would just be ugly in a game that’s supposed to feature a believable looking environment. His solution is really flawed both for gaming and for actual simulators. I have a hard time imagining it would ever actually be used. Depicting aircraft greatly out of scale would cause all sorts of problems. He tries to acknowledge other solutions like having better projectors etc. And there are many references to video games as a use which is what makes me think that was his goal all along. Along with all the credentials he may very well be a gaming enthusiast as well.
  13. Well this Doctor of Philosophy guy really screwed up your skills at flight sim games that’s for sure. He gets an A+ for that.
  14. Yeah the paper is for a Dr of Philosophy. How does that make any sense? Because the guy was probably a video gamer and apparently nobody cares what a Dr of Philosophy writes their thesis about.
  15. Is that all you can do? Post the same stupid nonsense link over and over?
×
×
  • Create New...