PDA

View Full Version : More SoW pics @ 1C



Bearcat99
09-12-2008, 06:21 AM
Go to the end of this thread (http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=2040)

JG52Uther
09-12-2008, 06:41 AM
Like the Spitfire pics,somehow I just can't get excited about the trains,no matter how well they are modelled.It will help with the realism,but as most will be flying along at 300+ I think this level of realism for ground objects is unnecessary for quite a few users,and will just bring FPS down.

stathem
09-12-2008, 06:53 AM
http://files.games.1c.ru/il2pict/01.jpg

It's Duck!

Frequent_Flyer
09-12-2008, 07:31 AM
Originally posted by JG52Uther:
Like the Spitfire pics,somehow I just can't get excited about the trains,no matter how well they are modelled.It will help with the realism,but as most will be flying along at 300+ I think this level of realism for ground objects is unnecessary for quite a few users,and will just bring FPS down.


I am convinced the extreme level of detail on the ground objects is to allow the SOWBOB game engine to be used for applications other than just a " flight sim ". Film documentries or " dog fights " application. Increasing its market value. The return on investment for "just" a flight sim, is a slim to none margin.

crucislancer
09-12-2008, 07:39 AM
Wow!


Weathering of the aircraft in time. When you entering a career you'll get the new aircraft (or partially used). Then with each flight your aircraft will be in constant changes of conditions... you will see in a sequence of missions. It isn't only about how it looks, but also about performance of aircraft (new and used – are different).

Now that's cool. That was always a minor gripe of mine with a lot of flight sims, no effects on aircraft performance/appearance over time. I wonder if mission builders will be able to set up random failures?

Haigotron
09-12-2008, 07:45 AM
Originally posted by crucislancer:
Wow!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Weathering of the aircraft in time. When you entering a career you'll get the new aircraft (or partially used). Then with each flight your aircraft will be in constant changes of conditions... you will see in a sequence of missions. It isn't only about how it looks, but also about performance of aircraft (new and used – are different).

Now that's cool. That was always a minor gripe of mine with a lot of flight sims, no effects on aircraft performance/appearance over time. I wonder if mission builders will be able to set up random failures? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Is that going to be FX that are applied over the plane's skin OR is it just a series of skins that are created beforehand and swapped as the missions progress?

Haigotron
09-12-2008, 07:47 AM
sorry to double post

but does the change of the plane's condition entitle that:

if I overheat the engine early on, there are chances that i damaged the engine and the effects can be felt down the line?

Uncle_Stranger
09-12-2008, 07:53 AM
Judging by the detailes of the trains...
They are going to be flyable!
That just doesn't sound right does it?

Weathering of the aircraft betwen the missions?
That sounds very cool. I wonder if the bullets holes will stay on the AC too?

LEXX_Luthor
09-12-2008, 07:58 AM
Wearing out aircraft in time. Is this for Player Plane only?

AI aircraft need wearing out -- at a more simplified level. A good example: You fly Ki-61 in a dynamic campaign or Online War that sees the Japanese side in deep poo by 1944. Do the AI Ki-61s perform perfectly no matter how badly the war goes on your side?

Now, the Player Plane can have more "detailed" wearing out, and all AI aircraft have much more simplified and basic wear modelling. Maybe Oleg is doing something like this. Bravo if So!

Bremspropeller
09-12-2008, 08:04 AM
They continue to not impress me.

I don't give a rat's *** about trains and railway - I wanna see pics of the engine, weather and all the "magic" stuff they're promising.
That's what gets me immersion.
Not some eeny-weeny train where I could count the rivets.
I want a flight-sim, not a candy-show.

If I wanted trains, I'd have bought M$ Train Simunlator. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

stathem
09-12-2008, 08:09 AM
Well, it'll be important to you when you have to catch the train back to your airfield after getting shot down.

LEXX_Luthor
09-12-2008, 08:10 AM
"If I want trains, I'll buy Microsoft Train Simulator." ~Bremspropeller


That could be SiG worthy.

stathem
09-12-2008, 08:10 AM
Originally posted by Haigotron:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by crucislancer:
Wow!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Weathering of the aircraft in time. When you entering a career you'll get the new aircraft (or partially used). Then with each flight your aircraft will be in constant changes of conditions... you will see in a sequence of missions. It isn't only about how it looks, but also about performance of aircraft (new and used – are different).

Now that's cool. That was always a minor gripe of mine with a lot of flight sims, no effects on aircraft performance/appearance over time. I wonder if mission builders will be able to set up random failures? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Is that going to be FX that are applied over the plane's skin OR is it just a series of skins that are created beforehand and swapped as the missions progress? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The former I think. Oleg has mentioned and explained it before.

Bremspropeller
09-12-2008, 08:11 AM
Well, it'll be important to you when you have to catch the train back to your airfield after getting shot down.

Touché http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

LEXX_Luthor
09-12-2008, 08:14 AM
stathem::
Well, it'll be important to you when you have to catch the train back to your airfield after getting shot down.
That would be like the old Pilot Videos that many of the Sims of Old, the Sims of Reknown, needed for "immersion."

Everybody would watch it one time, then they will always press Escape and skip over the Train Video. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Chris0382
09-12-2008, 08:15 AM
I can barely see or locate the ground objects as is because they are too tiny. I hope with SOW they make the GO's bigger so we can locate and see them.

LEXX_Luthor
09-12-2008, 08:22 AM
Seeing ground objects has always been a problem in The Sims. However, ground objects don't need to be "bigger."

The Sims developers need to stop this exponential growth in Polygons and work at making a visual detect system where the terrain grafix does not hide or "eat" ground objects, unless the ground objects are under, say, a "motionless camoflage" state where they should be hard to see.

A million Polygons and you can't see them from the cockpit. All The Sims are like this.

stathem
09-12-2008, 08:25 AM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
stathem:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Well, it'll be important to you when you have to catch the train back to your airfield after getting shot down.
That would be like the old Pilot Videos that many of the Sims of Old, the Sims of Reknown, needed for "immersion."

Everybody would watch it one time, then they will always press Escape and skip over the Train Video. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ha! and what about of your carriage gets strafed by roving 109's when you're on the way back? Campaign over!. And you have to help pull badly injured civvies from the wreck.

I think you're just stuck in the past there Lexx.

(btw, mustn't forget to include this http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif this time)

stalkervision
09-12-2008, 08:27 AM
Originally posted by Bremspropeller:
They continue to not impress me.

I don't give a rat's *** about trains and railway - I wanna see pics of the engine, weather and all the "magic" stuff they're promising.
That's what gets me immersion.
Not some eeny-weeny train where I could count the rivets.
I want a flight-sim, not a candy-show.

If I wanted trains, I'd have bought M$ Train Simunlator. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

me too. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

How about instead we get a nice Non-AI Me-108 trainer!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

The NON-ai list for BoB seems pretty darn short to me.

LEXX_Luthor
09-12-2008, 08:30 AM
Well okay. Oleg did say we get flyable AA, so that could mean flyable AA trains so we can shoot back at Bf-109 strafer.

Ferdinand_L
09-12-2008, 09:03 AM
Originally posted by stathem:


It's Duck!

Hehe. Those of us with kids got it.

http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/ttte/images/thumb/2/2d/Duck.jpg/250px-Duck.jpg

Toten_Waffe
09-12-2008, 09:16 AM
Originally posted by Ferdinand_L:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stathem:


It's Duck!

Hehe. Those of us with kids got it.

http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/ttte/images/thumb/2/2d/Duck.jpg/250px-Duck.jpg </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


With kids? Or who still are kids? Eh Eh http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Feathered_IV
09-12-2008, 09:30 AM
Can we make them do this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bn1DmFwXqkk

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

crucislancer
09-12-2008, 09:37 AM
Originally posted by Ferdinand_L:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stathem:


It's Duck!

Hehe. Those of us with kids got it.

http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/ttte/images/thumb/2/2d/Duck.jpg/250px-Duck.jpg </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL! Slightly off topic, I have been chastised in the past by my daughter for blowing up "Thomas" on a few ground attack missions. "Is that Thomas, Daddy? No! Don't blow up Thomas!!"

stathem
09-12-2008, 10:24 AM
Originally posted by Ferdinand_L:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stathem:


It's Duck!

Hehe. Those of us with kids got it.

http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/ttte/images/thumb/2/2d/Duck.jpg/250px-Duck.jpg </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Urufu_Shinjiro
09-12-2008, 10:30 AM
Originally posted by crucislancer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ferdinand_L:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stathem:


It's Duck!

Hehe. Those of us with kids got it.

http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/ttte/images/thumb/2/2d/Duck.jpg/250px-Duck.jpg </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL! Slightly off topic, I have been chastised in the past by my daughter for blowing up "Thomas" on a few ground attack missions. "Is that Thomas, Daddy? No! Don't blow up Thomas!!" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Lol, and this is the difference between boys and girls, my son would say "Cool, blow up Thomas!". His current favorite line is " Daddy, lets crash in the water!", lol.

stathem
09-12-2008, 10:35 AM
Originally posted by Toten_Waffe:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ferdinand_L:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stathem:


It's Duck!

Hehe. Those of us with kids got it.

http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/ttte/images/thumb/2/2d/Duck.jpg/250px-Duck.jpg </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


With kids? Or who still are kids? Eh Eh http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Me racking up another kill:

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/griffnav/Gallery/a1a1a1.jpg

stathem
09-12-2008, 10:39 AM
Originally posted by Urufu_Shinjiro:
Lol, and this is the difference between boys and girls, my son would say "Cool, blow up Thomas!". His current favorite line is " Daddy, lets crash in the water!", lol.

What is it with that? Mine does too, grabs the stick and dives straight for the water. Loves it. Gets most upset if you put him the Smolensk map.

Urufu_Shinjiro
09-12-2008, 10:45 AM
Originally posted by stathem:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Urufu_Shinjiro:
Lol, and this is the difference between boys and girls, my son would say "Cool, blow up Thomas!". His current favorite line is " Daddy, lets crash in the water!", lol.

What is it with that? Mine does too, grabs the stick and dives straight for the water. Loves it. Gets most upset if you put him the Smolensk map. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Lol, I have no idea why he digs that so much. Lately I've started putting him on QMB with no realistic landing and invulnerable in float planes, he loves that, lol. Says "can I fly by myself with no badguys?" ,lol.

ZappaTime
09-12-2008, 10:57 AM
Originally posted by Bremspropeller:
They continue to not impress me.

I don't give a rat's *** about trains and railway - I wanna see pics of the engine, weather and all the "magic" stuff they're promising.
That's what gets me immersion.
Not some eeny-weeny train where I could count the rivets.
I want a flight-sim, not a candy-show.

If I wanted trains, I'd have bought M$ Train Simunlator. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

They don't look anywhere near as good in M$ Train Simulator, or EA's Railway Simulator for that matter. I just think Oleg is pulling all the stops out on the quality; hope its a decent pint at the officers' mess http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Urufu_Shinjiro
09-12-2008, 11:08 AM
What you guys have to remember is that Oleg designs with the future in mind. These high poly objects are probably for "uber-perfect" mode to be turned on when your pc can handle it in 5 years or so.

crucislancer
09-12-2008, 11:26 AM
Originally posted by stathem:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Urufu_Shinjiro:
Lol, and this is the difference between boys and girls, my son would say "Cool, blow up Thomas!". His current favorite line is " Daddy, lets crash in the water!", lol.

What is it with that? Mine does too, grabs the stick and dives straight for the water. Loves it. Gets most upset if you put him the Smolensk map. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

My daughter is a bit like that, too. She gets quite proud of herself when she crashes. She doesn't understand why I get upset when I crash!

She gets a kick out of shooting down planes, I'll set her up with a bunch of rookie bombers that are empty, and guide her around as needed. My son is a tad too young at the momment, but he wants to play badly.

I_KG100_Prien
09-12-2008, 11:48 AM
Ah, good I can stop worrying about my daughters love for watching planes smash into the ground.

Every time I let her fly in any flight sim she always wants to auger in.

I was playing ShipSim08 the other night and she wanted me to crash into things....

Buzzsaw-
09-12-2008, 12:06 PM
Salute

In my opinion, from looking at the captures, this Sim is going to be almost photorealistic. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

It is clearly a big step above what we are seeing for example from RISE OF FLIGHT, or any of the MS offerings.

People should also realise, that with the aircraft in BoB travelling slower on average than IL-2, (160 kph slower than late war aircraft) it will be much easier to see the ground objects. That is why they are being modelled to the detail you are seeing.

Here's my prediction: When you first come up behind an opponent, open fire, and watch debris fall off, the smoke start, the wheels drop, and then the pilot bail out, all in amazing detail, you will be raving. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

zardozid
09-12-2008, 12:25 PM
I kind of like the idea of being able to record and render my "flight missions"...I think it will be cool to view them in full overkill-detail, super-rendered, high-quality, full visual effects.

I want to re-live my kills and revel in the glory of me blasting apart enemy polygons...

stalkervision
09-12-2008, 12:25 PM
Better start saving for one of these then,

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a2/Cray_2_Arts_et_Metiers_dsc03940.jpg/300px-Cray_2_Arts_et_Metiers_dsc03940.jpg

a cray 2

stalkervision
09-12-2008, 12:41 PM
Personally I would trade a lot of this new eye candy for a whole lot better ai and better missions.

and a being able to run it on a mid-level computer.

seems to me the eye candy factor is what people seem to really be impressed with. Other aspects can be pretty third rate but still "I want my Eye Candy!"

TheFamilyMan
09-12-2008, 02:09 PM
Thought FSX was rough on your system when it first came our? Well you haven't seen nothin' yet! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

PanzerAce
09-12-2008, 02:18 PM
Well,as an onlinerz, eye candy, flyable planes, and the FM/DM really I really care abouthttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Bearcat99
09-12-2008, 02:38 PM
I think the new pics are nice... and I also think that if 1C is paying this much attention to ground object detail then FMs, DMs, AI etc will be off the hook.

That's my take on it.

Hey Brem & stalker.. stop pi$$ing in the beer.. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/typing.gif

Choctaw111
09-12-2008, 02:38 PM
http://files.games.1c.ru/il2pict/grab0003.jpg

I told you all this would be a feature. That will sure look nice with those shadows moving around the pit as you pitch and roll.
Everything is looking great.

Is3Starsis
09-12-2008, 03:46 PM
Many folks complain about too much eyecandy and stuff other-than-the-FM/DM. You're right, the FM is most important but when we can have things like playable AA, realtime shading and highly detailed groundobjects... why not, Great Oleg! Looks brilliant to me...

besides: incorporating playable AA (or whatever) will attract more gamers of a different breed who might eventually discover they actually like the magic of flying...
which is good.

Kind regards

ElAurens
09-12-2008, 04:21 PM
Like I've said before, if you guys think this is going to be just a "flight sim" you really need to open your mind a bit.

I'm betting that in 2 to 3 years this will be an all encompassing, total war simulator.

Imagine the possibilities.

If you have a mind open enough that is.

Be sure.

stalkervision
09-12-2008, 04:35 PM
Originally posted by Bearcat99:
I think the new pics are nice... and I also think that if 1C is paying this much attention to ground object detail then FMs, DMs, AI etc will be off the hook.

That's my take on it.

Hey Brem & stalker.. stop pi$$ing in the beer.. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/typing.gif

I never **** in my beer. That would ruin my beer! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

PanzerAce
09-12-2008, 04:37 PM
Sort of like WWII:O, but with good graphics? Seems like it *might* be able to work. Obviously, the ballistic model is already there for artillery, guns, tanks, etc. The issue is going to be the map size. Unless it's designed around online campaigns broken up into sections....*shrugs*

*IF* they go that route, something tells me they'll incorporate SH into it as well....

Bremspropeller
09-12-2008, 04:41 PM
El, I'd appreciate that happening.

But I'd prefer a good flightsim first - they can stil think of candy and stuff afterwards.

I'm not gonna buy it as a infantry/ tin can sim - I'm gonna buy it as flight sim.
And that creates very high expectations - particulary in weather and environmental simulation.

Urufu_Shinjiro
09-12-2008, 05:00 PM
Oleg has said that he is making first and foremost a flight sim but is making code in such a way as other game play elements can be added later. He has said ground war is possible, as well as using it for CG film making as El suggests. This has all been said by the great Oleg at one time or another.

Uufflakke
09-12-2008, 05:21 PM
Originally posted by ElAurens:
Like I've said before, if you guys think this is going to be just a "flight sim" you really need to open your mind a bit.

I'm betting that in 2 to 3 years this will be an all encompassing, total war simulator.

Imagine the possibilities.

If you have a mind open enough that is.

Be sure.


Flight Simulator, Total War Simulator. Open your mind, Imagine the Possibilities.
To me it is just a PC game. You buy it, you play it. Just an amusing, interesting escape from reality.

Bremspropeller
09-12-2008, 05:26 PM
http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/

Same for modern warfare - based on LOMAC.

bengal
09-12-2008, 07:24 PM
Hi Guys,

I don't often log on to comment on this forum. (but a very interested observer).

These screenshots are quite stunning and thankyou for sharing them. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I am thoroughly enjoying IL2 Sturmovik : 1946, and to see what Oleg will be offering in the future is quite --- dare I say --- aweinspiring.

Definitely something to look forward too.

I would make one plee ---- on my knees infact---.

Can that magnificent Sunderland be Flyable? Please. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif BEG, Beg, I'll be good I promise. I'll wash the dishes, mow the lawns , fix the car, replace lightbulbs. Buy an "Aston Martin". Name your price. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

Thanks for listening to that rant.

Cheer's everyone,

Bengal <----- Girlfreind just said; "He's a worry really, its a "Big Boys toys" thing you know". http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

HuninMunin
09-12-2008, 08:33 PM
Originally posted by Bremspropeller:
http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/

Same for modern warfare - based on LOMAC.

For ground combat to be implemented into DCS a LOT has to happen.
And as of now there are no plans to do anything in that direction.

Von_Rat
09-12-2008, 09:24 PM
iirc oleg already said that the sow engine was going to used for a mmog type game. something like ww2online.



wow the people here have short memorys.

trumper
09-13-2008, 05:00 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif IF the Flight Modelling is really going to be that accurate then 99% of us will never get off the ground to start with. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
I think i will just pop down to Duxford and ask if i can try out one of their Spitfires as i can fly it on a computer http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Feathered_IV
09-13-2008, 06:28 AM
Originally posted by ElAurens:
Like I've said before, if you guys think this is going to be just a "flight sim" you really need to open your mind a bit.

I'm betting that in 2 to 3 years this will be an all encompassing, total war simulator.

Imagine the possibilities.

If you have a mind open enough that is.

Be sure.

Only if third party companies and mod makers get involved. MG hasn't the manpower for that.

VW-IceFire
09-13-2008, 08:55 AM
Originally posted by Feathered_IV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
Like I've said before, if you guys think this is going to be just a "flight sim" you really need to open your mind a bit.

I'm betting that in 2 to 3 years this will be an all encompassing, total war simulator.

Imagine the possibilities.

If you have a mind open enough that is.

Be sure.

Only if third party companies and mod makers get involved. MG hasn't the manpower for that. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
True...but they have a good base for it. I can see the engine also being licensed for documentaries.

stalkervision
09-13-2008, 09:12 AM
Originally posted by trumper:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif IF the Flight Modelling is really going to be that accurate then 99% of us will never get off the ground to start with. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
I think i will just pop down to Duxford and ask if i can try out one of their Spitfires as i can fly it on a computer http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I agree. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

jarink
09-13-2008, 04:12 PM
Originally posted by crucislancer:
Wow!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Weathering of the aircraft in time. When you entering a career you'll get the new aircraft (or partially used). Then with each flight your aircraft will be in constant changes of conditions... you will see in a sequence of missions. It isn't only about how it looks, but also about performance of aircraft (new and used – are different).

Now that's cool. That was always a minor gripe of mine with a lot of flight sims, no effects on aircraft performance/appearance over time. I wonder if mission builders will be able to set up random failures? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

While it sounds cool at first, the more I think about it, I really don't think I'll care for this feature. First and foremost, it seems to assume that planes never get worked on by the ground crews and never have things like engines replaced. What about having the entire plane replaced? Replacement planes didn't only appear when a plane was lost, they were replaced when worn out if another was available. Face it, squadron leaders and other senior pilots didn't fly the same old, cruddy planes their entire careers.

The only way I could be reassured about this is if it can be turned off (just the graphic changes, just the FM changes or both) and if there is a squadron pool of aircraft that is kept for campaigns where the pilot can select which a/c (s)he's going to fly for the next mission.

jarink
09-13-2008, 04:16 PM
Originally posted by Feathered_IV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
Like I've said before, if you guys think this is going to be just a "flight sim" you really need to open your mind a bit.

I'm betting that in 2 to 3 years this will be an all encompassing, total war simulator.

Imagine the possibilities.

If you have a mind open enough that is.

Be sure.

Only if third party companies and mod makers get involved. MG hasn't the manpower for that. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'll double-ditto that. While it's good to think that Oleg and 1C are looking long-term at things, adding such non-flight sim stuff only delays the release of the flight sim. If they want to leave then engine open for future development, fine. I just wish they would be concentrating on the core elements of the product, which is still a flight simulator.

Treetop64
09-13-2008, 04:25 PM
Gotta agree with jarink on the paint chipping.

It just seems that an awful lot of energy is spent on designing, implementing, and finally describing such a superfluous detail. Personally, in respect to other details that are, or could be implemented, I couldn't care any less about the paint chipping.

As long as the job is done on - among other things - the damange model, flight model, the models themselves, and a believable AI (as difficult as that is!) then the rest of the package will come together in time - as it has with IL-2 since it's introduction in 2001. I'm sure most of us will be quite happy with that.

slipBall
09-13-2008, 05:21 PM
When it's all said and done, it is Oleg's baby. Let him put in what ever he likes, he is the maestro!...it is his dream http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

knightflyte
09-13-2008, 11:36 PM
Originally posted by stalkervision:
Personally I would trade a lot of this new eye candy for a whole lot better ai and better missions.

and a being able to run it on a mid-level computer.

seems to me the eye candy factor is what people seem to really be impressed with. Other aspects can be pretty third rate but still "I want my Eye Candy!"


This is from the guy advocating BoB:WoV with a warning that a high end system will be needed to get the best out of it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

In all honesty I agree with you about AI. I'll be SORELY dissappointed if there's not a huge improvement there in the SoW:BoB. With what the BDG Team has done with the AI for BoB:WoV I'd expect nothing less than what they have accomplished.

What's been presented so far bodes well for the eye candy. I can't wait to discover the intangibles like AI and FM.

Feathered_IV
09-14-2008, 12:49 AM
Originally posted by Treetop64:
Gotta agree with jarink on the paint chipping.

It just seems that an awful lot of energy is spent on designing, implementing, and finally describing such a superfluous detail.

It is a fairly unexciting innovation from a technical standpoint too. Essentially it is just a 32 bit tga overlay which gets superimposed over the skin. Undoubtably there will be a generic selection of these which are applied to the aircraft as things progress. This was mentioned by Luthier a couple of years ago in ORR, as I recall.

csThor
09-14-2008, 02:08 AM
Originally posted by jarink:
While it sounds cool at first, the more I think about it, I really don't think I'll care for this feature. First and foremost, it seems to assume that planes never get worked on by the ground crews and never have things like engines replaced. What about having the entire plane replaced? Replacement planes didn't only appear when a plane was lost, they were replaced when worn out if another was available. Face it, squadron leaders and other senior pilots didn't fly the same old, cruddy planes their entire careers.

The only way I could be reassured about this is if it can be turned off (just the graphic changes, just the FM changes or both) and if there is a squadron pool of aircraft that is kept for campaigns where the pilot can select which a/c (s)he's going to fly for the next mission.

Ding! Ding! Ding! Full ack from my side. If I was a pilot and a tech would give me this crate (http://files.games.1c.ru/il2pict/Spitfire%20Mk.I_02.jpg) to fly I'd make him polish it to high-gloss with his bare tongue.

Seriously - the screenshot I linked to looks a lot like an aircraft left out in the open for a year or two, not like an active warplane. Weathering needs to be subtle to be realistic. This is anything but subtle ...

VW-IceFire
09-14-2008, 08:35 AM
I imagine they are showing us the maximum weathering on the plane. There is probably at least one intermediate state otherwise it'd be kind of funny to have either perfect paint jobs or all beaten up.

Either way it looks good...takes simulation to a new level.

crucislancer
09-14-2008, 09:18 AM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
I imagine they are showing us the maximum weathering on the plane. There is probably at least one intermediate state otherwise it'd be kind of funny to have either perfect paint jobs or all beaten up.

Either way it looks good...takes simulation to a new level.

+1

stalkervision
09-14-2008, 09:26 AM
Originally posted by knightflyte:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stalkervision:
Personally I would trade a lot of this new eye candy for a whole lot better ai and better missions.

and a being able to run it on a mid-level computer.

seems to me the eye candy factor is what people seem to really be impressed with. Other aspects can be pretty third rate but still "I want my Eye Candy!"


This is from the guy advocating BoB:WoV with a warning that a high end system will be needed to get the best out of it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not "high end" middle end will do. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif Lots of people come into BOB with a motherboard video card and cry and whine it won't work. Well it won't work for il-2 either! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

High end would be the snazz for the big missions. The frame rate drops to low levels with these as I imagine so they will with Bob/SOW without a really high end computer. Also I imagine all that ground level detail will do it likewise.

knightflyte
In all honesty I agree with you about AI. I'll be SORELY dissappointed if there's not a huge improvement there in the SoW:BoB. With what the BDG Team has done with the AI for BoB:WoV I'd expect nothing less than what they have accomplished.

What's been presented so far bodes well for the eye candy. I can't wait to discover the intangibles like AI and FM.

If the ai doesn't get improved vastly it franky will disappoint me. Oleg has already said he sees no problem with the Il-2 ai and this has me worried.

Antoninus
09-14-2008, 09:47 AM
Originally posted by csThor:
Seriously - the screenshot I linked to looks a lot like an aircraft left out in the open for a year or two, not like an active warplane. Weathering needs to be subtle to be realistic. This is anything but subtle ...

There are plenty of pictures form actual active combat aircraft that don't look much better than this Spitfire. Heavily used planes can loose their paint much faster than one simply parked anywhere outside. Especially if they are operated in certain enviroments as tropical regions.

http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/661/bf109ekhv1.jpg

http://img239.imageshack.us/img239/384/f4u4bn97243is7.jpg