Could 6-DoF ever be available in 4.2 if players could forgive small Graphics issues

[BadAim]

I'm not sure that I really want to get into this, but as a fan of 6Dof I suppose I'll risk it......

Isn't the whole argument that 6Dof isn't perfect so it's no good, kinda throwing the baby out with the bathwater? The system in use now is just as wrong, (granted, it was the best we had when Il2 was developed) and 85% of the respondents seem to agree that the 6Dof that is so far available is the better choice.

In the interest of reason I'd be more than happy if DT were to implement a somewhat more restrictive version of 6Dof, but if it isn't practical within the confines of IL2's code (and DT's other constraints) the version that is available now is better than what we've got IMO (and quite a few others).

[Red Dragon-DK]

Well said BadAim.
If it was done so it work like the one in microsoft flight simulator X I would say it was close to spot on.

[Falke]

Come one, come all, see the mighty fighter pilots lean forward, lean left, lean right and twist to look back... tight straps and all! ... step right this way....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCrKDz8hH5E

(See 2 minutes into video)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hgbo...yer_detailpage

[klem]

Do I detect movement here? Perhaps even a degree of agreement?

"6DOF has a place in IL-2 but with restricted movement and not as implemented by UP"

"Some 4.10 rear views are basically not too good and need looking at"

No-one wants mickey mouse solutions. In fact what most posters here want is something closer to reality than we have even if its not as "helpful" as some UP solutions. Limited 6DOF may not give a huge advantage in viewing but it will add to the individual aircraft capabilities and greatly improve the immersion over the head fixed in a frame.

Wouldn't it be better for TD to focus on clearing some of these long standing issues rather than continue to expand the game including, and possibly extending, the existing faults?

This isn't a TD bashing excercise, they are doing great work, it is perhaps a question of TD priorities.

When CoD comes out many of us in the flight simming community will be looking at, among others, CoD, IL-2 vanilla, IL-2 UP, FSX, X-Plane (yes I know FSX and X-Plane 6DOF has complete freedom of body movement) and only one of those doesn't have 6DOF. We know why, IL-2 was a leading edge game 10 years ago and still is to some extent but the views aspect hasn't been brought up to date. It will be hard to persuade many many people to go back to IL-2 vanilla after CoD with its 6 DOF (even those not too interested in it now that haven't tried it), I think they are far more likely to consign vanilla to history and go to UP. What will further TD work be worth then? Will many people be interested in new developments then in IL-2 without 6DOF?

[Silverback]

I say please put 6 DOF in and if for some reason the player doesn't like it, the player can turn it off. No problem. Thank you

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by klem

Do I detect movement here? Perhaps even a degree of agreement?

"6DOF has a place in IL-2 but with restricted movement and not as implemented by UP"

"Some 4.10 rear views are basically not too good and need looking at"

No-one wants mickey mouse solutions. In fact what most posters here want is something closer to reality than we have even if its not as "helpful" as some UP solutions. Limited 6DOF may not give a huge advantage in viewing but it will add to the individual aircraft capabilities and greatly improve the immersion over the head fixed in a frame.

Wouldn't it be better for TD to focus on clearing some of these long standing issues rather than continue to expand the game including, and possibly extending, the existing faults?

This isn't a TD bashing excercise, they are doing great work, it is perhaps a question of TD priorities.

When CoD comes out many of us in the flight simming community will be looking at, among others, CoD, IL-2 vanilla, IL-2 UP, FSX, X-Plane (yes I know FSX and X-Plane 6DOF has complete freedom of body movement) and only one of those doesn't have 6DOF. We know why, IL-2 was a leading edge game 10 years ago and still is to some extent but the views aspect hasn't been brought up to date. It will be hard to persuade many many people to go back to IL-2 vanilla after CoD with its 6 DOF (even those not too interested in it now that haven't tried it), I think they are far more likely to consign vanilla to history and go to UP. What will further TD work be worth then? Will many people be interested in new developments then in IL-2 without 6DOF?

Precisely...........

[arthursmedley]

Originally Posted by Silverback

I say please put 6 DOF in and if for some reason the player doesn't like it, the player can turn it off. No problem. Thank you

Exactly. In my opinion this is not about 'realism.' Oleg gave us a pause button. How 'real' is that? This is about immersion in the sim. I also think this would be a great opportunity to re-unite the community behind TD and the 'official' version. How many people have posted here and over in the Ubi forum thread that the ability to use 6DoF was their main reason for using mods? For myself, if this were implemented in the vanilla version then I'd have to take a long hard look whether it was worth continuing with the multiple installs, the switchers, having to wait for other squad members to catch up with the latest version of this, that and the other..................................

[Red Dragon-DK]

Reson for using mods is basig the SOUNDS and 6DOF + been able to fly heavy bombers like the B17 Liberater and many other planes. It allso provide a lot of good looking things that make it very enjoyable to fly. I dont belive it is a stand up behind DT or against them or modders. I think they both have the right to be here. It just provide a lot more of what I like and wouldent be without. DT is doing a great job, and so are the modders. The very best thing that cut happent was they starting work together. Its not a religion was. Not in my book after all. Think how far it cut go? And I would still bye the new COD when comes out. But I allso like this a lot.

[MD_Titus]

a small range of side to side movement, so that you can see round the stick to the instrument panel, would be useful. however the range of movement in the mod 6dof is far too extreme, as it would see you bouncing your skull off the sides of the canopy.

i fly with the 6dof mod, but i have limited the side to side movement and only really use the tilt aspect of it with regularity.

on the tempest pov, it would seem that it's less of a head on a stick, more eyeball on a stick, as the straight down view is roughly where the pilot's spine would be. shifting it forward 10cm or so would seem about right. there's a few other planes with similar views. not sure if an arc could be modelled into the viewing angle, to simulate tipping head forward rather than rotating the stick-eyeball view down.

[SEE]

Originally Posted by MD_Titus

.

i fly with the 6dof mod, but i have limited the side to side movement and only really use the tilt aspect of it with regularity.

Same here, I don't like excessive tilt or side movement and I suspect a lot of others don't either. I have less tilt than is actually possible in real movement. I disable XY sidemovement quite frequently. Some of the objections seem to be focussed on rearview ability which is exactly the same in both 6DOF and 2DOF and fixed views