PDA

View Full Version : Rise of flight specs silently going up...



Metatron_123
12-30-2008, 08:44 AM
Platform: PC
Processor: Core 2 Duo (Intel) 2.8 HGz
RAM : 3Gb
Hard disk: 6 Gb
Videocard: 512 Mb video RAM(GF9800 series or AMD ATI Radeon 4850 series)
Access to the Internet: At least 512 Kb/s
Operating system: Windows XP/Vista (Windows XP requirements can be a little bit less then listed above)
Support of 64-bit operating system is not guaranteed by developers

It was core 2 duo 2.4 ghz and 2gb ram a few weeks ago... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

Metatron_123
12-30-2008, 08:44 AM
Platform: PC
Processor: Core 2 Duo (Intel) 2.8 HGz
RAM : 3Gb
Hard disk: 6 Gb
Videocard: 512 Mb video RAM(GF9800 series or AMD ATI Radeon 4850 series)
Access to the Internet: At least 512 Kb/s
Operating system: Windows XP/Vista (Windows XP requirements can be a little bit less then listed above)
Support of 64-bit operating system is not guaranteed by developers

It was core 2 duo 2.4 ghz and 2gb ram a few weeks ago... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

JG52Uther
12-30-2008, 08:58 AM
All getting a bit ridiculous now,I hate to think what SoW will be.

DrHerb
12-30-2008, 09:11 AM
well, guess ill have to start pinching pennies for my new rig http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Choctaw111
12-30-2008, 09:14 AM
3GB of RAM? That's a bit of a strange number isn't it? XP32 will only handle 2.5 GB.
Is that to say that those who are still running WinXP32 will not be able to play this very well?

Is that minimum specs, or recommended?

Edit...
I checked the RoF website. It is recommended specs and it says 3GB ram for WinXP/Vista. Very strange. As I mentioned before, WinXP32 can only recognize 2.5GB. Maybe they are talking about XP64?

VMF-214_HaVoK
12-30-2008, 09:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Uther:
All getting a bit ridiculous now,I hate to think what SoW will be. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What do you expect game developers do? You want great graphics and physics and realism you got to pay for it. You can not expect game devs not to take advantage of bleeding edge hardware.

Be thankful they are being honest which many devs are not when it comes to system specs. At least this way you will not be mislead when you purchase the game.

S!

Mr_Zooly
12-30-2008, 09:57 AM
I'm with Havok on the dev/spec thing as I recently bought GTA4 foolishly thinking my comp would run it (core2 duo 2gb, nvid 9800gt 512mb and 3gb system ram).

JG52Uther
12-30-2008, 10:05 AM
Well you won't know if they are being honest or not until you buy it!

waffen-79
12-30-2008, 10:08 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mr_Zooly:
I'm with Havok on the dev/spec thing as I recently bought GTA4 foolishly thinking my comp would run it (core2 duo 2gb, nvid 9800gt 512mb and 3gb system ram). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

w00t!??

I was thinking of getting it (GTA4)this january, but my system is:

P4 3.0ghz, 2gb ram, nv8600GT 512mb

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

I mean, how powerfull is the xbox360 cpu and gpu wise?

Why you need such powerfull specs just to run GTA4???

I thought crysis and farcry2 were the only ones I whould have difficulty running at max

JG52Uther
12-30-2008, 10:12 AM
Is it because its good,or badly coded maybe?

staticline1
12-30-2008, 10:25 AM
Really hasn't changed much. Before it was a core2duo 2.4HGz now its 2.8HGz but that's more for vista as mentioned XP should be a little bit lower. Everything else for the most part is still the same. Though I didn't think that Vista made that much of a difference but not going to worry about it much. Besides, if you have a core2duo/quad they OC huge anyway you'll be fine. 3 Gig ram looks strange wonder if thats a typo or something.

Chivas
12-30-2008, 10:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Uther:
Is it because its good,or badly coded maybe? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good question. I would imagine its not easy task to write code for all the features required to compete in next generation flight sims.

Personally as far as systems go, I would prefer that the developers pushed the envelope as much as possible. I would build a system to turn on as many options as possible. That said I'm sure the developers are savy enough to create options for people with less than stellar systems to still play the game.

Unfortunately at this time we can't expect our systems to be effective for long periods of time, if we want to play next generation sims. Maybe one day when we have cinematic graphics and human equivilent AI our systems may last for more than a year or two. Unless you venture into the hologram world. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Chivas
12-30-2008, 10:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by staticline1:
Really hasn't changed much. Before it was a core2duo 2.4HGz now its 2.8HGz but that's more for vista as mentioned XP should be a little bit lower. Everything else for the most part is still the same. Though I didn't think that Vista made that much of a difference but not going to worry about it much. Besides, if you have a core2duo/quad they OC huge anyway you'll be fine. 3 Gig ram looks strange wonder if thats a typo or something. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think 2 gigs of ram are ok for XP, but Vista would eat alot of that 2 gig memory, hence the 3 gig requirement.

Divine-Wind
12-30-2008, 10:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Uther:
Is it because its good,or badly coded maybe? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I believe GTA4's problems stem from poor coding, or at least that's what I've heard.

striker-85
12-30-2008, 12:31 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Choctaw111:
3GB of RAM? That's a bit of a strange number isn't it? XP32 will only handle 2.5 GB.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

With XP32 you can typically get in the 3.X GB range depending on your motherboard and IO. I have 4GB in my system and XP shows I have 3.25GB

This link explains it pretty well: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000811.html

Xiolablu3
12-30-2008, 12:37 PM
As has already been stated, that is not minimum specs, its recommended.

These things are always subject to opinion. How many times have you see ridiculously low min specs for agame on the box and it runs like a slideshow when using those specs?

Mr_Zooly
12-30-2008, 12:42 PM
I have heard lots complaints about gta4 and running like cr@p, rockstar say 'go buy a better computer with a quad core processor'
Well they actually said something about the game being 'future proof' and its scalable for the next gen of systems (yeah right)

Ba5tard5word
12-30-2008, 12:43 PM
GTAIV was indeed badly coded. I have it, and it runs like garbage on my 2.4Ghz Core Duo with an 8600GT. It looks ok, and is playable, and fun, but runs at 20fps and textures keep popping in and out.

Meanwhile I can run plenty of other games with better graphics that came out on 360 just fine...Gears of War, Far Cry 2, Mass Effect, Fallout 3, etc.

Xiolablu3
12-30-2008, 12:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by striker-85:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Choctaw111:
3GB of RAM? That's a bit of a strange number isn't it? XP32 will only handle 2.5 GB.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

With XP32 you can typically get in the 3.X GB range depending on your motherboard and IO. I have 4GB in my system and XP shows I have 3.25GB

This link explains it pretty well: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000811.html </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am pretty sure that XP 32bit can only use a MAX of 2gb of RAM for any single game/application.

SO I have heard anyway....

staticline1
12-30-2008, 01:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by striker-85:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Choctaw111:
3GB of RAM? That's a bit of a strange number isn't it? XP32 will only handle 2.5 GB.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

With XP32 you can typically get in the 3.X GB range depending on your motherboard and IO. I have 4GB in my system and XP shows I have 3.25GB

This link explains it pretty well: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000811.html </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am pretty sure that XP 32bit can only use a MAX of 2gb of RAM for any single game/application.

SO I have heard anyway.... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually he's right, XP32 can see up to just over 3Gigs ram give or take depending on the mobo and bios. I just thought it a strange amount as most say 2 and figured going up to 4 would be an easier way to go considering the way ram amount is counted.

striker-85
12-30-2008, 01:16 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
I am pretty sure that XP 32bit can only use a MAX of 2gb of RAM for any single game/application.

SO I have heard anyway.... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is different than Choctaw's comment stating that XP can't support more than 2.5GB of RAM.

What you are referring to is that any single process is limited to 2 GB unless the /3GB switch is used in the boot.ini file.

Regardless of 2GB or 3GB per process though the POINT is that you have many processes running and having more RAM (3+ GB) will reduced the amount of paging to virtual memory when certain processes (like a game) require a huge amount of memory.

Here is a reference in regards to the process 2GB virtual address space: http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/PAE/PAEmem.mspx

I_KG100_Prien
12-30-2008, 01:49 PM
Meh,

I'm not worried about it. I've run games on machines that didn't match the minimum requirements and it just took some massaging of the video settings etc.

Those being the RECOMMENDED specs I'm doubly not worried. All that means is that I can't firewall all of the graphics and gawk at the eye candy. Which is fine- I'm a "Gameplay over Graphics" guy anyway. So long as the actual activity of the program amuses me... I don't care if I don't have "swaying grass" turned on.

Choctaw111
12-30-2008, 02:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by staticline1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by striker-85:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Choctaw111:
3GB of RAM? That's a bit of a strange number isn't it? XP32 will only handle 2.5 GB.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

With XP32 you can typically get in the 3.X GB range depending on your motherboard and IO. I have 4GB in my system and XP shows I have 3.25GB

This link explains it pretty well: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000811.html </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am pretty sure that XP 32bit can only use a MAX of 2gb of RAM for any single game/application.

SO I have heard anyway.... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually he's right, XP32 can see up to just over 3Gigs ram give or take depending on the mobo and bios. I just thought it a strange amount as most say 2 and figured going up to 4 would be an easier way to go considering the way ram amount is counted. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am always learning something new. Time to get more RAM then. So XP can detect up to 3.5 Gigs then? Great!

Urufu_Shinjiro
12-30-2008, 02:16 PM
Windows 7 will be in public beta soon, get the 64 bit version of that and get 4gigs of ram, lol.

Mr_Zooly
12-30-2008, 03:56 PM
I'm pretty sure I heard somewhere that M$ had ripped the sh....crap out of Vista to create a more user/system friendly OS with Win 7 (again I say: yeah right)!
having just been to the win 7 info page, upgrading from vista will be easy (well thats 1 thing at least vista has going for it), how much will it cost I hear me cry, lots say M$ http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

Urufu_Shinjiro
12-30-2008, 04:12 PM
Windows 7 will be epic, the beta is spectacular already.

Mr_Zooly
12-30-2008, 04:24 PM
I'll believe it when I see it, m$ has been less than honest in the past and maybe once bitten = twice shy. maybe time will prove me wrong and I really do hope so but its the price of the new OS thats bothering me as its going to be a complete rip off (AGAIN).

Stingray333
12-30-2008, 04:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Choctaw111:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by staticline1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by striker-85:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Choctaw111:
3GB of RAM? That's a bit of a strange number isn't it? XP32 will only handle 2.5 GB.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

With XP32 you can typically get in the 3.X GB range depending on your motherboard and IO. I have 4GB in my system and XP shows I have 3.25GB

This link explains it pretty well: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000811.html </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am pretty sure that XP 32bit can only use a MAX of 2gb of RAM for any single game/application.

SO I have heard anyway.... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually he's right, XP32 can see up to just over 3Gigs ram give or take depending on the mobo and bios. I just thought it a strange amount as most say 2 and figured going up to 4 would be an easier way to go considering the way ram amount is counted. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am always learning something new. Time to get more RAM then. So XP can detect up to 3.5 Gigs then? Great! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

also, AFAIK, your best off putting in 4GB of ram so that you get it running in dual-channel mode (2x2gb) rather than trying to save $10 by using a 2gb+1gb ram modules

WTE_Galway
12-30-2008, 04:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mr_Zooly:
how much will it cost I hear me cry, lots say M$ http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

With dropping hardware prices the cost of windows is becoming a substantial part of the cost of a new PC. In the case of netbooks, a windows version is 25% more expensive than the linux version on identical hardware.

This may eventually backfire on microsoft.

M_Gunz
12-30-2008, 04:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Metatron_123:
Platform: PC
Processor: Core 2 Duo (Intel) 2.8 HGz
RAM : 3Gb
Hard disk: 6 Gb
Videocard: 512 Mb video RAM(GF9800 series or AMD ATI Radeon 4850 series)
Access to the Internet: At least 512 Kb/s
Operating system: Windows XP/Vista (Windows XP requirements can be a little bit less then listed above)
Support of 64-bit operating system is not guaranteed by developers

It was core 2 duo 2.4 ghz and 2gb ram a few weeks ago... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It was dual core 2.8 ghz over a month ago, before Thanksgiving when I last checked.

Is this Recommended or Minimum?

Feathered_IV
12-30-2008, 06:09 PM
Recommended.

I'm not too worried, as my pc's specs match that well enough. I appreciate their honesty.
There is something about the RoF team that inspires confidence. I wish them every success with this.

biggs222
12-30-2008, 06:16 PM
yeah i have that 4Gig being read as 3.25 as well....

but i have an Intel Core 2 Quad, hopefully that will still be above par for SoW when it comes out.

EDIT: Quick question, Does anyone know if there are any vid cards out there that are better than the ATI HD2900XT that i have currently? and im talkin single cards, not that dual card setup.

VMF-214_HaVoK
12-30-2008, 06:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Uther:
Well you won't know if they are being honest or not until you buy it! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well the fact you think its getting ridiculous leads me to believe they are being realistic and honest. No need shout btw. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

VMF-214_HaVoK
12-30-2008, 06:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by striker-85:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Choctaw111:
3GB of RAM? That's a bit of a strange number isn't it? XP32 will only handle 2.5 GB.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

With XP32 you can typically get in the 3.X GB range depending on your motherboard and IO. I have 4GB in my system and XP shows I have 3.25GB

This link explains it pretty well: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000811.html </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am pretty sure that XP 32bit can only use a MAX of 2gb of RAM for any single game/application.

SO I have heard anyway.... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

32bit can usually recognize about 3.2GB of RAM. It actually has nothing to do with Windows in this case but rather architecture.

S!

VMF-214_HaVoK
12-30-2008, 06:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by waffen-79:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mr_Zooly:
I'm with Havok on the dev/spec thing as I recently bought GTA4 foolishly thinking my comp would run it (core2 duo 2gb, nvid 9800gt 512mb and 3gb system ram). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

w00t!??

I was thinking of getting it (GTA4)this january, but my system is:

P4 3.0ghz, 2gb ram, nv8600GT 512mb

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

I mean, how powerfull is the xbox360 cpu and gpu wise?

Why you need such powerfull specs just to run GTA4???

I thought crysis and farcry2 were the only ones I whould have difficulty running at max </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The 360 is very powerful when you understand that all the power goes to playing games and that is it. Very different from the PC.

VMF-214_HaVoK
12-30-2008, 06:43 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mr_Zooly:
I'll believe it when I see it, m$ has been less than honest in the past and maybe once bitten = twice shy. maybe time will prove me wrong and I really do hope so but its the price of the new OS thats bothering me as its going to be a complete rip off (AGAIN). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

+1
Im so glad I did not fall for the Vista hype and stayed with XP Pro 64bit. When this Windows 7 ships I will wait a long time and read hundreds of reviews before I make a decision...be sure.

S!

WTE_Galway
12-30-2008, 08:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by biggs222:

EDIT: Quick question, Does anyone know if there are any vid cards out there that are better than the ATI HD2900XT that i have currently? and im talkin single cards, not that dual card setup. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Accoding to this chart ...

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics-char...lator-X-SP2,785.html (http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics-charts-q3-2008/Microsoft-Flight-Simulator-X-SP2,785.html)

... there are quite a few cards out there faster than a 2900XT with flight sims.

Choctaw111
12-30-2008, 09:38 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Stingray333:

also, AFAIK, your best off putting in 4GB of ram so that you get it running in dual-channel mode (2x2gb) rather than trying to save $10 by using a 2gb+1gb ram modules </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, very true.

HellToupee
12-31-2008, 12:05 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Divine-Wind:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Uther:
Is it because its good,or badly coded maybe? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I believe GTA4's problems stem from poor coding, or at least that's what I've heard. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

gta4 was designed for 3 cores, since its what the xbox has, and is thus completely CPU limited on pc as they did little if any optimization for 2 core cpus.

Ba5tard5word
12-31-2008, 01:15 AM
^
Yeah, it's much more cpu intensive than it really needs to be. I think they got lazy and didn't recode it so it puts the GPU more to work.

steiner562
12-31-2008, 01:35 AM
Is it even in Beta yet?,not really arsed the specs have gone up,we will all have to upgrade at sometime anyway..

Feathered_IV
12-31-2008, 01:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ba5tard5word:
^
Yeah, it's much more cpu intensive than it really needs to be. I think they got lazy and didn't recode it so it puts the GPU more to work. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The physics are much more advanced than Il-2, hence the high cpu demand. Variable wind, turbulence and slipstream and self-casting shadows are represented, amongst other things.

Couldn't find the wind preview, but this shows some of the dynamic shadow stuff. Works in the cockpits too. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=SdCsm1Uftfw

Stiener, beta stage was entered some time ago and was also recently shown to the press.