Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Open Beta Test => Topic started by: Randy1 on July 12, 2016, 12:45:14 PM
-
I spent couple hours using the Beta 80 FOV default setting in AH2 using Trackir. I used AH2 because of the ease of finding air to air fights.
The first thing you note is the 80 fov makes the cockpit frames very large. At that size they have an amazing amount of blind spots just due to the frames. Time and time again, when I was following a red through a maneuver, the frame on the P-38 front glass, blocked the view of the red. After awhile the next problem is the eye strain and general uncomfortable feeling I will call it at 80 fov. Using the rocket ladder for the P-38, the circle barely fit the glass at a proper head position.
I switched to 90 fov. The eye strain was noticeably less even after several hours. The frame hiding a red was still a problem but much more manageable. The gunsight image looked good. The instrument panel was easier to see.
In my setup the 90 FOV was a better compromise than 80.
Anybody else try the Beta default 80 FOV for an extended period of time?
-
I did testing with 60 and found that the 100Mil reticle was real life size and you never needed zoom but, blind areas with TR unless you also maneuvered to augment your head movements. I was gunnery testing offline and lost the drones about 1\3 of the time. Tracers looked like tracers.
80 was better while allowing gunnery without zoom unless I trying to pick out things on the ground. Tracers were still visible like AH2.
90 was a nice compromise for TR, none zoomed shooting much of the time while needing zoom more for seeing at long range and ground objects through the clutter. Tracers were visible most of the time but were a smidge smaller.
100 I needed to use zoom more than with 90, some long range shooting at 600 to verify the con's angle of travel. And like 90 just a smidgin of feeling crowded using TR. Tracers were visible about half the time.
106 relieved the crowded TR feeling but, required zoom to really resolve cons from background clutter and to pick out most objects from the clutter on the ground. Tracers are the easiest to see if you are shooting into empty air long enough to build up a visual stream. Tank round tracers depending on the round require practice to know where to look so you can acquire the tiny bright dot.
Past this point bye bye tracers, you need zoom for everything, and get yourself a dot as your gunsight reticle so you can see through the reflector plate.
-
I'm finding that 90 works well for me too. When I zoomed in and adjusted for the top dials to be partially seen, I also picked up 2-3 fps. Not sure why but it seems less dials equals up tick in fps.
-
Changing you FOV would have absolutely zero impact on hiding icons.
Bar width is still the same relative size to the distance the plane travel's when it is behind the bar.
HiTech
-
Changing you FOV would have absolutely zero impact on hiding icons.
Bar width is still the same relative size to the distance the plane travel's when it is behind the bar.
HiTech
I see what you are saying but it is like having your hand in front of your eyes. The closer you move the hand to your eyes the less you can see.
-
I see what you are saying but it is like having your hand in front of your eyes. The closer you move the hand to your eyes the less you can see.
You have TrackIR, you can easily look around the cockpit frame.
-
You have TrackIR, you can easily look around the cockpit frame.
Not everyone does however. Maybe a better default field of view should be set, rather than having new players in a game with a ton to learn already, to figure this out also.
Mine was immediately set back to 106 in AH3. 80 is way too close up.
-
Isn't 80 pretty much the norm for all the other flight games/sims out there? Doesn't seem to be an issue for them.
-
Not everyone does however. Maybe a better default field of view should be set, rather than having new players in a game with a ton to learn already, to figure this out also.
Mine was immediately set back to 106 in AH3. 80 is way too close up.
I realize that but you can still move your head with buttons, hat, or keyboard. I expect everyone who is used to a wider field of view will set it to their preference.
There are advantages to the 80 degree FOV like higher frame rate and bigger targets so you can argue that 80 is better, depending on what you feel is important.
-
I realize that but you can still move your head with buttons, hat, or keyboard. I expect everyone who is used to a wider field of view will set it to their preference.
There are advantages to the 80 degree FOV like higher frame rate and bigger targets so you can argue that 80 is better, depending on what you feel is important.
I always wondered if the guys that tank a lot use smaller field of view to help make tanks larger and easier to see.
-
I always wondered if the guys that tank a lot use smaller field of view to help make tanks larger and easier to see.
I seen posts about that, 60 -70 FOV IIRC.
-
Not everyone does however. Maybe a better default field of view should be set, rather than having new players in a game with a ton to learn already, to figure this out also. . . .
Well posted.
From an eye candy point of view the lower FOVs are the thing but from a practical game play standpoint, the higher FOV is better.
In a P-38, a minimum setting of about 95 will give you full coverage in a back and up view however the shooting resolution stats to suffer above 90.
If it stays the same or even lower, it doesn't matter to experienced players but as Lazer posted it is just another beginner's problem to deal with.
-
Okay, this is going to piss a lot of folks off but.......... what about icon arrows (tiny little one's)? You could turn them on or off if desired.
In the few discussions that I have had along this subject, I have learned as HiTech and others have said, the truth is your views are no more or less disrupted. What is lost with lower FOV, is peripheral vision only.
Having said that, placing tiny arrows that revolve around the edge of the screen would greatly help lower FOV players keep track of enemy :uhoh outside of the periphery of their FOV.
A secondary function, like the F11 target selection could also bold a particular enemy arrow, and thus would identify it's location outside of the periphery as opposed to other enemies not of interest at that time.
Yes, this would appear to be a high tech radar solution that does not fit well with WW2 aircraft, but would simply function as one of those things that helps to compensate for things like no gravity or human eyeballs with 3 dimensional input.
-
I see what you are saying but it is like having your hand in front of your eyes. The closer you move the hand to your eyes the less you can see.
It's dosn't work like that, changing the field of view does not bring your hand closer, it is like looking threw a zoom lens at your hand , then adjusting zoom. What is in the back ground will not move as compared to your hand by zooming a lens.
HiTech
-
Is this like saying our head is a camera, FOV changes the focus while the Pgup\Pgdn, arrow keys changes where the camera is located in the cockpit? And the numpad, mouse or TR changes where the camera is pointed?
-
Is this like saying our head is a camera, FOV changes the focus while the Pgup\Pgdn, arrow keys changes where the camera is located in the cockpit? And the numpad, mouse or TR changes where the camera is pointed?
Correct except "FOV changes the focus while" should read "FOV changes the zoom"
HiTech
-
I see what you are saying but it is like having your hand in front of your eyes. The closer you move the hand to your eyes the less you can see.
Moving your head forward at the same FOV is different from changing FOV with your head position the same. Your example uses the same FOV and a different head to hand distance.
-
It's dosn't work like that, changing the field of view does not bring your hand closer, it is like looking threw a zoom lens at your hand , then adjusting zoom. What is in the back ground will not move as compared to your hand by zooming a lens.
HiTech
I hope you see this as a discussion. Not as criticism. What ever AH3 uses I will still play the game. Newbies just need every break they can get.
I must have used a bad analogy but the front frame size appears to be larger at 80 FOV than at 90 FOV as seen on the screen if you use the same head position. A measurable difference in size. Much like my hand example where your hand looks bigger as it gets closer to your eyes but the hand is the still the same size. Now why it looks bigger? I bow to your expertise.
Now if there was a single FOV setting for everyone, then this post becomes mute.
If a red is flying across the frame then no big deal but if the red pulls up, and you pull up to set up a shot, the chances of the red icon being hidden by the cockpit frame is greater at 80 FOV than it is at 90. Again, this is using the same head position in both FOV settings.
-
I hope you see this as a discussion. Not as criticism. What ever AH3 uses I will still play the game. Newbies just need every break they can get.
I must have used a bad analogy but the front frame size appears to be larger at 80 FOV than at 90 FOV as seen on the screen if you use the same head position. A measurable difference in size. Much like my hand example where your hand looks bigger as it gets closer to your eyes but the hand is the still the same size. Now why it looks bigger? I bow to your expertise.
Now if there was a single FOV setting for everyone, then this post becomes mute.
If a red is flying across the frame then no big deal but if the red pulls up, and you pull up to set up a shot, the chances of the red icon being hidden by the cockpit frame is greater at 80 FOV than it is at 90. Again, this is using the same head position in both FOV settings.
Randy I am not speaking which way you prefer. I am simply speaking to the facts of how it works. When you press the Z key in AH the bars also get bigger, butthey do not cover any more angular area (I.E. head more icons) , wait , back up, are you speaking of when the icon is turned on or off, or are you speaking the % of text being covered up? Yes more or less text is covered, but that also changes when you change Icon size.
If you are speaking of when AH turns the icon off when it is behind the bar, then FOV is completely 100% irreverent, in fact the code that does it, does not even know about FOV.
HiTech
-
Randy the cockpit bar gets bigger and the bandit gets bigger by the same amount. There is no disadvantage. FOV settings are always a tradeoff. There is no best setting for everyone. There is only personal preference.
-
So............. :confused: my wishlist "tiny arrows" skirting edge of the screen is ........ out of the question.....???? :bolt:
-
Hitech and FLS thanks for your replies. I am talking about with icons on.
-
Hi Tech
Assuming a 65" 4K screen 40" from eye, what fov would produce life size. I.e. The bars in the p38 would look the same to you as if you were sitting in the real aircraft?
Thanks
Terry
-
Terry have you tried setting the FOV to match the angle of your visual field blocked by the monitor?
-
Hi Tech
Assuming a 65" 4K screen 40" from eye, what fov would produce life size. I.e. The bars in the p38 would look the same to you as if you were sitting in the real aircraft?
Thanks
Terry
tan((Width / 2) / Dist) * 2
I.E atan(32.5 / 40) * 2 = 78 Deg
And screen resolution has no effect on the calculation.
HiTech
-
As tv's are measured diagonally is that correct? Do you use the diagonal measurement or the actual width of the screen?
-
Use width for FOV.
-
As tv's are measured diagonally is that correct? Do you use the diagonal measurement or the actual width of the screen?
My equation needs the width. which is 4/5 the diagonal on an HD tv. Instead of 65" Diaganol 52" width should be used.
So FOV would be 66 Deg.
HiTech
-
If you want to match the 80 degree FOV you can figure the distance your eyes should be from the screen.
Going back to Randy's comment about a best FOV, if you set a wide FOV like 106-120 for SA you can still zoom in to the 1:1 life size view.
You can set your 1:1 FOV and take a screenshot in the cockpit then save it so you know what you should see when you zoom in, then set FOV back to your SA view.
-
Excel sheet attached to do the calcs. Although at first I thought the fov was coming up too low to be realistic on that size screen it seemed correct after taking into account your field of view outside the tv screen which of course is not shown in the game.
-
I used the excel sheet to calc my FoV, 35.5 is not available in the game.
I did earlier testing of FoV to scale a 100Mil reticle ring to 1.9in(50mm) on my 24in monitor measured with a ruler. That presents the 100Mil reticle ring at it's real world size. The FoV to achieve this on my monitor was 60.
If any of you played football and can remember the FoV out of the helmet through the bars. FoV of 60 is like having the area you can see out of the front of the helmet reduced by 1\3 and the bars increased in width by 1\3. It forces you to really put your head on a swivel because the advantages of the widened FoV starting about 90 just don't exist. And about 1\3 of the time in the drone circle I was loosing the drones while pulling lag rolls and other aerobatic maneuvers. Still, medieval knights learned to fight for their lives with only slits and very bad peripheral vision.
Reminded me a lot of a time for a few months I had to drive with one eye.
-
I used the excel sheet to calc my FoV, 35.5 is not available in the game.
I did earlier testing of FoV to scale a 100Mil reticle ring to 1.9in(50mm) on my 24in monitor measured with a ruler. That presents the 100Mil reticle ring at it's real world size. The FoV to achieve this on my monitor was 60.
If any of you played football and can remember the FoV out of the helmet through the bars. FoV of 60 is like having the area you can see out of the front of the helmet reduced by 1\3 and the bars increased in width by 1\3. It forces you to really put your head on a swivel because the advantages of the widened FoV starting about 90 just don't exist. And about 1\3 of the time in the drone circle I was loosing the drones while pulling lag rolls and other aerobatic maneuvers. Still, medieval knights learned to fight for their lives with only slits and very bad peripheral vision.
Reminded me a lot of a time for a few months I had to drive with one eye.
Couldn't you vary the distance from your eyes to the monitor a bit to match up to a specific FOV?
Wiley.
-
At 64 inches from my 24 inch monitor it is not worth trying to play the game. At 16 inches I have to constantly move my head left and right to see what I take for granted at 32 inches. At 32 inches the FoV arc allows me to see everything across a 23.5 inch presentation. I've played with my 40 inch TV and 64 inches is proportionally the same spot as my 24 inch monitor.
Distance from the monitor only finds the best spot for your eyes to easily see what the monitor is displaying without having to either move your head side to side or find it uncomfortable to focus on smaller things you don't need zoom to see. You are trying to find a trade off to the width of your monitor, FoV, and the comfort zone of your eyes current physical state. FOV fixes you to an arc of seeing your world what ever you do including the corresponding amount of zoom.
I will venture Hitech has a code formula that describes zoom in the game with values that correspond to the max\min values we have available to set our custom FOV. And our custom FOV input ends up being a zoom value.
In FPS games there is some conventional wisdom around lower number FoV and your ability to point aim and hit your enemies from your avatar. I always tended to play FPS games with my head closer to the monitor and a smaller FOV while keeping my vision on a swivel.
Air to Air combat requires peripheral vision to see the sky and track a small fast moving object in 360 degrees all over that sky. A narrower FOV is no different than setting a wide FOV but performing all of your ACM with zoom on. You can prove this by setting your FOV to 60 and using a ruler to measure the diameter of a 100Mil reticle ring. Then use the keypad to look at a few views and screen shot them. Then reset your FOV to 120, then spawn out in the same plane, hit zoom and adjust the 100Mil ring to the same diameter from FOV at 60. Keypad the same views and screen shot them from zoom. The views 60FOV and zoomed 120 FOV screen captured should both be reasonably close in size viewed from your art program.
-
I can't stand FPS games with a low FOV, gives me a headache and it's just not comfortable to play. I never bothered to get that nerdy and figure how far to sit etc., but I always used the "arm length " rule of thumb. And on my monitor, depending on the particular game but anything lower than 70 in an FPS is pushing it. And that's being too generous, I'd be more comfortable at 80 +
-
Arm's length is a good minimum and requires a big screen for life size. I usually use one 27" monitor now but I set this up on PC2 recently.
(https://www.mediafire.com/convkey/2792/a573r56pde1z0637g.jpg) (https://www.mediafire.com/view/?a573r56pde1z063)
-
Some of you guys should beg the wife to pay for some civilian air combat time at the local airfield.
-
You mean to equip my wife with a plane? :bolt:
-
I just did the calculations for my 24" widescreen monitor, and came up with a FOV of 40. That's just too narrow, so I set my FOV to 80 (it's been 100 forever), and actually kind of like it. I'll give it a few hours of gameplay...
-
For the record, I said FPS as in first person shooters specifically for a reason. Go play some old shooters like golden eye and youll see what i mean. Most games now have adjustable fov sliders, but some (cough CoD cough) - at least the last one I played didn't and was locked at 60 without editing .ini files.
-
With a 24in monitor, the only way I could get the excel sheet to generate a 80FOV was by sitting 12 inches from the monitor. No thank you..... :O
-
I think you old geezers need bigger monitors lol I'm only on a single 27 inch 144hz benq myself.
-
I set close to a 43" monitor/tv. I came up with about a 70 fov. What I noticed is that if I imagined the canopy extending out from the screen it would indeed be about the right size at a 70 fov. Not good for game play and if I set up a 104 fov, I can always zoom to a 70, but I can't "unzoom" from a 70 fov.
-
I set close to a 43" monitor/tv. I came up with about a 70 fov. What I noticed is that if I imagined the canopy extending out from the screen it would indeed be about the right size at a 70 fov. Not good for game play and if I set up a 104 fov, I can always zoom to a 70, but I can't "unzoom" from a 70 fov.
Exactly my point. Most of the FPS games that bug me are of course ports from consoles, and without that fov slider we sit closer to the monitors than people that play consoles in their living rooms etc
-
tan((Width / 2) / Dist) * 2
I.E atan(32.5 / 40) * 2 = 78 Deg
And screen resolution has no effect on the calculation.
HiTech
HiTech thank you for the calculation. When you setup the Vive and rift will you use a default fov that would represent life size?
Terry
-
Randy the cockpit bar gets bigger and the bandit gets bigger by the same amount. There is no disadvantage.
. . . Going back to Randy's comment about a best FOV, if you set a wide FOV like 106-120 for SA . . .
Exactly my point. The lower FOV increases the % screen covered by the cockpit frame as well as narrowed view. SA is less with lower FOV.
-
Exactly my point. The lower FOV increases the % screen covered by the cockpit frame as well as narrowed view. SA is less with lower FOV.
Situational awareness is not increased when the cockpit bars appear to be smaller because what's behind the bars is smaller too. It's simply that you see more of your surroundings in each view direction.
-
SA is increased the more you can see and that's the fine line were all looking for somewhere between 80 and 110 lets say, more sky or more detail
-
HiTech thank you for the calculation. When you setup the Vive and rift will you use a default fov that would represent life size?
Terry
Yes they give you that information from the API.
But it is not as simple as just a FOV with the VR stuf you have a Angle to the Left and right of each eye.
HiTech
-
Yes they give you that information from the API.
But it is not as simple as just a FOV with the VR stuf you have a Angle to the Left and right of each eye.
HiTech
Will you have a FOV recommendation for VR? I've read that the subjective horizontal FOV is similar.
-
Will you have a FOV recommendation for VR? I've read that the subjective horizontal FOV is similar.
With the current implementation you can not change it.
HiTech
-
So no way around my arrow idea....... (pun intended) :bolt:
-
With the current implementation you can not change it.
HiTech
Does it seem correct, in other words 'normal' to you?
-
Yes it feels like being there.
HiTech
-
Yes it feels like being there.
HiTech
I ordered one thinking it would ship in a month, I hadn't read gman's post that they were caught up, it's preparing for shipment today. :x
-
I ordered one thinking it would ship in a month, I hadn't read gman's post that they were caught up, it's preparing for shipment today. :x
Your SA is about to go through the roof. I kid you not.
-
Feels like being in an echo chamber?
-
Your SA is about to go through the roof. I kid you not.
I hope so, it's spent enough time in the basement. :D
-
Flying a P-51D at 80 and 90 put the top of my windshield at the very top of the screen. Also took a lot of the planes dash instruments out of the picture down at the bottom. So it made the cockpit way to big.
I made an adjustment of 100 and it was perfect. It looked like 80 in AH2. But tracers and all items outside the cockpit were just to small. I used magnification and that made outside the cockpit work but now the inside of the cockpit was to large. It hit the top and bottom of the screen again. I use TrackIR so I can get by with head movement in certain situations.
I appreciate the hard work y'all are doing and think you have done a super job. I thank you with keeping the game up to tip top industry standards.
AH is with out a doubt the best war time video game in the market.
Thanks again
Kimosabe
-
The front view is tilted down by default so that you can see the instruments with the FOV set to 80. The forward view, keypad 8, is set to look over the nose and cover the view between front and front/up.
-
Since no FOV setting has any advantage over any other FOV setting per FLS, why would your SA improve?
Your SA is about to go through the roof. I kid you not.
-
I think he is referring to VR equipment which changes much more than just fov.
-
Since no FOV setting has any advantage over any other FOV setting per FLS, why would your SA improve?
That's not what I said. I said every setting is a trade off and seeing more of your surroundings in each view direction improves SA. Seeing more detail of the bandit also improves SA but in a different way. That's why I said there is no best FOV, there is just personal preference.
Skuzzy's point is likely that the perception of being "in" the cockpit with a 1:1 "real" view will also enhance SA. I assume this is because it matches our real world experience in a way that monitors can't.
-
Since no FOV setting has any advantage over any other FOV setting per FLS, why would your SA improve?
Yes, I think he was referring to the VR stuff. You use TrackIR, how much better do you think your SA went up when you switched from keyboard views to TrackIR?
-
Randy the easy solution to the cockpit frame blocking your view is head movement not FOV. You can set up the forward view with an offset head position and instantly look behind the cockpit frame with a button press.
-
Randy the easy solution to the cockpit frame blocking your view is head movement not FOV. You can set up the forward view with an offset head position and instantly look behind the cockpit frame with a button press.
The point completely missed is the frame size covers a larger percent of the screen using lower fov setting. Again it is a disadvantage to a newer player fls especially a new player without the disadvantage of trackir.
-
The point completely missed is the frame size covers a larger percent of the screen using lower fov setting. Again it is a disadvantage to a newer player fls especially a new player without the disadvantage of trackir.
Nobody missed your point. You are in effect claiming that looking at something with binoculars makes it harder to see. Your theory is incorrect. What Hitech and I both explained to you already is that the aircraft behind the cockpit frame is also larger so it makes no difference. I also explained the quick and easy method new players can use to look behind the cockpit frame without TrackIR.
-
FLS what FOV do you use in ah2 and beta?
-
My FOV varies. I generally use 120 or 112 and zoom in to about 80-100 for general flying around. I like a wider FOV near the ground because it looks "faster" and when I want to see more with less head movement. I think the 262 Alpha video was 112. https://youtu.be/EmYpYfz6A50
I zoom in closer than 80 for detail and sometimes for non-maneuvering targets. I like having the option of zooming out to a wider FOV instead of only being able to zoom in closer.
With VR I expect I'll want a natural FOV most of the time.
-
The point completely missed is the frame size covers a larger percent of the screen using lower fov setting. Again it is a disadvantage to a newer player fls especially a new player without the disadvantage of trackir.
Short of Hitech giving us an invisible cockpit, can you describe with Hitech's current process, how he would solve the issue you are telling us is a problem?
Issue - A default FOV of 80 in one player's opinion is a disadvantage to newer players due to the increased size perspective of canopy structures and features blocking the available view area out of the canopy.
A function of FOV - FOV is the same as toggling Zoom to that FOV and then playing the game with it toggled. No matter the FOV the player is using, the time it will take for a con to pass through the width of a canopy bar or structure and become visible again will be the same for all players.
The higher number FOV may make it easier "perceptually" for a player to be aware of where and when a con comes into view again from behind the "perceived" narrower canopy bar or structure. That player will also have a higher percentage of available view area out of the canopy without manipulation of his view direction. The lower number FOV will make canopy bars and structures wider or larger with a "perceived" sense of the con taking a long time to travel the width. While the large canopy bars and structures will show the player less of the available view area forcing him to make more changes to his view direction to compensate. This may be at the root of what Randy is trying to communicate.
I can offer one solution if this really is a problem, and Hitech won't have to invent a whole new view system. A default FOV of 85-90.
-
Since no FOV setting has any advantage over any other FOV setting per FLS, why would your SA improve?
I was referring to the use of the VR headsets. It makes a huge difference in your ability to maintain SA.
-
Bustr,
It is just simply going to be a point of discussion that will not go away. 85-90 does not include enough peripheral view to adequately track in combat without TrackIR or VR movement of some type. I like how FLS describes his use of broader FOV, but his default position in the cockpit is zoomed to 80-100 for normal flying.
Without creating anything new, HiTech has given us two other options. There is the F11 mode icon selection motion tracker, and there is the mouse look.
We have also discussed the desire to grow community numbers. The retention of new players is vital, the longevity of averages for player involvement demands new blood. The learning curve for the new player is steep but not unusual for a niche genre, WW2 era Aircraft and vehicles. VR headsets will hopefully expand the influx and experience of playing.......
BUT:
The best possible solution for a new player's convenience would be a default FOV much wider (non VR headset users), and a default zoom back to 80.
Edit: Note, making the 1:1 zoom a default setting, will in effect, make the statement this is what size your target SHOULD be (at a button press).
-
So to further compete I have to have VR to get the same available views as those who do or at the very least Track IR?
Being sarcastic but how much does it help?
PS you had to know someone was going to ask right?
-
I was referring to the use of the VR headsets. It makes a huge difference in your ability to maintain SA.
Someone said this just about verbatim years ago(2003??) when TR was the new spiffy thing to replace the hat switch. I'm personally waiting for a VR system like in the anime SAO... :O
EMOTIV looks like the beginning of getting there in the real world. Hope they make it in my life time.
-
So to further compete I have to have VR to get the same available views as those who do or at the very least Track IR?
Being sarcastic but how much does it help?
PS you had to know someone was going to ask right?
I am a horrible pilot in this game. Without the headset I truly suck at it. When I put the headset on, then ability to track a target by just looking at it and not have to deal with manipulating views with my thumbs makes the plane more stable, which then improved my gunnery.
It was a quantum leap forward for me. I was really blown away by how much of a difference it made.
Once you are free to look around in the cockpit, and precisely hold your view in an 1:1 view system, it just makes everything so much easier.
You get the same views as someone using only a hat switch, but you have more precise control over those views as compared to someone only using a hat switch.
-
You get the same views as someone using only a hat switch, but you have more precise control over those views as compared to someone only using a hat switch.
Thanks I appreciate the feedback
-
Short of Hitech giving us an invisible cockpit, can you describe with Hitech's current process, how he would solve the issue you are telling us is a problem?
I started this thread to post results of my testing of the beta default fov setting. My point was the default fov, which a newbie was most likely use is a disadvantage since the SA is reduced due to view restrictions. I have not asked for a new view system just questioning the current beta fov default. Keeping players is paramount. Making it harder on newbies will not help.
Chili hit the nail square on the head.
Bustr,
It is just simply going to be a point of discussion that will not go away. 85-90 does not include enough peripheral view to adequately track in combat without TrackIR or VR movement of some type. . . . The best possible solution for a new player's convenience would be a default FOV much wider (non VR headset users), and a default zoom back to 80.
Edit: Note, making the 1:1 zoom a default setting, will in effect, make the statement this is what size your target SHOULD be (at a button press).
-
Why would a new player know to zoom in but not know they could change FOV to their preference?
-
Why would a new player know to zoom in but not know they could change FOV to their preference?
I used the zoom feature in this game for years.
I probably didnt figure out what field of view was until 2010.
The point is, the game is difficult to learn that way it is, not everything needs to be difficult. Remember the upcoming generations also, you want things to look good and function well right off the bat, otherwise ADD kicks in and they are down the road
-
... you want things to look good and function well right off the bat, otherwise ADD kicks in and they are down the road
That's why the default FOV is 80 now. New players complained the aircraft were too small at 106.
-
That's why the default FOV is 80 now. New players complained the aircraft were too small at 106.
Plus, isn't it pretty much the same FOV used in other flying games that new players seem to have no trouble with (or complain about)?
I think some players here have gotten used to their unrealistically wide FOV settings that lets them see both their wingtips.
-
I used the zoom feature in this game for years.
I probably didnt figure out what field of view was until 2010.
The point is, the game is difficult to learn that way it is, not everything needs to be difficult. Remember the upcoming generations also, you want things to look good and function well right off the bat, otherwise ADD kicks in and they are down the road
In this case if they really are self inflicted attention span gnats, the menu presentations on the clipboard from the opening splash screen into the full game need to be dumbed down. Currently the presentation is for people who read versus twitch. On the main screen "Video Settings" has to be changed to: !CHANGE YOUR SCREEN SIZE HERE!
Then other parts of the clip board menu system needs to follow suit to take them by the hand and get them past that awful reading requirement that gets in the way of fun. It has been obvious over the past 15 years that many players don't read the well thought out menus and web help HTC provides for players to self help by "reading". Our game, even as a kiddy game, is a bit slanted towards adults who read. That simply reflects the background of the creator and how he views menu creation along with the look he wants communicating "this is my dream".
Still making the menu any easier to devolve with the self inflicted attention span deficit generation would back fire by making the game look purpose designed for xbox kiddies and not very appealing to adults. Even in the face of the past 15 years, I've been constantly amazed how many adults don't want to read menus or the web help.
It is a subtle perceptual presentation thing about the feel of what you see. We could end up chasing the WT look for the kiddies with attention spans of gnats, and loose the overall, what makes us different and unique form WT. At that point the adults will ask them selves, why pay $14.95 for AH chasing WT when WT is free.
-
In this case if they really are self inflicted attention span gnats, the menu presentations on the clipboard from the opening splash screen into the full game need to be dumbed down. Currently the presentation is for people who read versus twitch. On the main screen "Video Settings" has to be changed to: !CHANGE YOUR SCREEN SIZE HERE!
Then other parts of the clip board menu system needs to follow suit to take them by the hand and get them past that awful reading requirement that gets in the way of fun. It has been obvious over the past 15 years that many players don't read the well thought out menus and web help HTC provides for players to self help by "reading". Our game, even as a kiddy game, is a bit slanted towards adults who read. That simply reflects the background of the creator and how he views menu creation along with the look he wants communicating "this is my dream".
Still making the menu any easier to devolve with the self inflicted attention span deficit generation would back fire by making the game look purpose designed for xbox kiddies and not very appealing to adults. Even in the face of the past 15 years, I've been constantly amazed how many adults don't want to read menus or the web help.
It is a subtle perceptual presentation thing about the feel of what you see. We could end up chasing the WT look for the kiddies with attention spans of gnats, and loose the overall, what makes us different and unique form WT. At that point the adults will ask them selves, why pay $14.95 for AH chasing WT when WT is free.
Respectfully, what people expect from a UI has changed drastically over even the last 3-5 years, never mind since the UI for AH was designed.
It's not about "chasing WT" nearly as much as it is about modernizing the interface to make it more inline with what some people apparently expect.
(https://s3.amazonaws.com/lardbiscuit/pix/idiothospital.jpg)
Yes, they're simpletons, but they might become paying simpletons if things are presented in a way they can understand.
Personally I think the FOV thing is a mountain out of a molehill. 106 is what Randy learned, so it's what he thinks is "normal". So did I. I also think there's something to the fact that HTC looked at the FOV of the other games and what people are useful, and chose to start them off with that. The canopy bars appearing to cover 4% more relative screen real estate at default is not going to be the reason newbs die.
Wiley.
-
Hitech did respond back in the alpha that he chose 80 because of other games. So he is looking at the industry for such things to help AH3 and a newer generation feel comfortable. The UI appears to be an icon of the AH look and not chasing the look of the new generation.
Having worked at an airfield and grown up in the civil aviation world. AH looks like the high end exotic where millionaires park warbirds on the field like other feilds are crammed full of old Cessna's and Pipers with a few antiques in hangers. Always felt like were flying around Texas during the summer the last 14 years. My father was stationed at Kelley and belonged to the Ft. Sam Houston flying club. I saw a lot of Texas from the air.
-
---I think some players here have gotten used to their unrealistically wide FOV settings that lets them see both their wingtips.
Somehow that made me think of Marty Feldman
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/7b/d6/a3/7bd6a3949bc732a7ba72d48e3a3d608b.jpg)
-
. . . Personally I think the FOV thing is a mountain out of a molehill. 106 is what Randy learned, so it's what he thinks is "normal". . . .
Wiley.
I spent the last year fiddling with my FOV setting. I have not used 106 in a long time. In all my experiments, the simple truth is higher FOV improves SA and tracking, lower FOV improves aiming when the red is insight and has a better immersion. An FOV setting of 90-93 seems to be the sweet spot for me but there have been times I wished i could push a button in flight to pop back to 106 when I could not find the red chewing on me.
Now what ever HTC wants to set the default fov to is fine with me. The point of the thread was beta feedback and nothing more than that.
-
Plus, isn't it pretty much the same FOV used in other flying games that new players seem to have no trouble with (or complain about)?
I think some players here have gotten used to their unrealistically wide FOV settings that lets them see both their wingtips.
Do other games allow players to increase their FOV? Serious question, because I wouldn't know.... guess I am all in with Aces High. The bigger question arises, will a new player be more disadvantaged (defenseless) at default FOV and no VR tracking movement against those with tweaked views? (LOL Marty Feldmans of the air - Thank you Bizman).
Respectfully, what people expect from a UI has changed drastically over even the last 3-5 years, never mind since the UI for AH was designed.
It's not about "chasing WT" nearly as much as it is about modernizing the interface to make it more inline with what some people apparently expect.
Yes, they're simpletons, but they might become paying simpletons if things are presented in a way they can understand.
Personally I think the FOV thing is a mountain out of a molehill. 106 is what Randy learned, so it's what he thinks is "normal". So did I. I also think there's something to the fact that HTC looked at the FOV of the other games and what people are useful, and chose to start them off with that. The canopy bars appearing to cover 4% more relative screen real estate at default is not going to be the reason newbs die.
Wiley.
I really applaud HiTech for making the statement that FOV 80 is definitive 1:1 actual scale for views (and answers a lot of long standing questions for me, having been a player since 2001 or earlier). I am just of the opinion, why would an inexperienced player give up situation awareness of where the enemy contact is, in order to have a larger target to shoot at if they could get guns on him?
Practically everyone that is not using VR tracking of some type, admits they ditch the default FOV. That includes me, BUT.... I wish for a "snap view" one click button that will give me the 1:1 default view when target is available to focus on. This is separate from zoom, which I consider to be a pair of binoculars searching the terrain for targets.
-
Chilli, there is no such thing as a simple 1:1 setting when looking at a monitor, the 1:1 changes with your distance from the monitor and the monitor size.
With VR head sets the size and distance are fixed.
HiTech
-
Randy what it sounds like you should have asked for is this:
The ability to set your zoom toggle for a first time toggle with the same settings of 45-152 from the front page custom FoV input. So you can set your custom FoV to 90-93 and then set your first time zoom toggle FoV to 106.
That might get even more confusing for the newbie versus knowing the default FoV is 80, and the first time zoom toggle is some percentage less of that. Then as they know to look for it or, told how to adjust FoV larger, the zoom toggle percentage scales with their custom FoV. That has been pretty standard in games since I can remember.
So why not set your FoV to 106, then toggle zoom in the cockpit to 90-93 and leave it toggled for your mission? Hitech could even add a FoV line to the alt\speed HUD for FoV. Then you could always return zoom to 90-93 while saving 106 for those special moments.
-
Chilli, there is no such thing as a simple 1:1 setting when looking at a monitor, the 1:1 changes with your distance from the monitor and the monitor size.
With VR head sets the size and distance are fixed.
HiTech
Thank you. I am still learning. Now that you explain it, makes it entirely clear that I meant to refer to the 80 FOV. Even then it is clear that not for all monitors and seating distances would this be equal.
What I have taken away from all of these many discussions, is there are hard technical facts that support the FOV decision. Any FOV beyond the 1:1 calculated settings seem to be a matter of preference and without statistical and neurological study of peripheral vision representation on a monitor (with size and seating distances included), it is unclear as to what such a default peripheral vision representation would be.
-
Randy what it sounds like you should have asked for is this:
The ability to set your zoom toggle for a first time toggle with the same settings of 45-152 from the front page custom FoV input. So you can set your custom FoV to 90-93 and then set your first time zoom toggle FoV to 106.
I do remember a wish asking for a saved default zoom much like saving head position maybe a year or so ago. Maybe two.
-
Randy,
This makes much more sense than all the other stuff we tossed at each other.
Sounds interesting, I wonder if changing the FoV from 93 to 106 with the zoom toggle is not something as easy as it looks for Hitech. As we know zoom, it is always below your current FoV and never changes your FoV higher. You could always research how zoom as a function in games really works, and see if some limitation exists to zoom changing the FoV above your current preset FoV.
-
If you adjust zoom with an analog control you can toggle it to any FOV you set.
-
But you can never unzoom to a larger FOV that has to set in the Video Settings menu as Bustr has said.
I think this is the contention of the entire discussion, or at least one side of the discussion. By the way, the game looks and sounds great. I truly enjoy the ability to save head tilt. FLS did an awesome job making the defaults.
Maybe a how to tutorial right up front somehow, that warns new players or AH2 converts that FOV settings now begin at 80 and shows them how to increase it.
-
There would not be a need for a tutorial if the default was something that most players didn't need to change.
Why have a default that most don't like?
-
Why have a default that most don't like?
I'd like to ask you who you refer to by saying "most"? I haven't seen a poll yet, although I might as well have missed it.
If you mean long time players, I've been registered almost a decade longer than you and I like it.
If you mean elderly people who are stuck with their routines, I'm 54 and stubborn as a mule. And I like the new FOV.
If you mean new players, they've already accustomed to this kind of FOV in other flight sims.
For quite a long time there has been threads about how this game needs an upgrade to be comparable with other flying sim games. Now that the graphics are getting on par with the others, it's not acceptable.
As Marilyn sang in an Irving Berlin tune (https://youtu.be/BcSq3N1P_RY?list=RDBcSq3N1P_RYl):
After you get what you want, you don't want it
If I gave you the moon, you'd grow tired of it soon
You're like a baby
You want what you want when you want it
But after you are presented
With what you want, you're discontented
You're always wishing and wanting for something
When you get what you want
You don't want what you get
-
I'm going off of the comments of those who immediately needed to change the fov, like me.
I've seen more comments from those who don't like it than those that do. You're right though biz, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
That said, the default POV is like looking through a toilet paper tube and this stubborn mule had to change it right away.
-
---I've seen more comments from those who don't like it than those that do. You're right though biz, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.---
It takes ten good reviews to revise a bad one. Or ten positive opinions against a negative one. Why? Nine out of the ten keep silent...
In another way, if there's no complaints it's perfect. With an handful of complaints (proportionately) it's good enough.
Back to the subject, isn't it wonderful that we have the option to change the FOV rather easily?
-
It takes ten good reviews to revise a bad one. Or ten positive opinions against a negative one. Why? Nine out of the ten keep silent...
In another way, if there's no complaints it's perfect. With an handful of complaints (proportionately) it's good enough.
Back to the subject, isn't it wonderful that we have the option to change the FOV rather easily?
I used the zoom feature in this game for years.
I probably didnt figure out what field of view was until 2010.
The point is, the game is difficult to learn that way it is, not everything needs to be difficult. Remember the upcoming generations also, you want things to look good and function well right off the bat, otherwise ADD kicks in and they are down the road
Bizman,
I will dogfight you any day, you choose default FOV with no other aids like triple screen, TIR or VR headset and my preferred FOV. Your skill level will remain the same but if I am able to make it past the first couple of merges, you would soon agree there is a "blind" aspect to default FOV. Yeah, I know that all areas CAN BE covered with views, but what am I most likely to be doing in a dogfight, moving controls to maneuver into position or flipping through views to locate my target?
By the way, you can take a poll now on how many use default FOV. "Start with me, even with TrackIR, I do NOT." I do however, zoom in to increase the size of my target when I am in a reasonable six o'clock position.
-
:airplane: Randy, I haven't read all the replies to your post, but what I found to make it appear like my setup does in AH2, I switched to FOV of 106 and everything looked normal!
-
Chilli, your idea would be perfect if we were on the same skill level. However, my SA sucks and I can perform hardly any maneuvers correctly. A few monthly hours of playing keeps the learning curve flat.
-
What in the diddly is the argument even about? It's a damn adjustable FOV anyway. Don't like it? Change it, and be glad you're not having to be SOL or editing .ini files to do it.
-
Estes,
Patience.............
There is no argument. However, your point, telling others that they can change it (which I do, when I encounter new faces who are having difficulties), does not cover, "if no one is there to tell them". We want new players to stick around. We veterans have plenty of other ways to stack the deck: plane weight, convergence, stall limiter, no tracers, not to mention the hours of practice. FOV is the only one that is set before you load the arena.
-
By the time FOV would make any difference to a players ability to kill, they would be already hooked on the game.
But one look and players thinking this game sucks because the planes are so small would cost us some one upon their first exposure to the Aces High.
HiTech
-
By the time FOV would make any difference to a players ability to kill, they would be already hooked on the game.
But one look and players thinking this game sucks because the planes are so small would cost us some one upon their first exposure to the Aces High.
HiTech
That's a nice feature with VR. All the aircraft appear life size. :D
I know everything is full size in AH but many players don't seem to understand FOV. :old:
-
I just suspend belief and imagine I'm back in a T28 bouncing my father's twin baron over the farmlands in northern Maryland after herding Holsteins in a PA field 15 minutes earlier with it. FAA inspectors are scary people. And all the reflections and their distortions on the inside of the canopy plex is real. If you leave the canopy open when you turn over the T28 you do get a little smoke in the cockpit from an old engine.
This whole post was really about making something programmatically convenient for someone with "it's for the newbies" on the side. But, Hitech started out for the newbies as his focus.
By the time FOV would make any difference to a players ability to kill, they would be already hooked on the game.
But one look and players thinking this game sucks because the planes are so small would cost us some one upon their first exposure to the Aces High.
HiTech
-
My whole point is it's a non issue as there is in fact an FOV slider, so whatever it's set to as default if the player noob or not doesn't like it they can change it.
-
Been following this thread so it's time for me to wade in w\ an opinion...........not that it means much.
IMHO I believe that Hitech and Co are already addressing this issue w\ the new players w\ the addition of VR as a VR headset pretty much makes all this a moot point as the nature of VR gets around all the shortcomings of viewing a realistic 3D viewing scenario on a computer monitor, which was the sole intention of providing a FOV adjustment setting so that players can do this to their tastes to help "make up" for as much of these shortcomings as could be feasibly done using the old viewing system......on a computer monitor using either the mobo keypad keys or a joystick's hat switch. The new players most likely are already moving in this direction since the advent of quality VR headsets and vid cards\drivers to take full advantage of them and the tier AAA titles are already driving this tech.
The question that I think needs to be asked isn't for Hitech, but for us as users.......................
The 1st question is "How much reality of views do you want?"
And the 2nd question is "How much are you willing to pay for it?"
If the answer to the 1st question is a lot, then IMHO you need to consider upgrading to Track IR or VR tech as this is the real ticket to achieving this then the 2nd question should decide which way in this area you should go and which VR-capable vid card you need to get to go along w\ the VR headset to get the most out of it then answer the 2nd question and decide what is the cost level you're willing to pay to attain it.
If the answer to the 2nd question is not much to none, then IMHO you need to come to grips w\ the viewing system as currently designed, set the view FOV as close to your liking and focus on developing other SA skills to circumvent the shortcomings in the meantime.
Now if Hitech feels a good feeling in his heart (which I hope he will), AFTER getting this Beta all finished\vetted and into production, to then go back and look at all these suggestions to see which 1 or IF 1 (or more than 1) of these suggestions are easy enough to code into the finished game w\o breaking other things then we MIGHT get something (like access thru the existing GUI in View Options to access the already existing code setting to control the view panning transition speed between the set viewing positions, which would go a long way IMHO to helping to maintain view tracking w\ the current viewing system by allowing a user to set this to their tastes, as well as the items mentioned in this thread thus far).
I myself am quite satisfied w\ this as it is simply due to training myself to make the adjustments along w\ a few other improvements in equipment. Currently I'm using a FOV of 90 which is not far off the default of 80 and I have found that I can pretty much keep up w\ con tracking using the hat switch on my CH Combatstick 568 now, but coming from the default FOV setting of 106 in AHII I DID have to work to get readjusted to it. I'm getting better sound cues on approaching cons to determine position due to the addition of my Creative SoundBlaster X7 DAC-AMP so I don't have to waste more thumb work to gain SA along w\ the usage of AMD's FRTC in conjunction w\ AMD FreeSynch via my Asus MG279Q Gaming Monitor which along w\ my Sapphire R9 FuryX vid card makes all graphics including views so smooth by setting the FPS limit at a FPS range the vid card can handle easily in most cases then use FreeSynch to fill in when the scenes start to tax the vid card to the point where the FPS starts to drop below the FRTC set FPS. Yes the costs of just these 3 items that I mentioned costs me a good $1,500.00 extra but IMHO this is why a user needs to answer the 2nd question honestly then reassess what you ask for. The only quirk I experience is sometimes I will tend to over pan due to the set panning transition speed being a little too fast so I may catch a glimpse of a con (or what I thought was a con due to the Beta's lighting effects cues) then have to repan to verify....thus why I would like the ability to set this myself. These lighting effects cues are what make viewing in this Beta a different aspect than in AHII in my view which justifies a programming addition. The rest is up to Hitech and his view of this game's development vision and direction to justify the additional work\resources against the current pricing model for feasibility.........
All this is really stating is how committed I am to playing this game and how far I am willing to spend my money to enjoy it. We all have to do the same and some of our results w\ this game are on us to either accept or rectify, not just on Hitech.
At this time VR is not in my radar of an item that I deem to need so I'll deal w\ the current viewing set up and pray that Hitech stays in good health so this game will continue cause he's getting a little older now.....................
:D :old:
This might change over time....but not at the current time.
But what I have typed here does justify what Hitech has already posted as well....and most of the rest of us who are posting as well. We are more or less committed to paying for and playing this game so we are here..........
Ok my 2 cents pitched in..................
You may return to the thread discussion as if I hadn't posted.................. :D
:salute
-
If I gave a toejam about VR I'd likely have one, that's not the point. Remember that whole 3d TV phase a few years back with the stupid glasses you would sit around your living room wearing watching TV etc? It was next to impossible to get away from it at it's height. Then as suddenly as it exploded it faded away. Little snips from the wiki page on it.The "golden era" (1952–1954) "Revival (1960-1984)" "Rebirth of 3D (1985–2003)" "Mainstream resurgence (2003–present)" "World 3-D Expositions (2003)" "Reported audience decline "2010 - R.I.P. pretty much) Hmmm, I seem to remember VR doing the same... I wonder?... :headscratch:
-
If I gave a toejam about VR I'd likely have one, that's not the point. Remember that whole 3d TV phase a few years back with the stupid glasses you would sit around your living room wearing watching TV etc? It was next to impossible to get away from it at it's height. Then as suddenly as it exploded it faded away. Little snips from the wiki page on it.The "golden era" (1952–1954) "Revival (1960-1984)" "Rebirth of 3D (1985–2003)" "Mainstream resurgence (2003–present)" "World 3-D Expositions (2003)" "Reported audience decline "2010 - R.I.P. pretty much) Hmmm, I seem to remember VR doing the same... I wonder?... :headscratch:
It's a limited application. Movies etc, whatever. Most video games really as well. That I agree wholeheartedly with the "fad" comments.
But 1:1 life size appearing cockpit/aircraft with head tracking for a game like this, or really any vehicle simulator... How does that get any better? Forgetting about motion sickness if a person's prone to it, and assuming money isn't an issue, who WOULDN'T want it?
Wiley.
-
Some folks will just never see things the same way. Plain and simple. Some folks are not able to see why in the world a family with medical issues could not afford the latest in high tech equipment or rather care less if they could or not. Others, offer to give up their time, effort and earnings to help out.
Not labeling anyone here at all .... please forgive, if it at all seems that way because I know of no one in AH that has not been overly generous with time, patience and what ever resources they had available to aid another.
The simple fact is that I have spent way too much of my time during beta, and have not come across one person that has professed that they are okay with flying limited to 80 FOV. This includes just about everyone who has responded in this post one way or the other.
I don't expect HiTech to do anything differently. I do like the idea of a standard that is reasonably realistic. It is just that in this case it will not be applied across the board. This is where I think this conversation about FOV is extremely important. With the VR headset will come great advantages in SA (so I have heard). What AHbeta allows us to do is to change settings that will, on some level, compete with players with that advantage, plus the many that have already done so or have TrackIR. Limiting FOV to 80 does not limit the newbies ability to kill, it renders them as cannon fodder and a lot less folks get hooked when all they do is die.
-
Some folks will just never see things the same way. Plain and simple. Some folks are not able to see why in the world a family with medical issues could not afford the latest in high tech equipment or rather care less if they could or not. Others, offer to give up their time, effort and earnings to help out.
Not labeling anyone here at all .... please forgive, if it at all seems that way because I know of no one in AH that has not been overly generous with time, patience and what ever resources they had available to aid another.
The simple fact is that I have spent way too much of my time during beta, and have not come across one person that has professed that they are okay with flying limited to 80 FOV. This includes just about everyone who has responded in this post one way or the other.
I don't expect HiTech to do anything differently. I do like the idea of a standard that is reasonably realistic. It is just that in this case it will not be applied across the board. This is where I think this conversation about FOV is extremely important. With the VR headset will come great advantages in SA (so I have heard). What AHbeta allows us to do is to change settings that will, on some level, compete with players with that advantage, plus the many that have already done so or have TrackIR. Limiting FOV to 80 does not limit the newbies ability to kill, it renders them as cannon fodder and a lot less folks get hooked when all they do is die.
As far as SA goes, I think the guy with enough computer to run a triple monitor setup and head tracking likely has the best possible setup to be had. He's the one you've got to worry about having the advantage.
HT's stated his reasons. I'd maybe include a first time setup thing that asks you for your desired FOV, but if what people are used to from other games is around 80, I don't see anything wrong with setting it up to be 80 by default.
Wiley.