A potential fix for the Aircraft visibility problems?

[Flanker35M]

S!

Sure has an impact on FPS that one..

[David198502]

Originally Posted by Flanker35M

S!

Tested the ShowFirstLod and has no impact on FPS...now testing the other one.

yeah that one indeed doesnt seem to affect performance, but it doesnt seem to affect the visibility either...

[Flanker35M]

S!

Could really use some more info on conf.ini on the settings..or the devs could just make the UI use them instead of trial and error we have now. Any decent UI in games has both basic and advanced settings that control the MOST used and featured items in the graphics. Only those HC guys tweak more but as a normal user you should not need this..AT ALL!

[HR_Naglfar]

MeshFirstLod only added some kind of low detail cockpit under the "real" cockpit when I tested it long time ago. It's just MeshShowLod what changes the LOD transitions.

[zapatista]

now that CoD has become playable for many of us in the last few months, it is clear there is a major problem in CoD with distant aircraft/ground-object (like tank/truck) spotting as there was in the il2 series. it is important to try and fix this because for a "ww2 pilot simulator" to be able to have correct visual spotting/identification/tracking distances for these distant objects (crucial in a dogfight or hunting for ground targets), otherwise you end up flying in a myopic mini-bubble of SA. for ex in il2 series you needed to fly at 300 m from the ground to try and spot a tank/truck, yet ww2 reports from pilots doing ground attack state they could spot enemy tanks in open fields or on roads from 1000 to 1250 meters, that difference is HUGE compared to our visibility problems in il2/CoD

note: to get a real sense of the degree of the visibility problem, you need to set your CoD/il2 monitor to the correct FoV setting for the size monitor you have and the distance you sit from it (which in CoD we cant directly adjust, but in il2 series we could). eg using a "zoomed" view is not an excuse/reason to pretend we have correct visibility, you never heard of a hurricane or typhoon pilot using a pair of binoculars while diving in on a ground target (or having one strapped to his helmet). there have been several threads over the years (including in this forum) discussing that in great detail, the facts are fairly simple. for ex the "normal" view we now have (70 FoV) is only normal (ie "correct") if you have a 30' monitor you sit at arms length from, if you use that on a 24' or 20' screen all distant objects will look MUCH smaller (by about 30 - 50%). using the zoomed 35 FoV migh partially overcome that (but will zoom in to much and hence magnify things) but gives a very tunnel vision perspective of the game and is not solution either for obvious reasons.
- the reason i mention this is because if you want to truly solve the distant LoD model visibility problem, for a start your FoV needs to be setup correctly for your monitor size, and only then will all ingame objects be represented 1:1 in their correct sizes

once FoV is set correctly, our problem is that :
- we are using a flat 2 dimensional monitor that tries to represent a small distant 3 dimensional object which moves (or is stationary) against a flat 2D scenery, and it blends in with the background scenery and there is no difference in "depth of focus" or 3D our eyes can work with (as the OP described int he first post of this thread)
- the distant LoD model is under ideal viewing conditions (for ex from directly above or in front) shaped as a coherent cluster of pixels that still represents the shape of the aircraft, BUT if you see it at a slightly different angle (since both you and it are moving) in most circumstances that little cluster of pixels will become jumbled and less coherent and will loose the shape of the aircraft it represents, making it MUCH harder to keep track of (it might have gone from 12 black pixels in the rough shape of an aircraft, to being 3 black pixels in one blob with a few grey ones around it and a couple of other "unattached" black pixels). easier to understand with a screenshot, will try and post one later
- some LoD models might stand out reasonably well against open blue sky, but the same LoD model usually becomes completely invisible against a terrain background (where in RL it would still be MUCH easier to spot). so what we need is instead a "visual representation" (modified LoD model concept) that stays visible against the terrain background more, but doesnt become to glaringly ugly and prominent when the same LoD model is seen against open blue sky

some possible solutions discussed in previous years:
- make all the smaller LoD models much darker (or a bright blue ?) so they stand out more (instead of sing a paint scheme that aims to represent the real color of the object it represents)
- give the smaller LoD models "3D volume" by using something like bump mapping, so they stand out more against the scenery background
- paint the smaller most distant LoD models in "non realistic" colors so they stand out more (or use some highlighting method around the edge of the shape, as the OP suggests)
- instead of focusing on having distant very small LoD models maintaining the shape of the aircraft they represent (which is done very poorly anyway because our smallest pixels arnt small enough to give that level of detail), use instead a "blob" or fixed larger number of black/grey pixels of some shape that makes the object stand out a bit more and overcome the problem we have of using a 2D screen. once you come closer to it, or use the zoom function, the larger LoD models would still keep the shape of the object of course.

note: there is one important variable in people reporting their degree of "distant object visibility" in CoD/il2. in the past, those that had the least problems identifying distant objects were those using the cheapest gaming monitors. these cheap gaming panels are usually TN technology and are 6 bit color (compared to most mid range and better quality panels being 8 bit color and using MVA/PVA or IPS technology).
- because these 6 bit panels are very poor at representing a large gradient in grey scales and color tones, a small moving distant object (which due to constant lighting changes on that object, is constantly slightly changing in tone/brightness/color) is very hard for these panels to recreate in great detail and display these subtle variations, so they have to constantly flip between different steps in the shades of grey (an 8 bit monitor has more "steps" and can display a greater range of shades of grey and color tones, so it is a much smoother transition). the more gross these "steps" in the 6 bit panels in trying to display the small cluster of pixels representing the distant little aircraft LoD model painted in grey/color, this results in a "flickering" that makes the moving object stand out much more against its background (for the same reason these 6 bit screens are bad at representing a uniform black/grey background in movies, where this flickering is very noticeable once you know what to look for)

i would suggest that people who claim not to have a significant visibility problem state
1) the field of view (FoV) they are using, and DONT use a zoomed view (because it is like using binoculars)
2) state the brand/model of screen they use
3) then compare object visibility to what it would be like as seen in a similar real life situation

[SlipBall]

Originally Posted by zapatista

now that CoD has become playable for many of us in the last few months, it is clear there is a major problem in CoD with distant aircraft/ground-object (like tank/truck) spotting as well. it is important to try and fix this because for a "ww2 pilot simulator" to be able to have correct visual spotting/identification/tracking distances for these distant objects (crucial in a dogfight or hunting for ground targets), otherwise you end up flying in a myopic mini-bubble of SA. for ex in il2 series you needed to fly at 300 m from the ground to try and spot a tank/truck, yet ww2 reports from pilots doing ground attack state they could spot enemy tanks in open fields or on roads from 1000 to 1250 meters, that difference is HUGE compared to our visibility problems in il2/CoD

note: to get a real sense of the degree of the visibility problem, you need to set your CoD/il2 monitor to the correct FoV setting for the size monitor you have and the distance you sit from it (which in CoD we cant directly adjust, but in il2 series we could). eg using a "zoomed" view is not an excuse/reason to pretend we have correct visibility, you never heard of a hurricane or typhoon pilot using a pair of binoculars while diving in on a ground target (or having one strapped to his helmet). there have been several threads over the years (including in this forum) discussing that in great detail, the facts are fairly simple. for ex the "normal" view we now have (70 FoV) is only normal (ie "correct") if you have a 30' monitor you sit at arms length from, if you use that on a 24' or 20' screen all distant objects will look MUCH smaller (by about 30 - 50%). using the zoomed 35 FoV migh partially overcome that (but will zoom in to much and hence magnify things) but gives a very tunnel vision perspective of the game and is not solution either for obvious reasons.
- the reason i mention this is because if you want to truly solve the distant LoD model visibility problem, for a start yor FoV needs to be setup correctly for your monitor size, and only then will all ingame objects be represented 1:1 in their correct sizes

once FoV is set correctly, our problem is that :
- we are using a flat 2 dimensional monitor that tries to represent a small distant 3 dimensional object which moves (or is stationary) against a flat 2D scenery, and it blends in with the background scenery and there is no difference in "depth of focus" or 3D our eyes can work with
- the distant LoD model is under ideal viewing conditions (for ex from directly above or in front) shaped as a coherent cluster of pixels that still represents the shape of the aircraft, BUT if you see it at a slightly different angle (since both you and it are moving) in most circumstances that little cluster of pixels will become jumbled and less coherent and will loose the shape of the aircraft it represents, making it MUCH harder to keep track of (it might have gone from 12 black pixels in the rough shape of an aircraft, to being 3 black pixels in one blob with a few grey ones around it and a couple of other "unattached" black pixels). easier to understand with a screenshot, will try and post one later

some possible solutions discussed in previous years:
- make all the smaller LoD models much darker so they stand out more (instead of sing a paint scheme that aims to represent the real color of the object it represents)
- give the smaller LoD models "3D volume" by using something like bump mapping, so they stand out more
- paint the smaller most distant LoD models in "non realistic" colors so they stand out more

note: there is one important variable in people reporting their degree of "distant object visibility" in CoD/il2. in the past, those that had the least problems identifying distant objects were those using the cheapest gaming monitors. these cheap gaming panels are usually TN technology and are 6 bit color (compared to most mid range and better quality panels being 8 bit color and using MVA/PVA or IPS technology).
- because these 6 bit panels are very poor at representing a large gradient in grey scales and color tones, a small moving distant object (which due to lighting changes on that object, is constantly slightly changing in tone/brightness/color) is very hard for these panels to recreate in great detail and display these subtle variations, so they have to constantly flip between different steps in the shades of grey (an 8 bit monitor has more "steps" and can display a greater range of shades of grey and color tones, so it is a much smoother transition). the more gross these "steps" in the 6 bit panels in trying to display the small cluster of pixels representing the distant little aircraft LoD model painted in grey/color, this results in a "flickering" that makes the moving object stand out much more against its background (for the same reason these 6 bit screens are bad at representing a uniform black/grey background in movies, where this flickering is very noticeable once you know what to look for)

i would suggest that people who claim not to have a significant visibility problem state
1) the field of view (FoV) they are using, and DONT use a zoomed view (because it is like using binoculars)
2) state the brand/model of screen they use

I'm not sure that there is a problem with the game itself. I just turned on icon to find the distance I was viewing perfectly fine without the icons on. It turned out to be 1.96 Spit1 the furthest we were separated in this test (so is'nt that 2000 yards), and I had no problem tracking the dot itself. In fact as the AI was positioning for a landing, his wings would clearly show against the darker terrain. I think its very important that if a pilot looses contact, to then look where it should be and it will be picked up again...in short it does not disappear, at least with off-line.

[recoilfx]

Turn off FXAA if you are using it. I couldn't spot dots for crap till I turned it off. Post processed anti-aliasing will filter out 1px dots pretty easily.

I actually kind of like the how planes get camouflaged against the background, it just takes a lot more practice to spot planes.

My strategy is to move a little, pause my head, and scan the WHOLE screen with only my eyes moving, then move on to the next section of the sky. Kind of like a robot.

When your head is not moving and your eyes focus on one area of the screen, it's much easier to pick out moving objects.

[TUSA/TX-Gunslinger]

Originally Posted by zapatista

now that CoD has become playable for many of us in the last few months, it is clear there is a major problem in CoD with distant aircraft/ground-object (like tank/truck) spotting as there was in the il2 series. it is important to try and fix this because for a "ww2 pilot simulator" to be able to have correct visual spotting/identification/tracking distances for these distant objects (crucial in a dogfight or hunting for ground targets), otherwise you end up flying in a myopic mini-bubble of SA. for ex in il2 series you needed to fly at 300 m from the ground to try and spot a tank/truck, yet ww2 reports from pilots doing ground attack state they could spot enemy tanks in open fields or on roads from 1000 to 1250 meters, that difference is HUGE compared to our visibility problems in il2/CoD

note: to get a real sense of the degree of the visibility problem, you need to set your CoD/il2 monitor to the correct FoV setting for the size monitor you have and the distance you sit from it (which in CoD we cant directly adjust, but in il2 series we could). eg using a "zoomed" view is not an excuse/reason to pretend we have correct visibility, you never heard of a hurricane or typhoon pilot using a pair of binoculars while diving in on a ground target (or having one strapped to his helmet). there have been several threads over the years (including in this forum) discussing that in great detail, the facts are fairly simple. for ex the "normal" view we now have (70 FoV) is only normal (ie "correct") if you have a 30' monitor you sit at arms length from, if you use that on a 24' or 20' screen all distant objects will look MUCH smaller (by about 30 - 50%). using the zoomed 35 FoV migh partially overcome that (but will zoom in to much and hence magnify things) but gives a very tunnel vision perspective of the game and is not solution either for obvious reasons.
- the reason i mention this is because if you want to truly solve the distant LoD model visibility problem, for a start your FoV needs to be setup correctly for your monitor size, and only then will all ingame objects be represented 1:1 in their correct sizes

once FoV is set correctly, our problem is that :
- we are using a flat 2 dimensional monitor that tries to represent a small distant 3 dimensional object which moves (or is stationary) against a flat 2D scenery, and it blends in with the background scenery and there is no difference in "depth of focus" or 3D our eyes can work with
- the distant LoD model is under ideal viewing conditions (for ex from directly above or in front) shaped as a coherent cluster of pixels that still represents the shape of the aircraft, BUT if you see it at a slightly different angle (since both you and it are moving) in most circumstances that little cluster of pixels will become jumbled and less coherent and will loose the shape of the aircraft it represents, making it MUCH harder to keep track of (it might have gone from 12 black pixels in the rough shape of an aircraft, to being 3 black pixels in one blob with a few grey ones around it and a couple of other "unattached" black pixels). easier to understand with a screenshot, will try and post one later

some possible solutions discussed in previous years:
- make all the smaller LoD models much darker so they stand out more (instead of sing a paint scheme that aims to represent the real color of the object it represents)
- give the smaller LoD models "3D volume" by using something like bump mapping, so they stand out more
- paint the smaller most distant LoD models in "non realistic" colors so they stand out more (or use some highlighting method around the edge of the shape, as the OP suggests)
- instead of focusing on having distant very small LoD models maintaining the shape of the aircraft they represent (which is done very poorly anyway because our smallest pixels arnt small enough to give that level of detail), use instead a "blob" or fixed larger number of black/grey pixels of some shape that makes the object stand out a bit more and overcome the problem we have of using a 2D screen. once you come closer to it, or use the zoom function, the larger LoD models would still keep the shape of the object of course.

note: there is one important variable in people reporting their degree of "distant object visibility" in CoD/il2. in the past, those that had the least problems identifying distant objects were those using the cheapest gaming monitors. these cheap gaming panels are usually TN technology and are 6 bit color (compared to most mid range and better quality panels being 8 bit color and using MVA/PVA or IPS technology).
- because these 6 bit panels are very poor at representing a large gradient in grey scales and color tones, a small moving distant object (which due to constant lighting changes on that object, is constantly slightly changing in tone/brightness/color) is very hard for these panels to recreate in great detail and display these subtle variations, so they have to constantly flip between different steps in the shades of grey (an 8 bit monitor has more "steps" and can display a greater range of shades of grey and color tones, so it is a much smoother transition). the more gross these "steps" in the 6 bit panels in trying to display the small cluster of pixels representing the distant little aircraft LoD model painted in grey/color, this results in a "flickering" that makes the moving object stand out much more against its background (for the same reason these 6 bit screens are bad at representing a uniform black/grey background in movies, where this flickering is very noticeable once you know what to look for)

i would suggest that people who claim not to have a significant visibility problem state
1) the field of view (FoV) they are using, and DONT use a zoomed view (because it is like using binoculars)
2) state the brand/model of screen they use

+1 Zapatista. Concur with recommendations.

For me, the "dot" issue is one of the 2 biggest issues in the sim at this time. I like your suggestions. There are of course, several related visibility issues which make this spotting problem in VFR conditions even worse:

- Contrails are not rendered at this time.
- When contrails were rendered, the max visibility range was too low. On a clear day one should see contrails many miles away.

The second major issue in the simulation is the inabilty for any of our aircraft to operate at altitudes greater than 6-7 km's.

In essence, the dot visibility issue mentioned here + lack of contrails + loss of contrail visibility, really forces multi-player into an Eastern Front style of air combat. The majority of MP action one finds on servers is below 3 Km.

Why? Practicality. Can't see, can't operate at higher altitudes and even if I could I can't see too well. Too much of that great Channel map is unusable to fairly blind pilots who can't operate their aircraft at typical Western European combat altitudes.

What can you do in this situation: Take bombs, sneak in at low altitude, make attack - go home, land - get points.

[zapatista]

Originally Posted by SlipBall

I'm not sure that there is a problem with the game itself. I just turned on icon to find the distance I was viewing perfectly fine without the icons on. It turned out to be 1.96 Spit1 the furthest we were separated in this test (so is'nt that 2000 yards), and I had no problem tracking the dot itself. In fact as the AI was positioning for a landing, his wings would clearly show against the darker terrain. I think its very important that if a pilot looses contact, to then look where it should be and it will be picked up again...in short it does not disappear, at least with off-line.

hiya slipball,
i looked up the monitor listed in your spec list, and altho panel technology is not a perfect predictor, it has been shown in the past that is a major variable. you personally will have significantly less problems spotting dots and distant small LoD models, because the monitor you are using is 6 bit color and has the "advantages" (in il2) that i mentioned earlier

Planar SA 2311W = 6bit TN panel (http://reviews.cnet.com/lcd-monitors...-34512572.html)
also make sure you are not using a zoomed view when trying to spot/track or identify distant objects (for the purposes of our discussion here)

[SlipBall]

Originally Posted by zapatista

hiya slipball,
i looked up the monitor listed in your spec list, and altho this is not a perfect predictor, it is a major variable. you personally will have significantly less problems spotting dots and distant small LoD models, because the monitor you are using is 6 bit color and has the "advantages" (in il2) that i mentioned earlier

Planar SA 2311W = 6bit TN panel (http://reviews.cnet.com/lcd-monitors...-34512572.html)
also make sure you are not using a zoomed view when trying to spot/track or identify distant objects

OK Zap thanks, I thought everyone was blind for a minute