109 sounds and other so called improvements - Page 3 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-21-2018, 04:34 PM   #21
DD_Fenrir
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 509
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by birdstrike View Post
i agree, the tires have too little friction. i dont agree that this looks "better", or in anyway convinceable. look at 1.5 videos of the 109...they had it almost spot on before, and then changed it to be beginner friendly. which makes no sense whatsoever, as there are already features like "autorudder" and "take off assistance" suiting to beginners who had problems with the original ground physics.
Because Nick Grey pointed out you get far more sensational feedback in the real airframe that there is no way of replicating in the sim; ergo it is harder to keep the a/c straight in the sim than real life. Which kind of goes against the point - if it's harder then it's as bad (or worse) than being easier?

They decided to let the frictional physics be more forgiving as a concession. Was it the right decision? Depends on your position in the gulf between purist user demanding 100% accuracy and the developer wanting accessibility for their product.

The auto-rudder and take-off assistance will have no effect if someone touches down with too much sideslip cos they can't feel it btw.

And just because you can do it at the "too realistic level" doesn't mean everyone can - I know a lot of my squad mates too intimidated by DCS to even try it; that means lost potential sales and that's not good for the community as a whole.

IMHO I suspect they went a little too far too, however, these things are always a subjective matter, and will require adjusting to best suit everyone's taste. Lately, it seems, a better balance has been struck.
DD_Fenrir is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2018, 04:36 PM   #22
DD_Fenrir
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 509
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by birdstrike View Post
Fenrir..... wall of text and taking the merlin as an example while in the 109 forum? and ending with insults while not even reading what i was saying. its you who is ignorant.

i dont even need real world recordings...what i do expect though, is to be able to hear differences between 2000 and 2900rpm other than a slight volume increase.
As is suspected. You want to tell everyone how they are wrong and learn nothing from anyone else. Good luck to you.
DD_Fenrir is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2018, 04:47 PM   #23
birdstrike
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 231
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DD_Fenrir View Post
Because Nick Grey pointed out you get far more sensational feedback in the real airframe that there is no way of replicating in the sim; ergo it is harder to keep the a/c straight in the sim than real life. Which kind of goes against the point - if it's harder then it's as bad (or worse) than being easier?

They decided to let the frictional physics be more forgiving as a concession. Was it the right decision? Depends on your position in the gulf between purist user demanding 100% accuracy and the developer wanting accessibility for their product.

The auto-rudder and take-off assistance will have no effect if someone touches down with too much sideslip cos they can't feel it btw.

And just because you can do it at the "too realistic level" doesn't mean everyone can - I know a lot of my squad mates too intimidated by DCS to even try it; that means lost potential sales and that's not good for the community as a whole.

IMHO I suspect they went a little too far too, however, these things are always a subjective matter, and will require adjusting to best suit everyone's taste. Lately, it seems, a better balance has been struck.
all fine with that...make it optional then and let the guys who want the realistic ground physics still have it...but dont force it on us.
and imo, even with the "harder" ground physics, landings and takeoffs in dcs were easier than irl.
birdstrike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2018, 05:01 PM   #24
DD_Fenrir
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 509
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sniper175 View Post
I’ve been around a few spits in my days and at least the external overhead fly by’s sound nothing like real world. Some very good sound mods within the community that makes these airframes sound more accurate.
Agreed, but that becomes part of a realm in which it becomes even more problematic and has to do with the modelling of SPL and the fact that the entire virtual spectrum of sound has to be compressed - else the explosion of a Mk84 would blow the cones out of your speakers or rupture your eardrums - which brings it's own problems.

The previously-abandoned-title-that-cannot-be-named has a neat way of getting around this; I suspect it plays a looping sample when a viewed aircraft is a set distance from the player and blends it with the synthesised engine sound model, then seemingly applies it's own rules for SPL and Doppler effects. It sounds pretty convincing, with a nice throb and apparent resonance.

Whether DCS could use the same process is known only to ED.
DD_Fenrir is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2018, 05:03 PM   #25
DD_Fenrir
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 509
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by birdstrike View Post
all fine with that...make it optional then and let the guys who want the realistic ground physics still have it...but dont force it on us.
Valid point.


Quote:
Originally Posted by birdstrike View Post
and imo, even with the "harder" ground physics, landings and takeoffs in dcs were easier than irl.
I'll take Nick Grey's opinion over yours.
DD_Fenrir is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2018, 05:12 PM   #26
Schmidtfire
Member
 
Schmidtfire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 998
Default

As for sound. It does not really matter how good or accurate you record the engine sounds on location if you don't know how to deal with it in post. Mixing and editing is key. The real sound and what is perceived as real in a sim/game are two different things. Sound is difficult. I work in the post-production industry for feature films and television. You won't believe how much work has to be done by a sound technician to make a show sound "real"
Not saying that there should be Hollywood sounds, but to make it truly sound like "on location" it still needs a lot of work even if recorded straight from the source (like an engine).

As of late it seems like ED has been getting better and better at sounds, so I hope that this is an area that keeps improving. There are some sound-modders who are also doing nice work for the community. Great sounds are very important for an immersive experience.
Schmidtfire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2018, 05:12 PM   #27
birdstrike
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 231
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DD_Fenrir View Post
Valid point.




I'll take Nick Grey's opinion over yours.
do that. no problem with that.but as you are an experienced dcs pilot, even better would be to take a few flying lessons in high powered tail draggers and then judge for yourself, if you have the chance to.

i know Nick Grey is a professional pilot with incredible experience on various types irl. what i do doubt though, is that he has even half the flying hours of for example yourself in dcs.
it can be tricky for very experienced rl pilots to then start with computer games trying to simulate it.

of course he is right when saying that you lose the feeling of flight because a pc game is still a visual thing only. but, with experience, you begin to "feel" due to those visual cues. after enough hours, you begin to "feel" the onset of a stall even without a ffb stick, although literally you cant feel anything....you know that. i somehow doubt that Nick Grey spent that much time in the warbirds in dcs. i might be wrong about that and maybe he logged several hundreds of hours in the dcs spit etc...i just cant imagine that, and i for myself know, that for me personally its a bigger challenge in real life even though it became second nature.



and back to the sounds. nobody says its easy to produce realistic sounds. i am not even questioning the overall tune of the new sound....but when i completely lose the sensation of being able to know at which rpm my engine is running currently only by listening, from one patch to the other, then for me thats a considerable step backwards.
you say, at the very first beta version of the 109, the dcs sound engine was more limited...i say i liked the sounds back then more...not because im of the opinion that back than it sounded more like a DB engine than it does now, but because back then, the sounds gave the engine a "life". you could hear it breathing. you knew whether you are at 2800rpm or at 2600rpm only by listening to the engine. this is all gone now.

Last edited by birdstrike; 12-21-2018 at 09:10 PM.
birdstrike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2018, 07:16 PM   #28
BaUU77
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 1
Default

I AGREE with birdstrike.

while the overall sound is good, the difference between different rpm settings is not noticebale anymore. please dont forget, that contrary to the other ww2 birds, the 109 has the option to use manual prop pitch. to use this feature successfully, its very important to be able to hear the different rpm settings. for example AT LEAST there should be a noticeable difference between 2600rpm and the upper limit of what the engine can handle, 2800-2900rpm...please this is important for MANUAL PROP PITCH PILOTS.
thank you
BaUU77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2018, 03:03 AM   #29
Wrench
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 494
Default

I'mma throw my two cents in here.
Sounds are fine, don't resist change.
__________________
Carrier Script.
Wrench is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2018, 09:33 AM   #30
Wolf8312
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 830
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by birdstrike View Post
do that. no problem with that.but as you are an experienced dcs pilot, even better would be to take a few flying lessons in high powered tail draggers and then judge for yourself, if you have the chance to.

i know Nick Grey is a professional pilot with incredible experience on various types irl. what i do doubt though, is that he has even half the flying hours of for example yourself in dcs.
it can be tricky for very experienced rl pilots to then start with computer games trying to simulate it.

of course he is right when saying that you lose the feeling of flight because a pc game is still a visual thing only. but, with experience, you begin to "feel" due to those visual cues. after enough hours, you begin to "feel" the onset of a stall even without a ffb stick, although literally you cant feel anything....you know that. i somehow doubt that Nick Grey spent that much time in the warbirds in dcs. i might be wrong about that and maybe he logged several hundreds of hours in the dcs spit etc...i just cant imagine that, and i for myself know, that for me personally its a bigger challenge in real life even though it became second nature.



and back to the sounds. nobody says its easy to produce realistic sounds. i am not even questioning the overall tune of the new sound....but when i completely lose the sensation of being able to know at which rpm my engine is running currently only by listening, from one patch to the other, then for me thats a considerable step backwards.
you say, at the very first beta version of the 109, the dcs sound engine was more limited...i say i liked the sounds back then more...not because im of the opinion that back than it sounded more like a DB engine than it does now, but because back then, the sounds gave the engine a "life". you could hear it breathing. you knew whether you are at 2800rpm or at 2600rpm only by listening to the engine. this is all gone
Have you thought about getting a jetseat, so you can actually feel the engine sounds/stalls/stops and RPM’s etc? When you can actually feel the sounds it makes a world of difference, especially in VR with a good pair of headphones. It can create the illusion that the sounds are changing, even when perhaps they are not really doing so.

I agree about realism physics though, nerf them if you want but leave the options to play either realistic or simplified open for players to choose.
__________________
------------

ASUS ROG STRIX Z370-H,1080Ti OC edition, i7-8770k 5ghz, 1 T SSD, 16GB DDR4 3200, HTC VIVE, VKB peddals, HOTAS VPC MONGOOSE, WARTHOG throttle, Gametrix JETSEAT, Voice attack

Last edited by Wolf8312; 12-22-2018 at 09:37 AM.
Wolf8312 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:37 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.