![]() |
|
IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover Latest instalment in the acclaimed IL-2 Sturmovik series from award-winning developer Maddox Games. |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I wonder when we get these things fixed:
- a decent system for looking through German gunsights. The current mechanism is neither realistic (it really is not, so please don't mention that one just has to move a little bit right as supposedly the pilots did - which they did not) nor helpful (please don't mention that with mouse one can recentre. This definitely does NOT work for TrackIR users). Has to be replaced. Preferably including that what Lixma has pointed out a couple of weeks ago that is including some mechanism to simulate real binocular view as close as possible. - correct flight models with historic performance for ALL aircraft - the tracers of gunners have still an off-set of several meters to its aircraft. Last edited by 41Sqn_Stormcrow; 08-21-2011 at 09:07 AM. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
I do the same thing with freetrack and it works fine, i also did this a lot with trackIR whenever i would change phase of flight: i would center lower than normal so that when sitting correctly on the chair i would be able to see above the nose for take-off/landing without straining myself, similarly i would also lean to one side and hit center so that when i returned to my original position my virtual viewpoint would be off the side for taxiing without me having to keep leaning. I'm not saying it shouldn't be adjusted, but workarounds exist that make it a not so critical fix compared to others, especially for people with head tracking equipment. I'd rather prefer they fix the JU88's gyrocompass, along with the top turrets and bomb release controls on the Blenheim and Br.20, because they are strictly gameplay bugs with no workarounds that prevent certain aircraft from fulfilling their intended role. Any 109 pilot can use a work-around to look through the sights and dogfight (people do it daily on multiplayer servers), but using the bombers is hampered in more ways than one. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
To richie: But you have just monocular view. Not realistic - at least if you have two eyes like the vast majority of people.
To caprera: it DOES NOT work for TrackIR. As has been written on this forum a thousand times before. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
And yes, it does work fine with TrackIR. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
i have no track IR but i like the gunsights as it is now
i think that they finally capture the real thing very close ![]() never have a problem to shoot someone in COD just learn the sights people or buy a track IR instead.... |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
but i am still wondering why the headmovement is limited in this "lean forward" and for bombercrewpositions..............
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
41Sqn_Stormcrow
you probably have right in some point i guess i just want the sim to be close as is gets thats it.. ps i have no track IR Just use my mouse |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
![]() |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Oups, I meant blackdog.
skouras, just learn that TrackIR is no help in learning sights. And it is not close to the real thing. I understand that it is difficult to understand and to explain why we actually have a representation that is definitely not close to reality and there had been a huge thread on this and still some ppl don't grasp it (no offence meant, as it is really difficult to understand without proper means of demonstration). Basically what we have ingame is the view you would get when flying always with one eye closed. But the real thing would be to have a representation what one sees with two eyes open (stereoscopic view). While overall this does not matter much as we just get a 2D perspective view instead of a 3D picture it does matter when it comes down to sight view - a feature that is essential for air combat and not eye candy. So I say: As the current thing is not close to reality AND it is awkward and NOT helpfull, let it be replaced by either something that is really close to reality OR helpfull (or better both but I will be satisfied with one of it). |
![]() |
|
|