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

[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.

[BadAim]

I'm not sure that I really want to get into this, but as a fan of 6Dof I suppose I'll risk it......

Isn't the whole argument that 6Dof isn't perfect so it's no good, kinda throwing the baby out with the bathwater? The system in use now is just as wrong, (granted, it was the best we had when Il2 was developed) and 85% of the respondents seem to agree that the 6Dof that is so far available is the better choice.

In the interest of reason I'd be more than happy if DT were to implement a somewhat more restrictive version of 6Dof, but if it isn't practical within the confines of IL2's code (and DT's other constraints) the version that is available now is better than what we've got IMO (and quite a few others).

[Tolwyn]

My "no" vote did have a caveat, and you've hit it.

There is certainly a benefit for a "realistic" 6DOF in the game. To ignore it is exactly throwing the baby out with the bathwater. It would have to be limited (and frankly, I think the "limitations" or, what we call in the business gimbal restrictions would turn a gimmicky thing into a GREAT thing).

My point was that to make it realistic would still not make the majority happy.

Originally Posted by BadAim

I'm not sure that I really want to get into this, but as a fan of 6Dof I suppose I'll risk it......

Isn't the whole argument that 6Dof isn't perfect so it's no good, kinda throwing the baby out with the bathwater? The system in use now is just as wrong, (granted, it was the best we had when Il2 was developed) and 85% of the respondents seem to agree that the 6Dof that is so far available is the better choice.

In the interest of reason I'd be more than happy if DT were to implement a somewhat more restrictive version of 6Dof, but if it isn't practical within the confines of IL2's code (and DT's other constraints) the version that is available now is better than what we've got IMO (and quite a few others).

[BadAim]

But do you really think that 6DOF as it's implemented already is really more unrealistic than the stock 2Dof? I mean the simple fact is that you can move your head around enough to see around canopy bracing in a real plane, so is perhaps being able to move around too much any more unrealistic than not at all?

Here is my point: were not going to get a perfect implementation in IL2. Are we going to settle for the best we can get, or refuse anything because we can't get exactly what we want?

And I don't think that most people would be any more unhappy with a slightly more restrictive 6DOF than those who see a "cheater" around every corner would be with having it at all.

I guess, I'm just saying that I don't believe that the argument is black and white. Were not talking about the difference between right and wrong here, but the best of whatever compromise we can get.

[Mysticpuma]

Fruitbat posted a great example of 6 DoF from his Youtube channel. It shows just what is possible with it enabled:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKD2a9xDPWc

[JG53Harti]

Originally Posted by Mysticpuma

It shows just what is possible with it enabled:

It shows only that the guy has trouble to shoot down a enemy

[kimosabi]

Originally Posted by JG53Harti

It shows only that the guy has trouble to shoot down a enemy

Just go ahead and try getting a quick kill on Toad. I dare you.

[JAMF]

Originally Posted by Mysticpuma

Fruitbat posted a great example of 6 DoF from his Youtube channel. It shows just what is possible with it enabled:

Well that was 4DoF, maybe 5 DoF tops. He didn't use the vertical head position axis much. Then again, there aren't that many obstructions that required it.

[Red Dragon-DK]

Well said BadAim.
If it was done so it work like the one in microsoft flight simulator X I would say it was close to spot on.

[Falke]

Come one, come all, see the mighty fighter pilots lean forward, lean left, lean right and twist to look back... tight straps and all! ... step right this way....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCrKDz8hH5E

(See 2 minutes into video)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hgbo...yer_detailpage