Which do you think is better? Do they do the same thing?

They actually control two different aspects of FSX. EZCA handles camera control (i.e. your "virtual eyes" in the cockpit) while Accu-feel actually moves the aircraft itself, in addition to sound effects.

 

I keep seeing this question come up so I decided to make a little youtube video that shows A.) what Accu-feel adds from default FSX and B.) how EZCA can work together with Accu-feel.

 

The link for the video is here:

 

Hey thanks Molleh, I was looking for more vid demos of V2- looks excellent. I'd say accu feel and Ezdok/opus would be perfect partners working together

They actually control two different aspects of FSX. EZCA handles camera control (i.e. your "virtual eyes" in the cockpit) while Accu-feel actually moves the aircraft itself, in addition to sound effects.

 

I keep seeing this question come up so I decided to make a little youtube video that shows A.) what Accu-feel adds from default FSX and B.) how EZCA can work together with Accu-feel.

 

The link for the video is here:

 

 

Thank you so much! But from the your video the Turbulence effect looks pretty bad. It doesn't seem to good.....

They are very different.

 

But I am so pleased to have been able to 'retire' EZCA, due to all of it's features now being replaced for me, by a combination of OPUS and ACCU-FEEL V2...... I say that only because EZCA was always soooo unstable for me, concerning TrackIR..... it would just stop working almost every day and require constant re-installs.

 

OPUS and Accu-Feel are so stable, intuitive and effective.

That turbulance effect looks like its shaking the cockpit as if the fuselage isn't attached to wings?

That turbulance effect looks like its shaking the cockpit as if the fuselage isn't attached to wings?

 

I don't understand what you mean. Can you explain further?

 

Keep in mind all I did was max all turbulence sliders in the Accu-feel menu, which includes gusting and choppiness, so it probably would have looked more natural with more moderate settings.

 

edit: I think I understand what makes you say that. I assume you're talking about how the engine on the left wing looks like it's not moving? It's just an optical illusion because the cockpit viewpoint was shaking around (due to EZCA) in addition to the aircraft itself being rocked about. If I changed the view to show the the wings (or maybe moved the view back in the cabin area so you can see more of the whole plane moving) that would help!

Thank you so much! But from the your video the Turbulence effect looks pretty bad. It doesn't seem to good.....

 

Can you let us know what you mean, the effect was created directly from our flying experiences in everything frim light GA's to heavies and military aircraft. However ff you have any input or ideas from your own experiences please let us know over at the A2A forums. Always open to suggestions and we already have a couple fixes and changes for the next version.

 

Re: the dis-jointed look you can sometimes get, this is due to the head bob, some really like it others dont. I know a few pilots who turn it off as soon as they install a flightsim. Immersion is one of those personal things. For me I really like head bob and movement esp with in conjunction with aircraft movement or in other sims/games vehicle movement etc.

Well, look at the cockpit, and the engine beside it.

Cockpit is shaking about violently, but the engine doesn't move an inch... As if the cockpit is not attached to the wing.

As far as I am concerned, I have uninstalled EZDOK (too many options/issues for what I need), change the MomentumEffect = No => Yes in the Camera.cfg to maintain a kind of head movement and with AccuFeel v2, that gives a really nice combination.....

 

PS : I discovered the MomentumEffect in the camera.cfg this morning... mine was set on "No" and changing it to "Yes" really brings a nice natural effect close to what other software are brining (3D Cockpit, EZDok...)

Cockpit is shaking about violently, but the engine doesn't move an inch... As if the cockpit is not attached to the wing.

 

This is just the FOV (field of view) setting of the camera and the distance from the camera to the cockpit frames and engine. This is related to an FSX view setting and not related to Accu-feel as it doesn't mess with the cameras.

 

However, I know there are some out there that do not like the camera effects, but I think FSX does a nice job with their camera effects. It basically does what it is supposed to do, give a sense of inertia in all directions. The camera effects can also have the unintended effect of exposing errors in a flight model. I don't see that in this video, but just something I've noticed in the past.

 

Scott.

I just watched the video again, don't see anything unusual. As the head moves around, the perspective between the canopy/fuse and engine changes. Yeah the setting is pretty high though, extreme.

 

Scott I can't wait to try V2, it looks like its adding a whole new dimension of physics to the 'boring' core of the sim, congrats!

Cockpit is shaking about violently, but the engine doesn't move an inch... As if the cockpit is not attached to the wing.

 

Ah. What you're seeing is the pilot's head moving, so that the cockpit seems to move while the engine outside doesn't. The engine outside is moving as well, along with the cockpit, but since it's farther away it doesn't seem to move as much, and the momentum effect on the pilot's head changes the actual eyepoint, similar to how TrackIR works if you're used to using that.

 

Hook

 

Edit: Wait... wait. Please tell me there isn't a camera shake system out there that doesn't move your eyepoint, but shifts the entire picture back and forth. This would make the window post and the engine stay locked together. If you're using such a system, what is it?

 

Hook

Edit: Wait... wait. Please tell me there isn't a camera shake system out there that doesn't move your eyepoint, but shifts the entire picture back and forth. This would make the window post and the engine stay locked together. If you're using such a system, what is it?

 

Hook

 

There is no such program, but why would there be?

 

It's called parallax effect. Closer objects appear to be moving faster than farther objects... this is how real life works. And actually every single 3D graphics engine ever made, lol.

There is no such program, but why would there be?

 

Hi Molleh.

 

If you didn't notice the tone of my question, I was amazed that someone might actually do something like that. Heck, I can't even imagine how it would be implemented in a 3D cockpit. But it's possible that someone's found a way. But honestly, doing something like that with a 3D cockpit would be the second stupidest thing I've encountered in several decades of flight simming. It would be how you'd do it in a 2D cockpit, but not a 3D one. But if you find a developer who makes up in arrogance what he lacks in experience, anything is possible.

 

The stupidest would be the guy who complained bitterly that he had to bank his airplane to get it to turn. This was back in the USENET days. It was patiently explained, and he *argued*! That kind of thing still goes on today, but not as blatantly stupid. I won't point out examples because I like some of these people.

 

Hook