PDA

View Full Version : More from Oleg 21/03/08



Rudel1965
03-21-2008, 05:56 AM
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=2040


(should this go in the OT forum?)

Rudel1965
03-21-2008, 05:56 AM
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=2040


(should this go in the OT forum?)

Feathered_IV
03-21-2008, 06:01 AM
The 110 looks nice. Ground texture must be highly wip too.

TgD Thunderbolt56
03-21-2008, 06:36 AM
I never fly "no cockpit", but the idea (and added flexibility) of the positionable transparent guages is kinda cool....and the 110C does look really good.

ZappaTime
03-21-2008, 06:38 AM
I hope the ground texture IS early WIP as the tile repeats very regularly, very noticable - hopefully just done to show semi-transparency of the instruments.

Flight_boy1990
03-21-2008, 06:41 AM
The 110 engine textures look TERRIBLE!!!

HuninMunin
03-21-2008, 06:44 AM
Even though the tiles seem to repeat themself it looks gorgeous!

And if my eyes don't treat me wrong we can see bumpmapping on the terrain!
That would indeed hint at a more progressed engine then I had hoped at this point.

@ Flight Boy

Look at the modell itself.
It looks gorgeous.

TheGozr
03-21-2008, 06:47 AM
Very disappointing imo.. nothing here is a waoo! and haaaa!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

SeaFireLIV
03-21-2008, 06:47 AM
I`ll never use no cockpit view, why miss all that wonderful in cockpit design? But at least we know that Oleg is trying to give Options for all.

bolox00
03-21-2008, 07:14 AM
dunno if it's just my work with devicelink pits but my first thought on seeing the ww view gauges was please Oleg do this as a module that can be run on a second pc (or second core http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif ) through devicelink. maybe not in initial release but in future patches?
imho would be a major boon for pit builders

Ernst_Bremmer
03-21-2008, 07:58 AM
Love that BF110, looks great!!

Haigotron
03-21-2008, 08:40 AM
everything looks great! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif and most are WIP, so might be that some of the textures are added on just to have a quick look, I'm sure they will up the resolutions. He also once said, that whenever we see pics of planes inside the editor (w/ the blue background) alot of the more complex lighting is turned off.

Diablo310th
03-21-2008, 09:18 AM
If guages like those can be used for WW view then possibly the same could be done for DeviceLink for online?

VW-IceFire
03-21-2008, 10:20 AM
Wow that looks nice...love the 110C-4!

Urufu_Shinjiro
03-21-2008, 10:45 AM
I fly both pit on and pit off(depends on who I'm flying with and which server), those WW guages are freaking awesome!

jolly_magpie
03-21-2008, 10:59 AM
Finally, a VSI!! It's hard to land properly without one.

VMF-214_HaVoK
03-21-2008, 12:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ZappaTime:
I hope the ground texture IS early WIP as the tile repeats very regularly, very noticable - hopefully just done to show semi-transparency of the instruments. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Still looks great. Repeating tiles will be far less taxing on the PC.

S!

JtD
03-21-2008, 12:51 PM
A neat idea with the no cockpit instruments!

Aren't the holes in the fabric a bit wrong if one expects the wind to tear the fabric of the frame? Too lazy too google for pictures.

Going through the pics, it was the first time that I thought - I'm going to get this as soon as it hits the stores. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Bearcat99
03-21-2008, 01:22 PM
It looks good.... I hope the tiles are an early WiP too... I think anything in BoB will look at least as good as what we have in here.. I wonder if the fabric will flap in the breeze.... and that in rerlation to airspeed & direction.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

It all looks good to me.

Da_Godfatha
03-21-2008, 01:47 PM
That is one of the problems I am having with SoW. Why do we need such detailed grass? Most of the action will take place at about 20,000 ft. The few minutes for taxi and take-off, for me IL2 type grass would work fine. I would rather the design team work on AI, FM, DM's and flyable aircraft. IMO, such grass just takes away resources.

To the transparent gauges.............. CFS3 anyone? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

GF

Xiolablu3
03-21-2008, 01:56 PM
That damaged Tiger Moth looks amazing.

http://files.games.1c.ru/il2pict/2008-03-21_115710.jpg

Obviously the textures and skins will be improved upon by Oleg and User mods. With proper dynamic lighting the models are going to look amazing.

I cannot see a polygon at all on some of the planes, the meshes look so smoothon the edges.

I love the Bf110 too

http://files.games.1c.ru/il2pict/Bf-110C-4_09.jpg

Bearcat99
03-21-2008, 02:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Da_Godfatha:
That is one of the problems I am having with SoW. Why do we need such detailed grass? Most of the action will take place at about 20,000 ft. The few minutes for taxi and take-off, for me IL2 type grass would work fine. I would rather the design team work on AI, FM, DM's and flyable aircraft. IMO, such grass just takes away resources.

To the transparent gauges.............. CFS3 anyone? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif
GF </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

See... now I am thinking.... if they are going into that level of detail on the grass then..... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

Rudel1965
03-21-2008, 03:02 PM
It would be hilarious to have perfect grass and only ai Do17s lol http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Xiolablu3
03-21-2008, 03:35 PM
I really dont get all this whining about the Grass.

The game engine has to last through the whole series. Planes can be added and made flyable afterwards.

The company NEEDS to make sure that the terrain/Grass/Sea/trees/houses etc look correct before they start adding planes.

One of the big parts of the BOB was the RAF scambling and taking of togther on grass airfields.

Da_Godfatha
03-21-2008, 03:36 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 really dont get all this whining about the Grass.

The game engine has to last through the whole series. Planes can be added and made flyable afterwards.

The company NEEDS to make sure that the terrain/Grass/Sea/trees/houses etc look correct before they start adding planes.

One of the big parts of the BOB was the RAF scambling and taking of togther on grass airfields. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are joking? Right? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

GF

Xiolablu3
03-21-2008, 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 Da_Godfatha:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
I really dont get all this whining about the Grass.

The game engine has to last through the whole series. Planes can be added and made flyable afterwards.

The company NEEDS to make sure that the terrain/Grass/Sea/trees/houses etc look correct before they start adding planes.

One of the big parts of the BOB was the RAF scambling and taking of togther on grass airfields. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are joking? Right? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

GF </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Joking about whta?!?!

Do you know anything about making a game/game engine?

Ugly_Kid
03-21-2008, 04:01 PM
If it was a golf game I'd understand your enthusiasm about grass and detailed graphical modeling of the different grass.

However ... operating from a grass field and such I would be much more concerned about the fact whether SoW will introduce some improvements to the actual ground handling so that take-off takes a little bit more than pointing the nose to the general direction of airfield end and applying the full throttle.

major_setback
03-21-2008, 04:02 PM
I agree that grass will be needed for the future. In the future!

Imagine the game in 10 years time (we will no doubt be playing it still, even if something better is out by then): The wind is blowing on take off, rocking your plane. Trees bending in the wind, clouds quickly passing...and the grass isn't moving???

Xiolablu3
03-21-2008, 04:10 PM
I'm not necesarily enthusiastic about the grass, however its just another thing that needs to look realistic for a next gen game.

Oleg was asked for pics and posted one of the nice looking grass, and all I see is a lot of people moaning about it, complaining that graphics artists should be instead programming flight models and silly things like that!.

HuninMunin
03-21-2008, 04:20 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

Ugly_Kid
03-21-2008, 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 Xiolablu3:
complaining that graphics artists should be instead programming flight models and silly things like that!. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmmm...how about engaging less of them graphics artists and more of them flight models makers?
- that way - you know - there might be eventually more than a mere visual difference between clipped wing spitfire and the normal one - a difference that we don't have ATM...

HuninMunin
03-21-2008, 05:23 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Why don't you write him an essay about what the audience wants and make a buisness plan?
I mean, sure he has absolutely no clue what he's doin...

Tater-SW-
03-21-2008, 05:29 PM
Many act as if there is no specialization at their shop. Like the guy who should be making planes or FMs is making grass. In fact, the terrain programmer probably got his milestones done, and went on to start jazzing stuff up.

That said, there does need to be concentration where it matters DMs, AI, etc.

Ugly_Kid
03-21-2008, 05:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by HuninMunin:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Why don't you write him an essay about what the audience wants and make a buisness plan?
I mean, sure he has absolutely no clue what he's doin... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, define audience - surely, as another discussion show you can go fishing for FPS crowds too in hope of making more profit. So targeting for that group does not mean "having no clue what he's doing". That, of course, does not necessarily attract people waiting for a more hardcore approach to simming.

HuninMunin
03-21-2008, 07:07 PM
I think Oleg proved that both approaches can be merged rather successfully with IL-2.

heywooood
03-21-2008, 07:49 PM
whats with all the cheese?

these are clearly wips and no where near ingame captures so maybe chill the hostility?

WoW is a longterm Oleg production - so like Il2 franchise it should be around for awhile...1c has proven that they can mix great visuals with a decent combat simulation with built-in expandability as better hardware comes along.

I think I'll wait to see if the grass bends, and if the Daimler engines look like a photogragh and how the fabric tears from the wings of my augering Moth...yes - I'll wait until I am installing the game on my machine before I pass judgement on these early, early developement screenies

ElAurens
03-21-2008, 08:01 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

SeaFireLIV
03-21-2008, 08:07 PM
I wonder how many RAF pilots noted the detailed grass as they ran to their Spitfires during an air raid?

TX-Gunslinger
03-21-2008, 08:21 PM
Oleg, Oleg why won't you tell us what's happening with SOW? We are your fan base?

Oleg, Oleg why can't we have an update!!!

Do you get it now?

Every time Oleg puts out an update, the same "back seat" drivers tear apart anything they can think of.

As I've said many times, Oleg would be much better off to put a blackout on all of it. He clearly has the development money to finish it, so why put out anything until it's near ready?

Anyway - I think the damage on the Tiger Moth is incredible and the 110 C4 is outstanding.

S~

Gunny

Tab_Flettner
03-21-2008, 10:34 PM
The customizable instruments for different views including "no cockpit" was a feature of Janes WWII Fighters, where they were called "pop ups":

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v712/mr_coffee/janesww2003_640w.jpg

VW-IceFire
03-21-2008, 10:47 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'm not necesarily enthusiastic about the grass, however its just another thing that needs to look realistic for a next gen game.

Oleg was asked for pics and posted one of the nice looking grass, and all I see is a lot of people moaning about it, complaining that graphics artists should be instead programming flight models and silly things like that!. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Agreed completely. Next gen game engine has got to be able to put on a realistic visual display as well as a satisfying gameplay experience...in our case...by making the planes fly right. That said some people won't be happy no matter what.

As for modeling grass and the like and whats the point if we're all flying around at 20,000 feet. Well three things:

1) In dogfight servers people don't fly at 20,000 feet. When you're really scraping the ground a little vegetation detail above what we have might be nice. I can't imagine it being forced so it'll be eye candy you can turn on and off.

2) Battle of Britain is the beginning. Its a whole series so the engine better have some staying power. I wouldn't even care if Oleg turned off the grass and some other visual features until they are going to be performance acceptable and they are brought in at a later date.

3) Lots of talk a while back about using the engine to do more than just gaming. Might be licensed for documentaries in the same vein as Dogfights on History channel...with the right tools you can do something that looks even better. It could be done for tank warfare even with the detailed ground units. I hope to see that possibility pan out.

Looking forward to seeing more!

I_KG100_Prien
03-21-2008, 11:26 PM
Some graphical goodies actually add enhancement and immersion. Others just eat up CPU resources and add very little in the broad scheme.

But, we can all sleep peacefully in our beds tonight knowing that by the time SoW comes out.. We will have saved our pennies for better machines... One-by-one.

(I mean that with good intentions though, I hope that when it hits the shelves- it's a peach)

Sama51
03-22-2008, 12:02 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif Good update.

Has the gears churning in my head of what we might possibly be getting in the future.

I hope Oleg enjoys creating his work as much as I do awaiting it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

slipBall
03-22-2008, 03:01 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">3) Lots of talk a while back about using the engine to do more than just gaming. Might be licensed for documentaries in the same vein as Dogfights on History channel...with the right tools you can do something that looks even better. It could be done for tank warfare even with the detailed ground units. I hope to see that possibility pan out </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Bingo

Bewolf
03-22-2008, 03:31 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:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
I'm not necesarily enthusiastic about the grass, however its just another thing that needs to look realistic for a next gen game.

Oleg was asked for pics and posted one of the nice looking grass, and all I see is a lot of people moaning about it, complaining that graphics artists should be instead programming flight models and silly things like that!. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Agreed completely. Next gen game engine has got to be able to put on a realistic visual display as well as a satisfying gameplay experience...in our case...by making the planes fly right. That said some people won't be happy no matter what.

As for modeling grass and the like and whats the point if we're all flying around at 20,000 feet. Well three things:

1) In dogfight servers people don't fly at 20,000 feet. When you're really scraping the ground a little vegetation detail above what we have might be nice. I can't imagine it being forced so it'll be eye candy you can turn on and off.

2) Battle of Britain is the beginning. Its a whole series so the engine better have some staying power. I wouldn't even care if Oleg turned off the grass and some other visual features until they are going to be performance acceptable and they are brought in at a later date.

3) Lots of talk a while back about using the engine to do more than just gaming. Might be licensed for documentaries in the same vein as Dogfights on History channel...with the right tools you can do something that looks even better. It could be done for tank warfare even with the detailed ground units. I hope to see that possibility pan out.

Looking forward to seeing more! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't forget Olegs plans to include player controlled ground units in IL2.

That aside, I really doubt most ppl here want a WW2 game. Cuz, uhm, I may be wrong, but back in WW2 there was grass me thinks. Yanno, those green fields were spitfires took off what made this a very cliché and typical trademark of BoB.
Maybe then we should go back to the EAW and CFS days. Cuz, when you are buzzing at 20.000 feet, terrain obviously just needs a simple texture to look realistic. Immersion is so overrated.
And as was said already, he then could fire the engine designers and texture artists, cuz he obviously only needs the flight modellers. That would make the game so much cheaper!

No41Sqn_Banks
03-22-2008, 04:06 AM
Thats a good idea, we could use the console for flight model outputs, so we don't need a 3D engine at all!

Aiming will be a bit tough, because you'll only have the coordinates of you and your enemy, but who said that it's going to be easy?

Fighterduck
03-22-2008, 04:54 AM
Uhm..personally i find the grass idea really nice. OK maeby its not 100% necessary in a flight sim as you call il, well flight sim, but i always welcome immersion factors, and the grass one its really nice. I quite find myself standing on the runway and simply looking at the plane in external view: in IL2 you can have amazing pics, with great details, and i an only immagine the ones we will have in SoW. Plus, oleg said the the new SoW will be great for the Movie makers community, and i think the for those guys, grass detail will be priceless.

WTE_Ibis
03-22-2008, 05:43 AM
I want crickets and butterflies and to be able to visit the local pub and pick up a tart or two.
But most of all I want that bar fixed, if it isn't I'm gonna surrender to the British!
Unless of course that fat basket gives me Spitfires!
Aufwiedersehen.


.

ElAurens
03-22-2008, 07:08 AM
As someone who does a fair ammount of ground pounding I must say that a better graphical representation of ground detail will be highly appreciated.

Can you imagine, coming in low over a wheat field in France to straff a column of German trucks, pulling up and looking over your shoulder and seeing the airflow from your craft disturbing the pattern in the field.

I can't wait.

Like Bearcat says: "Immersion baby!"

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

major_setback
03-22-2008, 07:24 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
As someone who does a fair ammount of ground pounding I must say that a better graphical representation of ground detail will be highly appreciated.

Can you imagine, coming in low over a wheat field in France to straff a column of German trucks, pulling up and looking over your shoulder and seeing the airflow from your craft disturbing the pattern in the field.

I can't wait.

Like Bearcat says: "Immersion baby!"

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, that's exactly the point. Fields of long grass and wheat etc. will be noticeable from the air too.

Crash landing in for example a wheat field wouldn't be the same with 2d wheat.

I will no doubt end up in lots of fields!!

I see no difference to having moving waves.

Taylortony
03-22-2008, 09:52 AM
Paint erosion on the 110 props is wrong, yes you will get erosion on the leading edges but not as much on the front face....... you will however get about 10 fold more on the thrust face on the back of the prop,so even allowing for the amount shown on the front face then the rear of the blades should be virtually bare metal........ even when its acting as the worlds most efficent fly swat, all the dead fly matter is on the rear face, NOT the front.

trumper
03-22-2008, 01:29 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif Of course the grass and other terrain details are important.Get the basics right and the rest will follow.
For me the terrain details and things like realistic grass etc are a huge part of the sim and realism.
Sit behind a warbird doing run ups and watch the grass move,the dust fly up,feel the power.
I want to enjoy flying low and slow navigating and sight seeing in a Tiger moth or buzzing the locals in a Spitfire or Hurricane.
The better the details can only mean better alround.
Technology has come on leaps and bounds and is continuing,lets push it to the limit where possible but make things scaleable to allow all people to play it to their own computers specs.
Go for it Oleg,moving trees,grass,corn fields http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

ronison
03-22-2008, 01:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WTE_Ibis:
I want crickets and butterflies and to be able to visit the local pub and pick up a tart or two.
But most of all I want that bar fixed, if it isn't I'm gonna surrender to the British!
Unless of course that fat basket gives me Spitfires!
Aufwiedersehen.

WTE_Ibis you best just give up and head to England. I hear the bar is fixed there and the tart's are rather sweet. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Xiolablu3
03-22-2008, 02:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by -HH- Beebop:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bewolf:
...Immersion is so overrated... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Do tell, really? I always thought that is what differentiated this game from other "arcade" titles.
Then again I have been known to be wrong before. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Read Bewulfs post again while thinking 'sarcasm'.

Skarphol
03-22-2008, 03:48 PM
So much whining about the grass, but strangely enough, no one is whining about moving truck-suspension?
Some people have a really weird focus...
The grass will be really nice as long as you are lower than 300m.
If we are lucky it will give us a good indication of wind direction as we are descenting on an enemy coulumn, or as we are trying to ditch in a farmers field with lowest possible ground speed..
Not a bad word towards the grass from my mouth...

Skarphol

Da_Godfatha
03-22-2008, 05:35 PM
Ahhh....the famous "Oleg Butt-smoochers(tm)" http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

You guys really crack me up. If I want player-controlled vehicles with planes....I will play BF1942.

In the future......future is right. Maybe Christmas 2010 it will come out.

You smoochers just don't get it, do you? The FOOKING GRASS is not important! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif Proper FM's, DM's, and a better AI IS IMPORTANT. Get it?

As one poster said, it will be a shame if the grass moves and planes like the Do-17 is just AI.

Man, this place has not changed one bit! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Dare to express a differant opinion than the self-appointed butt-kisser's and they go ballistic.

I think maybe some of you guys have been smokin too much grass.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

GF

blairgowrie
03-22-2008, 05:42 PM
Easy Da_Godfatha,

It is ok to express an opinion but try to do it politely and tactfully. I am not sure if the grass is important or not. I know I just look forward to the release of the game.

ElAurens
03-22-2008, 06:19 PM
Why is it that some people always think that to have one thing you must exclude something else?

Very narrow thinking.

Tater-SW-
03-22-2008, 06:54 PM
The most important elements are things the player, flying a plane immediately interacts with.

Ground quality certainly adds something, IMO. Any ability to discern the ground at higher fidelity improves low-alt flying, IMO, compared to a featureless "texture" on the ground. "Real" trees matter (compared to "layered" il-2 forests).

Clouds matter. A lot.

As for ground targets, if the players exclusively fly fighters, they can be cartoons in appearance, and DM. Once players are tasked with getting down low and attacking ground targets, IMO the target fidelity needs to approach aircraft. Ships, OTOH, need to be at least as complex as the largest plane. Ships absolutely require decent AI (evasion, combing torpedo attacks, etc). They require a complicated DM, none of this X hits and you sink nonsense. I just read a RL account of a 745 ton jap Kaibokan hit by FOUR 500lb bombs before it sank, Even then, it took over 30 minutes to sink. Ships are a joke in il-2. The DM need progressive fire, the ability to suppress open gun mounts, etc.

The guys making eye candy are likely not the same people working on other stuff though, it needn't be one or the other.

tater

Skoshi Tiger
03-22-2008, 07:08 PM
Ages and ages ago I wrote a post saying wouldn't it be great if we had guages like in WWII Fighters!

Unfortunately since then I've got my Track-IR and it became a non-issue. I rarely fly now with no cockpit because I loose track of where I'm looking! Sigh.

Be careful what you wish for. Some time it can come true!
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Tab_Flettner:
The customizable instruments for different views including "no cockpit" was a feature of Janes WWII Fighters, where they were called "pop ups":

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v712/mr_coffee/janesww2003_640w.jpg </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

major_setback
03-22-2008, 07:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Da_Godfatha:


....You smoochers just don't get it, do you? The FOOKING GRASS is not important! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif Proper FM's, DM's, and a better AI IS IMPORTANT. Get it?



GF </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It doesn't really matters what you think of the grass, or what I think of the grass. Oleg isn't about to release a sim onto the market with sub-standard graphics. They have to meet up with today's (tomorrow's) standards, or the kids won't buy the game.

His investments have to pay back.

trumper
03-23-2008, 03:18 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Da_Godfatha:

You smoochers just don't get it, do you? The FOOKING GRASS is not important! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif Proper FM's, DM's, and a better AI IS IMPORTANT. Get it?

As one poster said, it will be a shame if the grass moves and planes like the Do-17 is just AI.

Man, this place has not changed one bit! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Dare to express a differant opinion than the self-appointed butt-kisser's and they go ballistic.



GF </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Actually we DO get it.There's a saying "look after the pennies and the pounds will look after themselves".Get the small details correct first and foremost and the other details will follow http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Does anyone here really know what the FM's are anyway,so are they correct??,but we all know whether the grass and other details look correct.
How many times have you looked at a picture which is very good but something small is wrong and throws the whole picture off.
Calm down,---don't cut off your nose to spite your face and reduce one thing in the game thinking that it will improve another part,if they can't get right on one bit there's a good chance something bigger will be wrong as well. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Feathered_IV
03-23-2008, 04:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by trumper:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Da_Godfatha:

You smoochers just don't get it, do you? The FOOKING GRASS is not important! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif Proper FM's, DM's, and a better AI IS IMPORTANT. Get it?

As one poster said, it will be a shame if the grass moves and planes like the Do-17 is just AI.

Man, this place has not changed one bit! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Dare to express a differant opinion than the self-appointed butt-kisser's and they go ballistic.



GF </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You seem to be under the massive delusion that quality visuals and detailed flight/damage modelling are mutually exclusive. I am grateful that you have nothing to do with the sim's development team.

Farran1966
03-23-2008, 05:38 AM
I don't get it!

Every time Oleg puts out an update, you get Muppets saying "I don't like this", "I don't like that"

Who cares if you like it or not, you people cannot actually bring anything to the table. can you?

Me, I'm with Oleg. I will wait and see what this new game brings; he is obviously still working on the project, which is all I need to know

Skoshi Tiger
03-23-2008, 07:32 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Farran1966:
I don't get it!

Every time Oleg puts out an update, you get Muppets saying "I don't like this", "I don't like that"

Who cares if you like it or not, you people cannot actually bring anything to the table. can you?

Me, I'm with Oleg. I will wait and see what this new game brings; he is obviously still working on the project, which is all I need to know </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I assume its what's called the "Tall poppy syndrome", Which in this context is basically, "I can't run a software development company which is currently creating a STATE OF THE ART combat flight simulator, so I'll just run down any thing they announce so I'll feel a bit better about my self"

I do the same at work myself, when someone puts in a bit more effort than me or shows some more initiative than me, or more talent than me. It helps me keep my self esteemed up.

Happy Easter to one and all! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

440 O.T.T