Jump to content

SharpeXB

Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

    4226
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by SharpeXB

  1. If the CPU is limiting your frame rate then DLSS won’t help. Sims like this tend to be limited by CPU performance.
  2. Looks fantastic! The aircraft appear very well defined with great contrast and reflections. In 4K they should and do appear as very sharp specks which are identifiable at longer ranges.
  3. There will always be a certain amount of that just due to pixel blooming. But it sounds like Jason is running it in 4K But it depends on what you mean by “benefit”? Seeing blobs at long range or being able to ID something Eh this discussion is so old... let’s see what the new fix is like.
  4. You might misunderstand my opinions on all this. I have always been against excessive enhancements such as egregious “smart scaling” or artificial solutions such as “dots” Solutions which penalize higher resolutions, many of the older methods were based around low resolutions and encourage players to lower theirs. Or systems which simply look bad or awkward like the “inverse zoom” effect. I’m always in favor of improving this aspect in a realistic and believable way. I haven’t actually tried this new system out but what I see in the video example looks much like what I see now, just a bit more defined. And although scaling a algorithm is used, it doesn’t appear excessive. I see a bit better contrast and sharpness of the other aircraft against the ground and better reflections, yet it’s still possible to lose sight of a target as it should be. It’s good to see 1CGS really evaluating this in 4K as well. Looking towards the future and not rehashing past methods. The only part of the new proposal I’m not in favor of is having two settings, which is divisive in multiplayer. If the solution is good and realistic there should be no reason to have two choices.
  5. I finally got the chance to watch that in 4K looks nice! 🤙
  6. Sometimes your own wingmen don’t spot the enemy.
  7. I meant with TrackIR. Does that setting affect TIR? I guess I could try and find out
  8. So the 11.50 update with the Vulkan API is out I don’t see any performance difference, runs the same for me as Open GL. I can use decently high settings and get about 35fps either way. Which actually feels fine in civil sims without air combat and fast head turning. No magic bullet there I suppose.
  9. You’ve never been able to move your head outside the canopy in this sim. This isn’t being advocated for “realism” it’s to handicap 90% of the players down to the level of the 10% wearing VR headsets. And by its nature TrackIR is always going to move faster than your RL head turn. Again, nobody is forcing you to play in VR. So accept the limitations of virtual reality or use a monitor. Fine with me, add a snap view for VR. Just don’t mess up the game for everyone else. I don’t think snap views combined with head tracking work the way you are imagining. Last time I tried them was in RoF though. But a snap view when used with TIR, for example to the gunsight, will lock your head movement. So a “six o’clock” snap view will lock your view looking directly into the headrest. Not too useful.
  10. This thread is proof that flight sim players can complain about everything. It’s a single key press people... 🙄
  11. DCS has a more realistic head turn and it actually makes checking six easier. The “owl neck” in IL-2 just looks straight into your headrest.
  12. Sure but it is what it is. Changing it would not be popular. There’s also no way in a game to simulate the effort in looking around no matter the limits. And the limits are still quite large. Honestly if the head and shoulder movement was made more realistic it would make turning and looking with TrackIR easier. Your head should lean around the headrest as you rotate, not look directly into it.
  13. Now now... let’s not go wrecking the game for everyone else just because you chose to play in VR Then why did they change to blister canopies on aircraft like the P-47, P-51 and even the later model Spitfire. Especially considering this came at a penalty in airspeed? Why did 109 pilots remove their headrest and why was it later changed to panzerglass? It was certainly possible to check six IRL just with more physical effort that can’t be simulated on a PC Again. Please don't go advocating to wreck the game for other players. Nobody is forcing you to play in VR Currently in flight simulation, 12% https://download.navigraph.com/docs/flightsim-community-survey-by-navigraph-2019-final.pdf#page73
  14. I guess when you think about it, it’s better to assume average abilities. This applies to the AI as well and they can’t all be Aces. So neither should the player. That’s fair.
  15. This isn’t what Han is asking about. He’s simply asking what sort of physical conditioning the pilot physiology model should be based upon.
  16. I would rather the dev team work on more important things than dealing with complaints about minutia. Press “P” and get on with it! Seriously how can a topic like this generate a page of discussion? 🙄
  17. My alter ego pilot is not a 50+ year old guy who wears bifocals. And I think the skill level of the avid gamer equates to “expert” compared to real life WWII some of which were barely trained. Also gamers have decades of “experience” whereas the real war only lasted a few years. Basically gamers are way better than most real pilots ever were. So I vote for “ace” abilities. Both for human players and AI.
  18. If you are fully loaded with bombs and fuel and in summer weather, it can be very difficult to take off. In that circumstance, reduce your fuel load.
  19. Spotting aircraft between 1-6km seems ok to me.
  20. Cliffs itself took about 7 years to make as well. Then flopped. Not anything to hold up as an example except as an example of what not to do.
  21. It’s great that Cliffs of Dover has finally been made relatively successful, but recognize the reality here. It was just about the worst failure in this genre at launch and for many many years. Primarily because it stretched itself too far with features such as clickable cockpits. So it should never be used as any sort of comparison. Don’t compare it with products like IL-2GB which have to be financially viable. TF is a volunteer modding team. Not a company that needs to make a payroll and stay in business. Tobruk took something like 6-7 years to make too iirc
  22. So it’s a real aircraft. Such things are important. What? Did you expect it worked like an Xbox game? This is all veering off topic. IL-2 is never going to have clickable cockpits so forget about it.
  23. Well the Garmins are a tough thing to simulate. It’s gotten better. XP-10 was pretty awful by comparison.
×
×
  • Create New...