Revi Sight Fix?

[JG52Krupi]

Hi B6,

Are the guys working on the gunsights corrections/solution?

I.e. the target needs to be centred!

[5./JG27.Farber]

I think that requires further explination Krupi. ;)

[ATAG_Doc]

They look fine to me Krup.

[senseispcc]

.
I think it is the right deportation of the german revi gunsight? is it not?
If it is then it is normal the German pilot should use their right eye to shoot down the RAF planes in the BF109 it was always so even in the first IL2! ;) And in reality also! :o

[JG52Krupi]

This is worth posting.

It's a schematic of the FW-190. Look carefully.....

http://img856.imageshack.us/img856/2049/190revi1.jpg

Make a note of....

a) the center-line.

b) the sight-line.

c) the position of the reticle

d) the horizontal separation between centre-line and sight-line - 40mm.

Now grab a tape measure, find a mirror and measure the distance from the centre of your nose to the middle of your right pupil.....

Mine is 37mm.

The offset Revi gunsight is installed to sit directly in the right eye's line of sight.

No leaning required.

Here's a link to the full image....I'd post it here but it's a bit big....3mb.

http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=w8383ebj6n77up7&thumb=4

:D

When Lixma first came out with this I was dead against it and was on the "lean to see" side of the argument but I have come to the same understanding.

Its all about right eye dominant, in reality the sight would have looked more to the centre than it actually is.

[Matt255]

.
I think it is the right deportation of the german revi gunsight? is it not?
If it is then it is normal the German pilot should use their right eye to shoot down the RAF planes in the BF109 it was always so even in the first IL2! ;) And in reality also! :o
Unfortunately, we don't have a right (or left) eye in CloD (or the first IL2), so that doesn't help. We're all cyclops in CloD.

Imho, the reticle should be put right in the middle. Not the sight itself, but the reticle only. The only possible way, considering the technical limitations. They could even make it an option, so those people who prefer to lean all the time can keep it like that.

[senseispcc]

.
You know if you use the keys ctrl+f1 you see the reticule in the right place!

[CaptainDoggles]

This is, IMO, a really minor issue. We all dealt with it just fine in 1946.

There are much more pressing matters for the devs to attend to IMO.

[JG52Krupi]

.
You know if you use the keys ctrl+f1 you see the reticule in the right place!

And do you know that doing that severly limits your field of view DURRRHHHH!

[Volksieg]

I've never had a problem with this. Sure... it does limit FOV but, considering you can only take on one target at a time and should be firing in short controlled bursts....... not really a problem. Track.... zoom.... aim.... bang... unzoom. Over in seconds. :)

[notafinger!]

Lean left and then center trackIR.

[Matt255]

This is, IMO, a really minor issue. We all dealt with it just fine in 1946.
In 46, you could center your view on the reticle. This was atleast a workaround.

Doesn't work in CloD. You can still get that view, but cou can't look around anymore.

I wouldn't call it a major issue myself, but then this topic does not rate this issue or demands that this should be the priority to work on.

[JG52Krupi]

Lean left and then center trackIR.

Thats what I do currently but its not a great solution to the problem, you need to recentre every now and again which you shouldn't need to do.

Either they should change the fixed position so that you can look around properly or make it so that the rectile is fully displayed on the revi...

[CaptainDoggles]

In 46, you could center your view on the reticle. This was atleast a workaround.

Doesn't work in CloD. You can still get that view, but cou can't look around anymore.

I wouldn't call it a major issue myself, but then this topic does not rate this issue or demands that this should be the priority to work on.

I feel like the only person who doesn't use the "tighten straps" command.

[JG52Krupi]

I feel like the only person who doesn't use the "tighten straps" command.

I don't use it either ;)

[CaptainDoggles]

I don't use it either ;)

I don't re-center the TIR, either though. I just lean my head.

IMO it's just a matter of getting used to it; the shots I miss are because my gunnery isn't great, not because I can't find the reticle.

[senseispcc]

In 46, you could center your view on the reticle. This was atleast a workaround.

Doesn't work in CloD. You can still get that view, but cou can't look around anymore.

I wouldn't call it a major issue myself, but then this topic does not rate this issue or demands that this should be the priority to work on.

In the original IL2 and IL2-1946 you did puch the keys ctrl+F1...strange is it not?!

[gynoflyer]

If they were really interested in realism, the 109 revi sight would look like this...

http://i.imgur.com/JmJk5.jpg

The right eye sees the entire sight (without having to lean) and the brain extrapolates it over the left side of the picture that it sees. The fine adjustments on the revi sight are to allow the pilot to set up the sight's position so that this optical illusion works for him. Should another pilot hop in the seat he would have to probably fine tune it for himself. Left-eye dominant pilots would have a harder time, but I've been told it's something that you can train yourself to do in short order.

The principal works very much like a holosight one would see on a rifle/pistol.

Naturally there would be field of view blurring and slight doubling of the revi glass, and the gauges under it, but sometimes compromises have to be made. It's really funny how "the leaders in realistic flight sims" don't already know all this and have implemented it into the game, or at least made it an option.

(cue people not understanding how vision/the brain's interpretation of objects works and getting mad at this post)

[CaptainDoggles]

If they were really interested in realism, the 109 revi sight would look like this...

Only if you're right-eye dominant.

[Redroach]

Oh yeah, letz get on that bandwagon again! It was soo funny back then! That one guy even made a new account in order to re-post his worked-on screenshot! Good Times!

The 109 Gunsight's placing is correct in CoD. If you want to go on whining, buy a 3D monitor (and implore CoD on implementing 3D mode of course. Judging from the past, this will be the easy part...).

[CaptainDoggles]

Oh yeah, letz get on that bandwagon again! It was soo funny back then! That one guy even made a new account in order to re-post his worked-on screenshot! Good Times!

The 109 Gunsight's placing is correct in CoD. If you want to go on whining, buy a 3D monitor (and implore CoD on implementing 3D mode of course. Judging from the past, this will be the easy part...).

Anyone who's shot a firearm with both eyes open knows what the Revi ought to actually look like.

The screenshot is close, but not quite what you'd actually see.

Simulating true binocular vision with a single monitor isn't easy, and quite frankly I think there's much more pressing issues that I'd rather the developers spend their time on. The simple fact is that we all managed just fine with the current representation of the Revi throughout the IL2 FB years and up to the present.

[5./JG27.Farber]

I get what Krupi is talking about and he has a point, however it shouldn't be a full static HUD. Something mystical woulod be great.

There are more pressing matters like the red aircraft but meh...

S! Krupi! :-P

[adonys]

heh, let the reds whine.. having them with better aircrafts/UFO's would only make us improve our flying. it is always about the pilots, not the machines, and when the machines are better, most of the pilots tend to get sloppier :)

and, what the hell the "tighten straps" command is doing? I've completely forgot about it, I don't even know if it still is in the current version's controls screen, or if it has assigned a key..

[CaptainDoggles]

heh, let the reds whine.. having them with better aircrafts/UFO's would only make us improve our flying. it is always about the pilots, not the machines, and when the machines are better, most of the pilots tend to get sloppier :)

I see this going somewhere productive. http://simhq.com/forum/images/graemlins/default/clapping.gif

[Ze-Jamz]

Thats what I do currently but its not a great solution to the problem, you need to recentre every now and again which you shouldn't need to do.

Either they should change the fixed position so that you can look around properly or make it so that the rectile is fully displayed on the revi...

Why do you need to re centre Krupi?

Once you've done it once with Track you shouldn't have to do it again unless your dancing around in your seat..

[Matze81]

If they were really interested in realism, the 109 revi sight would look like this...

http://i.imgur.com/JmJk5.jpg

The right eye sees the entire sight (without having to lean) and the brain extrapolates it over the left side of the picture that it sees. The fine adjustments on the revi sight are to allow the pilot to set up the sight's position so that this optical illusion works for him. Should another pilot hop in the seat he would have to probably fine tune it for himself. Left-eye dominant pilots would have a harder time, but I've been told it's something that you can train yourself to do in short order.

The principal works very much like a holosight one would see on a rifle/pistol.

Naturally there would be field of view blurring and slight doubling of the revi glass, and the gauges under it, but sometimes compromises have to be made. It's really funny how "the leaders in realistic flight sims" don't already know all this and have implemented it into the game, or at least made it an option.

(cue people not understanding how vision/the brain's interpretation of objects works and getting mad at this post)
A lot of people would probably think that it is a bug, when they fired up the game for the first time and the sight/reticle would look like in the screenshot above. ;)
Without the background info of this thread (I missed any previous thread on this topic), I would think so too, probably.

But now, since I know a bit more (thanks for educating me), I would actually prefer, if they'd change it, like seen in the montage or at least give us the option.

Yeah, I know there's more important things to fix/optimize and whining about it doesn't change sh.t, but I'm just sayin': I'd like it!

[Kodoss]

Just buy a 3d monitor/TV and you have your binocular sight. Problem solved!

Somewhere in this forum were a thread with 3D pics from CloD.

Sooner or later you will have 3D monitors without the stupid glasses.

[335th_GRAthos]

+1 Krupi

I would like to see the same solution as in IL2 1946, I do not use TrackIR 6DOF and it is a real pain in the .... trying to fly, track enemies, aim with the current implementation :(

~S~

[Madfish]

Just buy a 3d monitor/TV and you have your binocular sight. Problem solved!

Somewhere in this forum were a thread with 3D pics from CloD.

Sooner or later you will have 3D monitors without the stupid glasses.

Glasses are fine, it's 3D Monitors that are stupid. They work in the same way as the screenshot above, only showing a fixed focal point with absolute and infinite focus, which you obviously critisize. And since they don't even cover your field of view I don't see what's making a monitor less stupid than an immersive HMD. :rolleyes: And if you're talking about shutter / pola glasses free 3D monitors... well, they suck. I tried them and they do not work nearly as good as the other solutions. Eventually they will but not now.

That said I like the screenshot. It will take YEARS until people have a properly working 3D solution. Probably way more than 5-8. The current gen 3D monitors are nothing but a joke and all HMD's are only beginning to be explorered for the end-user. Monitors are causing people headache and nausea, are having a crappy framerate and are still the old "in front of you" displays - which are rather useless for flying. In fact for flying a 3d screen is REALLY bad as it will "shift" the 3d axis of the plane along with the visual aim but your seat will stay so it's ending up distorted.


Sooo...:

I'd vote for this being an option too.
I'd also like it if they keep the game 3D ready though as more and more enthusiasts will begin adopting 3D hardware around the end of 2012 / mid 2013.

[adonys]

as w're here, talking about 3D, go and listen John Carmack's keynote from this year's Quakecon. He talks a lot in there about VR, and a solution they are working on, together with some other 3rd party. there's also a kick starter project for this, I think. and from what I've heard in there, we should have it commercial at most in 2014

that would be when we'll really start flying, gentlemen :)

[Madfish]

Carmack supposedly canceled "his" project after seeing the Occulus, the Kickstarter project you're talking about. His was way better though in terms of framerate and fluidity - it didn't have the FOV yet though.

But I fear that Occulus is a fake company anyways. All the "big" US gaming icones are siding with it although there are many other HMD's on the market already - not from the USA though.
How else would they be able to produce an HMD without violating literally EVERY patent there is though? HMD's are out there since decades and it would have been easy to support carl zeiss, sony or all the other makers in their development of HMD's.

So I am deeply worried that the Occulus will turn out like the next Natural Point - a monopoly on hard and software, heck, even the API's. That will again limit everyone's options and any real progress. TrackIR is so old and clunky I can't even imagine what will happen if the same goes on in the Head Mounted Display area which is 100 times more important than this lame LED tracking stuff.

Aside from that it's still not fully 3D as there is no depth of field of any sort of eye focus. That's why I'm still saying it will take at least 5-8 years for truly immersive 3D technology to be on the market.

[adonys]

well, carmack just stopped and shared his efforts with Occulus project, and became a support of it. and from what he said at latest Quakecon, it has the FoV, resolution (mostly) and latency he needed and wanted to achieve.

have you seen his 3h keynote from the Quakecon? we'll talk after that..

[Matt255]

In the original IL2 and IL2-1946 you did puch the keys ctrl+F1...strange is it not?!
First of all, it's shift+F1. Ctrl+F1 gives you the no-cockpit view.

Secondly, it worked totally differently in 46 than in CloD.

Strange is it not?

I feel like the only person who doesn't use the "tighten straps" command.
I don't use it, incase you were thinking that.

The 109 Gunsight's placing is correct in CoD.
Nobody is questioning the placing of the gunsight in CloD. It's just that the positioning of the reticle is incorrect.


I really can't understand all this negativity in this topic about that. The current implementation is obviously not great (unless you have a 3D screen or whatever), so why not have atleast the option to get something like in gynoflyer shot. For all the leaners or strap tighteners, they can leave this in as the default or whatever.

And again, nobody so far has demanded that this should be the priority (even though the guys fearing a delay in FM adjustments because of this should probably realise that there are different persons working on FMs than graphics or gui).

[Madfish]

well, carmack just stopped and shared his efforts with Occulus project, and became a support of it. and from what he said at latest Quakecon, it has the FoV, resolution (mostly) and latency he needed and wanted to achieve.

have you seen his 3h keynote from the Quakecon? we'll talk after that..It does not have the latency or framerate. (110fps+)
He said that he now feels that FOV is the (obviously) more important factor to get immersed though - a ton cheaper to achieve as well.

That aside it doesn't change anything about what I said... Occulus is still a fake company to me and it smells fishier than fish. I just hope it won't become the next TrackIR, an absurdely lame company which has kept us from seeing better devices for years... :rolleyes:


I really can't understand all this negativity in this topic about that. The current implementation is obviously not great (unless you have a 3D screen or whatever), so why not have atleast the option to get something like in gynoflyer shot. For all the leaners or strap tighteners, they can leave this in as the default or whatever.
Even with a 3D screen or HMD - currently the targeting reticles are bugged as far as I've tested and heard.