PDA

View Full Version : What I'm hoping for in BoB



BM357_TinMan
04-15-2004, 07:50 AM
S~ all,

In response to the simply breath taking pictures of a FPS game posted on this board in another thread, I have this bit of $.02 to add. I posted it on my own thread as to not sound like I was dogging on another guys thread. That is NOT my intention.

I, as much as anybody, would simply LOVE to see this type of realistic, visual representation of the world in a flight/combat flight sim. However, before that kind of visual accuracy can be produced in a flight simulator, we need CPU's that run at least 64bit and probably 8 to 10 times that calculating power that they now have. Not to mention the type of memory and the FSB bandwidth along with the monster GPU neccessary.

What IS attainable at this time, and what I would LOVE to have implemented into the next edition of 1C Maddox's great games, are things that would have more to do with SIMULATION...

For example:
1. The ability to switch fuel tanks
2. Magnetic declination
3. Gyroscopic drift
4. Progressive, realistic, dynamic weather (including, and certainly not limited to, barometric pressure that forces the adjustment of the altimeter, realistic turbulence, etc.)
5. Realistic Map with bases/airfields that are historically accurate and accurately represented. (i.e. Lieston, England; Avveville, France, etc.)
6. Separate brake axis' for left and right brakes
7. Flaps that have realistic degrees of extensions in each plane
8. Cowl flaps on an axis
9. Mixture that actually HAS to be leaned/enriched

There are more, but this is a representation of what I would like to see. This is a great game and I applaud 1C Maddox for their work and their devotion that keeps them updating it. But with out certain specific aspects (some of which I've noted above) it is not much more than an exemplary game and doesn't quite reach "simulation" level.

For this reason, before more planes, before better visuals, I would like to see those aspects that pertain to simulation updated or added.

Thank you for you time,

BM357_TinMan
xo BM357 VFG
www.bm357.com (http://www.bm357.com)

BM357_TinMan
04-15-2004, 07:50 AM
S~ all,

In response to the simply breath taking pictures of a FPS game posted on this board in another thread, I have this bit of $.02 to add. I posted it on my own thread as to not sound like I was dogging on another guys thread. That is NOT my intention.

I, as much as anybody, would simply LOVE to see this type of realistic, visual representation of the world in a flight/combat flight sim. However, before that kind of visual accuracy can be produced in a flight simulator, we need CPU's that run at least 64bit and probably 8 to 10 times that calculating power that they now have. Not to mention the type of memory and the FSB bandwidth along with the monster GPU neccessary.

What IS attainable at this time, and what I would LOVE to have implemented into the next edition of 1C Maddox's great games, are things that would have more to do with SIMULATION...

For example:
1. The ability to switch fuel tanks
2. Magnetic declination
3. Gyroscopic drift
4. Progressive, realistic, dynamic weather (including, and certainly not limited to, barometric pressure that forces the adjustment of the altimeter, realistic turbulence, etc.)
5. Realistic Map with bases/airfields that are historically accurate and accurately represented. (i.e. Lieston, England; Avveville, France, etc.)
6. Separate brake axis' for left and right brakes
7. Flaps that have realistic degrees of extensions in each plane
8. Cowl flaps on an axis
9. Mixture that actually HAS to be leaned/enriched

There are more, but this is a representation of what I would like to see. This is a great game and I applaud 1C Maddox for their work and their devotion that keeps them updating it. But with out certain specific aspects (some of which I've noted above) it is not much more than an exemplary game and doesn't quite reach "simulation" level.

For this reason, before more planes, before better visuals, I would like to see those aspects that pertain to simulation updated or added.

Thank you for you time,

BM357_TinMan
xo BM357 VFG
www.bm357.com (http://www.bm357.com)

JG14_Josf
04-15-2004, 12:35 PM
Can I jump in here to bump this up another .02$?


While flying co-pilot in my Brothers Cesna 150/150 he demonstrated how much drag and therefore loss in speed is associated with uncoordinated flight.
He said "The plane is like an arrow" or something to that effect. My best efforts to control yaw (I tended to over control) resulted in approx. 30 knots less IAS.


If it is not already modeled accurately (WWII fighter planes are not Cesna's) then wouldn't it be better to model the drag effects of uncoordinated flight accurately?

Including accurate drag associated with yaw and trim.

I know that some player may not want a penalty for flying sideways since it is difficult to maintain coordinated flight without a seat of the pants feedback capability, but couldn't there be a wind noise helper similar to the noises now used in the sim to indicate stalls?
Perhaps a higher frequency wind noise and or higher frequency vibration similar but different compared to the pre stall vibration simulation?

The game to me is more than shooting, it is also piloting.

P factor and torque reaction is also on my list.

Thanks for the opportunity to express my .02 cents.

P.S. I second the original posters concerns.

CyC_AnD
04-16-2004, 03:15 AM
I like that thread http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.
We need to answer the question:
Do you want realistic sim with good graphic, or do you want beautiful sim with exelent breath taking graphic and medium fligh models?
I want the firs one! So here are my few points http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

-more head movements in rolling and pulling G in gunsight view (like this in nongunsight view, shift+f1). It would add a little more smoothness in flying not jerky-putt-all-direction-at-one-time-manouvers http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.

-weather, bigger clouds, wind that has a matter, wind in good conditions of visibility.

-advance equipment in planes that works (two elemental cowling in bf109, which pilot could switch during fighting, what gives to him few min. of cooler engine, unfreezing instalation in planes-to glass and wings, that guns jamm in different conditions-like freez, shooting in Gforce[mk108 f.e.] and in some planes you could unjammed it, good working mixtures, prop. pitch, uses of economical speed for saving fuel and engine, p11c main tank drop in case of fire and more...)

-icing in high altitudes (or even in storm clouds...)

-bigger airfileds (not 3 strips one way)

-rudder that you need to use (like in old il2 times and not like in FB)

One major thing is that I want few planes, but they should differ between them selfes not only max speed and turn ability... I want plane which only to start you need some procedure (start engine, idle for some temp., give flaps, slowly go to full throtlle, gently pull out stick, speed up to starting speed, and gently pull off, hide gear, hide flaps) We dont have this in FB, you can just turn engine go 100% and at 220km/h pull off whitout even flaps... Me and my friends have few ideas and will try to sold them to Oleg's team, will see what happens.

CyC is my new home!

csThor
04-16-2004, 03:21 AM
What I am hoping for is a more correct representation of historical facts - unit specific skins already within the game, correct markings, correct commanders/aces, correct locations.

And I also hope that we get "real" airfields - meaning we get large flat fields and no landing strips as in FB.

______________________________

<A HREF="http://www.il2skins.com/?action=list&authoridfilter=csThor" TARGET=_blank>
http://home.arcor.de/csthor/bilder/ubi_sig.jpg </A>

csThor's skins @ Il2skins.com

BM357_TinMan
04-16-2004, 05:11 AM
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Looks like we are on the same page

This makes me happy to know that there are those out there that share my desire for a more "sim" experience.

S~

BM357_TinMan
xo BM357 VFG
www.bm357.com (http://www.bm357.com)

JG5_JaRa
04-16-2004, 05:36 AM
I agree 100%.
Good flight dynamics and realistic details make a simulation. Only eye candy with not much behind gets boring pretty quick and making effectful graphics is not a big deal nowadays anyway. We got too many eye candy air quake games already and way too few simulations http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif
Personally, I'd perfer a good flight model with as many effects as possible and especially a harmonized force balance. And a good complex engine managament, the current one in FB/AEP is pretty much the same as the "non-complex" one.

E_Temperament
04-16-2004, 06:33 AM
I think this is what Oleg has in mind for BOB, at least he has the knowledge to work all these elements out based on the hardware that is currently available.

paradoxbox
04-16-2004, 03:01 PM
Most general aviation simulators have all these features and more, and many of them have add ons that can allow gunfire, etc.. So I certainly hope Oleg is concentrating on the "simulation" aspect of BoB and not necessarily on other things like flight models and gunnery.

It will also help the simulations in the long run that use BoB as base code.

BodyBag33
04-17-2004, 07:01 AM
What I hope for is more atmosphere.

The weakness in both IL-2 & FB is that you don't feel you are part of a squadron of pilots, involved in some of the biggest air-battles in history.

I want more info and personal interaction with the other pilots at your base and with the outside world, so you really get the impression that this is Britain/France 1940.
You should be really upset by losing a wingman over the channel, and be concerned about the new green replacement-pilots.

Those people that think that the "Magnetic declination" etc is important, why don't they just fly FS 2004 and forget about BoB?

The flight models are way more realistic than most people really can and do appreciate, so the focus should be on breathing some life & immersion in to this sim.