Target visibility

[irR4tiOn4L]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=6909

Clearly you just don't understand any of this topic. I expect you are intellectually challenged. Still, I'll post a clarification;

5. The resolution of detials and LODs is way higher than in lL-2. How far we we will see the type of the object... I can't say right now. All will depends of the all final resource-eaters....

He is talking about rendering distances for LODs and objects. Mostly ground objects, as aircraft are already rendered very far out or as dots.

In Il-2 once we did halfransparent dot for the groun objects that to make some ability to see it from longer distance... howver users dislike this system and preffered to go back as it was.

Again, talking about ground objects. Aircraft already have the system in place.

It isn't definitiopn of the LOD only. It is definition of the screen resolution, and power of a system on which we will run BoB in fuuture in a middle settings.

The decision on how far to render ground objects also depends on performance and FPS hit on middle range systems and how far these objects can be seen comes down to factors other than LOD (including screen resolution).

Also due to online gamplay we will need to make it absolutely identical to medium system for the fair gameplay.

Given the last point, you can't have a LOD system that is switched off on medium systems and does not render objects at long distance, but does on high end systems because of fair gameplay. This is about FPS and performance hits, not spotting and dots.

Its a rule... Or the player with more power PC and greate resolution of the monitor you would be named as a cheater....

Justifying the position above, medium system players should be able to have access to the same LOD rendering system for ground objects as power users and any ground object dot system should scale across resolutions to ensure fair gameplay and to prevent the community turning on players using powerful pc's. This is all meant to justify why the developers are taking their time developing a lod system for ground objects.

We already have great experience in that and many items of gameplay when we need to go for some middle level of details on middle to high power game machines...

They like the way dots and other aspects of the graphics and gameplay systems are consistent across low spec and high spec PC's and intend to continue to develop in this way.

Note that they do not say anything about large monitors or aircraft dots.

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

wot?? and no three minute warning? spin it around all you want....

How old are you?

[Wolf_Rider]

Originally Posted by irR4tiOn4L

Note that they do not say anything about large monitors or aircraft dots.

keep up the denigrations, son...
and according to you, I would be 7. what's your next one, perhaps something about special needs?

5) will you correct and improve the "distant object visibility" problem we currently have in il2 ? ie seeing distant LoD models correctly as you would see the the same object (plane/truck/tank) from the same distance with the naked eye in real life
- this is not a problem in il2 when you look at a distant aircraft against the open sky because it is a black (or dark grey) object that is seen against a uniform light blue sky background, but there is a MAJOR problem looking for a small LoD model against the textures of the terrain background, it blends in to much.
- for ex right now in il2 when you fly your aircraft at 1500 meters altitude and you look down to scan the ground for objects, you can not see/locate/track an enemy truck or tank that is standing in an open field or is located on an open road (as you can in real life see it, and historical ww2 pilot reports available), but instead in il2 you need to fly at 500 meters altitude to be able to see it (using the 30 FoV zoom function is not the solution, because it creates tunnel vision and you can only scan a very small narrow part of the ground at a time, and loosing all your peripheral vision it makes you very vulnerable to fly like that). this is because the il2 LoD model blends in to much with the terrain textures (with pc grafix it is a flat 2 dimensional LoD model blending in with the colors of the flat 2 dimensional terrain textures, but in real life it is a 3 dimensional solid object that stands out much more)
- will you compensate for this pc grafix problem in BoB and make distant LoD models stand out more so they are correctly visible ? you mentioned we will have more LoD models in BoB, instead of the 3 currently used in il2, but i am asking about making the LoD model stand out more so it is correctly visible and we can see those objects like tank/truck/planes from the exact same distance as we can see them in real life !

was the question to which O.M. responded... "greater resolution" is in reference to larger monitors (you needed to be there at the time

Originally Posted by irR4tiOn4L

Remember also that FOV doesnt have to be all or nothing. Modern games can have a general view with one fov and a display within that (like say a sniper scope) ~

Which I suggested before, along with a penalty for in cockpit binocular use. Penalty being one hand off the stick or off the throttle (adding an exit pupil penalty as well) coded in.

[irR4tiOn4L]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

Which I suggested before, along with a penalty for in cockpit binocular use. Penalty being one hand off the stick or off the throttle (adding an exit pupil penalty as well) coded in.

Tell you what. Since this is plainly all you want, why don't you go start a thread about it, have your idea rejected on its own merit, and leave what is here to be considered on its? You're clearly not interested in anything I have to say and, well, given that I have already heard the breadth of your input, I would have to say the feeling is mutual.

I'm not sure why I continued the discussion. Perhaps I thought you might be interested, against the odds, in learning something about FOV and its uses. I was clearly wrong. So considering that your only aim is to raise hell about the inequity of fov switching and the perfection to be attained in the 60 fov + binoculars, I can't help you. Why don't you go look for a broader audience?

Sincerely,

Bored and disinterested

[Wolf_Rider]

leaving again??

that's three dollars I've lost already and now it is looking like a fourth...


well you want "realism" and "what the pilot really sees", so those penalties for incockpit binoculars (zoom) would be perfect.

Oh, hang on... you'd only want "realism" and "what the pilot really sees" up to a point, eh

and you're still stuck on the photography aspect, when in reality, you could have learnt something from projection, which is the image on the screen.

[irR4tiOn4L]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

leaving again??

that's three dollars I've lost already and now it is looking like a fourth...


well you want "realism" and "what the pilot really sees", so those penalties for incockpit binoculars (zoom) would be perfect.

Oh, hang on... you'd only want "realism" and "what the pilot really sees" up to a point, eh

and you're still stuck on the photography aspect, when in reality, you could have learnt something from projection, which is the image on the screen.

Well it seems to me that you are the one who wants something and are upset that its regarded as something silly that nobody else wants. So you come here and waste my time, and almost certainly waste your time.

Why bother? Just accept that you wont get a riser or support out of me or anyone else. Least of all the devs. Get over it and move on. Or get banned, I don't care.

[Wolf_Rider]

Bugga... there goes that fourth dollar


Banned because I suggested you only want "what the pilot really sees" up to a certain point? nah... you got upset because you got caught out - any more names you want to call me??

[6S.Manu]

irR4tiOn4L, it seems that you didn't follow the advise you gave to me.