Do plane controls seem a little nervous?

[303_Kwiatek]

Wobbling and swinging nose of planes in BOB is not depend of joystick or curves. It is how planes react in game on controls movements expecially in pitch and yaw movemements.

 

And nothing has changed in these update - it was the same before just people didn't notice it so much casue they dont need to aim and shoting.

 

For me it was obvious since i made first take off in BOS and get plane in the air. My first impression was that planes were flying like hanging on gums.

[J4SCrisZeri]

Should try your x52 imho. Potentiometer sticks like extreme 3d often end up like this after a some months:

 

Logitech.jpg

 

X52 is more precise (has more position steps) than extreme 3d, this should make your flying smoother, not more jerky.

The x52's weak center spring could make it feel jerky, but we just need to get used to the x52.

yes, that stick deserves a try sooner or later, keeping it laying on my shelf makes no sense.

problem is: the logitech is actually working perfectly, works with wop, clod, lock-on, il2 1946, everything

 

it lets me aim like a surgeon at a particular part of the enemy plane (if it's close enough) and kill it

I have the problem exclusively with bos

[303_Kwiatek]

Okay, didn't read the long all thread, but i agree with OP and many here.

Pitch response has changed in flight model (mainly noticeable in 109) as i mentioned it in other thread already burried in forum.

I can even say it's quite unpleasant...way too much twitchy and sensitive, extremely noticeable when aiming at certain speed.

IMO, it has nothing to do with beeing able to fly with 2 fingers on stick. Neither with stick quality. And obviously to me, the faster you fly, the harder the response is. Not the inverse.

It's something occuring only with BOS using my Warthog.

DCS is fine, CloD is fine, ROF is fine (yes with all different planes even Camel)

So, beside the fact it seems to me unnatural/unrealistic behavior (109 was mind you known as very stable firing platform) it has to be a bug if devs didn't change it intentionally.

If devs imported this twitchy behavior intentionally, i'm sorry to say it is wrong in my opinion...(yes, i know, i've never flew RL warbirds as everybody here on forum).

 

As actual soluce, we can set a sentivity curve of course...but...

 

oh yes. and I agree, last week it felt different. now at the minimum error the plane rotates on his axis like if ti was a pivot

aiming at a plane is a joke, too many shakes and you can't  brush against the stick, or the plane goes crazy

and I have no strange stick eh: logitech Extreme 3D, I guess the most normal popular joy of the planet

 

( I also own a Saiteck x52 but it's in its box, can't imagine this sim's behaviour with that iper-sensible device)

 

Well nothing change here comparing these update to previous one. Just i think you haven't noticed it before like now.  Planes wobbling and swinging the same way before like it do now.

[LizLemon]

Just ask yourselves "How difficult would it be to fly and shoot in the 109 if it didn't have these quirks ?" That's all I'm saying. Given a little practice in the 109, if it didn't have those quirks, right or wrong, shooting LaGG's wouldn't just be easy you'd be choosing which testical to shoot off the pilot (presumably an advantage for female pilots here, if they know where to look). There a whole load of things that simulators can't simulate that make a huge difference. Maybe I should try and get the other half to stand behind me with a cricket bat and belt me or the chair every time I get bounced or shot at ( then again she might enjoy it too much, I may not be able to get her to stop. Who said gaming wasn't shared family entertainment ?

 

If this game is supposed to be a sim then the only question to ask is "Did the 109 have these quirks IRL?"

 

If you think flying the 109 should be made artificially difficult for the sake of "balance" or some other nonsense then you should look into War Thunder and World of Warplanes.

[Sternjaeger]

My two bobs worth as a private pilot who mainly flew aerobatics (that is all stick and rudder work).

 

Prior to the dog fights becoming available I didn't notice anything untoward. However I find trying to line up on an a/c that is porpoising is extremely difficult with twitchy rudder and stick control, even staying out of their slipstream.

 

It's not so bad when lining up on moving vehicles in a 2 dimensional environment, but once the third dimension comes into play any hits on the target a/c are more good luck that good shooting in my humble opinion.

 

Sternjaeger, I realise with your PC down you have not experienced this in the game yet. I am interested to hear your opinion after you get a chance to fly the latest iteration.

 

Waiting for the new rig ATM mate, but if you guys get a chance to go fly over the weekend, try and stick a small adhesive dot on your windscreen and see how easy it is to keep it aligned with another aircraft. 

 

http://youtu.be/eDB5Qwaz7H4?t=4m47s

Edited December 8, 2013 by Sternjaeger

[Furio]

I reduced significantly over control by tweaking curves, but fact remains that – in my opinion, considering my experience with real airplanes, my understanding of aerodynamics, stability and control, plus my basic dumbness as a pilot  – I find the present FM problematic. That said, I understand that we are talking of an alpha version, and we must allow developers all the time they need, avoiding to start heated debates right now.

 

But I see a big question stands in front of us, and that could be debated.

Most people here in the forum are vocal supporters of no-compromises simulation. I tend to agree with them, but I’m beginning to worry about the overall difficulty of this sim. The learning curve looks really steep, beginning with demanding ground handling, and I’m afraid that newcomers would feel intimidated. I hope wise steps will be taken to guarantee everyone an enjoyable experience, with appropriate options. 

[DD_bongodriver]

Stern, take it from me, they have a point, it really doesn't feel too good ATM, it's like there is no proportionality in control inputs but instead you get all or nothing.

[Sternjaeger]

Stern, take it from me, they have a point, it really doesn't feel too good ATM, it's like there is no proportionality in control inputs but instead you get all or nothing.

 

oh yeah man, I don't doubt that, I just wonder how much is related to an FM that needs tweaking and how much is related to wrong expectations developed with other sims. I'm not trying to bash the point that the FM needs tweaking, I just would like to understand what is that needs to be addressed.

 

Can anybody please post a video showing the issue? 

Edited December 8, 2013 by Sternjaeger

[Grifter]

Waiting for the new rig ATM mate, but if you guys get a chance to go fly over the weekend, try and stick a small adhesive dot on your windscreen and see how easy it is to keep it aligned with another aircraft. 

 

http://youtu.be/eDB5Qwaz7H4?t=4m47s

 

You know Sternjaeger, that reminded me of a small plane commercial flight I had to take back in 2000. Flew into St. Louis and our connection to Springfield, IL was a very small twin prop plane. Can't remember the make, maybe Beechcraft? Anyway, it seated about 12 or so and the flightdeck was a few feet above the level of the passenger cabin.

It was a typical windy midwest day, but flying rarely bothers me, so no biggie I am thinking. Well, we get in the air to our cruising altitude and the crew for whatever reason left the door to the flightdeck open and I am sitting maybe ten feet behind them looking out the windscreen. Whew! It was everything the pilot could do just to keep us moving in the right direction. The plane's nose was all over the place the whole trip, which made it pretty exhausting even as a passenger. Can't imagine how whipped the pilot was after the flight! Thankfully we didn't experience radical altitude changes but it was a draining flight none the less.

[dburne]

Imho, at least in the Lagg as I have not tried the BF 109 yet, the pitch axis is way too sensitive, even when adding some curve to it. Roll axis is pretty decent. Rudder is not bad either for me with the pedals I am using.

[SeaW0lf]

So you are saying that the FM should be "balanced" for difficulty rather then accuracy?

 

Agree. Otherwise it is a waste of time.

[Freycinet]

An incredible number of people in this thread don't seem to understand that were dealing with an alpha version of the sim. Prepare for the flight model to change drastically numerous times from now until release. Just the way it is.

[HagarTheHorrible]

LizLemon, on 08 Dec 2013 - 09:57, said:

So you are saying that the FM should be "balanced" for difficulty rather then accuracy?

 

Agree. Otherwise it is a waste of time.

 

 

 

I'm just saying there's more too it and not every decision is either necessarily straight forward or black and white.

Edited December 8, 2013 by HagarTheHorrible

[JZG_Viking]

Hey,

 

From my limited experience flying the alpha so far, I noticed that the rudder seems very sensitive, I had to change the curve to tune it down a bit.

The elevator indeed seems a twitchy. Especially when pulling back on the stick, increasing the AoA, and then releasing stick pressure quickly.The aircraft will `bounce` back and oscillate too much or something, it feels there´s not enough damping, but I am no expert or a real life pilot. If this is realistic then don't change it. I can easily adapt by smoothing out the stick motions and easing into them a bit more.

Edited December 8, 2013 by JZG_Kaiser74

[DD_fruitbat]

For the love of all things, NO BALANCING. 

[arjisme]

I don't think the issues are FM, per se.  They are control input issues.  Our PC joysticks and rudder pedals don't have forces on them, so we have full control authority all the time.  Well, if I recall correctly, there is some damping of input when moving at very high speeds, but overall it is pretty minimal.  Some increased damping of inputs based on forces on control surfaces would help.  But, this also needs to handle cases where a user has a FFB joystick.  I don't find there to be much in the way of FFB forces at this point, so I think those should be higher (or tunable to be higher).  And if a user is using a FFB stick, the software damping needs to account for that as the stick itself will provide some of that damping effect.

 

The game should accurately simulate the FM of these aircraft.  It should also accurately simulate the controllability of them.

[Shakey60]

First session with the sim this week so this is all I can comment on. Not sure if pitch trim is implemented yet, (can't get it to work), so constantly holding the stick forward causes pitch twitchiness for me. I've also experienced this behavior in CLOD but when I trim it out, everything is nice and smooth. If trim isn't implemented yet then this may be the cure. 

[LizLemon]

LizLemon, on 08 Dec 2013 - 09:57, said:

So you are saying that the FM should be "balanced" for difficulty rather then accuracy?

 

Agree. Otherwise it is a waste of time.

 

 

 

I'm just saying there's more too it and not every decision is either necessarily straight forward or black and white.

 

No, I'm pretty sure it is that black and white.

 

The FM either matches the actual aircraft or it doesn't. Accuracy is what matters in a FLIGHT SIM.

 

You may have ideas about handicapping aircraft A, or making the combat feel "authentic" but if the FM isn't true to life then it isn't a sim.

[VBF-12_Snake9]

First session with the sim this week so this is all I can comment on. Not sure if pitch trim is implemented yet, (can't get it to work), so constantly holding the stick forward causes pitch twitchiness for me. I've also experienced this behavior in CLOD but when I trim it out, everything is nice and smooth. If trim isn't implemented yet then this may be the cure. 

Yes I believe that proper trim will at least allow us to isolate the "problem."  With other sims if not trimmed out aiming is impossible.  With no trim one is fighting the plane the whole time. 

[StG2_xgitarrist]

Wow, i am impressed how many virtual pilots have issues with the FM. 

"Fix FM"??  "CLOD and DCS have more realistic controls"?? Both Sims neither have a F4 nor a Lagg. Maybe the FM of the other Sims need to be fixed?

You can get the impression that we have a bunch of warbird experts in this Forum.

I dont understand how people can do this statemants on the basis of "it FEELS wrong".

 

An incredible number of people in this thread don't seem to understand that were dealing with an alpha version of the sim. Prepare for the flight model to change drastically numerous times from now until release. Just the way it is.

 

I hope/think there will be no drastic changes, because they are trying to get the FM right from the start (I think it was mentioned on a video, that they try to build Fm  with high accuracy from the start). "Tweaking"  doesnt mean rebuilding a Model.

 

For the love of all things, NO BALANCING. 

 

Yeah absolutely. Thats what the devs said (no balancing, only accuracy).

Edited December 8, 2013 by StG2xgitarrist

[HagarTheHorrible]

Nobody has answered my question yet.  The only challenge facing a 109 pilot at the moment is spotting the initial contact, making allowances for the delay between pulling the trigger and the guns firing and the oscillation around pointing the 109 piper at the target.

Everyone seems to think "balancing" is some sort of Boogie word soley centered around FM's, which is to think that there is not art, creativity, or decision making to be made in making a flight sim.  There are loads of tiny decisions and compromises to be made, that you probably haven't even considered, that might have profound impacts on how the game is played and because we're sitting in front of a computer they aren't always straight forward or obvious.

 

One plane shouldn't be nerfed to suit another, on that I'm sure we all agree, but that is not to suggest that there isn't a huge gap between that and the final strike of bullet on victim.   A case in point are red out and black outs.  You don't feel them sitting in front of your computer but they artificially include them and everybody accepts them as conveying the limitations of the pilot in high or negative "G" manoeuvres.

 

Aircraft can be as close too representative as possible, the closer the better,  even though there will always be a compromise because of the nature of flight dynamics and the limitations of home computers, but remember the aircraft are just a tool and when constructing a sim they also need to consider the interaction of the pilot and what he is capable of, or not, when sitting in that aircraft and not in front of a computer monitor.  An example might be an aircraft that can fly to 30,000 ft but if the pilot doesn't have oxygen then it would never get there because the pilot would have conked out long before so you can't go purely by "This aircraft could do this"  if in reality it didn't for reasons that had nothing to do with the FM.

 

Do none of you agree that a LaGG's life span is rather bleak as it stands, if the 109 flew or behaved and was changed as some people believe it should, rightly or wrongly, and nobody has suggested the basic FM parameters are incorrect, it might as well not even turn up except as lunch.

 

Another question is, should developer take into account, when designing certain aspects, the way the game IS played online rather than how it would have played out in real life ?

Edited December 8, 2013 by HagarTheHorrible

[15/JG52_Genie]

i find all the comments about jerkiness of the planes to blame poor joysticks you have. I will upload one video now of couple engagements and you tell me if you see any jerkiness there. It is all about the joystick you have. Plane are flying smooth and nice and I don't see any (nada, zero , null, null,0) twitching.

 

@J4Scriszeri - check your joystick. its broken.

 

here are couple of my kills

 

[AndyJWest]

Personally, I'm unconvinced that the Bf 109 FM has been changed at all. If you get it trimmed properly, it seems stable enough in level flight. Certainly it tends to wobble somewhat if you hoik the controls around too much trying to get a shot in - particularly if you overdo the rudder input. But then it probably should. It needs to be flown smoothly, and that should come with practice.

Edited December 8, 2013 by AndyJWest

[15/JG52_Genie]

Another question is, should developer take into account, when designing certain aspects, the way the game IS played online rather than how it would have played out in real life ?

 

i don't want one more "balanced" multiplayer experience.

 

I want how it was. I want the real stuff. I want to sit in that LaGG and fly against the odds!.

 

If you want "balanced multiplayer experience" go and play world of planes or world of thunder or whatever they are called.

 

I finally want to fly a HISTORIC simulation.

[HagarTheHorrible]

Personally, I'm unconvinced that the Bf 109 FM has been changed at all. If you get it trimmed properly, it seems stable enough in level flight. Certainly it tends to wobble somewhat if you hoik the controls around too much trying to get a shot in - particularly if you overdo the rudder input. But then it probably should. It needs to be flown smoothly, and that should come with practice.

 

 

I tend to agree, it is simply the difference of trying to fly a very particular flight path with lots of little course corrections rather than just flying in the general direction of as it was before the guns were introduced.

 

i find all the comments about jerkiness of the planes to blame poor joysticks you have. I will upload one video now of couple engagements and you tell me if you see any jerkiness there. It is all about the joystick you have. Plane are flying smooth and nice and I don't see any (nada, zero , null, null,0) twitching.

 

@J4Scriszeri - check your joystick. its broken.

 

here are couple of my kills

 

 

Thats what I get, it's not solid point and shoot but it's not jerky either, as suggested it might be to do with joystick settings if it isn't like the video.

[Panzerlang]

I believe if the same amount of force was required for our sticks as was needed for the real thing we'd find the a/c a great deal more stable. I have to concentrate on not hoiking my stick about but when I manage it things are a lot smoother. I've dialled up the resistance on my pedals, which has helped. That's a tensioner, not FFB, before anyone gets excited.

[HagarTheHorrible]

i don't want one more "balanced" multiplayer experience.

 

I want how it was. I want the real stuff. I want to sit in that LaGG and fly against the odds!.

 

If you want "balanced multiplayer experience" go and play world of planes or world of thunder or whatever they are called.

 

I finally want to fly a HISTORIC simulation.

 

 

Historic simulation only works when playing single player, online it's a totally different ball game and as a general rule of thumb every rule in the book is and will be broken. It's a shame online provides the best pure combat challenge but also the most unhistorical behaviour by the vast majority of players.  Like I say get somebody to stand behind your chair, in the dark, and get them to whack you, or your chair, with a kids foam covered baseball bat every time someone shoots you or your aircraft.  Now that would introduce some more realistic behaviour online, talk about turning into a stressed out nervous wreck.

Edited December 8, 2013 by HagarTheHorrible

[Quax]

Some facts about the "nervous plane controls":

 

 

1.   FM didn´t change.

 

2.   As I fly with a "realistic setup"  (original rudder and the stick prolonged to real length), I can confirm, that the ingame stick and rudder do exactly what i do with my controls. (Nothing nervous at all.) The control surfaces do exactly the movements corresponding to that input angle and the planes behave 100% realistic to that inputs. There is nothing the devs can change, without leaving the path of a realistic sim.

 

 

Is the "nervous" experience, a lot are encountering, surprising ?  No, not at all.  Try to imagine to fly a real WW2 fighter with a 15 cm spring loaded joystick and you know what i mean.

 

 

But the experience with RoF showed, that the complains about it  (there were exactly the same posts during the first months)  get less with time, because

 

1.   training helps a lot to adapt to this input disadvantages

 

2.   curves help to adapt "small" input devices

 

 

PS 1:  In RoF most did get convinced, when they checked the tracks (not possible yet).  The ingame stick did move like crazy when dogfighting and the planes moved accordingly 

 

PS 2:  there is only one thing that proofs me wrong like always:

Edited December 8, 2013 by Rama

[von_Sales]

i'm sure we'll see advanced controloptions in the future updates and changes to the FM. No reason to be disapointed at this stage of develpment (35%). The F4 feels a bit nervoes for me too, maybe it's realistic, maybe not, or I'm just compare it with IL2 1946 and CloD but who knows, maybe it's there not realistic? But after all that feedback the developers will have a closer look.

[DD_bongodriver]

it's somewhat premature to be talking about balancing, the alpha planeset is not what we should base any decisions like this on, when we have the full planeset then the 109 is likely to face a challenge, at6 the moment all we have is one aircraft from each side to play around with, it is not meant to be competitive at this stage.

[ImPeRaToR]

Nobody has answered my question yet.  The only challenge facing a 109 pilot at the moment is spotting the initial contact, making allowances for the delay between pulling the trigger and the guns firing and the oscillation around pointing the 109 piper at the target.

Everyone seems to think "balancing" is some sort of Boogie word soley centered around FM's, which is to think that there is not art, creativity, or decision making to be made in making a flight sim.  There are loads of tiny decisions and compromises to be made, that you probably haven't even considered, that might have profound impacts on how the game is played and because we're sitting in front of a computer they aren't always straight forward or obvious.

 

One plane shouldn't be nerfed to suit another, on that I'm sure we all agree, but that is not to suggest that there isn't a huge gap between that and the final strike of bullet on victim.   A case in point are red out and black outs.  You don't feel them sitting in front of your computer but they artificially include them and everybody accepts them as conveying the limitations of the pilot in high or negative "G" manoeuvres.

 

Aircraft can be as close too representative as possible, the closer the better,  even though there will always be a compromise because of the nature of flight dynamics and the limitations of home computers, but remember the aircraft are just a tool and when constructing a sim they also need to consider the interaction of the pilot and what he is capable of, or not, when sitting in that aircraft and not in front of a computer monitor.  An example might be an aircraft that can fly to 30,000 ft but if the pilot doesn't have oxygen then it would never get there because the pilot would have conked out long before so you can't go purely by "This aircraft could do this"  if in reality it didn't for reasons that had nothing to do with the FM.

 

Do none of you agree that a LaGG's life span is rather bleak as it stands, if the 109 flew or behaved and was changed as some people believe it should, rightly or wrongly, and nobody has suggested the basic FM parameters are incorrect, it might as well not even turn up except as lunch.

 

Another question is, should developer take into account, when designing certain aspects, the way the game IS played online rather than how it would have played out in real life ?

It was pretty obvious from the start that the F-4 would be far superior to the LaGG3. Not a real problem as long as the Yak1 will be competitive.

 

 

And what Quax says, practice will help people get used to it, so does having accurate controllers with long throw. Coming from ROF also seems to be an advantage as the majority of complains seem to come from other games.

Edited December 8, 2013 by ImPeRaToR

[SeaW0lf]

From this video, I can see that the camera wobbles in some cases, especially in ground strafing, since we have more reference points to compare. The FM might be not so off as we think, but I am not so sure.

 

[HagarTheHorrible]

Never underestimate nervious excitement it can play havoc with control (OOPs, sorry................maybe we can try again later darling ?  It can have embarassing side effects, Evidently)

.

 

 

 Coming from ROF also seems to be an advantage as the majority of complains seem to come from other games.

 

I think this is a big, big advantage , certainly until people get used to flying it and how BoS handles flight physics.

[dburne]

i find all the comments about jerkiness of the planes to blame poor joysticks you have. I will upload one video now of couple engagements and you tell me if you see any jerkiness there. It is all about the joystick you have. Plane are flying smooth and nice and I don't see any (nada, zero , null, null,0) twitching.

 

@J4Scriszeri - check your joystick. its broken.

 

 

Whoa wait, dang you mean my Warthog HOTAS is broken, or poor?

Now what am I going to ... wait, hmm, works beautifully in all my other flight sims.

Might have to give this some thought before I replace it with another...

[JZG_Viking]

i find all the comments about jerkiness of the planes to blame poor joysticks you have. I will upload one video now of couple engagements and you tell me if you see any jerkiness there. It is all about the joystick you have. Plane are flying smooth and nice and I don't see any (nada, zero , null, null,0) twitching.

 

@J4Scriszeri - check your joystick. its broken.

 

here are couple of my kills

 

 

Our joysticks are fine. The aircraft oscillates (bounces) on the pitch and yaw axis, it is clearly visible even in your tracks (nice flying btw). This is a result of the flight model. It seems a bit excessive compared to other flight sims that I played. I can't comment if this is realistic or not, I'll leave that up to the experts. 

Edited December 8, 2013 by JZG_Kaiser74

[Sternjaeger]

Gents please, let's try and not turn this into a competition...

[Rama]

I removed it because It's useless (nobody doubt you're a real pilot, and if someone don't believe it, he wont be convinced, since the picture is purelly anonnymous), and part of a useless dispute.

Read forum rule #5. There's no necessity to break the forum rules for something to be edited or removed.

 

Now,I will not edit and hide posts forever.... posters (all) should know what it means.

[303_Kwiatek]

What you see is the natural behaviour of a plane.  Don´t compare it to other sims.  

 

If you pull the stick, you just increase the AoA. This increases the drag, and increases the lift. But it initially doesn´t change the speed and vector due to the inertia of the mass. If you let loose on the stick in the next second, it will "bounce" back. Same goes for the rudder. There is no "bounce back" for the aileron - perfectly modelled.

 

 Nope it shouldn't  bounce back like it is in BOS now.  If you move nose of plane pitch up or pitch down then move stick to neutral nose should stay up or down position  ( some small oscilation could be possible) but it shouldn't back to initial position. It is terribly wrong in BOS flight model.  Thats why planes fly like they were hanging on invisible gums or springs. Not realistic at all. Other sims like DCS or CLOD got it better. Even in ROF ( which teoritiacaly had the same engine)  planes behaves much better in the air. I checked it and found ROF planes fly much more realistic in the "air"  then  in BOS.

 

Some thinks that in BOS they feel moving and living air. It is not true. Here planes just got wobling and swinging nose casued by pitch or yaw movements nothing more.   Unfortunately  there is no combat sim which i tested where there was implemented air conditions ( thermals, air mass etc.)

Edited December 8, 2013 by Kwiatek

[AndyHill]

I haven't flown real warbirds (or real aircraft for that matter) so I don't really know how they should behave, but a couple of things:

 

1) I'm not convinced that the flight model has changed since the last alpha, we are just noticing the wobbliness more now when we really need the accuracy.

- It's great thing to have feedback from real pilots, but if latter is true it at least deserves consideration to think if they have actually tried to shoot at moving targets in real planes (or done similar exercises). 

 

2) Controls are going to be an issue and modeling them correctly basically impossible. We are mostly handling light plastic stuff with springs, when the real planes had heavy long throw controls acting against airflow. The feel and capabilities are entirely different. I don't know if BoS models control inertia (a fairly controversial thing) and if it doesn't, how would warbirds react if you could kick the controls around as fast and easily as we do on our light sticks?

 

3) I'm probably speaking for many in saying that I want the modeling to be realistic, no matter if it means lots of woblwobl or not. 

 

Since I don't have much experience to bring into this discussion I thought I'd try a fun experiment in creating guncam footage from BoS. The results are scarily real IMRO (of course I was intentionally hamfisted with controls and shooting to emulate less perfect pilots we see lots of footage from), but that can be said of many simulators. BTW, it would be fun to have a guncam mode when we get recording stuff.

 

[303_Kwiatek]

I find some nice guncams too but from other sims:

 

 

 

 

Quite immersion but what does it mean?