Camera movement in VC

[Wanthuyr Filho 83]

Well the fix isn't available yet so that's a moot point. The possibility of a fix was always there though. I've said that several times in posts over the years. Ryan did mention once that Opus were planning a fix for this but that turned out to be a fixed eyepoint offset, not much use.

 

i don't think a fix exclusive to one addon developer would be welcome though. It's needs to be available for all FSX and P3D users.

I suppose Opus always had everything to solve (compensate) this. They already have that kind of manual compensation, like as the PoV shifts, you can correct it manually and save the new position temporarily. I'd say all they needed was the algorithm for automatic compensation.

Better yet, of course, would see LM or even Steam guys fixing the issue in its source.

[chumley 0]

 

 

i don't think a fix exclusive to one addon developer would be welcome though. It's needs to be available for all FSX and P3D users.

Not suggesting they should - just wondering why they haven't if the answer is available programatically.

[kevinh 409]

I suppose Opus always had everything to solve (compensate) this. They already have that kind of manual compensation, like as the PoV shifts, you can correct it manually and save the new position temporarily. I'd say all they needed was the algorithm for automatic compensation.

Better yet, of course, would see LM or even Steam guys fixing the issue in its source.

Correcting it manually only works if you fly in a straight line. Any change of heading and you're drifting again. Dovetail aren't able to change core code and LM may not feel the need to. Although OPUS and Ezdok could do this I prefer the idea of an independent fix, like Holger's prototype, that doesn't tie you to one particular parent addon.

Not suggesting they should - just wondering why they haven't if the answer is available programatically.

Because they have far too much to do already to have time to develop a new technology (for them) in the form of dynamic camera control. PMDG made it clear they were leaving it up to others to try and fix it.

[rsrandazzo 6,353]

Kevin-

 

You have a habit in this thread of throwing out conjecture that is factually inaccurate.  You probably need to take a step back and evaluate the facts of things you are saying before posting them, as you are creating bogus information that other users are bound to repeat as fact.

 

This is how people get misled.

 

Example:  DTG most certainly can modify core code.  DTG purchased a license to do as they see fit with FSX, the core code and any offspring they derive from it...

 

Exmaple:  "PMDG Made clear."  NO.  No, we didn't.  Please do not get in the habit of speaking on our behalf.

[Prycon 1]

 

 

Exmaple:  "PMDG Made clear."  NO.  No, we didn't.  Please do not get in the habit of speaking on our behalf.

Does this mean that you are working on it? 

[kamaz74 81]

Does this mean that you are working on it? 

Yes *commences speaking on PMDG's behalf*

[MD911 3]

Holger, I can't describe how thankful I am for what you've done. I really love PMDG 777 but because of view point movement I don't fly it at all because it bothers me so much. Well done, looking forward to the results!

[veeshy64 0]

I was using the rainy weekend to do a little rearch on this topic. It apprears that there is a solution for this. I have implemented a little prototype that shows that this issue could be resolved by automatically correcting the viewpoint based on a few parameters. I have posted a video that shows the results. Maybe someone is intrested in this solution approach.

 

https://youtu.be/ZroSNEGPXbg

 

omg u sir are a genius!... im soooo overwhelmed with emotion to see what u have been able to do its been such a huge issue for me that i stopped flying anything longer than a 737 ...

 

if i can help in any way let me know, message me, if be happy to send u a private donation of however much u need via paypal, and if u need my to buy u any software to help you develop or even use for ur fix/research like ezdok or whatever, id be happy to help mate, dont be shy to ask, it would be my absolute pleasure to help out financial for ur intelligence & time.

 

Kaveesh Singh

[kevinh 409]

Kevin-

 

You have a habit in this thread of throwing out conjecture that is factually inaccurate.  You probably need to take a step back and evaluate the facts of things you are saying before posting them, as you are creating bogus information that other users are bound to repeat as fact.

 

This is how people get misled.

 

Example:  DTG most certainly can modify core code.  DTG purchased a license to do as they see fit with FSX, the core code and any offspring they derive from it...

 

Exmaple:  "PMDG Made clear."  NO.  No, we didn't.  Please do not get in the habit of speaking on our behalf.

Robert,

 

What I said was my honest understanding of the situation based on what I have researched myself and what I have read here. I'm not claiming to be an authority, nor am I trying to speak for PMDG. I was trying to be helpful.

 

When I said "PMDG have made it clear", I was thinking of this post by Ryan. It states PMDG's position, at that time at least, was that the best fix for this might be by a view control system and that Opus had been asked about it. I haven't read anything from PMDG since to contradict that.

 

Earlier in the thread you said, ironically quoting a post of mine, the following:

Gents-

 

As stated by Kevin, and as documented in our 777 introduction (which all you 777 owners read, I'm sure... yup. surely. :ph34r: ) this is a well known and well documented bug in FSX. The head position has a very slight shift that is related to heading and position on the globe and the distance of the view position from the defined model center.

 

It is, quite simply, a mathematical rounding error inside FSX. We documented this for Microsoft during beta testing of FSX but it was not fixed.

 

There is no fix for it.

 

Adam: If you suspect that information you have learned is not factual, it is normally good form to state as such when initially presenting the information, not when you are corrected by another forum user. Thanks.

So you stated in this thread "there is no fix for it". If there is no fix for it, how can PMDG be working on a fix? How is that not PMDG making it clear?

 

If I'm wrong, and that since making that post you are now working on a fix for this issue, then I'm sorry for implying otherwise. But how can I have known things had changed?

 

Regarding Dovetail Games, I was only reiterating what is the general impression amongst FSX and FSX-SE users. DTG have a license to distribute FSX Gold. Not modify, update or develop it but distribute it. They cannot do as they see fit with it. There have been some bug fixes but as yet no sign that the view bug is on the agenda. As Microsoft wouldn't address it why should we expect DTG to do so? If you know otherwise please let us all know and possibly save Holger a lot of time fixing something which is already being fixed.

 

As for my other posts in this thread being conjecture, I really don't know what you mean. I have a lot of experience of this in the world of full flight simulation and have written code to do exactly the same eyepoint position offset calculations that this FSX code fails to do correctly. So I know what I'm talking about when it comes to what the inputs parameters are and saying that it is a relatively simple thing to do.

 

I'm very happy to be corrected by anyone, including your good self, but your post just says I'm wrong and misleading without actually saying what the true position is. It feels like a put down. And a put down from someone as authoritative as you is hurtful.

[kamaz74 81]

And a put down from someone as authoritative as you is hurtful.

[kevinh 409]

Please grow up Kylan

[Hammerheadmike 6]

 It feels like a put down. And a put down from someone as authoritative as you is hurtful.

 

I didn't like reading it either, it did seem sharp in the circumstances - although I sympathise with the problems around false information continually being spread about. I deal with it every day, and you can get fatigued by it.

 

If it lightens your day...  I can do a convincing monkey impression 

 

Anyway - back to the prototype. Can we please try it?

[geholger 1]

I was doing some further testing - so far even the flight tests look good. So here's the plan: As there are some holidays coming up and I'm not available during that time, I plan on providing the prototype for an open beta test somewhere around the end of next week. I will provide you with a download link and an email adress where you could request a license in order to try it out. Why does it take until the end of next week? Well - quite simple: I'm a one man show here and I would like to provide you with some basic support within a reasonable timeframe at least. I will keep you updated. Thanks for all your kind comments and your support so far.

[TrentXWB 20]

I was doing some further testing - so far even the flight tests look good. So here's the plan: As there are some holidays coming up and I'm not available during that time, I plan on providing the prototype for an open beta test somewhere around the end of next week. I will provide you with a download link and an email adress where you could request a license in order to try it out. Why does it take until the end of next week? Well - quite simple: I'm a one man show here and I would like to provide you with some basic support within a reasonable timeframe at least. I will keep you updated. Thanks for all your kind comments and your support so far.

Thanks....looking forward to this

[kevinh 409]

 

 

I plan on providing the prototype for an open beta test somewhere around the end of next week.

An open beta sounds like a good plan. I'm looking forward to trying it.