Jump to content

Thermal depth of field


Rotareneg

Recommended Posts

Out of all of the new features in 4.0, this is the one I'm a bit dubious about. Does it really enhance realism enough to make up for the disadvantages? It gets really weird looking with partially transparent textures like trees and grass and it's a big hit on performance. It's particularly annoying on vehicles with autofocus (that apparently can't be disabled) when moving in wooded areas, which is where you'd tend to find the CV9030 and 35.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 113
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

Well, we felt it was necessary to reduce the "magic" of TIs in SB Pro so far which would always show a perfect picture. Once that the decision was made to have it in, it was somewhat natural to apply it to every TI, even if we had to implement the simplification of a one-key adjustment. The overreliance on thermal imagers always strikes me when watching other people's Steel Beasts sessions on YouTube (makes the instructor in me rattle at its cage doors, screaming to be let out). So in that respect, if it helps users to switch to the day view more often, that's a plus.

 

Of course, if we can bring up the framerates in general (and in the TI in particular), and if we can make the transparency handling look prettier, that would certainly be desirable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point, I don't use the manual autofocus, I just use ALT-mouse wheel to manually focus as I  know what I want to focus on. My experience with cameras has been that the autofocus will ALWAYS pick the wrong subject when time is of the essence. :D The problem with the CV9030 and 35 is that, as far as I can tell, you can't disable their continuous autofocus, so when driving through woods (even if just on a road) the focus seeks in and out constantly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But shouldn't it be realism with a purpose?  We, as virtual soldiers, lack some of the real-world feel and situational awareness.  While there are some advantages, tedious functions in the name of realism can go too far.  Should you be made to fill out all the logistics paperwork?  Should you be made to take written tests for promotion?  Should you be locked out of the game when you die?  Should I have to get out and help move ammo into the tank for an hour before I am allowed in the AFV?

 

There is a line for "realism".  That gray area is should you be throwing switches and making adjustments that have little real impact on the job you are trying to do?  I don't have the answer, but I think ssnake has a very good philosophy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, until now the TIS has been the allseeing eye of god (also due to shortcommings in the terrain model) and in that sense often game breaking.

To me the adjustments to the SB-TIS systems make it closer to what its IRL and add to the immersion. In short, I like it :-D

Edited by Grenny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have mixed feelings about features such as the TI system, or the ammo handling system.

Personally, I quite often enjoy these minute details.

 

The problem is that others quite often do not.

Lets take a look at some examples...

 

I used to play SB Gold, and then Pro PE, with some friends.

 

The first one tried his hardest to be a good gunner.  He was frustrated by the Abrams because he often screwed up the ammo indexing.  He was frustrated by the Abrams because he quite frequently burnt out the laser.  He was frustrated by the Abrams because he could NOT figure out how to use the auto lead.

In the Leopard 2A4, however, where he couldn't burn out the laser, didn't need to index ammo, and didn't have to use auto-lead, he was quite comfortable.

 

The second one only played ProPE.  His favorite vehicles were any Leopards with low magnification on the daysight channel because he had trouble the same things as the first, and also vehicles like the M2/M3/LAV with an autocannon.  Furthermore, as a quite frequent FPS gamer, while he understood the concept of "limited ammunition" from SB Gold, but found the long reload times frustrating to the point of asking me to just turn unlimited ammo on.

 

 

So, I have requested this before, and I'll request it once more...

Please make certain features of the simulator switchable difficulty options.  For example, TI focusing on/off, ammo transfer Realistic/Faster/Instant, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Maj.Hans said:

I have mixed feelings about features such as the TI system, or the ammo handling system.

Personally, I quite often enjoy these minute details.

 

The problem is that others quite often do not.

Lets take a look at some examples...

 

I used to play SB Gold, and then Pro PE, with some friends.

 

The first one tried his hardest to be a good gunner.  He was frustrated by the Abrams because he often screwed up the ammo indexing.  He was frustrated by the Abrams because he quite frequently burnt out the laser.  He was frustrated by the Abrams because he could NOT figure out how to use the auto lead.

In the Leopard 2A4, however, where he couldn't burn out the laser, didn't need to index ammo, and didn't have to use auto-lead, he was quite comfortable.

 

The second one only played ProPE.  His favorite vehicles were any Leopards with low magnification on the daysight channel because he had trouble the same things as the first, and also vehicles like the M2/M3/LAV with an autocannon.  Furthermore, as a quite frequent FPS gamer, while he understood the concept of "limited ammunition" from SB Gold, but found the long reload times frustrating to the point of asking me to just turn unlimited ammo on.

 

 

So, I have requested this before, and I'll request it once more...

Please make certain features of the simulator switchable difficulty options.  For example, TI focusing on/off, ammo transfer Realistic/Faster/Instant, etc.

 

guess its down to personal preference. I actually like those features of the M1A1. when i then got around to trying the leopard 2a4/a5/2E it felt annoying not being able to index your own ammo or have autolead, and took time to adjust.

 

tbh even before the new adjustments came in 4.0 to thermal imagers i still used day sights more than TI becasue first gen flir was already too blurry for my taste at any range beyond 1000m. I would scope out for targets in TI and then switch to day sights to actually engage. For my preference only the M1A2's 2nd gen Flir  combined with higher zoom felt good enough to use exclusively over day sights.

Edited by Kev2go
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steel Beasts has been exceptionally generous with the thermal quality, and still is. 

 

I've seen some impressive thermals on vehicles with 3rd Gen platforms in real life, but its not magic. Still requires focus and zoom to get a good picture. 

 

It adds another dimension to gunnery in 4.0.

 

Also - I like the use of the mouse wheel for key mapping. I hope we can fully enjoy the feature in the future. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't mind the FCS on either the Leopard or the M1s.  I feel like the M1 is sometimes easier and the Leopard is sometimes easier.  Depends on the situation.  As for ammo indexing I see the benefits of both methods.

 

 

Now as for TIS vs Daysights, I use both.  I flip between them frequently.  If I'm scanning for targets in a zone I'll be flipping channels with every 2-4 oscillations of the turret.  The TIS has certain advantages, the daysight has others.  I can't see dust and smoke and other telltales in the TIS, although hot stuff does stick out like a sore thumb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, thewood said:

But shouldn't it be realism with a purpose?  We, as virtual soldiers, lack some of the real-world feel and situational awareness.  While there are some advantages, tedious functions in the name of realism can go too far.  Should you be made to fill out all the logistics paperwork?  Should you be made to take written tests for promotion?  Should you be locked out of the game when you die?  Should I have to get out and help move ammo into the tank for an hour before I am allowed in the AFV?

 

There is a line for "realism".  That gray area is should you be throwing switches and making adjustments that have little real impact on the job you are trying to do?  I don't have the answer, but I think ssnake has a very good philosophy.

 

Take things to the extreme much? Do you expect everything you mentioned to be necessary in a class room environment where a sim would be used? Is there not a purpose in having TI that is more realistic in a sim that is used by military personnel? This being training software, would this not help to improve your situational awareness and give you a better glimpse of what it might feel like in the real-world?

 

We are talking about a sim, not real life training with live fire exercises.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always considered the thermals in game were to high resolution

If you look at videos of real TI's especially the older generation ones the image quality seems to be very low res

It has taken me a little while to get used to the new feature in 4.0 but I think its a good addition

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I was on a Bradley, we always trained to use night sights even during the day.   I would switch back and forth between night and day when I was a gunner.  The way the night sights were portrayed  before, it was better to use them than it was the day site.  Yea great for those who love the night site, but realistically, lot of things factor during the day with using the night sites, which is why I would switch between both.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Azure Lion said:

 

Take things to the extreme much? Do you expect everything you mentioned to be necessary in a class room environment where a sim would be used? Is there not a purpose in having TI that is more realistic in a sim that is used by military personnel? This being training software, would this not help to improve your situational awareness and give you a better glimpse of what it might feel like in the real-world?

 

We are talking about a sim, not real life training with live fire exercises.

I am just asking where you draw the line.  A general statement like making it as realistic as possible is an extreme by itself.  So my question stands?  Where do you draw the line with an extreme statement like "as real as possible"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm personally pleased depth of field has been added. Previously TI was too omniscient and omnipotent (based on what I've heard, never having used it in real life). If 4.0 makes it more realistic by curbing its utility in all situations, forces the virtual crew to use other means of obtaining situational awareness, and restores some power to non-TI equipped vehicles and infantry, especially in adverse weather conditions and/or close terrain, then that's a good thing.

 

But, yes, having to adjust depth of field when trying to acquire, identify or engage a target is annoying, at least until it becomes second nature.

Edited by Panzer_Leader
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, thewood said:

I am just asking where you draw the line.  A general statement like making it as realistic as possible is an extreme by itself.  So my question stands?  Where do you draw the line with an extreme statement like "as real as possible"?

A general statement is an extreme? Like mandatory volunteerism I suppose?

I never said, "as real as possible" I said, "a strive toward realism." As far as what that realism is, well...

As this is not my project, nor my software, thus it is not my place to make that determination. I simply leave that decision making process to those more knowledgeable and bask in the excellent decisions of Nils and his crew to determine what that line needs be, the fact that they strive toward it and the fact that it brings the software as close to realism as is appropriate for a sim, which I might add is ever more realistic than its previous iteration.

 

Please also note that we are talking about realism in the context of a simulation, there should be certain unspoken things that should be understood and need not be reiterated upon.

I ask that you take this into consideration.

 

With that;

Enjoy the journey, do not always focus on the destination.

Or, if you prefer, enjoy the rainbow, search not for its terminus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...