PDA

View Full Version : pby cat? (Interesting PF and BOB info inside from O.M.)



fordfan25
02-12-2005, 10:03 PM
does anyone know if gib's PBY is going to be in the upcomeing patch/add-on?



sorry fordfan25, just edited title so people wouldn`t miss on Olegs post regarding BOB and PF.
crazyivan.

heywooood
02-12-2005, 10:08 PM
...maybe its just me, fordfan...but doesn't it seem like all the "are we getting this or that" threads all end up in a big circlej*rk in very short order?...no one really knows, do they?

And if they do, they cant say because of contracts etc....

Maybe we should just think about baseball whilst we wait for her (meaning PBY ofcourse) to come. After all, spring training begins next week.

EnGaurde
02-12-2005, 10:52 PM
heywoooooooooooooooood you hit the nail on the head.

yes, those threads do fall victim to those that clearly lost their first born due to the Betty not being modelled or coming or whichever.

aah its refreshing to see someone else hates the bs resulting from plane inclusion.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

heywooood
02-12-2005, 11:12 PM
not only that - but it now seems our hosts have gotten the last laugh by including in their 'dev update' the ultimate chain yanking "may or may not be included" disclaimer in the text...so what we got was a placebo suppository of rather large caliber....ouch.

The message we end up with is a kindof a 'pipedown back there or we'll smack ya' from Pops in the front seat as a reminder of whos' driving this rig and who better stop hollerin' "are we there yet?!" from the back seat.

3.JG51_BigBear
02-12-2005, 11:23 PM
I agree that everything has been taking the same turn around here lately but this isn't a bad question. Gib has made some of the best models we have in the game and it would be a shame if the pby doesn't get included. I bet it will make it eventually, although PF seems to be winding down, it did seem like there was room for some small scale development in the future.

fordfan25
02-12-2005, 11:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by heywooood:
...maybe its just me, fordfan...but doesn't it seem like all the "are we getting this or that" threads all end up in a big circlej*rk in very short order?...no one really knows, do they?

And if they do, they cant say because of contracts etc....

Maybe we should just think about baseball whilst we wait for her (meaning PBY ofcourse) to come. After all, spring training begins next week. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

well maby. just thought id ask seeing as i have not seen any one sles ask about it. we know its being made i just havent heard anything for along time now. of course we all know its going to be porked http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif.

haywooood wish i could get into baseball. of all the sports its the only one iv been able to watch at least half a game of lol. pretty much all sports these days are .... well more advertisment for things i cant afford anyway lol. i think i was born about 20 years to late.

fordfan25
02-12-2005, 11:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by heywooood:
not only that - but it now seems our hosts have gotten the last laugh by including in their 'dev update' the ultimate chain yanking "may or may not be included" disclaimer in the text...so what we got was a placebo suppository of rather large caliber....ouch.

The message we end up with is a kindof a 'pipedown back there or we'll smack ya' from Pops in the front seat as a reminder of whos' driving this rig and who better stop hollerin' "are we there yet?!" from the back seat. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

thats what happens when one company gets a monoply on something. or as close to as fb+AEP+PF is in the flight sim world. the consumer gets less important.

o and dont get me wrong im not asking because im being impatient for the new patch or anything. just woundering if there had been anything said about the cat that i missed.

Acidcrash_112th
02-13-2005, 05:56 AM
if im not mistaken, the PBY is ingame already, granted AI only, but im pretty sure it is there

3.JG51_BigBear
02-13-2005, 07:39 AM
Yes there is one in game but I believe Gibbage made a different external model and was working on an unbelievably expanisve internal model that was looking awesome.

badaboom.1
02-13-2005, 08:10 AM
fordfan you should really think about studying & enjoying the game of baseball,your female counterparts will LOVE http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gifYOU for it!!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif As SAMMY SOSA says"BAAZZBALL BEEN BERRY,BERRY GOOD TO MEA!!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

DuxCorvan
02-13-2005, 08:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Acidcrash_112th:
if im not mistaken, the PBY is ingame already, granted AI only, but im pretty sure it is there <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's not a true PBY, but a license-built export version that was rather rare and mostly used by URSS and other countries. If you look carefully you'll notice it's a pure hydro. US PBYs were amphibian, this is, they had retractable wheels, apart from other differences -gunner stations, etc.

Although you can use it in PF, that Russian version was not the common PBY used by USN.

heywooood
02-13-2005, 11:51 AM
no worries fordfan...I was up too late last night, posting unfunny postings instead of sleeping.

Flyable PBY was in the works but where is Gib?...the last few times he was in here he was...disgruntled.

1c will be hustling to get BoB done in time for contractual obligations...so maybe we get alot of stuff in 1 or 2 more patches, but whatever we dont get we might not ever get.

just my latest personal oppinion and it is subject to change...

For the record - I am happy with my PF expansion.

3.JG51_BigBear
02-13-2005, 10:04 PM
Looks like the cat is changing venues:
http://www.netwings.org/dcforum/DCForumID43/1326.html

shieldsyy
02-13-2005, 10:45 PM
That's a real shame.

fordfan25
02-14-2005, 12:58 AM
ok that does it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif. any one here can feel free to tell me how im not owed any thing or how i sould be happy with what we already have blah blah blah i dont care http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif . this is IMO complete bull$it of the highist caliber http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif . this is tottaly digusting to me. no -4 or p47 N. hay no prob i understand outside presure with plane companys wanting money, yea ok what ever http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif. no flyble carrier torp planes *grits teeth and bears it* fine i understand http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif .No US or JP BBs or a yorktown class carrier i accept http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif but takeing away my pby just plain hurts http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif. i have been waiting for that baby way before the game hit the shelves and now its gone http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif .i was looking forward to flying that sucker more than the corsair if you can beleave it. no more for me to look forward to i gusse sept for more german, JP and prob more russian planes http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif . o well. frig it and frig it hard. ........never mind just a little ticked right now......... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif no those are not tears just got something in my eye http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif.

its wrong just plain and simply wrong. dont bother telling me to stop whining or that so in so was not so and so because of so in so. i dont care its wrong. now if youll ecusse me im going to watch MIDWAY and see what the PTO was realy like. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

by the way the KI-100 B-534 and B6n2 on the dev update look great. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Popey109
02-14-2005, 01:07 AM
A lot people donated to Gibb to get that plan in. now it€s all fck up! PF the game that wasn€t€¦should have went too the Med http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

FF_Trozaka
02-14-2005, 08:51 AM
very sad, thats a beautiful model Gibbage, i would have loved to fly it.

3.JG51_BigBear
02-14-2005, 03:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by fordfan25:
ok that does it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif. any one here can feel free to tell me how im not owed any thing or how i sould be happy with what we already have blah blah blah i dont care http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif . this is IMO complete bull$it of the highist caliber http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif . this is tottaly digusting to me. no -4 or p47 N. hay no prob i understand outside presure with plane companys wanting money, yea ok what ever http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif. no flyble carrier torp planes *grits teeth and bears it* fine i understand http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif .No US or JP BBs or a yorktown class carrier i accept http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif but takeing away my pby just plain hurts http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif. i have been waiting for that baby way before the game hit the shelves and now its gone http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif .i was looking forward to flying that sucker more than the corsair if you can beleave it. no more for me to look forward to i gusse sept for more german, JP and prob more russian planes http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif . o well. frig it and frig it hard. ........never mind just a little ticked right now......... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif no those are not tears just got something in my eye http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif.

its wrong just plain and simply wrong. dont bother telling me to stop whining or that so in so was not so and so because of so in so. i dont care its wrong. now if youll ecusse me im going to watch MIDWAY and see what the PTO was realy like. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

by the way the KI-100 B-534 and B6n2 on the dev update look great. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Here here. This is another in a series of dissapointments that has come with PF. I'm not saying that the only reason I bought PF was because I wanted the PBY, or the Beety for that matter, but I was sort of excited to see it included. Over the past year or so Gib and others have posted some really interesting info about the PBY and what it did in the war. I'm not going to storm off and cry that I'll never buy il2 games again but this certainly does suck.

Extreme_One
02-14-2005, 04:30 PM
There are always two sides to every story...

So far we've heard less than half a stroy from one side. Yet judgement has already been cast. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

WTE_Gog
02-14-2005, 04:43 PM
Well feel free to let us all in on the other half?

3.JG51_BigBear
02-14-2005, 05:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Extreme_One:
There are always two sides to every story...

So far we've heard less than half a stroy from one side. Yet judgement has already been cast. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nothing I said wasn't true. I'm not even complaining that hard. All I'm saying is a lot of things got said and we ended up with only a fraction of what I know a lot of us thought we'd be getting given the support this game has had in the past, which was excellent http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif. I'm not saying that I'm going to stop buying anything or I want my money back or any other crazyness, over the last week I've said multiple times that I am really excited about getting BOB in the future and that should be great http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif. I've also said that in my opinion PF should have been scratched and that yes the cancellation of the PBY does suck. I'm not blaming anyone, I definitely feel I've gotten my money's worth, I was expecting just a little bit more given my experience over the last four years but if this is where it ends that's fine with me.

fordfan25
02-14-2005, 09:13 PM
i dont care what the sides are my self. this is not a hostle post. as 3.JG51_BigBear said im not asking for my money back. just that every day seems like the US flyers get kicked in the nuts lol. and yes i was expecting this game to get the kinda stuff that FB got. at least thay are patching problems and stuff.

LEXX_Luthor
02-15-2005, 12:08 AM
fordfan:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>every day seems like the US flyers get kicked in the nuts <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Nuts!

I'd say with only 2 early WAR planes the Italian flyers get kicked in the nuts the hardest, even if early WAR is the best.

Still missing Pe~2 too http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif a far more Famous combat plane than PBY (in Russia at least not in Ussia)

Gibbage1
02-15-2005, 12:39 AM
Yes. The flyable PBY 5a for IL2/PF is dead. Sad day when a Pacific game does not even have a PBY. The PBY made the Pacific and I dare say it was one of the most critical aircraft in the Pacific. What happened? Many things.

The main thing that happened was that it was just too big of a project for one man. Even me. I would say it was 10X more work then ANY single engine aircraft just because of not only how many positions I had to model, but just how COMPLEX the interior is. You cant truly get a grasp of this from a photo. The only show you 1/10th the story. The pilots sat far above the floor on what can only be described as a "catwalk" and there is enough room for another seat BELOW him. Then you have the extremly complex blister turrete's, a cramped bombadeer section and the hanus eyeball turrete. Not a simple area in the aircraft to be found! I was doing it all alone. I recently started recruiting for help, but I got the word from Oleg to stop.

The Catalina would not have been finished any time soon and Oleg was already greatly backlogged with 3rd party aircraft. Also the Catalina is rather unique, and would of needed a LOT of programming. It is simply not going to happen guys.

I know a lot of people donated. Thats why I am not stopping work on her, but transfering it into FS2002/2004 and will give it for free to anyone who did donate. I am also offering anyone who donated a refund if they so wish. They can PM me with details like there E-mail addy that they used in PayPal and ammount.

Sorry this happened. There are many factors at play, and none of them favorable to the PBY project. But look at it this way. 4000 poly limit of IL2/PF would NOT be able to do the PBY justice. In FS2004 I can build her up to 30,000 polygons with room to grow! She will be very detailed and lovingly modeled, be sure!!! Once I start the FS2004 model, I will be sure to keep people updated on its progress.

Again, sorry. I tried my best. But she was just too much for me to handle.

Gib

Hairball_1
02-15-2005, 01:11 AM
Bless your heart, anyway, Gibbage! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

LEXX_Luthor
02-15-2005, 07:45 AM
Thanks Gibb.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>The Catalina would not have been finished any time soon and Oleg was already greatly backlogged with 3rd party aircraft. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
That is some good news however. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

ucanfly
02-15-2005, 08:05 AM
Too bad about the cat although I think I agree that a PBY may be appropriate to a flight sim that can allow it the full polys it deserves. Just save the work Gib in case you can use it for BOB.

USsia - Good one Lex. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

fordfan25
02-15-2005, 02:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
fordfan:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>every day seems like the US flyers get kicked in the nuts <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Nuts__!__

I'd say with only 2 early WAR planes the Italian flyers get kicked in the nuts the hardest, even if early WAR is the best.

Still missing Pe~2 too http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif a far more Famous combat plane than PBY (in Russia at least not in Ussia) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

yea your right the italian's played such a massive roll. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif and i dont want to hear any thing about the poor russians. thay have there top line late war fighters. besides im not talking about FB im talking about the new game PF. just came out and already its being cut off yet there still bring out stuff for fb.

fordfan25
02-15-2005, 02:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gibbage1:
Yes. The flyable PBY 5a for IL2/PF is dead. Sad day when a Pacific game does not even have a PBY. The PBY made the Pacific and I dare say it was one of the most critical aircraft in the Pacific. What happened? Many things.

The main thing that happened was that it was just too big of a project for one man. Even me. I would say it was 10X more work then ANY single engine aircraft just because of not only how many positions I had to model, but just how COMPLEX the interior is. You cant truly get a grasp of this from a photo. The only show you 1/10th the story. The pilots sat far above the floor on what can only be described as a "catwalk" and there is enough room for another seat BELOW him. Then you have the extremly complex blister turrete's, a cramped bombadeer section and the hanus eyeball turrete. Not a simple area in the aircraft to be found! I was doing it all alone. I recently started recruiting for help, but I got the word from Oleg to stop.

The Catalina would not have been finished any time soon and Oleg was already greatly backlogged with 3rd party aircraft. Also the Catalina is rather unique, and would of needed a LOT of programming. It is simply not going to happen guys.

I know a lot of people donated. Thats why I am not stopping work on her, but transfering it into FS2002/2004 and will give it for free to anyone who did donate. I am also offering anyone who donated a refund if they so wish. They can PM me with details like there E-mail addy that they used in PayPal and ammount.

Sorry this happened. There are many factors at play, and none of them favorable to the PBY project. But look at it this way. 4000 poly limit of IL2/PF would NOT be able to do the PBY justice. In FS2004 I can build her up to 30,000 polygons with room to grow! She will be very detailed and lovingly modeled, be sure!!! Once I start the FS2004 model, I will be sure to keep people updated on its progress.

Again, sorry. I tried my best. But she was just too much for me to handle.

Gib <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

no prob Gib i gusse things just happen. i was very much looking forward to her but o well. sorry for my rants but it was not just the killn of the cat but all the bs thats been going on as of late.

Ps Gib. I hope maby youll take interst in the upcomeing SH3.

Gibbage1
02-15-2005, 03:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by fordfan25:
Ps Gib. I hope maby youll take interst in the upcomeing SH3. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

SH3? You mean Silent Hunter 3? Thats a boat sim, not a flight sim http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif I have no real interest in it, and I dont even know if there is a 3rd party modeling group for it.

p1ngu666
02-15-2005, 03:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by fordfan25:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
fordfan:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>every day seems like the US flyers get kicked in the nuts <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Nuts__!__

I'd say with only 2 early WAR planes the Italian flyers get kicked in the nuts the hardest, even if early WAR is the best.

Still missing Pe~2 too http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif a far more Famous combat plane than PBY (in Russia at least not in Ussia) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

yea your right the italian's played such a massive roll. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif and i dont want to hear any thing about the poor russians. thay have there top line late war fighters. besides im not talking about FB im talking about the new game PF. just came out and already its being cut off yet there still bring out stuff for fb. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif italians played a larger roll than what ppl actully think http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

well, my dad has fs2004, and i donated, so hes sorted. just a shame to fly warbirds in fs2004, cant do the war part. could do pilot rescue and recon (also very important)

R_Mutt
02-15-2005, 03:55 PM
Praise Gibbage, he's just another victim of the evil Dr. Maddox (cut to Oleg stroking white cat).

Gibb, quit the oppressed modelor bit before I vomit.

fordfan25
02-15-2005, 06:23 PM
stop the oleg A$$ kissn before i vomit http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

Gibbage1
02-15-2005, 06:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by R_Mutt:
Praise Gibbage, he's just another victim of the evil Dr. Maddox (cut to Oleg stroking white cat).

Gibb, quit the oppressed modelor bit before I vomit. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Did I ever blame Oleg? Read everything I posted. I take full responsability and said that the project was simply to big for me. Next time you post, read before you look like more of a moron, K?

clayman_52
02-15-2005, 07:14 PM
Boy Gibbage ... great thread, well spoken. The Catalina project is a truly brilliant and impressive piece of work on your part. I'm really happy it will see fruition in FS9.
Man, the work you showed at the studios last LAN party was stunning ... but your devotion was what impressed me. I've looked forward to flying her ever since.

Thanks for all the long hours ... maybe see you at Chino.

clayman

R_Mutt
02-15-2005, 09:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gibbage1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by R_Mutt:
Praise Gibbage, he's just another victim of the evil Dr. Maddox (cut to Oleg stroking white cat).

Gibb, quit the oppressed modelor bit before I vomit. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Did I ever blame Oleg? Read everything I posted. I take full responsability and said that the project was simply to big for me. Next time you post, read before you look like more of a moron, K? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Unfortunately I read more of your posts than I need, however it comes it handy in times like this.

Posted by Gibbage on the CWoS forum:
CWoS - PBY Catalina news (http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=41768)
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Also the PBY was unique compaired to other aircraft in the fact that it was anphibious. I doubt Oleg had programmed that into IL2 since there was no aircraft that could use it. So that could bring up a LOT of issues like rolling up onto a beach. Or even simply lowering the landing gear when in water. Also the PBY had depth bombs. Again, something thats not yet programmed into IL2. It would be a LOT of work for the 1C team on the programming side. I think thats why Oleg canned it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmm...so Oleg canceled your project because of limitations built into his code/programming. Yeah what am I sayin, you're not blaming Oleg at all.

Let me get this straight you didn't finish the PBY because you knew more about 1C's programming abilities and forsaw that the plane would never be flyable because of those lack of abilities?!? just brilliant.

or how bout this one from the same thread.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Just to let you know, the PBY Catalina for IL2/PF was canned by Oleg. Simply not enough time to implament it and he is already greatly backlogged with other aircraft - Gibbage <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That must be another post of you not placing the blame on Oleg.

But I'm just a moron who can't read so what do I know.

Popey109
02-15-2005, 10:34 PM
I€m not too happy! Not that anyone gives a sh*t. thing is Gibb, you came too us and offered this plan!...and many people supported you too get it. I do appreciate all you and Oleg have done but since PF it seems like a lot of smoke up the ars! from not enough room on the CD http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif too letting someone tie up a whole sh*t load of planes who didn€t know what they where doing€¦ http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif...I am a fan!!! But some of this just don€t wash!!!...like a said who gives a sh*t€¦ http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Gibbage1
02-15-2005, 10:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by R_Mutt:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Also the PBY was unique compaired to other aircraft in the fact that it was anphibious. I doubt Oleg had programmed that into IL2 since there was no aircraft that could use it. So that could bring up a LOT of issues like rolling up onto a beach. Or even simply lowering the landing gear when in water. Also the PBY had depth bombs. Again, something thats not yet programmed into IL2. It would be a LOT of work for the 1C team on the programming side. I think thats why Oleg canned it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is true. I have the E-mail from Oleg to prove it. But the reason Oleg canned it is because #1, he is backlogged with other aircraft. Not his fault. #2, would require a lot of programming. Not his fault. #3, is late. Not his fault. So again. How do I blame Oleg when the circumstances are NOT HIS FAULT.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Hmm...so Oleg canceled your project because of limitations built into his code/programming. Yeah what am I sayin, you're not blaming Oleg at all.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes. Not his fault. My fault for not getting it done in time. How many times have I said this? I said it on Netwings, on CWOS and here. My not getting it done in time caused Oleg to cancle it before I waisted any more time on it. That was a curtisy to me. One I am glad he gave me so I could make preperations.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Let me get this straight you didn't finish the PBY because you knew more about 1C's programming abilities and forsaw that the plane would never be flyable because of those lack of abilities?!? just brilliant.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again, your reading things that simply are not there. I did not finish the PBY because Oleg asked me to stop. I gave you his reasons above. Please READ. I have been in the game industry for YEARS. I know programmers, and a little programming myself. I have worked with games and there engines. I have spoken to Oleg many times about difficulty's of implamenting aircraft. Oleg said himself on this forum that he never ment to have IL2's engine expand this big and never thought of implamenting things like MULTI ENGINE CONTROLE and HIGH ALTITUDE PERFORMANCE and COUNTER ROTATING PROPS. I think its very save to say that I know more about the IL2 engine then you EVER will. Be sure!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Just to let you know, the PBY Catalina for IL2/PF was canned by Oleg. Simply not enough time to implament it and he is already greatly backlogged with other aircraft - Gibbage <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again. Not Oleg's fault. Yes, Oleg said stop production on the aircraft. But I was NOT blaming Oleg for saying that. If you read it that way, im sorry. But let me say this for about the 10th time. ITS NOT OLEGS FAULT AND I AM NOT BLAMING HIM! I did not get it done in time, and that resulted in Oleg stopping the project.

I would hope that settles your little child like vomit spat, but I doubt it. People like you love to start flames and love to watch people like me blow there tops. I am just explaining the circumstances as best as I can. People were asking. Nothing I have said in any of the threads is false or wrong. Some are asumptions (like extra programming for the Catalina) but well educated asumptions from experance and conversations I have had with Oleg. I stand behind my words. I stand behind my projects. I stand behind my work as a 3D artist.

The question is, why are you so upset at me to make you lash out? I doubt you were looking forward to the PBY THAT much. I dont know what has set you off because I have NEVER had a problem with you. So how did I wrong you?
That must be another post of you not placing the blame on Oleg.

But I'm just a moron who can't read so what do I know. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LEXX_Luthor
02-16-2005, 12:18 AM
Well said Gibb (and thanks for everything).

GSNei
02-16-2005, 12:33 AM
Gib - When I donated to the "PBY Fund" I knew it was a maybe, I just love the plane, I even bought the lame Abacus addon, so I'm not worried about the dough, but I'm curious if you convert it to FS9 is it going to be just the flight deck or other interior positions as well?

Gibbage1
02-16-2005, 01:34 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by GSNei:
Gib - When I donated to the "PBY Fund" I knew it was a maybe, I just love the plane, I even bought the lame Abacus addon, so I'm not worried about the dough, but I'm curious if you convert it to FS9 is it going to be just the flight deck or other interior positions as well? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thats a VERY good question. One I plan on looking into.

The problem with FS-2004 is you cant change view positions within the aircraft. There are "cheats" that allow you to pan your view around, but you cant simply hit the waist gunner position key and view the blisters from inside. So that leavs a very interesting question. What do I do with my almost complete blister section, half way complete bombadeer section and nose gunner? I think what I may do is incorporate them into the EXTERNAL model. That way it will add even more detail. The internals will add close to 5,000-10,000 polygons, but with a budget of 30,000+ I think it will be worth it. As for radio, navigator and engineer positions, I am not sure. Maybe make some details in there for people who look through the windows, but nothing too complex as it would be a waist of time and polygons. No more then 1% will even look into the portholes, but it will be nice to have SOMETHING there for those who can figure it out.

Also, there are some cool tihngs people are doing in FS2004. I heard of some add-ons that allow you to do rescue missions? Maybe I can do something like that. Its all to be seen as FS-2004 is new teritory for me. But an exciting one! I can finally see instantly the results of my work. When we do a model for IL2 it sometimes takes months before we even get a screenshot. A lot of programming goes into each aircraft that people cant even comprehend. So a 3D modeler's job in IL2 is only MAYBE 1/3 the job. The rest is up too 1C's programmers.

I will make a web page on gibbageart.com one day and keep it updated. I am just so busy with freelance work at the moment I have yet to restore my OLD web page. I have a friend working on it for me.

Thanks for your questions.

Gib

GSNei
02-16-2005, 02:12 AM
One thing you can say about FS, there sure is plenty of variety, but because it's an "open" system you get crude to icredibly detailed - free, to some things that are $40 bucks a plane!
Flight models can be all over the place, but there is a ton of stuff. By the way Alphasim had a payware PBY on their list but it's not there anymore.

JagDet97
02-16-2005, 02:19 AM
Hmmmm I heard your work wasn't up to scratch Gib and too many corrections were being made? Not sure if this is true or not but just saying?

Gibbage1
02-16-2005, 03:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JagDet97:
Hmmmm I heard your work wasn't up to scratch Gib and too many corrections were being made? Not sure if this is true or not but just saying? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is the thread of honesty. Yes, there was problems with my early models. I was never told of them and the 1C team had to put a LOT of work into them to get them into IL2's engine. I was never able to correct my models since I was never told i was doing them wrong, and documentation was dodgy at best. The Ki-43 was a turning point. Ilya would NOT accept it unless it was perfect. I then realized a LOT of the errors I made in the past. The Ki-43 was accepted after a LOT of editing and corrections. The Cw-21b faired a LOT better then the Ki-43 and SaQsoN helped me a lot. The first model did have errors, but not nearly as much as the Ki-43 and was imported into the engine with a few fixes. So as you can see, things got a LOT better once I realized there was a problem. But again, importing a 3D model into the engine is a VERY small fraction of the work. If I had the PBY done, it would be as close to 1C's standards as possible after going through the Ki-43 and Cw-21b.

I do however find it odd that you registerd just to post this. Whats your normal account? I have a few guesses. It would be interesting to compair IP addy's. Maybe another VFC friend?

JG53Frankyboy
02-16-2005, 04:50 AM
just out of interest Gibbage, are the both Ki-43-II also made by you ?

nakamura_kenji
02-16-2005, 05:20 AM
I sorry about cat gibbage i 3d modeler self so i understand many problem you face in making good model to get it inside a gmae often model can appear finish but often unseen error hidden that not cause big problem. be honest i wish i discover pacific fighter ealier so may have be able help v_v as there many plane i be have willing to make but appear now no time and pf 3rd part model development stop after march.
maybe when bob come out i can help that if i still around comunity.

thank you gibbage if i read right you make ki-43 you make favorite plane thank you

LEXX_Luthor
02-16-2005, 06:29 AM
nakamura_kenji:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>be honest i wish i discover pacific fighter ealier so may have be able help <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
FB/PF Modder website ~> http://www.netwings.org/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?az=list&forum=DCForumID43&conf=DCConfID1
(loads slow, but it gets there)


Ya, when Ki~43 for PF was first talked about, I knew 43 would be my Fave PF plane. The thin body amazed me ever since I was a kid.

Ki~44, the "Japanese MiG~3" is my 2nd Fave.... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

p1ngu666
02-16-2005, 09:06 AM
maybe u could use the 2d cockpit for a different cockpit. but the 2d cockpits always suck http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Gibbage1
02-16-2005, 01:57 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
just out of interest Gibbage, are the both Ki-43-II also made by you ? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ki-43 I model was done by me. Ilya had someone convert the I into the II. Im not sure who.

fherathras
02-16-2005, 02:29 PM
****, ****....


dang! i was looking forward to rescue missions in the PBY! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif



it was one sweet modell aswell!


to sad we wont get it



anyways, greate work on the modell gibbage!

I would take a cap in the **** for ya http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif

fordfan25
02-16-2005, 02:37 PM
yea its a shame. thanks for tring gibb.

AlmightyTallest
02-16-2005, 04:46 PM
Ditto on that, thanks for the time and effort you put into this art Gibbage, it would have been great to have been able to fly,fight, and do pilot rescue missions with your PBY in PF.

IV_JG51_Razor
02-16-2005, 05:06 PM
Gib, is there any chance of your cat showing up in Oleg's BoB? It certainly was around back then, and played a very pivital role in the early war in the North Atlantic. Sorry about it not making it to PF. I was very excited about the prospect of flying it.

How did you like "In The Hands of Fate"? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Gibbage1
02-16-2005, 08:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by IV_JG51_Razor:
Gib, is there any chance of your cat showing up in Oleg's BoB? It certainly was around back then, and played a very pivital role in the early war in the North Atlantic. Sorry about it not making it to PF. I was very excited about the prospect of flying it.

How did you like "In The Hands of Fate"? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry. No chance. The modeling that would be needed is just so much differant from not only IL2 but from FS9. Also the detail in the cockpits is just INSANE! I would need a very large team of good and dedicated artist's in order to make the PBY compatible for BoB.

Yes, I enjoyed your book. I wrote you a nice big E-mail talking about Helo's and junk but I never got your reply. I know you were out and about so I figure it got lost in the shuffle. I will try forwarding it back. I would love to contenue the conversation we had!

Aztek_Eagle
02-16-2005, 10:20 PM
so, are you gona take on other project??? what about a Ar234 or a Me410 (the 210 was poop, or so they say) The Ar234 even as AI would add alot to those ardenes maps

Gibbage1
02-17-2005, 03:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aztek_Eagle:
so, are you gona take on other project??? what about a Ar234 or a Me410 (the 210 was poop, or so they say) The Ar234 even as AI would add alot to those ardenes maps <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

There is no time. Oleg is already backlooged with new aircraft. Did you not read anything?

Oleg_Maddox
02-17-2005, 04:03 AM
To all.

I'm first time heard just on the last week about that Gibbage got donations from people to make the plane or cockpit for Fb+PF...
I was very impressed, because:

1. We never promised to include any of the third party models, except these that ordered by us for money... For any other except ordered we do it in free time when and only when these models are matching the technology and when we have "windows" in our own development. In these cases such our work looks more like a present for such a modeller and a present for the community. Like a bonus. You may say that it increase the community and rise some additional advertizement role for the sim itself. I agree, but just in a very small part, because our own expences in this case can't be covered by possible increasing of income. That is real statistic that we have in reality.
So any demands against us that we are so bad that do not take some of the models that doesn't match the technology or doesn't match the time that we may use for implementation - just the result of all above and these things that are also described below.

2. If third party modeller ask for donation from the community that to finish his work, then this third party modeler should be 100% sure that we will implement such a model. In case of PBY - we never even saw the model that to check except that he sent once me screen shots that was far from final and unknown for us if they match the technology. Also in case of Gibbage he was known personally on January 4 (at least) that we will stop very soon support of third party due to overloading with their models and due to time to re-force all the team forces on the development of the next sim.
And even with official anounce of such stop we really give enough time for third party modellers to finish and to make bugs free 3D models that could have a chance to be implemented AFTER THE DATE OF STOP. And there are so much already that simply deserve the CD release as stand alone sim, if we would to compare with the offers from other developers of the sims... Am I right?

3. We promised to stop support of third party models way early... Say it was known after we released AEP.... and all modellers that contacted us at first was asking do they have a chance if they will model such or other aircraft or cockpit and how much time they would have for this. And in each case I personally told - is is possible or not. Rules was known from Il-2 release time...
These that didn't contact me and which didn't receive from me the samples of our own 3D models was going on a wrong way, if they was listen only the guys that was positioned by themselves as Guru or like a "voice from Oleg".


4. For PF, mainly by the management of Luthier (ordered for this purpose), ordered third party from the list of looking experienced modellers to make the planes, cockpits and other objects for money (by direct order, which include the discussed in each case time for development), becasue we was busy with other development... However 3/4 of them on the defined beginnnig and mid stage of development, including Gibbage, wasn't able to finish all things in time that we were need.... And our team was need to completely re-switch from the BoB development to PF development that to save situation with third party modellers and we was reworking or ordering other developers, or finally to make ourselves a lot of things for PF for a very short time that to get control over the situation... Thats is a true story for you all that to understand the situation well!

5. If there were other donations from the community for the models that included/not included in the sim, I would like to know the list of these planes. Because I dislike the idea that someone got the payment say twice... From community and from us. So if there is known such a fact please write me the truth and I will compare the list of such things in my data base for third party modellers. I need to do it that to know who is right people and who is not - for future and tell communitly about such things.



Now about one of the modellers, that speaks too much...

When he was in hard situation without any job (from his words) - we gave him the order to make some bonus planes for AEP.... It was payed in almost all cases in advance because he had no money to pay his bills constantly. We payed even when we got from him not finished and completely buggy models. I was in hope that he will learn something, but not...
More later, he started also some works in hope that we also would pay (not contracted), but we dislike this idea, because we need to do really other things... We don't pay the money for the things that we don't order. Because when we take such models - our tech conditions should be 100% executed - we can't waster our time that to make crappy model alive... we should do only programming and as well it is our present for such modeller and for community (see above). For us is better to do not do it and concentrate on own needs.
Its very sad that some people misleading the community and some time even simply tell the lie, like "I got the word from Oleg...."
To post something that I never told presonally these people is strange isn't it?


The last:


There are 4 types of third party modellers in General:

1. Experienced: Who makes evrything fast and right from the first attempt. Their models match the blueprints and requested technology.
2. Experienced: Who makes long time due to lack of time (main Job and modeling for this sim is only hobby) but their models match the blueprints and requested technology (one of the samples - Tempest, which will be included as AI and flyable if the guy will finish in defined time frame the cockpit).
3. Theses that make evrything slow and doesn't match too well blueprints and doesn't match the technology. It is most that try for the first time, and ususally if they are not dissapointed with the first bad attempt and don't stop, finally begin to make everything or almost everything right.
4. This is the most strange case for me.... They speak too much... they do everything fast sometime... they know just basic rules, but never evaluate our samples or do not or dislike understand them in terms of possible technologies ... or they said they understand all after we send him back REWORKED by us HIS MODEL, but the next model is again contains the same bugs.... or even worse - simply doesn't match a lot of things...


Finally I officially name the best third party modellers for PF - Vladimir Kochmarsky and Dani Santos.

For FB-AEP the best third party modellers that was working for free and they are from Ubisoft and Codemasters companies. It was cockpit for Bf110 and J8 plane and cockpit.

Vladimir is now really GURU and can answer any questions to other modellers. Dani Santos - he was beginning with the bugs, but now his models are top quality.


And one more finally word. MSFS 2004 and Il-2 series polygon count for the cockpit or the planes.
I would like to point that the resources of PC for Il-2 series are dstributed for the AI, gunnery, diferent physics (simultaniosly for each different plane and AI object). However in MSFS you will not find it well. You can't play there the battle where is many planes at once (at least for comparison). Really we have no limit in polygon count for the details in our engine. But we need to remember about all other features and priority... Lets say we will spend 20,000 polygons for the cockpit and 40,000 per plane... Just think after this what will happens with the gameplay... You right - it will be simply slide show.
And in BoB we will have less polygon count then in best planes for the MSFS... Just because we need to model there 100 times more things simultaniosly. However if you will look for the cockpits in FB, such as I-185, Ki-84, J-8A you may understand that even with limited polycount is possible to create better and more precise cockpits then in other sims with high polygon count for these purposes.... Say I-185 and Ki-84 the test for BoB technologies.

Here is the sample for BoB. The limit of polygon count is even way less then 10,000, including the damage....

http://files.games.1c.ru/il2pict/ScShot010.jpg

So the talent third party modeller will do the right Job... But these who need more polygon count may go to make their models for other sims where they will be possibly unlimited... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Hope my Olegish English is clear.
Also I would point that I don't want to offend anybody, so in the cases when I'm myself angry or disagree - I don't name the names.

nakamura_kenji
02-17-2005, 04:27 AM
thank you much for clearing up thing over party modeler, i understand english not worry as my english poor also ^_^.

I understand polygon count limit very much as high count can cause terrible loss of speed, but as you say good modeler do not need high count produce good work. I used to producing sub 5000 models for armoured veihicles(i currently busy with project for ofp) for other game but i understand aircraft modeling also and can understand thing many not. i look forward to Bob more more now.

thank you oleg for wonderful sim

LEXX_Luthor
02-17-2005, 05:05 AM
Nobody has "good english" on internet webboard http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Ya, thanks Oleg for best sim ever. More PF, More BoB, ~~> More B6N cockpit !!! !! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif

Extreme_One
02-17-2005, 05:26 AM
Now we hear the other side of the story.

Thanks for posting Oleg. And your Olegish English was absolutley fine. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

LEXX_Luthor
02-17-2005, 05:28 AM
Oleg, have you considered one or more of the following Flyable for FB or Russian CD...?

SB
Su~2
DB~3
Tu~2
IL~4

Also, any word on that Polikarpov U~2 cockpit we saw some screenshots of?

Thanks.

...(hey Xtreme~1 you bumped me to the next page!!)..

indylavi
02-17-2005, 06:09 AM
Did I read correctly? 3rd party modelers are paid for their work? I thought they were people doing it for free but Oleg actually cuts them a check? I could understand if it's going to be part of an addon like AEP or PF but to pay for content and add it free into a patch after paying for it is just too generous I feel.

I always thought they were modders that simply enjoyed adding content as is the case in most other games. I didn't think we could get money out of it. I make 3d Models and write programs that allow Chemists to accurately simulate how drugs will affect the body. Complex stuff. I didn't know I could supplement my income modding for my favorite game http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Please excuse my ignorance if this is not the case as I've never really looked into how the 3rd part system for IL2 works.

nakamura_kenji
02-17-2005, 06:15 AM
my understand only get paid if oleg contact them to do work for them, if they not ask for work and people just make airplane in hope it go in game they not get paid.

i think only contracted for certain aircraft that are wanted, that my understanding, though it probably wrong and someone else explain better

Oleg_Maddox
02-17-2005, 07:45 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nakamura_kenji:
my understand only get paid if oleg contact them to do work for them, if they not ask for work and people just make airplane in hope it go in game they not get paid.

i think only contracted for certain aircraft that are wanted, that my understanding, though it probably wrong and someone else explain better <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are correct.

Viikate_
02-17-2005, 07:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:

5. If there were other donations from the community for the models that included/not included in the sim, I would like to know the list of these planes. Because I dislike the idea that someone got the payment say twice... From community and from us. So if there is known such a fact please write me the truth and I will compare the list of such things in my data base for third party modellers. I need to do it that to know who is right people and who is not - for future and tell communitly about such things.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I would like to state that I have NOT been paid by community or 1C, even somebody offered to pay 100" for modeller that starts doing the Fokker D.XXI. Oleg and I tried to work alternative "payment" for my H75s, but that didn't work out (I requested 3 autographed AEP copys for me and two skinners). But I got few good friends during the process, so I consider myself rewarded.

I haven't done much but the models were never ordered from me. I just started playing with Max and when the model looked good enough, I emailed Oleg and asked if the plane could be included. Well, the Hawks were buggy, but I was told that they were ok. All other 3rd party guys thought also that they are making great models. Then came Vladimir and told that all the models were **** http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif This was very good thing because only now the modellers could learn something. I just wish that BoB 3rd party modeling is better coordinated and organised.

Please Oleg and Vladimir! Try to find time to include all 5 Fokker versions in some patch. Although there will be whining that why danish D.XXI was included even it didn't saw any action. Five for the price of one, 0".

-Viikate

Jeronimo831
02-17-2005, 08:06 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
However if you will look for the cockpits in FB, such as I-185, Ki-84, J-8A you may understand that even with limited polycount is possible to create better and more precise cockpits then in other sims with high polygon count for these purposes.... Say I-185 and Ki-84 the test for BoB technologies.

Here is the sample for BoB. The limit of polygon count is even way less then 10,000, including the damage....

http://files.games.1c.ru/il2pict/ScShot010.jpg

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have a small question about this technique. I know that the way the I-185, J8 and above Spitfire cockpit are created, you can have great detail, and still not many poly's. But there is a disadvantage! Most structures are not really 3D, but textures that have 3D pictures on it. There is a problem when you move your point of view around the cockpit, because the 3D will not look like 3D then. This is the reason why you cannot move your head around in cockpits in LO:MAC (this sim used same technique). How will you solve this, Oleg?

Thanks for these explanations, from a type "3" modeler. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Oleg_Maddox
02-17-2005, 08:18 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Viikate_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:

5. If there were other donations from the community for the models that included/not included in the sim, I would like to know the list of these planes. Because I dislike the idea that someone got the payment say twice... From community and from us. So if there is known such a fact please write me the truth and I will compare the list of such things in my data base for third party modellers. I need to do it that to know who is right people and who is not - for future and tell communitly about such things.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I would like to state that I have NOT been paid by community or 1C, even somebody offered to pay 100" for modeller that starts doing the Fokker D.XXI. Oleg and I tried to work alternative "payment" for my H75s, but that didn't work out (I requested 3 autographed AEP copys for me and two skinners). But I got few good friends during the process, so I consider myself rewarded.

I haven't done much but the models were never ordered from me. I just started playing with Max and when the model looked good enough, I emailed Oleg and asked if the plane could be included. Well, the Hawks were buggy, but I was told that they were ok. All other 3rd party guys thought also that they are making great models. Then came Vladimir and told that all the models were **** http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif This was very good thing because only now the modellers could learn something. I just wish that BoB 3rd party modeling is better coordinated and organised.

Please Oleg and Vladimir! Try to find time to include all 5 Fokker versions in some patch. Although there will be whining that why danish D.XXI was included even it didn't saw any action. Five for the price of one, 0".

-Viikate <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

They are on the way.
I'm sorry to hear that you still didn't receive signed boxes... It was sent twice... ****...
I will kill the guy the sent it second time by my order.......

I also would say that you models are one of the best done.

Oleg_Maddox
02-17-2005, 08:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeronimo831:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
However if you will look for the cockpits in FB, such as I-185, Ki-84, J-8A you may understand that even with limited polycount is possible to create better and more precise cockpits then in other sims with high polygon count for these purposes.... Say I-185 and Ki-84 the test for BoB technologies.

Here is the sample for BoB. The limit of polygon count is even way less then 10,000, including the damage....

http://files.games.1c.ru/il2pict/ScShot010.jpg

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have a small question about this technique. I know that the way the I-185, J8 and above Spitfire cockpit are created, you can have great detail, and still not many poly's. But there is a disadvantage! Most structures are not really 3D, but textures that have 3D pictures on it. There is a problem when you move your point of view around the cockpit, because the 3D will not look like 3D then. This is the reason why you cannot move your head around in cockpits in LO:MAC (this sim used same technique). How will you solve this, Oleg?

Thanks for these explanations, from a type "3" modeler. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It is solved. You may use full support of new Track IR in some special frame. So we use a bit more advanced things that you mentioned. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
But in General you right about part of that technology, but not at all.

Oleg_Maddox
02-17-2005, 08:24 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Oleg, have you considered one or more of the following Flyable for FB or Russian CD...?

SB
Su~2
DB~3
Tu~2
IL~4

Also, any word on that Polikarpov U~2 cockpit we saw some screenshots of?

Thanks.

...(hey Xtreme~1 you bumped me to the next page!!).. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

There will be 3 CDs with different Russian planes. on the first will be different variants of Pe-2.
On other - Il-10.
And on the third - experimental and couple of just post war time planes using improved German Jet Engines.

jimmie_T
02-17-2005, 08:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:

It is solved. You may use full support of new Track IR in some special frame. So we use a bit more advanced things that you mentioned. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

THAT is very exciting to hear, Oleg, Wow!!!

HamishUK
02-17-2005, 08:57 AM
I think I just witnessed Oleg dishing out a 'slapping' http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

JG53Frankyboy
02-17-2005, 09:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Oleg, have you considered one or more of the following Flyable for FB or Russian CD...?

SB
Su~2
DB~3
Tu~2
IL~4

Also, any word on that Polikarpov U~2 cockpit we saw some screenshots of?

Thanks.

...(hey Xtreme~1 you bumped me to the next page!!).. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

There will be 3 CDs with different Russian planes. on the first will be different variants of Pe-2.
On other - Il-10.
And on the third - experimental and couple of just post war time planes using improved German Jet Engines. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

HELL ! thats realy a must have http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
some fake missions with gemran vs allied jets http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

R_Mutt
02-17-2005, 09:15 AM
Thank you Oleg for finally setting the community straight on this issue.

Gibbage you are right this is a thread of honesty. Maybe Oleg is in VFC too.

PriK
02-17-2005, 09:21 AM
Oleg, can you explain a bit more about how you work around the "flat" textures for moving viewpoints in 6DOF?

Did you just add enough extra facets to allow movement within the limited range of movement or by some other technique?

Thank you http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

crazyivan1970
02-17-2005, 09:37 AM
Man..that Spitfire pit is mind blowing. I might fly Spitfire after all http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Any chance of posting shot of 109s pit Oleg? Pretty please? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

@Mutt... all i can say is LOL

Jeronimo831
02-17-2005, 09:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PriK:
Oleg, can you explain a bit more about how you work around the "flat" textures for moving viewpoints in 6DOF?

Did you just add enough extra facets to allow movement within the limited range of movement or by some other technique?

Thank you http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, Oleg, you've made me curious too. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Anyway, I'd understand if you would not like to share this information.

One of the things that I appreciated most about the first part, IL2, was that it introduced so many technically advanced graphics, that were realitively not processor dependant, like for example the "3D" trees which are made up of alpha blended textures, or the sprites for the clouds, that are affected by light, the 3D muzzleflashed made up of several sprites etc.

One thing that I really hope will be the same quality in BoB is the color of the sky and water/snow in PF/IL2. It has always been the best out there. Probably because Oleg is so keen on this because of his photographic skills.

crazyivan1970
02-17-2005, 09:56 AM
Don`t tell them Oleg, they are CFS4 spies http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

HamishUK
02-17-2005, 09:58 AM
I think the most important thing to remember is that despite the fancy new graphics and designs this game is playable right here and now.

In that I mean we are not all playing this game on low settings and having to wait for future systems to allow us to receive this eye candy.

This was LOMACS downfall in that it pushed current system resources far too far and players were only playing a game that they couldn't possibly enjoy to its full unless their system spec was something that hasn't yet appeared on the market.

I can fully appreciate that a game must also use the latest wizadry to allow future growth, but this should not be at the detriment of current playability.

So I am hoping we can have a game that like IL2 was fully playable and looked gorgeous but also allowed the intergration of new technology as it appeared.

Just my thoughts.

HamishUK
02-17-2005, 10:01 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
Man..that Spitfire pit is mind blowing. I might fly Spitfire after all http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Couldn't possibly fly something with a DB engine....It would be like farting in the Queens face http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Oleg_Maddox
02-17-2005, 10:06 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeronimo831:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PriK:
Oleg, can you explain a bit more about how you work around the "flat" textures for moving viewpoints in 6DOF?

Did you just add enough extra facets to allow movement within the limited range of movement or by some other technique?

Thank you http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, Oleg, you've made me curious too. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Anyway, I'd understand if you would not like to share this information.

One of the things that I appreciated most about the first part, IL2, was that it introduced so many technically advanced graphics, that were realitively not processor dependant, like for example the "3D" trees which are made up of alpha blended textures, or the sprites for the clouds, that are affected by light, the 3D muzzleflashed made up of several sprites etc.

One thing that I really hope will be the same quality in BoB is the color of the sky and water/snow in PF/IL2. It has always been the best out there. Probably because Oleg is so keen on this because of his photographic skills. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Its too early to tell everything http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
But we learned initialy form Codemaster's modeller http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif. We just improved it in several directions. Thanks him for that very much.

And you right about my skill in photo. I do always a lot of photos that to show my programmers how it should looks. And then when they finished - I say Ok or no... And I say Ok if they will explain me their compromises in case if I'm not satisfied using my own knowledge of programming and possible compromisses...
I still dislike the new clouds... And probably will not release them untill BoB. Time will show...

Say we have here visbility 100 km ahead (around)... But it runs well on the top PC only...
The landscape even in PF looks inclreadible on any distance or altitude with such visibility...

Say right now we use Fb+AEP+PF as a test software for BoB... New BOB FM (lets name it by this way) modules already now testing by real pilots who is familiar with Il-2 series.
However they test just the part of new physics due to limits of Il-2 series engine.... As I know they anyway like it very much.
In Final they will test the plane, that fly now some of them that to check the FM module calculation in general (real flying and in a sim of one the same plane). Over this plane we also work with the manufacture of this plane...

Ok.... already too much speaking....

TAGERT.
02-17-2005, 10:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
I still dislike the new clouds... And probably will not release them untill BoB. Time will show...

Say we have here visbility 100 km ahead (around)... But it runs well on the top PC only...
The landscape even in PF looks inclreadible on any distance or altitude with such visibility... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>As long as it is an option than I would put it in. Reason being that as time goes by, and we get new PC's we will be able to enjoy IL2-PF well into the future.

PS thanks for the best flight sim made in the last 10 years!

AWL_Spinner
02-17-2005, 10:14 AM
Thanks for the updates Oleg, you seem to be enjoying your work at the moment http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

crazyivan1970
02-17-2005, 10:17 AM
Just like any future daddy, Oleg is excited about his future child...waaaayyy too obvious http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Oleg, maybe you`ll reconsider new clouds? Maybe optional? You`ll be surprized what kind of hardware these guys own http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Oleg_Maddox
02-17-2005, 10:19 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HamishUK:
I think the most important thing to remember is that despite the fancy new graphics and designs this game is playable right here and now.

In that I mean we are not all playing this game on low settings and having to wait for future systems to allow us to receive this eye candy.

This was LOMACS downfall in that it pushed current system resources far too far and players were only playing a game that they couldn't possibly enjoy to its full unless their system spec was something that hasn't yet appeared on the market.

I can fully appreciate that a game must also use the latest wizadry to allow future growth, but this should not be at the detriment of current playability.

So I am hoping we can have a game that like IL2 was fully playable and looked gorgeous but also allowed the intergration of new technology as it appeared.

Just my thoughts. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are right. And it is with what we are currently working... The problem of the sims - great map distances to render in relatively high details comparing say to shooters... We work over this at first... But at the same time we need to improve very much that to get the sim of next several years... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Big contradiction I would say. In IL-2 series beginning from FB we simply use two 3D engines... (second engine loads when we select Perfect)

Another one GREAT problem how to get more clever then now AI which will not eat so much resources... Its one of the hardest tasks...
Becasue should eb more planes at onece in air and at the same time to keep playability or say to allow to record track of any part of battle... I would say it is really very-very hard goal of our current development.

Another one thing - with new module FM with more complex and precise calculations we take also more resources of processor for computations in real time... and again more planes using it simultaniosly with different types and flights.... At the same time the Pilot testers notices that old AI now don't make some really non real things in behavior just becasue they can't do it now due to more complex calculations of Fm and AI simply can't use some incorrect things in their flight... We got it automatically without changes of AI...

I'm about just part of complex solutions and compromisses across which we are going now like we was going many years ago defining the Il-2 features (with possible upgrades) and future market of PC hardware...
Trust me - this is great scientific research that was show in Il-2 series. Il-2 we begun in 1997... (if not early with initial research)
I think we was right in that research...
No we are on the same way, but using market experience, accumulated database of thousands suggestions of users, using new technologies - its all way more complex in a system that it was for Il-2 series....

again too much speaking... will stop right now and will not go back to this speech untill the right time!

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

carguy_
02-17-2005, 10:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg Maddox:
Say right now we use Fb+AEP+PF as a test software for BoB... New BOB FM (lets name it by this way) modules already now testing by real pilots who is familiar with Il-2 series.
However they test just the part of new physics due to limits of Il-2 series engine.... As I know they anyway like it very much.
In Final they will test the plane, that fly now some of them that to check the FM module calculation in general (real flying and in a sim of one the same plane). Over this plane we also work with the manufacture of this plane... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Heheh even though most sim makers say the very same,in your mouth Oleg it sounds really great!
Current FM is relatively fantastic,har to imagine what BoB will have to offer.
First thing I`m gonna do in BoB is take the FW190 for a spin and see if it is reborn hehehhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

crazyivan1970
02-17-2005, 10:24 AM
Oleg, seriosly, thanks for taking your time and getting us all excited about all the goodies that coming our way. Much appriciated.

Oleg_Maddox
02-17-2005, 10:24 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TAGERT.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
I still dislike the new clouds... And probably will not release them untill BoB. Time will show...

Say we have here visbility 100 km ahead (around)... But it runs well on the top PC only...
The landscape even in PF looks inclreadible on any distance or altitude with such visibility... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>As long as it is an option than I would put it in. Reason being that as time goes by, and we get new PC's we will be able to enjoy IL2-PF well into the future.

PS thanks for the best flight sim made in the last 10 years! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The problem is to make it as option in the current sim..... Too much work with great limit of time... To put as it is - not all will be satisfied or some even would be simply disagree...

Carnage2681
02-17-2005, 10:27 AM
I think a lot of germans would buy it too.

I am one of them ! Please give us the Pe2/3 series and some Il10 too shoot http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Capt._Tenneal
02-17-2005, 10:27 AM
I get the sense Oleg wants so much to shout out from the mountaintop about everything that is to come, but for various reasons, can't show everything he has up his sleeve. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

This is the Oleg we know and love. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

crazyivan1970
02-17-2005, 10:31 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TAGERT.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
I still dislike the new clouds... And probably will not release them untill BoB. Time will show...

Say we have here visbility 100 km ahead (around)... But it runs well on the top PC only...
The landscape even in PF looks inclreadible on any distance or altitude with such visibility... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>As long as it is an option than I would put it in. Reason being that as time goes by, and we get new PC's we will be able to enjoy IL2-PF well into the future.

PS thanks for the best flight sim made in the last 10 years! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The problem is to make it as option in the current sim..... Too much work with great limit of time... To put as it is - not all will be satisfied or some even would be simply disagree... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

But Oleg, that will all depence on the server, right? It would be up to host, either to include overcast or not. And knowing that clouds might cause the problem SMART host will not include overcast. Offline people are not affected by it at all, and i am sure quiet a few of them are capable of running it...
How much of the frame rate drop we are talking about?

HamishUK
02-17-2005, 10:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by carguy_:
First thing I`m gonna do in BoB is take the FW190 for a spin and see if it is reborn hehehhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL..You'll be lucky as the FW190 wasn't around till July 1941 and that was a nearly a year after the 'official dates' that classified the name BoB.

Capt._Tenneal
02-17-2005, 10:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HamishUK:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by carguy_:
First thing I`m gonna do in BoB is take the FW190 for a spin and see if it is reborn hehehhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL..You'll be lucky as the FW190 wasn't around till July 1941 and that was a nearly a year after the 'official dates' that classified the name BoB. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

carguy must mean the BOB engine as opposed to the BOB campaign, because, if resources will allow, is there any doubt Oleg will go back to the Eastern Front with the new engine. Then look out, FW-190s will fill the skies again !

Gato__Loco
02-17-2005, 10:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
There will be 3 CDs with different Russian planes. on the first will be different variants of Pe-2.
On other - Il-10.
And on the third - experimental and couple of just post war time planes using improved German Jet Engines. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi Oleg,
I wish you will find the way to let people outside of Russia to buy these CD's, maybe through direct mail purchases, or downloading from a site after payment. I'll be happy to buy them and support your work!!!

crazyivan1970
02-17-2005, 10:52 AM
Well, Oleg went home. Hope we will get something else out of him tomorrow http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Oleg_Maddox
02-17-2005, 10:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HamishUK:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by carguy_:
First thing I`m gonna do in BoB is take the FW190 for a spin and see if it is reborn hehehhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL..You'll be lucky as the FW190 wasn't around till July 1941 and that was a nearly a year after the 'official dates' that classified the name BoB. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

They became to fly over channel way early...
But this plane we would like to put in add-ons http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

crazyivan1970
02-17-2005, 10:54 AM
You are still here...aren`t you http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Zneg1
02-17-2005, 10:58 AM
Well I hope that Oleg and crew are looking into the capbilities of the GPU's power to OFFLOAD some computations from the CPU via HLSL and Cg. As some of you know, the computing power of the GPU sometimes exceeds the CPU for vector computations as well as geometry transformations because the GPUs today are not just DSP's but also parallelized. Computatiosn such as 'raycasting' are very fast with GPU's.

Oleg_Maddox
02-17-2005, 11:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Zneg1:
Well I hope that Oleg and crew are looking into the capbilities of the GPU's power to OFFLOAD some computations from the CPU via HLSL and Cg. As some of you know, the computing power of the GPU sometimes exceeds the CPU for vector computations as well as geometry transformations because the GPUs today are not just DSP's but also parallelized. Computatiosn such as 'raycasting' are very fast with GPU's. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Something of this already present in PF code.

Capt._Tenneal
02-17-2005, 11:07 AM
Oleg, if you're still here, any thought of having the DVD option for the release of BOB along with CD ?

Zneg1
02-17-2005, 11:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Something of this already present in PF code. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's great to hear! I have been using nVidia utilities to look at making shaders via HLSL. I wish we modelers will be allowed in the future to do 'textures' this way as well as be allowed to 'bake' global illumination data into the cockpits which can still be modified/attenutated with regular CG lights for better efects.

PS: I mean maybe we can just 'bake' the 'skylight' compotent of the sky and let the sunlight be handled by the regular CG lights and switch 'models' when the weather changes like for overcast skies.

Bearcat99
02-17-2005, 11:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
Just like any future daddy, Oleg is excited about his future child...waaaayyy too obvious http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif! Uhhhhh didnt Mrs. M just have a baby??!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

No wonder you dont have time for our add ons!! You are too busy working on your add ons!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Congrats..


Now... you mentioned something about more jets........ http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif That sounds real good to me.

crazyivan1970
02-17-2005, 11:30 AM
You missunderstood me BC... i was talking about BOB... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Sorry for misleading you

Bearcat99
02-17-2005, 11:32 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif DOLP!!!! LMAO!!!!! I was about to say........ http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif Talk about busy....LOL.

CHDT
02-17-2005, 11:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeronimo831:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
However if you will look for the cockpits in FB, such as I-185, Ki-84, J-8A you may understand that even with limited polycount is possible to create better and more precise cockpits then in other sims with high polygon count for these purposes.... Say I-185 and Ki-84 the test for BoB technologies.

Here is the sample for BoB. The limit of polygon count is even way less then 10,000, including the damage....

http://files.games.1c.ru/il2pict/ScShot010.jpg

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have a small question about this technique. I know that the way the I-185, J8 and above Spitfire cockpit are created, you can have great detail, and still not many poly's. But there is a disadvantage! Most structures are not really 3D, but textures that have 3D pictures on it. There is a problem when you move your point of view around the cockpit, because the 3D will not look like 3D then. This is the reason why you cannot move your head around in cockpits in LO:MAC (this sim used same technique). How will you solve this, Oleg?

Thanks for these explanations, from a type "3" modeler. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It is solved. You may use full support of new Track IR in some special frame. So we use a bit more advanced things that you mentioned. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
But in General you right about part of that technology, but not at all. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Any possibility of using the Zbrush tecnic? I think it would be excellent for structures and terrains.

EFG_beber
02-17-2005, 11:42 AM
Thanks Oleg for the information. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I've just two questions.
Will it be possible to play big air battles with bob?
Do you will make an other game/add-on where it'will be possible to play at the ground(tank, artilery,humain...) and will it be possible to go outside the aircraft to take an another aircraft, vehicules or others...

excuse for bad english

Zneg1
02-17-2005, 11:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Any possibility of using the Zbrush tecnic? I think it would be excellent for structures and terrains. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't know if the game engine in BoB will support 'geometry displacement' and it would be interetsing if there is a LOD geometry displacement capability but personally I'd rather have the ability to 'bake textures' and couple that with HLSL capabilities. Hopefully we can use HDRI data as well!

CHDT
02-17-2005, 11:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Zneg1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Any possibility of using the Zbrush tecnic? I think it would be excellent for structures and terrains. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't know if the game engine in BoB will support 'geometry displacement' and it would be interetsing if there is a LOD geometry displacement capability but personally I'd rather have the ability to 'bake textures' and couple that with HLSL capabilities. Hopefully we can use HDRI data as well! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


there's also Mankua Kaldera for direct texture baking within Max:

http://www.techex.co.uk/info.asp?product=1592635720

Gibbage1
02-17-2005, 12:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by indylavi:
Did I read correctly? 3rd party modelers are paid for their work? I thought they were people doing it for free but Oleg actually cuts them a check? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oleg never contacted me to do the PBY. I offered it for free. I did the PBN-1 for free. Thats why I asked for donations. After I asked for donations, Oleg offered to pay for the P-80 and Go-229 to help me out.

Its not that I was getting paid by Oleg THEN asked for donations. I just want to clear that up.

goshikisen
02-17-2005, 12:09 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
Finally I officially name the best third party modellers for PF - Vladimir Kochmarsky and Dani Santos. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'll second that... I can remember how jaw-droppingly good SaQSoN's work looked for CFS2. I was glad to see his Hien in PF... the screenshots of his CFS2 Hien set a heck of a precedent.

We've gone from Feast to Famine back to Feast again in terms of contact with Oleg. Glad to see you active on the forums again... it's one of the best things about this community.

I'm beginning to get a far clearer picture as to why PF turned out the way it did. I may be critical of some aspects of it but overall it's better than anything else out there. A few more ships and.... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Anybody been in contact with the Tempest cockpit modeller? I hope they can swing that one... it'd make a kicka$$ addition to the series.

Regards, Goshikisen.

Agamemnon22
02-17-2005, 12:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CHDT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Zneg1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Any possibility of using the Zbrush tecnic? I think it would be excellent for structures and terrains. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't know if the game engine in BoB will support 'geometry displacement' and it would be interetsing if there is a LOD geometry displacement capability but personally I'd rather have the ability to 'bake textures' and couple that with HLSL capabilities. Hopefully we can use HDRI data as well! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


there's also Mankua Kaldera for direct texture baking within Max:

http://www.techex.co.uk/info.asp?product=1592635720 <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If I may.. you can bake lighting into textures including skylight and all that right from within MAX. Also, technology exists now to do skylight/radiosity in real time. Whether Oleg will use that is up to him obviously, and he may not want to say just now what he plans to do, but I'm just saying, the technology exists.
As for Zbrush, you wouldn't actually use the displacement model, but make a normal map with it, that way you keep low poly count but make it look like a high poly surface. Just like Unreal3 demo, if you saw it. The technology exists since GeForce4xxx and Radeon 8xxx cards tho.

Zneg1
02-17-2005, 12:43 PM
I am aware that in MAX you can 'bake' stuff there using the advanced lighting and radiosity options also with plugins like VRAY and Brazil.

I however have not seen 'instant radiosity' routines implemented in a game engine yet.

TAGERT.
02-17-2005, 01:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
But Oleg, that will all depence on the server, right? It would be up to host, either to include overcast or not. And knowing that clouds might cause the problem SMART host will not include overcast. Offline people are not affected by it at all, and i am sure quiet a few of them are capable of running it...
How much of the frame rate drop we are talking about? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Exactlly what I was thinking.. If this overcast is just another cloud option like the other cloud options than the servers could disable it for now.. But a year from now they could start using it as more and more people got better PC hardware. But, from what Oleg said.. It sounds like this new over cast does not fall into the current cloud stuff, thus would requre a whole seprate option? That is too bad.. What with the majority of the ETO being over cast I thought this would be a neat thing to have. Would have made for a nice place for the bombers to hang out in until near the target! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

DuxCorvan
02-17-2005, 01:18 PM
Oleg, thank you for the info, it's comforting and exciting.

Just a question: is there really any hope that non-Russian customers will ever get those Pe-2, Il-10 and post-war add-ons working in our versions? Most of us are really interested in this.

BTW, thank you for four years of making my child dreams true... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

AlmightyTallest
02-17-2005, 01:55 PM
What DuxCorvan said. Well, not the years of joy thing, I just discovered your series about 4 months ago http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif But you have made dreams come true http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I look forward to having years of fun and enjoyment with your sims Oleg.

Also, Oleg is there going to be any additional content specifically for the Pacific Theater after this upcoming patch? I can go without any new U.S. aircraft if there is no way around it, but we're hoping there's a chance to get more objects, specifcally more ship models for PF, along with improvements in the campaign engine for us offliners, AI improvements and perhaps even refinements in the graphics engine to make things run smoother. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Please let us know if there is anything coming in the future for the Pacific Theater if you could share that info with us.

Thanks again for taking the time to answer questions, it is obviously apprecitated by many here.

joeap
02-17-2005, 02:01 PM
Thanks for your input Oleg! MY gosh, I am really looking forward to the BoB SERIES .... it's not going to be just BoB. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I think the advances will probably set the FS world on it's ear. Heck I pretty gave up on civie FS just cause I love FB/AEP/PF so much. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif

Copperhead310th
02-17-2005, 02:06 PM
Oleg i hate to ask this question but....

Will we EVER see another 1C Maddox Sim with US aircraft? I was so hoping that after the Northrop fiasco that we could at the very least hope to see the other 3 B-25's become flyble.

Is there any chance of that or is it just already way too late?

Also please don't forget about the regimntals files we sent you. thanks.

and i'll have some more music for you soon. we just finished up soem studio work for a new album. ;-)

AlmightyTallest
02-17-2005, 02:21 PM
Oleg made the ships straffable with the gun mountings in the last patches, it would be great to have the straffer B-25J "Hardnose" and the cannon armed B-25H and others variants in PF to go against airfields and ships if it's at all possible.

1.JaVA_Razer
02-17-2005, 02:54 PM
baking things isn't the problem.

What I do want to strive for and I wouldn't mind helping anyway I can is to find a more efficient network transfer setup.

I wonder what gets sent at the moment over the internet when flying on line?

I'm guessing, type plane, where the center of the plane is on the map (X,Y,Z Axis coordinates), speed, roll, yaw. Right? (and firing/non firing)

I'm guessing a bit more also but couldn't we offload the people at home a bit by using "high power servers" meanign the servers will be under higher stress (load) more then now but this will be because they "precalculate" some stuff.

Now I'm talking about letting the server do all the calcualting for say...
bullets.
This way we will prevent lag shots or lag being teh cause of not hitting somebody and the latency won't rise by it because the calculations are done locally so it's not like they need to be senth somewhere.

As I understand it, now you get the server just running like a big switch/ router. Just distributing the data to all(simply put).

What I'd suggest is giving the server a more active part except "just" routing.

It could easely calcualte the bullet stream/ impacts.

All we'd need to do it distribute the data of where they impact and which speed/angle and the computer of the clients can do that calculating.

Also I'd strive for a dynamic info system.

Meaning, you only get info that is relevant for you. You don't need info (from the server) containing how a plane is shot, where it is shot, if it's burnign or not...

IF you can't see it you don't need the data you know what I mean? this would relieve personal package transfer also but would intensify the stress on the server a bit more (meaning calculative power )

BTW
Oleg, will BoB support Bump mapping/dot3 mapping or normal maps?

I'd think they'd help a lot to relief pure polygons amount and you'll be able to put in more details at the same polygon count.

JG7_Rall
02-17-2005, 03:08 PM
Oleg, thanks for the info! If you were to keep working at the pace you are now, do you think BoB would be available this year? If so, any estimate on a month or season? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

PriK
02-17-2005, 03:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 1.JaVA_Razer:
baking things isn't the problem.

What I do want to strive for and I wouldn't mind helping anyway I can is to find a more efficient network transfer setup.

I wonder what gets sent at the moment over the internet when flying on line?

I'm guessing, type plane, where the center of the plane is on the map (X,Y,Z Axis coordinates), speed, roll, yaw. Right? (and firing/non firing)

I'm guessing a bit more also but couldn't we offload the people at home a bit by using "high power servers" meanign the servers will be under higher stress (load) more then now but this will be because they "precalculate" some stuff.

Now I'm talking about letting the server do all the calcualting for say...
bullets.
This way we will prevent lag shots or lag being teh cause of not hitting somebody and the latency won't rise by it because the calculations are done locally so it's not like they need to be senth somewhere.

As I understand it, now you get the server just running like a big switch/ router. Just distributing the data to all(simply put).

What I'd suggest is giving the server a more active part except "just" routing.

It could easely calcualte the bullet stream/ impacts.

All we'd need to do it distribute the data of where they impact and which speed/angle and the computer of the clients can do that calculating.

Also I'd strive for a dynamic info system.

Meaning, you only get info that is relevant for you. You don't need info (from the server) containing how a plane is shot, where it is shot, if it's burnign or not...

IF you can't see it you don't need the data you know what I mean? this would relieve personal package transfer also but would intensify the stress on the server a bit more (meaning calculative power )

BTW
Oleg, will BoB support Bump mapping/dot3 mapping or normal maps?

I'd think they'd help a lot to relief pure polygons amount and you'll be able to put in more details at the same polygon count. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The problem with having the server calculate firing data is that for laggers it will look (to them) that their shots aren't even coming from their plane. So you're ****ed if you do and ****ed if you don't.

There are some clever predictive techniques out there being used in FPS games that might apply well enough though to be of use. There is also the problem of potential cheats and exploits although I'm not sure if it applies in Oleg's closed code system.

Freycinet
02-17-2005, 05:10 PM
Viikate, congratulations on the official confirmation you received in this thread that ALL the Fokkers will be included.... - I'm so happy the Danish Fokker XXI will be in there too!! It was a fine "cadeau" that Oleg told you it was one of the best models he's seen from 3rd party modellers. Fabulous.

- After the via dolorosa of Fokker XXI-development it is incredible that it makes it IN just before closing time, albeit only as AI. Yahoo!

Oleg: It would be great if you soon would give out info for 3rd party modellers on the requirements for BoB third party models. Also, you should devote a bit of time to organise the 3rd party community, or rather delegate the work to someone you trust. I think 3rd party can be a great resource for you in coming years with BoB sequels.

ImpStarDuece
02-17-2005, 05:12 PM
Just have a look at that Spitfire cockpit. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

H.F.S! As my mates from Idaho would say.

How absloutely, mind-blowingly, stupendously, incredible does it look!

Having only had PF for 3 weeks BoB was in the "Meh, its gonna be good but i'm not THAT excited' category. Now, I tingle internally with joy at the thought of it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

If the cockpits are THAT standard, my life, as I know it, is going to be at an end. I will spend untold hours slaving at work to afford the biggest, baddest, box I can buy then spend untold hours flying, dying and oggling the planes.

MEGILE
02-17-2005, 05:34 PM
Thanks for the info Oleg. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

TX-Gunslinger
02-17-2005, 05:49 PM
Oleg,

Thank you for coming around again. We miss you.

S~

LEXX_Luthor
02-17-2005, 06:41 PM
Please don't forget the air combat environment outside the cockpit. The air warfare environment will make new challenges for navigation and air combat tactics, as well as mission planning...if weather can be given by, or "forced" on mission maker (it is nature), in the Mission Builder.

Thunderstorm, about 150km from photographer.
http://www.polarimage.fi/clouds/cu03353b.jpg
~> http://www.polarimage.fi/clouds/cumul001.htm

Contrails, visible from 100km or more...
http://www.polarimage.fi/clouds2/va03013b.jpg
~~> http://www.polarimage.fi/clouds/cumul001.htm


Beautiful stunning skies will entrance the Newbie flight simmer *and* the bitter Old Timers--even if they don't know it now. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

HamishUK
02-17-2005, 06:42 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HamishUK:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by carguy_:
First thing I`m gonna do in BoB is take the FW190 for a spin and see if it is reborn hehehhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL..You'll be lucky as the FW190 wasn't around till July 1941 and that was a nearly a year after the 'official dates' that classified the name BoB. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

They became to fly over channel way early...
But this plane we would like to put in add-ons http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The FW190 had technical problems that were resolved in July 1941. The RAF's first 'unofficial' pilots record of a FW190 was around September 1941 (although squadron records show March 1942 as the recorded date). The aircraft started to be encountered in quantity during operations in connection with the channel dash by the Warships Scharnhorst and Gneisenau. Spitfires then fought a number of running battles with 190's and 109's.

As for adding it later on superb news! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

goshikisen
02-17-2005, 06:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by AlmightyTallest:
Also, Oleg is there going to be any additional content specifically for the Pacific Theater after this upcoming patch? I can go without any new U.S. aircraft if there is no way around it, but we're hoping there's a chance to get more objects, specifcally more ship models for PF, along with improvements in the campaign engine for us offliners, AI improvements and perhaps even refinements in the graphics engine to make things run smoother. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's a good question. Oleg, you mentioned third party development of the current series will continue after 1C is no longer involved and has moved on to BoB. Will the third party development only involve Russian (Pe 2) content or is there a possiblity that PF can continue to evolve?

FltLt_HardBall
02-17-2005, 06:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
I'm sorry to hear that you still didn't receive signed boxes... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Commonwealth voice pack team involved in PF still haven't received their copy of the game.

Of course, that's not why we did it, but it would be nice...

Obi_Kwiet
02-17-2005, 07:39 PM
I would love it if Oleg used the music for BOB from the BoB campaign for AEP... I think it was by extreme one... It had recordings of Churchill in there with the music. That was the best in game music I've ever heard.

heywooood
02-17-2005, 08:09 PM
I agree 100% with Obi on that. Ex_O and Poymandos BoB campaign had great touches.

..and its great to hear Oleg take a break from all that programming to give us a little insight and to respond to some rhetoric.

The Spitfire 'pit looks photorealistic and to know that it will definitely work with TIR vector expansion is a pure relief to many.

Hearing that they are working on modifiying AI so that it can work with many more planes per mission is a good thing too, as everyone knows how vital that is for a solid representation of the massive airial armadas associated with The Battle....it seems to be their biggest concern at the moment according to Oleg.

And 3 more CD's ? for FB/PF?... I hope he will make it clear whether or not we in the west will be able to get them....my russian is a little rusty....and non existant.

I love 'Olegish english'...ya'll should hear my 'Heywoooodian russian' .. !que horrible!

Badsight.
02-17-2005, 09:38 PM
im kinda bummed the Maddox Games got caught up making a PTO game . . . . . . . after seeing that Spitfire cockpit

does anyone else besides me remember the originall release date for BoB as told here

middle of 2005 . . . . . .

p1ngu666
02-17-2005, 10:19 PM
good about il10 being ordered http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

id so dearly love to fly pe2, il10, and many others http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif

spit looks superb http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

LEXX_Luthor
02-17-2005, 11:25 PM
Badsight:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>im kinda bummed the Maddox Games got caught up making a PTO game . . . . . . . after seeing that Spitfire cockpit <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
mmm I dunno. The more I get into PF, the more I am enjoying the Pacific. I never expected this. (please don't tell SkyChimp!!)

Cockpit-Candy(tm) does NOT impress me. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif You spend most of your time looking outside the cockpit at things in the sky and on the ground. I am most impressed with MiG~3 cockpit--the *best* cockpit of FB/PF--the cockpit I see most as I fly the missions I love best.

With no limit to the Polygons, a pure civil flight sim like that "Microsoft" thing should have even more Cockpit-Candy(tm) -- and no AI programming and no battlefield environment.

LeadSpitter_
02-17-2005, 11:35 PM
Oleg why dont you entrust the game to a group with contract that will allow the future expansion of 3rd party models for free and to be added in game along with maps, I understand the limited team members have to focus on the next project BOB to earn the heafty $$$ for next years paycheck.

But someone like gibbage haddock jippo ianboys etc who have completed projects and which have made it to game and have knowledge of how things work, why couldnt they be entrusted to future free addons? They know the quality standards and could all have equal say on what models will and wont be incorporated into the game. I think something like that would be the best bet for the community rather then just saying thats it games done no support or addons again and expect us to buy bob for 40 battle of france for 30 battle of poland for 30.

I do understand that wwii flight sims are not the most popular game type and dont make millions like other games like bf1942 cod halflife gta etc and we have a very tight community, even smaller online.

Not all do it for the money and spend many many hours becuase they enjoy seeing a project get into game. Look at the fs9 community and all the excellent freeware which is of equal quality of payware projects many cases.

since your team is busy I think having a trust worthy team who will continue to add aircraft and maps to the fb aep pf would be a great benefit to the community, we did pay alot of money and dont want to see it end. Have them under contract to not leak source and encryption, as for fm complaints they can provide all the data and charts to the community they use for info something that has not been done for the current game fms.

30 sturmovik 30 fb 30 aep 40 pf. And be sure we are going to buy bob when it comes out but many will continue to play fb aep pf becuase of the ammount of content and not everyone will be able to buy the latest computers out late in 2005 when bob hits shelves just for one game.

WWMaxGunz
02-18-2005, 03:05 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
Another one GREAT problem how to get more clever then now AI which will not eat so much resources... Its one of the hardest tasks...
Becasue should eb more planes at onece in air and at the same time to keep playability or say to allow to record track of any part of battle... I would say it is really very-very hard goal of our current development.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I keep upgrading and the cost for new super is way more than another just very good.
If the AI was able to run on a 2nd system through eithernet LAN or other cable then it
could have all of a PC to itself without need for graphics or player control. Really,
would not 2 systems be possibly better than 1? I wrote you this before but maybe not
so clearly for an AI-only client --- I think for offline LAN and also to boost online
servers for extra not just planes but ground guns that this would be most efficient
use of our old computers and parts that pile up from chasing the tech needed for these
sims! Instead of sell at a loss and buy newest at highest price, some of us might LAN.

I don't have the budget to keep up. How many others will? Make something possible and
see if people don't use it if it saves them money.

Besides that, ask your AI person/people how they would think of having a whole PC for
just AI, how old that PC could be and still make them happy.

It is 2005. Past time more people started thinking multiple PC's. Monitor, keyboard and
mouse switchboxes are not that expensive if space is the problem, either. Been there,
done it, still got the box and cables.

Viikate_
02-18-2005, 03:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Freycinet:
Viikate, congratulations on the official confirmation you received in this thread that ALL the Fokkers will be included... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Umm... where was that official confirmation http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

DuxCorvan
02-18-2005, 05:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Viikate_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Freycinet:
Viikate, congratulations on the official confirmation you received in this thread that ALL the Fokkers will be included... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Umm... where was that official confirmation http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think he refers to the confusing Oleg's answer to your post in page 4, where he says: "They are on the way". But it's hard to know whether he refers to the Fokker variants or your signed game boxes. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

actionhank1786
02-18-2005, 05:33 AM
Wow, looking at that Spitfire, makes me want to see the 109!
Good lord that was Good Looking!
Oleg Congratulations on such a great series of games.
I know most of us would buy BOB without seeing a screenshot, based on your background alone http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

CyC_AnD
02-18-2005, 07:58 AM
Oh My God! What a fantastic cocpit of spit! WoW now I will just press "I" full throtlle and fly to the sky to kill some nazis! /irony mode off/

Really, do you so care about superb cockpit graphics? Im ok with what I see now (maybe refraction problem solved only). I want to see real procdures in start, during flight (clickable cockpits?). More then high poly plane models, I want to see very good and accurate damage model, much planes in the air, better ground reality, better weather (not so static like now, air is living creature...). But more and more I read forums I see that people care only about graphics, high poly count, da effects...

actionhank1786
02-18-2005, 08:35 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CyC_AnD:
Oh My God! What a fantastic cocpit of spit! WoW now I will just press "I" full throtlle and fly to the sky to kill some nazis! /irony mode off/

Really, do you so care about superb cockpit graphics? Im ok with what I see now (maybe refraction problem solved only). I want to see real procdures in start, during flight (clickable cockpits?). More then high poly plane models, I want to see very good and accurate damage model, much planes in the air, better ground reality, better weather (not so static like now, air is living creature...). But more and more I read forums I see that people care only about graphics, high poly count, da effects... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

People do care about the graphics because that is what you get most out of a screenshot.
Videos and such would be best for showing a working damage model, and only playing the game can really give you a feel for what the game flys like.
So the fancy screenshots are the best way to build up talk for the game.
On top of that, if you've seen old Development updates, you would know that the planes are pretty much modelled piece by piece, so i can only assume (based on the extent of the models as shown way back when, and oleg's attention to detail) that you will be more than pleased with what BoB gives you.

actionhank1786
02-18-2005, 08:41 AM
p.s.
here's what i was talking about with the planes being built the way they are
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v54/Halfwayhank/vortal_pic_112810.jpg
I'm pretty sure Oleg will use this to make one of the best damage models yet

Rola.
02-18-2005, 10:34 AM
Yeah, I once posted a full detailed list of official BOB screenshots:

http://www.9-1939.pl/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=61


Great news Oleg! Thank you for sharing them with us! ...mmmm.... New FM http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif
We all appreciate your hard work and dedication.

potver
02-18-2005, 12:48 PM
What system can produce this beauties?
I don,t think the hardware is available for the next 2 years! away from the costs.

Dimensionaut_
02-18-2005, 02:13 PM
Don't worry, it's developed the smart way. You can tell by the screenshot.

Still, even if the next sim is on the edge of what hardware can do...
I don't mind you know that the engine has something that will last the next couple of years.

Sure it's dissappointing when you cannot play the best settings right away, but you'll be dissapointed more if the engine looks old fashion right from the start. Or worse for both develloper and you: you won't probably even buy it.

JG7_Rall
02-18-2005, 07:07 PM
pleeeaaaaseeeee Oleg....can we have a 109 cockpit shot to drool over? Pretty please? I will give you my first born! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif

Hunter82
02-19-2005, 06:04 AM
I wouldn't go that far but I would love to see a 109 pit also...since it's generally all I fly

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG7_Rall:
pleeeaaaaseeeee Oleg....can we have a 109 cockpit shot to drool over? Pretty please? I will give you my first born! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

DuxCorvan
02-19-2005, 06:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hunter82:
I wouldn't go that far but I would love to see a 109 pit also...since it's generally all I fly

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG7_Rall:
pleeeaaaaseeeee Oleg....can we have a 109 cockpit shot to drool over? Pretty please? I will give you my first born! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I would go that far: I'd give Oleg JG7_Rall's first born. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

And he would be in better hands... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

actionhank1786
02-19-2005, 10:19 AM
haha

JG7_Rall
02-19-2005, 05:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DuxCorvan:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hunter82:
I wouldn't go that far but I would love to see a 109 pit also...since it's generally all I fly

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG7_Rall:
pleeeaaaaseeeee Oleg....can we have a 109 cockpit shot to drool over? Pretty please? I will give you my first born! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I would go that far: I'd give Oleg JG7_Rall's first born. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

And he would be in better hands... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

lmao....

so, about that cockpit shot? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

MaxMhz
02-19-2005, 06:29 PM
This is better than any TV soap - but YES

I would like to see a pic of a Bf109 (any type) for il-2-BoB made by the developer of the model - and rendered/ray-traced with full quality on a mirror - like the Rowan's BoB boys do http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif - I bet it would look better http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
look at it lol REALY!
it's a photoshop job - see the wheels ? hehehe

http://www.airwarfare.com/Sims/GMX%20BOB/images/3.jpg
lol

even so...
seems to be awsum offline http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

and to Oleg - How do I become a beta tester for BoB ? (I got and am going to keep a low-end system http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif ) - I don't talk about things I shouldn't discuss either...
But then when I find news I spread it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif lol

JG7_Rall
02-20-2005, 08:49 PM
please oleg....109 cockpit...name your price

ElAurens
02-20-2005, 09:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MaxMhz:

it's a photoshop job - <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No...It is not. It is a shot of the actual 3D model for that other BoB, rendered in Max.

Trust me...

But you are correct in one area, that other BoB is primarily going to be an offline experience.

*yawn*

Badsight.
02-20-2005, 10:39 PM
Rowans BoB had a campaign system to make FB tuck its tail up & run

**cough**immersion**cough**

this sequal will be a awesome offline experience , probably the best yet done for a CFS game

TgD Thunderbolt56
02-21-2005, 08:42 AM
I've just spent over an hour skimming through this thread and ...*whew*. There are a number of conclusions:

1. Things arent always as they seem.
2. Oleg is openly "jazzed" about developement (this is good)
3. Hunter82 is just another Mk108 junky! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif


Good to see Oleg posting again and to see that there is still more to come. If I have one major concern, though, it is the decision NOT to distribute some of the new content in the "West". I know, I've heard and read most of the politics behind those decisions...it's just too bad.

I'm not one of those "more, more, more" people, but I am fond of "better, better, better". Big difference.

Thanks Oleg for taking the time to stop by and inform us as you can.

TB

Rola.
02-21-2005, 01:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ElAurens:
It is a shot of the actual 3D model for that other BoB, rendered in Max. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Heck, I even know the modeler who did it.
And he'll be joining my 9/39 modeling team http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif