Expert visibility - contrast change dependent on zoom level

[SharpeXB]

32 minutes ago, SCG_Wulfe said:

 

Your video in that topic is blocked for me says I'm not authorized to view.

 

Oops I had the permission set to private. Try it now. 

[SeaW0lf]

This one is interesting (I posted before on the wrong thread). It starts with the Bristol disappearing from a very close distance. At 0:10 you can see that not even with half zoom (perhaps more) the Bristol is visible. But from 0:22 onwards the contrast / reflection bug is clear. I have seen it before, but I could not record a track until now. The plane just blips white in and off of existence, blending with the mist. It is best viewed at 1440p for me.

 

 

[[DBS]TH0R]

2 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Is this what you are seeing? As much as I can see here it’s the reflections and not the skins vanishing.

 

 

Wow, I did not notice that one. I thought this was skin loading / unloading thing, but apparently not. Thanks for making the video out of it. I can only imagine if this is happening in conjunction with the skin loading/unloading how targets can be difficult to reacquire during engagement.

 

My video was focused on contrast at very long ranges, coupled with wide zoom making the target nearly invisible - as shown in the video @SeaWolf made:

 

31 minutes ago, SeaW0lf said:

This one is interesting (I posted before on the wrong thread). It starts with the Bristol disappearing from a very close distance. At 0:10 you can see that not even with half zoom (perhaps more) the Bristol is visible. But from 0:22 onwards the contrast / reflection bug is clear. I have seen it before, but I could not record a track until now. The plane just blips white in and off of existence, blending with the mist. It is best viewed at 1440p for me.

 

 

 

This is exactly the same as in the first clip from my video. Depending on the zoom level the targets around you can become completely invisible. Probably also dependent on the time of day and weather settings.

 

Thank you for posting it here. This is good stuff gents. Keep'em coming!

Edited November 19, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[SharpeXB]

36 minutes ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

 I thought this was skin loading / unloading thing, but apparently not.

It’s hard to tell in the video but on my screen I can tell it’s the reflection vanishing because the skin decals are still visible. This is also SP where the aircraft have default skins (in the cockpit segment looking at the wingmen)

[SCG_Wulfe]

 

2 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Oops I had the permission set to private. Try it now. 

 

Thanks. Ya that could very well be what I have experienced online the few times I have had something close and its appeared to vanish.  Come to think of it, there have been even a few times tailing aircraft at low altitude where this seems to happen and I need to zoom to keep tracking them easily as they seem to hit a range where the reflection/lighting on their surface goes away making them distinctly harder to see from one second to the next against the same background. 

[A_S]

22 hours ago, SCG_Wulfe said:

 

The range and scale is as perfect as it's going to get in the current "expert" visibility setting. All these arguments about why things need to be re-scaled to make various tactics possible are silly because the current visibility range and size is realistic and therefore the current usable tactics are realistic.

 

I want some of what you have been smoking. You are in a state of self-deception here. I am sorry, if that may sound harsh.. but that big of BS i don´t read often

 

I think you and IL-2 is confusing realistic "spotting distances" with "ID-ability distances" - at least from the products current state it is.

 

You DO understand yes? that realistic size-ing of targets can be done even with changing FOVs, right?  I think i need to make a post about this topic, WHY and HOW this can be achieved. Yes. i need to.

 

Image standing on the side of a plane (looking at nose and tail at the same time)

 

- plane is 5 meters from you

- plane is 100 meters from you

- plane is 2000 meters from you

 

the ANGLE between the straight lines of sight from nose-tip to tail-tip will change, according to distance (milliradian).

 

No matter what FOV you use, or can use inside a game, milliradian  must remain true to what it would be in reality, which then results in realistic size/distance. Vio la.

Not only is that important for visbility, but also for gunnery and wing-span distance measure-ments.

It starts with the question, what IS real FOV in reality .. and how to maintain size-ing true even changing above or below that realistic FOV value (which we do in games due to monitor size etc etc etc). VR has it somewhat right.. accurate scaling however.. does not exist in any sim (exception one) i know of.

 

 

Edited November 20, 2019 by A_S

[SCG_Wulfe]

2 hours ago, A_S said:

 

I want some of what you have been smoking. You are in a state of self-deception here. I am sorry, if that may sound harsh.. but that big of BS i don´t read often

 

I think you and IL-2 is confusing realistic "spotting distances" with "ID-ability distances" - at least from the products current state it is.

 

You DO understand yes? that realistic size-ing of targets can be done even with changing FOVs, right?  I think i need to make a post about this topic, WHY and HOW this can be achieved. Yes. i need to.

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks for dismissing what I'm saying by suggesting I have no clue what I'm talking about without even taking the time to grasp what I'm saying. Of course you can adjust a monitor FOV to match the real world scale perfectly. That's not what I'm suggesting has or should be done in IL2. 

 

What I am saying is that the current modified scale and visibility of aircraft in the 'expert visibility' setting is about is close a facsimile to the realities of spotting and identifying aircraft in real life as we are going to get at this stage without everyone being in VR with 8k resolution. No doubt, it is a compromise to achieve a realistic outcome of pace and difficulty. But I believe the outcome is bang-on in terms of what we can spot and what we can distinguish with the use of aids like zoom (by the way, combat pilots often used binoculars). The real-life pilots I've seen comment that fly this game are unanimous in this sentiment. I'm not talking about ensuring the angular size of the game world lines up perfectly with the window through your monitor. Suggesting that this would lead to the most accurate simulation of real world vision is an oversimplification of all of the variables involved with air to air combat. 

 

Finally, the funniest part about what you are saying is that it completely defeats your upholding of BMS style scaling as a realistic alternative. You just stated that the most realistic option is not to scale at all and to simply calculate the monitor as a window into a world with perfect angular size methodology.  Artificially inflating (scaling) planes to make spotting and I'ding easier goes against the premise entirely. 

 

Once again for clarity sake, what I am suggesting is that the current expert visibility setting while using some minimal scaling to enhance ID and spotting capability to make up for the shortcomings of a monitor, it does not resort to extreme up-sizing to make you an all-seeing eye in the sky. It results in what I believe is the most realistic depiction of what you can see in real life translated to a monitor or headset. 

Ultimately and most importantly, it results in an accurate and realistic outcome for the pace and tactics of ww2 air combat.

 

Caveat: The reflection/spotting issues at close range are a bug/design issue and could use improvement/correction. 

Edited November 20, 2019 by SCG_Wulfe

[[DBS]TH0R]

 

2 hours ago, SCG_Wulfe said:

What I am saying is that the current modified scale and visibility of aircraft in the 'expert visibility' setting is about is close a facsimile to the realities of spotting and identifying aircraft in real life as we are going to get at this stage without everyone being in VR with 8k resolution. No doubt, it is a compromise to achieve a realistic outcome of pace and difficulty. But I believe the outcome is bang-on in terms of what we can spot and what we can distinguish with the use of aids like zoom (by the way, combat pilots often used binoculars). The real-life pilots I've seen comment that fly this game are unanimous in this sentiment. I'm not talking about ensuring the angular size of the game world lines up perfectly with the window through your monitor. Suggesting that this would lead to the most accurate simulation of real world vision is an oversimplification of all of the variables involved with air to air combat.

 

The statement in bold is in complete contradiction from what you've posted in the second quoted part below. I find it completely untrue, and down right false. Either those pilots haven't tested the aspects of the sim entirely or they are simply lying / not understanding how it works. Lastly, I sincerely doubt many of them have chased a plane in a dogfight in real life.

 

If you venture outside of the IL-2 forums and ShapeXB's and alike - you will find that visual spotting is one of the worst aspect of this sim. Inconsistent and plagued with various bugs.

 

Thanks, but no thanks - cashing / waiting out for an 8K VR set to solve the spotting problems is not a solution:

• the game should have such requirement listed then
• there are better ways to spend my free time than pixel hunting

 

2 hours ago, SCG_Wulfe said:

Once again for clarity sake, what I am suggesting is that the current expert visibility setting while using some minimal scaling to enhance ID and spotting capability to make up for the shortcomings of a monitor, it does not resort to extreme up-sizing to make you an all-seeing eye in the sky. It results in what I believe is the most realistic depiction of what you can see in real life translated to a monitor or headset. 

Ultimately and most importantly, it results in an accurate and realistic outcome for the pace and tactics of ww2 air combat.

 

Caveat: The reflection/spotting issues at close range are a bug/design issue and could use improvement/correction. 

 

Agreed wholeheartedly. I believe no one here is asking for extreme up-sizing, as much as some here would like to paint it that way.

 

This is exactly what ALT visibility was attempting to solve, with the inverse zoom effect that needed more work. Sadly, it also came with super long and unrealistic rendering thus making it unusable in an online MP environment.

 

A flight sim where one can simply dive to the ground and turn on cloaking device to hide from your pursuers, coupled with planes becoming invisible dependent on zoom level is anything but realistic and doesn't deserve "Expert" description.

 

Edited November 20, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[Leon_Portier]

I´d like to have a clearer picture and more visible contacts at distance.

Playing the first mission of the Ivan´s war campaign, the JU88 I´m supposed to catch disappears after 5 km, while fully zoomed out in my 1080p display, with expert spotting.

Edited November 20, 2019 by Leon_Portier

[SharpeXB]

25 minutes ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

you will find that visual spotting is one of the worst aspect of this sim.

“Worst” Compared to what? There are only two games like this which are actually supported currently. IL-2 and DCS. They’re both about equal in this regard. If you start naming much older titles you’re talking about games developed in the small screen CRT era and their visibility tricks probably don’t hold up today. 

29 minutes ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

plagued with various bugs.

Which bugs specifically? If you find them then document and report them. This thread is kinda a mess, Devs can’t follow this. Cite something specific and post a clear example with a track. Otherwise you can’t expect them to be able to do anything about it. 

[nighthawk2174]

5 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

“Worst” Compared to what? There are only two games like this which are actually supported currently. IL-2 and DCS. They’re both about equal in this regard. If you start naming much older titles you’re talking about games developed in the small screen CRT era and their visibility tricks probably don’t hold up today. 

I'd say warthunder, of all things, (yes I know not a hardcore sim but that doesn't mean it can't have aspects or features that a sim needs too) still has the most accurate representation i've seen of vision.  I've been spending a couple of hourse over the past 3-4 days paying attention and watching the aircraft that fly near my home and the more I've payed attention the more and more warthunders system just get better.  And its my understanding they use supersampling to 'enlarge' an aircrafts relative size along with color and contrast adjustments based on background color.

Edited November 20, 2019 by nighthawk2174

[Leon_Portier]

Does expert visibility have the 10km vision bubble?

It seems it does.

[nighthawk2174]

1 minute ago, Leon_Portier said:

Does expert visibility have the 10km vision bubble?

It seems it does.

As far as i'm aware it doesn't but seeing anything beyond 10km is largely limited to glint effects right now. 

[RedKestrel]

Just now, Leon_Portier said:

Does expert visibility have the 10km vision bubble?

It seems it does.

No, it does not. It may seem that way because spotting fighter-sized aircraft out past 10 km is very difficult, both in-sim and real life. You can spot contrails easily at great distances and occasional flashes of reflection past 10 km. 

If you are having aircraft disappear in scripted campaigns, it may be that those campaigns were written before the new visibility setting, and maybe the mission designer added some logic to despawn planes that got a certain distance away from the player or battle area in order to save system performance. I know BlackSix made some changes to some of the official campaigns for this very reason, as he had planes only spawning in a certain distance from the player, but since they are now visible further away he had to change their spawn functions. This was mentioned in one of the last patch notes.
 

[Leon_Portier]

@RedKestrel

It could be that the AI JU88 spawns 5 km infront of me. My flight commander spots it around half a minute before me tho.

Its super frustrating, both AI and real players (VR) spot planes way before me.

Edit: Maybe its going to become a VR only game?

Edited November 20, 2019 by Leon_Portier

[[DBS]TH0R]

 

36 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

“Worst” Compared to what? There are only two games like this which are actually supported currently. IL-2 and DCS. They’re both about equal in this regard. If you start naming much older titles you’re talking about games developed in the small screen CRT era and their visibility tricks probably don’t hold up today. 

 

Seeing how AnPetrovich is involved in both titles, I am not surprised both sims have issues. ? Besides, DCS has already announced fixes in that area, acknowledging problems.

 

As for the rest - we've been down that rabit hole. Simply browse through recent threads on this topic. And stop with CRT nonsense. It was already demonstrated how scaling works here, and people agree that rendering size 1:1 on a monitor, especially with this graphical engine isn't doing its job.

 

BMS features an old implementation, and it does have its own issues. Scaling is simply one of the discussed ways to approach this problem (other versions of it). A problem that you still cannot grasp.

 

 

36 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Which bugs specifically? If you find them then document and report them. This thread is kinda a mess, Devs can’t follow this. Cite something specific and post a clear example with a track. Otherwise you can’t expect them to be able to do anything about it. 

 

The ones being reported here, and demonstrated with videos as examples:

• contrast / reflections disappearing dependent on zoom level
• skin loading / unloading if you move your view off target
• wide zoom (even normal!) rendering the targets completely invisible (or not rendering at all)

The only one doing his hardest to make this more difficult to follow is yourself. For the majority people reading this, it is evident how plagued the visibility rendering is in this sim.

 

 

One more thing about this quote:

 

3 hours ago, SCG_Wulfe said:

The real-life pilots I've seen comment that fly this game are unanimous in this sentiment.

 

A fellow squad mate who has some experience with flying is simply refusing to use zoom, because "real pilots don' have zoom". This goes along with the lines what Jason said:

 

Quote

And real pilots didn't have 'zoom'. 

 

Jason

 

Based on what I'm reading here, it seems highly likely that those pilots who vouch for the spotting in the sim don't use zoom either. Which could explain wide zoom invisibility bugs being unnoticed ...

Edited November 20, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R
spelling

[Barnacles]

35 minutes ago, Leon_Portier said:

@RedKestrel

It could be that the AI JU88 spawns 5 km infront of me. My flight commander spots it around half a minute before me tho.

Its super frustrating, both AI and real players (VR) spot planes way before me.

Edit: Maybe its going to become a VR only game?

It's not just VR. I can seem to spot much better on a monitor than in VR.

Edited November 20, 2019 by 71st_AH_Barnacles

[SCG_Wulfe]

1 hour ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

 

 

The statement in bold is in complete contradiction from what you've posted in the second quoted part below. I find it completely untrue, and down right false. Either those pilots haven't tested the aspects of the sim entirely or they are simply lying / not understanding how it works. Lastly, I sincerely doubt many of them have chased a plane in a dogfight in real life.

 

If you venture outside of the IL-2 forums and ShapeXB's and alike - you will find that visual spotting is one of the worst aspect of this sim. Inconsistent and plagued with various bugs.

 

Thanks, but no thanks - cashing / waiting out for an 8K VR set to solve the spotting problems is not a solution:

• the game should have such requirement listed then
• there are better ways to spend my free time than pixel hunting

 

 

 

Well what you've posted illustrates again that you are completely missing the point of what I'm saying or willfully misrepresenting it.

 

I'm not saying that an 8k VR headset is necessary to solve spotting problems. I was saying that an 8k headset would be necessary to render the game world including all objects at a perfect 1:1 scale without having to use some trickery and scaling to make spotting and ID easier. And actually on second thought, even then, due to the way light and shadow and contrast and a multitude of other variables are perceived, some massaging of the rendering would still be required. 

 

Given that they have used what I would deem a reasonable and subtle amount of said trickery to ease and enhance spotting and ID in the the expert mode, it is a truly exceptional facsimile to the realities and challenges of spotting and ID in real life. 

 

Anyhow. I'm glad that the developers and the majority of the player-base has realized this as is evidenced by the populations of players in servers that use this setting. I really only waded into this topic in the hopes to unite all of us to work to improve the issues/bugs with spotting at close range. I see now that it was a waste of time, so I will leave it at that. 

Edited November 20, 2019 by SCG_Wulfe

[[DBS]TH0R]

 

39 minutes ago, SCG_Wulfe said:

Well what you've posted illustrates again that you are completely missing the point of what I'm saying or willfully misrepresenting it.

 

I'm not saying that an 8k VR headset is necessary to solve spotting problems. I was saying that an 8k headset would be necessary to render the game world including all objects at a perfect 1:1 scale without having to use some trickery and scaling to make spotting and ID easier. And actually on second thought, even then, due to the way light and shadow and contrast and a multitude of other variables are perceived, some massaging of the rendering would still be required.

 

I did understand what you meant, just added a touch of sarcasm. Apologies if not immediately obvious. 

 

 

39 minutes ago, SCG_Wulfe said:

Given that they have used what I would deem a reasonable and subtle amount of said trickery to ease and enhance spotting and ID in the the expert mode, it is a truly exceptional facsimile to the realities and challenges of spotting and ID in real life. 

 

Anyhow. I'm glad that the developers and the majority of the player-base has realized this as is evidenced by the populations of players in servers that use this setting. I really only waded into this topic in the hopes to unite all of us to work to improve the issues/bugs with spotting at close range. I see now that it was a waste of time, so I will leave it at that. 

 

The majority of player-base wasn't really given a choice, since ALT spotting renders targets so easily seen at 40km. Those seeking realism are forced to use Expert mode. Big difference.

 

I too would like us to unite and present the best possible examples of what isn't working in this sim spotting wise.

Edited November 20, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[LColony_Kong]

On 11/19/2019 at 10:29 AM, SCG_Wulfe said:

I also have real life experience as a soldier and if you think seeing guys in video games is harder than it real life I really start to understand the issue here. You are struggling to see in all video games it seems. I've seen people sneak through the weeds up to 10 feet from a spotter who was looking for them without being seen. I go hunting and often don't see a deer in the woods until I'm right on it and it jumps up and runs. I excelled in my field and have recently tested vision that is better than 20/20. Spotting planes, people, animals, is a skill - not a given and it's hard, making it trivial completely removes any authenticity from the experience. 

What a bunch of nonsense. Every single person who plays those games has problems seeing relative to real life. Just go to the shooting range in squad and look at the targets at different ranges. If you come back on here and tell me that those are as easy as they are to see in the real world I will know you genuinely have lost your marbles.

[SharpeXB]

2 hours ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

The ones being reported here, and demonstrated with videos as examples:

• contrast / reflections disappearing dependent on zoom level
• skin loading / unloading if you move your view off target
• wide zoom (even normal!) rendering the targets completely invisible (or not rendering at all)

This thread has gone way off topic from reporting bugs. Stick to bugs...

Those you are listing there

1. Has been reported, documented. 

2. That one has been around for a long time, it thought it was fixed a while ago too. Haven’t seen it recently at all. 

3. This is not a bug. It’s how the zoom view is supposed to function unless you have Alternate Vis checked. 

2 hours ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

A fellow squad mate who has some experience with flying is simply refusing to use zoom, because "real pilots don' have zoom".

Does your squad mate have a 55” 8K screen? Does he realize that on a desktop sized monitor zoomed-in is more like life sized? Real pilots aren’t looking at the world squashed down on a 24” display. Many players create their own problems in this regard, there’s nothing Devs can do about that. 

Maybe it’s the fact that so many gamey games don’t have a variable FOV and people can’t grasp this idea. Many first person games allow you to adjust the FOV in the settings. Call of Duty or Battlefield don’t somehow imply that the view you see is supposed to be real in any way. Everyone understands that. So what’s wrong with flight sim players? They don’t get it.  Racing sim players do and some have their FOV indeed set to 1:1 but that requires triple screens. And a zoom view in that game would be disastrous since it affects perception of speed.  Why flight sim players can’t understand the zoom view is really perplexing. Because it’s completely necessary and every flight sim has it. Every sim type FPS does too, for the same reason. 

Suit yourself but don’t go claiming the game has a bug because you don’t understand the view commands. 

[LColony_Kong]

The contrast bug appears to be that the reflection mechanic stops working at higher zoom levels. I think it also stops working at closer ranges as well, or it is near enough gone to be almost unnoticeable. Between this, the cloud bug, and the fact that scaling seems to stop working under 6-7km, airplanes that entire the 6km bubble tend to vanish.

 

As it stands right now it is easier to spot planes at 20km than it is at 3km in il2. It is not uncommon for me to spot 5-6 planes 15-20km away and watch their dogfight and count their numbers, but as I get closer they start to disappear. By the time you get to 6km or so, vision is so bad that you will probably only see a quarter of the planes that are actually there at close ranges. This is because the scaling and the reflections stop being at thing and all the planes turn into a few black pixels.

 

This is one of the factors that is contributing to what I said before about being able to watch your six. A fighter might see you 15km out (which is entirely possible IRL, this is not the problem) but then starts to approach you for attack. As the range closes, the attacker will vanish for all intensive purposes,  but the attack can keep sight on you because they can zoom in on something they have been keeping their eyes glued to. The defender cant do this, and suddenly the attack plane blinks into existence less than kilometer away.

 

It would seem to me that the solution to this problem is rather simple and straight forward. The game should be adjusted so the scaling and reflection system is much more aggressive from 1-6km, and it should be tuned based on FOV so that the widest in game FOV is the standard FOV. As the players zooms, reflections should remain but scaling should adjust so that relative size remains the same regardless of the FOV.

Edited November 20, 2019 by [TLC]YIPPEE

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, [TLC]YIPPEE said:

The contrast bug appears to be that the reflection mechanic stops working at higher zoom levels.

On the example I saw and posted the reflections are disappearing at farther distances (aircraft appearing smaller) not higher zoom. Actually the bug has not to do with the zoom function but just the rendered size of the aircraft. If you watch my video you’ll see the same bug is seen just moving the camera back and forth in the external view. 

1 hour ago, [TLC]YIPPEE said:

I think it also stops working at closer ranges as well, or it is near enough gone to be almost unnoticeable.

If you see this effect post a track of it. 

1 hour ago, [TLC]YIPPEE said:

As it stands right now it is easier to spot planes at 20km than it is at 3km in il2. 

This sounds like you are using Alternate Visibility and the subject here is about Expert. Are you using Alternate?

2 hours ago, [TLC]YIPPEE said:

 it should be tuned based on FOV so that the widest in game FOV is the standard FOV. As the players zooms, reflections should remain but scaling should adjust so that relative size remains the same regardless of the FOV.

This isn’t a “bug” it’s just an opinion. And the effect you’re describing is the “inverse zoom” that most people don’t seem to like. Me included. You can get this effect in Alternate if you like it. 

[LColony_Kong]

30 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

This sounds like you are using Alternate Visibility and the subject here is about Expert. Are you using Alternate?

Nope, this is from expert setting on combat box. It is not hard to see planes at very long ranges. What is hard is to see them up close.

[nighthawk2174]

31 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

This sounds like you are using Alternate Visibility and the subject here is about Expert. Are you using Alternate?

 

Nope happens on combat box and WOL both of which don't use alt vis.  I've seen everything yippee here is talking about  and hope its a bug that'll be getting fixed whenever this next patch drops.

[[DBS]TH0R]

11 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

This thread has gone way off topic from reporting bugs. Stick to bugs...

Those you are listing there

1. Has been reported, documented. 

2. That one has been around for a long time, it thought it was fixed a while ago too. Haven’t seen it recently at all. 

3. This is not a bug. It’s how the zoom view is supposed to function unless you have Alternate Vis checked.

1. Well done.
2. Was never fixed. It is present from day one for me.
3. Does this look realistic to you:

?????????????????????????????????????

 

How yes no. Targets should not disappear when fully zoomed out. There is nothing realistic about it. Unless developers expect we fly zoomed in (from normal view) with a tunnel vision.

 

More evidence of this being a bug is the ALT mode - which clearly attempted solving it.

 

11 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Does your squad mate have a 55” 8K screen? Does he realize that on a desktop sized monitor zoomed-in is more like life sized? Real pilots aren’t looking at the world squashed down on a 24” display. Many players create their own problems in this regard, there’s nothing Devs can do about that.

 

He is using VR, exclusively.

 

11 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Maybe it’s the fact that so many gamey games don’t have a variable FOV and people can’t grasp this idea. Many first person games allow you to adjust the FOV in the settings. Call of Duty or Battlefield don’t somehow imply that the view you see is supposed to be real in any way. Everyone understands that. So what’s wrong with flight sim players? They don’t get it.  Racing sim players do and some have their FOV indeed set to 1:1 but that requires triple screens. And a zoom view in that game would be disastrous since it affects perception of speed.  Why flight sim players can’t understand the zoom view is really perplexing. Because it’s completely necessary and every flight sim has it. Every sim type FPS does too, for the same reason. 

Suit yourself but don’t go claiming the game has a bug because you don’t understand the view commands. 

 

You haven't understood the point of my statement why he isn't using zoom. Quite the opposite - my statement was that he should be using the zoom, and that is what we explained to him.

 

I simply drew a parallel to the way this "wide zoom invisibility" bug is going unnoticed since like him, many other pilots try not using zoom to begin with - going along the quote what Jason said. My opinion is that this is why such bugs go for so long unnoticed.

 

 

8 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

On the example I saw and posted the reflections are disappearing at farther distances (aircraft appearing smaller) not higher zoom. Actually the bug has not to do with the zoom function but just the rendered size of the aircraft. If you watch my video you’ll see the same bug is seen just moving the camera back and forth in the external view.

 

And if you look at my video (last clip) you can clearly see how it is linked with zoom function - for long range contacts.

 

8 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

This isn’t a “bug” it’s just an opinion. And the effect you’re describing is the “inverse zoom” that most people don’t seem to like. Me included. You can get this effect in Alternate if you like it. 

 

Absolutely a bug. No other sim that I know off, suffers from it, last I can tell - it is quite specific to this one. And again, that ALT visibility attempted to solve it, all the more evidence devs think (or have thought) the same. Assigning resources to fix visibility is the main problem, as far as I understood Jason.

 

Before you reply "ALT visibility was originally a bug" - only the super long distance spotting and the dreaded "balloon effect" of it was.

 

 

10 hours ago, [TLC]YIPPEE said:

It would seem to me that the solution to this problem is rather simple and straight forward. The game should be adjusted so the scaling and reflection system is much more aggressive from 1-6km, and it should be tuned based on FOV so that the widest in game FOV is the standard FOV. As the players zooms, reflections should remain but scaling should adjust so that relative size remains the same regardless of the FOV.

 

To me it seems they have attempted that with ALT visibility. However, it doesn't work in conjunction with super long distance rendering that makes those planes way too easy to spot then, and by looking ugly (balloon effects). A compromise between the Expert and ALT should IMHO be the way to go, with sub 10 km rendering tailored to the highest FOV.

Edited November 21, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[LColony_Kong]

28 minutes ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

To me it seems they have attempted that with ALT visibility. However, it doesn't work in conjunction with super long distance rendering that makes those planes way too easy to spot then, and by looking ugly (balloon effects). A compromise between the Expert and ALT should IMHO be the way to go, with sub 10 km rendering tailored to the highest FOV.

Not exactly. Alt spotting was better at scaling from about 6km to 15km. Obviously at long ranges it was excessive. The problem both expert and alternate have is that scaling under 6km is next to non-existent. I certainly cant see it, anyhow. As far as I cant tell, they have made no attempt to fix close in spotting, which was always the bigger issue.

 

A compromise between the two would be good for spotting over 10km. But something entirely different needs done for everything from 1-6km, really 1-10km. ALT spotting had the same issue with planes blinking out of existence at shorter ranges, and the contrast bugs people are seeing now were there from the beginning with alt spotting, it has just taken longer to notice with expert because everything was smaller in the first place.

 

What needs to happen is that the scaling needs to be seriously implemented at closer ranges.

 

It should be more akin to this:

 

 

 

Or this

 

 

 

Or This

 

 

 

 

And it needs to stop being this crap:

 

 

 

[SharpeXB]

7 hours ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

1. Targets should not disappear when fully zoomed out. There is nothing realistic about it.

At some size / distance a target should vanish. Unless you want to keep them visible for huge distances like Alt Visibility does. If a target is barely visible when you zoom in to see it larger, what should happen when you zoom out? If it remains visible, that’s the “inverse zoom effect”. It’s unrealistic and confusing to easily see targets that are actually at a great distance from you. That’s what the chief complaint about Alt is. I don’t suspect there is a middle ground. Also “how” would you force an invisible (too small to be rendered) target visible? If that’s done by forcing a certain pixel size like with a “dot” that’s going to encourage players to turn down their resolution. So that’s not ideal either. 

7 hours ago, [TLC]YIPPEE said:

It should be more akin to this:

That IL-2 GB doesn’t exactly emulate other games isn’t a bug. No doubt the Devs have seen and experienced all those other sims and more so they are all aware of their features and both the good and bad. 

 

And some of those examples. Jeesh! Aces High III looks like it was made for an iPhone. The graphics are horrible. 

 

CloD (vanilla) was absolutely awful with regard to spotting. The game had no antialiasing and everything was just a jagged mess. Muted colors that just vanished into the background. And “dots” which appeared at long range and disappeared as you zoomed in. 

 

In BMS at 3:30 you see another aircraft merge by you and actually see it scale down and just about vanish. That’s pretty awkward. 

Plus the graphics look like DCS from 8 years ago. 

 

None of those are an an improvement over this game. IMO

Edited November 21, 2019 by SharpeXB

[nighthawk2174]

 

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

At some size / distance a target should vanish. Unless you want to keep them visible for huge distances like Alt Visibility does. If a target is barely visible when you zoom in to see it larger, what should happen when you zoom out? If it remains visible, that’s the “inverse zoom effect”. It’s unrealistic and confusing to easily see targets that are actually at a great distance from you.

I don't quite get why you think zooming in all the way is realistic because it isn't.  Or that you think seeing stuff that's far away from you at high FOV's is unrealistic...  A target should be just as visible as it is irl even at high FOV values.  And if someone plays at a lower FOV it should adjust itself to be smaller to keep the ranges you can see them and track them consistent across FOV values.  

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

 Also “how” would you force an invisible (too small to be rendered) target visible?

 

Scaling aka making it bigger than a 1:1 ratio... 

 

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

If that’s done by forcing a certain pixel size like with a “dot” that’s going to encourage players to turn down their resolution. So that’s not ideal either. 

Additionally there's nothing saying a game can't take into account your screen size and resolution to combat this potential exploit either by reducing the scaling ratio or by decreasing the opacity of the contact... besides how many people would actually do this?  Playing at super downsampled resolutions looks quite bad.  

 

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

And some of those examples. Jeesh! Aces High III looks like it was made for an iPhone. The graphics are horrible. 

 

CloD (vanilla) was absolutely awful with regard to spotting. The game had no antialiasing and everything was just a jagged mess. Muted colors that just vanished into the background. And “dots” which appeared at long range and disappeared as you zoomed in. 

And this matters how?  

 

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

None of those are an an improvement over this game. 

 

 

Edited November 21, 2019 by nighthawk2174

[Barnacles]

1 hour ago, nighthawk2174 said:

 

I don't quite get why you think zooming in all the way is realistic

 

 

 

It's not, but having zoom is one of the compromises necessary to simulate something that is, ie in real life your eyes have a much higher resolution than current technology, so can identify objects with small angular size. It's attempting to simulate the difference between your foveal and peripheral vision.

You've said yourself

 

"A target should be just as visible as it is irl even at high FOV values."

And in one respect you are correct,  using scaling to achieve this, you are achieving the desired effect of both being able to see a large FOV whilst seeing the detail of targets,

However this is a trade off, as you gain an undesirable effect, because in real life, it's actually quite hard to see small objects in your peripheral vision. Without visual or audio cueing such as a flash of sunlight, a substantial vapour or smoke trail or actually hearing the aircraft; you will not spot a small fighter sized aircraft at 2.5 miles unless you systematically scan the sky with your foveal vision. (about 18 degrees of visual field) as I sit here, if I zoomed fully out in the game my foveal vision covers almost 90 degrees of simulated sky, therefore it makes it much more likely I will detect a contact if you scale them to the extent seen in falcon BMS, than I would in real life.

 

 

1 hour ago, nighthawk2174 said:

 

Additionally there's nothing saying a game can't take into account your screen size .

 

 

It'd be very difficult technically to send that data to the sim. A monitor does give information on its resolution but not its physical dimensions in the real world. Also a monitor doesn't know how far away the person watching it is sitting.

 

 

 

 

Back to the original subject, related to my post above, the contrast thing is important to get right as it's one of the visual cues that can help you detect a distant contact, so it'd be nice if the change wasn't so abrupt. The best mission to observe this is a career mode mission with a formation of 9 bombers to escort. You can easily see this is you fly about 1.5 km away from the bombers then zoom in and out. 

Edited November 21, 2019 by 71st_AH_Barnacles

[gimpy117]

Zoom should, again not effect the visibility of items. sure, Items should be easier to identify details or see at higher zoom levels....but, they should not totally / effectively disappear at lower zoom levels like currently  

 

two aircraft going 400 khm head on have 6.75 seconds until they meet. so, imagine that you scan front, then look left, right, and check 6 like you should

by the time you look back more than likely the person at 1.5K away who suddenly appeared visible somewhere between when you looked away from front to back again is there, lining up a shot. If that player is flying on full zoom, he has already seen you and you lose.

 

that is why this bug is such a big deal. spotting IMO with this bug comes down to cheesing or luck which it should not be 

Edited November 21, 2019 by gimpy117

[SharpeXB]

27 minutes ago, gimpy117 said:

that is why this bug is such a big deal. 

What you’re talking about is not a bug. 

1 hour ago, 71st_AH_Barnacles said:

if I zoomed fully out in the game my foveal vision covers almost 90 degrees of simulated sky, therefore it makes it much more likely I will detect a contact if you scale them to the extent seen in falcon BMS, than I would in real life.

Well stated. Yes this is why allowing small far away contacts to be visible in wide FOV is inaccurate. IRL you would never see something that small or detailed with your peripheral vision. 

[Barnacles]

14 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

What you’re talking about is not a bug. 

Precisely, it's working as intended, with the exception of the zoom affecting an abrupt change in contrast. Which is what the topic's about, not trying to persuade the developers how much better you think falcon BMS deals with the limitations of display technology. Ps I know it's not you doing that Sharpe.

Edited November 21, 2019 by 71st_AH_Barnacles

[nighthawk2174]

1 hour ago, 71st_AH_Barnacles said:

It's not, but having zoom is one of the compromises necessary to simulate something that is, ie in real life your eyes have a much higher resolution than current technology, so can identify objects with small angular size. It's attempting to simulate the difference between your foveal and peripheral vision.

You've said yourself

 

"A target should be just as visible as it is irl even at high FOV values."

And in one respect you are correct,  using scaling to achieve this, you are achieving the desired effect of both being able to see a large FOV whilst seeing the detail of targets,

However this can be considered an undesirable effect because in real life, it's actually quite hard to see small objects in your peripheral vision. Without visual or audio cueing such as a flash of sunlight, a substantial vapour or smoke trail or actually hearing the aircraft; you will not spot a small fighter sized aircraft at 2.5 miles unless you systematically scan the sky with your foveal vision. (about 18 degrees of visual field) as I sit her, if I zoomed fully out in the game my foveal vision covers almost 90 degrees of simulated sky, therefore it makes it much more likely I will detect a contact if you scale them to the extent seen in falcon BMS, than I would in real life.

() but I don't think the full in zoom (zooming to increadiblly small field of views is accurate) if we look at aces high or most shooters like ARMA this zoom is a significantly smaller snap zoom which I think is far more representative than the levels of zoom we have in IL2 right now.

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, 71st_AH_Barnacles said:

It'd be very difficult technically to send that data to the sim. A monitor does give information on its resolution but not its physical dimensions in the real world. Also a monitor doesn't know how far away the person watching it is sitting.

Its a single Windows API call: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-gb/windows/win32/api/shellscalingapi/nf-shellscalingapi-getdpiformonitor additionally the user can choose how far away from their screen they want to sit but… well… that's their choice. If they want to make things worse for themselves, then why should the game stop them?

[[DBS]TH0R]

 

4 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

At some size / distance a target should vanish. Unless you want to keep them visible for huge distances like Alt Visibility does. If a target is barely visible when you zoom in to see it larger, what should happen when you zoom out? If it remains visible, that’s the “inverse zoom effect”. It’s unrealistic and confusing to easily see targets that are actually at a great distance from you. That’s what the chief complaint about Alt is. I don’t suspect there is a middle ground. Also “how” would you force an invisible (too small to be rendered) target visible? If that’s done by forcing a certain pixel size like with a “dot” that’s going to encourage players to turn down their resolution. So that’s not ideal either. 

That IL-2 GB doesn’t exactly emulate other games isn’t a bug. No doubt the Devs have seen and experienced all those other sims and more so they are all aware of their features and both the good and bad.

 

Yours and mine definitions of what is and isn't realistic are clearly in direct opposite. As soon as objects around me start to disappear in real life whenever I don't focus my eyes on them - then and only then I shall begin to call that "feature" realistic and not a bug.

 

Furthermore, it was described and copy pasted several times already to you how there are several versions of scaling that take into account different resolutions. When you remove your personal feelings about this "feature" there are 0 arguments left. Hell, allow me to C/P it once more:

 

You are just too lazy to test different versions for yourself, in the supplied .exe.

 

Last but not least - please point me in the direction of another sim that has this "feature".

 

 

4 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

And some of those examples. Jeesh! Aces High III looks like it was made for an iPhone. The graphics are horrible. 

 

CloD (vanilla) was absolutely awful with regard to spotting. The game had no antialiasing and everything was just a jagged mess. Muted colors that just vanished into the background. And “dots” which appeared at long range and disappeared as you zoomed in. 

 

In BMS at 3:30 you see another aircraft merge by you and actually see it scale down and just about vanish. That’s pretty awkward. 

Plus the graphics look like DCS from 8 years ago. 

 

None of those are an an improvement over this game. IMO

 

All I am reading here is snob like bragging / comparison. Cool graphics doesn't make a game better, content does. Perhaps a better comparison would be buying a new car. A lot of the stuff that is new you like, but some things are worse than in the old one. Just like spotting is in this sim. A step backwards.

 

 

56 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

What you’re talking about is not a bug. 

Well stated. Yes this is why allowing small far away contacts to be visible in wide FOV is inaccurate. IRL you would never see something that small or detailed with your peripheral vision. 

 

Since only this "simulator" has it, and there is evidence developers tried to fix it - it clearly is a BUG.

Edited November 21, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[Barnacles]

4 minutes ago, nighthawk2174 said:

 

 

 

 

 

Its a single Windows API call: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-gb/windows/win32/api/shellscalingapi/nf-shellscalingapi-getdpiformonitor

I stand corrected.

[[DBS]TH0R]

  

1 hour ago, 71st_AH_Barnacles said:

And in one respect you are correct,  using scaling to achieve this, you are achieving the desired effect of both being able to see a large FOV whilst seeing the detail of targets,

However this is a trade off, as you gain an undesirable effect, because in real life, it's actually quite hard to see small objects in your peripheral vision. Without visual or audio cueing such as a flash of sunlight, a substantial vapour or smoke trail or actually hearing the aircraft; you will not spot a small fighter sized aircraft at 2.5 miles unless you systematically scan the sky with your foveal vision. (about 18 degrees of visual field) as I sit here, if I zoomed fully out in the game my foveal vision covers almost 90 degrees of simulated sky, therefore it makes it much more likely I will detect a contact if you scale them to the extent seen in falcon BMS, than I would in real life.

 

90° sounds about right with what human peripheral vision is. Therefore, targets should not disappear when at that FOV. Smaller YES, invisible NO. Screenshot for reference:

 

On 11/16/2019 at 8:57 PM, [DBS]TH0R said:

NV Image Sharpening OFF | AA x4

 

 

 

 

However, I don't believe anyone here is asking to see target details at high FOV. Merely it not being INVISIBLE. As is now in-game.

 

 

1 hour ago, 71st_AH_Barnacles said:

Back to the original subject, related to my post above, the contrast thing is important to get right as it's one of the visual cues that can help you detect a distant contact, so it'd be nice if the change wasn't so abrupt. The best mission to observe this is a career mode mission with a formation of 9 bombers to escort. You can easily see this is you fly about 1.5 km away from the bombers then zoom in and out. 

 

+1

 

The reason why we're discussing wide FOV invisibility "feature" here is because it is, like @[TLC]YIPPEE said - one of the reasons this contrast change went unnoticed.

 

Both of these effects combined are affecting the visibility in a negative way.

 

Edited November 21, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[Barnacles]

2 minutes ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

  

 

90° sounds about right with what human peripheral vision is. Therefore, targets should not disappear when at that FOV. Smaller YES, invisible NO. Screenshot for reference:

 

 

However, I don't believe anyone here is asking to see target details at high FOV. Merely it not being INVISIBLE. As is now in-game.

 

 

 

+1

 

The reason why we're discussing wide FOV invisibility "feature" here is because it is, like @[TLC]YIPPEE said - one of the reasons this contrast change went unnoticed.

 

Both of these effects combined are affecting the visibility in a negative way.

 

Absolutely 100% agree.

For the assistance of the Dev's, I think if it was technically difficult not to have the contract change implemented by a texture, they should consider something like the nav lights mechanic, although far more subtle. In the game, nav lights make an object more detectable, so a less obvious glow around a lit object on a dark background would serve the same purpose, and as nav lights are not effected by zoom, neither would this hypothetical 'glint' mechanic.

[SharpeXB]

53 minutes ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

Yours and mine definitions of what is and isn't realistic are clearly in direct opposite. 

I think we all have an idea of how far away you would realistically be able to see other aircraft. At some size / distance they must vanish. If you want them visible way beyond that you’ve got the Alt Visibility setting. 

[[DBS]TH0R]

29 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

I think we all have an idea of how far away you would realistically be able to see other aircraft. At some size / distance they must vanish. If you want them visible way beyond that you’ve got the Alt Visibility setting. 

 

No one here is arguing that. Simply that vanishing should not be affected by FOV / zoom. Period.

 

Please stahp... ?

Edited November 21, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R