PDA

View Full Version : SoW graphic is NOW (link inside)



VONGRAZ
11-06-2008, 05:43 AM
http://www.gamershell.com/download_35486.shtml

why not for pc ? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

First view inside cockpit in the video http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif

zardozid
11-06-2008, 05:49 AM
That's a "Birds of Pray" link NOT a "Storm of War" link...

"BoP" is a console game that uses some (all?) of the "IL2 1946" flight model data...no shared graphics, not an Oleg project, and uses an all new game engine.

Choctaw111
11-06-2008, 01:37 PM
I must say, that it is starting to look VERY good, console or not.
This is a great way to introduce more people to our type of gaming and when they like this kind of stuff, stepping up to Il2 and eventually to BoB is more of a reality.
Great news for us, as the more people who like this stuff means revenue to keep this genre going.
A good portion of that revenue will hopefully wind up in Oleg's pocket, as he makes the best.

Choctaw111
11-06-2008, 02:03 PM
I also wanted to say that it looks very good and runs so smooth.
Which console/consoles will this be intended for? I am sure it is for nothing less than PS3 and XBox360. I will be very surprised if the Wii has enough power to run it well.
My question is, if the PS3 and XBox360 can run something that looks so good, so well, why do our PC's have as much trouble as they do with Il2? The power of a PS3 or XBox360 won't out-muscle the PC I've got. I have often wondered this for other games. What gives?
Is the coding that much different in BoP?
I can imagine that there are many things in Il2 that are not present in BoP that tax our CPU's to the limit, but WOW does BoP look good.

stalkervision
11-06-2008, 02:32 PM
Originally posted by Choctaw111:
I also wanted to say that it looks very good and runs so smooth.
Which console/consoles will this be intended for? I am sure it is for nothing less than PS3 and XBox360. I will be very surprised if the Wii has enough power to run it well.
My question is, if the PS3 and XBox360 can run something that looks so good, so well, why do our PC's have as much trouble as they do with Il2? The power of a PS3 or XBox360 won't out-muscle the PC I've got. I have often wondered this for other games. What gives?
Is the coding that much different in BoP?
I can imagine that there are many things in Il2 that are not present in BoP that tax our CPU's to the limit, but WOW does BoP look good.

GOOD QUESTION! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Mr_Zooly
11-06-2008, 03:01 PM
ooh ooh I know the answer to that one http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
Consoles have very little else to process other than whatever software is running, PCs on the other hand have the OS initially, then the various programs that are needed to make the PC run (network, drivers, DX etc..)

Divine-Wind
11-06-2008, 03:22 PM
Originally posted by Choctaw111:
I also wanted to say that it looks very good and runs so smooth.
Which console/consoles will this be intended for? I am sure it is for nothing less than PS3 and XBox360. I will be very surprised if the Wii has enough power to run it well.
My question is, if the PS3 and XBox360 can run something that looks so good, so well, why do our PC's have as much trouble as they do with Il2? The power of a PS3 or XBox360 won't out-muscle the PC I've got. I have often wondered this for other games. What gives?
Is the coding that much different in BoP?
I can imagine that there are many things in Il2 that are not present in BoP that tax our CPU's to the limit, but WOW does BoP look good.
Consoles are basically designed to do one thing: Play games. The PS3 and 360 are also able to play DVD's, but you're probably not going to do both at the same time. Hence, more power devoted to the program currently running.

In theory, anyways. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif



Back on topic, I'm thinking I might have to check this out. Those graphics are just incredible. Although I have to say the HUD isn't really doing it for me.

WTE_Galway
11-06-2008, 03:41 PM
Bare in mind that game consoles are no longer something soccer mums buy to entertain the younger kids on a wet day whilst "grownups" play PC games. Console games have overtaken PC gaming in many areas.

Many younger dedicated console gamers will have specifically purchased a 27" or larger 1080p
1920×1080 resolution high definition TV just for gaming and connecting to "XBOX live" online.

This means new titles for console games are written to run with reasonably high resolutions "out of the box".

VF-17_Jolly
11-06-2008, 04:02 PM
Also that you can pickup a console for the price of a mid range graphics card i have a 360 hooked up to the same screen as my pc (HDMI)


I have never played a flight sim type game on it, that is what i built my pc is for

This il2 on the console just does not apeal to me

TheFamilyMan
11-06-2008, 05:41 PM
While running IL-2 on a PC, very little of the CPU, <1%, is being taken by other activities (unless you do something stupid like run a video encode while playing IL-2 on a single core processor). Throw in a dual core and it becomes an even tinier percent. Which makes me wonder: does the console version have dumbed down physics and FMs?

Divine-Wind
11-06-2008, 06:46 PM
What kind of processor do you have? I have a 2.4 Ghz Celeron and Il-2 takes up, on average, 95% of my processing power, according to Task Manager.

Metatron_123
11-06-2008, 08:37 PM
This game really looks good...

It makes me wish it was a polished version of Il-2:1946 instead of an arcade game. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif

halfcool
11-06-2008, 08:51 PM
Just because the game looks terrible doesn't nessesarily mean that it will run well. It's older.

Older games are crippled by outdated rendering, openGL is no longer the type of choice, if you want maximum FPS you need to use DirectX and take the graphical hit.

Not only that but a QX CPU, or even a duel core CPU, has very little effect on a game that was designed for a single core CPU's so your PC isn't dispersing the load of the game across it's cores. It just assigns the first core to do everything.

As for SLi. Again it's the older game. It was not meant to be split between GPU's. If you're having FPS problems drop it to DirectX rendering, and disable one of your GPU's in the nVidia menu when IL2 starts up. You may get a boost.

As for the game. I would LOVE IL2 to look like that as would anyone else who could take advantage of those details and shaders... In a perfect world.

Divine-Wind
11-07-2008, 09:05 AM
Originally posted by Metatron_123:
This game really looks good...

It makes me wish it was a polished version of Il-2:1946 instead of an arcade game. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif
That's what 4.09 is for. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

WOLFMondo
11-07-2008, 09:40 AM
Originally posted by Choctaw111:

My question is, if the PS3 and XBox360 can run something that looks so good, so well, why do our PC's have as much trouble as they do with Il2? The power of a PS3 or XBox360 won't out-muscle the PC I've got. I have often wondered this for other games. What gives?


Its to do with how console games are developed. They code is specifically written for a set of hardware. A developer can use 100% of the consoles resources all the time on engines specifically designed to run on those systems.

Its much harder to do that on a PC game where allot of resources are spent on making scalable software that will interact with various hardware dealing with a variety of standards and API's.

I would like to see that video at 1920x1200 1:1 and see how good that game looks. Like many 360/PS3 games, they look good in those small videos but a 2 year old PC with 8800GT will look just as good if not better.

We also don't know what BOP has under the hood. IL2 can choke (although I've not seen it have problems for some years on PC's i've been running it on) because its running allot of complex physics calculations all the time. BOP might dispense with some of the higher level flight and damage physics or calculations to do with bullets and the like.

BigC208
11-07-2008, 03:07 PM
Looks good. Reminds me a bit of Cannon's Channel map beta with the new trees and texture's. Only thing that this console game has are a lot more ground and city detail. Amazing. Can you amazing playing this on a 50 60 inch plasma or lcd tv? Be nice if they made it possible to play it with our regular joysticks. Cannot imagine playing this with one one of those console controllers. Big immersion killer.

Mr_Zooly
11-07-2008, 03:28 PM
beware the darkside, consoles lead to hate, hate leads to suffering etc...etc.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

The.Tyke
11-07-2008, 03:43 PM
oooh , might have to hijack my son's PS3 ! When's it out ?

Divine-Wind
11-08-2008, 09:41 AM
Originally posted by BigC208:
Looks good. Reminds me a bit of Cannon's Channel map beta with the new trees and texture's. Only thing that this console game has are a lot more ground and city detail. Amazing. Can you amazing playing this on a 50 60 inch plasma or lcd tv? Be nice if they made it possible to play it with our regular joysticks. Cannot imagine playing this with one one of those console controllers. Big immersion killer.
Saitek has 360 and PS3 compatible versions of their Av8r stick.

Aaron_GT
11-08-2008, 10:03 AM
My question is, if the PS3 and XBox360 can run something that looks so good, so well, why do our PC's have as much trouble as they do with Il2? The power of a PS3 or XBox360 won't out-muscle the PC I've got.

The PS3 and Xbox 360 are more powerful than you might think and might well out muscle your PC in terms of floating point. Also as noted having a fixed number of cores, FPUs and cache structure means that much tighter optimisation is possible and this can increase effective processing power quite dramatically. I've seen code badly optimised for a chip's cache structure take 10 times as long to run.

DIRTY-MAC
11-08-2008, 10:08 AM
What I wonder is, will SOW look this good?

Chivas
11-08-2008, 11:21 AM
The terrain looks great in BOP, but SOW terrain will be even more detailed.

The.Tyke
11-09-2008, 03:46 AM
Just run the video on my Pioneer Plasma HD via a PS3 and it looks great full screen !

Choctaw111
11-09-2008, 07:28 AM
So, will it be better on PS3 or XBox?
To be honest I haven't really been pleased with my PS3. Not many good titles, and not many "family" type games. I want to sell it (teaching my sons about money) and get an XBox360. I think we all here at home will have more fun with the 360 than the PS3.
Either way, I am really looking forward to getting this title, as it will draw my younger two sons more into this genre of gaming.

major_setback
11-09-2008, 08:28 AM
I'm hoping for a PC version of BoP.

Player_43
11-09-2008, 10:30 AM
Yes a PC versin track-ir copmpatible !

I suppose that the consoles won't offer any possibility to connect a head tracking device, which will force the players to use the prehistoric hat for the head movements ... fact that strongly decreases the interest that the IL2 community could have for such a game.

For me it's simple, if a flight simulation doesn't allow to use track-ir, I don't play it.

AWL_Spinner
11-09-2008, 10:56 AM
That's one of the key advantages of a PC - how many peripherals does the average simmer have hooked up?

For me, a console would need to provide USB capacity and support for at least:

CH Joystick
CH Pedals
Track IR

But others would also need

Dual/Triple Monitor Support
HOTAS Throttle
Things like that configurable CH Control Panel
Sub-woofer Buttkicker

Etc. etc.

That's where your driver support comes in.....

WhiteKnight77
11-09-2008, 12:24 PM
Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">My question is, if the PS3 and XBox360 can run something that looks so good, so well, why do our PC's have as much trouble as they do with Il2? The power of a PS3 or XBox360 won't out-muscle the PC I've got.

The PS3 and Xbox 360 are more powerful than you might think and might well out muscle your PC in terms of floating point. Also as noted having a fixed number of cores, FPUs and cache structure means that much tighter optimisation is possible and this can increase effective processing power quite dramatically. I've seen code badly optimised for a chip's cache structure take 10 times as long to run. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Remember though that the RAM on a console is shared by everything, including video.

Metatron_123
11-09-2008, 02:14 PM
Did anyone else think the bubble top Spitfire with desert camo was a bit odd?

JSG72
11-09-2008, 02:23 PM
For all the Eye Candy available for BoP.

I would doubt that there will be much of an immersion factor. I would guess at pure Shoot em up. with unlimited ammo. And remember "No Mods"? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

I would still buy it though, for the X360 As mine sits doing nothing atmo. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Aaron_GT
11-09-2008, 02:45 PM
Remember though that the RAM on a console is shared by everything, including video.

True, but in flight sims the bottleneck is traditionally floating point performance, not graphics, although BoP does look -very- pretty!

PanzerAce2.0
11-09-2008, 03:26 PM
Originally posted by Metatron_123:
Did anyone else think the bubble top Spitfire with desert camo was a bit odd?

I noticed that as well. I'm more ticked off that we don't get a bubble spit http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif


Its at 0:46sec for those that didn't catch it.

VW-IceFire
11-10-2008, 03:22 PM
Originally posted by Metatron_123:
Did anyone else think the bubble top Spitfire with desert camo was a bit odd?
Yeah that bothered me...as did the stars on the top of the La-7's wings.

The developer doesn't appear to be too serious about the history...simple research would take care of these things but alas...no.

Also the Blenheim taking apart a FW190 with a single .303 machine gun? Right then...