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

[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.

[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

[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.

[trashcanman]

Originally Posted by Fenrir

No mate, MY opinion is that your attitude is offensive, infantile and degrading to all of us here by association, and therefore I'd rather not be seen to in anyway condone it, or you.

If it's not too much for your intellect to grasp I'll let you in on a secret; some of us fly without some ridiculous agenda and simply want this sim to be as accurate as it can be within the engine limitations. And having been in PM contact with two of the TD team and communicated via posts with 2 others, I can tell you they make damn sight more sense than you, and are considerably better mannered. But hell, guess you're the type who's got his way bullying and shouting and tirading his way through life huh? Won't cut the mustard here chum.

And facts?! I saw bugger all in the way of anything remotely factual in your post. In fact it looked remarkably like ill-informed conspiracy driven bluster to me, but hell, perhaps I'm wrong. Please do enlighten me.

The Fw190 gunsight bar has been removed - FACT
The justification for this is that it has been calculated due to refraction of light in photographs from external views of the cockpit ... yes I know it sounds crazy but 2 TD members have told me that - FACT

For the record I personally think that the Fw190 gunsight in unmodded IL-2 is probably wrong.

Now, let us look at the P-47 razorback ....

This is not my research however I feel it is solid (sorry for expressing my opinion again ) http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/t...5351020214/p/1

And yet TD choose to not use their magic on the Razorback Jug ....??? - FACT
I have asked TD people this (oh yes, you aren't the only one!) and they use the NG excuse .... - FACT

This is my perception. I am sorry if my views offend you. Personal insults do not bother me btw so please feel free to continue

[trashcanman]

Originally Posted by robtek

Well t-man, you know the saying about opinions?
They are like a**holes, everybody has one, and nobody wants to see the other ones!
Having said that, i'd like to mention that your opinion seem very unique, as it isn't shared by anyone so far.

Just because you and the people you associate with don't share my views, that does not necessarily make them wrong

The fact that you resort to that particular orafice in your analogy tells me a lot about the lifestyle choice you have made.
I make no judgement on that and wish you good luck, good health and happiness in your relationships

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by Mysticpuma

Caspar, that is one of the most exciting things I have read in this whole thread..."Yet".

My fingers are crossed that at-least TD could offer us a switch in the settings will give the user the option to enable it.....

You may not have said much, but my wife once said "It may be small.......but it excites me!" Lol, cheers, MP

Same here... INMO it would be great.. even if it was made tighter.. as in not quite the same range of 6DoF as the mods.. but it needs to be in there. As I previously stated... for me a lot of this makes sense .. adding 6DoF and some of the other functional mods.. and maybe a few variants of AC.. because at the end of the day this sim is going into it's golden years.. but it will still be getting new users I think for at least the next 1-3 years.. and then it will gradually die down.. but the final official version of this sim needs to be definitive.. and it can be just that.. and they wouldn't even have to rework a lot of the pits.. This is is a great product thathas captured the minds and more importantly time and money of grown men... for some a decade.. that says a lot.. and as much as I have to admit... I like a lot of the mods.. and I believe that they have shown us what it possible.. but this is still Oleg's sim.. He created it with 1C and it should be defined by them.. as long as some of the for lack of a better term "goodness" that is in mods is not in the official version when it could easily be.. (my thinking is ... if an unauthorized group can do it then the authors should be able to "do it+".. I don't expect to see every single mod in this sim.. and they shouldn't be... but it wouldn't take every mod to make more people choose the stock sim over the modded one... or at least use it more than they do now..

I hope that some of the points raised in this thread become food for thought to Oleg & TD .... This is till the best WWII combat flight sim on the market.. and truth be told even after CoD is released it will still be contending with it's older brother IL2... and the two of them have nothing runnign a close second.. there are others in the race.. but pound fore pound they don't even come close..

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

Originally Posted by trashcanman

And yet TD choose to not use their magic on the Razorback Jug ....??? - FACT
I have asked TD people this (oh yes, you aren't the only one!) and they use the NG excuse .... - FACT

Republic Aviation (later Fairchild) has nothing to do with NG. I doubt, what you say. Even more I do not know about any request to DT of that topic.

Thanks for the link anyway.

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

BTW: 190 vs 37 ... My oppinion is, that the orientation should not be to please the 85%, but to convince the 15% instead. Then the task is done.

[Mysticpuma]

"BTW: 190 vs 37 ... My opinion is, that the orientation should not be to please the 85%, but to convince the 15% instead. Then the task is done. "

Hi Caspar, interesting the way you put that, but look back earlier and the percentage was only 80. Surely the vote is going the correct way?

I know it seems there have been a couple of attempts to drag this one off-topic, and thanks to those of you who dragged it back.

This is a request that if the Poll is considered, that the OPTION of switching 6-DoF is given to the Users of the Sim, not that you will be enforced to use it if you don't want to!!

As has been put before, it is up to the user of the Sim to decide what hardware they invest in. I have a Modded Cougar, Track IR and Rudder Pedals. I don't 'need' them, but I wanted to invest in my hobby and make my experience online and offline as immersive as possible.

Some people don't use a stick, some don't use tracking devices but to say that everyone cannot have 6-DoF because not all of us have Tracking devices is rather like saying "I ride a push-bike so you can't have petrol for your car!" If you invest in the Hardware, surely it would be nice to offer the Individual the 'switchable' Option of whether they can use it or decide to leave it switched off?

What I am requesting is that a switch be added to enable or disable 6-DoF and for the User to decide which they prefer.

Look, some people may not like the 6-DoF to be active once they have tried it.......but they can then (if there was an optional switch) turn it off?

It's like the argument (in a broad sense) of watching Violence on TV. No-one says you have to watch it....that's what the switch is for.

All I'm requesting is a switch, nothing more, nothing less!

(Then after that get on to adding updated p-51's )

Cheers, MP