Thrust pushes the UI bottom edge off screen

[SilverbladeTE]

is there a setting to turn this effect off as you accelerate?

I find it INCREDIBLY annoying to lose a chunk of the UI at bottom of the screen when accelerating, as I miss info on that part of the screen :/

 

[Associat0r]

I agree, this is a big problem.

 

[popuptoaster]

you can use the head look to look at whatever you like, you dont have to leave the view in the fixed position, if its that important to you that you can't have it out of view for a second or so then look down before you hit the boost button, personally i look where im going when i hit the boosters. :S

 

[huwthomas]

Have you maxed out the "field of view" slider in the graphics settings?

 

[Associat0r]

Have you maxed out the "field of view" slider in the graphics settings?

This I find very problematic, because a high FOV might not be natural for the size of monitor that you're using, or the distance you are sitting from it.
I also voiced my concerns in the Alpha forums about it.

 

[Adept]

I really love the effects of acceleration on the viewpoint. It's one of my favorite features, and makes me feel like I'm in the cockpit and the acceleration forces are real.

FoV adjust and headlock seem to be what you want if it's being troublesome. Remember, it is also happening to everybody else.

 

[Associat0r]

But the movement is too much and can get in the way of immersion and gameplay.

 

[Asp Explorer]

But the movement is too much and can get in the way of immersion and gameplay.

Get on a motorcycle, preferably something with a bit of grunt - lets say 1000cc's and 120HP.

You are on a private road, no laws to worry about breaking, and you are going to be completely safe. So, get on the bike, and open her right up all the way to WOT, up through the gearbox and all the way to maximum speed. When you've had enough fun, stop.

Now tell me the movement is too much and it breaks immersion and gameplay - a ship with magnitudes of magnitudes more power would squish you flat

 

[Associat0r]

Get on a motorcycle, preferably something with a bit of grunt - lets say 1000cc's and 120HP.

You are on a private road, no laws to worry about breaking, and you are going to be completely safe. So, get on the bike, and open her right up all the way to WOT, up through the gearbox and all the way to maximum speed. When you've had enough fun, stop.

Now tell me the movement is too much and it breaks immersion and gameplay - a ship with magnitudes of magnitudes more power would squish you flat

You brain compensates for this kind of movement, so it's unnatural to go over the top with this on a screen especially if you are supposed to be strapped in a seat, but the main problem is that it also breaks the game when people prefer to use a lower FOV, as the high FOV that the game forces to be usable is only correct if you have a really large monitor.

 

[Adept]

I haven't increased my FoV from the default, and I love it. Accelerations are short events of a few seconds. Why does it even matter?

 

[Associat0r]

I haven't increased my FoV from the default, and I love it. Accelerations are short events of a few seconds. Why does it even matter?

The default FOV may be too high for the size of monitor used, if you want the stuff on screen be proportionally scaled to real life.
With a too high FOV the environment and planets will appear too small and this makes you feel too far detached from the game.

Here is an interesting thread on the rFactor forum exactly explaining this problem: http://isiforums.net/f/showthread.php/4904-FOV-Calculator

For example with the FOV I'm using for my screen which is still too high btw, I can't see the landing position coordinates at the bottom of the landing helper thing.

Here I can't see the launch button, but this is a minor issue.

During flight a lot more of the screen gets obscured because of the head movement. The problem is that a narrow FOV (Field Of View) makes the game unusable if you don't have a head tracking device, because important instruments are spread out over the cockpit. A better design would be to put those instruments more at the center.

 

[Asp Explorer]

Surely it makes more sense to upgrade from one of these:

to one of these:

 

[Associat0r]

@Asp Explorer
We shouldn't have to.

 

[Asp Explorer]

@Asp Explorer
We shouldn't have to.

With all respect, why not?

If something doesn't meet minimum requirements - replace or upgrade it until it meets those requirements.

Otherwise we'd all still be using DOS on 486 DX2/66's and revelling in the majesty of having 8 whole megabytes of RAM and a 512Mb hard drive.

Progress does have it's advantages

 

[MrShadowfax]

I agree with the OP that this is an issue.

Headlook and a massive monitor should NOT be required to play the game. It's not about visibility, it's about being able to read the information within your own cockpit.

 

[Asp Explorer]

I agree with the OP that this is an issue.

Headlook and a massive monitor should NOT be required to play the game. It's not about visibility, it's about being able to read the information within your own cockpit.

Indeed. Our friend here is running in netbook resolution. The number of pixels he has available simply does not meet the requirements to physically display the cockpit information, so the cockpit is drawn to meet the abilities of the display.

It's below recommended specs, so the engine does the best it can.

If you want to see more, meet the specs required by the engine.

It works great on a [redacted] air of all things - and they have some of the worst displays I've had to use. I would demonstrate on an old acer netbook - but it's CPU won't allow the alpha to run. Should I not have to replace a 1.6GHz Atom? Should I demand FD make it run on the rough equivalent of a 1GHz Pentium III?

 

[Associat0r]

Indeed. Our friend here is running in netbook resolution. The number of pixels he has available simply does not meet the requirements to physically display the cockpit information, so the cockpit is drawn to meet the abilities of the display.

It's below recommended specs, so the engine does the best it can.

If you want to see more, meet the specs required by the engine.

It works great on a <Moderation Edit: Residual Cleanup> air of all things - and they have some of the worst displays I've had to use. I would demonstrate on an old acer netbook - but it's CPU won't allow the alpha to run. Should I not have to replace a 1.6GHz Atom? Should I demand FD make it run on the rough equivalent of a 1GHz Pentium III?

I already told you in the other thread that the resolution has nothing to do with this, as the aspect ratio I showed is 16:9

 

[Asp Explorer]

I already told you in the other thread that the resolution has nothing to do with this, as the aspect ratio I showed is 16:9

Maybe someone else can explain this to you - I have tried and obviously failed.

Respectfully, I wish you luck.

 

[Associat0r]

I agree with the OP that this is an issue.

Headlook and a massive monitor should NOT be required to play the game. It's not about visibility, it's about being able to read the information within your own cockpit.

Exactly my point, real HUDs have most info close to the center of the view, that's also the reason why I have no trouble playing flightsims with a low FOV, but ED forces us to use an almost fisheye FOV just to be able to see the crucial info on the HUD and that is a real problem on small displays or displays far away, it prevents most of us from experiencing the realistic scale of the game.
FD say they want to have an immersive cockpit experience, but all these problems result in the opposite.

 

[Oscalator]

Please remember it's early days yet we are barely out of the Alpha phase pushing into beta release.