well, if you can't put up something to verify your claim... just say so.


and... "what is magnification??

World English Dictionary
magnification (ˌmæɡnɪfɪˈkeɪʃən)

— n
1. the act of magnifying or the state of being magnified
2. the degree to which something is magnified
3. a copy, photograph, drawing, etc, of something magnified
4. a measure of the ability of a lens or other optical instrument to magnify, expressed as the ratio of the size of the image to that of the object

Already did. Check this post;

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpos...&postcount=198

Well that's a start - so it's the APPARENT size of something isn't it?

So apparent to what (ie, what is the sensor detecting the 'apparent' size of something?), how do we measure apparent size and how can we increase (ie magnify) the apparent size of something?

yes, I saw your cheap trick there.... well done err except, you were saying FoV and binocluars (zooming) were the same thing. All you have explained is the FoV of a pair of binoculars and the properties of maginfication with regard to which end of the binoculars are being looked through.

try again...

Ahh but there's more to it - FOV and magnification are LINKED, not just ASPECTS of binoculars you see!

Think deeply for a moment about what is happening. Light is coming in at certain angular limits - lets call this the 'angle of view' and in the case of our eyes its something like 90 degree cones for each eye - and the eye is focussing it onto a small sensor called the retina.

What binoculars, telescopes and magnifying glasses do is modify the Angle of view from which light is being collected, then REFOCUS it onto the eye and retina! Actually, so do photographic lenses.

Let me explain that a bit more. A telescope, for example, will grab light from a cone much smaller than our normal angle of view/field of view of 90 degrees per eye, then refocus and shift the light rays to project them onto our WHOLE retina! So it is as if our retina didn't change in size, but our eye focussed light from a much smaller cone - say a 5 degree cone rather than 90 degree cone - onto it.

The result is that the full visual acuity of our retina is focussed on a much smaller part of the world, and that part of the world appears to increase in size - it is 'magnified'.

In other words, they modify the ANGLE OF VIEW, also know as the FIELD OF VIEW, in order to magnify! IT is the very PRINCIPLE by which magnification works!

A related way of thinking about this is that we judge the size of something by its angular size - the amount of our view that it occupies. Our brain then figures out distance to interpolate actual size. OF course, our brain does not know exactly how much of our field of vision something occupies - it receives information from the retina. So it is actually the size of an image on the retina that is used to judge apparent size. This allows us to trick the brain by bypassing the normal cone of vision our eye projects onto the retina, and thus make a small angle of view occupy more of our retina! Thus, we have magnification.

ANGLE/FIELD OF VIEW is FUNDAMENTAL to magnification!


So now games -

Let's step back for a moment. You are sitting in a room with a monitor a certain distance in front of your of a certain size (lets assume you dont move closer/further). This monitor only occupies a portion of your angle/field of view, and thus only a portion of the image being projected by your eye onto your retina.

On this monitor (lets assume no bezel) is displayed a game with a certain amount of the world displaying according to the game's 'FOV' setting. What does this setting do?

Like a telescope or lens, except purely in the mathematics of 3d rendering, the FOV setting determines how much of the 3d 'scene' to render onto the screen (let's ignore perspective, ie, how straight lines appear and how things are distorted in it, which can of course be changed too). Its not actually a cone, unlike our eye, because the monitor is generally square, but it could be of course. But it is like a rectangular cone into the world.

If the FOV is set high, then a larger rectangular cone of the world is displayed on the monitor - but there is a cost - the monitor has certain acuity limits (resolution for example) and fine detail information is lost. Moreover, however, the monitor still occupies the same portion of the viewer's retina, so things will appear SMALLER than they would in reality, and with less detail (because our retina has acuity limits too).

If we set FOV to EXACTLY EQUAL the angle of view (and portion of our retina) that the monitor's image occupies, than projections of objects on the screen will occupy AS LARGE A PORTION OF OUR RETINA AS THEY WOULD IN REALITY. This is what I call a 1:1 view. The result? OBJECTS APPEAR AT THE SAME ANGULAR AND APPARENT SIZE AS IN REALITY! There's still some loss of acuity though, because the resolution of the monitor is likely LOWER than the visual acuity of our retina to discern details in the image of the monitor projected onto it - in other words, resolution on the monitor is not high enough to exceed the capabilities of our eye. But at 1:1, objects occupy as much of our retina and appear as large as they would in reality.

The big drawback is that only a small portion of the world or a few objects can be displayed on our retina - so we get 'tunnel vision', as you pointed out earlier. Such is the cost of 1:1 apparent size.

So what happens if we set FOV in the game LOWER than the angle/field of view the monitor occupies on our retina? Well we get a zoomed, or 'magnified' (and by this I mean a magnification of more than 1x) view, because the portion of the world displayed on our monitor now occupies a LARGER part of our retina than it would IF WE WERE IN THE GAME WORLD ITSELF AS HUMAN BEINGS. Remember that game worlds are basically representations of our physical worlds as if we occupied them!

This is basically as if we stood in the game world as human beings and use binoculars/telescopes. Now, the apparent size of objects is GREATER than it would be with the normal view of our eye, and so our retina's visual acuity and our monitor's acuity is bieng used to discern MORE detail in a SMALLER portion of the world. Just like telescopes.


Now there is an important aspect that I have not mentioned, and that is the tradeoff between realistic apparent size (ie 1:1 view) and realistic ANGLE OF VIEW INTO THE GAME WORLD. Because we are flexible and goal oriented beings, we do not necessarily put a premium on one or the other, and are able to adapt to either.

In other words, we might consider it more important to use our monitors to display a LARGER portion of the world and a LARGER FOV, despite the loss of visual acuity, because we dont actually need to see fine details to play the game!

OR, and this is why we use it in IL2, we might want to display LESS of the game world and use our monitor to display a SMALLER portion of the world to maximise the visual acuity of fine details, because we need these to play the game (for example gunnery in IL2).

Both are compromises that stem from the fact we are trying to play a game with a small monitor. And this is why I keep telling you that you shouldn't look at this in such an inflexible way - FOV is a compromise, THERE IS NO CORRECT FOV IN A GAME WHEN PRESENTED WITH LIMITED DISPLAY SIZE!

well, if you want to use real binoculars to zoom into the narrow FoV (as selected) of the (any) computer game as displayed on your monitor and view the pixels real big... go right ahead.
With regard to the (any computer) game and selecting a narrow Fov, and using in sim (assuming the game has them available) binoculars, you'll find that changing the FoV and zooming in or out are not the same thing.






*Edit


Lenses
A convex lens bends the light that goes through it toward a focal point. The light spreads out again past this focal point. Magnifying glasses are convex lenses. When you use one, the lens bends the light rays so that they come together and focus on the lens within your eye. The light then spreads out as the rays continue past the focal point, and they hit the retina of the eye. The spreading of the light makes the image viewed appear much larger than it really is because it causes the image to take up more space on the retina. Moving the magnifying glass closer or farther away from the eye will change how much the light is spread on the retina. The closer the magnifying glass is to the eye, the bigger the image will appear.



Read more: How Does Magnification Work? | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/how-does_4947702...#ixzz1tF7id261




No... lenses are... but that seems omitted from your addin to your previous post...

FoV (or as you'll interchange them now Angle of View) is the amount (the angle) the lens "sees"... magnification, via a series of lenses as with binoculars, brings that image closer (or further away if you look down the wrong end)

Reread the post, ive added a lot.

Ahh now that is an interesting point - I COULD use binoculars to increase the APPARENT SIZE of the monitor FIRST, and thus make pixels BIGGER in apparent size!

But what am I reallly doing? I am actually increasing the portion of my retina that is taken up by the monitor! And even more interestingly, I am actually changing the real world angle/field of view that the that the monitor occupies and thus need to change the FOV ingame if I want to maintain the same apparent size of objects ingame! Do you see now?

Ah but they are!

Let's think of the typical game binoculars. When you 'activate' them, your whole view is suddenly taken up by a simulated 'view' from them. Here is an example;

http://farm1.staticflickr.com/51/128...bf05a963c9.jpg

So what's actually happening?

Well, let's break this down.

First, there is a UI texture being applied that creates the 'binocular' outline itself. That's the black bit around the edge. Its basically just a texture like this;

http://img281.imageshack.us/img281/5...culars22cc.png


But objects clearly appear larger when you use the ingame binoculars! So what actually causes the magnification of the image?

You guessed it! FOV!

All the developers do, apart from this black outline texture, is lower the FOV!

Look at what this 3D Game Programming guide for example has to say;
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=...culars&f=false

Yep, that is all there is to it!

read mine...I added some as well.


keep on trying....

Have you read my post and what you added? Do you realise they prove me right?

What is being described here is this - the magnifying glass bends light gathered all over its surface toward a point behind it in a cone. The closer you get to that lens, the bigger the image on your retina, and the more magnified the view.

Do you know another way of describing that? That's right! The amount of your retina taken up by the image determines apparent size!

Think back to what I wrote - it is ultimately the size of the image on your RETINA, not your actual angle of view, that determines apparent size. When nothing interferes with your angle of view, your eye does the focussing onto the retina, and thus your actual angle of view correlates with apparent size.

But if we place a lens - such as a magnifying glass, telescope, binoculars etc - in front of the eye, your ACTUAL ANGLE OF VIEW - ie, the view out from your face - is no longer important, because your eye's field of view has effectively been replaced (or supplemented really) by that of the lens! And depending on the lens, it may have a very wide or narrow angle of view.

The fundamental principle here however is the portion of an image that is being displayed on your retina. The more of an object fills your retina, the larger it will appear!

Well it actually makes the image FROM the lens take up more of your retina. Its the image on the retina that is important.

Now you might say - well whats that got to do with fov? Why isnt it just bringing the image 'closer'. Well, first of all, its about the size of an image on the retina, not how 'close' it is. Thats why we talk about angular size.

For example, how big is the sun? Our brain knows its very big, but in reality, it appears no larger than the moon! Thats because the moon is much closer, and its angular size is similar!

If we didn't have extra information to determin which is bigger, we could be forgiven for thinking the sun was no bigger than the moon!

More importantly though, LENSES HAVE FOVS OF THEIR OWN, AND IT IS THIS FOV THAT IS IMPORTANT. In other words, the FOV OUT of the binoculars is given by the lenses in it, and this ultimately determines what portion of the world the binoculars focus on our retina. The smaller this slice of the world, the bigger individual objects appear on our retina - and thus the more they are MAGNIFIED.

Try that one again...

Its been updated with a thorough explanation.

But let's just double back to a crucial bit of info;

GAME DEVELOPERS USE FOV TO MAKE ZOOMED IN BINOCULAR AND TELESCOPIC VIEWS!

Yep, it really is all about FOV!

If you want, I can even BUILD you 'mock binoculars' in CLoD, by doing nothing more than changing the FOV and introducing a black outline texture! Its THAT simple!

In other words, every time I switch to 30 fov in IL2 CLoD, its as if I was using what most games call 'binoculars' - it's the same zoomed in view and all it is missing is the black outline texture. But even this 'binocular' view still doesn't make individual objects appear at 1:1 apparent size because my monitor is still too small.

to make the dots bigger ;)






most FPS's are user altered to run @ 90 deg FoV and in those games running a high FoV is considered a cheat... altering the Fov for zoom, is to "assume" a zoom bearing in mind the technical limitations of monitors.


Field of View is associated with magnification yes, I've never denied that, however, they are not same thing as you claimed earlier.

Ok tell me you're just being an ass now!

But seriously, the dots get harder to see at smaller fovs because of the way they work - they remain the same size in terms of pixels, except now they are further apart and harder to see. Try it!

The main reason you'd want to use a 1:1 view is not to make dots bigger, but to actually FOREGO (mostly) the need for dots!

By making the apparent size of distant aircraft as close to reality as possible, they disappear at the appropriate distance, meaning that dots are no longer necessary.

Remember, dots are artificial rendering modifications introduced by 1C to make spotting aircraft at long distances possible at larger fovs (70/90) - to simulate a real pilot's spotting ability.

Cheat is a relative term and I don't want to discuss that. Let's put it this way - if a modification provides an advantage to a small number of players (which wider fovs in FPS's do) in a competitive environment and it is not officially sanctioned for whatever reason, it is a cheat. It could STILL be realistic you know - but be considered a cheat.

In IL2 CLoD, the difference is that fov facilities are provided and officially sanctioned so its not a cheat.

When it comes to zoom in games though, FOV is what is used to zoom the view by developers, whether we are talking about binoculars, telescopes etc. Thats just a fact

I know its hard to admit, but what I said was true. Let's go back to what I said;
As you can see, what I said was true - the way 'FOV' in games is used to magnify and the way angle of view in binoculars is used to magnify works on the same principles.

What you've said, by contrast, is things like this;
Which is just completely wrong - FOV is USED to create 'binoculars' in games!


By the way, FOV is very dependent on how far you sit from your monitor and how big it is, and we are by no means helpless as players when it comes to improving our visual acuity. Remember this formula?

FOV = ((((screenwidth/viewer distance)/2)tan-1)2)

Depending on how large your monitor is and particularly how close you sit to your monitor, the 1:1 (or 'optically correct' according to valve) FOV changes a lot!

Lets use my own monitor as an example. My monitor is a 22" CRT that is 41 cm wide on its viewable area (thats screenwidth). So let's see what my 1:1 (ie, optically correct FOV where objects appear roughly as large in terms of apparent size/angular size as in reality) is for various viewing distances:

1 metre - 1:1 FOV = 23 degrees
90 cm - 1:1 FOV = 25 degrees
80 cm - 1:1 FOV = 28 degrees
70 cm - 1:1 FOV = 32 degrees
60 cm - 1:1 FOV = 37 degrees
50 cm - 1:1 FOV = 44 degrees
40 cm - 1:1 FOV = 54 degrees
30 cm - 1:1 FOV = 68 degrees
20 cm - 1:1 FOV = 91 degrees

Notice the fov's I have highlighted. These are the distances at which the relevant FOV appears as near to reality as possible given my existing monitor. If I sit 80cm away, then at 30 fov objects appear roughly as large (and thus easy to spot) as in reality. If I sit 30 cm away, then at 70 fov objects appear roughly as large as in reality. If I sit at an eye-crushing 20cm, then at 90 fov objects appear roughly as large as in reality. Note that 'dots' are more visible at 70/90 fov, and if I sit very close, spotting them will probably be too easy. Notice also how much the 1:1 FOV changes based on just viewing distance! A larger monitor would also have a big effect.

Now remember - 1:1 FOV is the FOV setting at which individual objects on the screen APPEAR ROUGHLY AS LARGE TO OUR EYE AS IN REALITY. Anytime I go BELOW the 1:1 FOV for any given setting - for example, if I am sitting 50 cm away from the monitor and switch to 30 FOV - I am actually MAGNIFYING objects compared to reality, and making more detail visible than a real pilot could see!

So yes, its very possible to gain a large advantage over other players just by moving closer to your monitor, let alone using a larger monitor! And this is not just about 30 FOV - its the same for ANY fov setting - just by moving closer, my 'dots' are indeed getting bigger ;) Are you going to stop moving closer to your monitor when you fly online? Would you like to prevent others from doing the same?

now you're just being plain rude (I'll bet you vote Labor too ;) )


not according to what you said here





with regard to the limits of current monitor technology and keeping in with the realism


go wider with FPS and narrower with combat flight sims... if its sounds like and walks like, a duck ~


because of the limitions of computer gaming/ monitors... notice how pupil exit size isn't taken into account




FoV is associated with magnification... it is not, however the same thing

Look down a tube with one eye, what happens?






*and an edit for the incessant edits...

by physically moving closer to the monitor, the dots are getting bigger?
Slightly bigger yes, but in reality all that is achieved is a clearer definition and perhaps eye damage.

and "let alone using a larger monitor"? well that is part of your problem right there ;) (which was taken care of by the developers regarding using real big monitors as a cheat; as in an unfair advantage online)

Well you were being an ass, weren't you? You know dots get smaller with lower fovs but you still insist on saying it. I'm not talking about your intellectual capacity (though I have my doubts given you still don't get it after 10 pages) and political choices, they are your own concern - I am simply describing how you are choosing to behave (like an ass).

Btw, I don't vote Labour. Stereotypes ey!

You do realise your Field of View does not change when you look down a tube with one eye right? Most of it is simply filled by the tube ;)

It's important to seperate what you see with what is happening.

Lol what you think they are magic? They are just a bunch of pixels that don't even account for FOV! They don't magically give you the most realistic spotting experience you can get.

Garbage. FOV is a rendering property and has nothing to do with the limitations of computer gaming and monitors. The CHOICE of FOV does - but not FOV itself.

If everybody suddenly had wraparound monitors, games could suddenly use much wider fovs. But they would still need to use FOV to zoom in.

Remember also that FOV doesnt have to be all or nothing. Modern games can have a general view with one fov and a display within that (like say a sniper scope) that actually renders part of the scene at a different FOV. But FOV is what is being used, period.

In case we ever doubted you are a grating, unpleasant personality that looks for people to blame, you make it clear once more. You must have a very bitter life.

Are you not doing well online? Feel the need to blame the game's sanctioning for fov changes? Well thats too bad. 1C officially sanctions it so its not a cheat. It also happens to make dots harder to spot although it is very useful in other ways, and widely used.

Anyway, I thought you were against whining? What makes you different?

You're a bit slow aren't you :)

Let me repeat once more. In practice and my testing, the dots are actually harder to spot in 30 fov. Try it. You'll see :)

Of course!

No, MUCH bigger! At least 4 times larger. That is also what 'clearer definition' means - each pixel on the monitor is much larger, and occupies more space on your retina, so it is much easier to tell them apart (and the details they represent).

I agree on the eye damage though. Never said it was practical - just possible.:grin:

Aren't you using a 22" CRT also?

A larger monitor can, in the strictest sense of the word, be an unfair advantage. If there were an IL2 professional tournament (in like a tournament hall or something), things like this would need be standardised.

But I am not against people using larger monitors of course! A larger monitor is nicer to look at and covers more of your field of view (while still sitting a decent distance from it) which is ultimately more realistic and comfortable.

As for the developers addressing this. I don't know what you are talking about - but I reckon the developers should have no business telling people what monitors to use online. If I had a wraparound, 360 degree view monitor handy, i'd want Cliffs of Dover to support it no matter what certain online knobs thought about it.

which translates as "make the dots bigger"

Boy, you really didn't do well in school, did you? I bet corporal punishment was banned when you were a kid. Too bad.

The dots ONLY means the high contrast pixels that appear instead of aircraft at long distances.

And those don't get any bigger. Go on. Try it and prove me wrong!

IF it looks like an ass, smells like an ass and talks like an ass..


Anyway, you've had your fair chance. You want to stay ignorant? Your choice.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=6909

wot?? and no three minute warning? spin it around all you want....





which translates as "make the dots bigger"

Clearly you just don't understand any of this topic. I expect you are intellectually challenged. Still, I'll post a clarification;

He is talking about rendering distances for LODs and objects. Mostly ground objects, as aircraft are already rendered very far out or as dots.

Again, talking about ground objects. Aircraft already have the system in place.

The decision on how far to render ground objects also depends on performance and FPS hit on middle range systems and how far these objects can be seen comes down to factors other than LOD (including screen resolution).

Given the last point, you can't have a LOD system that is switched off on medium systems and does not render objects at long distance, but does on high end systems because of fair gameplay. This is about FPS and performance hits, not spotting and dots.

Justifying the position above, medium system players should be able to have access to the same LOD rendering system for ground objects as power users and any ground object dot system should scale across resolutions to ensure fair gameplay and to prevent the community turning on players using powerful pc's. This is all meant to justify why the developers are taking their time developing a lod system for ground objects.

They like the way dots and other aspects of the graphics and gameplay systems are consistent across low spec and high spec PC's and intend to continue to develop in this way.

Note that they do not say anything about large monitors or aircraft dots.

How old are you?

keep up the denigrations, son...
and according to you, I would be 7. what's your next one, perhaps something about special needs?


was the question to which O.M. responded... "greater resolution" is in reference to larger monitors (you needed to be there at the time ;)









Which I suggested before, along with a penalty for in cockpit binocular use. Penalty being one hand off the stick or off the throttle (adding an exit pupil penalty as well) coded in.

Tell you what. Since this is plainly all you want, why don't you go start a thread about it, have your idea rejected on its own merit, and leave what is here to be considered on its? You're clearly not interested in anything I have to say and, well, given that I have already heard the breadth of your input, I would have to say the feeling is mutual.

I'm not sure why I continued the discussion. Perhaps I thought you might be interested, against the odds, in learning something about FOV and its uses. I was clearly wrong. So considering that your only aim is to raise hell about the inequity of fov switching and the perfection to be attained in the 60 fov + binoculars, I can't help you. Why don't you go look for a broader audience?

Sincerely,

Bored and disinterested

leaving again??

that's three dollars I've lost already and now it is looking like a fourth...


well you want "realism" and "what the pilot really sees", so those penalties for incockpit binoculars (zoom) would be perfect.

Oh, hang on... you'd only want "realism" and "what the pilot really sees" up to a point, eh

and you're still stuck on the photography aspect, when in reality, you could have learnt something from projection, which is the image on the screen.

Well it seems to me that you are the one who wants something and are upset that its regarded as something silly that nobody else wants. So you come here and waste my time, and almost certainly waste your time.

Why bother? Just accept that you wont get a riser or support out of me or anyone else. Least of all the devs. Get over it and move on. Or get banned, I don't care.

Bugga... there goes that fourth dollar


Banned because I suggested you only want "what the pilot really sees" up to a certain point? nah... you got upset because you got caught out - any more names you want to call me??

irR4tiOn4L, it seems that you didn't follow the advise you gave to me. :D

Ok with your 60fov and real size objects you totally lose your peripherical vision: how do you think to solve this VERY important issue?

We are talking about a combat flight simulator here...

I sorely regretted it, I assure you!

The number one rule of giving advice: make sure you follow it yourself first!

Well I do hope SOME of the last 15 pages was useful to someone.

60 Fov is actually only marginally more zoomed than 70 fov (which I use for SA). Its probably not 'real size' objects either for most people's monitors/viewing distance.

For example, on my 22" CRT, 22 fov would be 'real size' (which is obviously a huge loss of SA). I would need to sit just 40cm away to make 60 fov display objects at 'real size'.

The basic thing to understand about Wolf Rider's contributions in this thread though is that he doesn't care what you have to say or what problems you have. He actually just wants people to stop switching to zoomed fovs like 30 fov because he blames this for his lack of performance online (bet he flies through trees to escape though).

He feels that people are 'zooming in' with 30 fov and unfairly making the dots bigger. He is so outraged about it that he spites them for it by suggesting the developers should replace 30 fov with ingame 'binoculars' instead. But remember that basic thing - he doesn't actually care what you think or have to say about it.

exactly correct (in any angle of view used though) , in fact you lose your "peripheral vision" entirely (when using a monitor/ screen), as you would require a full 360 degree screen (ie inside a sphere) and the flight sim would have to be coded to project onto it properly.






and with a change of tac., I'm now a dollar up ;)

It's not an answer.

Since this simulator had to be sold to "average" buyers who can't permit themselves to own such a sphere (if it really exists... but why 360°? 180°h & 120°v is the human fov) we have to reach a compromise. So I repeat: how can you retain real size objects keeping at the same time a realistic peripheral vision?

re-read the reply... "peripheral vision" can't be recreated on a monitor which sits directly in front of you.



the simmer may wish to "look around" and with anything less, they would lose full range. If the simmer just wanted to look straight ahead... a sphere wouldn't be necessary at all and something that fiited with the range of vision would suffice, to maintain "usable" and "peripheral vision".



in computer modelling (simming) that is the name of the game, though some of the reasons why a "compromise" is adopted may vary....



see the above points, you've inadvertently answered your own question

So here you are showing that you didn't understand what this thread is about: it's not about what you (player) see, it's about what the pilot sees in a combat flight simulator that is not an expensive military simulator (they can have all they want... US army is spending $57millions on an infantry simulator).

When you pull a high G manouvre and the image on your screen blackens what's happening? It's the pilot's G-Lock, not yours.

When a shell pass through the cockpit it's the pilot the one who gets hurt, not the player.

Lets change sim:
In Arma2 your soldier is running and after 30 seconds he slows down: but you (player) are not tired...

Peripheral vision can't be reproduced? Really?

Take one of the old Quake games and change the fov to a great number like 180 (I remember playing at 90 probably)... then you have the same fov of a human being but things are distorted and smaller and you still see clearly enemies at your 3 and 9 o'clock.

It's easy for a graphic engine to reproduce peripheral vision with those settings: the game renders really detailed objects in front of you (60°) while on your left and right it renders approximate objects (like blurred shadows) that you need to put on your focus to recognize them.

Here's a Fisheye Quake image with fov at 170...
http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/2903/70779523.jpg

You only need to decide which's your priority: a realistic reppresentation of what a real pilot can see while he's looking through a 22" monitor (PPI 92) or a distorted one that give to you more important informations (but still not all of them, and these are the targets of this thread).

IL2's choice is between them. The 30fov and the 90fov are need to balance out the things because:

A) Objects in normal fov are smaller
B) The normal FOV is not bigger enough to have a realistic SA.

And then, about the zoom cheat we could talk about visual acuity, PPI and DPI... but I really got to work now...

Well said, I appreciated that explanation.

It is difficult to determine exactly what the OP is about, but what is clear is the topic seems to be on "we can't spot the dots" (yes its a topic which has come up from time to time in various forms over many years now.



Yes, that's right... it is simulated



That is correct for most games



depends on how long the player has been playing the game for... but basically, what you say is corrrect...



With a full wrap around screen it can, with the correct coding... but not sitting in front of a monitor



nooo, that is 180 degree FoV and explains clearly why those simmers want to run at as large a FoV as possible




Its still not "peripheral vision".



Normal in cockpit FoV is 70, not 30 or 90 and the distortion comes from switching to a FoV other than "normal", "what the pilot really sees" can only be "what the pilot really sees" on a full wrap around screen system and really... the snapshot is only a very large FoV projected onto the monitor


as mentioned earlier, that's why FPS simmers want to run as large a FoV as possible






Now, if your above remarks are for in favour of "what the pilot really sees", then your attempted points on peripheral vision should clearly indicate to you that a large Fov compared to your narrow FoV favoured, is also "what the pilot really sees"

So moving on Manu, have you given more thought or developed your idea?

I use a 46" lcd hdtv, and the supid dot doesn't get bigger, still stuck with a tiny dot up until you can smell the engine.. seriously,, the dot thingy is a big (tiny) problem..

Really? How far away do you sit and what is its resolution?