Please bring back model visibility options

@SharpeXB

The issue with monitor resolution is two-fold. The resolution does indeed matter and it depends on graphical settings.

Given we have two identically proportioned and sized screens, one running 1080p and the other running 4K. The screens have different pixel sizes. DCS draws a unit as a 3D object as far as it is able, which stops when the object is the size of a single pixel. After that it is drawn as the size of a single sprite until an arbitrary draw distance is met.

What this means is, that with lower resolution screens you have the advantage of larger pixels meaning the target will appear larger at distances when the target shrinks to the size of said pixel and beyond, where as the 4K display target get's smaller and smaller until that screen's pixel size is met.

Now all this is with no anti-aliasing.

With anti-aliasing the problem reverses. On lower resolution screens once the target passes the pixel size downwards it starts to be blurred against the background (in case of a white background for example a black target will get increasingly grey and eventually white). What this means is that at distances where with a 4K screen the target is still drawn with full pixels + some edge anti-aliasing, the target on the 1080p screen would be a single pixel blended into the background.

Additionally, at least a time ago, once the target stopped 3D rendering it's lighting calculation either stopped or got simplified, meaning that a target that was barely larger than a pixel may appear much lighter (and thus harder to see against certain backgrounds) than the sprite-render beyond the 1-pixel-size-distance. This meant that as you came closer to your target the target suddenly appears to vanish, when in reality it just starts to render in 3D making it more difficult to spot.

You can see this in action especially with ground targets. Zoom out and you see nice dark dots on the ground - zoom in and you first appear to loose tally, and then regain it as you realize that the targets look a different color.

As for the target size enhancement breaking BVR, there is a simple solution:

Use the system only when transitioning from pixel-rendering to 3D rendering to smooth out the transition.

In fact, most aircraft (apart from their contrails) should not render at all at distances beyond 10-15 NM. Perhaps they might glint in the sunlight at times, but nothing else. I dare you find a person spotting a fighter-sized target much beyond those distances. Especially if the air is not 100% clear.

Regards,

MikeMikeJuliet

Now all this is with no anti-aliasing.

With anti-aliasing the problem reverses.

There’s the issue. Running without antialiasing causes a lot of problems, mainly that entire pieces of a distant aircraft can vanish from view. Wings at high aspect etc. Turning AA off is I suppose trading the ability to see distant aircraft as single pixels vs anything better when they get closer.

Is this visibility problem caused by players setting AA off?

In 4K then you’re seeing a distant aircraft as a 3D model much farther away. At ranges where they’d blur out at 1080p with AA set. It’s important to note that a single pixel in 2160x3840 is incredibly small. Almost certainly showing targets which are at the 10-15mi range.

I run 2160p and AA at 2x in flight sims (in DCS all other setting max). Despite being very sharp, jaggies are still visible on a 4K screen without AA. On games like FPS I usually turn it off because it’s not so noticeable then and it’s a big frame rate boost.

4K is definitely not a disadvantage in these games. It looks very very nice and clear.

Is this visibility problem caused by players setting AA off?

As I posted before, the variety of the problem and if it exists or not depends on one's monitor resolution and do they use AA or not.

If AA is on, the problem is with lower resolution screens blurring the target making it difficult to notice way before a hi resolution screen.

If AA is off, then high resolution screens give you much smaller pixel to go by, making spotting easier on a low resolution screen due absolute minimum size of the target in your field of vision.

This is of course comparing monitors that have similar physical dimensions. If the monitors are sized according to their resolution (thus keeping the pixels the same size physically) then both displays show the same effect on the same physical viewing distance.

This is partly amplified or smoothed out by changing physical viewing distance, since a pixel's size in your field of vision depends on the distance to the viewed pixel as well as the pixel's physical size.

-----

Another factor that I briefly touched previously is the player's chosen in-game zoom level. The farther in you zoom (i.e. FOV decreases) acts as if you had a higher and higher resolution display, since you spread a smaller and smaller field of view in-game to the same amount of physical pixels. And vice versa when zooming out.

Given that VR HMD's have a relatively low resolution per eye you almost need to use AA in order to remove the ugly edges, but this again amplifies the problem of spotting with AA on with low resolution screens - you can't spot targets far away.

-----

My point in the end is, there should be a technique to, firstly, reduce the effect that changing from 3D to 2D rendering of an object has on visibility of said object. And secondly to dynamically change the algorithm thresholds to try to level different screen setups' output to the user.

What I would like everyone to understand by this dual-post of technical babble is: Model enlargement, dot-labels and similar techniques try to achieve the exact same thing that zooming currently does. They just do it the other way around. Model enlargement tries to keep the objects visible on a higher range of ranges, where as the more simple, but less elegant option is just to zoom the view, which achieves the exact same thing target-wise.

Next time try and see what happens when you zoom in and out on a target. The model enlargement is not there, but don't you consider it exactly the same effect if you zoom out enough to see your targets more clearly (by forcing them to be rendered in 2D and thus more visible, unless using AA), or zooming all the way in to see your target better in 3D?

The only way to get rid of both solutions completely is to transfer to VR only and wait for human-eye-resolution displays. Then the FOV is always correct and objects always render in 3D. Otherwise it is either zoom (breaks immersion) or model enlargement or similar (possibility of exploits and more difficult to make it work correctly).

Regards,

MikeMikeJuliet

Single pixel targets, no matter what resolution. Are really really small. I’m not sure tracking at any resolution is worthwhile for those.

Games look horrendous without antialiasing. Especially flight sims with all the straight lines seen on aircraft. Given the choice of having to turn that off in order to play effectively I’d quit flight sims and find a different game.

And nothing helps spotting more than having 4x the pixels on your display. 4K is not a disadvantage.

Another tip. The zoom view is the tool given to you in the sim to replicate 20/20 eyesight. If you aren’t using it you’ll be blind in the game. Many posters on these threads don’t get how or why to use that and that’s another part of the problem. Put it in a slider so you can use it easily and constantly.

Model enlargement tries to keep the objects visible on a higher range of ranges, where as the more simple, but less elegant option is just to zoom the view, which achieves the exact same thing target-wise.

Actually no. Model Enlargement represents targets out of scale with the FOV and surroundings whereas a zoomed view does not.

Actually no. Model Enlargement represents targets out of scale with the FOV and surroundings whereas a zoomed view does not.

... both of which have the point of countering the fact that the users visual system (the type of display) can't accurately represent the view in the world because of size, FOV and pixel amount limits.

I don't know if you have noticed, but pixels in similar sized 4K displays are way smaller than with 1080p displays. For reference I use a 2K monitor and I can clearly see the difference between 2 and 4K.

I'm not saying 4K is a disadvantage. But a lower resolution screen has an advantage with AA turned off. And I fly with AA turned off. Because of the trigonometry (namely target size, distance to target and pixel size) means that reducing pixel size by half for example has a significant difference in distance. I choose to play with AA off because AA on makes spotting targets (especially ground targets) a pain at ranges I would begin an attack run. And I very much do not enjoy zooming. It is unimmersive, disrupts my sense of space and allows me to zoom in way beyond 1:1 scale compared to the physical size of things. Target enlargement at certain ranges is way less interruptive and doesn't have as large an effect size-wise.

In addition the zoom does way more than simulate 20/20 vision. It goes way beyond that because you can zoom in to ridiculous levels effectively acting as a cheat that everyone can use. I do not see how this would differ from model enlargement, since that too would be available to everyone.

I fully agree the models should not be enlargened so as to allow spotting at overtly long distances. The system doesn not need to apply to all instances at every distance. I fully agree on that. The previous model enlargement made it possible to see missiles as dots in the sky at ranges over 20NM.

My take on this is that model enlargement can be used to help overcome system and hardware limitations if implemented correctly. And the previous implementation was not correct.

Regards,

MikeMikeJuliet

The zoom view is pretty essential in order to play effectively. Even Model Enlargement wasn’t going to allow you to see targets in enough detail. Don’t think of it in terms of size, think about resolution. Since your display has a fixed number of pixels the only way to see with the higher acuity that approaches real world vision is to enlarge the image. In many cases you need the zoom view just to read the cockpit displays or the HUD. Pilots need 20/20 eyesight, imagine trying to read the bottom line of an eye chart in the game, the only way is to zoom in. It’s also self regulating, you’re trading off peripheral vision for detail. So it doesn’t need to be controlled as a “cheat”. On a desktop sized screen, zoomed-in is actually closer to life size.

Here’s a good example of using the command, pulled randomly from YouTube. See how this person is constantly varying the view.

The zoom view is pretty essential in order to play effectively. Even Model Enlargement wasn’t going to allow you to see targets in enough detail. Don’t think of it in terms of size, think about resolution. Since your display has a fixed number of pixels the only way to see with the higher acuity that approaches real world vision is to enlarge the image. In many cases you need the zoom view just to read the cockpit displays or the HUD. Pilots need 20/20 eyesight, imagine trying to read the bottom line of an eye chart in the game, the only way is to zoom in. It’s also self regulating, you’re trading off peripheral vision for detail. So it doesn’t need to be controlled as a “cheat”. On a desktop sized screen, zoomed-in is actually closer to life size.

Fair points. As a side note a perfect vision is not mandatory.

I would still argue model enlargement is still exactly for the purpose of allowing you to see the target with enough detail, but without compromising peripheral vision. In the same way I would not call it a cheat, since A: everyone has the ability to use it if they want, and B: it tries to achieve the same effect (to simulate the ability to see better than your display allows you to) without sacrificing FOV.

On the subject of axis-bound FOV. It is good if you have an axis to work with. My Warthogs only available axis (the friction lever) spikes constantly and will produce a vomit-inducing effect on use. Plus I actually prefer to use constant FOV. It is most comfortable way to play that way.

Regards,

MikeMikeJuliet

Plus I actually prefer to use constant FOV. It is most comfortable way to play that way.

You are putting yourself at an unrealistic disadvantage, in real life you have both more FOV and more magnification at the same time (with naked eye) then with a typical PC monitor. Zoommig in and out at least lets you access more realistic FOV and magnification, although only one at a time.

On the subject of axis-bound FOV. It is good if you have an axis to work with.

Try assigning one of your rudder toe brake axis. The modern planes can get by with a single brake axis. Braking is only so important, used just briefly on the ground whereas the zoom view is used constantly. Plus it keeps your hands free.

Try assigning one of your rudder toe brake axis. The modern planes can get by with a single brake axis. Braking is only so important, used just briefly on the ground whereas the zoom view is used constantly. Plus it keeps your hands free.

How would you make that work with the A-10C, for example? You have the option of Left and Right brake axis or a single brake keyboard command (not an axis). If there was an axis bind for both brakes together, I would agree with your idea, but there is not.

How would you make that work with the A-10C, for example? You have the option of Left and Right brake axis or a single brake keyboard command (not an axis). If there was an axis bind for both brakes together, I would agree with your idea, but there is not.

There’s a mono brake axis available for the A-10C. All the aircraft have that option. For WWII birds where right and left brakes are a necessity I use HOTAS buttons for them. Not perfect but I’d rather have the zoom.

I think I'd rather sit on glass than have to use a toe brake for zoom.

I think I'd rather sit on glass than have to use a toe brake for zoom.

Suit yourself. It actually works really well. Keeps your hands free. A slider or axis gives you the best control over this because you can zoom in and out at any speed or level. For myself that’s all preferable to having a ground handling simulator. I assign R & L brakes on civy sims where there’s no need to zoom look around quickly.

That’s really not true. The 3D objects you see on your screen are exactly the same size. I hope that’s obvious. A pizza with 8 slices is exactly the same size as one with 12.

And with single pixels, a 2160p display would show a single black pixel whereas a 1080p one would show 4 x 25% grey ones. 1080p is blurrier and objects disappear into the background easier. Extra resolution does not make it harder to see or identify objects. That’s just counter intuitive.

 

It absolutely makes targets harder to see at higher resolutions.

Problem to see? Use the zoom Key in the Key pad " /" or "*"

But in one thing i agree, in real life with clear sky, we can see a plane miles away, in the sim not, some times It apears in looking at you at 7miles. (Some Su And f-5)

But in one thing i agree, in real life with clear sky, we can see a plane miles away, in the sim not, some times It apears in looking at you at 7miles. (Some Su And f-5)

It absolutely makes targets harder to see at higher resolutions.

Not in my experience. If you think higher resolution makes targets harder to see you should get a 400x600 CRT. :cry:

But in one thing i agree, in real life with clear sky, we can see a plane miles away, in the sim not, some times It apears in looking at you at 7miles. (Some Su And f-5)

But indeed as a VR user I want this option back. Hard to spot anything far away in VR.

Envoyé de mon SM-G955F en utilisant Tapatalk

So there you have it kiddies. Ive counted 5 threads in the past month now pertaining to model visibility (or lack thereof), do we still think this is a non factor?

So what are the WW2 servers doing then? Are they allowing labels on?

So what are the WW2 servers doing then? Are they allowing labels on?

They use a mod for labels that puts a little dot on top of the aircraft. For me it is still too hard to see in 4k. The size of the dot changes depending on your resolution, which is lame.

There's always one.

 

Not everybody flies on open MP servers. Some of use fly on dedicated servers for our groups.

Not everyone flies online as noted above. Some only fly single player, some do both.

 

Having this feature will not harm your experience as it can simply but shut off by server control. If you don't like the server controls, feel free to start your own.

don't like it? turn it off.. I agree... wish I could see stuff... :joystick:

They use a mod for labels that puts a little dot on top of the aircraft. For me it is still too hard to see in 4k. The size of the dot changes depending on your resolution, which is lame.

Its even hard to see anything in 2K (1980x1080). Even zoomed in against clean background (sky, water).

I don't like the idea of labels or any sort of artificial helper like dots over planes. But spotting planes should be a bit easier as it is now. Currently I will have to put my eyes just a few centimeter in front of my monitor to get any chance of spoting a plane even in perfect visibility conditions. And even then its impossible against the ground at distances above 3 Km.

Camouflage is fine, but this is a bit to much.

And even then its impossible against the ground at distances above 3 Km.

Can you IRL? You want them flash or what? Computer graphics is what it is. It's mathematically correct now. In order to see RL representation you need max resolution and display near your eyes with 1:1 scaling. Most of the time it means zoomed. I can understand that some more effects are needed when ie. plane deflects sunshine.