Latest issue of PC Gamer.

[winny]

Originally Posted by Robotic Pope

Actualy I think its called "Pilot Cam". The effect is what you would get from a video camera planted in the middle of the pilots face. Pretty sure no pilot in the Battle of Britain ever had his eyes replaced with video cameras, so it is completly unrealistic BS like he says.

Unrealistic? Really? It was actually the part of the video that I was most impressed with. It seems like a better solution than having a 'fixed' POV that's (to use your analogy) like having a camera on a tripod. Obviously the game needs a 'camera' otherwise you wouldn't be able to see and having one stuck to the pilots face seems like the best place for it. As for the real BoB pilots not having cameras stuck to thier faces; They didn't need to because they had eyes. Is flyby view therefore not needed as it's unrealistic? And god knows how all those BoB pilots had room in the cockpit to use thier mouse.. Is there a mouse mat in that spit cockpit?

This forum never ceases to amaze me with what people will complain about.

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by winny

Unrealistic? Really? It was actually the part of the video that I was most impressed with. It seems like a better solution than having a 'fixed' POV that's (to use your analogy) like having a camera on a tripod. Obviously the game needs a 'camera' otherwise you wouldn't be able to see and having one stuck to the pilots face seems like the best place for it. As for the real BoB pilots not having cameras stuck to thier faces; They didn't need to because they had eyes. Is flyby view therefore not needed as it's unrealistic? And god knows how all those BoB pilots had room in the cockpit to use thier mouse.. Is there a mouse mat in that spit cockpit?

This forum never ceases to amaze me with what people will complain about.

If it's not trees, it's tracers or fire... or video cameras if that is the fashionable thing to discuss

Welcome to IL-2 forums. It's been like this since 2001!

[winny]

Originally Posted by IceFire

If it's not trees, it's tracers or fire... or video cameras if that is the fashionable thing to discuss

Welcome to IL-2 forums. It's been like this since 2001!

The 'trees' thread is a personal favourite of mine..

Thanks, been lurking for a while and am actually a Birds of Prey (PS3.. don't laugh!) player who's waiting for SOW as an excuse to buy a good PC (come on Oleg!).

I come here specifically for the SoW bashing.. it's funny.

[philip.ed]

Meh, I think the environmental aspects are really important to the game; if you live and have flown over blighty, seeing envronmental pieces that looks wrong can ruin the immersion a bit. But let's not split hairs; one persons meat is anothers poison.

Personally, I don't care about what the camera is like. Either way when flying a sim on the PC you are at a disadvantage to real life where you have periphieral vision. It really makes a big difference.

[Robotic Pope]

Originally Posted by winny

Unrealistic? Really? It was actually the part of the video that I was most impressed with. It seems like a better solution than having a 'fixed' POV that's (to use your analogy) like having a camera on a tripod. Obviously the game needs a 'camera' otherwise you wouldn't be able to see and having one stuck to the pilots face seems like the best place for it. As for the real BoB pilots not having cameras stuck to thier faces; They didn't need to because they had eyes. Is flyby view therefore not needed as it's unrealistic? And god knows how all those BoB pilots had room in the cockpit to use thier mouse.. Is there a mouse mat in that spit cockpit?

This forum never ceases to amaze me with what people will complain about.

lol, I'm not complaining winny, I was just saying the guy had a point. The head movement under Gs is fine its the shaking he didn't like.

Also I think you'd be supprised how far some people go to get realism in their flight sims, going as far as to build themselves a cockpit. I'm not one of these people but I believe the sim should cater for everyone. Some people seem to like the effect of flying by camera as if by remote control with all the shaking, other people want to believe they are actually there strapped into the cockpit using their eyes and their moniter/s are just panes of glass infront of them. For this you would want a lot less of the vibration effect. A better way to simulate VERY heavy vibration would be to make it more like a very fast but stable humming movement and a loss of focus, than a big shaking. As someone else once mentioned if the loose objects in the cockpit like the strap above the gunsight moved that would give another visual sign of vibration and G force.

Again, I'm not complaining. I know this is all WIP stuff, as I'm sure do most people here.

[winny]

Originally Posted by Robotic Pope

lol, I'm not complaining winny, I was just saying the guy had a point. The head movement under Gs is fine its the shaking he didn't like.

Also I think you'd be supprised how far some people go to get realism in their flight sims, going as far as to build themselves a cockpit. I'm not one of these people but I believe the sim should cater for everyone. Some people seem to like the effect of flying by camera as if by remote control with all the shaking, other people want to believe they are actually there strapped into the cockpit using their eyes and their moniter/s are just panes of glass infront of them. For this you would want a lot less of the vibration effect. A better way to simulate VERY heavy vibration would be to make it more like a very fast but stable humming movement and a loss of focus, than a big shaking. As someone else once mentioned if the loose objects in the cockpit like the strap above the gunsight moved that would give another visual sign of vibration and G force.

Again, I'm not complaining. I know this is all WIP stuff, as I'm sure do most people here.

Fair point. So let's have an option for it then? I don't like the whole I don't want this, I don't want that argument.. these people should be asking for an option to turn it off. Then when this game finally appears you can sit in a lobbyfull of people who agree 100% with you about how the game should be played.


If Da Vinci had had a load of people standing over his shoulder whilst he was painting the mona lisa, all moaning and saying change this and change that then that painting would have been sh*t.
I've seen how personally Oleg takes SoW and when you're working on your masterpiece there's only you who knows where the final brush stroke is, when is your masterpiece finished.. Cut the guy some slack and trust him to produce the best sim that he can.

Sorry got carried away.

[julian265]

If you've flown through turbulence in a small plane, or left the bitumen and driven on slightly rough road... you wouldn't be complaining about the higher-frequency shake in that clip, IMO. My eyes/brain do not correct for the shake in these circumstances - far off objects are fine, but not near objects like the cockpit.

I won't be murdering anyone, but I'd be pretty disappointed if SoW BoB had as smooth a pilot's perspective as IL-2 does. The stillness of air (or lack of it) makes a huge difference to air combat with guns, and immersion.

[Robotic Pope]

Originally Posted by julian265

If you've flown through turbulence in a small plane, or left the bitumen and driven on slightly rough road... you wouldn't be complaining about the higher-frequency shake in that clip, IMO. My eyes/brain do not correct for the shake in these circumstances - far off objects are fine, but not near objects like the cockpit.

I won't be murdering anyone, but I'd be pretty disappointed if SoW BoB had as smooth a pilot's perspective as IL-2 does. The stillness of air (or lack of it) makes a huge difference to air combat with guns, and immersion.

Yes, but thats not the point. When you are flying or driving offroad your brain knows that you are being bumped around inside the vehicle and the dash in front of you is relatively stable. What the effect in the video gives is the impression of the plane being bumped around you while you sit in comfy chair unaffected thus giving a disconnected feel.

It is something that just cannot be simulated properly with just visuals. Some people like the attempt, other people find it just wrong. So a choice between the two would be good.

[julian265]

Originally Posted by Robotic Pope

Yes, but thats not the point. When you are flying or driving offroad your brain knows that you are being bumped around inside the vehicle and the dash in front of you is relatively stable. What the effect in the video gives is the impression of the plane being bumped around you while you sit in comfy chair unaffected thus giving a disconnected feel.

It is something that just cannot be simulated properly with just visuals. Some people like the attempt, other people find it just wrong. So a choice between the two would be good.

Agreed, choice is good, unless it cancels out the effects of (server enabled) turbulence / wake when you're online.

However, the dash is certainly not stable for me (or stabilised by eyes/brain) whenever I'm off-road. Hell, it's not even stable coming up my driveway (which is pretty much off-road )

I can see what you're saying about the head position seeming to remain stable, whilst the plane bumps around (that is indeed true of sitting in front of a screen!). However, whether it's your head that is moving, or the plane that is moving, the relative movement is still the same - so it gets back to your statement about needing more than visuals to convince.

[WTE_Galway]

Originally Posted by julian265

I can see what you're saying about the head position seeming to remain stable, whilst the plane bumps around (that is indeed true of sitting in front of a screen!). However, whether it's your head that is moving, or the plane that is moving, the relative movement is still the same - so it gets back to your statement about needing more than visuals to convince.

A better effect would be if the terrain moved around slightly but not as much as the air frame.

Turning the effects off is an essential option, as it was with the FFB gun shake, and stall flutter in IL2 which a lot of online players disable. Realistic or not is beside the point, some people simply will not put up with anything that interferes with shooting.