Air plane pilots that use simulators are in a fixed view, because that is what a real pilot see's.They don't fly the plane from the nose.I think I made my point.
Santa Claus does and I'm sure he knows more about airplanes than you or the average pilot. Year by year he brings gifts to the homes of good (and bad!) simracers and is never late. I always knew he was cheating with s.th. but should we condemn him for this?
Your comparing chalk with cheese, and fail to see the connection, airline pilots fly by instruments rarely if ever looking out the window. Before you flame me I use cockpit view, and couldn't imagine me ever doing otherwise. But if others wish to drive with another view then they are free to do so. If I had a single small monitor I would use bonnet and did, now I am lucky enough to have triples so it's happy days and in car all the way.
LOL, Well maybe you would like to explain in what way that post conforms to the definition of irony, if you can do that I will immediately sent some imaginary money for that imaginary software...actually it's a shame it is, it would work overtime on here. Had you said he was being sarcastic I might agree, but it really is a toss up sometimes on here working out the serious from the sarcastic.
You pretend s.th. (not necessarily by arguing the converse) and expect others to understand what you really want to say. Using Santa Claus as a logic argument is an obvious contradiction so I think the definition applies to my posting. Irony is often sarcastic (not vice versa), it was not my intention to be sarcastic though. Sarcasm is used to ridicule someone. I only wanted to make fun of this pointless discussion. no irony/sarcasm ahead: Most simracers don't possess full motion force feedback rigs, so instead of feeling what the car does we have to rely on graphics and sound. As you pointed out it depends on the hardware you have if cockpit view makes sense. With a 18" screen cockpit view will decrease the actual area where the track and other vehicles are displayed to less than 25cm² which will put you at a significant disadvantage.
I´ve seen this "argument" come up a lot by now. And yes, the screen area is often times smaller than in real life. But telling me, that just because someone has the bigger screen, he is at an advantage is the wrong conclusion. The field of view (FOV) determines what you see. So two screens with the exact same aspect ratio but different sizes will show you exactly the same portion of the virtual world, only scaled to different sizes. And yes, that might mean you should not run the most realistic FOV setting, because that only works if you have screen real estate, that matches the real world, so you could have the scale set to 1:1 effectively. If I wanted a realsitic FOV, then, judging by other people´s suggestion, I´d have to set it to what, 10 degrees for my 19" 5:4 aspect ratio screen standing roughly 1 metre away from me? That´d be fun. That statement about too small screens is just an excuse to say something along the lines: "We cannot possibly make this realistic, so let´s go all out and throw away any attempt to get as close as possible." As close as possible means cockpit view, period. If you can´t see enough with ridiculously low FOV settings, that´s where you have to compromise then.
So you are saying I should not use an unrealistic camera view but instead a realistic view (cockpit) and alter it (make it unrealistic) to at least compensate its disadvantage to some extent. That's brilliant logic. BTW changing the FOV is no solution at all as anything beyond small changes from the default setting will affect the sense of velocity and distance of objects. I've tried to lower the FOV in Iracing because cockpit view is mandatory there but due to what I just explained it didn't work. Now with 27" widescreen there are no problems with cockpit view for me but I can understand those simracers who still have smaller monitors or play/race on their laptop want an alternative.
Ah here we see the problem of linear posts, I was replying to the one before yours, yours made me chuckle. You a commercial Airline Pilot Hoser? If so I bow to your superior knowledge, if not I stick by what I have been told that commercial airline pilots fly predominantly on instruments. Not that that is at all relevant to the point, which was my point.
As I said, you do have to compromise somewhere. The compromise in FOV has less net loss in realism. No matter how you twist my words, the fact of the matter is, that a real world driver, has to cope with a very limited view, because he is sitting way down and often very far to the rear. For the "realistic" FOV, anything less than say 160 degrees of horizontal field of view is unrealistic , and that´s only if I keep my head and eyes dead straight. glancing my eyes left and right, I reckon my horizontal FOV to be well into 200 degrees. So the majority of people will always have to compromise on the FOV front. Add to that an unrealistic viewing perspective, anything non-cockpit, and you have two compromises already. With forced cockpit view, there is only FOV that´s compromised.
It isn't fair or unfair. It just is. In my view it is up to whomever develops the product to say how they want their product used/experienced and if it an option and the rules of competition say fixed view that is just a rule of competition just as 2x fuel or 3x tire wear is a rule/condition. If you don't want to compete under a certain set of rules then find a competition that meets what you want or develop your own and invite those who want to compete under those rules. racing introduces weight penalties, horsepower limits, abs etc. as part of the rules of participation. Sim racing brings something unique in its ability to define the view the driver has and some may want to limit it while others want no limitation whatsoever. There isn't a right or wrong answer - just endless debate.
