PDA

View Full Version : The Modern Sturmovik doing its thing.....



XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 07:22 PM
Check out this video from Lock On...Its worth the download.

ftp://ftp.ubisoft.de/lockon/lockon_movie20.zip

(9mb approx)


http://lockon.ubisoft.de/ss5/sshot74.jpg


http://lockon.ubisoft.de/ss5/sshot75.jpg



Nate



Message Edited on 06/26/0307:24PM by Nate--IRL--

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 07:22 PM
Check out this video from Lock On...Its worth the download.

ftp://ftp.ubisoft.de/lockon/lockon_movie20.zip

(9mb approx)


http://lockon.ubisoft.de/ss5/sshot74.jpg


http://lockon.ubisoft.de/ss5/sshot75.jpg



Nate



Message Edited on 06/26/0307:24PM by Nate--IRL--

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 07:31 PM
cool vid, the planes polys look very low early 1990's style and the textures are horrid and the fps seem a bit shady, the thing that makes the vid look good is the external view shake, and the ground looks like il2 with out the horable tree groups that are transparent from the sides i like what they did making the ground texture darker and adding in individual trees looks so much better.

http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4jz7i/ls.gif

Good dogfighters bring ammo home, Great ones don't. (c) Leadspitter

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 07:42 PM
LeadSpitter_ wrote:
- cool vid, the planes polys look very low early
- 1990's style and the textures are horrid and the
- fps seem a bit shady, the thing that makes the vid
- look good is the external view shake, and the ground
- looks like il2 with out the horable tree groups that
- are transparent from the sides i like what they did
- making the ground texture darker and adding in
- individual trees looks so much better.


What in God's name are you talking about? It looks amazing.

http://members.shaw.ca/cuski4678/sig.jpg

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 07:44 PM
"What in God's name are you talking about? It looks amazing. "


Probably he doesn't know what he is talking about.

The 3d modeling of the aircrafts is simply beautiful (last screenshots of the MiG-25 were amazing).

The landscapes are extremely realistic (much more realistic than in a real Hornet sim, I can say it).

And the clouds overcast is simply top!

Cheers,

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 07:47 PM
I CAN'T TAKE THIS ANY LONGER



The Sun is Gone
But I Have a Light

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 07:55 PM
I love the tree groups in Il-2. That was the one feature that stood out to me.

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 07:56 PM
Dayak wrote:
- I CAN'T TAKE THIS ANY LONGER


Take your time, save some money... you'll need it.

According to the authors from www.checksix-fr.com (http://www.checksix-fr.com) with a PIV @ 3.2ghz + 512MB RAM + radeon 9700pro 128MB, the test mission they did ran at 23 fps on a 1024x768 resolution, all detail at max.

Yikes.

http://members.shaw.ca/cuski4678/sig.jpg

Message Edited on 06/26/0311:57AM by cuski

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 08:01 PM
That is NOT a modern Sturmovik. The Il-2 was a tankbuster, the Frog is a CAS plane. THIS is the modern Sturmovik http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

<img src= "http://www.lo-mac.com/ss/A-10_Attack_new.jpg" >

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 08:05 PM
The max setting in LOMAC will most likely kill most machines FPS just like perfect settings in FB do on my rig (Ti4400 128, AMD XP2000, 1gig DDR2100 RAM). I myself think the water effects are cool but I turn it to High Quality since it still looks pretty damned sweet with high FPS.

I'm getting LOMAC no doubt, even though I know Max setting won't be practical for me (yet /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif ) just hope I get my replacement potentiometer for my Cougar throttle by then (using my old X36 for the time being).

Must...resist urge to spend money on computer upgrades...must resist...must use it to fix car...must resist...

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Roy Baty
III/7/JG2

"Be happy in your work!"
- Col. Saito

<center>http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/images/mash_henry_blake.jpg (http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/)</center>

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 08:08 PM
roybaty wrote:
- The max setting in LOMAC will most likely kill most
- machines FPS just like perfect settings in FB do on
- my rig (Ti4400 128, AMD XP2000, 1gig DDR2100 RAM). I
- myself think the water effects are cool but I turn
- it to High Quality since it still looks pretty
- damned sweet with high FPS.

Interesting... I have a 2GHz P4, 768Mb RDRAM, Ti4600 128MB and FB runs perfect on my machine with Perfect turned on. And not to mention I have AA turned on.

http://members.shaw.ca/cuski4678/sig.jpg

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 08:15 PM
I don't want to sound too dated, but does anyone remember SU-25 Stormovik? Now that was a fun game. Check it out here. http://www.the-underdogs.org/game.php?id=1082

I still have my copy laying around me room here somewhere, maybe I'll dig it out and fire up the 486 and do some tank busting.

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 08:35 PM
keep in mind XP2000 is actually running at only 1.3 Ghz. and by kill I mean it brings my FPS down to 24fps at 1152x864 whereas at high settings I get 60+ fps depending on how many object are in view.

I am tempted to just get a new CPU instead of risking overclocking my current one (don't have the cash to blow on a liquid cooling kit http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif)

cuski wrote:
-
- roybaty wrote:
-- The max setting in LOMAC will most likely kill most
-- machines FPS just like perfect settings in FB do on
-- my rig (Ti4400 128, AMD XP2000, 1gig DDR2100 RAM). I
-- myself think the water effects are cool but I turn
-- it to High Quality since it still looks pretty
-- damned sweet with high FPS.
-
- Interesting... I have a 2GHz P4, 768Mb RDRAM, Ti4600
- 128MB and FB runs perfect on my machine with Perfect
- turned on. And not to mention I have AA turned on.
-
http://members.shaw.ca/cuski4678/sig.jpg
-



Roy Baty
III/7/JG2

"Be happy in your work!"
- Col. Saito

<center>http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/images/mash_henry_blake.jpg (http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/)</center>

Message Edited on 06/26/0303:40PM by roybaty

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 08:43 PM
XP2000 should run at 1666Mhz.

--NJG26_Killa--

http://lbhskier37.freeservers.com/FW190.jpg .

"Ich bin ein Wuergerwhiner"

"We could do with some of those razor blades, Herr Reichsmarshall."
When Erwin Rommel that British fighter-bombers had shot up my tanks with 40mm shells, the Hermann G├┬Âring who felt himself touched by this, said: "That's completely impossible. The Americans only know how to make razor blades." and the above was Rommels reply.

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 08:44 PM
Xp2000 is 1.67ghz if I remeber correctly. My friggin' Xp1700 is 1.5ghz, 1.47ghz to be exact /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 09:08 PM
Sumthun must be up with my Bios settings, the last time I looked it showed it running at 1.3 /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif . I dunno why I didn't register the problem. I must be working to hard, getting my priorities screwed up, forgetting important stuff /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif .

Well, 1.5 hours to go before my tinkerin begins


Dylan_D wrote:
- Xp2000 is 1.67ghz if I remeber correctly. My
- friggin' Xp1700 is 1.5ghz, 1.47ghz to be exact /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
-
-


Dylan_D wrote:
- Xp2000 is 1.67ghz if I remeber correctly. My
- friggin' Xp1700 is 1.5ghz, 1.47ghz to be exact /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
-
-



Roy Baty
III/7/JG2

"Be happy in your work!"
- Col. Saito

<center>http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/images/mash_henry_blake.jpg (http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/)</center>

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 09:47 PM
It must be running 100 FSB instead of 133, that would cause that, check it out there should be an option for FSB 133
Probably in the last tab of the BIOS

--NJG26_Killa--

http://lbhskier37.freeservers.com/FW190.jpg .

"Ich bin ein Wuergerwhiner"

"We could do with some of those razor blades, Herr Reichsmarshall."
When Erwin Rommel that British fighter-bombers had shot up my tanks with 40mm shells, the Hermann G├┬Âring who felt himself touched by this, said: "That's completely impossible. The Americans only know how to make razor blades." and the above was Rommels reply.

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 09:57 PM
Yeah, Had some recent "issues" had to flash the bios and reinstall the system, musta forgot to set the options.

Roy Baty
III/7/JG2

"Be happy in your work!"
- Col. Saito

<center>http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/images/mash_henry_blake.jpg (http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/)</center>

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 10:15 PM
What were the yellow "bullets" being fired at the SU25? Were those the 20 mm gatlings?

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 10:24 PM
the cluster bombs look a lot like the news reels you always see from the gulf war or something, well, except from the side. if you guys haven't been following the screenies and vids you gotta check em out. one of the things that seems small to me but adds a lot to the graphics is the self shadowing. really adds a lot to the realism, yet it does it very subtly. unfortunately i won't be able to run lomac very well. i'm gonna go cry in the corner about my crappy pc now

XyZspineZyX
06-27-2003, 12:52 AM
I guess since we are talking about LOMAC it would only be reasonable to ask here:

Is LOMAC going to aim for a level of realism similar to IL2:FB when it come to the flight model and damage?

XyZspineZyX
06-27-2003, 01:40 AM
Just so you guys know, there was a bit of a mix up over on SimHQ.

They were benchmarking the 3.2 and used an ALPHA build of LOMAC as one of the benchmarks... I'd take the fps listed on Check6 with a grain of salt... They probably used the same copy, if not just the same numbers.

XyZspineZyX
06-27-2003, 01:59 AM
Wow so it is a Sturmovik.Kool I didnt know that.I thoughtit was called Frogfoot but this is a nickname given to it by NATO.

"Su-25 Stormovik (or Sturmovik in correct Russian spelling) is one sim that tries to simulate a little known attack fighter, the Su-25 in a uniquely Russian perspective during the troublesome early '90's era. The Su-25 (NATO callsign Frogfoot) is the closest Russian equivalent to the American tank busting A-10 Thunderbolt II. It is also interesting that its shape closely resembles the YA-9, the losing competitor to the YA-10 (eventually developing into the A-10) in the USAF competition for a new attack aircraft. Thickly clad in armour and fearsomely armed, this aircraft has proved its mettle in many combat theaters, most recently in Chechnya.""

My oh my how we have got it good these days/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
A modern day and a vintage Sturmovik sim in the same decade.LOL

XyZspineZyX
06-27-2003, 02:38 AM
KDiggity8 wrote:
- They were benchmarking the 3.2 and used an ALPHA
- build of LOMAC as one of the benchmarks... I'd take
- the fps listed on Check6 with a grain of salt...
- They probably used the same copy, if not just the
- same numbers.


That is true... they do have a disclaimer at check6 saying that is indeed an alpha version and most likely things will not be the same in the release... but that could go both ways IMO /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://members.shaw.ca/cuski4678/sig.jpg

XyZspineZyX
06-27-2003, 02:44 AM
Dont forgat this is a build with unoptimised and also debug code in it, as such it is not really representitive of the final product.

Yoou really cant judge it until the code is optimised and finalised with the debug code removed.


Nate


cuski wrote:
-
- KDiggity8 wrote:
-- They were benchmarking the 3.2 and used an ALPHA
-- build of LOMAC as one of the benchmarks... I'd take
-- the fps listed on Check6 with a grain of salt...
-- They probably used the same copy, if not just the
-- same numbers.
-
-
- That is true... they do have a disclaimer at check6
- saying that is indeed an alpha version and most
- likely things will not be the same in the release...
- but that could go both ways IMO /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
-
http://members.shaw.ca/cuski4678/sig.jpg

XyZspineZyX
06-27-2003, 07:50 AM
Nate--IRL-- wrote:
- Dont forgat this is a build with unoptimised and
- also debug code in it, as such it is not really
- representitive of the final product.
-
- Yoou really cant judge it until the code is
- optimised and finalised with the debug code removed.
-
-
- Nate
-

My point exactly! 23 fps with a 3.2... I think that lomac will get totally optimized before release! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

XyZspineZyX
06-27-2003, 07:57 AM
AFAIK alpha's and often beta's as well are bogged down by debug code that is stripped before final release

XyZspineZyX
06-27-2003, 08:01 AM
i think LOMAC will be on par with il2/fb if not better on graphic terms, i dunno about the FM though



The Sun is Gone
But I Have a Light

XyZspineZyX
06-27-2003, 10:23 AM
Lomac will be scaleable like Flanker2 was before it.

Tully__
06-27-2003, 10:29 AM
TAW_Jenikov wrote:
- What were the yellow "bullets" being fired at the
- SU25? Were those the 20 mm gatlings?
-
-

I suspect they're weren't fired at, but rather dropped from. They look like incendaries dropped to "distract" IR SAMs, a fairly standard infra-red counter measure in jets.

<center> ================================================== ========================= </center>

<center> <img src=http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/Corsair.jpg> </center>

<center> The "under performing planes" thread (http://www.simhq.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=35;t=007540) /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </center>
<center> Forum Terms of Use (http://www.ubi.com/US/Info/TermsOfUse.htm) </center>


Salut
Tully