PDA

View Full Version : Seen these new BoB2 videos??



triggerhappyfin
08-24-2005, 05:53 AM
http://www.3dgamers.com/

Take-off-landing and intercept!!

Looks promising http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

triggerhappyfin
08-24-2005, 05:53 AM
http://www.3dgamers.com/

Take-off-landing and intercept!!

Looks promising http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Philipscdrw
08-24-2005, 06:04 AM
SW-BoB is an appetiser for 1C-BoB. People will buy SW-BoB and upgrade to the full richness of 1C-BoB in the fullness of time.

triggerhappyfin
08-24-2005, 06:16 AM
Philips...I think you just came up with a new slogan for your self http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

Jagdgeschwader2
08-24-2005, 06:27 AM
How about this video from 1C BoB. I saw this posted on the Pacific Fighters forum. I'll wait and see what the reactions are to the SW BoB before I jump in.

BoB from 1C
http://files.games.1c.ru/il2pict/SpitfireMKI.mpg

Pics of 1C Me 109 cockpit.

http://files.games.1c.ru/il2pict/bf109e3_co1.jpg

http://files.games.1c.ru/il2pict/bf109e3_co2.jpg

http://home.earthlink.net/~jagdgeschwader26/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/jagdgeschwader2s.jpg

major_setback
08-24-2005, 07:28 AM
High resolution cockpit screens (BoB Wings of Victory):

http://www.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/boards/bbs/ultimatebb....;t=000113;p=1#000009 (http://www.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/boards/bbs/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=130;t=000113;p=1#00 0009)


http://www.shockwaveproductions.com/bob/screenshots/Spit_pit_1.jpg

http://www.shockwaveproductions.com/bob/screenshots/Spit_pit_2.jpg

http://www.shockwaveproductions.com/bob/screenshots/Spit_pit_3.jpg

http://stud3.tuwien.ac.at/~e9826217/BOB/files/Bader/shot_480.JPG

GBrutus
08-24-2005, 07:44 AM
That 1C 109 cockpit looks very impressive, can't wait for BoB. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

major_setback
08-24-2005, 07:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jagdgeschwader2:
How about this video...
BoB from 1C
http://files.games.1c.ru/il2pict/SpitfireMKI.mpg

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

A great video of the cockpit!

I would buy 1C BoB just for the cockpits alone, even if there were no flyable planes. People buy reference books with less detail than this (me).

Popey109
08-24-2005, 08:32 AM
I just can€t bring myself to spend on BOBII, I think the work they did to update this sim is great but there asking New sim full price?€¦would have been better to charge me for the update install program I could DL€¦say $14.95?...but $40.00 for what will still be an older sim€¦I think many people will be disappointed!

triggerhappyfin
08-24-2005, 08:35 AM
To judge by those videos and screens BoB2 is gonna be something...It wasnt my intention to start any flaming discussions about pro´s and con´s about these sims. Pity it´s offline only http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

BoB2 is available now and sure is going to offer us some nice flying and those cockpits look really good in considaration it is an old game in new suit.
Hope only IL-2series gets somebodys attention like old BoB has.

stubby
08-24-2005, 08:44 AM
Graphically the game looks pretty **** good considering the age of the original source code. Smoke and clouds look impressive. Ground textures are ok and not up to Il2's level but then again, BOBII is about the air war that took place 20,000 feet up so the ground isn't critical.

Sound - far better than Il2. Merlin actually sounds throaty and robust not like a lawn mower I hear when I fly the SpitVb.

Bottom line, I'm getting it. The offline content is top notch with the killer dynamic campaign not to mention, you'll actually be able to fly against very large formations that aren't possible in Il2. 30+ Do17s with 20+ Bf109E4s against 20 Spits. That's going to be insane. For me, I know 1C's BOB is still more than two years away so that's plenty of time for me to get my fill of BoBII and move on to other things for when the time comes and 1C actually finishes their BOB.

Kuna15
08-24-2005, 09:31 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GBrutus:
That 1C 109 cockpit looks very impressive, can't wait for BoB. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif

alichino
08-24-2005, 12:01 PM
I agree with Stubby. The audio quality alone made for an interesting experience.

And the smoke effect coming off of the damaged aircraft was voluminous, nice touch.

BSS_Goat
08-24-2005, 04:02 PM
Probably run like a scalded cat on my mid-level machine(with 100 AC in air)

LeadSpitter_
08-24-2005, 07:51 PM
I just think oleg compairing his bob to rowans bob2 is just stupid.

I mean we all enjoy wwii flight sims im sure many of us are going to buy rowans bob2, i know i am and will buy olegs BOB.

I seen them arguing about cockpit detail, rowans bob2 has pit models that are made better then fb aep pf but then il2 aep pf have some ac that look better then rowans pits,

I dunno flight sims are such a small community the more the better.

Bashing each others sims just makes both companies look bad. Like every single prop flightsim made they all have thier strong and weak points and things done better then thier competitors.

Oleg has the most important ones, difficulty selections as host option, and anti cheating aids.


And for olegs BOB he plans on having a user addon section that is seperate from the locked stock unchangable ac vechiles maps. Im sure shockwave will be making addons for BOB when the time comes, shockwave is a great bunch of people but compaired to the ammount of ac you get for your money they cant compete.

thier p-51 and fw190 are worth more each then fb aep and pf now.

if we had a flyable spitmk1a and a britian map that would be the onlything to stop me from buying rowans BOB we have all the other ac already plus more

jamesdietz
08-24-2005, 11:50 PM
Thanks for heads up 1 nice looking ...I'll be paying a visit to my video games store early next week!

Old_Canuck
08-25-2005, 12:30 AM
Very impressive sights and sounds in the BOBII intercept movie. Still planning to wait for a few weeks and find out what the scoop is on the DMs and FMs.

Lt.Davis
08-25-2005, 01:20 AM
Yes it's true, eg. wing over vietnam cannot compare with FB, but the campaign and the audio make you feel the game is not empty (if you know what i talking). And i have to mention that i like FB for the detail of the graphic, just lack of atmosphere.

Simple, i'll get both BOB2 and Oleg BOB.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by alichino:
I agree with Stubby. The audio quality alone made for an interesting experience.

And the smoke effect coming off of the damaged aircraft was voluminous, nice touch. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

volkware.xyz
08-25-2005, 02:01 AM
I don`t think I`m too thrilled with that ultra detail cockpit.

Don`t get me wrong - it looks great, very realistic - but I just don`t think its necessary. I wonder how many different aircraft could be added/made flyable in current IL/PF by such marvellous effort, and I wonder just how many polygons this architecture comprises: I would rather devote processing power of my cpu and videocard to greater numbers of planes in the sky at once. More active environments and more realistic circumstances by virtue of those environs strikes me as a wiser utilization of all this new computer power we`re seeing.

This is like a level designer crafting a wall made of 1000 polygons by habit, when 100 would have sufficed. Imagine how many more walls he could build and still have the engine smooth.

Besides, as you venture closer and closer to photo-realism there are fewer and fewer people in the world community that can possibly possess the sheer skills required to produce. A good case in point would be to look at the number of DOOM 3 mods out there now... don`t see too many (are there any? Can anybody besides a fully employed professional actually produce for such a target bit of technology?).

I *know* my current system won`t come anywhere near the threshold necessary to run this. I wonder if alot of players will drift off. Like I say, I just look at those cockpit pictures and shake my head... we don`t NEED cockpits that detailed. I don`t know - am I the only one who thinks this?

No I haven`t watched that Spitfire video linked previously. Stupid missing codecs. I`d love to see a set of codecs that were SUFFICIENT at some point before I die...

volkware.xyz
08-26-2005, 12:33 PM
I can put my concern more eloquently: I would rather see computer/videocard horsepower devoted to sustaining a living world fully *visible out to my view range* than see more polys and advanced bump maps in a cockpit.

That has far more substantial gameplay value than a detailed cockpit.

crazyivan1970
08-26-2005, 01:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Warlok_0:
I can put my concern more eloquently: I would rather see computer/videocard horsepower devoted to sustaining a living world fully *visible out to my view range* than see more polys and advanced bump maps in a cockpit.

That has far more substantial gameplay value than a detailed cockpit. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Then combat flight simulation is not up your alley http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Visual effects is a huge part of any game, sim, RTS...whatever. People who says that visual quality doesn`t matter.. they are lying http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif. It does matter and first reaction of normal human would be ... holy **** - it looks AWESOME!

As far as immerssion goes.. ww2online probably the one that holds the crown.. at least in my books... but graphics are terrible and that alone is a huge turnoff.

Just saying.

volkware.xyz
08-26-2005, 02:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by crazyivan1970:

Then combat flight simulation is not up your alley http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Visual effects is a huge part of any game, sim, RTS...whatever. People who says that visual quality doesn`t matter.. they are lying http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif. It does matter and first reaction of normal human would be ... holy **** - it looks AWESOME!

As far as immerssion goes.. ww2online probably the one that holds the crown.. at least in my books... but graphics are terrible and that alone is a huge turnoff.

Just saying. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

IL-2/PF already looks awesome - I would if anything turn your argument around and say that one who does not appreciate the ideal of rendering all things fully out to the limits of your view and of having 100s of aircraft in the sky at once is someone for whom flight sims are not for.

There is far more gameplay value in the aforementioned than there is in 2x polys and multi-textures for a cockpit...

Besides, again, the current graphics look SUPERB.

faelas
08-26-2005, 02:22 PM
Ok first let me say that I hold no illusions that my opinion makes a **** bit of difference to anyone, but I totally agree with Warlok_0.

Like Crazy Ivan says, when I saw the 1C Bob Spit mkI cockpit video, I was quite impressed. But thinking about what Warlok_0 says, he's right. The power the Oleg and 1C are putting into BoB may make it a really snazzy looking game, and it may sell a lot of copies, but it is insignificant compared to what that amount of power could achieve if applied to improving IL2 series instead. A cockpit with twice as many polys as IL2 gets the same amount of use as an IL2 cockpit. Will people pay for an IL2 upgrade? Sure they would. Will people pay to get better looking cockpits? Sure they would. But which would they want more? Since we can only have one or the other, that choice becomes important.

Ask anyone here: Raise the bar on sim cockpit graphics or have 30 more flyables in IL2? Raise the bar or have double the number of a/c airborne in IL2? Raise the bar or have better IL2 AI? The list goes on and on of possible ways to improve the already stellar IL2 series.

Raise the graphics bar or an even better IL2?

You know the answer.

Oilburner_TAW
08-26-2005, 04:34 PM
LOL, I'm with Ivan. If it looks like I'm shooting at a block how immersive can that be? I want it all..high res pits,photo-realistic surroundings, full atomosphere effects, full DM and FM effects. If I have to build a $4000 rig to play it so be it.

JG54_Arnie
08-27-2005, 02:45 AM
Building forward on IL2? Yeah sure, it will give us some more good entertainment for a few more years on an engine thats already 8(?) years old. But I think its certainly not a good idea if Oleg wants to move the genre forward.
Consider the limitations of IL2's engine, its very old, but Oleg build it with the future in mind, this is why its still looking brilliant and manages to keep its own out there. But the limits of the engine are showing and I'm sure Oleg sees it a lot clearer then we can.
Considering that he build all this from an engine that was at first only meant to show off the IL2, its a brilliant achievement.
Next to that, consider that in order to improve IL2's graphics, allow for much better cockpits etc.. you really need to improve the entire engine, with all the content in the game I can easily see that causing lots of problems with older material, in short, it will take up much more time than starting from scratch again.

Having a completely new engine build right now with the experience Oleg and crew gained from creating the IL2 series and this time with the outlook to build it for huge expansion in the future, is certainly the best option.
They start from scratch, which makes sure they get rid of all the bugs, limitations and problems of IL2's engine. They can prevent the same limitations popping up by planning beforehand and creating something meant to hold many new flyables and theaters. An engine that makes high altitude flying and fighting properly possible. And yes, on top of it all, much more advanced DM, FM, physics, graphics, sounds, cockpits, effects, everything. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
And I tell you, personally, I'd rather fly a game with much better FM, DM, and everything with a few flyables to start with, then a game with hundreds of flyables that gives only half the FM, DM and everything.. maybe even less. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Aaron_GT
08-27-2005, 07:01 AM
Getting off topic....

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">As far as immerssion goes.. ww2online probably the one that holds the crown.. at least in my books... but graphics are terrible and that alone is a huge turnoff. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

When fighting as infantry something with the strategic scope of WW2OL with the graphics quality and ability to deal with personal stores like Hidden and Dangerous 2 would be the ideal, I think. WW2OL graphics, unless they've updated it recently, aren't even up to Operation Flashpoint standards when fighting as infantry.

Also sometimes the strategy in WW2OL does suffer a bit from small back-and-forth capture-the-flag bittiness. To get a good strategic feel you really need a lot more AI units to be able to create big pushes, and so on, that are controlled at some strategic level.

To be honest I think a good model is a persistent world but with a few 'hotspots' that you can spawn in that change depending on the overall strategic situation, with that controlled via a higher level model, and with lots of AI filling the ranks. But then you can't really play aircraft in that as they have too great a mobility.

P.S. And you might not spawn in some contested town, but as part of reinforcements that have to travel into a disputed hotspot en masse, rather than in penny packets as now in WW2OL.

Edbert
08-27-2005, 04:21 PM
I'll buy it. I buy every WWII flight sim that comes out (first one I bought was BattleHawks-1942) in the hopes they'll keep making them. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

volkware.xyz
08-28-2005, 12:42 PM
One other thing I`d like to see them devote polys and horsepower to over super-fantastic cockpits: infantry. By the squad, sprite infantry.

And civilians for that matter.

As it stands, this is a WWII air combat/ground attack sim without personnel attack. It`d give value to those stores of machinegun ammo many planes carry (especially thinking of the Stuka here...).

.

As for the engine overall, I can see improvements to the renderer, to the flight model etc., but cranking up the detail of cockpits (i.e. polygon visuals) is completely unnecessary.

Besides, when you increase the level of graphical sophistication, you dramatically decrease the amount of community support your product receives. We haven`t seen too many DOOM 3 mods out there for a very fundamental reason - unless you work for Pixar you don`t have the skills. If you think there are few modellers crafting new plane work for this series now, wait till BoB hits. The days of mod work on games is going to come to an end with progression like this.

JG54_Arnie
08-28-2005, 01:54 PM
Which means we only get the good stuff. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif


Actually, mods are starting to look more and more professional, depending ofcourse. But there is a lot of potential out there. I think it will only increase the quality of mods and those that are talented to make good models. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Tallyho1961
08-28-2005, 04:59 PM
The intercept movie is very nice. The sound is totally impressive across the board - especially the flypasts. And the smoking engines are pretty top drawer, too. If I hadn't seen those cockpit screenies up above, I would've said the cockpit was average at best - but those are darned sharp-looking.