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

[trashcanman]

Voted No.
Team Blueadalos have only nerfed a few RAF aircraft so far.
They should be allowed to focus their time and energy on improving the 109 and 190 still further, enhancing the explosive power of German bombs and fiddling with the Spitfire FM to create yet more mystical anti-torque.
Apparently "refraction" can remove the 190 bar but doesn't work on the P-47 razorback gunsight ....
Imho Oleg has allowed this bunch of chancers to officially mod IL-2 in order to generate sales for CloD by making IL-2 a joke game
When you look at the map textures, bomb doors, AI flyables, 6DoF etc etc etc available in UP in a far more stable format than 4.10 it beggars believe
Team Blueadalos is Olegs secret marketing tool

[Fenrir]

Originally Posted by trashcanman

Voted No.
Team Blueadalos have only nerfed a few RAF aircraft so far.
They should be allowed to focus their time and energy on improving the 109 and 190 still further, enhancing the explosive power of German bombs and fiddling with the Spitfire FM to create yet more mystical anti-torque.
Apparently "refraction" can remove the 190 bar but doesn't work on the P-47 razorback gunsight ....
Imho Oleg has allowed this bunch of chancers to officially mod IL-2 in order to generate sales for CloD by making IL-2 a joke game
When you look at the map textures, bomb doors, AI flyables, 6DoF etc etc etc available in UP in a far more stable format than 4.10 it beggars believe
Team Blueadalos is Olegs secret marketing tool

The only joke here is your attitude. Take a hike loser.

[Fenrir]

To quote Tom Neil, famous Battle of Britain and Malta Hurricane pilot, and later flyer of Mk V and Mk XII Spitfires on ops:

"... the pilot strapped himself in using his Sutton harness - left shoulder, right leg, right shoulder, left leg - which were secured in the area of his tummy by an outsize peg which went through a hole and was kept in place by a split pin; the more familiar quick release box was not available until much later in the war. Inertia straps also being a gadget of the future, he then would flick up his harness release toggle, enabling him to lean forward and adjust instruments, or whatever."

Nuff said. You ulterior agenda boys have really gotta try harder, you know.

[carl]

tolwyn wrote
Unfortunately the answers to this poll are so biased, it's ridiculous.

A simple Yes or No would have been better than introducing the poll-authors bias.

I think I'd like my 2¢ here in this thread.

I voted no.
For a few reasons, but I'll focus on one that gets overlooked.

I've been strapped in an aerobatic plane (a Citabria, to be precise). I couldn't lean forward if I wanted to. So, my head was "stuck to a stick, thank you very much." I had some limited "wiggle room" but not much.

So, 6DOF is a gimmick in a WW2 game, since you'd be strapped so damn tight into your plane you wouldn't be able to do what you guys would like to do with 6DOF enabled.

And you don't get to have it both ways. If you loosened your straps (virtually) to have enabled that freedom, you would need to face the consequences of a severe g-loaded maneuver not being properly strapped in.

Wanna add that?

I have a TrackIR. I've had a TrackIR since 2003 or 2004.
But in my opinion, to model 6DOF in a way that would be realistic in the paradigm of being strapped into a cockpit wouldn't make many if any of you happy

plus 1

i flew firefly aerobatics up to a mere 4.5g, loose straps would not have been much fun, and poll wording certainly seems bias although doubt it really had much influance

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by KG26_Alpha

6DoF

Its simply unrealistic as its in its present form, you cannot move around that much in a fighter aircraft when strapped in, you are not wearing an inertia belting system in these aircraft you simply cannot move as given by 6DoF.
Any forward movement for gun sights was done by seat adjustment not the pilot leaning forwards.

Zooming forwards and unplucking your eyeballs from your skull and placing them on the canopy, rotating your head almost 180 degrees is worse than the present viewing system.

.

That is a bogus argument.

At best.

Zoom is and always has been a feature of this sim.. and actually every sim over the past 12 years or so, at least everyone I have flown.. from the moment that macros were possible it was possible to have zoom on a simulated slider... even though zoom is now on a slider.. my zoom is still the way it has been.. with a macro, set at .002 second intervals .. and you can say what misinformed mumbo jumbo you want.. but if you try to fly and fight zoomed in you will die a quick virtual death... Zoom definitely has it's place in any sim.. and that, because it is part of the stock sim and always has been.. even before TIR came out, renders it a non issue.

6DoF doesn't need to stay in it's present form.. but it needs to be implemented.. and the mods have shown us that it is possible.. There are many features in this sim that take into consideration the fact that every one using it is not 19-24 years old with 20-20 vision and that we are trying to reproduce and fight in a 3D world on a 2D screen..

Originally Posted by Lixma

I know....
Let's get the current plane-set's gaps and holes filled so 6DOF can happen without glitches. A lot of work, yes, but then you release it as....
IL-2 : Anniversary Edition

It will bring the game up to date, future-proof it for a while and bring in some revenue for TD or 1C:Maddox.

That is not going to happen unless they use some of Freddie's repaints.. but to tighten it up and put it in the official stock version of the sim would go a long way to offering the community a standard they can rely upon. As I said some folks will always fly modded.. but many, myself included if given some of the options I have now in the modded sim in a stock version, particularly the ones mentioned by Neil and myself.. and some of the improved loadouts and planes.. like the Mustang 25s.. and 30s... and the A and the additional K-14 gunsights on some planes that actually had them like some of the Spits & Jugs... , would take that option knowing that anyone who wanted to join a server we were in woukld have to be flying the same version.. As it is now regardless to the version ... you cant get in a stock server if you have mods correct?

Put some of the mods in the stock version.. even a modified 6DoF and you will have more people flying stock. There will always be people who will fly modded.. that is a done deal.. and that too is a good thing... (might as well be..) but give those who would like to fly stock more reasons to do so... so that 1C will be the cake.. and the mods will be the icing.. for may... for the moment at least it is the other way around.

again... just food for thought...

[KG26_Alpha]

Originally Posted by KG26_Alpha

6DoF

Its simply unrealistic as its in its present form, you cannot move around that much in a fighter aircraft when strapped in, you are not wearing an inertia belting system in these aircraft you simply cannot move as given by 6DoF.
Any forward movement for gun sights was done by seat adjustment not the pilot leaning forwards.

Zooming forwards and unplucking your eyeballs from your skull and placing them on the canopy, rotating your head almost 180 degrees is worse than the present viewing system.




.

Originally Posted by Bearcat

That is a bogus argument.

At best.

Zoom is and always has been a feature of this sim.. and actually every sim over the past 12 years or so, at least everyone I have flown.. from the moment that macros were possible it was possible to have zoom on a simulated slider... even though zoom is now on a slider.. my zoom is still the way it has been.. with a macro, set at .002 second intervals .. and you can say what misinformed mumbo jumbo you want.. but if you try to fly and fight zoomed in you will die a quick virtual death... Zoom definitely has it's place in any sim.. and that, because it is part of the stock sim and always has been.. even before TIR came out, renders it a non issue.

What are you talking about misinformed mumbo jumbo ?


Your opinion is the only opinion allowed here ?

If you ever flew in a high performance aircraft you would realise what you are requesting is fantasy.

At the extreme end of the scale

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8i04...eature=related

At the lower/fun end of the scale

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6w91G...eature=related

The current UPv2.01 6DoF is not realistic, the current V4.10 viewing system is not realistic, any new viewing system work should be done from this point,
and take into consideration the integrity of the cockpits limitations regarding the poly counts allowed back then.

I would rather see the work/time spent else where by DT.

IMHO

.

[SEE]

IL1946 embraces difficulty levels. Oleg has frequently stated that he wanted his work to be enjoyed by all.

If 'viewing Realism' is one of the primary requirements before any consideration for the implementation of 6DOF into stock (and applies to 2DOF, fixed pov with regards swivelling to 6) then it must be part of the difficulty options and integrate fully with all other viewing features such as Zoom, FOV, gunsights, etc to ensure a common experience with that 'difficulty' enabled with or without HT. This would be an overwhelming technical challenge (added to resolving the 'glitches') - compromises would have to be made that I am unsure TD and 'purists' would be prepared to accept.

[arthursmedley]

Originally Posted by KG26_Alpha

I would rather see the work/time spent else where by DT.

IMHO

.

Fair enough! However, 85% of respondents to this poll would seem to disagree with you.

[kimosabi]

Originally Posted by KG26_Alpha

The current UPv2.01 6DoF is not realistic, the current V4.10 viewing system is not realistic, any new viewing system work should be done from this point,
and take into consideration the integrity of the cockpits limitations regarding the poly counts allowed back then.

I would rather see the work/time spent else where by DT.

IMHO

.

Your agenda is clear and it explains the stubbornness. I assume you meant my reading comprehension? You're in for a wedgie hombre.

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by KG26_Alpha

What are you talking about misinformed mumbo jumbo ?


Your opinion is the only opinion allowed here ?
If you ever flew in a high performance aircraft you would realise what you are requesting is fantasy.

At the extreme end of the scale

At the lower/fun end of the scale

The current UPv2.01 6DoF is not realistic, the current V4.10 viewing system is not realistic, any new viewing system work should be done from this point,
and take into consideration the integrity of the cockpits limitations regarding the poly counts allowed back then.

I would rather see the work/time spent else where by DT.

IMHO

.

???

Flying a combat aircraft from my desk looking through a 24" diagonal box is not realistic either.. I am not saying that 6DoF should be implemented exactly as it is in the mod packs.... I never said that but it should be implemented.. and it wouldn't be too much work if it were tightened up some .. the work has already been done.. changing a few numbers in the code is not too hard for these guys.. Considering how many people use TIR3 and above in this sim and the fact that it is possible.. to not do it IMO is a mistake. and of course my opinion is far from the only one allowed here.. but it is shared by many..

Originally Posted by Tolwyn

That's because they aren't pilots.
If you want realism, listen to me. If you want arcade... well, then...
My original caveat is clear and still accurate.
To INVOKE 6DOF in a *realistic manner* would not make any of you happy. Even I agree the current restriction is just as inaccurate, however, to enable 6DOF like you see in the mods is grossly MORE inaccurate.
You'd need to move about 27-33% to 6DOF. But that would be about it.

Even that would be better than what is in the stock sim now.. and it is doable.