Realism or accessibility, what decision should be made?

[TUCKIE_JG52]

Let's back to mechanical tachometers and realism settings!

Now that they modelled both mechanical and electricl, they can set an easy instrument mode and a realism instrument modes... there's room for all...

[SG1_Gunkan]

Originally Posted by TUCKIE_JG52

Let's back to mechanical tachometers and realism settings!

Now that they modelled both mechanical and electricl, they can set an easy instrument mode and a realism instrument modes... there's room for all...

+1

[15JG52_Brauer]

Originally Posted by SG1_Gunkan

+1

Ditto - We've all been newbies (In fact often I feel I still am over the channel - especially in red planes!!) - so give them options - it also means the devs hard work on analogue dials does not go to waste - any maybe they can just dampen the flutter down - (at the same time as they fix our clod-hopping mixture problems - or if we are mishandling the engines somehow give us some clues .Though the fact that even when I jump into a free flight over the channel it bumps imediatley if I am not on full throttle does seem to indicate some other problem - but thats off topic - sorry).

[SEE]

realism? Would that include restrictions on rear view ability even when loosening shoulder straps. Heads on swivels?

Lets face it, 6DOF, mouse lookaround and check yer six POV hat assignments are equally unrealistic with little penalty for being 'unstrapped' in combat even in full switch!

Just wondering how far people would be prepared to go or do they have a cut off point? In which case the arguments 'for and against' are not quite so black and white!

[Robotic Pope]

Originally Posted by SEE

realism? Would that include restrictions on rear view ability even when loosening shoulder straps. Heads on swivels?

Lets face it, 6DOF, mouse lookaround and check yer six POV hat assignments are equally unrealistic with little penalty for being 'unstrapped' in combat even in full switch!

Just wondering how far people would be prepared to go or do they have a cut off point? In which case the arguments 'for and against' are not quite so black and white!

How would people like this for realism? The first time you crash and die you are booted back to the desktop and the game is automaticly deleted off your hard drive and you are unable to re-install it ever again.

[frenchfly]

Originally Posted by SEE

realism? Would that include restrictions on rear view ability even when loosening shoulder straps. Heads on swivels?

Lets face it, 6DOF, mouse lookaround and check yer six POV hat assignments are equally unrealistic with little penalty for being 'unstrapped' in combat even in full switch!

Just wondering how far people would be prepared to go or do they have a cut off point? In which case the arguments 'for and against' are not quite so black and white!

I think since we don't have the benefit of peripheral vision, some compromises have to be made in regards to views. Unless you have a 360 degree projection system set-up?

[RAF74_Winger]

Just another viewpoint, I'm all for more realism - but it has to be accurate. The issue with the needles (and there still remains an issue with the ASI and Altimeter) and the negative G cut-out thing really revolves around a perception of what should be realistic and not experience of what really is.

For all I know, the original 0.25 and 0.5g figures for the cut-out may well be absolutely correct, I suspect that the problem arose from the inertia of the carburettor components not being considered - resulting in the rather strange cut-outs in turbulence.

The bouncing needles thingy is a bit strange too - though I'm not really qualified to talk about mechanical tachometers, all the aircraft I've flown have used tachogenerators AFAIK - but it is somewhat perplexing that the ASI and Altimeter behave in the way that they do, and the VSI doesn't - though it should be even more sensitive than the other two instruments

The fact is that these instruments don't behave in the way they're depicted here. Before anyone jumps in to say 'Aha - but these were old fashioned instruments!'; the technology hasn't changed much since the 20's - except if you're talking about really modern stuff with ADCs etc.

So what would I like to see in terms of realism?

Well; I think that although the landing phase probably has to be modelled with a bit less fidelity than could actually be achieved in order to retain playability, I think it could do with being bumped up a few notches in this game - the aircraft here are much too tolerant of poor touchdown technique and roll out very straight (I've not noticed any tendency to an impending swing in any of my landings).

Another thing would be the tailplane effects (I've mentioned this before), the aircraft seem very sluggish to swing over the top in a humpty or stall turn, and there's not much swing on take-off - though I do appreciate the fact that the rudder is immediately effective, unlike the original IL2 where you'd actually have to get a bit of airspeed on before it would do the job.

Just my opinion, make of it what you will. Certainly won't stop me flying the sim.

W.