Aces High Bulletin Board

Help and Support Forums => Aces High Bug Reports => Topic started by: lulu on July 25, 2010, 06:27:01 AM

Title: external engine vs internal one
Post by: lulu on July 25, 2010, 06:27:01 AM
If i lower my engine, then i lower all external engines too. 

Pls HTC fix it.

TY

 :salute

p.s.

Why lower int engine?
To listen my music too!
Title: Re: external engine vs internal one
Post by: badhorse on July 25, 2010, 10:55:06 PM
Sorry lulu.
This isn't a bug.  It was intentional. 

 :(
Title: Re: external engine vs internal one
Post by: Chilli on July 26, 2010, 03:26:11 AM
Just made a long post in another thread about this "issue".  The short of it, internal engine is fixed to other sounds that are getting drowned out.  Maybe the volume is totally accurate, but in real life the human ear would have a much broader spectrum of sounds and would process them differently than is being recreated here IMHO.

Example:  Wishlist:

.... or whatever
Problem solved  :aok 
Title: Re: external engine vs internal one
Post by: VonMessa on July 26, 2010, 04:20:50 AM
You mean that you can't turn down your own engine sound so you can hear the engines of others over your own?

How sad.....

 :noid
Title: Re: external engine vs internal one
Post by: Chilli on July 27, 2010, 02:57:57 AM
Von,

It's not just the other plane engines that you don't hear when you adjust the effects, and without suggesting that this should be fixed for everyone's sound setup, I think that making the engine sound grouped and separate from other sounds does allow for some personal preferences or differences in sound equipment.

I have a gaming chair that I wouldn't dare use with the roar from the engine alone, I would be in divorce court in a minute.  :uhoh

As far as turning engine sounds down, and hearing external engines, I and others already have that option.  It takes time to do, but well worth it in my opinion (and my wife's).  :D
Title: Re: external engine vs internal one
Post by: VonMessa on July 27, 2010, 04:49:15 AM
So why not just use headphones, alone for this particular game?

I know, I know..  the gaming chair and all that.

Just because I'm hung like a horse doesn't mean that I have to to be a porn star, though.

Not being able to hear the engines of others over ones own is, by far, the most common complaint that I have been hearing over range channel.

That is kinda what happens when one is in a tank, or in the cockpit of an airplane with a (+/-) 12-cylinder motor running open headers.   :D
Title: Re: external engine vs internal one
Post by: SEseph on July 27, 2010, 09:01:12 AM
So why not just use headphones, alone for this particular game?

I know, I know..  the gaming chair and all that.

Just because I'm hung like a horse doesn't mean that I have to to be a porn star, though.

Not being able to hear the engines of others over ones own is, by far, the most common complaint that I have been hearing over range channel.

That is kinda what happens when one is in a tank, or in the cockpit of an airplane with a (+/-) 12-cylinder motor running open headers.   :D

While I don't entirely disagree Von, the problem arises that you're basing the statement on facts of the world. There in the problem lies. Players are either in the "I like the game to be a game in most ever aspect" camp, or the "Realism is how I explain everything until it doesn't suit my flight style." Either everything is on the line of realistic (radar, maps, AA, Puffy, every possible load out, tigers that have correct armor etc etc) or it's a compromise. Should it be the latter, then the sound argument from others is valid. If it is the former, as you say.. then there are major changes that must be implemented for the argument of "this is how it was" to be a valid argument. Now, if HTC would state: hey, we're going to fix everything so it is how it was during WWII, then the argument will carry more weight, though I highly doubt one life, sitting in POW camps etc would be popular. Either it's as close to realistic as possible, or concession must be made from both sides.

For the record, I don't mind the new sounds, but I dislike how truly loud they are and here's why: I can't hear myself think. I have a headset as you suggested, but I have squad mates who are impossible to hear unless volume is cranked. If I turn down volume, I really, really can't hear anything going on in my environment and while I did turn down the effect volume under voice, I have yet to figure out how one would fight in an area where range is yammering away, there by muting the sounds in the fight?

It will come down to people making Sound Packs with ultra low, or deleted sounds (my sounds are all renamed so I have no personal engine sound, remember, personal sounds are allowed) but I also hate having no engine of my own. Or it will be HTC that allows the movement of groups of sounds. Others have also pointed out, as I'm sure you know, the human ear can hear much more than we currently can distinguish from the Miles.

I just think both camps needs to be a little more empathetic toward the other on these matters. BOTH   :cheers:

Oh, and miniature ponies aren't exactly hung amazingly!  lol J/K 
Title: Re: external engine vs internal one
Post by: VonMessa on July 27, 2010, 10:38:56 AM
While I don't entirely disagree Von, the problem arises that you're basing the statement on facts of the world. There in the problem lies. Players are either in the "I like the game to be a game in most ever aspect" camp, or the "Realism is how I explain everything until it doesn't suit my flight style." Either everything is on the line of realistic (radar, maps, AA, Puffy, every possible load out, tigers that have correct armor etc etc) or it's a compromise. Should it be the latter, then the sound argument from others is valid. If it is the former, as you say.. then there are major changes that must be implemented for the argument of "this is how it was" to be a valid argument. Now, if HTC would state: hey, we're going to fix everything so it is how it was during WWII, then the argument will carry more weight, though I highly doubt one life, sitting in POW camps etc would be popular. Either it's as close to realistic as possible, or concession must be made from both sides.

For the record, I don't mind the new sounds, but I dislike how truly loud they are and here's why: I can't hear myself think. I have a headset as you suggested, but I have squad mates who are impossible to hear unless volume is cranked. If I turn down volume, I really, really can't hear anything going on in my environment and while I did turn down the effect volume under voice, I have yet to figure out how one would fight in an area where range is yammering away, there by muting the sounds in the fight?

It will come down to people making Sound Packs with ultra low, or deleted sounds (my sounds are all renamed so I have no personal engine sound, remember, personal sounds are allowed) but I also hate having no engine of my own. Or it will be HTC that allows the movement of groups of sounds. Others have also pointed out, as I'm sure you know, the human ear can hear much more than we currently can distinguish from the Miles.

I just think both camps needs to be a little more empathetic toward the other on these matters. BOTH   :cheers:

Oh, and miniature ponies aren't exactly hung amazingly!  lol J/K 


I have it set where sounds "cut out" when someone speaks on vox.  I have no problem with it.  How about being able to mute range vox as an option to eliminate the yammering?

Thinking that some folks aren't going to change the sounds to gain an advantage does not even merit discussion.  It is going to happen, period.  Should we make it easy for everyone to be able to do it?  I have owned a DJ business, worked in a recording studio and have done live sound reinforcement for the better part of my life.  I either have, or have access to, just about every audio manipulation software under the sun.  Must I edit every sound individually to level the playing field and negate the advantage that these players create for themselves?  It would be as easy as breathing.  It is also not worth my time.

Obviously, having an adjustment slider for every individual sound is ludicrous.  So then, which sounds shall be given an adjustment slider?  Which ones are important enough to make the list?  Who will make those determinations? Do we want new players to have the ability to "game the game" right off the bat?  It begs so many questions.

I would say that a fast and dirty way to give more immersion, etc, one could simply put a sub-woofer either on the floor under ones chair, directly mounted under ones chair (best scenario as it would give the most bump for the least volume and disturb SWMBO the least)or in the corner of the room (facing into the corner).  Most of the "immersive" sound frequencies fall into the bass/sub-bass range which are, for the most part, non-directional and are not so much "heard" as they are "felt".  Think movie theater.

As for the x.x discreet channel surround sound junkies, there is really only one "proper" way to achieve the sound imaging that you are looking for and this is by proper speaker placement.  Period.  You cannot defy the laws of physics.  Regardless of the marketing claims, you will never achieve a "true" surround sound with "surround sound headphones" until the headphones can relay to the game exactly where your head is in relation to computer monitor.  Gaming is dynamic, as your head moves from side to side, or closer/farther away from the screen, etc as you scan the sky or are involved in a fight and the headphones move with you, UN-like watching a movie with the same headphones where your head would be in a more static position.  Even then it is not as "true" of a surround sound environment as traditional speakers would be because you simply cannot recreate the stereo and distance imaging of satellite speakers which are located in the proper place in the room and effects of the sound  traveling through the air around you.  All these headphones are doing is "fooling" your brain (albeit slightly) into the illusion of distance and space by using delay, reverb, etc..  Reverb has been used for ages now to create "space" or the illusion of being at a performance in a larger room, such as a performance hall, from a dry recording.  A perfect example of how good stereo imaging is any Beatles tune produced by George Martin.  Listen to a song of your choosing three separate times:  Once with only the left speaker, once with only the right and once with both.  You will hear three distinctly different songs.

The bottom line is that if one is using external speakers, someone in the house that is not involved in the game will be disturbed unless you are in a totally different and enclosed room.

I personally, find nothing grossly out of proportion with the levels of the sounds effects in what would be a "normal " environment.  Tanks are loud.  The tracks are noisy.  Firing the main gun is near deafening.  It is not a Cadillac by any means.  One would rarely, if ever, hear another tank creeping around whilst ones own tank had it's engine running.

Aircraft would be quite comparable.  Can anyone here tell me that they really believe that the sounds of hydraulic or or electric flaps/gear motors, etc would be anything more that a whisper above the  roar of a Junkers Jumo or a pair of P/W Twin Wasps?  And the CV guns?  My grandfather has told me stories about how the 5" guns on his tanker would break the mirrors in the head from time to time when fired.

I just can't agree that there is a need to be able to control sounds on an individual basis by the user.  It only leads to gaming the game.  Not by all, of course, but it happens.  As long as users are able to change the files used for sounds there will be folks that will use this to gain an advantage on other players.

If it is too loud, turn it down.  If it is too soft, turn it up.

One nice feature though, would be a dynamic compression control.  One where a threshold level could be set so ones ears do not get blown out by abrupt and disproportionally loud sounds such as when the first 8" shot of a CV battle from complete silence .
Title: Re: external engine vs internal one
Post by: gyrene81 on July 27, 2010, 10:52:43 AM
One nice feature though, would be a dynamic compression control.  One where a threshold level could be set so ones ears do not get blown out by abrupt and disproportionally loud sounds such as when the first 8" shot of a CV battle from complete silence .
LOL...I twitch every time that happens, the puffy ack is the same way.



Aircraft would be quite comparable.  Can anyone here tell me that they really believe that the sounds of hydraulic or or electric flaps/gear motors, etc would be anything more that a whisper above the  roar of a Junkers Jumo or a pair of P/W Twin Wasps?  And the CV guns?  My grandfather has told me stories about how the 5" guns on his tanker would break the mirrors in the head from time to time when fired.
Don't forget that the pilots, bomber crews and tank crews had headsets on that quieted all sounds, especially external noises, so they could hear comms. From inside the cockpit of a plane it was impossible to hear another aircraft 100 yards away.
Title: Re: external engine vs internal one
Post by: Chilli on July 27, 2010, 04:03:56 PM
I agree Lethrnek. 

Von,

Hit and damage sounds are very important "in game".  In the real world, there would probably be bright flashes, aircraft vibration, and a number of other cues that your aircraft is being ripped up.  It just seems ridiculous, that absent of these "sounds" and a damage report screen, I have no other clue if I am not seeing the damage, until a critical handling surface is damaged.  Just pointing out that superhuman hearing, although "gamey" enhances the "feel" of interaction.

This is not a complaint or a whine, just comparing..... "the why I need this" posts to something that maybe we all can agree on.  :cheers:

PS  You can do away with the .303 hit sound all together   ;) or replace it with Pillsbury Doughboy's giggle.
Title: Re: external engine vs internal one
Post by: RTHolmes on July 27, 2010, 04:17:52 PM
good post von :aok
Title: Re: external engine vs internal one
Post by: guncrasher on July 27, 2010, 06:06:02 PM
Ever been in a commercial airplane and not hear the landing fear or flaps deploy?


Semp
Title: Re: external engine vs internal one
Post by: sparow on July 27, 2010, 07:18:45 PM
Hi  chaps,

I participated in the tests for this version and I feel the sound levels, effects and balance are worse now.

Our engine, guns, bombs and other noises are too high to be confortable. Others are too low. The doppler effect is sudden, not progressive. there's much to be fine tuned.

I agree with the concept behind a un-gameable sound sistem but this is simply not working well as it is. I use a simple one ear headset. I'm going deaf from my left ear after so many years playing WB and AH...

Oh well... I'm a patient chap and I trust HTC completely. They will fine tune it. In it's due time. The game will be better.

Cheers,
Title: Re: external engine vs internal one
Post by: Lepape2 on July 28, 2010, 05:44:28 AM
Don't forget that the pilots, bomber crews and tank crews had headsets on that quieted all sounds, especially external noises, so they could hear comms. From inside the cockpit of a plane it was impossible to hear another aircraft 100 yards away.

Lower your Master slider and your effects slider along with increasing your speakers/headphones volume. Vox is independent from the master slider it seems and can be heard more clearly at around 75-80% of its max value. The effects slider is just for convenience against other sounds.
Title: Re: external engine vs internal one
Post by: Stoney on July 28, 2010, 06:39:22 AM
Ever been in a commercial airplane and not hear the landing fear or flaps deploy?


Semp

You ever been in a P-51 and heard anything other than the absolute roar of the engine?  Yeah, you might be able to "feel" the gear extending, or notice the nose down pitch of an airliner once flaps get extended, but that's from the relative quiet of the cabin.  I flew formation with a couple of other aircraft in my Grumman, and I couldn't hear them 50 feet away.  I could never hear my flaps going down--I had to watch them go down or come up to know where they were.

The thing is, you have been used to playing the game with all of these auditory ques that wouldn't exist in real life.  I like the new settings.  I barely get a whisper when flaps or gear deploy--the way it should be.  I can't turn down my engine noise to nothing and hear all the bad guys sneaking up on me.  If you were just joining Aces High 2, you wouldn't be complaining--ignorance is bliss.

Nice post Von...
Title: Re: external engine vs internal one
Post by: guncrasher on July 28, 2010, 08:42:02 AM
You ever been in a P-51 and heard anything other than the absolute roar of the engine?  Yeah, you might be able to "feel" the gear extending, or notice the nose down pitch of an airliner once flaps get extended, but that's from the relative quiet of the cabin.  I flew formation with a couple of other aircraft in my Grumman, and I couldn't hear them 50 feet away.  I could never hear my flaps going down--I had to watch them go down or come up to know where they were.

The thing is, you have been used to playing the game with all of these auditory ques that wouldn't exist in real life.  I like the new settings.  I barely get a whisper when flaps or gear deploy--the way it should be.  I can't turn down my engine noise to nothing and hear all the bad guys sneaking up on me.  If you were just joining Aces High 2, you wouldn't be complaining--ignorance is bliss.

Nice post Von...


But that is exactly what made this game fun, all the different sounds.  flaps, landing gear, explosions, cannon sound, mg sound, etc. when ht first switched to the miles system a couple of months ago, I loved it.  I had no problems whatsoever, all the sounds were so much clearer, voice was better, it was awesome.  Which is how it is now with the exception that some sounds are gone. with the beta release of a couple of weeks ago, my fr was horrible, now it is better than ever.  To be honest it drives me crazy to hear the constant loud humming of the engine and that is really a problem with me and If i lower the sound of it, then all the other sounds are lowered to and that is the problem.  I spend around $700 building the computer and about $400 on headphones/speakers/sound card, so i can hear all the distinctive sounds, because that was just as important to me as flying.  right there with the awesome graphics we have now.


semp
Title: Re: external engine vs internal one
Post by: Flayed on July 28, 2010, 12:35:16 PM
  I really have no issue with the sound as it is though I do miss hearing the flaps and gear a bit BUT being able to turn your engine sound down so you can hear an enemy con coming in behind you is no better than a cheat code in my opinion.    I how ever don't see a problem with it as long as external engine sounds are turned down along with internal sounds to eliminate said cheat. You want to know when a con is on your 6? Then try looking behind you once in a while.
Title: Re: external engine vs internal one
Post by: Chilli on July 28, 2010, 02:40:42 PM
You ever been in a P-51 and heard anything other than the absolute roar of the engine?  Yeah, you might be able to "feel" the gear extending, or notice the nose down pitch of an airliner once flaps get extended, but that's from the relative quiet of the cabin.  ....

My point exactly Stoney.  Now if this was a wishlist then adding visual graphic cues like shake, blur or bump when damage occurs or flaps or gear click into place would be the topic.  Imagine the realistic feel of trying to calibrate your bomber as it is tossed around the skies by flak explosions.  Who here would not want that kind of "feel".

Just my opinion.  LOUD engine noise, is just going to get turned down and does nothing to add to my "feel" of flight.  The simple fact that another similar thread started because a player is "feeling" that he is stalling sooner should give you a clue.   

This might be a more realistic sound (LOUD AS HELL), but masking other cues, flying now "feels" neutered.
Title: Re: external engine vs internal one
Post by: Chilli on July 28, 2010, 02:49:59 PM
Nevermind,  Fixed  :aok
Title: Re: external engine vs internal one
Post by: Stoney on July 28, 2010, 05:31:12 PM
My point exactly Stoney. 

That comment was intended to qualify his remarks of flying in an airliner and experiencing those auditory or physical changes, not in the P-51 cockpit.  I didn't word that clearly.  Additionally, there is quite a lot of You Tube footage taken from inside a P-51 during takeoff and landing.  I'm not sure about the flaps, but I didn't hear the gear cycle in any of them.  But, I'm arguing semantics at this point.