PDA

View Full Version : I wish the planes would appear somewhat bigger



JG301_nils
10-03-2004, 11:58 AM
I wish the planes would appear somewhat bigger in the game, in my opinion the planes seems to be very small at some distance, more like toy planes. I think if the objects were scaled up 30-50% it would look a lot better. If you´re 100 meter or so from another plane, it looks so small, and light. Compare it to a 10 meter object (say a average house front or a bus) from that distance. It looks bigger doesn´t it? But I know it´s not possible to do. Still ....
An other thing that also seems strange, the size of the propeller disc from your cockpit, it looks like a little fan. Just see how big the P-47 propeller really is on the outside model, but from the cockpit it hardly is bigger than the engine cowling.

jurinko
10-03-2004, 12:40 PM
switch to max zoom view and the sizes seem quite realistic.. but then you see nothing else. It is the limitation of monitor and 2d.

WOLFMondo
10-03-2004, 04:13 PM
I just wish ground units were in proportion to the planes.

clint-ruin
10-03-2004, 04:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WOLFMondo:
I just wish ground units were in proportion to the planes. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ditto. One good thing about getting out of the FB base with BOB is that this problem should go away. Totally inexplicable that things on the ground are about 30% smaller than air objects - especially for what is supposedly a ground pounding plane sim.

Snoop_Baron
10-03-2004, 09:11 PM
I suggested a while back what would be a nice option as an alternative to icons would be to have the plane size from the narrow view (gunsight) available in the normal view.

s!
Snoop

antifreeze
10-04-2004, 07:49 PM
> I just wish ground units were in proportion to the planes.

I used to think that, but I found when I examined it carefully that it seemed to be because of the 'fishbowl lens' effect that the game has.
I taxied my plane over to a tank, and looked at both using F2. When the camera is on the plane's side the tank looks too small. But when you pan over to the tank side, then it is the plane that looks too small. It helps to compare the tank commander and the pilot, as well as the machines.
I have noticed at least one house model that actually is the wrong size though.

clint-ruin
10-04-2004, 09:47 PM
Have you ever seen the pilot model eject and walk next to a jeep? Do you think he'll fit? :>

F19_Ob
10-05-2004, 04:53 AM
I also had problems with the planesize in the early days of il2....no probs now though.


Anyway I very much liked the planesize in the old CFS1. when u escorted b17's in a mustang the b17 felt really big.
If I remember it correctly they reduced size considerably with CFS2 and they really felt like toyplanes to chase.
I imported the old planeset from cfs1 into cfs2 and scaled the planes up to cfs1 standard and flew mainly in the greenland location wich looked very much like europe in the alp areas.
great fun.....wouldnt go back to those days though.

GvSAP_Dart
10-05-2004, 09:12 PM
That's really weird, y'all.

At 100 meters a FW-190 stretches from one end of the Hurricane reticule to the other, wingtip to wingtip.

Either the gunsight is too small relative to the cockpit or the plane is the right size in scale...

clint-ruin
10-05-2004, 11:45 PM
I don't think anyone is aware of any problem with planes relative to the angles you'll see looking through them at a gunsight.

Put it another way. Park a king tiger next to a plane in the FMB.

polkku
10-06-2004, 01:13 AM
I tried this in FMB and i tested Brewster vs T-34. They should be equal in length (8m), but the T-34 is clearly shorter (some 1 or 2 meters). In all web pages the length of T-34 and T-34/85 is the same so I presume this means the lenght of its hull. Either way, measured from barret tip or front hull, the T-34 is shorter than Brewster. Actually it is closer to I-16 (6m). You can test this just like Mr.Clint said, put them both to FMB and drag them on top of each other.
I don't think the size errors are so big that it affects the game in an way. A 10% increase in size will not help hitting them very much.

clint-ruin
10-06-2004, 01:34 AM
As far as I know it's worse for some objects than others. Plumps just posted on the PF forum:

You can't say that all buildings' dimensions in FB are completely wrong. But to give you an example: The Reichstag in IL2FB has a ground plan sized ~ 50 x 75 m. The real Reichstag building in Berlin is (estimated) ~ 90 x 135 m large.

Another fun thing to do is to try and find a road big enough for two cars to pass each other on :>

grifter2u
10-10-2004, 06:16 AM
in the normal view from the cockpit all external planes look to small compared to their expected size in real life.

this means that ALL dogfighting and chasing of enemy planes is not realistic ! we are in fact chasing mini planes in the sky !

this fact has been confirmed by most experienced real pilots that have used the il2sturmovik sim and have compared their experience to that of identifying real planes (small and large) in real life.

this error in il2 is the main current "realism" obstacle and should be addressed as a major priority. this error also creates the need for currently using icons and tags in il2, and this distracts from many of the good aspects of the sim.

Oleg, why dont you recognise this is a problem and is a real IMPORTANT issue for the il2 enthousiasts and help us to fix this SOON.

Gato__Loco
10-10-2004, 08:01 PM
Of course they look small. It is because you are watching a scaled version of "reality". Instead of watching real planes through a full-size cockpit you are doing it through a 17 inches monitor.

grifter2u
10-11-2004, 02:47 AM
Gato-Loco,

what you say makes no sense

we sit behind a 22 inch or 19 inch monitor, this is the "size of the window" that we look out of onto the outside world.

it should not change the size of the aircraft you are looking at.

F19_Ob
10-11-2004, 05:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by grifter2u:
Gato-Loco,

what you say makes no sense

we sit behind a 22 inch or 19 inch monitor, this is the "size of the window" that we look out of onto the outside world.

it should not change the size of the aircraft you are looking at. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


What do u mean grifter2u? I think Gato-Loco has a point. A bigger monitor should scale up the world. what part in that dont make sense?

I have a 17 inch myself and I'm used to the scale by now so I dont have any problem with that part, although a 19 or 22inch thingy would be really enjoyable.

grifter2u
10-11-2004, 05:59 AM
if you are at home and looking out of a large window at your car outside, why would you expect the car to look smaler when you then go and look at the same car through a smaller window ?

same thing in il2.

if an aircraft with a wingspan of 10 meters is flying at 250 meters from my cockpit, then i would expect to be able to see it in its correct proportions and size when this is "simulated" on my pc monitor in il2. there should be no significant difference if your monitor is 17 or 19, or 21 inches.

just ask an experienced real pilot, how easy/diffuclt is it to spot or identify a small or medium size aircraft in real life at various distances (like 100, 300, 700, 1000 meters etc).

the problem is that in il2, the size of these "external aircraft" is way to small, they are like toy scaled-down planes roughly.

the minor differences in "external plane size" is not caused by the different sized monitors, it is mainly caused by a problem in il2 coding.

F19_Ob
10-11-2004, 06:41 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by grifter2u:


just ask an experienced real pilot, how easy/diffuclt is it to spot or identify a small or medium size aircraft in real life at various distances (like 100, 300, 700, 1000 meters etc).

the problem is that in il2, the size of these "external aircraft" is way to small, they are like toy scaled-down planes roughly.

the minor differences in "external plane size" is not caused by the different sized monitors, it is mainly caused by a problem in il2 coding. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


I'm not a pilot but I have observed other planes while flying with a pilot in smallerplanes enough times and I agree that its easier to spot planes under good conditions in RL than in FB, but I have always imagined that a big monitor that makes the cockpit more close to a real one in size also would make the spotted planes appear bigger (not bigger compared to the cockpit) and that inturn would make it more realistic in spotting. So just an overall scale up.

But do u mean that the cockpitsize should remain the same and the planes outside bigger?
I'm not saying right or wrong here I just try to understand what u mean.

ECV56_Rolf
10-11-2004, 07:14 AM
The point is that when you change between a 15" monitor to a 17" one, you are making no big deal. The increase in size if you use a the same resolution is no more than some 12%.

This means that the overall pixel size increases, but the plane has exactly the same amount of pixels. So that's why it's no big deal. Bigger monitor but the same amount of pixels.

Using better resolutions is just no big deal also, this asuming that nearly everybody could use 1024x768. The best next resolution size is 1280x960, which means an increase of 20, that implies that a 10 pixel image is now a 12 pixel image. Not a great change. Somewhat better, but the problem is still there.

The weird thing, is that for allowing us to have 3 views, we have a zooming effect that is far away from realitty. If you look at the moon with the three views you will see it change sizes.

This is some kind of compromise for the planes being so small. If you could allways fly in the panoramic view, with planes the size on sight view, you will get something nearer to the reall thing, but I don´t know if that is wright or wrong.

clint-ruin
10-11-2004, 07:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>The weird thing, is that for allowing us to have 3 views, we have a zooming effect that is far away from realitty. If you look at the moon with the three views you will see it change sizes.

This is some kind of compromise for the planes being so small. If you could allways fly in the panoramic view, with planes the size on sight view, you will get something nearer to the real thing, but I don´t know if that is wright or wrong. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You have this backwards.

FOV 40 is near 1:1 scaling [or as near as can be]. This is the least 'faked' view on offer. There is next to no distortion in this view. Most objects appear as being the same size they would be in reality at the same distance, on a 17" monitor, in this view.

FOV 90 is nowhere near 1:1. This is a distorted perspective, kind of like a fisheye lens. This is the widest angle of perspective in FB and it is still about 1/2 of what a real person would see with both eyes from the same position. Objects may be closer than they appear - same as in your side mirrors.

You are basically asking for aircraft objects to be made unrealistically larger. Scaling the models themselves with FBs current rendering and views system is going to be pretty hard to pull off, to say the least.

Janes WW2F had a switch for this [making objects bigger as compared to landscape], as far as I know it was spurned by most players.

You could always buy 3 monitors and run 'em all at FOV 40, if you really wanted 'panoramic' views with real/large object sizes. Hey, it's been done by some people here! :>

grifter2u
10-11-2004, 10:00 AM
yeps with zoomed gunsight 30 degree FOV the external aircraft sizes look closest to the real size they should be at, but it is not realistic to fly and scan the skies permanantly with that setting while flying in il2.

most people fly with the 70 degree view, and at that setting the external aircraft are almost half the size they should be.

people delude themselves by pretending that it is realistic trying to spot aircraft at unrealistic distances and flying like that "look ma, i am a real ww2 pilot by looking for those little dots, arnt i fantastic !" Those same people yell loudly and proudly they are flying "full real".

what a load of rubish !

in fact they are not using aids that might help more closely recreate the "real flying experience in ww2". and as we all know, sitting behind your monitor at home does require a few aids to mimic more closely a real flying experience those pilots had.

the reason to provide the 70 degree FOV and 90 degree FOV is to try and reduce the limitations of severely reduced peripheral vision caused by sitting in our living rooms behind a small pc 3x4 monitor (19' or larger for most of us).

sadly by trying to reduce one problem, Oleg has introduced a new one. In 70 and 90 degree FOV all external aircraft are roughly half the size they should be. This has severely distorted the real flying experience ww2 pilots had, were SA was the most important survival skill.

Oleg needs to add another option that can be set on/off to display external aircraft at REALISTIC size in the 70 and 90 degree FOV, than this would bring us closer to SIMULATING the real flying experience in ww2 (since this is a request for an option, the realwhiners can turn it off if they dont want it)

some much older flightsims had much less of a problem with this, just look at BoB and mig-alley by Rowan years ago.

ECV56_Rolf
10-11-2004, 03:32 PM
I remembered something that will make using bigger planes nearly imposible.

I read about what the revi markings implicate, the two inner marks, when you get a normal fighter plane in between them (no more than 10 meters wingspan) you know it is at 600 meters, if it is in between the other two, it is at 300 meters, and so on. The game simulates this very well in any view

This makes it imposible to have bigger planes in the panoramic view. We will have a giant sight! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

grifter2u
10-11-2004, 09:14 PM
rolf,

that is not a valid reason, and what you say is illogical.

first we need the planes to be displayed at the correct size.

btw, in the zoomed in view (30 degree FOV) the planes are displayed roughly at the correct size, and that is the view people use for looking through the sight to aim at the enemy. the size of the plane you look at from that view should give you a correct proportion to the reticles on the sighting system.

Snoop_Baron
10-11-2004, 09:47 PM
Yes it would be nice to let you have a key to toggle between planes at correct scaled size in FOV 70 and 90 (what we have today) and planes at the size they appear in FOV 30 but in FOV 70 and 90.

Basically toggle plane size between 'real' (still an approximation) and scaled. You could toggle to real size when planes are at a distance or scanning and then back to scaled size for the nicer asthetics.

In the mean times you can still use limited icons to get at a reasonable compromise. But this would be better IMO.

Snoop

HQ1
10-12-2004, 01:56 AM
So can anyone explains why Oleg make the plane size compare to cockpit in this way ? there must be some reason. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

WOLFMondo
10-12-2004, 06:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by clint-ruin:
Have you ever seen the pilot model eject and walk next to a jeep? Do you think he'll fit? :> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Jeeps?!?! The pilots are bigger than those half track german motorcycle vehicals! The King Tiger is so small you could strap one to a P47 under each wing and drop them instead of the 500lbs'ers.

ECV56_Rolf
10-12-2004, 07:49 AM
All I can say is that the sight works on any view.

You can verify that easily, get a friendly plane on sight, with icons on so that the distance is displayed. Pause the game, and change the views with the game paused. You will see that proportions are maintained through the different views.

When you fly with icons off, this is the only way to know at what distance you are firing.

Here in the widest view, at 10m distance, a 12m wingspan plane measures 2cm, on sight view it measures 7cm. 64 pixels in the first case, and 224 in the second. This means a roughly 4 to 1 zoom.

If you keep in mind that when you step at 10 meters distance from somethig measuring 12m size, your measured perception is around 10 times smaller. So if you try to measure that object at that distance, it will measure 1.2m

Then we have that:

Wide view, 1.2m = 0.02m this is a 1/60 scale
Sight View, 1.2m = 0.07m this is a 1/17 scale
(This is on a 17" monitor and is aprox)

The game has right proportions, any solution that keeps them, will mean a reduced field of view.

Now you can makes planes bigger in the wide view, but that will get all the rest out of place.

I don´t believe that higher resolutions on our 17, 19, or 21" monitors will do the job. Unless we use the machine with a huge magnifyng glass in front. (some systems used that a long time ago), or we have a huge monitor where higher resolutions could be usefully represented.

This is not a developing problem, but a technical one. One kind of solution, that few people will like it is something like WWII implemented. The window representing the real view on some corner. Another one is to allow to use 2 displays, one with the wide view, and another with the sight view.

Still, I must agree that some compromise could be taken for objects sighted further from shooting range.

At 1000m, a 12m wingspan in RL, is an 0.012m or 1.2cm object. In the sim, that object on the sight view will take something like 0.07cm or 2 pixels. On the wide view, it will be only 1 pixel. Maybe at some distance, a compromise could be achieved so that objects stop diminishing in a such a way that you could have a near RL long distance sighting.

It seems that there is allready something like that implemented, because objects don´t behave like being 1 or 2 pixels at 1000m. Maybe it is still not enough.

effte
10-13-2004, 08:54 AM
Using an ALDQ (Advanced Linear Dimension Quantifier, aka ruler), I made an analysis of the problem (again). The system I€m using right now has a 17€ monitor. This means a screen 0.32 m wide.

The distance from my eyes to the screen is approximately 0.55 m.

This means the screen covers atan(.32/2/.55)*2 degrees of my field of vision, or 30 degrees. In other words, a 30 degree field of view on the screen will give me the least distorted view port into the simulated world.

Or, to put it another way, using this view would be the same as having your head inside a box in the simulated world with a monitor-sized hole cut out in the wall of the box, at monitor distance from your eyes. Very realistic but also useless for almost anything but taking shots.

You€ll have to live with the distortion. Increasing the sizes of objects has been done in other simulators, and it is complete and utter ****. Perhaps if the objects are scaled down as they get closer, to be at 1:1 at somewhat beyond guns range... but this will screw up your distance judging tremendously.

Cheers,
Fred

Stiglr
10-13-2004, 11:48 AM
Whatever the solution to this is, it needs to be implemented.

Anyone who will contest the fact that seeing the enemy well before engagement range is ABSOLUTELY VITAL to air combat just doesn't understand air combat (er, at least in the pre-onboard radar era).

Not being able to see enemy against the backdrop of terrain, or not being able to use the "perch" of altitude advantage is one of the big reasons why combat in this sim rarely resolves itself like combat in WWII. It's a big reason why lower planes have an advantage over higher planes, much more often than should be the case.

noshens
10-13-2004, 12:14 PM
I played il2 on my friend's 21" LCD and everything was so huge I didnt' even have to use zoom.. at least comparing to my 15.4" laptop screen where I've never shot a bullet without zooming.

grifter2u
10-14-2004, 10:33 PM
effte,

your measurements confirm the exact problem we have in il2 !

1) at 30 degree FOV external plane size is roughly correct.

2) at 70 and 90 degree FOV the external planes only look about 1/2 the size they should be.

this means that any simulation of the real aerial combat experience is totally impossible !

you are only seeing enemy planes at roughly 1/2 the distance compared to real life, because the planes are roughly 1/2 size.

Oleg must address this issue urgently and provide us with an option to "display external aircraft at realistic sizes in 70 and 90 degree FOV", and this should be an OPTION that can be turned on/off in the setting.


noshens,
i dont think the problem is any less severre on large 21' or 22' moniors, since all that happens is that everything is now displayed on a larger screen, but is still at the same wrong comparetive proportions.

effte
10-15-2004, 08:22 AM
So, what to do about it? Within gun range + a bit, say 120%, scale must be accurate to enable gunnery. Beyond that, size has to reduce with distance to allow us to judge distance, but perhaps the visible size of the aircraft could be increased ever so slightly to make the visual shrinking less than it would actually be?

It is far less of a problem on larger monitors. As your view port is larger, the reduction in degrees of your field of vision covered by a given object is smaller. I e, an aircraft might still be ten pixels across, but those ten pixels are larger and probably less fuzzy than on a smaller screen or, if you increase the resolution with the increase in screen size, the aircraft is represented by a larger amount of pixels.

OTOH, many people fly with lower resolutions to make the single dots at distance larger and easier to spot...

Cheers,
Fred

Lunix
10-15-2004, 10:03 AM
On my joystick I have "zoom" view mapped to my joysticks shift button plus the trigger and normal and wide views are shift plus my thumb hat. This way I can quickly flip between scanning the sky and identifying aircraft and their flight vectors. This really helps and is somewhat similar to switching between our small area of focus and our peripheral vision IRL.