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

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

Originally Posted by Kubiszko

Because the board had a guard's head and shoulders, and not obstruct the view.Its logical!For what Tempest or P-47 has drip shield cockpit?For worst visibility or for beter?

Originally Posted by klem

By the simplest means possible. I turn my head and I see that far too much of the rear view is obstructed.
...
The armour plate appears to be too wide. It was essentially narrower than its height and not roughly equal in height and width as it appears to be in the current rear view.

Like Kubisko and other past posters I don't understand why you are having such a hard time accepting this.

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:


(Typhoon, but should be the same)





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.

[Kubiszko]

Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar

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:


(Typhoon, but should be the same)





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.

Maybe time for major changes and not deal with "bullshit".May is time to consider the more realistic DM(hispano,browning) is too weak,instead of doing more and more bombs are not known to have been used.
You are dealing with this and in your hands is a refreshing this not very popular old game.
I have a hunch that clifs of dover will have not more to offer than il2 1946 for long time.Show what U got.

I believe in you

[Fafnir_6]

I haven't actually tried the Macchis since 4.10 came out. I'll check them out when I get home from work today . PoV in the C.200 was awesome, if the C.202/205 are like that now, it is a very good thing.

@Klem: It is entirely possible that the Tempest hasn't been looked at (officially) because of 1C's concentration on CoD prior to DT taking charge of IL-2 updates and DT's heavy workload since. The important thing is that your request is in now and Caspar has implied that they will look into it. I suppose comparing the 4.09 and 4.10 Macchi C.202/205 would be a good demonstration of what he is proposing. As stated above, I haven't looked into it myself, but it should prove interesting. Multiple IL-2 installs are a wonderful thing.

Cheers,

Fafnir_6

[klem]

Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar

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!
.........................

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!

Caspar, I am not demanding anything. I am asking TD to fix something that is long overdue. This question of the Tempest backplate has been rumbling along since the Tempest was introduced.

I am not demanding that you change the model if there is another way. I only suggested that as a possible way to solve the problem because you said the cockpit was correct so I assumed there was some other kind of visual/scaling issue which might require a 'cheat' to overcome it. Why else would the problem not have been addressed before?

If the geometry of the cockpit is correct, if you are confident that moving the eyepoint will solve the problem without making the other views ridiculous I don't understand why such a simple change, presumably known for some time, to such an important aircraft has not been done before and is still only now "maybe move POV".

I have seen the mods compromise and I agree it is much too far the other way but at least its an attempt to fix it. Like the argument over the 6 DOF question causing minor graphics glitches, the value of an imperfect but improved and more realistic view far outweighs the penalty of a perfectly wrong view but I agree the mod goes too far. We used to have a saying for achieving objectives, "almost right rather than precisely wrong"

Fafnir_6
I do understand all that, I move eyepoints in FSX, but I assumed there was a more complex problem because such a simple solution has not been implemented before now.

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

Originally Posted by klem

If the geometry of the cockpit is correct, if you are confident that moving the eyepoint will solve the problem without making the other views ridiculous I don't understand why such a simple change, presumably known for some time, to such an important aircraft has not been done before and is still only now "maybe move POV".

Because it is all YOUR oppinion about the plane and the problem, that this makes it so urgent for you.
And because there is so much else to do for us. And for me, this discussion is rather new (playing for almost 11 years even modding is still young to me).

OK, I'll take it as a request for taking a look at the rather bad rear view of the Tempest and other planes.

[klem]

Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar

Because it is all YOUR oppinion about the plane and the problem, that this makes it so urgent for you.
And because there is so much else to do for us. And for me, this discussion is rather new (playing for almost 11 years even modding is still young to me).

OK, I'll take it as a request for taking a look at the rather bad rear view of the Tempest and other planes.

Thank you Caspar.

btw it is not suddenly urgent for me and not only my opinion, it has been urgent for Tempest flyers for a very long time until we gave up asking.

Thank you again for taking on the request.