Author Topic: FW190 Front views? (Read 3632 times)

Crumpp · « **Reply #45 on:** April 16, 2005, 07:29:56 PM »

Glad to be of help!

All the best,

Crumpp

TDeacon · « **Reply #46 on:** April 17, 2005, 12:12:35 AM »

Must be some way to get them a bit thinner without ruining the overall 3-D model...

Furball · « **Reply #47 on:** April 17, 2005, 05:31:33 AM »

isnt the picture taken inside the 190 - in a museum with the cockpit OPEN?

Wouldnt it being closed add the framing of the rear portion of the canopy?

havent read the whole thread, but thats what it immediately looks like to me, sorry if it has been brought up already.

Kweassa · « **Reply #48 on:** April 17, 2005, 07:19:10 AM »

Well, here's one I dug up.

Look closely at the relative positions of the throttle quadrant and the main framing.

If, the exterior dimensions of the cockpit and the cockpit glass is correct, then the interiors are a bit wrong. If the interiors are correctly done, then the position of the main framing is a bit off.

Probably wouldn't make much difference, but..

Pongo · « **Reply #49 on:** April 17, 2005, 09:58:07 AM »

Personally what I think is missing from this whole thing is the pilot.
When firing I bet his forehead was an inch from that bar and his eyes were well below it. So the got a way better view then you get with your head back on the leather head rest.
The cockpit is very small. Even leaning forward would dramatically improve your sight picture.

With track IR vector the cockpit works nicley but it feels like leaning forward kicks in the zoom feature cause the enemy target gets bigger not just the gun sight.

TDeacon · « **Reply #50 on:** April 17, 2005, 10:35:09 AM »

I see 2 issues here, from the above posts:

1) The question of whether the framing appears too thick when viewed from the head-on-headrest position.

2) The question of how to best simulate the ability of a real pilot to see around framing, due to binocular vision and the ability to quickly and precisely shift head position.

In my opinion, for game play reasons, we should err on the side of greater SA in both of the above areas. Therefore,

1) The 3-D model should err on the side of thinner framing, up to just before the point where the plane begins to look strange from the game's normal viewing distance. I assume this is what the previous model did, and it looked fine to me.

2) Other game mechanisms should yield equivalent effect to binocular vision and head movement ability. The former might be achieved by allowing icons be visible through the canopy frames, at least to some degree. The latter might be achieved by increasing the "move" speeds (simulating head movement), which are currently glacially slow.

moot · « **Reply #51 on:** April 17, 2005, 10:47:16 AM »

Icons could fadeout when behind opaque parts of the cockpit.

TDeacon · « **Reply #52 on:** April 17, 2005, 12:04:29 PM »

BTW, I would like to make my motivation clear, here. I am not trying to make my favorite plane better; I care about all of them. I am hoping to (at least) retain our previously existing ability to see out of the cockpit of all planes.

That's because, to me, AH is primarily a WWII flight combat simulation, rather than a movie. Graphics are nice, but not worth sacrificing gameplay over. If I want to see real scenery, I can get up from the computer and go outside (it's free too).

Remember, HTC will be upgrading other planes eventually, and I would hope these visibility issues won't become institutionalized for all of them. If HTC can think of a way to fix this issue now, it might avoid the need for rework later when the P51 guys, the La7 guys, the etc. guys see new models for their planes, with thick canopy framing, and no mechanisms to mitigate this effect.

Nath_____ · « **Reply #53 on:** April 17, 2005, 07:52:41 PM »

Kweassa,

Thx for posting that diagram of the cockpit. I agree with your perception about the relative size of the throttle to the cockpit pane. But even in that diagram you can see how narrow the two struts are compared to the AH version. It is clear they are too wide! Please HTC fix this.

As probably the player that has the most flying hours in an A8 (since beta) I can honestly say that the new cockpit has seriously hampered SA and the ability to track targets. I find most of my snapshots now rely on guesswork and less precision in shooting because of the frames.

In addition, I agree that in real life the pilot's ability to move his eyes and head quickly to resposition a target for better tracking should be considered when building AH cockpit models. This type of movement is not possible in a video game.

All in all, I don't know if I will become comfortable with the new cockpit. Most 190 pilots/enthusiasts I have spoken with in game feel the same way about the current cockpit.

Overlag · « **Reply #54 on:** April 17, 2005, 08:07:41 PM »

anyone else noticed that the wings now look like the 109E, all square and rubbish looking, where as before they was curved and looked like a real airplane wing?

or is it just my download?

Nath_____ · « **Reply #55 on:** April 17, 2005, 09:20:36 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Overlag
anyone else noticed that the wings now look like the 109E, all square and rubbish looking, where as before they was curved and looked like a real airplane wing?

or is it just my download?

Overlag

Some of us 190 pilots noticed this in the new AH model and its a flaw in the wing modeling. As Pyro's screenshot showed, from an external view (or even top down) the wingtip is correctly proportioned. What's making it look too sharp, however, is the fact that for some reason the wing is thicker and towards the edge it abrubtly tapers off to the wingtip. What you are seeing is the thickness of the wing not tapering elegantly enough into the wingtip. Examples:

it is merely a graphical oversight where the thickness of the wing is not tapering off gently enough. It could easily be fixed (hopefully w/ the cockpit!)

Pongo · « **Reply #56 on:** April 17, 2005, 10:59:08 PM »

I have reviewed all the FW books I own and come to the conclusion I am correct. The inflight postion of a pilot in the FW has his nose under that bar that supports the rear of the windscreen. His head is feet away from that head rest on the rear armour. Put your nose 1 inch from your monitor and see how little the frameing of the monitor bothers your view. Thats how the FW was. You could only see those bars out of your periferal vision when you were in a fighting postion. Excellent forward view.

I wont bother trying to scan the pictures.
A simple look at Ospreys east and west front FW books will show it and it is really clear in the photo version of JG26 top guns of the LW by Caldwell.
The first picture in the FW section of Bonanzas Great Book of WW2 Aircraft has a great front shot of a pilot in the shooting postion of a FW 190A3.
Both this game and to a much greater extent IL2 made this mistake and I am not sure how easy it would be to fix. From that postion it is hard to see the instraments.....
Simply rocking forward with TrackIR3 doesnt solve it in AH2 cause it zooms the view which makes vision and lead harder not easier.

Naudet · « **Reply #57 on:** April 18, 2005, 02:10:46 AM »

LOL Nath, your guesswork is still way superior then mine

EDIT: BTW even before you painted me, i knew that it was you. Something about the way that A8 moved...

MANDO · « **Reply #58 on:** April 18, 2005, 04:21:59 AM »

Now it is a pain to dive over enemy bombers with the correct angle and angle variation, they keep most of the time obscured by the frontal arc. I've been completely missing entire formations of 3 B17s.

Left and right frontal scans are now extremely restricted also.

Overlag · « **Reply #59 on:** April 18, 2005, 07:59:59 AM »

the leading edge of the wing is also square for me...

also my skins are like 128x128 or something really crappy...and the 1024 update on the mainpage is well out of date!