PDA

View Full Version : Those BoB doubters: Look at these videos



Buzzsaw-
11-12-2010, 04:48 PM
I know some have had their doubts about BoB, but take a look at these videos.

(watch them in 720 HD)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ye_VY1aV3Zg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z469HXN0hlQ


Especially the 1st one with the Stuka shows just how close to photo realism this game is going to be when maxed out with a superfast computer.

Metatron_123
11-12-2010, 04:58 PM
Oh my.

ElAurens
11-12-2010, 04:59 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

RegRag1977
11-12-2010, 05:25 PM
Ladies (if any)and gentlemen, please run this new game on your old P4 + AGP8x config at full graphic settings and look how your processor melts rapidly while your graphic card explodes in flames! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Seriously, I think i need a new computer...Still any idea about what will be required to run such a game?

stalkervision
11-12-2010, 05:59 PM
Originally posted by RegRag1977:
Ladies (if any)and gentlemen, please run this new game on your old P4 + AGP8x config at full graphic settings and look how your processor melts rapidly while your graphic card explodes in flames! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Seriously, I think i need a new computer...Still any idea about what will be required to run such a game?


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif


No problem. They have a provision for older computers if you buy the game and try to run it on one.

a screen come on with the words?

" Are you really serious? " http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

danjama
11-12-2010, 06:07 PM
Hope that's not the same crappy engine sounds in that spitfire video.

Cockpits and lighting are beautiful though.

danjama
11-12-2010, 06:11 PM
God that makes me want to play il2. It all looks so familiar, yet so different.

Buzzsaw-
11-12-2010, 06:36 PM
Originally posted by RegRag1977:
any idea about what will be required to run such a game?

I would say a fast Core I7 with latest gen video card and 4-6 gigs of RAM will get you into the door at the party.

But to really run this thing optimized, if its anything like IL-2 when it first came out, there won't be anything for six months which will run it maxed out.

Rjel
11-12-2010, 07:38 PM
I wonder if the computer has been invented yet to run BoB as Oleg envisions it? Still, if his financial future depends on it's success I can't imagine he made this sim to run on only the very best systems. That would be suicidal.

Woke_Up_Dead
11-12-2010, 08:43 PM
What's with the Italian fighters? Will the game come with a campaign outside of the BoB scenario?

jarink
11-12-2010, 08:48 PM
It looks pretty promising, but for all the talk in the past about more detailed modeling of water, the splash at 1:12 looks almost like it was taken straight outta IL-2. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

It obviously still has some work to be done. Lots of little glitches here and there (white outlines of the planes at the 2:00 dogfight, for example), but that's to be expected for something that's still in development.

The stuff I'm most looking forward to (better AI, variable weather, etc.) can't really be shown in promotional videos, unfortunately.

Jaws2002
11-12-2010, 09:14 PM
That video was made on an older beta version. Many sounds and effects are just placeholders, taken right out of Il-2. Tracers, weather, water and many other things in that video are already different in newer beta version. Some of the graphics bugs that you see were already fixed.
Oleg said he'll keep many features and effects secret until the release version is ready, so i wouldn't be to woried about some things you don't like in that video. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Jaws2002
11-12-2010, 09:22 PM
Here are Olegs exact words:


On some frame is visible direct split line of horizon. Not everywhere, because this split line became visible (should be something like on Bf109 everning scene split of sky) due to bug in code right before the Igromir and right before some video I begun to record.

Sound. The sound you heard is the old try. Some time even missed. Because the final sound you will listen only in final release.

Colors are not final really

Camera: there is a lot of optoions, that are not tuned. But the amount of options - filmakers will be very happy.

Effects, rounds on the water, water itself, beach, trees lods - all should be tuned in better way or replaced already by the final effects that was implemnented insted of placeholders.

Traccers of different type (smoked for example). It is already, but not present in a video.

As I told this video is from early beta. How knows how much time it take to produce - will understand me. So... i wasn't able to put new scenes in already ready project sequence, except the change Russian for English.

On exhibition is also demonstrated separate presentation video about some unique technologies. Maybe I will do it late in english with new video materials, but more close to release. As well as Su-26 video also demonstrated. But Su-26 had not tuned igauges, had some glitches in the details of cockpit.

PhantomKira
11-12-2010, 09:29 PM
Originally posted by Woke_Up_Dead:
What's with the Italian fighters? Will the game come with a campaign outside of the BoB scenario?

The Italians had a brief stint over Britain pretty much after the battle was over. Their performance was appalling, and the Luftwaffe stayed well away from the area they "lent" to the Italians. There was no apparent reason for Italian involvement, other than boosting morale, and the Germans were not quick to offer the required airfields and other support.

Link (http://surfcity.kund.dalnet.se/falco_bob.htm)

Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corpo_Aereo_Italiano)

Bankoletti
11-12-2010, 09:37 PM
My computer ran away and hid, scared to death!

Ba5tard5word
11-12-2010, 11:08 PM
Italian planes eh? Hmm...I kinda hoped they would fire, I wanted to see if they'll still have their ineffective cloud-farter guns that are impossible to hit anything with. I wonder how much MTO stuff we'll get, or if the IT planes are just for fun over France.

Looks good but it is kinda funny how it looks an awful lot like Il-2 with more detail.

Feathered_IV
11-13-2010, 02:03 AM
Historic moment for the flight sims. Can't tell you how glad I am to see things coming along at last.

BaronUnderpants
11-13-2010, 02:38 AM
The pc`s visitors could play the "game" on at the show had i5 and Gtx 460.


As far as SoW beeing the same as IL2 when it was released, that no one could run it on hig/maxed out, i dont think this will be the case here as i think the hardware has pretty much caught up with game developers. Not completly but still much closer then was the case in 2001.

I think oleg made it his buissness making it work on existing hardware and not forcing people to get 980X and Sli Gtx 580. Think hes holding of on the extremly demanding stuff till hardware gets better. They allredy gave some examples on how they make the game run much smoother then would normally be the case (like the user created skins used online for ex.)

I get the feeling Oleg and team would see it as a faliure if the game couldnt be played on a decent rig on high/max settings (well, max would maby be to good to be true, but still.)

TheGrunch
11-13-2010, 12:01 PM
BU is right, the booths at the show (not the presentation video however) had i5s and GTX460s with only 2GB of RAM, running the game maxed-out. This meant that the performance over land was less than ideal (short freezes every few seconds) since the game requires at least 3GB of RAM to run maxed-out, according to luthier I think. Other than that the game seemed to be running pretty smoothly.

JSG72
11-13-2010, 12:09 PM
Sooo? My upgrades in anticipation of SOW. purchased over 18mths ago should be OKhttp://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif? Running in HD? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blush.gif

TheGrunch
11-13-2010, 12:18 PM
Certainly looks like it. Although bear in mind that most of the videos at the show depict only a few aircraft in the sky at one time on fairly small monitors so there's no way to be sure, I guess.

The.Tyke
11-14-2010, 04:49 AM
I gave up IL2 a couple of years ago and now don't have a pc. I bought a laptop under the correct assumption that BOB would be years away and I'm quite happy with the flexibility of my laptop.

Now I could be in a quandary soon. Do I get a pc again, JUST FOR ONE GAME ?? it's going to make it a hell of an expensive game.

Xiolablu3
11-14-2010, 08:23 AM
DOnt worry too much about system specs, AMDs new 6 core Phenom 2 is competetive with the I7 and so prices will be pushed down much more than when intel had a general 'monopoly' on the best CPUs http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

The 1055T in particular seems to be a great bang for buck chip in the high end realm.

WTE_Galway
11-14-2010, 07:39 PM
Originally posted by TheGrunch:
) since the game requires at least 3GB of RAM to run maxed-out, according to luthier I think. Other than that the game seemed to be running pretty smoothly.

I think that is 3Gb to run without freezes at all unless you stay over the water http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Which is interesting because 3Gb is the absolute maximum 32 bit windows can provide to an application.

You may well need a 64 bit OS with 4-6Gb of ram for "maxed out". The people saying Win7/64 with 6Gb may have been pretty close to the mark. We will know for sure in a few months.

Feathered_IV
11-14-2010, 08:21 PM
Loft, one of the Rise of Flight devs was at the show and spent some time on the sow/cod beta.
He mentioned that the familiar nitro-glycerin style DM is still there from Il2. Touch the ground or something you shouldn't with some extremity and the entire aircraft immediately explodes. Hopefully this is placeholder behavior only though.
He also mentioned that the pc that delivered the press presentation had 12gb of RAM.

Romanator21
11-14-2010, 08:58 PM
ROF guy, hm? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif (Oleg has criticized the ROF DM too, so, who's right?)

Conspiracy theories aside - planes in IL-2 don't disintegrate if an extremity touches something, but they do break apart at a gentle touch (taxiing planes touching wingtips for example). If the central part touches something, then it explodes.

I think as presented, there were still major bugs in the collision system. In one video a Hurricane does a "Taran" attack on an He-111, they pass through one another like ghosts, and suddenly some wings are torn off.

I wouldn't be surprised if Oleg wanted to include some force-based damage. In fact, I think he said there would be, but not modeled visually (bent wings, etc). Instead, the player would suffer aerodynamic penalties.

Feathered_IV
11-14-2010, 09:20 PM
Yeah, the RoF team could teach Oleg a thing or two about releasing an incomplete product. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Still, WiP is still just that. Perfectly happy to await developments. For the record though my pc is an early quad with a NV460 and 2gb of ram... Exactly the same as the under powered demo machines. Better start saving for more ram!

mortoma
11-14-2010, 10:56 PM
I've got six gigs of DDR3 1833, I wonder if I will have to double it? I already am thinking that I'll upgrade my 285GTX to a high end 480GTX. I can always work more overtime! Also think I'll pick up a high performance SSD just to install. If the game ever needs to pull more from the drive to the ram during gameplay, a SSD will speed things up a bit. At least in theory.

BaronUnderpants
11-15-2010, 10:38 AM
Originally posted by Feathered_IV:
He also mentioned that the pc that delivered the press presentation had 12gb of RAM.


That sounds more than a little odd to me, unless they where doing the presentation in realtime from game (3D rendering program) instead of, say a powerpoint type deal. Like any normal presentation.

Beirut
11-15-2010, 10:38 AM
This is pretty funny. This place is going to start looking like the FSX threads over at AVSIM.

"Ya, I've got an overclocked i7-980 with 2x480GTX running SLI on an ASUS Extreme MB with 12 GBs of DDR3 and I have FSX loaded onto a 120GB SSD drive and I'm only getting between 10 and 15 fps over KSEA with the sliders on medium. Should I tweak the cfg. file to try and bring it up to 18fps?

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

MB_Avro_UK
11-15-2010, 01:42 PM
All I ask for is no CTDs or system domes. I can cope with varied periodics or even fluctuations but output deviations capped with unknown and unannounced spikes is too much to ask for http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Unless of course RAM is 'bounced' but without knowing if there is sufficient bacon wrapped in foil it's anyone's guess.

Oleg. Please take note. Why don't you listen?

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

WTE_Galway
11-15-2010, 02:53 PM
Originally posted by BaronUnderpants:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Feathered_IV:
He also mentioned that the pc that delivered the press presentation had 12gb of RAM.


That sounds more than a little odd to me, unless they where doing the presentation in realtime from game (3D rendering program) instead of, say a powerpoint type deal. Like any normal presentation. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Two things to consider.

1) the system probably does other things and the 12Gb ram may be there for some other purpose entirely.

2) On a triple channel mother board the logical ram increments are either:
a) 6Gb (3 X 2Gb sticks)
or
b)12Gb (either 6 x 2Gb or 3 x 4Gb sticks).

In other words if you actually need 8Gb the simplest solution is install 12Gb.

Mysticpuma2003
11-16-2010, 03:53 AM
Hmmm, video looks very impressive. Land and Sea detail is excellent. The paintschemes on the aircraft look almost like 'Plastic' though, no roughness or weathering, but I'm sure the skinners will soon sort that out!
My main issue is the sound.....it sounds like IL2 from 10-years-ago http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif
Maybe they are just place-holder sounds, but after so-long in development I hope that the engines sound like they do actually have some power rather than buzzing flies?

(I'll still buy it though http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif )

Cheers, MP

Feathered_IV
11-16-2010, 04:25 AM
Il-2 was never known for it's high quality default skins... I hope they change their minds and allow the weathering and panel layers to be customised too.

csThor
11-16-2010, 05:12 AM
Actually almost all sounds are still placeholders or are even missing completely. VMWIP ... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

thefruitbat
11-16-2010, 05:22 AM
oleg said over at the banana forums that we won't hear the final sounds till we buy it.

Feathered_IV
11-16-2010, 06:18 AM
Good! that'll be one less Storm of Whining to worry about.

knightflyte
11-16-2010, 07:16 AM
Listen to the Spitfire in the last 20 or so seconds. I'm betting we get something akin to that than the old IL2 playschool sounds.

thefruitbat
11-16-2010, 07:26 AM
Originally posted by knightflyte:
Listen to the Spitfire in the last 20 or so seconds. I'm betting we get something akin to that than the old IL2 playschool sounds.

see csThors post about 4 above.

the sounds in the vid are not final sounds, in fact they are largely il2 sounds as placeholders.

knightflyte
11-16-2010, 07:37 AM
I should have clarified more...... I realize these are place cards and as such shouldn't be considered as the final sounds, but I still think that the sounds we get will tilt toward the latter Spitfire sound than the earlier sounds in the video where they sound exactly like IL2's.

thefruitbat
11-16-2010, 07:40 AM
Rog,

it's def a possibility, but i guess until it comes out, we'll never know.

JG53Frankyboy
11-16-2010, 07:46 AM
Originally posted by Feathered_IV:
Il-2 was never known for it's high quality default skins... I hope they change their minds and allow the weathering and panel layers to be customised too.

OM:
"Please note that the video was made with some decreased plane texture settings.........."

Bremspropeller
11-16-2010, 09:07 AM
Hopefully, they'll delete that glossyness of the airframes http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif

Falcke
11-16-2010, 09:59 AM
It was probably done just to showcase the lighting effects.

Bremspropeller
11-16-2010, 10:09 AM
I hope so.

It's realistic for a greased and polished airframe (I'm a fan of options...), but usually, camo is used to NOT flicker the other guy in the eye http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Player_43
11-16-2010, 02:20 PM
The planes look very photorealistic and the cockpits too, great job ! But on some other aspects (especially ground textures and clouds) it still looks very cartoony to me ... and I wouldn't be surprised to see Mickey Mouse bouncing out of these clouds in this yellow
biplane ;-)

http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/2224/80540008.jpg

Really, there is something strange when you see the quality of the planes and cockpits surrounded by these cartoony clouds that really look like cotton wool balls. ROF does much better on that point. I would have expected some much better atmospheric effects in a sim supposed to ne high tech. BUT ... it's still WIP and I heard that they are still working on the meteo effects so all hope is not lost yet.

ElAurens
11-16-2010, 03:51 PM
What is it about the fact that this is an early Beta build and a work in progress that so many fail to comprehend?

And if you want to talk about Mickey Mouse, look no further than the rubber airplane damage model in RoF. Unless of course you think that stick and fabric aircraft that nose dive into the ground all bounce.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Urufu_Shinjiro
11-16-2010, 04:02 PM
Originally posted by mortoma:
I've got six gigs of DDR3 1833, I wonder if I will have to double it? I already am thinking that I'll upgrade my 285GTX to a high end 480GTX. I can always work more overtime! Also think I'll pick up a high performance SSD just to install. If the game ever needs to pull more from the drive to the ram during gameplay, a SSD will speed things up a bit. At least in theory.

I doubt that, the i5 GTX460 systems were perfectly adequate to run fairly high graphics settings, the only reason the demo machines stuttered is the large BoB map will not fit on the 2gig of ram that was supplied, 4gig would probably have been butter smooth.


Originally posted by Player_43:
The planes look very photorealistic and the cockpits too, great job ! But on some other aspects (especially ground textures and clouds) it still looks very cartoony to me ... and I wouldn't be surprised to see Mickey Mouse bouncing out of these clouds in this yellow
biplane ;-)


Really, there is something strange when you see the quality of the planes and cockpits surrounded by these cartoony clouds that really look like cotton wool balls. ROF does much better on that point. I would have expected some much better atmospheric effects in a sim supposed to ne high tech. BUT ... it's still WIP and I heard that they are still working on the meteo effects so all hope is not lost yet.


Originally posted by ElAurens:
What is it about the fact that this is an early Beta build and a work in progress that so many fail to comprehend?



http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Uufflakke
11-16-2010, 04:29 PM
Everything still looks like the Bonus DVD from 2006 or 2007 except the cockpits and vehicles. Cockpits are great already in this stage.
Yeah, I know it's still very WIP and beta after all those years and using placeholders for almost everything and not using the best system and videocard. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif
And reading comments at 1C people are amazed to see the quality of villages and beautiful cliffs of Dover. But watch again that bonus dvd and nothing has changed. LMAO. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
To me the structure of the cliffs looks like the trunk of an old birch tree or a bad modelled diorama.
If this is the current state of art we have to wait at least till Christmas 2012.
But it won't surprise me if all of a sudden Oleg and his team show what really to expect and this is just something to deceive us and other game companies. |Or something like that.
Just my opinion for what it's worth...

Mysticpuma2003
11-17-2010, 03:01 AM
Originally posted by Player_43:
The planes look very photorealistic and the cockpits too, great job ! But on some other aspects (especially ground textures and clouds) it still looks very cartoony to me ... and I wouldn't be surprised to see Mickey Mouse bouncing out of these clouds in this yellow
biplane ;-)

http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/2224/80540008.jpg

Really, there is something strange when you see the quality of the planes and cockpits surrounded by these cartoony clouds that really look like cotton wool balls. ROF does much better on that point. I would have expected some much better atmospheric effects in a sim supposed to ne high tech. BUT ... it's still WIP and I heard that they are still working on the meteo effects so all hope is not lost yet.

White Cliffs of Dover:

http://rst.gsfc.nasa.gov/Sect17/021.jpg

Lets be realistic, this is a simulation and I'm sure Oleg could make a version that looks like a Pixar Render, but who'd want to play a game at half a frame per second?

I do however agree with the RoF comment about clouds.

I do hope that the clouds improve though!

Cheers, MP

ElAurens
11-17-2010, 05:40 AM
See my lasst post.

THIS IS AN EARLY BETA WORK IN PROGRESS BUILD.

After so many times that Oleg has been burned by showing too much too soon do you really think he is going to show everythng he has now?
He even scolded Luthier about giving out too much info on how skins work.

RoF is going to look, and be, very dated when SoW hits the market.

JG52Uther
11-17-2010, 05:45 AM
Its obvious to me that people don't read the threads now El.
I would bet the game build shown at the show is already long surpassed.
As for RoF,I agree completely.

Feathered_IV
11-17-2010, 06:39 AM
SoW/CoD will herald the next generation of sim, when it arrives.

Although RoF is of an earlier vintage, it's development isn't over yet and it will be interesting to see where it goes from here. The NQ team has been a bit of an underdog, producing their first sim with a fraction of the resources and experience that Maddox Games has. I find myself wishing them the best and hoping that they survive to contribute to the hobby into the future. While I wouldn't expect Rise of Flight to beat Oleg Maddox at his own game, I suspect there is still some fun to be wrung out of it, even into the age of SoW.

Monty_Thrud
11-17-2010, 07:20 AM
Really hope they do a top notch job on the Aircraft sounds (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49CpQJ4G8wA&feature=related), i have some neighbours i want too scare the living be-jayzus out of.http://premium1.uploadit.org/bsamania//scare.gif

Bremspropeller
11-17-2010, 10:08 AM
What is it about the fact that this is an early Beta build and a work in progress that so many fail to comprehend?

What's about word "preview" that you don't comprehend?

I couldn't care less about "placeholders" - show the game as it looks when being sold, or do nothing at all.

Urufu_Shinjiro
11-17-2010, 10:33 AM
Originally posted by Bremspropeller:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">What is it about the fact that this is an early Beta build and a work in progress that so many fail to comprehend?

What's about word "preview" that you don't comprehend?

I couldn't care less about "placeholders" - show the game as it looks when being sold, or do nothing at all. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Seriously? Really? The very nature of the word PREVIEW implies it is a view BEFORE the final version is ready, how do you expect to get a preview yet see the final product? /logicfail

Bremspropeller
11-17-2010, 10:35 AM
The very nature of the word PREVIEW implies it is a view BEFORE the final version is released

fixed

Buzzsaw-
11-17-2010, 10:42 AM
I couldn't care less about "placeholders" - show the game as it looks when being sold, or do nothing at all.

Oleg has always been a believer in showing his games as they progress through development, AND GETTING FEEDBACK.

That is one of the reasons why his games are so successful... HE LISTENS.

As for RoF, the possibility of Oleg releasing a game which is as incomplete and bug riddled as RoF is impossible. Nice eye candy at certain ranges, and decent flight model, but the distance modelling, (you can't see aircraft at distances longer than 1.5 kilometers unless you use an awkward zoom mechanism) damage model which is ludicrous, (as mentioned, fabric and wire planes bouncing undamaged after they hit the ground) and complete lack of a decent campaign or flyable two seaters, (although they are coming apparently) plus an inability to host large numbers of players on a server means RoF is the actual 'placeholder' while people wait for BoB.

Don't get me wrong, I bought and support RoF, but there is no comparison with Oleg's work.

BATTLE OF BRITAIN will be a revolutionary sim, in the same way IL-2 was. And we will be flying it for a LONG time.

Bremspropeller
11-17-2010, 10:47 AM
Oleg has always been a believer in showing his games as they progress through development, AND GETTING FEEDBACK.

That is one of the reasons why his games are so successful... HE LISTENS.

How can he get feedback if he doesn't show his planned-to-be-released stuff? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif

Jaws2002
11-17-2010, 10:54 AM
At this stage in SOW development, things move very fast and the game can look different from one update to another.
I'd rather have the update as it is than nothing at all. Remember, the game is not ready yet, so it can't look exactly like it will look when will be sold.

In the mean time I can have plenty fun with ROF.

ElAurens
11-17-2010, 10:54 AM
I agree with you on all counts Buzzsaw.

In a couple of years, as we fly over a totally human populated/controlled battlefield on a campaign mission, getting target coordinates from our squadmates on the ground who are involved in the battle, all this bickering and doubting will seem as pointless as it is.

Xiolablu3
11-17-2010, 12:27 PM
Speaking of which, how has battleground Europe improved over the last 2 years?

Anyone still play it? Is it a lot better?

I enjoyed the free 2 weeks I played a lot.

Buzzsaw-
11-17-2010, 01:33 PM
Salute

I'll go out on a limb and do some imagining:

March 2011:

"Battle of Britain" STORM OF WAR is published.

1c Maddox announces partnership with Luthier in the production of a Korean Air War Simulation. Release date 2013.

Maddox also announces the next release in the STORM OF WAR series will be "Star of Africa", a desert campaign set on a map of Libya and Egypt.

Maddox also invites gamers to create cockpits for all the non-flyable aircraft in the game. He announces aircraft and cockpit modelling for FW-190's, 109's, Hurricanes and Spitfires are reserved for the company.

A year after publication:

1c Maddox releases new aircraft for a free mini-campaign addon for BoB: "KanalKampf" Aircraft include FW-190A1, A2 and A3, 109F2 and F4, Spitfire Va, Vb, Hurricane IIb, IIc, Mosquito and Boston bomber.

At the same time, 1C Maddox announces a partnership with a European group who will be producing "Fall of France", a simulation of the May/June 1940 campaign

In the first year of the game, there have literally been hundreds of new maps created by users due to the ease of use and simplicity of the new map creation software. Some of the better maps include 'Narvik', 'Greece 1940', and 'Malta 1940'. These have been incorporated into the official game.

There have also been 20 new cockpits created by users, the Walrus, Wellington, and many other aircraft are now flyable. Some of the better cockpits have been incorporated into the game in official patches, some are user only mods, only available on 'open' servers. There are also a number of new player created aircraft underway.

1C Maddox games has announced a partnership with an as yet un-named company to produce "Red Baron Extreme", using the SOW engine to create a WWI flight Simulation.

1C has also announced the SOW engine will be used in a new tactical ground simulation, 'Blitz'.

Two years after BoB's publication, "Star of Africa" is released. The game includes a comprehensive graphics upgrade to be compatible with DX-15.

Aircraft include the Tomahawk, Kittyhawk, Macchi 200, 202, SM-79, Stuka D, Spitfire IX, FW-190A4, A5, 109G2 and G6, as well as the games first flyable 4 engine bomber, the B-17F.

Included is an updated and official map of Malta and southern Sicily as well as a 1940-1942 Malta campaign.

2013: "MiG Cap" the latest in the SOW series is released.

2014 "Fall of France" is released.

2015 "Red Baron Extreme" is released.

and so on...

thefruitbat
11-17-2010, 04:12 PM
Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Salute

I'll go out on a limb and do some imagining:

March 2011:

"Battle of Britain" STORM OF WAR is published.

1c Maddox announces partnership with Luthier in the production of a Korean Air War Simulation. Release date 2013.

Maddox also announces the next release in the STORM OF WAR series will be "Star of Africa", a desert campaign set on a map of Libya and Egypt.

Maddox also invites gamers to create cockpits for all the non-flyable aircraft in the game. He announces aircraft and cockpit modelling for FW-190's, 109's, Hurricanes and Spitfires are reserved for the company.

A year after publication:

1c Maddox releases new aircraft for a free mini-campaign addon for BoB: "KanalKampf" Aircraft include FW-190A1, A2 and A3, 109F2 and F4, Spitfire Va, Vb, Hurricane IIb, IIc, Mosquito and Boston bomber.

At the same time, 1C Maddox announces a partnership with a European group who will be producing "Fall of France", a simulation of the May/June 1940 campaign

In the first year of the game, there have literally been hundreds of new maps created by users due to the ease of use and simplicity of the new map creation software. Some of the better maps include 'Narvik', 'Greece 1940', and 'Malta 1940'. These have been incorporated into the official game.

There have also been 20 new cockpits created by users, the Walrus, Wellington, and many other aircraft are now flyable. Some of the better cockpits have been incorporated into the game in official patches, some are user only mods, only available on 'open' servers. There are also a number of new player created aircraft underway.

1C Maddox games has announced a partnership with an as yet un-named company to produce "Red Baron Extreme", using the SOW engine to create a WWI flight Simulation.

1C has also announced the SOW engine will be used in a new tactical ground simulation, 'Blitz'.

Two years after BoB's publication, "Star of Africa" is released. The game includes a comprehensive graphics upgrade to be compatible with DX-15.

Aircraft include the Tomahawk, Kittyhawk, Macchi 200, 202, SM-79, Stuka D, Spitfire IX, FW-190A4, A5, 109G2 and G6, as well as the games first flyable 4 engine bomber, the B-17F.

Included is an updated and official map of Malta and southern Sicily as well as a 1940-1942 Malta campaign.

2013: "MiG Cap" the latest in the SOW series is released.

2014 "Fall of France" is released.

2015 "Red Baron Extreme" is released.

and so on...

that sounds just about like my idea of heaven http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Mysticpuma2003
11-18-2010, 05:00 AM
Although I understand what you mean, I think that the Russian, German, Pacific and American main areas of combat will need to get priority development though, so I would expect to see Lagg, Sturmovik's, 190's, Corsair's, P-40,47's and 51's along with B-24 and B-17's in the early add-ons.

Now, I don't mean that in a 'They should be' sort of way, I'm just thinking that if you want to appeal to larger markets (eg. make more sales), you develop for the larger countries interest surely?

I live in the UK, so I'm glad we get BoB, but when it comes to sales, wouldn't it make more sense to pander to the larger populations to get back some of the investment first?

Don't get me wrong, I'm buying it anyway, but when you have a company that lives or dies on finances, surely getting a larger market interest would be beneficial?

Cheers, MP

Urufu_Shinjiro
11-18-2010, 07:39 AM
Originally posted by Mysticpuma2003:
Although I understand what you mean, I think that the Russian, German, Pacific and American main areas of combat will need to get priority development though, so I would expect to see Lagg, Sturmovik's, 190's, Corsair's, P-40,47's and 51's along with B-24 and B-17's in the early add-ons.

Now, I don't mean that in a 'They should be' sort of way, I'm just thinking that if you want to appeal to larger markets (eg. make more sales), you develop for the larger countries interest surely?

I live in the UK, so I'm glad we get BoB, but when it comes to sales, wouldn't it make more sense to pander to the larger populations to get back some of the investment first?

Don't get me wrong, I'm buying it anyway, but when you have a company that lives or dies on finances, surely getting a larger market interest would be beneficial?

Cheers, MP

That's all very true, but I suspect the financial benefits would balance out or even favor the path of the Med. Going from BoB to the Med would mean minimal work, new map yes but less planes to add etc. This not only means less money spent making the next product, but less time until it is released. New product, new sales, establishing the series in a more solid way and quickly should all lead to the funding and time necessary to move to ETO, Russia and the Pacific.

Player_43
11-18-2010, 03:00 PM
Originally posted by Bremspropeller:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The very nature of the word PREVIEW implies it is a view BEFORE the final version is released

fixed </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly, the word ‘preview’ (pre = before and view means what it means) means that what we see looks like what we will see in the final version.

But there is still something that I don’t understand in the arguments of those who say, ‘it’s a Beta version’ and it doesn’t reflect the release quality.

So does it mean that Oleg developed some cartoony looking landscapes and clouds in order to use them as place holders with the intention of rebuilding everything later or is there a miracle graphic feature missing that will transform Disneyland into London ?

In my opinion, I think that this video was not so bad and that with some good fine tuning of lightings and colors will change a lot and we will be surprised by the quality of the release version.

Look at this screen:

http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/3816/shot20101022183530.jpg (http://img193.imageshack.us/i/shot20101022183530.jpg/)

Urufu_Shinjiro
11-18-2010, 03:59 PM
Originally posted by Player_43:
But there is still something that I don’t understand in the arguments of those who say, ‘it’s a Beta version’ and it doesn’t reflect the release quality.

So does it mean that Oleg developed some cartoony looking landscapes and clouds in order to use them as place holders with the intention of rebuilding everything later or is there a miracle graphic feature missing that will transform Disneyland into London ?


No it means that the textures used to make the landscape are not final (still being fine tuned). The whole graphics engine simulates colors etc. based on lighting and atmospheric conditions (really advanced stuff that will cause maps to look correct at 1m as well as at 10km altitude) and this is still being tweaked so that until this is done ALL color and saturation etc. will be slightly off. Also, Oleg's software development methods are quite different than most game companies, Oleg creates many various elements at the same time and then right at the end throws them all together and tweaks everything, so the textures the map maker used when first making the map look entirely different when the atmospheric lighting was suddenly in effect, and Oleg will tweak both right up until release (and probably beyond, knowing him). So understanding why one screenshot looks different than another, understanding why there may be placeholder textures or objects etc. in an early beta version is a combination of understanding Olegs odd development methods and understanding the fact that Oleg really is showing us stuff far sooner than other game developers would. Most game companies will not release one shred of video or a single screenshot until the game is damn near in the bag and ready for the over-hyped PR campaign they rely on to sell their rehashed same-old-same-old crap year after year.

C.W.M.V.
11-20-2010, 09:09 PM
In for updates...Cant wait to see the 190-Dora in this game.

Uufflakke
11-21-2010, 03:06 AM
Originally posted by C.W.M.V.:
In for updates...Cant wait to see the 190-Dora in this game.

Then I have to disappoint you: The Battle of Britain took place in 1940 and the Dora was operational in late 1944.
For the Fw-190 D you need to wait for an eventual add-on.

ElAurens
11-21-2010, 07:44 AM
I'd say at least 3 years till we get to the late war period.

Thankfully.

I'm totally burned out on the entire late war, Defense of the Reich, plane set.

Uber planes bore me to tears.

JSG72
11-21-2010, 11:22 AM
Originally posted by ElAurens:
I'd say at least 3 years till we get to the late war period.

Thankfully.

I'm totally burned out on the entire late war, Defense of the Reich, plane set.

Uber planes bore me to tears.

"Uber Planes" AFAIC. Is not a good description unless used in the wrong Time/Theatre of War.Examples being of folks flying 190Ds against Hurricanes or Mustangs against 109Es.
It is up to those who purchase and fly this Sim to do what they like.Flying Full Real in actual combat would mean you die when the Full real pilot does.(And you get bored in the process of reaching some action.) So you have just wasted your money on this Sim. I have flown Buffalos agains Ki27s and it was fine. Because it happened.(Against "Uber" Ki 84s? Well Doh!)Trying to fly 7 Fw190Ds against 16 MKxiv. Spitfires/Tempests is far more challenging.Ie. reallity
As far as SOW. goes. It would appear that in the past few years of its development a lot more "History" about BoB has been uncovered/released and Rather than the magnificent Victory that Britain had over the Luftwaffe. It would seem that the Luftwaffe were set on a ridiculous task that simpley could not possibly be realised successfully.
Thus making the whole premise of B0B SOW. An improbable Whatif? So of course the reason behind it is just to fly in the foregone conclussion and for us to try and change it.

Anyways forget about that. I have just took my first ever, flight abroad over Europe and I will be very happy if SOW. can actually portay the ability to make out ground targets at the heights flown. Like I could from 34,000ft as opposed to the 7000 in IL2. (Of course BOB was never flown much above 20,000 )So it will be interesting to see developments of later "Addons".

Kurfurst__
11-22-2010, 04:14 AM
Personally, what I would like to see in the add on is flyable Me 410... I don't think there was one ever since EAW...

JG53Frankyboy
11-22-2010, 04:31 AM
my personal "choice" would be:
first a "plane AdOn" on the same map (i belive making a map in SoW standards a HUGE task !!) called 'Dieppe 42'.
flyable SpitV, IX, Allison Mustang, B-17, Fw190A and 109G-1 to name a few.

than to a big AdOn : 'Tobruk 42' (i would prefer a 41 planeset, but that would lack the so wanted Spit http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ) ->
Bf109F, Mc202, SpitV, Kittyhawk to name the main fighters.