1. #41
    Nice to see some life of BoB but the only thing that was impressive and looked good to me was the cockpit and ground objects.

    I really hope things improve a great deal before the day. It still looks like a spruced up version of the IL-2 engine as well.

    Im looking forward more to IL-2 Sturmovik 1946 and Knights of the Sky.
    Share this post

  2. #42
    Originally posted by NekoReaperman:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9OWQ55n8ig

    Youtube link, hosted on my account... feel free to put on original post or do whatever you want with it :-)
    Thanks for the post.. I couldn't view the original.. Looks GREAT to me! - I just hope there are more people on the ground so it looks less sterile..
    Share this post

  3. #43
    You know, it's funny...other developers try and release as much stuff as possible, to keep the fans interested, and to have publicity. 1C and Oleg, however, don't release anything, and when they do, it's just a bad beta video with a lot of stuttering.


    The thing that struck me the most was the lighting. We're in 2006, we have bump maps, shaders, stencil shadows - why is none of this in this sim? You know, you could probably save about 5k worth of polies in that cockpit if you used a bump map to simulate some of it. Or you could actually model the panel lines on a fighter by adding bump maps. Stencil shadows would be a great addition - and yes, it would bring the visuals closer to realism. More so than working truck suspension.

    I don't know, I mean the sim looks interesting, but it looks like IL-2 with the same terrain set. Where's the pizazz? I understand that a sim doesn't need great graphics to look good, but good water can only do so much - I want to see some new graphical touches on my aircraft, besides the cockpit (and remember, once you look around the cockpit at the outside world - it's still the flatland of bad lighting out there. You go from super realistic cockpit to 2001 unrealistic lighting effects and whatnot). This sim is supposed to revolutionize, that's great, but it doesn't look like much of a jump from IL-2.
    Share this post

  4. #44
    Right on unknowntarget, I have my doubts that this video is even from BoB and if it is no thanks. I didn't see really anything new except the addition of the new cockpits added into the video, the clouds were nice and can someone post a link to the thread for those clouds?
    Share this post

  5. #45
    DuxCorvan's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    5,969
    And we know nothing about gameplay yet. Looks like they worry more about the visual and technological stuff than about the simulation itself, or the immersion.

    And sincerely, what I see on that video, doesn't justify so much hype and secrecy. I personally abhorr those cheerful bright colours. Despite the amazing models, it looks less realistic visually than FB.

    Unless -I hope- we are seeing just early premature 'testing' ugly stuff.
    Share this post

  6. #46
    Its probably because 1c, as usual show all their work with the lowest video card settings, take a look at their screen shots.

    Plus, they probably haven't got a computer powerful enough yet
    Share this post

  7. #47
    You know, it's funny...other developers try and release as much stuff as possible, to keep the fans interested, and to have publicity. 1C and Oleg, however, don't release anything, and when they do, it's just a bad beta video with a lot of stuttering.
    Yeah, they know we'll buy it anyway (and dam them, they're right). Unless ofcourse it looks like that video. That (IMO) is some harmfull marketing. I can only hope thats some mis-information. I have said it before, the less you show the more the expectations will be, and mine are quite high. "looks like real" means looks like real to me, and so far I haven't seen anything that looks like real. The sky looks ok, but heck BoB2 by Gmx clouds looks better now. I'm hoping this is all old engine stuff, if not jewels are fastly falling out of Olegs crown (IMO).
    Share this post

  8. #48
    Yeah, how about decent in-game lighting & bumpmaps. I would've thought that these would have been pre-requisites for next-level game graphics. Also, am I alone in thinking that the cockpits should have uniformed arms & legs modelled and not just be piloted by ghosts that move levers by magic? Or, for the cockpit purists, how about coding for limbs only when controls are moved.

    The IL2 world looks too happy cheerful for my taste. Northern European sky and sea should have a touch of grey to them. Not impressed.
    Share this post

  9. #49
    DuxCorvan's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    5,969
    BTW, I know it is Russian stuff, but they should have at least asked a competent writer in English to make those titles, if they were to show this to someone.

    Those mispelled texts looked just kinda weird and had a funny grammar, like something you'd hear from an oriental taxi driver. Spacially, "excruciating" sounds strange in a laudatory context.

    It's supposed to be part of a limited PR campaign, but with those texts it looks a bit 'blotchy' and house-made, doesn't it?
    Share this post

  10. #50
    DuxCorvan's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    5,969
    Ha! Now I remember:

    "Excruciating, isn't it? Ha ha ha!"
    Share this post