PDA

View Full Version : BF109 - Can't we just have the gunsight in the middle?


Pages : [1] 2

Lixma
04-20-2011, 08:13 PM
Seriously.

Over a decade of faffing about with Shift-F1, leaning over, loosening straps or whatever...i'm weary of it. Just place the damned thing in the centre of the dash! Is anyone really going to be put out by such a minor concession to usability?

Realism be hanged in this instance.

Space Communist
04-20-2011, 08:14 PM
A much more sensible concession would be to simply make the default center view for the 109 (and pretty much all other German aircraft for that matter) line up with the gun-sight.

Steuben
04-20-2011, 08:15 PM
No let it stay as it is now! I like it! With Track ir 5 its ok!

smink1701
04-20-2011, 08:15 PM
Exactly.

JG52Krupi
04-20-2011, 08:16 PM
Seriously.

Over a decade of faffing about with Shift-F1, leaning over, loosening straps or whatever...i'm weary of it. Just place the damned thing in the centre of the dash! Is anyone really going to be put out by such a minor concession to usability?

Realism be hanged in this instance.

LOL I kind of agree, in real life you would close one eye when using the offset gunsight but if you have track ir or freetrack its easy to lean slightly to the left.

Personally I love having to move to get the gunsight in view wish some fps games would add track ir in that way too :D

ChrisDNT
04-20-2011, 08:56 PM
No, simply let it where it is and just change the parallax of the aiming, as the pilot, in real life, didn't move his head to aim, but just close his left eye.

choctaw111
04-20-2011, 09:04 PM
No, simply let it where it is and just change the parallax of the aiming, as the pilot, in real life, didn't move his head to aim, but just close his left eye.

Close left eye---cntrl E

Trust me. It really works LOL

Robotic Pope
04-20-2011, 09:08 PM
Close left eye---cntrl E

Trust me. It really works LOL

lol :lol:

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-20-2011, 09:10 PM
I doubt any pilot closed his eye in combat. Deprives you of 3d view and distance estimation. Just give us a button that has to be pushed throughout aiming that moves the head automatically to the right position while keeping head shake and g effects. Bingo. The current way is not more realistic as viewing hardware is not simulating real movement well and making it unrealistically difficult to aim with the 109 compared to other planes.

snwkill
04-20-2011, 09:24 PM
Close left eye---cntrl E

Trust me. It really works LOL

See that is funny because.... there is no one eye button, Ctrl+E is eject...

Apparently it needed an explanation...:rolleyes:

angrueo
04-20-2011, 09:25 PM
So, you want an arcade game.. then play HAWX 2

Heliocon
04-20-2011, 09:27 PM
I have no idea about its historical accuracy but I agree with the OP - partially because its unneeded fluff it doesnt improve the realism or gameplay other then a minor cosmetic which actually gets in the way (especially for new players). Its not in the same league as for example realistic engine managment or other features.

+1 to space communist

Lixma
04-20-2011, 10:02 PM
So, you want an arcade game.. then play HAWX 2:grin:

Please don't breed.

If you hang realism in this instance, where do you stop? He-111's that break the sound barrier? Pe-2's with more guns that B-17s? Sooner or later you're playing Crimson Skies.

You stop before supersonic He-111s. Obviously.

But you might be right. Today it's just a visible gun-sight....tomorrow who knows where it'll lead to.....perhaps dancing?!!!

Formula88
04-20-2011, 10:04 PM
I dont even attempt to fly the 109 because of this. Shift F1 makes the view too narrow to fly the thing. Worked fine in 1946, yet another fail.

Fafnir_6
04-20-2011, 10:10 PM
Back when I was flying the Ki43-I with its telescopic sight in the original IL-2, I mapped the Shift-F1 function to the spacebar. This can be hit quickly and easily without the need to co-ordinate two keys in the middle of combat. Problem solved for all aircraft needing the gunsight view.

Cheers,

Fafnir_6

Baron
04-20-2011, 10:35 PM
If you hang realism in this instance, where do you stop? He-111's that break the sound barrier? Pe-2's with more guns that B-17s? Sooner or later you're playing Crimson Skies.


U do realize that ctrl-F1 severely restricts your field of view and to get normal view back u have to press it again, target appears, press it again, and so on and so forth.

Hardly realistic or practical in the middle of a df.

Ctrl E
04-20-2011, 10:40 PM
You're playing the wrong game mate. This game is about realism. Putting the gunsight in the middle is the most idiotic suggestion made on these boards to date

Rattlehead
04-20-2011, 11:00 PM
A much more sensible concession would be to simply make the default center view for the 109 (and pretty much all other German aircraft for that matter) line up with the gun-sight.
+1

IvanK
04-20-2011, 11:04 PM
With TRKIR here is a trick that might get it to the centre for you as a pseudo default.

1. Centre Track IR before going in game.
2. Select your 109 aircraft.
3. In game move your Head LEFT until you loose the Reticle completely, hold your head there.
4. With your head position frozen as in STEP 3 Re centre Track IR
5. Move head to its neutral position .. Bingo new centre is looking straight at the revi.

Koyan
04-20-2011, 11:08 PM
Who needs a gunsight? :grin: No really, you only need the horizontal line of it.

kimosabi
04-20-2011, 11:08 PM
C'mon guys. It's not that hard to use and yes you have to make some adjustments to see through it. It's part of the simulation. If you want center mount sights go fly British.

Germans didn't just close the left eye, they also had to move their head to the right and forward ever so slightly.

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-20-2011, 11:42 PM
Please refer to this thread I started on a similar topic a while ago.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=21600

I did the effort to draw a picture in order to better illustrate why the current setup is NOT really realistic.

For simplicity I repost the drawing here.

http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/1432/trackirrevi109problem.jpg

The red curve is the approximate curve of my TrackIR profile. It indicates the SPEED with which TrackIR transforms my head movement into game. So for a head displacement of x cm I get a displacement velocity of y pixel/s. But as y is speed the displacement ingame obtained for a displacement of x cm is not z pixel with z = k*x (k being a constant factor to translate head displacement into pixel displacement) but it is x0 + k*x^2 so the square of the displacement. You can easily deduce that the further the displacement the quicker the movement I obtain ingame. So being off-centre the slightest head movement, even if it is just because I cannot hold my head that steady has so much more impact than on centre.

So for centre sights you have to fight:
- head shake due to manoeuvering and g-effects

For off-centre sights you have to fight:
- head shake due to manoeuvering and g-effects
- big impact on sight due to slightly unsteady physical head

Your body does NOT have a different displacement speed wether you lean to the right or not at all.

TrackIR DOES have a different displacement speed wether you lean to the right or not at all.

This makes off-centre sights much more difficult to aim with than centre sights. If in reality it would have been equally more difficult to aim with an off-centre sight the Germans would have quickly moved it to the centre. Proof that it was no deal at all is that the off-centre position was used till the end.


Proposed solution that should accomodate everybody imho:

- For aiming I lean sideways so that I can see the circle.

- I press a button that "saves" the position as long as I keep the button pushed. I can look around like normally and like in any other plane with no shift+f1. But when I return to forward view I am in the "saved" position as long as the button is still pressed.

- When I am done with aiming I release button and I jump back to cockpit centred view.

KDN
04-20-2011, 11:47 PM
Keep it the way it is, please :-)
As Kimosabi (and in different words Cheesehawk) said...it is part of the simulation

No trained marksman ever closes an eye.

Lixma
04-21-2011, 12:02 AM
C'mon guys. It's not that hard to use and yes you have to make some adjustments to see through it. It's part of the simulation. If you want center mount sights go fly British.

Germans didn't just close the left eye, they also had to move their head to the right and forward ever so slightly.
:grin:

Can anyone top this post?

Stay tuned!

tranquillity
04-21-2011, 12:03 AM
Oh come on, stormcrow,
just practice a little with your TrackIR and soon there won't be a reason to change a thing.
shouldn't be too hard to lean left a little for shooting.
quite a good exercise to keep your head steady. if you can not do it you really should practise..
or you try to tweak your trackIR profile.
always try to find the mistake on your end first.
I think the present solution works very well, no need to change.
sorry.

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-21-2011, 12:09 AM
How conservative you all are :)

I make a proposition that allows everyone to aim his fashion (it won't even prevent you to use the current way), which is at LEAST as realistic as current state if not more realistic, but all you do is to pressume falsely that I don't have enough flight time with the 109. :)

TUSA/TX-Gunslinger
04-21-2011, 12:18 AM
I like it the way it is.

It makes the German fighters feel different.

It works just fine for me with 6DOF TrackIR 5

Lean a little to the right - presto - crosshairs.

In all the years of Il2, I have to admit - I never heard this one.

S!

Gunny

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-21-2011, 12:22 AM
Because in IL2 old you got view through off-centre sight by shift+f1 :grin: without limitation of virtual head movement

frenchfly
04-21-2011, 12:23 AM
Like most of you have already stated, leave it the way it is. Put a little time in and tweak your TrackIr profiles or use the required buttons to do the job. This is a simulation not a semi-lation.

F

Skoshi Tiger
04-21-2011, 12:33 AM
Seriously.

Over a decade of faffing about with Shift-F1, leaning over, loosening straps or whatever...i'm weary of it. Just place the damned thing in the centre of the dash! Is anyone really going to be put out by such a minor concession to usability?

Realism be hanged in this instance.

You haven't bin round these har parts fer long pilgrim! Have ye?

Wolf_Rider
04-21-2011, 12:35 AM
http://www.socalvalue.com/airace/bf-109/bf109_cockpit_photo2.jpg


sorry OP, it looks like you lose out to real life

Widow17
04-21-2011, 12:38 AM
I have no problems with the gunsights and like them as they are. I think its great.

Lixma
04-21-2011, 12:45 AM
Sorry OP, it looks like you lose out to real life
Apparently so.

In this thread we've learned that BF-109 pilots really did close one eye and lean over to the right just to be able to see the gunsight.

Therefore to maintain such high standards of historical accuracy the player should have to do the same.

After all it's not a 'semi-lation'!

Thee_oddball
04-21-2011, 12:49 AM
nice pic wolf, but whom ever took the picture was not sitting in the plane (unless he had no legs) and it is not centered its to the left which exaggerated the off center position of the revi.
The revi being off center is fine but the Zooming forward i do not think is realistic (unless someone has source to prove other wise i would like to see it)

The cockpit of a 109 is like the drivers seat of a sub compact car with the seat pushed ALL the way forward!:mrgreen:

SG1_Gunkan
04-21-2011, 12:51 AM
We can't depend on TrackIR, because the most of the people just don't have it. Developers need's to find a solucion. And even with trackir, there is sime problems.

In the real world, the revi can be in the left or in the right. Every german pilot choose his best gunnery eye and they don't look at the revi. Pilot look to the enemy, and the revi form just "join" the view without been any kind of problem.

FZG_Immel
04-21-2011, 01:10 AM
You haven't bin round these har parts fer long pilgrim! Have ye?

March, maybe april.. right ;)

I'm leavin' anyway, no more Grizz...

We can't depend on TrackIR, because the most of the people just don't have it. Developers need's to find a solucion. And even with trackir, there is sime problems.

well, let's just remove the rudder axis then, since not everybody has rudder pedals..

WTF ???

Lixma
04-21-2011, 01:11 AM
In the real world, the revi can be in the left or in the right. Every german pilot choose his best gunnery eye and they don't look at the revi. Pilot look to the enemy, and the revi form just "join" the view without been any kind of problem.
Or in the middle....BF-110.

Here's a (very) rough mock up of what the 109 pilot would see (assuming he wasn't a Cyclops). Never mind this leaning over to the right nonsense. If CoD wants to be as realistic as possible then this is what we should have.

http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/4070/revi.jpg

Wolf_Rider
04-21-2011, 01:14 AM
nice pic wolf, but whom ever took the picture was not sitting in the plane (unless he had no legs) and it is not centered its to the left which exaggerated the off center position of the revi.



http://www.asisbiz.com/il2/Bf-109E/Messerschmitt-Bf-109E/images/1-Bf-109E-Sections-Cockpit-01.jpg

better?

JimmyGiro
04-21-2011, 02:01 AM
Whilst in cockpit, in legacy view, hold right mouse button down, and drag mouse slightly to the right.

Head view should now be aligned with the sight reticule, and any subsequent movement of the hat-switch, will recentre to your new position; until you activate another set view, which will restore the centre default position.

Then press CTRL-E...

Heliocon
04-21-2011, 02:06 AM
A much more sensible concession would be to simply make the default center view for the 109 (and pretty much all other German aircraft for that matter) line up with the gun-sight.

+1

Lixma
04-21-2011, 02:08 AM
Whilst in cockpit, in legacy view, hold right mouse button down, and drag mouse slightly to the right.

Head view should now be aligned with the sight reticule, and any subsequent movement of the hat-switch, will recentre to your new position; until you activate another set view, which will restore the centre default position.

Then press CTRL-E...

Ta, Jimmy....i've already been assimilated into the Track-IR collective, though. It's too late for me, save yourself!...etc...etc.

Thee_oddball
04-21-2011, 02:14 AM
I think this one is by far the best , you can see just where it was mounted in the dash
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_hf92i8rLnrE/TP2PUrERGbI/AAAAAAAAAHk/Bop6D5d5GIs/s1600/Meserschmidt109.Cockpit%2526InstrumentsNiceice.jpg

and here is a nice photo that lets you know how close you are to it

http://www.taphilo.com/photo/pictures/bf109/bf-109E-3-pilot.jpg

S!

xnomad
04-21-2011, 02:36 AM
To keep both sides happy:
Leave the default view the way it is please! It feels right and is easy to use.

But do whatever you want with the Shift + F1 as I'm sure the 6DOF crowd (like me) don't use it or need it.

Pilots did alter their position slightly to use gun sights, I've read this in many accounts, even for centred mounted ones, they would hunch forward a bit.

frenchfly
04-21-2011, 03:03 AM
The post is pointless really, since the devs won't (shouldn't) look past the title. You can go back to playing wings of hawks now Lixma.

F

speculum jockey
04-21-2011, 03:26 AM
Or in the middle....BF-110.

Here's a (very) rough mock up of what the 109 pilot would see (assuming he wasn't a Cyclops). Never mind this leaning over to the right nonsense. If CoD wants to be as realistic as possible then this is what we should have.

http://i.imgur.com/DhmPGl.jpg

I don't think the sperglords here would appreciate that much realism. It would make them feel bad about their TrackIR purchases losing some edge against mouse/hat people.

Lixma
04-21-2011, 03:39 AM
I don't think the sperglords here would appreciate that much realism. It would make them feel bad about their TrackIR purchases losing some edge against mouse/hat people.

I thought about offering this idea in the first place but thought that, aesthetically, a centralized Revi would be a better idea.

But, yeah. If we're after realism then something like that picture is the way to go.

Voyager
04-21-2011, 03:47 AM
Can you bind viewing position/angles? Since, in theory, everyone have 6-DoF view now, even without Track IR, I would think you could use keyboard keys to shift the head around to center it on the sights, and then save it as a view position favorite.

In fact, considering that we should now all have 6DoF, I would think it only reasonable to be able to define your own hotkey view positions.

Harry Voyager

zakkandrachoff
04-21-2011, 03:53 AM
A much more sensible concession would be to simply make the default center view for the 109 (and pretty much all other German aircraft for that matter) line up with the gun-sight.

i would like press shift f-1 but without zoom.

Rattlehead
04-21-2011, 07:48 AM
A simple key press to align the gunsight, but without that awful zoom feature, is all that is needed to keep everyone happy.
Like in the old series.

The uber realism crowd can simply ignore it, and those who don't mind conceding that tiny bit of realism can use it. Simple. Everyone is happy.

And about the realism...are icons and big arrows realistic? What about external views?
Maps? Minimap paths? Info windows?
Give me a break.

Groundhog
04-21-2011, 07:55 AM
Rattlehead +1

GH

SYN_Flashman
04-21-2011, 09:06 AM
I have more of an issue with the Stuka in this regard. When locked into the sight you cannot look far enough to the left or right enough to be able to judge your dive angle.

IMHO for the Stuka you shoould be able to llok further to the right when locked into the sight so you can see the angle lines on the cockpit.

otherwise accurate dive bombing is really quite difficult.

Pluto
04-21-2011, 09:09 AM
... Sorry, but I can only close my right eye thats why I shoot a gun as a lefthander. Actually I am a righthander!

But I must say, the gunsights in the BF109 in Cliffs of Dover are a pain in the a... No british plane has such weird gunsights.
And its not true that german pilots had to aim with one eye closed because of their gunsights, that is rubbish!
I knew a real german pilot of that time and he would tell you its crap. The sight was not exactly positioned in the center, ok you had to lean a bit forward also ok, but you did not have to twist yourself like a corkscrew like you have to do in Cliffs of Dover just to see the crosshairs!
Aiming with only one eye is also crap, you loose the in depth perception and you have no feeling for distance anymore.

I have track-IR4 and it works well with 6DOF and all that comes with it.
I dont intend to buy track-IR5 just because of that messed up gunsight of the 109!
You can use it but you have to move and twist arround in your cockpit in order to see the crosshairs, thats rediculous and dont tell me real pilots also had to do that!
Make it usable like the one in the old IL2 flightsim (and that was not arcade)!
This one here is a joke!
:evil:

Pluto
04-21-2011, 09:22 AM
Whilst in cockpit, in legacy view, hold right mouse button down, and drag mouse slightly to the right.

Head view should now be aligned with the sight reticule, and any subsequent movement of the hat-switch, will recentre to your new position; until you activate another set view, which will restore the centre default position.

Then press CTRL-E...

... who aims with a mouse button in a flightsim? You better go and "play" birds of prey, sorry.
All this move your head to the right twist a bit and close your eye shit is crap, nobody ever aimed like that!
:evil:

Wolf_Rider
04-21-2011, 09:29 AM
what you're saying there flies in the face of historical accuracy which has been presented... can you back up, with historically accurate data, what you're whinging about there?

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-21-2011, 09:29 AM
I say keep the sight where it is historically but allow to switch to sight view with pressed button. I proposed a solution that me thinks does the trick and still sticks to realism as closely as possible and should allow still the immersivity and allow nonetheless to have realistic aiming with 109 sight. And it would even allow people who like the current way to continue.

Solution:
A button push should save temporarily the current head position like shift+f1 in old IL2. As long as this button is pushed this new position is maintained until the button is released. Of course head shake and g effects would be still working. So for aiming I would have to lean to the right finding the good position for aiming (which could be also quite difficult in the outcome), I press button and keep it pushed. So now my head position is locked to this saved position and I can view normally as I would with normal centre head position. I now have to steer and shoot while keeping the button constantly pushed (not THAT easy to do) in order to stay centred on sight. When I release my head will jump back to cockpit centre position. If you prefer the old ways you still could just lean right.

Those people shouting that this would dump down realism just don't understand that this thread is there because of available computer hardware which makes aiming with 109 currently absolutely unrealistic.

HFC_Dolphin
04-21-2011, 09:42 AM
... who aims with a mouse button in a flightsim? You better go and "play" birds of prey, sorry.


Ahahahahaha, if you ever manage to shoot down Jimmy just one time in your flying time, you'll feel like a real winner ;)

I think what Rattlehead suggests is the best solution.
We're walking in a grey area when it comes to defending absolute realism in a pc flight simulator, therefore it might be wise to get it like in IL-2.

Raggz
04-21-2011, 09:43 AM
Not gonna happen. They will never, ever move the sight in the bf109. This game is about realism. Luthier and the dev team will never compromise the models. And i hope they never do!
After playing the game awhile you won't even bother using the sight. You will "know" when to fire anyways.

Pluto
04-21-2011, 09:46 AM
what you're saying there flies in the face of historical accuracy which has been presented... can you back up, with historically accurate data, what you're whinging about there?

historical accuracy? HA! From where do you get your "historical accuracy"?
:lol:
Unfortunately I cant ask this former pilot anymore because he is dead for 6 years now but he would tell you the same and by the way, I am not whining! I just state something concerning that "highly accurate" flightsim!

(but dont get me wrong, apart from certain "bugs" its a great new sim and I like it :) they only should have ironed out the many bugs before releasing the game)

JG52Krupi
04-21-2011, 09:49 AM
If they change the position of the gunsight of german aircraft I will snap my CD in half.

Go fly another plane or play another game if you don't like this one.

JG52Krupi
04-21-2011, 09:51 AM
A simple key press to align the gunsight, but without that awful zoom feature, is all that is needed to keep everyone happy.
Like in the old series.

The uber realism crowd can simply ignore it, and those who don't mind conceding that tiny bit of realism can use it. Simple. Everyone is happy.

And about the realism...are icons and big arrows realistic? What about external views?
Maps? Minimap paths? Info windows?
Give me a break.

You do realize you can set this all yourself, with a mouse?

patrat1
04-21-2011, 09:53 AM
oh for crying out loud. its not that freakin hard to aim in a 109.

i have track ir3 and with a little tweaking to my profile it works just fine with the me109 gunsight.

good grief, next thing you know people will be asking to get rid of the bouncy gauges and the spits neg g cut out :confused:.

Binnies
04-21-2011, 10:36 AM
oh for crying out loud. its not that freakin hard to aim in a 109.

i have track ir3 and with a little tweaking to my profile it works just fine with the me109 gunsight.

good grief, next thing you know people will be asking to get rid of the bouncy gauges and the spits neg g cut out :confused:.

A lot of people(with trackIR) in this thread have given this type of reaction. You're basically saying that people without trackIR can get bent. If the current system is working for because you're using trackIR that's fine but don't come here and post about a feature you're not even using.

When you use the loosen straps function now your FOV changes which is bad because you lose situational awareness. Just remove the zoom and it's fine.

And yes I know that i can easily do this with the mouse but it's pain having to reposition my view using the mouse and it can't be done quickly.

carguy_
04-21-2011, 10:38 AM
If they change the position of the gunsight of german aircraft I will snap my CD in half.

Go fly another plane or play another game if you don't like this one.

+1

I love the viewtype in CoD. It doesn`t feel any different from that of IL2 though the headshake makes deflection shooting something exceptional. I don`t have a problem with that. Instead of whining I just keep training, right now the thing I need is good stick settings to find that smooth lead for deflection shots.

I just hope I can change the vertical convergence of the guns - default is something I would never use.

KDN
04-21-2011, 11:01 AM
I use a mouse on left side for my situational awareness for many years now. In COD it takes less than a second to get to line up your sight. It might feel longer to some because at the moment they need to think what to press and what to move. As many of you have said already, once you do it a few hundred times, it becomes a reflex and it WILL get faster.
I also have trackIR, you can do the same thing. Get your profile right for you, look up the pertaining keys and set them to get in and out on a cue (e.g your bandit just went left). I am much slower with the Track IR but much faster than a week ago.
It can be done, gentlemen and it is gratifying.
After all, why shouldn't the pilot that put the effort have an advantage?

JG52Krupi
04-21-2011, 11:05 AM
A lot of people(with trackIR) in this thread have given this type of reaction. You're basically saying that people without trackIR can get bent. If the current system is working for because you're using trackIR that's fine but don't come here and post about a feature you're not even using.

When you use the loosen straps function now your FOV changes which is bad because you lose situational awareness. Just remove the zoom and it's fine.

And yes I know that i can easily do this with the mouse but it's pain having to reposition my view using the mouse and it can't be done quickly.

PURE BULLSHIT

If you dont have track ir get free track, if you don't like free track use your mouse.

Seriously are you guys seriously telling me your too s***** to work your damned mouse, I will post a video if you want me too.



Simply hold down the middle mouse and right mouse button and this allows you to move your position along the Y plane and therefore position your head your head directly behind the gunsight..............................SIMPLE

I took me 2 seconds....

+1

I love the viewtype in CoD. It doesn`t feel any different from that of IL2 though the headshake makes deflection shooting something exceptional. I don`t have a problem with that. Instead of whining I just keep training, right now the thing I need is good stick settings to find that smooth lead for deflection shots.

I just hope I can change the vertical convergence of the guns - default is something I would never use.

EXACTLY you hit the nail on the head, the head shaking has made life harder FOR EVERYONE.

I have track IR and the head shaking has made it harder/realistic to aim.

Wolf_Rider
04-21-2011, 11:56 AM
oh for crying out loud. its not that freakin hard to aim in a 109.

i have track ir3 and with a little tweaking to my profile it works just fine with the me109 gunsight.

good grief, next thing you know people will be asking to get rid of the bouncy gauges and the spits neg g cut out :confused:.

actually, I want a digital gauges because the needles......

RCAF_FB_Orville
04-21-2011, 12:00 PM
It's fine the way it is, and 'realistic' whether you like it or not. The Luftwafflers are always the most vociferous of complainants in sims though, even their Central Powers equivalents (who I pretty much know are by and large the exact same people lol) are now getting captured Aldis and Reflector sights in Rise of Flight. LOL! (Actually I don't care and I'm all for the field mod idea, but they do have a way of getting what they want. This time, the parties over!)

Neeeiiiiinnn, verdammt! I can't get the hang of it, its not fair! Suck it down, Kameraden. :grin: No one said it was going to be easy. :grin:

Hehehe. :grin:

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-21-2011, 12:03 PM
Hihihi, mh, what was it again with the bouncing needles and the cut out thing? ROFL

Lixma
04-21-2011, 12:15 PM
oh for crying out loud. its not that freakin hard to aim in a 109.

i have track ir3 and with a little tweaking to my profile it works just fine with the me109 gunsight.
The point being is that it should not require any effort at all to see the reticle on the BF-109.

Leaning to the right = not realistic.

Shift-F1 = not realistic.

Messing about with mouse = not realistic.

Centralised Revi = not realistic.

As witnessed here by the wailing and gnashing of teeth people seem to rate 'cosmetic realism' above 'functional realism'.

Visible reticle = Realistic.

http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/4070/revi.jpg

JG52Krupi
04-21-2011, 12:19 PM
The point being is that it should not require any effort at all to see the reticle on the BF-109.

Leaning to the right = not realistic.

Shift-F1 = not realistic.

Messing about with mouse = not realistic.

Centralised Revi = not realistic.

As witnessed here by the wailing and gnashing of teeth people seem to rate 'cosmetic realism' above 'functional realism'.

Visible reticle = Realistic.

http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/4070/revi.jpg

You do realize the sight only reflects on the small rectangular piece of glass, not the entire cockpit :confused: Hence the angle of the small piece of glass.

JG4_Helofly
04-21-2011, 12:20 PM
I am using Track ir, so no problem with the gunsight. I set the neutral position slightly to the right and voilà! gunsight centered, problem solved.
But for people without track ir, it would be good to have an off center default view, because using shift+F1 is very annoying.

Just don't put the revi in the center! Cod is supposed to be a simulation and not an arcade air combat game!

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-21-2011, 12:20 PM
Why is visible reticle realistic? Just curious as I don't understand.

RCAF_FB_Orville
04-21-2011, 12:20 PM
I want the bouncing needles back Stormcrow, lol. The cut out was way over done and you know it. :grin:

On a serious note though, I think they went a bit too far the other way RE: Cut out TBH, but that's for another thread. ;)

Just having a laugh man, this is always par for the course.
:grin: 'The Battle of France is over....Now the Battle of the Sim Forums is upon us'. I fly both sides, lots of love for the 109 too. :grin:

You do realize the sight only reflects on the small rectangular piece of glass, not the entire cockpit Hence the angle of the small piece of glass.

Ding Ding, we have a winnah! ;)

kimosabi
04-21-2011, 12:24 PM
Hell, lets just mount a Merlin to the 109s while we're at it.

Lixma
04-21-2011, 12:28 PM
You do realize the sight only reflects on the small rectangular piece of glass, not the entire cockpit :confused: Hence the angle of the small piece of glass.
You do realize how Revi sights worked?

The Revi was used with both eyes open. The reticle image was formed fully on the right eye. No leaning necessary.

Baron
04-21-2011, 12:29 PM
Think most pople with TrackIR completly missed whats been asked for.


Keep the ctrl F1 but make it like in IL2, that is, no zoom.

With ctrl F1, as it is now, u CANNOT look 135 degrees to the sides or look back.

U have the massive canopy bars on the sides right in the field of view when lookin left and right with ctrlF1 enabled and zoomed in as icing on the cake.


Realistic, dont think so.

JG52Krupi
04-21-2011, 12:33 PM
You do realize how Revi sights worked?

The Revi was used with both eyes open. The reticle image was formed fully on the right eye. No leaning necessary.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrjwaqZfjIY

Your wrong, you had to lean with slightly with the 109 and 190.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Blem3FlkaMc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EayasHQYEGM&NR=1

SG1_Lud
04-21-2011, 12:34 PM
Hell, lets just mount a Merlin to the 109s while we're at it.

You know, that wouldn,t be unrealistic at all.

kimosabi
04-21-2011, 12:40 PM
A Buchon is the bastard stepdaughter of a 109.

Baron
04-21-2011, 12:41 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrjwaqZfjIY

Your wrong, you had to lean with slightly with the 109 and 190.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Blem3FlkaMc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EayasHQYEGM&NR=1


Fine, in that case we should all petition so that everyone else have to press ctlrF2 to lean forward and hence get the zoomed in restricted field of view per default.

U know, im perfectly capable irl of leaning to the right WITHOUT zooming in/lean forward.

I mean, we all want it to be realistic, right?

JG52Krupi
04-21-2011, 12:48 PM
A Buchon is the bastard stepdaughter of a 109.

THANK YOU, buchon is FUGLY.

JG52Krupi
04-21-2011, 12:49 PM
Fine, in that case we should all petition so that everyone else have to press ctlrF2 to lean forward and hence get the zoomed in restricted field of view per default.

U know, im perfectly capable irl of leaning to the left WITHOUT zooming in/lean forward.

I mean, we all want it to be realistic, right?

Yes, thats why its going to stay like it is right now :cool:

Lixma
04-21-2011, 12:58 PM
Your wrong, you had to lean with slightly with the 109 and 190.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Blem3FlkaMc

How many eyes does a camera have? = 1

How many eyes does the virtual pilot in CoD have? = 1

How many eyes does a (healthy) 109 pilot have? = 2

An illustration....

Here's what a Cyclops would see if he flew the BF-109. As you can see it's exactly the same standard view we have in CoD. On eye, straight down the centerline....

http://img577.imageshack.us/img577/8366/cyclops.jpg


Now here's what a real 109 pilot would see. A pilot with binocular vision. A pilot with the reticle being projected fully into one eye.....

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4853/109kb.jpg


At the moment people are taking the current Cyclops view as 'Realism'.

Erkki
04-21-2011, 12:58 PM
As it is, it gives a huge unrealistic advantage to 6dof users. I dont have a TrackIR and I'm not going to get one. The great majority of the people buying the game will be similar to me in that regard.

I cannot see why simple offset camera position(without leaning forward, zooming, restricting views) is not possible.

Either offset camera position OR full reticle visible, pseudo-simulating 2-eye stereo vision, with 50% of the reticle glowing maybe 50 or 25% of the intensity.

JG52Krupi
04-21-2011, 01:06 PM
As it is, it gives a huge unrealistic advantage to 6dof users. I dont have a TrackIR and I'm not going to get one. The great majority of the people buying the game will be similar to me in that regard.

I cannot see why simple offset camera position(without leaning forward, zooming, restricting views) is not possible.

Either offset camera position OR full reticle visible, pseudo-simulating 2-eye stereo vision, with 50% of the reticle glowing maybe 50 or 25% of the intensity.

Get a free track then?

Erkki
04-21-2011, 01:14 PM
Get a free track then?

I'm not going to get any kind of head tracking. I've survived now 10 years without.

edit: how silly is this really? TrackIR 6dof crowd forcing people to adapt to THEIR hardware, and unrealistic advantages? Is this a simulation game or not? By whose standards, and to what extent?

b101uk
04-21-2011, 01:17 PM
LOL I kind of agree, in real life you would close one eye when using the offset gunsight but if you have track ir or freetrack its easy to lean slightly to the left.

I have nearly always shot guns with sights with both eyes open regardless of if they are iron sights or telescopic sights as my brain will happily merge the two images, about the only time I will close one eye is if I want to be deathly accurate to hit the proverbial pea on a post at 600 yards (never managed to hit the pea but have hit the post many times in the past knocking the pea off :rolleyes:)

Redroach
04-21-2011, 01:26 PM
Or in the middle....BF-110.

Here's a (very) rough mock up of what the 109 pilot would see (assuming he wasn't a Cyclops). Never mind this leaning over to the right nonsense. If CoD wants to be as realistic as possible then this is what we should have.

http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/4070/revi.jpg

I call BS.

FFS, go play something easier, will ya? I really can't stand people that want to ruin even the last of this sim (emphasis on "ulation") because it's too f*cking hard for them.
People with learning disabilities belong to a wholly different class of games.

BigPickle
04-21-2011, 01:26 PM
maybe thats why you mostly knock the pea off, close one eye

:-P
maybe then you'll hit it :-P

@Redroach - why dont you go to another forum if you wanna speak to its members like this! he is allowed his opinion so acting like a petty child calling him a retard is just plain rude.

unknwn
04-21-2011, 01:27 PM
I'm not going to get any kind of head tracking. I've survived now 10 years without.

edit: how silly is this really? TrackIR 6dof crowd forcing people to adapt to THEIR hardware, and unrealistic advantages? Is this a simulation game or not? By whose standards, and to what extent?

That's your choice not to get tracking hardware. You can also try flying only with a keyboard. But don't blame others for having some king of advantage. Trackir simulates head movements in game, like joystick simulates real controls in a plane.

P.S. Even with the gunsight in the middle you will have problems while manoeuvring and trying to aim without any tracking software/hardware.

Erkki
04-21-2011, 01:31 PM
That's your choice not to get tracking hardware. You can also try flying only with a keyboard. But don't blame others for having some king of advantage. Trackir simulates head movements in game, like joystick simulates real controls in a plane.

P.S. Even with the gunsight in the middle you will have problems while manoeuvring and trying to aim without any tracking software/hardware.

And yet another. Now think if Spit and Hurri pilots could only turn their gunsight on when they were leaned forward? Of course you first need to wait that over a second the "loosening straps" takes, and not able to look around you...

IL2's (fb to 1946) system was, and is, lot more realistic than this.

b101uk
04-21-2011, 01:48 PM
How many eyes does a camera have? = 1

How many eyes does the virtual pilot in CoD have? = 1

How many eyes does a (healthy) 109 pilot have? = 2

An illustration....

Now here's what a real 109 pilot would see. A pilot with binocular vision. A pilot with the reticle being projected fully into one eye.....

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4853/109kb.jpg


At the moment people are taking the current Cyclops view as 'Realism'.

err no, because from the edge of the reflector glass to the centre of the reflector glass is wider than the distance from the centreline of the nose to the centre of the right eye, only if the reflector glass from its left edge to is centre matched the average anatomical distance of the nose centreline vs. right eye would you see the above.

in reality with both eyes open and a wider reflector glass from its left edge to it centre you would get about <~66% of the reticle

To get the effect you depict the reflector glass would need its left edge central to your nose, the glass would need to be ~3” (~75mm) wide (~1.5" (~37.5mm) to reticle centre).

;)

unknwn
04-21-2011, 01:57 PM
And yet another. Now think if Spit and Hurri pilots could only turn their gunsight on when they were leaned forward? Of course you first need to wait that over a second the "loosening straps" takes, and not able to look around you...

IL2's (fb to 1946) system was, and is, lot more realistic than this.
How can you call instant leaning to the gunsight realistic? It isn't. Question is whether looking around while leaned should be available. I don't understand why you can turn your head so little.

drewpee
04-21-2011, 02:05 PM
IMO its very hard to emulate the movement of a human body using a keyboard joystick or tracking head gear. Catching a ball would be a good example, you just couldn't do it using say a robot hand controlled by keyboard ex.
On the other hand controlling a machine is different, you can copy the movement of levers handles, wheels and switches with gaming devices.
There for making a short cut to make up for the lack of a human body is perfectly acceptable.
There are Axes pilots arguing against a change, but I suspect most opposition would be coming from the British side. After all the way it is centered gun sights have the advantage.
As far as realism go, that's why we have a choice to turn things on and off. If you want more people to play the game and keep it alive in the future you must make exceptions after all how many people started playing IL2 on easy settings(every one if their honest). One more small realism aid isn't going to destroy the game. :grin:

skouras
04-21-2011, 02:05 PM
keep the realism please:mad:
don't take anything else......
if you want you can use the mouse hold the button and move it to align:mad:

Lixma
04-21-2011, 02:11 PM
err no, because from the edge of the reflector glass to the centre of the reflector glass is wider than the distance from the centreline of the nose to the centre of the right eye,

I just measured the distance from the centre of my nose to middle of my pupil....37mm. Double that and we get 74mm (3 inch).

Now, I just tried Googling 'Revi dimensions' with no appreciable success but 74mm/3 inch on my tape measure looks pretty close to the width of an actual Revi's reflector.

To get the effect you depict the reflector glass would need its left edge central to your nose, the glass would need to be ~3” (~75mm) wide (~1.5" (~37.5mm) to reticle centre).

On screen in CoD the left hand edge of the Revi is bang down the centre-line (give or take 2mm), and those figures look good to me and confirm what my tape measure is suggesting.

Wolf_Rider
04-21-2011, 02:14 PM
" besides, our histories of six thousand moons make no mention of any other regions than the two great empires of Lilliput and Blefuscu. Which two mighty powers have, as I was going to tell you, been engaged in a most obstinate war for six-and-thirty moons past. It began upon the following occasion. It is allowed on all hands, that the primitive way of breaking eggs, before we eat them, was upon the larger end; but his present majesty's grandfather, while he was a boy, going to eat an egg, and breaking it according to the ancient practice, happened to cut one of his fingers. Whereupon the emperor his father published an edict, commanding all his subjects, upon great penalties, to break the smaller end of their eggs. The people so highly resented this law, that our histories tell us, there have been six rebellions raised on that account; wherein one emperor lost his life, and another his crown. These civil commotions were constantly fomented by the monarchs of Blefuscu; and when they were quelled, the exiles always fled for refuge to that empire. It is computed that eleven thousand persons have at several times suffered death, rather than submit to break their eggs at the smaller end. Many hundred large volumes have been published upon this controversy: but the books of the Big-endians have been long forbidden, and the whole party rendered incapable by law of holding employments. During the course of these troubles, the emperors of Blefusca did frequently expostulate by their ambassadors, accusing us of making a schism in religion, by offending against a fundamental doctrine of our great prophet Lustrog, in the fifty-fourth chapter of the Blundecral (which is their Alcoran). This, however, is thought to be a mere strain upon the text; for the words are these: 'that all true believers break their eggs at the convenient end.'

And which is the convenient end, seems, in my humble opinion to be left to every man's conscience, or at least in the power of the chief magistrate to determine. Now, the Big-endian exiles have found so much credit in the emperor of Blefuscu's court, and so much private assistance and encouragement from their party here at home, that a bloody war has been carried on between the two empires for six-and-thirty moons, with various success; during which time we have lost forty capital ships, and a much a greater number of smaller vessels, together with thirty thousand of our best seamen and soldiers; and the damage received by the enemy is reckoned to be somewhat greater than ours. However, they have now equipped a numerous fleet, and are just preparing to make a descent upon us; and his imperial majesty, placing great confidence in your valour and strength, has commanded me to lay this account of his affairs before you."

- J Swift

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-21-2011, 02:20 PM
Actually thinking about it I don't think that Lixma's picture is realistic.

BUT:
It might be possible that in fact one did not have to lean right for aim. It depends on how the reflector glas actually worked.

As far as I understood reflector sights the trick is to project light on a surface that is reflected so that the pilot can see it. Now from school we know that inbound angle = outbound angle. That is the benefit of the reflector sight with respect to iron sights because this makes the aiming point almost independent of small head movements. The image will slightly move but it won't impact the aiming as much.

A little picture about the basic principle after which to my understanding a reflector sight works. For simplicity I moved the light source into the same horizontal plane as the eye but the principle won't change at all with a 90° moved light source:

http://img825.imageshack.us/img825/5691/reflectorsightbasics.jpg

The angle between the reflector glas and the light beam emanating from the light source is equal to the line of sight when the eye is on the image. That's the basical law of optical physics.

Now what happens if the reflector glas is slightly inclined sideways? Yes, the angle between the light beam and the reflector glas decreases and so the angle between reflector sight and the eye line of view. This itself increases the angle between the light beam and the eye line of view so that the image can be seen from further aside. But it will be on the reflector glas and not on the window.

Here a drawing with the setup as described. I exagerated on purpose the inclination of the reflector side to better make the effect visible. Please also keep in mind that with appropriate glas cristal design it should be possible to obtain the same optical result without really inclining the reflector glas.

http://img713.imageshack.us/img713/1834/reflectorsightinclinedr.jpg

My strong feeling is that taking into account the tight cockpit dimensions of the 109 and the not so far off-centre position of the reflector sight a very very very tiny inclination would have been enough to allow seeing the image without leaning sideways.

Anyhow I agree with drewpee. I mean we're not talking about making the 109 turn better than the spit. We talk about computer hardware limitations in simulations and as far as I see it there's absolutely no loss in realism if the sights can be recentred on a button push (I even suggested something that is inbetween the current status and old IL2 days).

drewpee
04-21-2011, 02:23 PM
Wolf you make my head hurt. LOL
But I do see your comparison. ;)

Lixma
04-21-2011, 02:40 PM
Actually thinking about it I don't think that Lixma's picture is realistic.
Why not?

1: You're sat in a 109.

2: Looking straight ahead.

3: Both eyes open.

4: Revi offset to project the reticle image directly into your right eye only.

I submit your view would be more or less like this..... (paintshop skills notwithstanding)

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4853/109kb.jpg

What would you see?

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-21-2011, 02:44 PM
try it yourself, Lixma.

Go to a mirror (the reflector glas is nothing different that a transparent mirror) and see if you can see anything from behind you at the side of the mirror. I guess you won't see anything exept the wall to which the mirror is attached.

Wolf_Rider
04-21-2011, 02:48 PM
we understand what you're trying to say Stormcrow, but the old "arcade machine" type reflection system has the source a lot closer than the bathroom wall.

Sauf
04-21-2011, 02:50 PM
Why not?

1: You're sat in a 109.

2: Looking straight ahead.

3: Both eyes open.

4: Revi offset to project the reticle image directly into your right eye only.

I submit your view would be more or less like this..... (paintshop skills notwithstanding)

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4853/109kb.jpg

What would you see?

Actually, while were redesigning the revi can we have a spitfire painted on it as well? Will save me having to do all that take off/landing and flying bs :rolleyes:

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-21-2011, 02:52 PM
That still cannot defy physical laws. The distance between the light source and the reflecting surface is irrelevant to optical law. Only the angles count. See my previous post one page before.

justme262
04-21-2011, 02:59 PM
When I first got track IR I imaged I would be able to see better. Yes of course I could see better. I could effortlessly and naturally lean just a little to the right to look through the Revi as I line up a shot.

But the thing which I didn't expect from Track IR is the feeling of flying. When you do a loop you lean back and look up and over as you pull through ... If you are flying full throttle at tree top level at 60 degree bank you lean with the turn to stay upright and it FEELS like you are turning. :cool:

I think you can turn any web cam into facetrack for free. Try it

With track IR the revi is perfect on the right side out of the way until i need it.

One of the things they used to say to the new pilots is keep your head on a swivel.

http://img861.imageshack.us/i/revi.jpg/

Wolf_Rider
04-21-2011, 03:01 PM
source distance to reflector makes a big difference, Stormcrow. You only get the big shift when the source is a big distance away


http://www.spitfirespares.com/spitfirespares.com/pages/gunsites.html

Gun Cam Harmoniser (Pg 1 Gun)... illustrates my point

its about 1/5 the way down the page

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-21-2011, 03:14 PM
First you won't need a big shift in the 109. And I would also say that the required shift is by far less than in the image you're pointing me to. IF distance of the light source is significant at all which I still doubt. The limiting factor is the size of the reflector glas, not the distance. The distance only plays a role because of optical size reduction with increased distance. But this factor is irrelevant for a particularly designed light image projected actively at a certain angle on the reflector surface.

EDIT: Also reflector surface sideway inclination plays a role (see last picture in my post)

grunge
04-21-2011, 03:18 PM
I liked the revi behaviour in the old sturmo adn get used to it. It was good to have the same FoW with Shfit+1. A track IR device costs 1/4 of my earnings in a month, so i'm a bit sad about this also :(

Wolf_Rider
04-21-2011, 03:20 PM
you'll have to take that up with the real world image, Stormcrow

b101uk
04-21-2011, 03:23 PM
That still cannot defy physical laws. The distance between the light source and the reflecting surface is irrelevant to optical law. Only the angles count. See my previous post one page before.

the critical distance is if the left edge of the reflector glass is central to the position of the human nose & the nose of the aircraft, if it is then is the distance from the left edge of the reflector glass to the centre of the reflector glass the same distance as the human anatomy from the centre of the human nose to the centre of the right eye.

if yes to all the above then the right eye is in perfect line with the centre of the reflector glass thus reflector light and the brain will naturally merge the left/right eye image in the same manner to if you were to use a marker pen on a bit of clear glass to mark a X and with both eyes open were to position it in line close the right eye, however with respect to the gun sight and the above there needs to be a narrow angle of view for the “reflective recticel” so it cannot be seen at all by the left eye when the right eye is positioned correctly.

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-21-2011, 03:27 PM
Can you make a drawing? I really don't get what you try to explain, b101.

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-21-2011, 03:34 PM
Two images I found on the net.

Here a cockpit image of a 109E
http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/Flugzeuge/J%E4ger/Me109E/Cockpit/gross/109E_bestfoto.jpg

Note that the left edge of the reflector sight is on or at least very very close to the centre of the cockpit. Also note that the reflector glas is quite big.

Now here an image of a pilot sitting in a 109. Please note that he sits a bit leaned to his left side but it gives a good impression about where his eyes would be if he sat central:
http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/downloads/Bilder/Ger%E4tebretter2/Original/gross/Me109G/Me109G.jpg

I think the paralaxis is so small that my guess is that he wouldnt have had to lean sideways for aiming.

Lixma
04-21-2011, 03:37 PM
if yes to all the above then the right eye is in perfect line with the centre of the reflector glass thus reflector light and the brain will naturally merge the left/right eye image in the same manner to if you were to use a marker pen on a bit of clear glass to mark a X and with both eyes open were to position it in line close the right eye

Thankyou!

My reply to you earlier confirmed the positions and measurements regarding the reflector glass and gave some (rough) numbers.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=269706&postcount=97

JG52Krupi
04-21-2011, 03:38 PM
So yes they had to lean to use the sight.

/Thread Cheers.

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-21-2011, 03:40 PM
If you want Krupi you can lean all the way from Norway to Australia as long as we get a decent sight shift.

Geronimo989
04-21-2011, 03:40 PM
Just bind it to some joystick button instead of shift+f1= problem solved!

JG52Krupi
04-21-2011, 03:41 PM
If you want Krupi you can lean all the way from Norway to Australia as long as we get a decent sight shift.

WOW the sights the same as it is in il2, why don't you moan at them to change that too.

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-21-2011, 03:44 PM
Actually I do just want my view centred on sight on button push back as it was in IL2. You would still be able to lean if you want. I don't see why you oppose to this. It won't prevent you from what you want to.

David Hayward
04-21-2011, 03:45 PM
Actually I do just want my view centred on sight on button push back as it was in IL2.

You can't set up a button for the sight in CoD?

JG52Krupi
04-21-2011, 03:46 PM
You can't set up a button for the sight in CoD?

Yes you can, just press middle mouse and right mouse and its done :)

Buts thats apparently too much effort :rolleyes:

Lixma
04-21-2011, 03:47 PM
Note that the left edge of the reflector sight is on or at least very very close to the centre of the cockpit.
In CoD's un-shifted view the left-edge of the reflector glass is just millimetres from the centre of the screen.

We are flying with a Cyclops as a pilot. That's why we need this leaning over/Shift-F1 nonsense. None of which is realistic.

If CoD wants to simulate a real pilot with realistic binocular vision then we should get a reticle that was fully visible and appears to float 'outside' of the reflector glass.

Like so....

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4853/109kb.jpg

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-21-2011, 03:47 PM
Uhm, not that I know of. Not identically to IL2. But if you can show me you'll be welcome. But don't talk about the COD default shift+f1 as it is something completely different from old IL2.

@Krupi: guess what, I tried this indeed yesterday, shifting with mouse to set the view. When I go back to trackir I am automatically shifted back to centre cockpit view. It simply does NOT work. So this advice is useless.

Lixma, please go physics and explain it in an understandable way why it should be so. I still don't get it why out of miracle the opposing half of the circle should appear in the middle of nowhere.

David Hayward
04-21-2011, 03:49 PM
But don't talk about the COD default shift+f1 as it is something completely different from old IL2.

Why is that different? When I want to line up behind the sight in IL2 I hit shift/F1. How is it different now?

David Hayward
04-21-2011, 03:50 PM
@Krupi: guess what, I tried this indeed yesterday, shifting with mouse to set the view. When I go back to trackir I am shifted back to centre cockpit view. So this advice is useless.

OK, so it's a TrackIR issue. Is that different from how TrackIR worked in IL2?

b101uk
04-21-2011, 03:50 PM
Can you make a drawing? I really don't get what you try to explain, b101.

Find some clear safety glasses with individual lenses, get a fine tip marker pen and put a small fine cross on the RH lenses about the same diameter in total as 1p coin in line with ware your right eye would be centred, put on the clear safety glasses with the fine cross marked on the RH lenses and tell us what you see - a combined image by your brain.

It is the same “optical brain trick” used by NV/targeting monocles etc used by pilots of e.g. AH-64 or I use to use when I did a lot of shooting with both iron and telescopic sights (you get use to seeing a merged image with the black haze of the outside of the telescopic sights with the left eye which you don’t get with a monocle etc)

Lixma
04-21-2011, 03:52 PM
It is the same “optical brain trick” used by NV/targeting monocles etc used by pilots of e.g. AH-64

I had an Apache HMS post lined up ready to go.

:grin:

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-21-2011, 03:54 PM
OK, so it's a TrackIR issue. Is that different from how TrackIR worked in IL2?

Do you ACTUALLY play Cod and try the shift+f1 in both games? Well, obviously not. If you had you would know that in Cod when pressing shift+f1 I can NOT turn my head around and track an enemy. In Il2 I could track an enemy when pressing shift+f1. Go try it yourself.

drewpee
04-21-2011, 03:56 PM
It's just not that big a deal if some want an easier aiming system. Think about it, Germany was and are brilliant at designing machinery. If the sight wasn't effective and easy to use why would they stick with it. Men did in fact modify their machines in the field. If the British sight as better why not use a captured sight or just move their own?

David Hayward
04-21-2011, 03:58 PM
Do you ACTUALLY play Cod and try the shift+f1 in both games? Well, obviously not. If you had you would know that in Cod when pressing shift+f1 I can NOT turn my head around and track an enemy. In Il2 I could track an enemy when pressing shift+f1. Go try it yourself.

I don't have the game yet. That's why I'm asking you all these questions. So, the problem is not the location of the sight, the problem is that you can't turn your head when you're in Shift/F1 mode, right?

Wolf_Rider
04-21-2011, 03:59 PM
were the gunsights made by Zeiss?

if so the photography methodology was used... keep both eyes open looking through the view finder

Daniël
04-21-2011, 04:05 PM
were the gunsights made by Zeiss?

if so the photography methodology was used... keep both eyes open looking through the view finder

The most German gunsights were made by Revi. The one in Bf 109's are Revis too.

JG52Krupi
04-21-2011, 04:05 PM
@Krupi: guess what, I tried this indeed yesterday, shifting with mouse to set the view. When I go back to trackir I am automatically shifted back to centre cockpit view. It simply does NOT work. So this advice is useless.

If you are using Track IR then yes it jumps back.

To center the sight with track ir just lean to the left and center track ir. This way when you stop leaning you will be positioned behind the sights. :)

drewpee
04-21-2011, 04:08 PM
Not that this helps, but it's pretty neat don't you think?
http://youtu.be/Blem3FlkaMc

Lixma
04-21-2011, 04:11 PM
Lixma, please go physics and explain it in an understandable way why it should be so. I still don't get it why out of miracle the opposing half of the circle should appear in the middle of nowhere.

Okay try this....

Here's an Apache driver's Helmet Mounted Sight (HMS). It projects the HUD and other stuff into one eye only.

http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/9938/integratedhelmetanddisp.jpg

And yet the Apache drivers have two eyes...binocular vision.

So what does the Apache pilot see when he's flying around?

Is it this....?

http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/6999/heli2y.jpg

Or is it this.....?

http://img851.imageshack.us/img851/7717/helic.jpg


And so with the Revi.

The Revi is installed on the 109 to project its reticle onto one eye only (the right one in our case).

And yet Luftwaffe pilots has two eyes....binocular vision.

So what would our Luftwaffe pilot have seen while flying around?

Something like this...?

http://img577.imageshack.us/img577/8366/cyclops.jpg


Or this.....?

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4853/109kb.jpg

b101uk
04-21-2011, 04:17 PM
Well all that need to be established is the width of the reflector glass (thus its centre) (which is suspect is wider than >3” (>75mm) ) and the aperture thus FOV of the rectical which will denote if a pilot could use his brain to merge the 2 images (left eye cannot see the rectical when the right can) or if he was required to lean a little &/or close one eye etc.

Wolf_Rider
04-21-2011, 04:18 PM
The most German gunsights were made by Revi. The one in Bf 109's are Revis too.

I could be wrong but revi is a shortened reflex vision? (whatever that was in german)


*Edit...

Reflexvisier

EvilJoven
04-21-2011, 04:31 PM
Or in the middle....BF-110.

Here's a (very) rough mock up of what the 109 pilot would see (assuming he wasn't a Cyclops). Never mind this leaning over to the right nonsense. If CoD wants to be as realistic as possible then this is what we should have.

http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/4070/revi.jpg

Why isn't this post getting more love? The 109 gunsight lined up with the gunners right eye and stereoscopic sight compensated for the rest. This really is what a 109 gun sight should display if this SIMULATION is SIMULATING a pilot with TWO EYES.

The fact is, no matter how realistic a sim is, it must compensate at least just a bit for the fact that this simulation is being displayed on a two dimensional display (don't get me started on 3D displays that only use one of the ten visual cues to simulate human stereoscopic vision) with image resolution that falls far below the image quality of the average human with two eyes.

The fact is that a human being with eyesight comparable to viewing the world through the best computer display available on the market wouldn't have the vision requirements to be a combat pilot in WWII seems to be a fact that a lot of people here seem to ignore.

drewpee
04-21-2011, 04:43 PM
Well said Evil Joven

JG52Krupi
04-21-2011, 04:56 PM
Okay try this....

Here's an Apache driver's Helmet Mounted Sight (HMS). It projects the HUD and other stuff into one eye only.

http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/9938/integratedhelmetanddisp.jpg

And yet the Apache drivers have two eyes...binocular vision.

So what does the Apache pilot see when he's flying around?

Is it this....?

http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/6999/heli2y.jpg

Or is it this.....?

http://img851.imageshack.us/img851/7717/helic.jpg


And so with the Revi.

The Revi is installed on the 109 to project its reticle onto one eye only (the right one in our case).

And yet Luftwaffe pilots has two eyes....binocular vision.

So what would our Luftwaffe pilot have seen while flying around?

Something like this...?

http://img577.imageshack.us/img577/8366/cyclops.jpg


Or this.....?

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4853/109kb.jpg


Comparing a ww2 gunsight to that of a modern helicopter whose operator has to be trained to use the sight like you are showing it very clever!!! :rolleyes:

EvilJoven
04-21-2011, 04:59 PM
Comparing a ww2 gunsight to that of a modern helicopter whose operator has to be trained to use the sight like you are showing it very clever!!! :rolleyes:

It is, because the concept behind both gun sights is nearly identical; the sight is only viewable by one eye and yet, due to the the way the human brain processes stereoscopic vision the image will appear to be displayed in front of both eyes as long as both are open.

Redroach
04-21-2011, 05:02 PM
besides that, stereoscopic vision is very poor in a night vision device.

Lixma
04-21-2011, 05:02 PM
Comparing a ww2 gunsight to that of a modern helicopter whose operator has to be trained to use the sight like you are showing it very clever!!! :rolleyes:

:grin:

I think this post should win.

zipper
04-21-2011, 05:02 PM
I could be wrong but revi is a shortened reflex vision? (whatever that was in german)

Correct. REVI is Reflexvisier and the EZ/REVI (gyro sights) were Einheitszielvorrichtung Reflexvisier. Askania was probably the main producer, although Zeiss was made quite a few also.

Buzpilot
04-21-2011, 05:04 PM
http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4853/109kb.jpg

This is not possible, even with two eyes.
Reading this thread (and this forum, and others) makes me think about that guy that was hypnotized to think Porche 911 was faster than any other car (Top gear), you guys are hilarious :lol:

Would be better to just make it possible to save a default view for each plane, userfriendly is a key here.
And Shift F1, loosening the straps should not restrict view at all, not realistic.

I would even like it to be possible to save config on each plane.
Using a throttle quadrant, and have to reprogram axis from water to oil radiators each time when changing between some planes is very unpractical

Lixma
04-21-2011, 05:07 PM
This is not possible, even with two eyes.
You heard it here first.

Stereoscopic vision is impossible. Even with two eyes.

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-21-2011, 05:11 PM
Lixma, mh. Perhaps we're talking about two slightly different things. I do understand that even if only one eye sees an image the other is made to believe that it also sees this image. This I can understand. Provided they see the SAME image.

What I find hard to believe is that according to your images the brain is capable to add stuff. In the case of the 109 it would be the other half of the circle, something the right eye would not see as it only sees the left half of the circle.
Also the Apache Hud view is strange. As depicted the brain is obviously capable to make the eye without hud see the numbers whereas the eye with the visor doesn't.

b101uk
04-21-2011, 05:14 PM
Why isn't this post getting more love? The 109 gunsight lined up with the gunners right eye and stereoscopic sight compensated for the rest. This really is what a 109 gun sight should display if this SIMULATION is SIMULATING a pilot with TWO EYES.

because the reflector glass is wider than 3" (~75mm) thus its centre is >1.5" (>37.5mm) from its left edge.

the reflector glass is ~25% of the front window width and how wide is a human body with arms that need to move relative to the canopy A pillars vs. canopy B pillars vs. the inner walls of the cockpit.

http://www.asisbiz.com/il2/Bf-109E/Messerschmitt-Bf-109E/images/1-Bf-109E-Sections-Cockpit-01.jpg

If the reflector glass is 3" (~75mm) wide how wide dose that make the cockpit for a human to sit in!

Buzpilot
04-21-2011, 05:14 PM
You heard it here first.

Stereoscopic vision is impossible. Even with two eyes.

Stereoscopic vision don't put something inside the sight, to the front window, unless you have your left eye to right of your right eye?

recoilfx
04-21-2011, 05:22 PM
Okay try this....

Here's an Apache driver's Helmet Mounted Sight (HMS). It projects the HUD and other stuff into one eye only.

http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/9938/integratedhelmetanddisp.jpg

And yet the Apache drivers have two eyes...binocular vision.

So what does the Apache pilot see when he's flying around?

Is it this....?

http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/6999/heli2y.jpg

Or is it this.....?

http://img851.imageshack.us/img851/7717/helic.jpg


And so with the Revi.

The Revi is installed on the 109 to project its reticle onto one eye only (the right one in our case).

And yet Luftwaffe pilots has two eyes....binocular vision.

So what would our Luftwaffe pilot have seen while flying around?

Something like this...?

http://img577.imageshack.us/img577/8366/cyclops.jpg


Or this.....?

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4853/109kb.jpg


I agree with your post, but you have left out a very important aspect in your 109 illustration, in order to actually 'see' the whole circle, you'd have to move your head a lot closer to the revi (so the right eye actually see the whole circle), in other words, you'd have to use Shift-F1 again.

Stereoscopic vision only applies to things in close range. That's why when you look into the vista of Grand Canyon, the whole view looks so flat and picture like.

Notice also how close the HMD is to the pilot's head.

speculum jockey
04-21-2011, 05:25 PM
Stereoscopic vision don't put something inside the sight, to the front window, unless you have your left eye to right of your right eye?

Someone needs to go back time and tell the Luftwaffe that their sighting system is flawed! They need to know this! Also I'm going to send an email to the department of defense to let them know that their Apache pilots are using a useless aiming device.

Baron
04-21-2011, 05:25 PM
I don't have the game yet. That's why I'm asking you all these questions. So, the problem is not the location of the sight, the problem is that you can't turn your head when you're in Shift/F1 mode, right?


Yes + when pressing ctrlF1 in CoD it zooms in per default (cannot be changed afaik) so the view is the same as using maximum zoom (or close to it) when u aiming for a target in IL2.

So u first press ctrl F1 and it lean right/zooms in, then u zoom in even more with the normal fov button.

In CoD u cannot be combat redy with ctrl F1 eneabled since u see squat whats happening around u. Its also a "animation" that takes a couple of seconds to kick in.

EvilJoven
04-21-2011, 05:27 PM
Here's a dude sitting in his cocpkpit with the gunsight clearly covering his right eye. Because he's leaning a bit to the right his right eye is actually right of center of the sight, if he wasn't, it'd be right in the middle.

http://i.imgur.com/v17Ap.jpg

Wolf_Rider
04-21-2011, 05:27 PM
what he meant was "binocular vision". The brain doesn't magically create the l/h half of the reticule, but it does do the (Apache pilot vision) overlay thing quite effectively, same with photography.

the same lack of which made great brouhaha over "the bar"

Lixma
04-21-2011, 05:33 PM
Lixma, mh. Perhaps we're talking about two slightly different things. I do understand that even if only one eye sees an image the other is made to believe that it also sees this image. This I can understand. Provided they see the SAME image.
The left eye doesn't have to see any image at all. It could be closed for all we care.

It's the brain combining two separate images (left eye with no reticle plus the right eye with a fully formed reticle) into one coherent image.

What I find hard to believe is that according to your images the brain is capable to add stuff. In the case of the 109 it would be the other half of the circle, something the right eye would not see as it only sees the left half of the circle.

Nothing is being added.

In real life (not in-game) the pilot will have a fully formed image of a reticle projected to his right eye. The left eye does not receive any such image. But the brain combines both streams of data from each eye into one visual image.

Please remember the view in CoD as it stands is that of a Virtual Cyclops. Just one eye, straight down the centre-line of the aircraft. This is why in CoD's standard view the reticle is only partly visible....because the Revi and its offset installation was designed for a pilot with two eyes.

Buzpilot
04-21-2011, 05:34 PM
Someone needs to go back time and tell the Luftwaffe that their sighting system is flawed! They need to know this! Also I'm going to send an email to the department of defense to let them know that their Apache pilots are using a useless aiming device.

Ok, I see the Apache pilots stole vision sights from the Lufwaffles?
And Luftwaffles used one on each eye, thats what your telling me?

David Hayward
04-21-2011, 05:35 PM
Yes + when pressing ctrlF1 in CoD it zooms in per default (cannot be changed afaik) so the view is the same as using maximum zoom (or close to it) when u aiming for a target in IL2.

So u first press ctrl F1 and it lean right/zooms in, then u zoom in even more with the normal fov button.

In CoD u cannot be combat redy with ctrl F1 eneabled since u see squat whats happening around u. Its also a "animation" that takes a couple of seconds to kick in.

OK It sounds like the sight view is not nearly as easy to use as before. I have seen people stick their head out the side of the cockpit. Can you shift your head over to look through the sight?

Wolf_Rider
04-21-2011, 05:37 PM
click mouse scroll wheel (? or one of the buttons) and shift right

JG52Krupi
04-21-2011, 05:50 PM
i agree with your post, but you have left out a very important aspect in your 109 illustration, in order to actually 'see' the whole circle, you'd have to move your head a lot closer to the revi (so the right eye actually see the whole circle), in other words, you'd have to use shift-f1 again.

Stereoscopic vision only applies to things in close range. That's why when you look into the vista of grand canyon, the whole view looks so flat and picture like.

Notice also how close the hmd is to the pilot's head.

winner the reason he see the sight like that is because its shoved directly into his eight eye. They need training to be able to focus each eye separately on a apache.

You cannot use the apache as an example.

TUSA/TX-Gunslinger
04-21-2011, 06:05 PM
I like it the way it is.

It makes the German fighters feel different.

It works just fine for me with 6DOF TrackIR 5

Lean a little to the right - presto - crosshairs.

In all the years of Il2, I have to admit - I never heard this one.

S!

Gunny

Because in IL2 old you got view through off-centre sight by shift+f1 :grin: without limitation of virtual head movement

Many posts since your response.

Well, I've been using 6DOF with Il2 Mods off and on for a few years, and this isn't a huge departure from that - as far as functionality goes.

I have to admit, I do not like the new Shift-F1 a great deal. All I'm doing is leaning over a little bit and moving up in the gunsight - this should not limit my head traverse.

I think a better solution for me is to map TrackIR pause key to my controls, and just Pause the TrackIR when I've centered the gunsight in normal view.

While I'm on the point of views - I've been focusing the last few days on bombers and turrets. I do not like the traverse limits of view within those turrets. Your view is quite constrained. Look, if I'm going to be stuck in a small bomber turret - at least let me look around!

Back to the 109, I like the offset - In fact I like it better than having the RAF/US setup with this great big gunsight in the middle of my view. I only shoot a small fraction of the time I'm flying, the rest of the time I like the fact that the sight is out of the center of my view.

Just my 2 cents.

S!

Gunny

JG52Krupi
04-21-2011, 06:08 PM
Many posts since your response.

Well, I've been using 6DOF with Il2 Mods off and on for a few years, and this isn't a huge departure from that - as far as functionality goes.

I have to admit, I do not like the new Shift-F1 a great deal. All I'm doing is leaning over a little bit and moving up in the gunsight - this should not limit my head traverse.

I think a better solution for me is to map TrackIR pause key to my controls, and just Pause the TrackIR when I've centered the gunsight in normal view.

While I'm on the point of views - I've been focusing the last few days on bombers and turrets. I do not like the traverse limits of view within those turrets. Your view is quite constrained. Look, if I'm going to be stuck in a small bomber turret - at least let me look around!

Back to the 109, I like the offset - In fact I like it better than having the RAF/US setup with this great big gunsight in the middle of my view. I only shoot a small fraction of the time I'm flying, the rest of the time I like the fact that the sight is out of the center of my view.

Just my 2 cents.

S!

Gunny

I thought that was the main point of the offset, the spits and hurris have a very dirty looking gunsight that spoils the forward view.

Lixma
04-21-2011, 06:10 PM
This might help some...(hope springs eternal)

Here's a BF109 pilot's perspective.

Right eye open, left eye shut....

http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/3368/rightbz.jpg

Left eye open, right eye shut....

http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/8409/lefty.jpg

And here is what a pilot with two eyes open would see....

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4853/109kb.jpg

And here we have the current set up in CoD. It also happens to faithfully, realistically, recreate what a Cyclops would see were he ever to fly for the Luftwaffe.

http://img695.imageshack.us/img695/3412/cyclopsj.jpg

http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/6605/gallandlops.jpg

KOM.Nausicaa
04-21-2011, 06:24 PM
And here is what a pilot with two eyes open would see....


No that is not what he would see.

Lixma
04-21-2011, 06:33 PM
No that is not what he would see.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflex_sight

Because reflex sights provide an illuminated reticle, they are often used with both eyes open (the brain will tend to automatically superimpose the illuminated reticle image coming from the dominant eye onto the other eye's unobstructed view), giving the shooter normal depth perception and full field of view.

OK, what would he see?

b101uk
04-21-2011, 07:07 PM
We should remember wile most people brain can superimpose 2 slightly different images given they have 2 eyes and do it ALL the time :rolleyes:, some people have different eye dominance so would not be able to process info from a RH sight without training unless they used the left eye instead for the sight (regardless of if they are left or right handed) ;)

Likewise not everyone (fewer people) in all would be able to use a magnified image in one eye and normal focuses in the other eye, thats why fewer people have both eyes open with telescopic sights than with reflex sights. ;)

Remember the brain is a powerful with respect to image processing, given that what out eye see’s and feeds to the brain is upside-down and the brain flips it the right way up and that the brain if we were to ware some special glasses that flipped the image upside-down after a few weeks to a couple of months the brain would flip the image so we would the correct way up agene as experiments have shown.

Gollum
04-21-2011, 07:20 PM
Seriously.

Over a decade of faffing about with Shift-F1, leaning over, loosening straps or whatever...i'm weary of it. Just place the damned thing in the centre of the dash! Is anyone really going to be put out by such a minor concession to usability?

Realism be hanged in this instance.

I WILL SMASH YOUR FACE INTO A JELLY!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBzxfR6VF80

Hatch
04-21-2011, 09:43 PM
So which is more real then ?

The perception of reality is so subjective.

I think it's a viable alternative, and should be an option for those that wish to simulate real life

heloguy
04-21-2011, 09:55 PM
And here is what a pilot with two eyes open would see....

As a pilot that flies with HUD every once in awhile, no, that's not what you would see. If I adjust the HUD so only half of it is visible in my right eye, I don't magically see the reverse of that half mirrored on the left. I only see the half, unless I adjust it back to center. HUD, and reflector sights are pretty much the same thing, it's just that the HUD shows information from a processor, instead of only an image of a gunsight. The way it's modeled now is correct.

Redroach
04-21-2011, 10:03 PM
http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4853/109kb.jpg

This is not possible, even with two eyes.


Oh, this is very possible. Just ingest copious amounts of hallucinogens prior to climbing into your plane!

Lixma
04-21-2011, 10:06 PM
So which is more real then ?

The perception of reality is so subjective.

I think it's a viable alternative, and should be an option for those that wish to simulate real life

In real life the 109 pilots (and FW-190) did not have to lean over to the right to see the reticle clearly. The cockpits were cramped enough as it was. If the pilots really did have to lean over to the right just to get a clear image it's surprising that no bright soul ever thought to mount the gunsight centrally rather than offset to the right.

In CoD we have a beautifully modelled cockpit. However we are handicapped with a Cyclopean view of it due to the nature and limitations of a 2D display. And, so, work-arounds such as Shift F-1 or using Track-IR to lean over are necessary.

Unfortunately these work-arounds are being mistaken for reality. The reasons given range from "Go play Hawx noob" to "I've gotten used to it, it's easy with practice".....none of which have any connection with simulation as far as I can tell.

Lixma
04-21-2011, 10:10 PM
As a pilot that flies with HUD every once in awhile, no, that's not what you would see. If I adjust the HUD so only half of it is visible in my right eye, I don't magically see the reverse of that half mirrored on the left.
Then don't adjust the HUD so only half of it is visible in your right eye.

The offset Revi sight in the 109 projects a full image onto the right eye, not half.

spiritdmp
04-21-2011, 10:16 PM
As a pilot that flies with HUD every once in awhile, no, that's not what you would see. If I adjust the HUD so only half of it is visible in my right eye, I don't magically see the reverse of that half mirrored on the left. ...

Yeah that's the point missing here, you would have to be able to adjust your HUD so that ALL of it is visible in your right eye, and NONE of it is visible in your left eye.

Then your brain magically blends both images together.

damn beat me to it lixma, kudos for your indefatigable patience!

Sauf
04-21-2011, 10:18 PM
Then don't adjust the HUD so only half of it is visible in your right eye.

The offset Revi sight in the 109 projects a full image onto the right eye, not half.

Correct, if the pilot leans a bit to the right! ie loosen straps. Back to where we started.

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-21-2011, 10:23 PM
I now understand what Lixma continually explains.

I just come to thinking that both the cockpit of the 109 and the 190 was sooo small that the final paralaxis was insufficient to make the pilot lean to the side in order to align to the sight.

See real historic picture of the 190, the revi's left edge as seen by the pilot is cockpit centred:
http://i.imgur.com/v17Ap.jpg

The Focke pilot actually sits quite centred while his right eye is spot on on the revi sight. The left edge of the reflector glass is centred as is the pilot's nose which is pressumably in the middle between both eyes. My guess is that the pilot sees the full image of the aim circle as much as I see my hand when I hold it in front of the right half of my face. And I still can regognize it as a hand but the image is that it is superimposed with the background like putting to photo slides together. You can easily try this yourself without any particular equipment.

It is a bit difficult as both eyes will focus at two different distances that is a bit strenuous when you hold your hand that way. However this problem is inexistent for the revi sight as the aim circle was projected as if in far away distance is I understand correctly, so no focus problem.

kimosabi
04-21-2011, 10:27 PM
I don't know where people get from that you lean to the sides. You move your head slightly over, which this picture clearly shows. Are you all wearing neck-supports or something?

Lixma
04-21-2011, 10:28 PM
Correct, if the pilot leans a bit to the right! ie loosen straps. Back to where we started.

Nope.

The gunsights were installed directly in the right eye's line of sight. And further adjusted to suit the individual pilots.

I am not sure if the gunsights back then were used as modern helmet mounted Huds are.

The analogy may not be perfect (else it wouldn't be an analogy :)) but the concept is the same.

b101uk
04-21-2011, 10:29 PM
As a pilot that flies with HUD every once in awhile, no, that's not what you would see. If I adjust the HUD so only half of it is visible in my right eye, I don't magically see the reverse of that half mirrored on the left. I only see the half, unless I adjust it back to center. HUD, and reflector sights are pretty much the same thing, it's just that the HUD shows information from a processor, instead of only an image of a gunsight. The way it's modeled now is correct.

:rolleyes: lol

HUD are for looking threw with both eyes thus however you adjust the HUD the left eye can always see what’s on the right side hence it wont work, if the gun sight has a significantly narrow FOV for the reflected recticle so the right eye is centred over the reflected reticle and at the same the left eye cannot see the reflected recticle on the reflector glass then the effect will work like monocular HMD. ;)

Skiiwa
04-22-2011, 12:36 AM
No.......

Thee_oddball
04-22-2011, 01:05 AM
Think most pople with TrackIR completly missed whats been asked for.


Keep the ctrl F1 but make it like in IL2, that is, no zoom.

With ctrl F1, as it is now, u CANNOT look 135 degrees to the sides or look back.

U have the massive canopy bars on the sides right in the field of view when lookin left and right with ctrlF1 enabled and zoomed in as icing on the cake.


Realistic, dont think so.

+1 its the ZOOM that is unrealistic not the position of the revi

Thee_oddball
04-22-2011, 01:08 AM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c1/Revi_C12-A.jpg

SQB
04-22-2011, 02:49 AM
That post before with the two images showing the two eyes, open them in two browser windows, put the right eye on the left and the left eye on the right, makes sure the windows are fairly small and you are sitting a little further back from the screen and the go sort of cross eyed (as if looking at something a lot closer) and then you will ACTUALLY see in 3D what the pilot would have seen if his eyes were there.

Result: You have placed the eyes too far apart, but also, you can see the gunsight AND out the front windscreen. It seems you guys are right! It doesn't look like that picture you keep posting though, impossible to simulate 3d on 2d properly...

Lixma
04-22-2011, 03:49 AM
You have placed the eyes too far apart...

The 'Right Eye' image is spot on. The fully visible reticle is proof of that. (assuming the dev team have got their measurements correct).

The 'Left Eye' image is a bit of a guess. I had no gauge to measure how far I should shift the view-point to the left with the mouse to accurately recreate what the left eye would, in isolation, see. It doesn't matter so much, though. The picture was illustrative rather than scientific.
....but also, you can see the gun-sight AND out the front windscreen.

That's what I have been attempting to demonstrate (with varying degrees of success :)).

It doesn't look like that picture you keep posting though, impossible to simulate 3d on 2d properly...

It's not an attempt to simulate 3D.

It's a simulation of how the Revi reticle would appear to a real 109 pilot with both eyes open.

Currently CoD simulates a Cyclops with one eye open, looking bang down the centreline of the aircraft.

Because of this unfortunate but necessary Cyclopean view we have had, for a decade now, a work-around; the Shift-F1 view.

More recently Track-IR has enabled the player to lean to the right and achieve a similar result. Unfortunately people are mistaking this as reality. People really do think Shift-F1 simulates what a 109/190 pilot had to do just to see their gun-sight.

Wolf_Rider
04-22-2011, 04:01 AM
Thanks for being clearer on what you were trying to get across...


some were thinking, if only half the reticule is seen, only half the reticule gets overlayed, hence some of the difficulty you had.


http://www.imfdb.org/w/images/0/01/ReviC12D.jpg

Buzpilot
04-22-2011, 05:50 AM
I see what you guys want to see, but you have narrowed it down to only the reticle. If we should have it like a reticle on front screen, it will be similar to holding your finger close to screen and pointing it upwards, you will still be able to read this(not too close), but there also will be two blurry fingers on each side of the words.
And then it would be like everything close to reticle will have to be double and blurry, to be realistic.

Jaws2002
04-22-2011, 05:53 AM
The colimated gunsights work just like the modern red dots on rifles.
The sight projects a crosshair in front of the sight and the shooter can scan aim and shoot with both eyes open. You don't have to close one eye or move your head to the side to aim. You look with with both eyes at the target, one eye through the sight, and the brain will automatically create the combined image, with the dot in the midle.
Shooting both eyes open, specially with reflex sights, has some clear advantages, specially in a fluid combat situation, where your periferial vision is very important.
Same in a 109. The pilot didn't zoom in, or moved so much like in the game. The sight was right in front of his eye.

So Lixma is in a way correct. We have two eyes and a brain to combine the two images.
This looks quite good.
http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4853/109kb.jpg

Of course our brain is very good at bluring things close to the eye that we don't focus on.
I kind of agree. The Shift+1 image is unnecesary restrictive in CoD.

Wolf_Rider
04-22-2011, 06:26 AM
binocular vision won't work on a monitor though... it will only work in real life

Voyager
04-22-2011, 08:32 AM
Correct, if the pilot leans a bit to the right! ie loosen straps. Back to where we started.

So leaning to the right requires 2-3 seconds of horsing around, and then bolts your head down?

You might want to see a chiropractor, because something is really wrong with your neck.

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-22-2011, 08:52 AM
The colimated gunsights work just like the modern red dots on rifles.
The sight projects a crosshair in front of the sight and the shooter can scan aim and shoot with both eyes open. You don't have to close one eye or move your head to the side to aim. You look with with both eyes at the target, one eye through the sight, and the brain will automatically create the combined image, with the dot in the midle.
Shooting both eyes open, specially with reflex sights, has some clear advantages, specially in a fluid combat situation, where your periferial vision is very important.
Same in a 109. The pilot didn't zoom in, or moved so much like in the game. The sight was right in front of his eye.

So Lixma is in a way correct. We have two eyes and a brain to combine the two images.
This looks quite good.
http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4853/109kb.jpg

Of course our brain is very good at bluring things close to the eye that we don't focus on.
I kind of agree. The Shift+1 image is unnecesary restrictive in CoD.

Now this thread evolved into a real good thing and I learned something. Thanks to Lixma and all the others explaining that thing with a lot of patience. Unlike before I now do think that this image IS what we should have ingame as the best representation of what we have in reality. My guess is also that with headshake the circle will wobble around the position as depicted on the image but stay intact, as long as one eye of the pilot sees the whole circle. We also now should get this kind of behaviour for sideway headshakes in Spits and Hurris as the effect would have been the same (not so though for vertical headshakes whatever plane).

For those not yet convinced: take your hand, hold it up in front of one of your eyes only at a certain distance (10-30cm is a good distance for demonstration) and focus on something in the background but try to mentally concentrate on the hand. You will see a half transparent, a little blurry hand superimposed to the background image you are focussing to. You can try this with other objects, too.

Could we get this to the developers somehow?

JG52Krupi
04-22-2011, 09:10 AM
I now understand what Lixma continually explains.

I just come to thinking that both the cockpit of the 109 and the 190 was sooo small that the final paralaxis was insufficient to make the pilot lean to the side in order to align to the sight.

See real historic picture of the 190, the revi's left edge as seen by the pilot is cockpit centred:
http://i.imgur.com/v17Ap.jpg

The Focke pilot actually sits quite centred while his right eye is spot on on the revi sight. The left edge of the reflector glass is centred as is the pilot's nose which is pressumably in the middle between both eyes. My guess is that the pilot sees the full image of the aim circle as much as I see my hand when I hold it in front of the right half of my face. And I still can regognize it as a hand but the image is that it is superimposed with the background like putting to photo slides together. You can easily try this yourself without any particular equipment.

It is a bit difficult as both eyes will focus at two different distances that is a bit strenuous when you hold your hand that way. However this problem is inexistent for the revi sight as the aim circle was projected as if in far away distance is I understand correctly, so no focus problem.

So that guys head is in the center is it HAHAHAHAHAHA, open your eyes.

Baron
04-22-2011, 09:19 AM
So that guys head is in the center is it HAHAHAHAHAHA, open your eyes.


Cant figure out why u are arguing against changing how shift F1 works in CoD.

Something tells me neither do u.

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-22-2011, 09:20 AM
@Krupi:
irrelevant. Dismissed.

JG52Krupi
04-22-2011, 09:32 AM
Cant figure out why u are arguing against changing how shift F1 works in CoD.

Something tells me neither do u.

I think they should change how Shift F1 works, but i don't think that they should change the position of the sights.

@Krupi:
irrelevant. Dismissed.

How the hell is that irrelevant?

Note I understand about the ocular vision but it would not look like this. It would only look like that if the pilot had a setup like the one apache pilots use.

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4853/109kb.jpg

So your telling me all german pilots were right eye dominant?

Baron
04-22-2011, 09:40 AM
I think they should change how Shift F1 works, but i don't think that they should change the position of the sights.



How the hell is that irrelevant?

Note I understand about the ocular vision but it would not look like this. It would only look like that if the pilot had a setup like the one apache pilots use.

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4853/109kb.jpg

So your telling me all german pilots were right eye dominant?


Well, there we agree and i think everyone else is to.

Probably the topic headline that messes up things.


Im pretty sure no one wants the sight physically moved to the left, even if, at times, it seems like thats what they are debating.

Wolf_Rider
04-22-2011, 09:46 AM
So your telling me all german pilots were right eye dominant?




It works for either eye, left or right, dominant or not

zxwings
04-22-2011, 10:28 AM
And here is what a pilot with two eyes open would see....

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4853/109kb.jpg

This image is erroneous for the two-eye-open situation, in that the cockpit here is strictly the only-LEFT-eye-open cockpit. Instead, the correct image shoud be a certain superposition of the left-eye cockpit image and the right-eye cockpit image, the two images being transparent to each other.

~~~
All the above discussions (yours and mine) are about the situation where the left eyeball's axis and the right eyeball's axis (by axis I mean the direction an eyeball is pointing at) are parallel; in other words, the pair of eyeballs are looking at a point relatively far away, such as a fighter you are aiming at. If the pilot looks at objects inside the cockpit, the way to take screenshots for the two eyes will be different.

If, for example, the pilot is gazing right at the Revi gunsight with two eyes, the Revi gunsight would be at the centre of both his left eye vision and his right eye vision, but would look slightly different for being looked at from slightly different points of view. The brain then processes these two images to form a binocular 3D vision of the Revi. So the image posted for the left eye (with right eye shut), pasted below, would be wrong if the left eyeball is also looking at--pointing at--the Revi gunsight, because now the Revi should be at the centre of the image.

http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/8409/lefty.jpg

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-22-2011, 11:16 AM
Yeah, but as we don't have 3D capable game now we have to make the best approximation to reality as possible with a game that tries to represent a 3D environment with only 2 dimensions available.

And as for the aim circle depiction the best compromise with respect to a 2D world and binocular vision simulation is to show the whole aim point circle wobbling slightly around the centre of the screen as long as the right eye is capable to capt the full circle on the reflector glas with all the headshake. So me thinks Lixma got the point at how it should be presented in the game.

Hatch
04-22-2011, 12:11 PM
For those that still have aproblem visualizing it, try this.

Set a (D)SLR camera to infinity and look through the viewfinder while keeping both eyes open.
( don't block your other eye with teh camera body LOL)

You'll have steropscopic vision with the viewfinder data superimposed.

Now try to read the numbbers in the viewfinder while keeping track of whats happening in the distance.

That's what requires training, not the actual superimpostioning.

Lixma
04-22-2011, 12:28 PM
Note I understand about the ocular vision but it would not look like this. It would only look like that if the pilot had a setup like the one apache pilots use.
I think you are still mis-understanding the Revi setup in the 109/190.

In a real-life 109 the Revi (a reflex sight) is offset to the right....as accurately depicted in CoD/IL-2 etc...

In real-life the 109 pilot sits looking straight ahead through the windscreen....both eyes open.

The offset Revi is installed this way to project its image into one eye only. The right eye.

The right eye receives a fully formed reticle image (just as the Apache driver gets a fully formed HUD image in his right eye).

The left eye receives no reticle image whatsoever.

The brain combines both eyes viewpoints into one.

Therefore the real life 109 pilot would see a full reticle in front him while sat straight ahead with both eyes open....approximately like the (rough) picture i've been posting.....

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4853/109kb.jpg

So your telling me all german pilots were right eye dominant?
No.

But the majority of people are right eye dominant, thus the offset of the Revi to the right.

Lixma
04-22-2011, 12:40 PM
This image is erroneous for the two-eye-open situation, in that the cockpit here is strictly the only-LEFT-eye-open cockpit. Instead, the correct image shoud be a certain superposition of the left-eye cockpit image and the right-eye cockpit image, the two images being transparent to each other.

It's actually weirder than that, Zxwings.

The picture you refer to does not show the Left Eye image, but is actually what someone with one eye located in the centre of the head would see! A Cyclops in fact.

The reasons for this are we're trying to represent a 3D stereoscopic reality onto a 2D display screen.

1./JG2_Miller
04-22-2011, 01:36 PM
And I want a Heartbreaker 109 with Megan Fox in it...

Seriously, this game is about simulating the Battle of Britain, so there's no need to change the 109's revi to an unrealistical position, just to make it easier to look through it.

Pist-N-Broke
04-22-2011, 01:53 PM
I think you are still mis-understanding the Revi setup in the 109/190.

In a real-life 109 the Revi (a reflex sight) is offset to the right....as accurately depicted in CoD/IL-2 etc...

In real-life the 109 pilot sits looking straight ahead through the windscreen....both eyes open.

The offset Revi is installed this way to project its image into one eye only. The right eye.

The right eye receives a fully formed reticle image (just as the Apache driver gets a fully formed HUD image in his right eye).

The left eye receives no reticle image whatsoever.

The brain combines both eyes viewpoints into one.

Therefore the real life 109 pilot would see a full reticle in front him while sat straight ahead with both eyes open....approximately like the (rough) picture i've been posting.....

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4853/109kb.jpg


No.

But the majority of people are right eye dominant, thus the offset of the Revi to the right.

Lixma is RIGHT. End of story. This how it would look (and probably should be the normal view in the game). I have done 30 years of shotgun shooting, and ALWAYS shoot both eyes open. I have also done 30 years of hunting with rifles with telescopic sights, but I shoot rifles with both eyes open. I have never closed the left eye to shoot with sights of any kind, open, telescopic, or red dot, or laser. Yes I am right eye dominant, and right handed.

Lixma
04-22-2011, 01:55 PM
And I want a Heartbreaker 109 with Megan Fox in it...

Seriously, this game is about simulating the Battle of Britain, so there's no need to change the 109's revi to an unrealistical position, just to make it easier to look through it.

Another victim of Shift-F1 = Reality.

Oh the humanity!!!!1

(Seriously though, Miller. You've read perhaps 5 lines from page one and skipped the rest)

kimosabi
04-22-2011, 01:55 PM
But do you close your sphincter?

Jaws2002
04-22-2011, 02:23 PM
Here's a little video on shooting both eyes open and how the brain processes the image....Just like with the Revi.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCsktp0pO10

zxwings
04-22-2011, 02:34 PM
It's actually weirder than that, Zxwings.

The picture you refer to does not show the Left Eye image, but is actually what someone with one eye located in the centre of the head would see! A Cyclops in fact.

The reasons for this are we're trying to represent a 3D stereoscopic reality onto a 2D display screen.
Ah, I see; yes, that cockpit is as seen from the centre of the head. Nonetheless, I think that a 'centred'-eye cockpit with a right-eye reticle is erroneous, because a superposition of the left and the right eye images is what binocular vision sees.

I understand your image is for trying to represent a 3D stereoscopic reality onto a 2D display screen. Yet I think this attempt itself is too much against reality.

A right-eye vision with the left eye shut, when you are using the gunsight, and a centred-eye vision when you are not, are, I believe, still the most realistic.

Lixma
04-22-2011, 02:54 PM
Ah, I see; yes, that cockpit is as seen from the centre of the head. Nonetheless, I think that a 'centred'-eye cockpit with a right-eye reticle is erroneous, because a superposition of the left and the right eye images is what binocular vision sees.

By that logic then an Apache simulation should not display the HUD on screen.....:)

An Apache pilot receives the HUD image in only one eye....just like the 109 pilot does.

http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/9938/integratedhelmetanddisp.jpg

And this is what every simulation of an Apache will look like for a few decades more....a fully visible HUD on our 2D displays. A combination of left and right eye information where it really matters.

http://img851.imageshack.us/img851/7717/helic.jpg

No one would dream of removing the Apache's in-game HUD display!

And yet there is no fundamental difference between simulating on a 2D screen what an Apache pilot would see, and what a 109 pilot would see.

If our simulated Apache pilots can see the HUD clearly then why shouldn't our simulated 109 pilots see the reticle?

JG52Krupi
04-22-2011, 02:57 PM
FFS stop comparing the revi to the apache, that monocle projects the image directly into the pilots eye the revi does not do this.

1./JG2_Miller
04-22-2011, 03:01 PM
Another victim of Shift-F1 = Reality.

Oh the humanity!!!!1

(Seriously though, Miller. You've read perhaps 5 lines from page one and skipped the rest)

Actually a victim of TrackIR reality. Simply adjust it a bit and you don't have any problems. If I'd use Shift-F1, dude i would go crazy. And unfortunately you can't simulate closing your left eye, and I doubt any pilot did this due to the loss of the ability of estimating distance and being unable to overview the area around you.

ATAG_Bliss
04-22-2011, 03:09 PM
If your right eye is not close to centered on the sight, you will never get 3d vision with the revi sight. The 1/2 recticle image is all you would see until the 1/4 of your head where your right eye is near center on the gun sight. The reflected image is only properly seen with the closest eye to it (your right eye) ONLY if that eye is coming close to center of that image.

I don't know why you are comparing an apache's HUD to a revi sight. Keeping both eyes open would not create the effect you are talking about until one eye, at the very least, was close to the center of the sight. You had to lean in reality to see the revi, even some 190s had the sight directly in the center. You have to lean to see this sight correctly in game as well. I honestly don't see what the problem is.

Lixma
04-22-2011, 03:21 PM
FFS stop comparing the revi to the apache, that monocle projects the image directly into the pilots eye the revi does not do this.

We are talking about simulating on a 2D screen what a pilot with two eyes open would see.

A pilot using a Revi gun-sight and an Apache pilot using a HMS both have an image in front of their right eyes.

A pilot using a Revi gun-sight and an Apache pilot using a HMS do not have an image in front of their left eyes.

Agreed?

Now here is a picture of a simulation of what an Apache pilot would see with both eyes open.....

Please explain why this screenshot is an acceptable representation for simulation....

http://img851.imageshack.us/img851/7717/helic.jpg

....whereas this one is not acceptable?

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4853/109kb.jpg

Wolf_Rider
04-22-2011, 03:27 PM
@ Bliss...

If you don't think so... texta a reticlue onto a piece of clear plastic and investigate it ;)

speculum jockey
04-22-2011, 03:37 PM
This thread is amazing. It's like the world's shortest, most accurate test for retardation. Pretty much everyone who's criticized Lixma has failed.

The Revi was designed to do exactly what Lixma is describing in terms that even your reptilian brains should understand. This is why the revi was made this way, not because they didn't want to move another gauge over a few centimetres, but because this is how it was supposed to work, with the image being projected to your right eye and you brain overlaying it into your forward vision.

If you're debating this, then you are some kind of "King Retard Aspergers Lord!"

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-22-2011, 03:39 PM
@Bliss:

I too thought initially that Lixma was wrong. Go to page 11 where you can see me doubting. But Lixma was very patient and tried to explain it (which is very difficult). I then did a very small experiment that everyone can do at home with no particular item if desired. And I had to conclude that Lixma was right right away. It SHOULD look like his image.

The experiment is: take a hand (or a drawn cross on a transparent slide) and hold it in front of one of your eyes only and don't focus on that cross but on something in the background. You WILL see the cross or the hand superimposed to the background image even though the eye not seeing the cross or the hand to the background. I tried it and it worked and it will work for you too.

BTW: As this effect will be available to all human pilots it would lead also to the aim scheme not disappearing with a head pushed to the sides in a Spit or a Hurri within certain limits. So horizontal headshake will make the circle move to one side as a whole within certain limits. The limits are that the eye closer to the reflected sight still can see the whole circle on the reflector glas.

Btw the aim circle would never appear to the pilot as being on the reflector glas but somewhere in the distance.

Speculum, remove your insulting troll post please as quick as possible.

Lixma
04-22-2011, 03:42 PM
I don't know why you are comparing an apache's HUD to a revi sight. Keeping both eyes open would not create the effect you are talking about until one eye, at the very least, was close to the center of the sight. You had to lean in reality to see the revi, even some 190s had the sight directly in the center. You have to lean to see this sight correctly in game as well. I honestly don't see what the problem is.

You didn't have to lean to see the Revi sight. You are mistaking IL-2's work-around (Shift-F1) for reality.

The Revi was installed offset to the right to be dead in line with the pilots right eye as he looked forward....a reflex sight. It was to be used with both eyes open.

Here's what a 109 pilot's right eye would see....

http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/8606/1newrights.jpg

And here's what a 109 pilot's left eye would see....

http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/2561/1newlefts.jpg


Now imagine what the 109 pilot would see with both eyes open.

As a further exercise, imagine the same thing with the Apache pilot. What would the Apache pilot's left eye and right see? The right one would see a HUD, the left one would not see a HUD.

And yet despite the fact that an Apache pilot sees the HUD in only one eye (just as our real-life 109 pilot sees the Revi's reticle in one eye) we simulate an Apache like this.....

http://img851.imageshack.us/img851/7717/helic.jpg

b101uk
04-22-2011, 03:43 PM
If you're debating this, then you are some kind of "King Retard Aspergers Lord!"

should that not be: "King Retard Asparagus Lord!" :-P

Zimbower
04-22-2011, 03:45 PM
Please add key shortcut so i can switch left eye right eye xD give them a break! I like it as it is no easy boom and zoom dogfights last longer!

Wolf_Rider
04-22-2011, 03:52 PM
Shift +F1 ;)

ATAG_Bliss
04-22-2011, 04:11 PM
Lixma,

We don't use 2 eyes in this sim. We are playing in a 2d world here. We have one POV to look upon and until technology has changed, this is what the limits of COD will be.

So you are basically a cyclops in the game, but my point in all of this is the point of reference you are looking at "in-game" would be one eye, directly in the center of the pit.

This video (remember a camera only has one eye) shows exactly what I'm talking about with regards to the current limitations present with simulating something via a 2d image. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Blem3FlkaMc&feature=player_embedded

Notice how the sight goes out of view depending on where your one eye is looking. That's how it's modelled in the game. Because in the game we can only have one eye. The last thing I would want to see on my screen is a recticle covering 1/2 the revi and 1/2 into space. When technology is out to simulate true 3d in the game, I'd wager that the sight would show up just as it was in RL. But it's not going to until that time.

Wolf_Rider
04-22-2011, 04:16 PM
so the work around is setting the view to a key... just like there isn't a real work around for the "flying by the seat" or a feeling of weight

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-22-2011, 04:21 PM
I don't understand your logic, Bliss. As we never will really feel real g-loads ourselves should this not be simulated as closely as now? Why do you have headshake and g-loads activated on Syndicate server? This also never ever can be correctly represented on a computer screen as it cannot influence on how you yourself feel the forces when sitting in front of your computer. Same goes for black and red outs.

I say let's make it as close as reality within the possibilities. If in real life we have binocular vision the representation ingame should be as close as possible with a 2d graphics. And be it a aim circle wobbling before the background and not restricted to the reflector sight glas.

ATAG_Bliss
04-22-2011, 04:29 PM
Umm, clearly you are upset about something. What I stated was correct. In order for the sight to appear (the entire recticle) in RL your right eye must be somewhat centered on the sight. This is true.. Calm down and take a breath and think about it. Also, in RL we have 2 eyes and a 3D world. This is also true.

Now moving on to the COD world. In this sim we have 1 POV and 1 eye. This is because of technology. So (keep up here for a minute, I know you must be smart!) our 1 POV in the sim is not centered on the gunsight in the 109. Therefore, (here we go again) it's not going to show the entire recticle.

Now before you go pounding all over your keyboard again. Please read this again and tell me how I'm wrong..

Thanks!

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-22-2011, 04:31 PM
No, you are unfortunately not wrong as like it is today we only have a cyclope's view with one eye only. Were you are wrong imho (no offence meant, Bliss) is that you - as far as I understand it - say that as we have only one eye modelled it shall be kept modelled as one eye whereas I say let's simulate a real two-eyed pilot as best as possible. Lixma's picture is what I believe the best approximation to a two-eyed pilot as this is closest to reality.

Come on, you Syn people always hold up the flag for realism without concessions. Keep it this way and support two-eyed sight simulation.

Wolf_Rider
04-22-2011, 04:35 PM
there won't be any true 3D until goggles/ twin screen visors come about... until then, we're stuck with multiplanar

Jaws2002
04-22-2011, 04:44 PM
The best way to understand what Lixma is trying to say, is to just go to a gun range, or gun store, and try it yourself with a rifle with reflex sight (like the eotech).
Just bring the rifle in front of your eye and aim at a distant object while keeping both eyes open.
The reticule in the reflex sight is projected far away in front and actls like a front sight that is way far in front of you, so the focal distance for the dot is really close to the focal distance for the target.
If you aim with both eyes open your dominant eye will take over and impose the reticule visible with one eye over the entire image. Of course your dominant eye has to be in line with the center of the sight, but you still have a lot more room to play compared to irons.

But in game i think is really hard to implement this. The image with he reticule floating over everything is not exatly right. Human eye will simply blur the glass of the sight when it concentrate on the distant target and reticule.

Lixma
04-22-2011, 04:44 PM
Lixma,

We don't use 2 eyes in this sim. We are playing in a 2d world here. We have one POV to look upon and until technology has changed, this is what the limits of COD will be.

So you are basically a cyclops in the game, but my point in all of this is the point of reference you are looking at "in-game" would be one eye, directly in the center of the pit.


Bliss, with respect....you are repeating everything i've tried to explain throughout the thread. Just do a search for 'Cyclops'. I even made this for example....:grin:

http://img594.imageshack.us/img594/6605/gallandlops.jpg

I must ask you to have a read through my previous posts, i've been there and got the T-shirt.

The last thing I would want to see on my screen is a recticle covering 1/2 the revi and 1/2 into space.

This is an aesthetical judgement....nothing to do with realism.

And its exactly the tack I tried to take at the start of the thread. I thought the idea of moving the gun-sight to the centre would be a more 'palatable' option, visually speaking. If you read the thread you can see how well that went down.

So, if moving the gun-sight is off the cards but we still want to simulate what a 109 pilot actually sees it's the projected reticle.

Yep.

As visually unsettling as it may be for some (and i'm not immune to the visual charm of the current set-up) it's the correct way to go. 109 pilot's did not have to mess about to see their gunsight projected before them and if realism is the watchword here (which I have been assured it is by some in this thread :)) then a projected reticle should be coded in.

In our Apache simulations no one complains about a big green floating HUD in front of them. No one would dream of complaining about it....it's too obviously a necessary visual element of what the Apache pilot sees when he looks upon the world.

On the other hand the horror being expressed at giving the 109 pilot the exact same visual element is....odd.

Wolf_Rider
04-22-2011, 04:51 PM
would technical limitations prohibit that though?

all other sights would (I assume) be coded to float within the confines of the centered sight

Lixma
04-22-2011, 05:00 PM
would technical limitations prohibit that though?

all other sights would (I assume) be coded to float within the confines of the centered sight
You would only be able to see as much or as little of the reticle as your in-game pilot would see with his virtual right eye.

So under G-forces and manoeuvring the reticle image will still be cut off or disappear just like any other gun-sight. It's not like you could see a full reticle in front of you at all times, there is no advantage being sought or gained here.

Wolf_Rider
04-22-2011, 05:02 PM
You would only be able to see as much or as little of the reticle as your in-game pilot would see with his virtual right eye.

So under G-forces and manoeuvring the reticle image will still be cut off or disappear just like any other gun-sight. It's not like you could see a full reticle in front of you at all times, there is no advantage being sought or gained here.

sorry, I meant for just "recreating" the RL effect of just having the reticule float on centre screen without having any key command, like currently exists with the Shft + F1

heloguy
04-22-2011, 05:04 PM
Then don't adjust the HUD so only half of it is visible in your right eye.

The offset Revi sight in the 109 projects a full image onto the right eye, not half.

I'm not so sure. I would hope the develpers would have had some time to sit and try one out, as apparently some people on youtube have.

Personally, it seems to me that moving your head from a fixed reflector sight is no different than me changing the position of the reflection of the HUD on its fixed position on my NVGs. Anyway, I'm pretty sure the game is right, and your wrong. The pilot would have to keep his head pretty still to keep that sight from disappearing.

Lixma
04-22-2011, 05:05 PM
But in game i think is really hard to implement this. The image with he reticule floating over everything is not exatly right. Human eye will simply blur the glass of the sight when it concentrate on the distant target and reticule.
Yeah, as Dayglow mentioned in his previous post our 2D displays keep everything in focus. Although I suppose a ROF-like blurred foreground effect may help?

Speaking personally it wouldn't bother me. The last thing i'm focussed on in a dogfight is what the reflector glass is doing.

Wolf_Rider
04-22-2011, 05:06 PM
@ heloguy...

judging from the amount of room not available to the pilot, in the front on shot provided earlier, it would appear the pilot would have no other choice but to not move around much

Hatch
04-22-2011, 06:17 PM
Yeah, as Dayglow mentioned in his previous post our 2D displays keep everything in focus. Although I suppose a ROF-like blurred foreground effect may help?

Speaking personally it wouldn't bother me. The last thing i'm focussed on in a dogfight is what the reflector glass is doing.

Well everything is in focus, so shouldn't this be the next step?
Blurring whatever your not looking at.
maybe linked to your tracking device.

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-22-2011, 06:32 PM
I like the idea of Hatch as such but as others pointed out it won't work very well with what we have now (only head tracking). But I think it is rather an aesthetical issue without functionality than something essential adding to the simulation aspect however.

Lixma
04-22-2011, 06:39 PM
Well everything is in focus, so shouldn't this be the next step?
Blurring whatever your not looking at.
maybe linked to your tracking device.
How would the PC know what to blur and what focus on?

All a head tracking device does is tell the PC where to centre the on-screen image. The PC has no clue as to where the users' eyes are actually looking. As such it can't make any reliable deductions about which part of the screen should be in focus or blurred.

EDIT: Dayglow beat me to it.

EDIT: So did Stormcrow.

JG52Krupi
04-22-2011, 07:02 PM
How would the PC know what to blur and what focus on?

All a head tracking device does is tell the PC where to centre the on-screen image. The PC has no clue as to where the users' eyes are actually looking. As such it can't make any reliable deductions about which part of the screen should be in focus or blurred.

EDIT: Dayglow beat me to it.

EDIT: So did Stormcrow.

The technology is there ROF uses it, but you have to turn off AA to select it.

Lixma
04-22-2011, 07:25 PM
The technology is there ROF uses it, but you have to turn off AA to select it.
It's a psuedo-effect. It just tracks your head position and blurs the outer edges. Like a fuzzy tunnel. If I want to glance at my instruments I have to physically move my head down to 'de-blur' them.

We'll need iris scanners (or something) for a PC to even begin to guess where we are actually was looking, and therefore which area of the screen to blur.

I was going to grab a few pictures to illustrate but the ROF mothership is on the dark side at the moment.

JG52Krupi
04-22-2011, 07:35 PM
It's a psuedo-effect. It just tracks your head position and blurs the outer edges. Like a fuzzy tunnel. If I want to glance at my instruments I have to physically move my head down to 'de-blur' them.

We'll need iris scanners (or something) for a PC to even begin to guess where we are actually was looking, and therefore which area of the screen to blur.

I was going to grab a few pictures to illustrate but the ROF mothership is on the dark side at the moment.

:D

I understand where you are coming from but you clearly do not understand the drain on resources that implementing these will have on a already system pushing game.

I agree that at present track ir users do have more of an advantage than they had compared to 1946. The best they could do at the moment would be to remove the head locking in the shift f1 view.

Lixma
04-22-2011, 07:39 PM
:D

I understand where you are coming from but you clearly do not understand the drain on resources that implementing these will have on a already system pushing game.


What on Earth are you talking about?

JG52Krupi
04-22-2011, 07:41 PM
What on Earth are you talking about?

The team are working on other things at this moment in time, all I am saying is that don't except any changes soon. :( Sorry i did not mean to be offensive.

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-22-2011, 07:46 PM
The most important thing to retain on this thread is that we have come to the conclusion that the aim circle should be wobbling freely as long as one of both virtual eyes can see the full aim circle on the reflector glas. The dev team should take notice of this and hopefully implement this in one of the next patches.

Lixma
04-22-2011, 07:55 PM
The team are working on other things at this moment in time, all I am saying is that don't except any changes soon. :( Sorry i did not mean to be offensive.

The tone of the your post suggested you had caught me out in some hideously embarrassing gaffe!

Wasn't offended....just genuinely baffled that's all.

:)

The most important thing to retain on this thread is that we have come to the conclusion that the aim circle should be wobbling freely as long as one of both virtual eyes can see the full aim circle on the reflector glas. The dev team should take notice of this and hopefully implement this in one of the next patches.

Huzzah! (etc...)

GOA_Potenz
04-22-2011, 08:27 PM
trackir or free track!!!

Lixma
04-22-2011, 08:38 PM
Personally i'd go with Track-IR if you can afford it.

:grin:

Pist-N-Broke
04-22-2011, 08:45 PM
FFS stop comparing the revi to the apache, that monocle projects the image directly into the pilots eye the revi does not do this.

Ah, explain how the monocle 'projects' the image into the eye?

You do realise that the 'projection' has to make it through the pilots eye lens, iris, and then be focused on to the retina at the back of the eye?

And can you please explain how the pilots eye can then focus to inifity at the outside world, and targets, and at the same time focus on the monocle projected HUD?

The answer is neither image is 'projected'. Revi, apache HUD, or the outside world have to have equal focal points at the same time, or at least one is going to be seriously out of focus. You can't 'project' images in to the eye. The eye has to focus the light on to the retina.

Hatch
04-22-2011, 09:16 PM
Well Canon did have autofocus that focussed on the point you were looking at. So the tech already exists and is quite old as these things go.

Perhaps the next stage in tracking device's.
Sorry for not really elaborating in my posts but I always assume everyone's a genius :grin:

KOM.Nausicaa
04-22-2011, 11:00 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflex_sight



OK, what would he see?

Thanks I know how a reflex sight works.

The whole mistake you are doing since I do not know how many posts, is to assume the reflex sight is set up to project into the right eye by default. It's an assumption, and it's wrong, because the pilots head is not in the position to make that work by default - for many reasons. It only works if you lean slightly right and forward. Note, not much forward - most here have no idea how small the Bf109 cockpit is, and how close you are to the instrument panel. The sim gives a wrong impression of that.

What the sim shows in the normal view (half cut of circle) is indeed what you see if your head is in the "default" position, and the leaning right and forward (shift F1) is pretty much spot on. What is NOT correct is the subjective impression of distance to the panel in the sim.

Lixma
04-22-2011, 11:33 PM
I'm too tired to repeat myself tonight so i'll limit myself to this....

What the sim shows in the normal view (half cut of circle) is indeed what you see if your head is in the "default" position

No it doesn't.

CoD's default view is what a Cyclops would see; a being with one eye looking straight down the centre-line of the aircraft. To my knowledge no Cyclops ever flew for the Luftwaffe....although I confess I have no hard data on the issue.

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-23-2011, 12:00 AM
Poor Lixma. Hopes getting high that finally people understood and then somebody jumps in that obviously hasn't read all posts or did understand them.

Lixma's right. Period.

KOM.Nausicaa
04-23-2011, 12:32 AM
No he is not. He is dead wrong. The sim default view is what you see, it is correct -- except for being much closer to the panel IRL. A small movement is enough to put your body/head into position. But you do NOT see the full circle as he pretends. I have experienced it myself in a cockpit replica 1:1 with working REVI once. (109 artisanal replica) There was a youtube video about that thing, but it's a long time ago. Can't find it.


And yes I am German. Btw, If someone is interested he can experience it at the technical museum in Berlin, but with a FW 190 cockpit. Same principle and REVI position though.

41Sqn_Stormcrow
04-23-2011, 12:44 AM
Lixma ist spot on. Obviously you did not bother to read the thread. I say it in German to get myself understood.

Lixma hat absolut recht. Was wir heute im Spiel sehen, berücksichtigt nicht stereoskopisches Sehen mit zwei Augen. Das Spiel tut so, als hätte der Pilot nur ein Auge. Natürlich, wenn man das Cockpit einfach nur mal so sieht, denkt man, das, was Lixma sagt, kann gar nicht stimmen, und genau das habe ich auch anfangs gedacht. Dann habe ich aber mal genau nachgelesen und versucht zu verstehen, was Lixma uns zu erklären versucht. Und dann verstanden. Man kommt zu dem falschen Schluss, dass Lixma Unrecht hätte, weil man selber keine Erfahrung hat mit derartigen Vorrichtungen und dadurch falsche Schlüsse zieht. Es gibt auch viele Leute, die, wenn sie einen Science Fiction Film sehen, denken, es sei ganz normal, dass das vorbeifliegende Raumschiff Motorengeräusche von sich gibt.
Eine Kamera und damit jedes Video gibt den wirklichen Sachverhalt absolut falsch wieder, weil eine Kamera nicht über stereoskopische Sicht verfügt, da sie nur ein Auge hat.

Mach mal einen Versuch:
Nimm mal Deine Hand und halte sie 10 bis 30 cm vor eines Deiner beiden Augen, aber lasse Dein anderes Auge ebenfalls offen. Dann schaue auf etwas dahinter (z.B. den Bildschirm), aber so, dass das eine Auge mit der Hand im Blickfeld die Hand immer noch sieht. Was Du sehen wirst, ist eine halbdurchsichtige Hand, die sich dem Hintergrund überlagert. Das Hirn verbindet nämlich das, was beide Augen sehen, zu einem einzigen Bild. Das heißt, das Gehirn überlagert das Bild, dass das Auge mit der Hand sieht, mit dem Bild, dass das andere Auge sieht. Genauso funktioniert das mit dem Revi. Wenn jetzt das eine Auge den Zielkreis sieht und man hält das andere Auge offen, wird das Gehirn beide Bilder verbinden und der Pilot sieht einen Zielkreis, aber nicht auf dem Revi, sondern halt sonst wo.

KOM.Nausicaa
04-23-2011, 01:06 AM
Seufz.....Was du nicht verstehen willst, ist das dein Kopf im cockpit NICHT in der Position ist die nötig ist um den von dir beschrieben Effekt zu erhalten. Das habe ich selber erfahren. Man muss sich nach VORNE UND RECHTS lehnen. Wenn auch nur sehr wenig, da der Kopf sehr nahe am Revi ist, besonders wenn man gross ist. (ich bin 1,85)

Du musst mir bitte nicht das Reflexvisier oder Optik erklären, danke, ich habe meine Physik klassen besucht.