![]() |
|
IL-2 Sturmovik The famous combat flight simulator. |
View Poll Results: Would you sacrifice small graphical issues in order to be able to use 6-DoF | |||
Yes I could cope with this as it would add to my flying experience |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
270 | 85.44% |
No, I'd rather have my head on a fixed stick thanks you very much |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
46 | 14.56% |
Voters: 316. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
Quote:
Guys... do you really expect us to change a cockpit part to a wrong size/proportion by will? Never! Oh I have seen the result of the guy, who thought, that was a good idea... disgusting! Here... this is the best grafic... made by someone else, that I found, so I don't have to do an own... compare for yourself: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() The reason for the bad view in game is the problem, that is this thread about: the ugly fixed PoV. You demand (sorry I understand it that way) from us, that we should change the model instead of looking for a good solution? I really cannot go with that foulty solution. What about all other planes? Each one of them is suffering from fixed PoV! Thats a fact! Did you fly Mc.200/202/205 series lately? Checked PoV? It had been changed with 4.10. Moved forward for 202 and much more for 205 (making them all equally). The rear view was very worse before, now its ok (still a penalty without 6DoF). Or what about Ki-43 I ? No problem with that one? Moving the PoV is the only thing we can consider as an approach to make the resampling better to the real thing, but changing the model... no.
__________________
---------------------------------------------- For bugreports, help and support contact: daidalos.team@googlemail.com For modelers - The IL-2 standard modeling specifications: IL-Modeling Bible |
|
|