PDA

View Full Version : A few BoB and 4.06/7 screen shots....



NerdConnected
09-15-2006, 03:21 PM
Okay, lousy quality, but nevertheless ;-)

http://www.redrodgers.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=2932&cat=500&ppuser=193

Found on: http://www.france-simulation.com/index.php?op=edito

Mark

NerdConnected
09-15-2006, 03:21 PM
Okay, lousy quality, but nevertheless ;-)

http://www.redrodgers.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=2932&cat=500&ppuser=193

Found on: http://www.france-simulation.com/index.php?op=edito

Mark

mazexx
09-15-2006, 03:39 PM
Wow - THE first ingame image of BoB. Sorry to say I'm not that impressed but I guess they are still far from release. Had a hard time telling if it was from IL2 or BoB but that's for sure some Mk1 spit's taking off on one of the shots.

Mazex

VW-IceFire
09-15-2006, 03:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mazexx:
Wow - THE first ingame image of BoB. Sorry to say I'm not that impressed but I guess they are still far from release. Had a hard time telling if it was from IL2 or BoB but that's for sure some Mk1 spit's taking off on one of the shots.

Mazex </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I thought that too...but then I thought...what more would we really expect? Everything looks very highly detailed...and the Spitfires themselves look gorgeous...very smooth lines instead of the obviously shaped polys from the current generation (if you look closely you can see the nose cone of the curent models is still only a half dozen polys but the new ones...smooth).

I don't think BoB is going to be as big of a jump as some expect. Visually it will just look generally better. I expect the bigger changes will be under the hood with weather and more precise effects.

Oh and...formation takeoff....nice!

mazexx
09-15-2006, 03:54 PM
I agree that the models look great. I also realized you could click again on the images to get a higher resolution image, which does it better justice! The grass does not look that good, but at the other hand - making good looking flat grass in a game is almost impossible http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Some more lighting work to make it look a bit less reflective will probably do the trick...

/Mazex

mazexx
09-15-2006, 03:57 PM
A positive thing about this is probably that we will hopefully get more ingame shots soon to show off what it can look like, now that the "cow is out of the barn"...

/Mazex

TheGozr
09-15-2006, 04:02 PM
That is not BOB it can't be, it's the next il2 addon 406 and 407.

mazexx
09-15-2006, 04:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TheGozr:
That is not BOB it can't be, it's the next il2 addon 406 and 407. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

How do you fit high-poly Spitfire MkI:s into Manchuria or 1946? They are obviously using the same model as the one in the latest BoB hangar shot (the two "rails" on the wings etc). Let's face it, the Spits are out of the hangar http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://www.redrodgers.com/gallery/data/500/MG_2203.jpg

/Mazex

TheGozr
09-15-2006, 04:20 PM
mazexx.. Dhuuu sarcasme.
Well while flying Lockon to high settings BOB do not impressed me right now That all i can say but this is very a bit early to juge from those screens. You can admire the paper thin props as well http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
I suspect the position of the pilots to be like in il2 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

The minimum request on quality is i hope as equal or better than the ones in Lockon.
http://www.gozr.net/iocl/images/screen/lockon/lockon_139.jpg

Flg._Adler
09-15-2006, 06:18 PM
If u look at the pics very closely u can see a forward swept wing Volksjaeger{he-162D} in the clouds carrying x-4 missiles. Its just another plane that the Luftwaffe vnever got a chance to build. I hope its flyable in the 46 addon.

FritzGryphon
09-15-2006, 06:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The minimum request on quality is i hope as equal or better than the ones in Lockon. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Lock-on makes 1 plane study addons for a modern jet sim. No comparison.

From the WIP pics of BoB models, the detail is second to none. I look forward to seeing how the final textures look in nice screens. If the cockpits are any indication, they will be very nice.

At the same time, they are succesful at conserving in polygons, as is necessary for a WWII sim. Put a dozen LOMAC Ka-50's on the screen at once, and a slide show will break out.

Those shots look pretty early stage. No panel lines or weathering on the skins, for example. Also, I remember hearing about grass (the stick up kind) in BoB.

Grey_Mouser67
09-15-2006, 07:04 PM
I've not found that graphics or screen shots predict the enjoyement of a game in any way. In fact, graphics do a great job of attracting prospective buyers but a lousy job of keeping them.

What is important is the game interface, immersion, Flight modelling, damage modelling, AI, mission building, online interface....that is where the meat and potatoes are....if we kept the FB graphics and improved all the others I'd be happy as a pig in do-do

Frankly speaking, when I'm flying, fighting and enjoying myself I don't notice those polys at all....can't see them as LOD's increase and I get pretty bored looking at screenshots examining the color of the throttle knob.

Hawgdog
09-15-2006, 07:21 PM
A beer drinking boyscout?

http://www.redrodgers.com/gallery/data/500/medium/MG_2193.jpg

LEXX_Luthor
09-15-2006, 10:31 PM
Formation takeoff? For AI or just humoid players? Very good. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

ColoradoBBQ
09-15-2006, 11:42 PM
Maybe its still in developement but I'm disapointed that they are using the old propeller graphics. Its a minor thing but I think the warplanes would look much better with a thicker rotating propeller than the flat prop.

mazexx
09-16-2006, 02:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Grey_Mouser67:
I've not found that graphics or screen shots predict the enjoyement of a game in any way. In fact, graphics do a great job of attracting prospective buyers but a lousy job of keeping them.

What is important is the game interface, immersion, Flight modelling, damage modelling, AI, mission building, online interface....that is where the meat and potatoes are....if we kept the FB graphics and improved all the others I'd be happy as a pig in do-do

Frankly speaking, when I'm flying, fighting and enjoying myself I don't notice those polys at all....can't see them as LOD's increase and I get pretty bored looking at screenshots examining the color of the throttle knob. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're quite right about that. Yesterday I fired up "Aces Over Europe" (using DosBox). I played that game for hundreds of hours back then and had a lot of fun with it. The graphics barely do the job of making you tell friend from foe but that did'nt matter then - I remember thinking the graphics where awsome compared to other games of the era... I guess we are all spoiled. I still play SPWAW which is basically using the same graphics as back in 1994 when it was released but it still is a great game...

/Mazex

NerdConnected
09-16-2006, 03:06 AM
Also some rgg updates from yesterday ;-)

http://rrgstudios.com/EN_02_07_1946.shtml

Take a look at the Lerche cockpit, must have been a weird experience to fly that thing (if it would have flown of course) .

Mark

Haigotron
09-16-2006, 08:04 AM
Usually you cant judge a game with still screenies, in action, im sure the game would look alot better...

LEBillfish
09-16-2006, 08:24 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ColoradoBBQ:
Maybe its still in developement but I'm disapointed that they are using the old propeller graphics. Its a minor thing but I think the warplanes would look much better with a thicker rotating propeller than the flat prop. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmmmmmm.........maybe I've just imagined it yet I could swear our props when viewed on edge do have width....Will check again.

VW-IceFire
09-16-2006, 08:34 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ColoradoBBQ:
Maybe its still in developement but I'm disapointed that they are using the old propeller graphics. Its a minor thing but I think the warplanes would look much better with a thicker rotating propeller than the flat prop. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmmmmmm.........maybe I've just imagined it yet I could swear our props when viewed on edge do have width....Will check again. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
They do have width when viewed on the edge. Its a really cool effect...one of the first things I noticed.

I suspect we're looking at BoB at a very early level. The in-cockpit hangar shot we saw before was apparently the "low detail" version so we may be looking at another low detail version. Hard to say.

LEBillfish
09-16-2006, 08:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
They do have width when viewed on the edge. Its a really cool effect...one of the first things I noticed.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well I just checked, and though we do NOT have what you might guess to be a 5' diameter x 6" thick disk, what we have is a collection of roughly 4-6 or so individual graphics that are angled from their base to fill that 6" thickness (10deg, 5, 0, -5, -10, filling the entire profile) or the like....Their rotation and illusion of speeding up and slowing down well done.

Frankly, a big thick graphic would probably look much, much worse.....Looks great to me http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

heywooood
09-16-2006, 08:45 AM
thats a photo of a screenshot so...

I notice the turf...the buildings seem to blend into the landscape better...not looking detached as they do in FAP...the landscape itself has a more blended, smoothness and the sky looks much better. All of that and more is noticeable in a photo of a screenshot so - I imagine the quality we can't discerne is measurable. This one is going to be something special.

If this sim is so early in developement as they say, I'll eat a bug.

It will be a xmas '06 purchase be almost sure....if it isn't - it won't be because it isn't ready...it'll be because the FAP expansion s were delayed until then.

major_setback
09-16-2006, 09:01 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hawgdog:
A beer drinking boyscout?

http://www.redrodgers.com/gallery/data/500/medium/MG_2193.jpg </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Beer with a spoon? I think that's tea. By the look of Oleg there might well be something stonger in it though. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/oleg_tea.jpg

heywooood
09-16-2006, 09:04 AM
*hic* bump - for Oleg the inebriated

major_setback
09-16-2006, 10:27 AM
Yikes, Photobucket is restricting image size now!!


Anyway I managed to get this one done (won't go any bigger hosting with photobucket though).


I stretched the picture a bit in Photoshop so that the perspective is more normal, and adjusted the strong roundel colours (please let them be better than this in BoB) and the grass.

I think the blurring of the background planes is due to camera shutter speed; the main plane is stationary?

http://i58.photobucket.com/albums/g260/restranger/MG_2203changed7.jpg

heywooood
09-16-2006, 10:30 AM
see how the field has more of a variable surface texture to it...not unlike FAP perfect water surface variable textures....if you see what I mean.


and I believe all of these planes are in motion - on takeoff in formation as the Brits preferred from the outset...takeoff in formation to save time assembling afterward...just all go up together.

major_setback
09-16-2006, 10:33 AM
Better sized. The main Spitfire:

http://i58.photobucket.com/albums/g260/restranger/MG_2203changed7cut.jpg

DuxCorvan
09-16-2006, 10:45 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Flg._Adler:
If u look at the pics very closely u can see a forward swept wing Volksjaeger{he-162D} in the clouds carrying x-4 missiles. Its just another plane that the Luftwaffe vnever got a chance to build. I hope its flyable in the 46 addon. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think you're wrong: that's a Ta-183 seen from behind.

The only new He 162 will be B (two engines) and C (backward swept wings).

BTW, judging by the pilots in those BoB pics, I'd say they unfortunately look like those in FB: Big-headed, frozen guys that have just eaten a broom stick. I hoped them to have a curved spine, like all walking-on-two-legs mammals.

heywooood
09-16-2006, 10:59 AM
not until 1.02 curved spine patch in 2 weeks.



" where did you read of a curved spine in mammals?...close this book forever and don't read it anymore!"

major_setback
09-16-2006, 11:12 AM
The shadows are very accurate, there is even a shadow of the (radio) antenna.
Also the elevator position is correct in the shadow!

bloblast
09-16-2006, 01:32 PM
The image major-setback just posted is great.
Could be a picture!!!

I like the sun glare on the wings, the shadowed right side of the fuselage and the shadow on the ground. Cockpit seems to be very detailed.

major_setback
09-16-2006, 06:32 PM
Here's a version with improved colours. It almost looks like the shadows might be cast on the aircraft itself! The body of the aircraft is much darker than the rest of it (in the shade?). I hope so.

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/MG_2203changed9d.jpg

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/MG_2203changed9dcut1.jpg

MM-Zorin
09-16-2006, 06:47 PM
What a desperate bunch of people we are. Trying to squeeze out every little bit of detail out of a blurred photograph of a beamer pic.

Just look how they abased us... Do you think they feel good about it?

KG26_Alpha
09-16-2006, 07:27 PM
Imposible to compare anyting from this but thxz for the shots.

shadows & jaggies are looking then same as I see in v4.05m

BTW is Oleg putting on weight?

TheGozr
09-16-2006, 07:43 PM
the lights look good