Friday 2010-07-23 Dev. update and Discussions

[Oleg Maddox]

Folks,

Today is very small update (5 shots).
Luthier is in USA at the moment (urgent need). And I'm still in vacation.
Because of vacation I'll be absent next two weeks probably without Internet access.
Ilya (Luthier) will post updates next two weeks, if he will be able.

Anyway, there is something new to show:

[NSU]

nice air war scenes :-)

[Pato Salvaje]

Nice tracers!! but must be nice see it in "real motion"... will we have a video soon?

[fireflyerz]

Third post ...Yeah:cool:
Ok, I give in, whats the new bit ?

[Erkki]

Thanks man! ;)

[335th_GRSwaty]

Thank you Oleg!

Nice pics!!

[Freycinet]

Love the smoke coming from the right-most plane in the last screenie. Looks exactly the way it should IMHO.

Great also to see the Taifun, tho I guess it won't be flyable.

[BadAim]

Totally sweet Oleg, best shots yet. Enjoy your vacation. I pray Luthier's trip goes well.

[Pato Salvaje]

Good level of damage! this mid He111 "aleron" looks nice! and this hurry is near of "half" plane... ;) Very good shots...
Thanks Oleg!

[Hecke]

seems the game is quiet ready because you are doing "that much" vacation.
It's very disappointing to be lured with video thoughts of luthier and then getting a few shots without anything new in it.
These effects have to be shown by video. They look bad in a screenshot

[zapatista]

oleg, thanks for the update !

the shredded hurricane looks very detailed (first picture), it will be a pleasure to try and land damaged aircraft like that with their altered flight models

the aircraft in flames in the 2e shot look very spectacular :)

have a good holiday !

[Flyby]

It's coming along. Maybe Oleg is taking two weeks vacation because things are coming together a bit more quickly now as release nears? The pressure is on Luthier now, boys!!
Flyby out

[LukeFF]

It's very disappointing to be lured with video thoughts of luthier and then getting a few shots without anything new in it.

Give the guy a break already, you ingrate. He's away because of some sort of emergency.

[JVM]

Hello Oleg!

beautiful shots as always! I like the Bf 108 which was a beautiful aircraft!

Concerning the shot 2, I believe the transition flame/smoke is not really correct and that the red part of the flames are much too transparent: the fuel/oil/dope flames are much brighter light emitters than anything in their environments and their brightness obliterate the view whatever is just behind them. Flames never feel visually transparent (they are really, but your eyes will react to their brightness and could not discriminate any light coming across it if the said light is enormously less bright)
The flame shots of last week or the one before were better from this standpoint.

The smoke itself should at first either be impenetrable if a lot of oil/dope is involved (bad combustion = thick smoke), or can be quite transparent in case of pure fuel smoke (many stills and movies show fuel flames very bright and almost smokeless, this being due to extremely rapid vaporisation of fuel with speed/shell explosion and ensuing excellent combustion...usually some smoke appears quickly afterwards due to other components beginning burning)

Concerning shot 5, I see the tracers are there, but why do we have to see them as dashes like we are watching a movie?
The dashes appear because during the time the shutter of the camera is open the moving bright point that is the tracer goes a certain distance which depends only on the shutter open time and the bullet speed (this is a way to calculate the speed!); however in a simulation we are using directly our eyes which only see the bright points going away, like anybody having fired tracer rounds with a gun or a machine gun could assess!
This reminds me of the "camera" light reflection effects in Il2...we are so much used to watch WWII or any event for that matter across a camera that we forgot that the camera introduces artifacts and that the real world does not exactly appear that way to our eyes :-)
I would like to see only bright points for tracers...the "fin du fin" would be to be not able to see tracers from anywhere in front 180° of the bullet position, and more and more bright as you see them closer to their trajectory in the aft 180°...this being absolute real world behavior (the optics laws being what they are) the immersion would make a big leap forward...but I could understand simple bright points for the sake of simplicity!

JVM

[rakinroll]

Thanks Oleg.

[kgwanchos]

Concerning shot 5, I see the tracers are there, but why do we have to see them as dashes like we are watching a movie?
The dashes appear because during the time the shutter of the camera is open the moving bright point that is the tracer goes a certain distance which depends only on the shutter open time and the bullet speed (this is a way to calculate the speed!); however in a simulation we are using directly our eyes which only see the bright points going away, like anybody having fired tracer rounds with a gun or a machine gun could assess!
This reminds me of the "camera" light reflection effects in Il2...we are so much used to watch WWII or any event for that matter across a camera that we forgot that the camera introduces artifacts and that the real world does not exactly appear that way to our eyes
I would like to see only bright points for tracers...the "fin du fin" would be to be not able to see tracers from anywhere in front 180° of the bullet position, and more and more bright as you see them closer to their trajectory in the aft 180°...this being absolute real world behavior (the optics laws being what they are) the immersion would make a big leap forward...but I could accept simple bright points for the sake of simplicity!

I wouldnt presume to lecture Oleg on camera optics and real world visual effects..... hes rather an expert on those subjects.... I would assume a screen shot is to all intents a "photo" hence the emulation of shutter speed on tracers, prop blur etc ........ I think it looks great ... well done Oleg and team ....

[Birdflu]

Well done Team !!!

[katdogfizzow]

Thanks..the damage looks great

[Sturm_Williger]

Looking even better every time you show us something.
Thanks

[swiss]

Concerning shot 5, I see the tracers are there, but why do we have to see them as dashes like we are watching a movie?
The dashes appear because during the time the shutter of the camera is open the moving bright point that is the tracer goes a certain distance which depends only on the shutter open time and the bullet speed (this is a way to calculate the speed!); however in a simulation we are using directly our eyes which only see the bright points going away, like anybody having fired tracer rounds with a gun or a machine gun could assess!


That depends on the percentage of tracers in the amo, cadence and bullet speed.
I have seen machine gun and flab salvos from a >45° angle that appeared rather like a freakin' red laser beam - with a few interrupts.
You are right if you say the shallower the angle of the observer, the less blurry but dot like they appear.

Fire: I agree here, I just checked the pics of the Concorde crash in Paris.


BTT:

Great pics, thanks.

[Novotny]

Well I think it looks excellent, but then I am capable of remembering that this is a game on a computer, unlike many contributors to this forum.

Thanks for the update, Oleg.

[Sutts]

Great shots Oleg, thanks:grin:

One small observation - on a speeding plane I'd expect the flame to be more streamlined, hugging the wing surface and trailing out behind. I'm referring to the fiery bursts above the wing surface in the second shot. This probably wouldn't be as noticeable in a video though.

Very nice fire effects. It looks really hot.

Have a great holiday.

Cheers

[brando]

I think it's difficult to make constructive criticisms of details like fire and tracers when the only evidence is a frozen moment in an ongoing action. The true extent of the visual accuracy will only be apparent when the game is on the hard drive of your own machine, and I'm willing to bet that the final effects will be several leaps beyond the already stunning ten-year-old sim that most of us know so well.

I don't even worry too much about the opening version of BoB which we are all looking forward to. As a constant 'flier' since Sturmovik became available I've always felt well-supported by the fact that updates, add-ons and corrections have been plentiful. Oleg Maddox and his team have proved their willingness to improve the sim in line with technological improvements in computing many times over - as well as keeping the game available to people with less than leading-edge PCs. This alone is a great achievement.

I'm really looking forward to jumping into Storm of War. I'll leave nit-picking until I have the finished article in my hand and I've tasted action.

Thanks for the updates Oleg, and I hope you return to us refreshed and raring to go.

<S>

Brando

[JVM]

@kgwanchos

I am not lecturing Oleg, I do not have this pretention...I explain for the people who are not aware of these aspects...the tracer issue was already there in Il2...the screen shot is not taken using a camera and should show the tracer for the dots they are, nothing else...but this is only my opinion!

@swiss

I agree but do not forget they were less tracers in WWII than nowadays (presumably tracers were more expensive?) and the rates of fire were also lower so the tracers were more clearly separated! Did you see this tracer firing directly IRL, without a camera intermediary?
At altitude you should not be able (or barely) to see tracers if fired toward you from in front of you (almost no light scattering compared to lower atmospheric layers close to the ground). In Il2 you see tracers from 10 km away like they were fireworks!

I understand however there may be compelling reasons to not being completely faithful to reality on this subject, but I prefer pointing it out now than after the game release..you never know!

[HFC_Dolphin]

Thanks for the update.
One note though: I guess explosions/fires are not final, right?
They don't look that good yet. Too red maybe? I don't know what seems wrong to me, but I think you should work more on them.

Once again, thanks!

Edit: Just saw that other guys mentioned fires as well.

[IceFire]

The age old tracers debate :)

So long as they are useful to me as a simulator pilot I'm not going to complain too much. I hope everyone remembers that tracers look like lasers because we all saw StarWars at some point or another and StarWars is based on World War II air combat videos. Real laser beams travel at the speed of light in a continuous stream rather than defined pulses like a tracer (but unlike StarWars).

The pictures themselves look great. I think it's sometimes silly to complain about the visuals of an explosion until it's seen in motion. Often the various frames of an animation have an overall effect that cannot be seen from a single frame.

[TUSA/TX-Gunslinger]

Thanks Oleg!

Amazing as always. Wishing you good luck in the final efforts of finishing!

S!

Gunny

[erco]

Enjoy your vacation Oleg!

I hope Luthier is OK.

Great work!

[swiss]

Did you see this tracer firing directly IRL, without a camera intermediary?


IRL?

Yes, with my own eyes, no camera or night vision device.


At altitude you should not be able (or barely) to see tracers if fired toward you from in front of you

Of course not.
Well I guess, in fact i cant tell - I've never been in this position I really never want to... ;)

My 45° agrees are based on 0° when directly behind/gunner sight.


In Il2 you see tracers from 10 km away like they were fireworks!


Of course, but since we have no recon maps or radio contact to ground units, this is our only way of recon.



Real laser beams travel at the speed of light in a continuous stream rather than defined pulses like a tracer (but unlike StarWars)

Check out Babylon 5.

[Thunderbolt56]

This thing isn't out yet? http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v687/Thunderbolt56/Smilies/exitstageleft.gif

[mark@1C]

A question, who can tell me please what are those four shining spots in the first picture?
Reflected light from He-111? Then from the body or the canopy?
I feel a little odd, I mean if it came from the body, the shining spots should be bigger than that have been shown, shouldn't they? Or if it came from the canopy, then where are their bodies? Vanished in the blue sky, because of their camouflage? Or they are just navigation lights? In a daytime in a white colour?
Those four shining spots really look a little odd for me at such a distance in the picture, just like four UFOs...

[mungee]

Well said Brando - I couldn't have put it any better!!
I think it's difficult to make constructive criticisms of details like fire and tracers when the only evidence is a frozen moment in an ongoing action. The true extent of the visual accuracy will only be apparent when the game is on the hard drive of your own machine, and I'm willing to bet that the final effects will be several leaps beyond the already stunning ten-year-old sim that most of us know so well.

I don't even worry too much about the opening version of BoB which we are all looking forward to. As a constant 'flier' since Sturmovik became available I've always felt well-supported by the fact that updates, add-ons and corrections have been plentiful. Oleg Maddox and his team have proved their willingness to improve the sim in line with technological improvements in computing many times over - as well as keeping the game available to people with less than leading-edge PCs. This alone is a great achievement.

I'm really looking forward to jumping into Storm of War. I'll leave nit-picking until I have the finished article in my hand and I've tasted action.

Thanks for the updates Oleg, and I hope you return to us refreshed and raring to go.


Brando

[Drum_tastic]

So many experts here!

Shouldn't the fire look like this....?

Those tracers they don't look right.....

I hope that this is not the finished product terrain, it doesn't look right.....

Even though it is usually specified that the updates are work in progress!

Well you guys have got plenty of choice in the cutting edge WW2 combat sim market to choose from, why not just vote with your feet and go and play the one of your choice, you know, the one that has got everything spot on.

Or how about all you experts build your own sim and publish a weekly update for us to take a look at? I am sure Oleg would give you a few pointers.

Leave the guys alone to get on with their work. I am just totally happy to see the progress and knowing that at some stage we will all be able to play this. Isn't that enough for you people?

Anyway, I got some drums to play.

[koivis]

So many experts here!

Shouldn't the fire look like this....?

Those tracers they don't look right.....

I hope that this is not the finished product terrain, it doesn't look right.....

Even though it is usually specified that the updates are work in progress!

Well you guys have got plenty of choice in the cutting edge WW2 combat sim market to choose from, why not just vote with your feet and go and play the one of your choice, you know, the one that has got everything spot on.

Or how about all you experts build your own sim and publish a weekly update for us to take a look at? I am sure Oleg would give you a few pointers.

Leave the guys alone to get on with their work. I am just totally happy to see the progress and knowing that at some stage we will all be able to play this. Isn't that enough for you people?

Anyway, I got some drums to play.

"Look, I made a flight sim, here's some pics for you" (picture shows the most detailed model of Hawker Hurricane and He 111 ever modelled on a playable sim with very detailed damage).
Response: "Nonono, the fire looks bad, tracers too and oh man you gotta not release this with those crappy ground textures, so awful..."

Ehh...?:rolleyes:

Brando and the post I quoted have a point. I really can't see any other WWII flight sims this realistic and detailed in the near future, than this one. Yes, the fire may NOT be 100% correct, the groud textures may NOT be perfect etc. But, still it's WIP, as has been said 364757436 times already. Have a nice vacation Oleg, and do not worry, we are not THAT inpatient yet. Indeed, not yet.:-P

[zakkandrachoff]

tracers:
http://i970.photobucket.com/albums/ae188/zakkandrachoff/sow-tracers.jpg
maybe i need to see the video of the new tracers. anyway, are better than 1st tracers:-P
some tracers machine gun real life
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bx5aR1Knpb8&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCbDvc8-9g8

[Dano]

some tracers machine gun real life

That's the point, they're not in real life, they're on film and that affects how they look.

[JVM]

IRL?
Check out Babylon 5.

Ah, Babylon5...watched the full set 15 times and not bored yet...

[nearmiss]

The tracers in photo 3 and 5 do look abit cartoonish, especially the closer they are to the shooter.

[kristorf]

Nice pics, looks like its coming on good.

[No601_Swallow]

So many experts here!

Shouldn't the fire look like this....?

Those tracers they don't look right.....



Thanks, Drumtastic. That's pretty much what I was going to say.

Oleg - ignore the know-it-alls! Personally I feel privileged just to be able to see these WOP updates. Thank you!

[Splitter]

The age old tracers debate :)

So long as they are useful to me as a simulator pilot I'm not going to complain too much. I hope everyone remembers that tracers look like lasers because we all saw StarWars at some point or another and StarWars is based on World War II air combat videos. Real laser beams travel at the speed of light in a continuous stream rather than defined pulses like a tracer (but unlike StarWars).

The pictures themselves look great. I think it's sometimes silly to complain about the visuals of an explosion until it's seen in motion. Often the various frames of an animation have an overall effect that cannot be seen from a single frame.

This. The pictures look excellent once again and I especially love the battle damage with the torn cloth. Awesome detail.

On tracers....didn't different countries use different tracers? I've never seen it modeled in a game that I can remember (did not play IL2 so can't comment there), but gun camera footage from German planes tends to show "smoke trails" on the tracers.

Here is a cool quote from 5ad.org:

"It was a common practice on fighter planes to load every 5th found with a tracer round to aid in aiming. That was a mistake. The tracers had different ballistics so (at long range) if your tracers were hitting the target, 80% of your rounds were missing. Worse yet, the tracers instantly told your enemy he was under fire and from which direction. Worst of all was the practice of loading a string of tracers at the end of the belt to tell you that you were out of ammo. That was definitely not something you wanted to tell the enemy. Units that stopped using tracers saw their success rate nearly double and their loss rate go down."

I'm not sure how one would lead another aircraft without tracers though, I know I couldn't lol.

Pie in the sky here, but one thing that would be a great addition in the sim is the option to load out and sight your guns to your own preference. I know some pilots wanted all of their bullets to pass through a single point at a given distance while others wanted a spread. Others used a combination. They also ran combinations of tracer, AP, and incendiary ronuds.

Anyway, GREAT photos, can't wait!

Splitter

[Splitter]

The age old tracers debate :)

So long as they are useful to me as a simulator pilot I'm not going to complain too much. I hope everyone remembers that tracers look like lasers because we all saw StarWars at some point or another and StarWars is based on World War II air combat videos. Real laser beams travel at the speed of light in a continuous stream rather than defined pulses like a tracer (but unlike StarWars).

The pictures themselves look great. I think it's sometimes silly to complain about the visuals of an explosion until it's seen in motion. Often the various frames of an animation have an overall effect that cannot be seen from a single frame.

This. The pictures look excellent once again and I especially love the battle damage with the torn cloth. Awesome detail.

On tracers....didn't different countries use different tracers? I've never seen it modeled in a game that I can remember (did not play IL2 so can't comment there), but gun camera footage from German planes tends to show "smoke trails" on the tracers.

Here is a cool quote from 5ad.org:

"It was a common practice on fighter planes to load every 5th found with a tracer round to aid in aiming. That was a mistake. The tracers had different ballistics so (at long range) if your tracers were hitting the target, 80% of your rounds were missing. Worse yet, the tracers instantly told your enemy he was under fire and from which direction. Worst of all was the practice of loading a string of tracers at the end of the belt to tell you that you were out of ammo. That was definitely not something you wanted to tell the enemy. Units that stopped using tracers saw their success rate nearly double and their loss rate go down."

I'm not sure how one would lead another aircraft without tracers though, I know I couldn't lol.

Pie in the sky here, but one thing that would be a great addition in the sim is the option to load out and sight your guns to your own preference. I know some pilots wanted all of their bullets to pass through a single point at a given distance while others wanted a spread. Others used a combination. They also ran combinations of tracer, AP, and incendiary ronuds.

Anyway, GREAT photos, can't wait!

Splitter

[Robert]

Best wishes to Luthier. I hope your coming back to the states isn't because of anything tremendously serious. I know it doesn't matter in the big scheme, but I'll think good thoughts.

Oleg, Dammit man. You're on VACATION. Screw us!!!!!! You should be tanning and spending valuable time with family.

That said. Thanks Oleg.

[Feuerfalke]

It's WIP - I bet this is just a basic tracer-test and colors are added later.

I can imagine they look rather nice in motion and even better: They vanish gradually! :grin:

[ECV56_Lancelot]

On tracers....didn't different countries use different tracers? I've never seen it modeled in a game that I can remember (did not play IL2 so can't comment there), but gun camera footage from German planes tends to show "smoke trails" on the tracers.


Il-2 have´s diferent color tracers according to country and ammo since the original IL-2 release.
Green tracers from I-16 and I-15 have been an issue because they do look too much like taken from Star Wars. But nobody researched seriously if they look and are realistic, only judge if they like it or not, like here.
Still, tracers should be judged only from ingame video, not by screenshots, they can be very deceiving on an screenshot. And also they look very diferent when saw from a distance (like small lines moving fast) or from behind when you fire them (like dots), but it seems most people do not realize that.
Also, if tracers give away your position and all that, its another subject, they were used and were an standar part of the ammo loadout, so they should be there. Even if some pilots or squadron preferred not to use them. Or else provide data that the real policy of the RAF or Lufftwaffe was to not use tracers.

[Tone71]

Concerning shot 5, I see the tracers are there, but why do we have to see them as dashes like we are watching a movie?
The dashes appear because during the time the shutter of the camera is open the moving bright point that is the tracer goes a certain distance which depends only on the shutter open time and the bullet speed (this is a way to calculate the speed!); however in a simulation we are using directly our eyes which only see the bright points going away, like anybody having fired tracer rounds with a gun or a machine gun could assess!


That's because this is a computer game, so the effect needs to be simulated. If you move a dot across a screen that updates 60x a second you will never achieve quite the same effect. In reality, however, our eyes don't see things in discrete steps, so fast moving lights are blurred.

maybe it's because we been waiting this since 2005, and 5 years later see some things too similar to il2 engine, makes you wonder why.

Oh and GOA_Potenz, that's just plain rude btw.

Thanks for the shots Oleg, very good of you seeing as you are on vacation and should be taking a break from work! Remember, you can't please all the people all of the time! :)

[hellbomber]

on the note of tracers, if you've ever fired a heavy machine gun loaded with tracers (i have), they do indeed look like streaks to the human eye

the old ww2 clips dont do them justice they look different on camera than they do to the human eye, due to the way film captures light vs the way the human eye captures it

even when you just try to capture a picture of it the tracers dont appear as long in the picture as they do when you see them in person

you see long streaks this is because the bullets are moving so fast the bright lights will appear long and 'burn' the image into your cornea, although during bright light in the day the effect is alot more subdued, if there is heavy cloud cover out covering the sun or if its dusk / dawn the tracers will look alot longer and brighter, tracers never look like an individual point of light to the eye, sometimes on camera they will as there is time in between frames and the image is captured in frames wheras the eye captures it in continuous motion, they look like streaks, even when they bounce of rocks and stuff they look like cool "L" or "v" or "w" (if they skip) shapes, it would be cool if at night the images from the tracers would temporarily leave streaks on your screen as they will irl at night the light leaves streaks in your eyes like a camera flash will

[philip.ed]

Damage effects are awesome; tracer is mediocre, smoke and fire are crapper than I thought. Will I be flamed for saying this (no pun intended)? Yes, probably. Do I care? No.
Seriously, the smoke here looks worse than current Il-2 and much worse than RoF.
But that damage is just incredible. Hopefully all of the effects will be severely re-worked.

Thanks, Drumtastic. That's pretty much what I was going to say.

Oleg - ignore the know-it-alls! Personally I feel privileged just to be able to see these WOP updates. Thank you!

Why post for us to share our critique and ignore it? What a waste of time that'd be.

[louisv]

A question, who can tell me please what are those four shining spots in the first picture?
Reflected light from He-111? Then from the body or the canopy?
I feel a little odd, I mean if it came from the body, the shining spots should be bigger than that have been shown, shouldn't they? Or if it came from the canopy, then where are their bodies? Vanished in the blue sky, because of their camouflage? Or they are just navigation lights? In a daytime in a white colour?
Those four shining spots really look a little odd for me at such a distance in the picture, just like four UFOs...

Flak exploding I think (watch from close -up we can see some far-away flak smudges)

[louisv]

maybe it's because we been waiting this since 2005, and 5 years later see some things too similar to il2 engine, makes you wonder why.


If what you have been seeing in the updates in the last few weeks looks to you like IL-2, then there is no hope for you ;)

[robday]

maybe it's because we been waiting this since 2005, and 5 years later see some things too similar to il2 engine, makes you wonder why.

The updates we have seen so far look many times better than IL2 IMHO! I've been playing IL2 since it was first released and I believe SoW will be a quantum leap forward in aerial combat sims when it is eventually on our machines.

[ECV56_Lancelot]

on the note of tracers, if you've ever fired a heavy machine gun loaded with tracers (i have), they do indeed look like streaks to the human eye


I should had wrote small streaks then, instead of points. From behind that streaks from a tracer look shorter that from the side, motter of angle point of view. Bottom of the line, you are right.

[choctaw111]

The tracers in photo 3 and 5 do look abit cartoonish, especially the closer they are to the shooter.


Tracers, because of their speed, look like streaks when they are close and bright dots when they are further away.
It is hard to say what these tracers look like "in game" but I do think that they will look a lot better in motion.
I like how Oleg has the tracers slowly "fading" as they get further away to give the illusion of distance BUT tracers stay brightly lit during the entire time they burn.
Who is to say anything about it now as this is all work in progress anyway.
I can't wait to see a movie of what they look like and
I can't wait to see what the ricochets look like :)

[Abbeville-Boy]

thanks very much for good looking shots
enjoy the vacation
and luither enjoy the usa visit :grin:

[philip.ed]

If what you have been seeing in the updates in the last few weeks looks to you like IL-2, then there is no hope for you ;)

The smoke looks like Il-2, the sky looks like Il-2, the clouds (when not lit to show the individual particles) look like Il-2 so I can see what he's saying. Of course, I can see all these features being haveily tweaked, but it's not really 2010 standard. I have full faith in the team, but we need to see this in video form to get a real grasp of it.
But really I can see so many things that are similar to Il-2; smoke and fire that just don't look right (I have seen lots of WW2 guncam footage, a fair amount in colour, and the smoke doesn't look like this, and the fire in the hurricane pic just looks odd) so really I can see that certain features are like they have been regurgetated from Il-2. Take the tracer, the tracer from the .303's that I've seen in guncam videos has had smoke-trails behind the burning tracer. This looks a bit like Il-2's lasers...

But really people take these comments too seriously; they are just small aspects of the game, and it'd be pages of essays to concentrate on each individual amazing aspect.

[Avimimus]

Err... The closest thing we have to 2010 standard for flightsims is Lock-on Flaming Cliffs 2 and Rise of Flight - not a very large sample.

Just have faith. It will appear over-saturated - because that is what Oleg does. It will come out with a few details looking a bit like Il-2 - because the project is being rushed a little. It will be astounding - because that is what Oleg does. Finally, it will be developed further (by Oleg or 3rd parties).

So, yes, I take your comments far too seriously (especially as the tracers last week were dots and now they've become lines). Very silly of my really.

[SlipBall]

IL-2 was done very well, to the point that we all still fly it. I really don't expect SOW to look that much different from what was very much, near perfection. It certainly will look better in the end, just stop the critique of every up-date, and say thank you for a change of pace.:)

[Feuerfalke]

Flak exploding I think (watch from close -up we can see some far-away flak smudges)

I rather guess these are placeholders for the smokepuffs from bullets penetrating the aircraft skin, just like the ones present in IL2.

[Jaws2002]

I see some of you here are really acting like the "vilage idiot" with your rude coments. Is because of this kind of morons, Oleg stoped being directly involved with the IL-2 community. I think you guys need to have a good look in the mirror and stay away from this forum for a while. You are not helping one bit.:evil:

[Viikate]

Remember how the original IL-2 development shots looked like?

http://www.combatsim.com/memb123/htm/jan99/IL-2.htm
http://www.combatsim.com/memb123/htm/jan99/IL-2b.htm

Totally different than the actual release ;)

[Oleg Maddox]

Remember how the original IL-2 development shots looked like?

http://www.combatsim.com/memb123/htm/jan99/IL-2.htm
http://www.combatsim.com/memb123/htm/jan99/IL-2b.htm

Totally different than the actual release ;)

Right words.

[JVM]

on the note of tracers, if you've ever fired a heavy machine gun loaded with tracers (i have), they do indeed look like streaks to the human eye

the old ww2 clips dont do them justice they look different on camera than they do to the human eye, due to the way film captures light vs the way the human eye captures it

even when you just try to capture a picture of it the tracers dont appear as long in the picture as they do when you see them in person

you see long streaks this is because the bullets are moving so fast the bright lights will appear long and 'burn' the image into your cornea, although during bright light in the day the effect is alot more subdued, if there is heavy cloud cover out covering the sun or if its dusk / dawn the tracers will look alot longer and brighter, tracers never look like an individual point of light to the eye, sometimes on camera they will as there is time in between frames and the image is captured in frames wheras the eye captures it in continuous motion, they look like streaks, even when they bounce of rocks and stuff they look like cool "L" or "v" or "w" (if they skip) shapes, it would be cool if at night the images from the tracers would temporarily leave streaks on your screen as they will irl at night the light leaves streaks in your eyes like a camera flash will

I like your explanation...I had forgotten of the retinal persistence consequences!

JV

[Cpt_Farrel]

I'd love to see videos too but the screenshots are showing more and more cool stuff! Sure, there are things that need tweaking and I'm sure they will be tweaked. Off course it's good with CONSTRUCTIVE criticism, but whining and rudeness, perhaps not as much...

Also, for every unhappy poster I bet there's 10 (100?) that likes what they see but won't comment but simply move on. I know, I've done it often enough... Trying to redeem that now! :)

I'm really excited at the level of detail of the aircrew and I sure hope we'll see a video of that soon!

[luthier]

Hey everybody, greetings from sunny jetlagged California!

Our tracers are perfect. End of discussion.

We can finetune thickness - color - transparency - luminosity, but in theory ours are the most perfect true to life tracers ever modeled anywhere. Tracers in real life look like that, like straight dashes of uniform thickness. There's a spot at the tail end of a bullet that emits plasma. It doesn't fade out towards the end. It doesn't get thinner. It doesn't wiggle. Sperm-style tracers you're used to from other video games are Hollywood.

We have that emitter that draws out a line of specific length based on tracer speed and "exposure". The tracer shots you see were not taken in pause, because in pause our tracer turns into a dot - those mysterious white dots in the first shot are stopped tracers in pause.


Our fire and smoke are extremely WIP. Everyone hates them here even more than you guys hate them. Calm down and trust us a little bit.


Finally, the surprise from last week is failing to materialize. We were going to release some PSDs to give the skin makers an early start, and maybe even team up with you guys to make some historical skins or something. But we hit a little snag because, as it turns out, you can't very well make skins with just a PSD, and we can't very well release our plane models with the skins. We need to figure this out, hopefully very soon.

[IceFire]

Hey everybody, greetings from sunny jetlagged California!

Our tracers are perfect. End of discussion.

We can finetune thickness - color - transparency - luminosity, but in theory ours are the most perfect true to life tracers ever modeled anywhere. Tracers in real life look like that, like straight dashes of uniform thickness. There's a spot at the tail end of a bullet that emits plasma. It doesn't fade out towards the end. It doesn't get thinner. It doesn't wiggle. Sperm-style tracers you're used to from other video games are Hollywood.

We have that emitter that draws out a line of specific length based on tracer speed and "exposure". The tracer shots you see were not taken in pause, because in pause our tracer turns into a dot - those mysterious white dots in the first shot are stopped tracers in pause.


Our fire and smoke are extremely WIP. Everyone hates them here even more than you guys hate them. Calm down and trust us a little bit.


Finally, the surprise from last week is failing to materialize. We were going to release some PSDs to give the skin makers an early start, and maybe even team up with you guys to make some historical skins or something. But we hit a little snag because, as it turns out, you can't very well make skins with just a PSD, and we can't very well release our plane models with the skins. We need to figure this out, hopefully very soon.
Thanks for the explanation on the tracers. That sounds positively great in terms of how they are being done. If I understand correctly the part about the exposure has to do with lighting conditions at the time? So tracers will appear differently at night or under a cloud as opposed to in direct sunlight? Sounds interesting in my head anyways :)

[Tone71]

IL-2 was done very well, to the point that we all still fly it. I really don't expect SOW to look that much different from what was very much, near perfection. It certainly will look better in the end, just stop the critique of every up-date, and say thank you for a change of pace.:)

Couldn't agree more. Let's not forget that IL-2 is almost 9 years old! And graphically still puts many new games to shame.

[Hecke]

Couldn't agree more. Let's not forget that IL-2 is almost 9 years old! And graphically still puts many new games to shame.


That's maybe true but why don't you think further.
With the graphics we have seen in the last updates, how can these "put many new games to shame" in 2020.

I would say, the graphics of SoW BoB are nearly ok for 2010/2011 but not for much longer.

Don't always compare to the previous game. Compare it to what is standard.

[Old_Canuck]

....
Don't always compare to the previous game. Compare it to what is standard.

The "previous game" [IL-2] IS the standard. When SoW is released IT will be the standard. Before IL-2 was released CFS-2 WAS the standard. But only by comparison. It still puzzles me that with the resources and talent at Microsoft they can't even hope to compete with a relatively small team from Russia.

[Hecke]

The "previous game" [IL-2] IS the standard. When SoW is released IT will be the standard. Before IL-2 was released CFS-2 WAS the standard. But only by comparison. It still puzzles me that with the resources and talent at Microsoft they can't even hope to compete with a relatively small team from Russia.



I do not mean comparing it to only one game that contains some of all aspects but to the several parts (graphic, sound, physics) of other games that built the new standard where they are better than others.

I would really like to know how many people are working on SoW BoB

[nearmiss]

The "previous game" [IL-2] IS the standard. When SoW is released IT will be the standard. Before IL-2 was released CFS-2 WAS the standard. But only by comparison. It still puzzles me that with the resources and talent at Microsoft they can't even hope to compete with a relatively small team from Russia.

It is like so many things when people have too much money. Money isn't ever the most important ingredient... it's committment.

Think about all the very excellent development systems, like Foxpro,dbase,etc. that were bought out by companies with the big bucks.

Foxpro is the only one left, but MSFT hasn't done anything with it compared to when it was in the hands of the original developers. Foxpro was hot, and the developers were always doing new things. I just read where MSFT will not support it past 2015. Kinda sounds like the death bells to me.

Same with the MSFT combat flight series. They had a winner in CFS2 that was the benchmark sim. I remember when Sim-outhouse and netwings had enormous numbers of users for CFS2 and the IL2 had a squeaky little corner on the site (no users).

CFS2 was the big dog until MSFT hired the ferrets from Red Baron to update the sim. What a debaucle. They tried to rework the sim and screwed the pooch. If they had just improved what they had it would have still been a contender as a favorite. The very best mission builder tools of any WW2 combat sims, the CFS2 and Jane's ww2 FIGHTERS.

Even today the CFS2 has the best mission builder.

I am hoping BOB SOW could very well take us into a new era of mission builders. Two very most important tools for Offline users are the mission builder and high standards of AI performance.

[HFC_Dolphin]

Remember how the original IL-2 development shots looked like?

http://www.combatsim.com/memb123/htm/jan99/IL-2.htm
http://www.combatsim.com/memb123/htm/jan99/IL-2b.htm

Totally different than the actual release ;)

Correct!
And we all know that everything is still WiP and we just add our point of view, based on what we see.

We are all sure that final release won't fail us. We trust in Oleg & Co!!!

[HFC_Dolphin]

Hey everybody, greetings from sunny jetlagged California!

Our tracers are perfect. End of discussion.

We can finetune thickness - color - transparency - luminosity, but in theory ours are the most perfect true to life tracers ever modeled anywhere. Tracers in real life look like that, like straight dashes of uniform thickness. There's a spot at the tail end of a bullet that emits plasma. It doesn't fade out towards the end. It doesn't get thinner. It doesn't wiggle. Sperm-style tracers you're used to from other video games are Hollywood.

We have that emitter that draws out a line of specific length based on tracer speed and "exposure". The tracer shots you see were not taken in pause, because in pause our tracer turns into a dot - those mysterious white dots in the first shot are stopped tracers in pause.


Our fire and smoke are extremely WIP. Everyone hates them here even more than you guys hate them. Calm down and trust us a little bit.


Finally, the surprise from last week is failing to materialize. We were going to release some PSDs to give the skin makers an early start, and maybe even team up with you guys to make some historical skins or something. But we hit a little snag because, as it turns out, you can't very well make skins with just a PSD, and we can't very well release our plane models with the skins. We need to figure this out, hopefully very soon.


Great to read this Ilya (especially the part about fire and smoke ;-))!

With regards to the skins, I guess that there's no hurry, since you'll see thousands of skins coming the moment people will be able to model them through the game (some beta or even the final release).
No need to worry about this ;-)

[SlipBall]

The very best mission builder tools of any WW2 combat sims, the CFS2 and Jane's ww2 FIGHTERS.

Even today the CFS2 has the best mission builder.

I am hoping BOB SOW could very well take us into a new era of mission builders. Two very most important tools for Offline users are the mission builder and high standards of AI performance.



I agree totally about the builder tool's in those sims, It's very important to get it right in SOW...I can't wait to see what we got, I'm sure that we will pleased

[Mango]

Oleg, Ilya, thanks for the updates!

Hope Oleg is resting up so he can travel to U.K. to show SoW here:
http://www.flightsimulatorshow.com/

!! :D

[furbs]

now that would be the place to show off SOW :)...and im going too .

[Blakduk]

Wow guys- the damage modelling is looking brilliant. The internal structure of the Hurricane is shown in exquisite detail- i'm very keen to see what effect such damage has on the flying characteristics. I assume it will be critical to keep the airspeed down to decrease the risk of more canvas peeling off and control cables gradually being stretched to breaking point?
These graphics are already so far ahead of Il2- the potential for future development looks extraordinary.
One question about the fires- i realise they are WIP, but will they be true light objects, able to cast highlights on objects and create shadows?
I am imagining being able to create evening/low light scenes with dramatic lighting effects being created by a burning plane and the flames illuminating the pilot and other objects around them.

[BadAim]

Right words.

Hey! Quit looking at the forum and get the hell back to vacation! (that way you can get the hell back to work) and have fun! That's an order soldier!

[airmalik]

A question, who can tell me please what are those four shining spots in the first picture?
Reflected light from He-111? Then from the body or the canopy?
I feel a little odd, I mean if it came from the body, the shining spots should be bigger than that have been shown, shouldn't they? Or if it came from the canopy, then where are their bodies? Vanished in the blue sky, because of their camouflage? Or they are just navigation lights? In a daytime in a white colour?
Those four shining spots really look a little odd for me at such a distance in the picture, just like four UFOs...

yeah it's hard to tell if it's tracers in the distance (evenly spaced) or glints off aircraft. I don't think all three planes would glint at the same time so maybe it's tracers.

It'd be cool if you could see occasional glints from distant aircraft if you happen to be looking in the right direction. IRL unless your eye is focused at correct distance air craft in the air are hard to spot. Glints would help greatly in this regard. I'd like it to be an occasional glint rather than a constant glow as in the screenshot though.

[LukeFF]

Thanks for say that you make my day.

Yet you write that after you wrote the post above it. :rolleyes:

[choctaw111]

Hey everybody, greetings from sunny jetlagged California!

Our tracers are perfect. End of discussion.

We can finetune thickness - color - transparency - luminosity, but in theory ours are the most perfect true to life tracers ever modeled anywhere. Tracers in real life look like that, like straight dashes of uniform thickness. There's a spot at the tail end of a bullet that emits plasma. It doesn't fade out towards the end. It doesn't get thinner. It doesn't wiggle. Sperm-style tracers you're used to from other video games are Hollywood.

We have that emitter that draws out a line of specific length based on tracer speed and "exposure". The tracer shots you see were not taken in pause, because in pause our tracer turns into a dot - those mysterious white dots in the first shot are stopped tracers in pause.





This is the greatest thing I have heard in some time.
Will this sort of "motion blur" be used for other objects as well.
I was always wondering if BoB would have bullets frozen in mid flight during a pause.
You guys are right on top of it :)

[swiss]

now that would be the place to show off SOW :)...and im going too .

It's just an excellent place to burn money elsewhere needed - even if some your potential customers are there, the related sales will never make up for it.

my$.02

[kedrednael]

A question, who can tell me please what are those four shining spots in the first picture?
Reflected light from He-111? Then from the body or the canopy?
I feel a little odd, I mean if it came from the body, the shining spots should be bigger than that have been shown, shouldn't they? Or if it came from the canopy, then where are their bodies? Vanished in the blue sky, because of their camouflage? Or they are just navigation lights? In a daytime in a white colour?
Those four shining spots really look a little odd for me at such a distance in the picture, just like four UFOs...

the spots are paused tracers

[Hecke]

@ Oleg or Luthier

Do the bullet casings seen in the fith image damage other planes when hitting them?

[Oleg Maddox]

That's maybe true but why don't you think further.
With the graphics we have seen in the last updates, how can these "put many new games to shame" in 2020.

I would say, the graphics of SoW BoB are nearly ok for 2010/2011 but not for much longer.

Don't always compare to the previous game. Compare it to what is standard.


SoW will put new standards in sim industry.

Graphics in engine based on real physics laws comparing to most other games in the world, that claimed themselves ultrarealistic.
Graphics optimized for the great amount of AI units operating in air and on the ground sea on a large square....

Graphics in engine is scalable from space to the ground and looks everywhere perfect... probably no one engine can performs these conditions for that day. And we should remember that it is flight sim, but not the other genre game!


Aircarft, ground units - you can't see more precise in any other game now and probably in future. You may see with more polygons and more greater size of textures.... and thinking then it looks better, but it will be wrong opinion....because all these models are not precise.... and mimics real just in some part... I don't count other things that NOBODY MODELING....or doing it wrong or replacing by wrong methods advertithing then that it is right and user then thinking the same, if he isn't experienced in real laws of physics, etc...


Also, from the beginning the first sim is a base for the following series
with additions of new features... using experience of own IL-2 and others , including suggestions of players, real pilots from around the world...


In Flight sims Il-2 is still world standard for the combat flight sims. Standard with engine which is in modification even now.
Standards of Il-2 we may see in many-many other new games that wer coming more later. Ideas that were in Il-2 now using a lot of developers....

Still Il-2 offers so much that no one can offer really for these that love WWII aaviation.
And repeat it for others would be really too hard if really possible.


Still all new developers try to compare own producs with Il-2.... and then anyway users in most cases come back to Il-2....


I try to keep silence about what we will offer with the release and then after.... Becasue our ideas, my personal ideas a lot of others simply copying.... Even some time copy my speeches with users.... however I'm speaking to users on the same level and never tell that I'm (or we) a star(s)....

We simply doing our work.

Ilya, as american, can traslate my thoughs better...
I'm in vacation.

[fireflyerz]

Yet you write that after you wrote the post above it. :rolleyes:

Stop (Profanity will get you banned) stirring :rolleyes:

[Abbeville-Boy]

if my post makes anybody angry sorry.

But maybe some of you know what we have done for
il2 effects, i know everything about il2 effects, and i'm
only talking about smokes and fires in those photos, and
i don't like it, those smokes and fires looks wrong, actually
it looks exactly as the system today present in il2, if anybody
already use our plutonium edition, knows what old il2 engine can
do and, will see that our smokes are more realistic, textures in those
are very low quality, and the emit freq isn't right, for that i say "tell me
that are still wip.

In every sim effects can be a really inmersion killer, if you make it
too overdone or dramatic, i love WWII aerial combat and i will love to
see every aspect represented in this new sim, i will love to see realistic
effects, even if they aren't so dramatic and awesome.

sorry if i made somebody feel unconfy.

BTW






different does not always mean better
i hope you two can never get in the sow code :evil:

[A.Fokker]

SoW will put new standards in sim industry.

[..]

Ilya, as american, can traslate my thoughs better...
I'm in vacation.

Oleg, I have great respect for you , and great trust SOW will be above and beyond all expectations.

CHEERS!!! No hurry, and enjoy your vacation.

AF

[Hecke]

I hope you're right Oleg and Luthier that SoW BoB will be perfect, I'll take you by your words.

Anyway a video of effects would be great to see.

[whatnot]

Oleg, I have great respect for you , and great trust SOW will be above and beyond all expectations.

CHEERS!!! No hurry, and enjoy your vacation.

AF

+1

And hat goes off for your patience to comment on these forums over and over and over again to calm the most neurotic feature critics down that 'it's still WIP and will be a jaw dropper when released' even though you have to do it with almost every release of new shots.

I find your lack of faith disturbing. The success and long life of IL2 was based on quality that re-defined the genre combined with continuous development and I would be surprised if this time around the team would just release some quick & dirty one for the hell of it. Ofcourse it won't be perfect as none of the sims ever are with our puny CPU resources to simulate just a fraction of attributes affecting the universe but it for sure will be a quantum leap of what we've seen so far.

[PVT.Roger]

Oleg & Co

Great update! I am among the mostly silent majority who eagerly waits until Friday to see the updates, but rarely posts. I've been around a long time, and remember well the beta version of IL-2 Sturmovik that was sent by Blue Byte (this was before Ubi took over) to me for review. The game in that form was better than any WW2 Flight Sim I had ever played, and it only got better. I expect, and have faith :) that SOW will be just as ground breaking.

Thanks again, and enjoy your time off.

PVT.Roger

[MBF]

SoW will put new standards in sim industry.

Graphics in engine based on real physics laws comparing to most other games in the world, that claimed themselves ultrarealistic.
Graphics optimized for the great amount of AI units operating in air and on the ground sea on a large square....

Graphics in engine is scalable from space to the ground and looks everywhere perfect... probably no one engine can performs these conditions for that day. And we should remember that it is flight sim, but not the other genre game!


Aircarft, ground units - you can't see more precise in any other game now and probably in future. You may see with more polygons and more greater size of textures.... and thinking then it looks better, but it will be wrong opinion....because all these models are not precise.... and mimics real just in some part... I don't count other things that NOBODY MODELING....or doing it wrong or replacing by wrong methods advertithing then that it is right and user then thinking the same, if he isn't experienced in real laws of physics, etc...


Also, from the beginning the first sim is a base for the following series
with additions of new features... using experience of own IL-2 and others , including suggestions of players, real pilots from around the world...


In Flight sims Il-2 is still world standard for the combat flight sims. Standard with engine which is in modification even now.
Standards of Il-2 we may see in many-many other new games that wer coming more later. Ideas that were in Il-2 now using a lot of developers....

Still Il-2 offers so much that no one can offer really for these that love WWII aaviation.
And repeat it for others would be really too hard if really possible.


Still all new developers try to compare own producs with Il-2.... and then anyway users in most cases come back to Il-2....


I try to keep silence about what we will offer with the release and then after.... Becasue our ideas, my personal ideas a lot of others simply copying.... Even some time copy my speeches with users.... however I'm speaking to users on the same level and never tell that I'm (or we) a star(s)....

We simply doing our work.

Ilya, as american, can traslate my thoughs better...
I'm in vacation.

You are all doing a terrific job, Oleg.
I know I'm not the only one that thinks that Storm of War will put to shame every other air combat simulator out there, just like IL2 did back in its day (it's still the best thing out there in my humble opinion).

Enjoy your vacations and keep up the good work!

[KOM.Nausicaa]

Oleg and Luthier, thanks for the updates and the comments, despite you being both on travel. It's much appreciated. It all looks and sounds great -- I am sure SoW BoB will be a combat sim masterpiece.

[Hecke]

i post again.


Do the bullet cases damage other planes by hitting them?

[Baron]

Oleg and Luthier

Thx, looking good and will look even better when finished, as we all know.


That u where planing to release skins templates is/where indeed a big supries, and im not even a skinner. Even though it didnt work out that way i prefere to read beween the lines and smile at what that means looking at the big picture. ;)

[Flanker35M]

S!

Thanks for the update. Read thru the thread and it cleared up some things. Lot of WIP there but also if you look closer, a LOT more is there to be discovered. Enjoy the vacation Oleg and waiting for the next week's update :)

Abbeville Boy. You should keep that comment to yourself. Potenz and others have made excellent work on improving IL-2 effects and those new ones are far better than originals, period. Without Team Daidalos/Oleg IL2 would be dead as it has not offered anything new in years..Now it still does with official updates. Have a nice weekend.

[swiss]

i post again.


Do the bullet cases damage other planes by hitting them?

Why? Should they? Did they? What kind of damage? Do you have proof?

Other than possible take a chip out of a wood prop, I can only think of jammed cowl flaps, or maybe reduce cooling(because they block the radiator).




A *ping* sound when they hit your aircraft would be quite cool though.

[Feuerfalke]

i post again.


Do the bullet cases damage other planes by hitting them?

I doubt that.


They have a very low mass.

The chance that they have an effect in real life are so minimal, that I doubt they have modeled it in a simulation.

[Flanker35M]

S!

Swiss, hitting a shell case at speeds above 300km/h can make more damage than just a ping ;) If you drive a car at 80km/h and a small piece of rock hits your window or paint job there is usually some damage. And we talk about smaller pieces and less speed. So I would figure flying through a cloud of shell casings is not very desireable. But again modeling this..hmm..not adding anything to the sim.

[Hecke]

but when a whole load of shell castings hits the prop i think that has a huge effect on it.

[swiss]

S!

Swiss, hitting a shell case at speeds above 300km/h can make more damage than just a ping ;) If you drive a car at 80km/h and a small piece of rock hits your window or paint job there is usually some damage. And we talk about smaller pieces and less speed. So I would figure flying through a cloud of shell casings is not very desireable. But again modeling this..hmm..not adding anything to the sim.

If the cases are from your wingman, the have pretty much the same, if you hit your enemy's during a head on - well...

Don't know.
If they indeed caused damage there would be reports about it.
Are there? :confused:


but when a whole load of shell castings hits the prop i think that has a huge effect on it.

Stop thinking and bring proof, otherwise STFU.

BTW: "Castings" would really cause some bad ass damage, lol.

[dl-3b]

i post again.


Do the bullet cases damage other planes by hitting them?
Hecke,

Do you think that you are the master of the universe?
That Oleg (during his vacation) should be standby exclusively for you 24 hours a day to answer your silly and arrogant questions.
Get lost and take your shItty attitude with you.

[Hecke]

Hecke,

Do you think that you are the master of the universe?
That Oleg (during his vacation) should be standby exclusively for you 24 hours a day to answer your silly and arrogant questions.
Get lost and take your shItty attitude with you.


holy moses,

why don't you stop writing off topic instead of insulting me.
Same to your brother, swiss.


I was just asking because i was wondering if shell cases are a matter, not more not less.
And I ask because i don't know it, so what makes you think i'm "the master of universe" (childish thought)

[SaQSoN]

It still puzzles me that with the resources and talent at Microsoft they can't even hope to compete with a relatively small team from Russia.

Resources - yes. Talent? What talent? Their usual attitude to talent is: buy a small talented developer and dissolve/destroy it, so they don't mess around with their "crazy" ideas.

[Feuerfalke]

S!

Swiss, hitting a shell case at speeds above 300km/h can make more damage than just a ping ;) If you drive a car at 80km/h and a small piece of rock hits your window or paint job there is usually some damage. And we talk about smaller pieces and less speed. So I would figure flying through a cloud of shell casings is not very desireable. But again modeling this..hmm..not adding anything to the sim.

1. a piece of rock is solid, a case is not - it's deformable.
2. your windscreen is most likely not armored to withstand birdstrike or small arms fire.
3. Your windscreen is reinforced class that is designed to splinter on impact to not cause any large, sharp fragments. A canopy is designed to not splinter.
(If you lose your windscreen at 80km/h you just stop. If you lose it at 500km/h at 30,000ft you're in trouble.)

[swiss]

I was just asking because i was wondering if shell cases are a matter, not more not less.
And I ask because i don't know it,


Then my friend, you need to work on your choice of words.
This;

Do the bullet casings seen in the fith image damage other planes when hitting them?

i post again.


Do the bullet cases damage other planes by hitting them?

but when a whole load of shell castings hits the prop i think that has a huge effect on it.

...sounds rather demanding than a question.

Why don't you go ahead and do some research, then come back and share your findings.

[swiss]

2. your windscreen is most likely not armored to withstand birdstrike or small arms fire.
3. Your windscreen is reinforced class that is designed to splinter on impact to not cause any large, sharp fragments. A canopy is designed to not splinter.
(If you lose your windscreen at 80km/h you just stop. If you lose it at 500km/h at 30,000ft you're in trouble.)

Now I'll do some research, I indeed think it was bullet proof glas, several inches thick.

[Feuerfalke]

The "previous game" [IL-2] IS the standard. When SoW is released IT will be the standard. Before IL-2 was released CFS-2 WAS the standard. But only by comparison. It still puzzles me that with the resources and talent at Microsoft they can't even hope to compete with a relatively small team from Russia.

What resources at Microsoft? You mean Microsoft Games? Flight Simulator-developers? They're driving taxis around in L.A., now. Microsoft closed the complete FS-studio, in case you didn't hear it.

That's how much trust Microsoft had in their own team to compete with the current market. ;)

[swiss]

BF109: 90mm (30+60)

[Hecke]

Then my friend, you need to work on your choice of words.
This;







...sounds rather demanding than a question.

Why don't you go ahead and do some research, then come back and share your findings.




swiss, my friend,


I wanted to know if they do damage and not if they do it in SoW BoB because in real life they maybe do it,too.
Maybe you're right that my choice of words is not perfect, but that's maybe because i am 16 years old and from germany so my english knowledges need to be improved.
Please don't presume me bad intention.

[swiss]

C'est le ton qui fait la musique.

[Hecke]

C'est le ton qui fait la musique.

Qui, c'est vrai. La prochaine fois je vais te demander avant que j' ecrive quelque chose.
Tu est d'accord ou non?

[FG28_Kodiak]

Dann könnt ihr euch auch auf Deutsch austauschen.

[swiss]

Qui, c'est vrai. La prochaine fois je vais te demander avant que j' ecrive quelque chose.
Tu est d'accord ou non?

Ton Français n'est pas meilleur, mon chéri.

"écrive"? LOL

écrirai peut être?

[Hecke]

Ton Français n'est pas meilleur, mon chéri.

"écrive"? LOL

écrirai peut être?



Nein, völlig korrekt nach avant que kommt ein subjontif.
Und was hast du jetzt schon wieder auszusetzen?
Welchen Ton hab ich jetzt nicht getroffen?
Wie wärs wir machen vorerst mit dem Fach Musik weiter damit wir da wenigstens auf den selben Nenner kommen?

[Feuerfalke]

Now I'll do some research, I indeed think it was bullet proof glas, several inches thick.

Of course it was! :-P

Where did I say something else? ;)

[swiss]

2. your windscreen is most likely not armored to withstand birdstrike or small arms fire.

?

[Feuerfalke]

?

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=171585&postcount=103


You should also check out the posts other people reply to ;)
(Isn't that the idea of quoting posts in your own reply?)



At least "your windscreen" should have given you a hint - well, I assume that neither you nor Flanker 35M drive armored cars? :cool:

[swiss]

I got a LeoA2 license, so it's more like a tank.

;)

my bad, sorry.

[zapatista]

Microsoft closed the complete FS-studio, in case you didn't hear it.

That's how much trust Microsoft had in their own team to compete with the current market. ;)

doesnt have anything to do with competition. after bush's cronies had raided the piggy bank and the american empire collapsed (almost taking the rest of the world with it), microsoft simply shut down many low profit non-core departments as a radical cost cutting methods, and prepared for the worst possible economic climate scenario.

microsoft still kept a 3 man skeleton staff to keep the old flightsim information viable for later revival. since, like in the time of the romans, the peasants are now back to their "wine and games" mindset and lulled back into the trance of acting like passive consumer units they have been so well groomed for, i dont doubt microsoft will revive yet again one of their old proven games like ms-flightsim in the near future.

[KOM.Nausicaa]

Ton Français n'est pas meilleur, mon chéri.

"écrive"? LOL

écrirai peut être?

Pas mal pourtant pour quelqu'un qui à 16 ans et qui est allemand.

Hecke, wie ich sehe gehörst du zu den etwas jüngeren hier :-) Du warst wahrscheinlich am Anfang von IL2 nicht mit dabei. Viele im Forum gehören zu den alten Fliegern -- wir vertrauen Oleg sehr, denn er hat in der Vergangenheit nur immmer das Beste geliefert.
Hast du den schon mal einen richtigen Simulator geflogen? (nicht so Konsolenspiel wie IL2 WoV meine ich)

[Hecke]

Pas mal pourtant pour quelqu'un qui à 16 ans et qui est allemand.

Hecke, wie ich sehe gehörst du zu den etwas jüngeren hier :-) Du warst wahrscheinlich am Anfang von IL2 nicht mit dabei. Viele im Forum gehören zu den alten Fliegern -- wir vertrauen Oleg sehr, denn er hat in der Vergangenheit nur immmer das Beste geliefert.
Hast du den schon mal einen richtigen Simulator geflogen? (nicht so Konsolenspiel wie IL2 WoV meine ich)



Hi,

Il-2 leider nicht dabei. Habe es mir zwar gekauft aber aufgrund der Grafik die mir nicht zusagte und der auflösung die mit meinem Monitor nicht harmonieren wollte hab ich es wieder in die Schublade gelegt.

Vor 5 Jahren hab ich mit Combat Flight Simulator 1 angefangen und dann auch den 3er gehabt, sonst Flight Simulator 2004 und X.
Dann natürlich auch mal ein Ausrutscher mit dem Konsolencrapspiel Blasende Engel.

[Richie]

different does not always mean better
i hope you two can never get in the sow code :evil:


Have you seen the movie of the Corsair catching fire and going down? Also look at some old colour WWII footage. There is quite a bit of the Pacific Theater on youtube.

[KOM.Nausicaa]

Hi,

Il-2 leider nicht dabei. Habe es mir zwar gekauft aber aufgrund der Grafik die mir nicht zusagte und der auflösung die mit meinem Monitor nicht harmonieren wollte

Aha. Klar, heute sieht IL2 natürlich recht alt aus. Damals war es für uns der Schocker, weil wir sowas noch nie gesehen hatten.
übrigens: IL2 war für 4:3 monitor gemacht weil es noch kein widescreen gab. Man kann aber per Hand die conf.ini file anpassen und hats auch die richtige Auflösung für jeden widescreen monitor. ;-)

[Oleg Maddox]

I was just asking because i was wondering if shell cases are a matter, not more not less.


If I understood correct...

Shell pices after explosion of shell do the damage.
It was in il-2 and it is way more advanced feature in SoW.

[Feuerfalke]

doesnt have anything to do with competition. after bush's cronies had raided the piggy bank and the american empire collapsed (almost taking the rest of the world with it), microsoft simply shut down many low profit non-core departments as a radical cost cutting methods, and prepared for the worst possible economic climate scenario.

microsoft still kept a 3 man skeleton staff to keep the old flightsim information viable for later revival. since, like in the time of the romans, the peasants are now back to their "wine and games" mindset and lulled back into the trance of acting like passive consumer units they have been so well groomed for, i dont doubt microsoft will revive yet again one of their old proven games like ms-flightsim in the near future.


Interesting. So you say that the valuation, "low profit non-core department", has nothing to do with it's marketing value?

[Hecke]

Aha. Klar, heute sieht IL2 natürlich recht alt aus. Damals war es für uns der Schocker, weil wir sowas noch nie gesehen hatten.
übrigens: IL2 war für 4:3 monitor gemacht weil es noch kein widescreen gab. Man kann aber per Hand die conf.ini file anpassen und hats auch die richtige Auflösung für jeden widescreen monitor. ;-)



ja das mit der ini hab ich gemacht aber es hat mir einfach nicht gefallen.

Naja nun gehe ich mit einer hohen (vielleicht doch zu hohen) Erwartungshaltung an SoW BoB ran.

[Feuerfalke]

If I understood correct...

Shell pices after explosion of shell do the damage.
It was in il-2 and it is way more advanced feature in SoW.

I think he's referring to the screenshots of the empty shells falling from the aircraft and asking, if the damage from colliding with or picking up these shells will be modeled.

[Richie]

Flames


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhNipr5qz4U&feature=related


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KP-_cVgKSG0


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIgpluBCzpI&feature=fvw

[Feuerfalke]

Not sure what your point is, but if the videos are posted to show how fire really looks as compared to the ingame-shots, well, actually the thumbnail of the first video looks a lot like the screenshot on the first page. Even if not all filters are active.

[SlipBall]

S!

Thanks for the update. Read thru the thread and it cleared up some things. Lot of WIP there but also if you look closer, a LOT more is there to be discovered. Enjoy the vacation Oleg and waiting for the next week's update :)

Abbeville Boy. You should keep that comment to yourself. Potenz and others have made excellent work on improving IL-2 effects and those new ones are far better than originals, period. Without Team Daidalos/OlegIL2 would be dead as it has not offered anything new in years..Now it still does with official updates. Have a nice weekend.





You seem to have missed the point. Each week the same group of people throw around much criticism.up-date, and insure us that they know better than the team. They are nothing but hackers, who complain a lot, and who say..Look here, look at my work, isn't it wonderful. That is like someone taking a brush to a fine painting, and saying..There I fixed it, now lets put my name on it......I agree with A-B, and you try to have a nice weekend as well.:grin:

[FG28_Kodiak]

You seem to have missed the point. Each week the same group of people throw around much criticism. ability to judge a WIP up-date, and insure us that they know better than the team. They are nothing but hackers, who complain a lot, and who say..Look here, look at my work, isn't it wonderful. That is like someone taking a brush to a fine painting, and saying..There I fixed it, now lets put my name on it......I agree with A-B, and you try to have a nice weekend as well.:grin:

+1

[SaQSoN]

So.. U tryi to say that modders are just huckers? Huh..

No, calling them hackers is too much honor for them. Think on letter "L". :-P

Modders gives a new life to IL 2... and expanded lot of functions.. For Example MDS..

Not very good example, actually. For many reasons.

MG asked money and refused to make moving ground units online.

What a bullsht.

Besides modders has specialisations.. as planes, function, FX.. and other.. And they know their line of activity some time better and wider than authors team..

LOL!!! and then - doublefacepalm. :grin:

People want's to get a best product.. and they helps as they can..

Yeah, but then there is a good saying: don't start something, if you don't know how to do it. ;)

[T}{OR]

I agree with SlipBall 100%.


MODS discussion is prohibited on these forums.

[SlipBall]

own..
People want's to get a best product.. and they helps as they can..[/QUOTE]




My friend, I can not see how you could condone such a statement as the following:

But maybe some of you know what we have done for
il2 effects, i know everything about il2 effects, and i'm
only talking about smokes and fires in those photos, and
i don't like it, those smokes and fires looks wrong, actually
it looks exactly as the system today present in il2, if anybody
already use our plutonium edition, knows what old il2 engine can
do and, will see that our smokes are more realistic, textures in those
are very low quality, and the emit freq isn't right

[zapatista]

Interesting. So you say that the valuation, "low profit non-core department", has nothing to do with it's marketing value?

i am saying that to microsoft its flightsim department was mere peanuts in its bigger picture, as can be illustrated for ex by its 2007 annual revenue surpassing $50 Billion

but like all companies riding an economic wave that ebbs and flows, when suddenly the bottom falls out of the world economy it makes cuts where it can, for microsoft those cuts would have been easiest and quickest in its non-core business area's. whatever tabloid speculators might say, once the economic system is more stable and its future easier to predict, the less important (but previously profitable) products for niche markets will reappear no doubt

[IceFire]

Oleg, I have great respect for you , and great trust SOW will be above and beyond all expectations.

CHEERS!!! No hurry, and enjoy your vacation.

AF

Ditto!

Things seem to be coming along just fine. Look forward to the final release. In the meantime I hope Oleg continues to enjoy his vacation :D

[KOM.Nausicaa]

No matter what good modders have done - they have killed on-line community. Period. The best part of IL2 died from the moment mods became widespread.

+++1
And some people said it would happen, people who saw CFS3 online die, and other games. Lots of squadrons switched to IL2 when modding made CFS3 a mess, at least online. Modding is the sworn enemy of any online game.
And yes they are hackers. The code wasn't given to them, period. I am aware that nice things have been done, yes...but they can be happy 1C didn't come after them with lawsuits, IMO.

[philip.ed]

-------

Oleg and Ilya; regarding tracer, will different types of tracer and ammo be able to be chosen by the player? Also, what sources are you using for the RAF tracer rounds? I ask as I had always seen and thought that they had smoke trails to the tracer which were left behind.

[Feuerfalke]

i am saying that to microsoft its flightsim department was mere peanuts in its bigger picture, as can be illustrated for ex by its 2007 annual revenue surpassing $50 Billion

but like all companies riding an economic wave that ebbs and flows, when suddenly the bottom falls out of the world economy it makes cuts where it can, for microsoft those cuts would have been easiest and quickest in its non-core business area's. whatever tabloid speculators might say, once the economic system is more stable and its future easier to predict, the less important (but previously profitable) products for niche markets will reappear no doubt

That's exactly what they said and still say about the Falcon-Team.

Fact is, though, it was closed because it could not make enough money to support the expensive team. And as with Falcon, it was closed to be reopened, whenever suitable. But as you know so much about business: If you close something now to reopen it later, you will lose a lot against companies that even with a small team continue to produce, grow, gather experience and of course make themselves and their products renown. And then we're back at where we started: At the very heart of competition.



@AED:
I'm glad you made a new account to post this. It's not only complete BS, your attitude and appearance is the very reason why the unspeakables are still officially referred to as hackers, not as modders.

[SlipBall]

Well forgive me if I came across as being rude to you. In my defense, I very much want the sim released this year. The complaints worry me that, the game will only be delayed to address them.:grin:

[zapatista]

That's exactly what they said and still say about the Falcon-Team.

Fact is, though, it was closed because it could not make enough money to support the expensive team. And as with Falcon, it was closed to be reopened, whenever suitable. But as you know so much about business: If you close something now to reopen it later, you will lose a lot against companies that even with a small team continue to produce, grow, gather experience and of course make themselves and their products renown. And then we're back at where we started: At the very heart of competition..

your off on your own tangent there, i never mentioned falcon and it has nothing to do with what we were discussing

for microsoft it is easy, and good business practice at he moment, to put some non priority projects back on the shelf and cut the money it spends on them during "the economic crisis". its also very easy for them to revive it later should they choose to. ms flightsim still has a lot of legs in it, since only the latest hardware can at long last run fs-x fluidly with decent scenery on a high resolution, so it is not as if an imminent upgrade was/is needed.

as oleg supporters all we can hope for is that his project is a success, and that many 3e party flightsim software developers who initially made programs for ms will transition to his flightsim during that hiatus.

[Flanker35M]

S!



As of a shell casing hitting a windscreen. Sure it would not penetrate the screen but if the windscreen, armored or not, is hit by multiple objects the dents or marks alone can call for a replacement as pilot's view will be affected by the damage. A shell casing has a mass and with enough speed hitting an object moving at speed as well there will happen something, not just a ping. If you work with airplanes, you would know that a surprisingly small object can cause damage on the airplane ;)

Well, the update was nice as stated. Waiting for more in future :)

[Feuerfalke]

your off on your own tangent there, i never mentioned falcon and it has nothing to do with what we were discussing

for microsoft it is easy, and good business practice at he moment, to put some non priority projects back on the shelf and cut the money it spends on them during "the economic crisis". its also very easy for them to revive it later should they choose to. ms flightsim still has a lot of legs in it, since only the latest hardware can at long last run fs-x fluidly with decent scenery on a high resolution, so it is not as if an imminent upgrade was/is needed.

as oleg supporters all we can hope for is that his project is a success, and that many 3e party flightsim software developers who initially made programs for ms will transition to his flightsim during that hiatus.

Of course MS-Flightsim has still a large market-value :grin: it's just been quit! ;)
But when BoB will be released and DCS offers more SDKs, these "lots of legs" can easily stumble and fall. This position is far from save and sound DUE to competition.
No matter what you call it, hybernation, dead, whatever - the longer the studio is closed and the competition still produces the lower the chances it can be revived.

Again exactly these arguments have been used by Falcon-fans for years, as well as for good old Janes simulations. Especially the last comment with the hardware needed to play it fluently. Looks like copy'n'pasted right from Frugals-World ;)

[Jaws2002]

I agree with SlipBall 100%.








A big +1!!!!!

Every 13 year old and his little brother got their greasy hands on IL-2 and started cooking their own home brew.
It totaly killed a game I loved and enjoyed for nearly eight years.:(

Now the same guys are here acting like "know-it-all" and bitching after every set of screenshots.:rolleyes:

Hey, It's W.I.P. Don't you see that things are still changing from week to week? Wait for the release and then start to whine.

I remember few years ago Hightech Creations released a public beta, months before a new release. The same type of whining filled the forums until the lead developer posted this sticky in the forum:

"IT'S BETA, STUPID!!!!"



Anyway. Thanks for the great update Oleg and Ilya.

[Tree_UK]

Our fire and smoke are extremely WIP. Everyone hates them here even more than you guys hate them. Calm down and trust us a little bit.

But what about all the guys on here that thought the fire and smoke was looking realistic!! :grin::grin::grin::grin: very good news Luthier and thanks you, you had us worried for a moment.

[SlipBall]

But what about all the guys on here that thought the fire and smoke was looking realistic!! :grin::grin::grin::grin: very good news Luthier and thanks you, you had us worried for a moment.


You surprise me Tree, your not helping much:) I thought you were in a bigger hurry than me, that is, to get this sim to market...I say, tweak it after release!!!!!!!

[Feuerfalke]

But what about all the guys on here that thought the fire and smoke was looking realistic!! :grin::grin::grin::grin: very good news Luthier and thanks you, you had us worried for a moment.

:grin::grin::grin::grin:

because those guys do exactly what you didn't quote? That it's WIP and that they have faith if this is just a start?

:-P:-P:-P:-P

[philip.ed]

But what about all the guys on here that thought the fire and smoke was looking realistic!! :grin::grin::grin::grin: very good news Luthier and thanks you, you had us worried for a moment.


Two words chum; fan-boys :grin: It's best to be honest and compliment than suck-up and compliment :-P

[The Kraken]

Way to go guys, game isn't even out yet and already we've arrived at the zoo's discussion level :rolleyes:

[Viikate]

il2 code is a mess!

You haven't seen a single row of the real IL-2 source code with comments, clear variable names, clear constant names instead of some random numbers, etc... You've only seen decompiled code which looses much of the info that is important to coder and makes it easy to read & understand. Even something as trivial as bullet caliber value in weapons classes is still complete mystery to modders. Because they can only see the final value, not the formula how it's calculated. So they call the original values wrong and change them.

I find the real source code very clear.

[The Kraken]

your off on your own tangent there, i never mentioned falcon and it has nothing to do with what we were discussing

for microsoft it is easy, and good business practice at he moment, to put some non priority projects back on the shelf and cut the money it spends on them during "the economic crisis". its also very easy for them to revive it later should they choose to. ms flightsim still has a lot of legs in it, since only the latest hardware can at long last run fs-x fluidly with decent scenery on a high resolution, so it is not as if an imminent upgrade was/is needed.

The main issue with Microsoft from how I see it, is twofold: first they have all but abandoned the PC games market, despite occasional claims of the contrary. Second is the classic ROI problem: even if their flight sim line is profitable, it binds too much capital for a substantial time. And of course it's a niche market that is only getting smaller, so there's not much growth potential. Stockholders don't like that. I don't see that changing in the near future either so I guess they are out of that market for good.

Which does of course open opportunities for other develoeprs. I appreciate that Oleg is going against these trends, even though I assume SOW won't be "perfect" on release. Feel free to prove me wrong though :-)

[Tree_UK]

You surprise me Tree, your not helping much:) I thought you were in a bigger hurry than me, that is, to get this sim to market...I say, tweak it after release!!!!!!!

Aw mate I would love to see this sim out asap, but in truth it really doesn't matter how long it takes if its not going to be dissappointing in any way. The frustrations have always been for me when Oleg would would hint at a release date that was a year away and then when we got there we would find out its going to be another year etc, etc. :grin:

[SlipBall]

Aw mate I would love to see this sim out asap, but in truth it really doesn't matter how long it takes if its not going to be dissappointing in any way. The frustrations have always been for me when Oleg would would hint at a release date that was a year away and then when we got there we would find out its going to be another year etc, etc. :grin:


Yes, I hear you...was, and continues to be very frustrating. I fear that I'm loosing my youthful reflexes, and will be an easy kill for philip.ed.:grin:

[Redwan]

In the in game render the fire effect should look more like this photoshoped screen. And if it's so, the photorealism could be quite good !

http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/8783/42332075.jpg

[Viikate]

So.. why U still not finished 4.10.. if U have paradize conditions? +)))


Sa
Working for free on your own free time after real job.

[Richie]

This is the video that got my hopes up :)



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMFFQGryWhk&feature=related

[Jaws2002]

Im really bumped about the troubles with releasing the templates for the skins.:(

Would it be possible to make some sort of "skin viewer" (a simple 3d viewer aplication where we can see the texture on the 3d model)?
It may be too time consuming tho. It has to come with the 3d models of the planes and possibly lighting engine.:(

Anyway you guys know better what you can do and what you can't.

[Necrobaron]

Have we forgotten last week's update? I thought the flames looked pretty darn good there. I assumed what was shown in this week's update was either from an earlier build or taken on a lower graphical setting.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachment.php?attachmentid=2841&d=1279279581

[Tone71]

I am not new to the IL-2 series and I am not new to these forums but (as you can see from my total posts) I am new to voicing my opinions; I am now beginning to wish that I had never started reading these responses to the weekly updates.

The gfx of BoB:SoW will not please everyone 100%. The gameplay of BoB:SoW will not please everyone 100%. BoB:SoW as a 'game' will not please everyone 100%. We must all learn to accept comprimise and the final word rests with Oleg.

On the subject of the gfx effects; do we want them to look realistic, or should they look spectacular ('Hollywood', if you will)? The flight model, true to life, or playable?

I know many of you want a 'simulator' with life-like effects and FM but others want a playable 'game', that's fun and yet looks good. Can we not all agree that these are mutually exclusive and compomises must be made?

Imagine a realistic Formula 1 racing sim, the most true to life available. This would be neither fun nor playable, for all but maybe a small percentage of gamers that actually race Carts or Formula 3.

C'mon guys, let's not argue amongst ourselves but keep it to constructive criticism and enjoy the updates. Can we call a truce and just enjoy the forthcoming sequel to a game that we currently all enjoy, be it modded or otherwise. :)

[daHeld]

isn't mysterius at all
just it seem that many diferent
progamers work on that code
and you diferent functions from
diferent people

Of course it does look like that. That's because it's the way things are done in a development team. Every coder has his own style, and that's exactly why the code is COMMENTED. Those comments are there so that one coder can carry on from where the last one left off.

@AED

Pleas mind your manners. People wouldn't get angry with you, if you were posting in a more "grown up" way.

[kendo65]

My, my, everyone's feisty this week. Seems to be 3 different arguments going on at once :)

Entertaining though ;)

[Old_Canuck]

It is like so many things when people have too much money. Money isn't ever the most important ingredient... it's committment.

Think about all the very excellent development systems, like Foxpro,dbase,etc. that were bought out by companies with the big bucks.

Foxpro is the only one left, but MSFT hasn't done anything with it compared to when it was in the hands of the original developers. Foxpro was hot, and the developers were always doing new things. I just read where MSFT will not support it past 2015. Kinda sounds like the death bells to me.

Same with the MSFT combat flight series. They had a winner in CFS2 that was the benchmark sim. I remember when Sim-outhouse and netwings had enormous numbers of users for CFS2 and the IL2 had a squeaky little corner on the site (no users).

CFS2 was the big dog until MSFT hired the ferrets from Red Baron to update the sim. What a debaucle. They tried to rework the sim and screwed the pooch. If they had just improved what they had it would have still been a contender as a favorite. The very best mission builder tools of any WW2 combat sims, the CFS2 and Jane's ww2 FIGHTERS.

Even today the CFS2 has the best mission builder.

I am hoping BOB SOW could very well take us into a new era of mission builders. Two very most important tools for Offline users are the mission builder and high standards of AI performance.

Enlightening insights, nearmiss. Didn't know about Red Baron involvement. I didn't get too deeply involved in mission building in CFS2 but it seems they had "triggers" right? That in itself would be a powerful mission builder tool for any sim.

[TicTac]

How is this game going to be distributed?

[Old_Canuck]

Resources - yes. Talent? What talent? Their usual attitude to talent is: buy a small talented developer and dissolve/destroy it, so they don't mess around with their "crazy" ideas.

Point taken.

[Old_Canuck]

What resources at Microsoft? You mean Microsoft Games? Flight Simulator-developers? They're driving taxis around in L.A., now. Microsoft closed the complete FS-studio, in case you didn't hear it.

That's how much trust Microsoft had in their own team to compete with the current market. ;)

My feeble attempt at mild sarcasm. I'm aware that M$ has shut down their flight sim team but it remains that they have a core of talent and resources in the main -- misused though it seems to be.

[Avimimus]

The basic fact is that successful flight sims cannot be developed by teams experiencing interference from high level corporate management.

For example there is the EA debacle where 75% of flightsim studios were wiped out during the dot com bust - not because they weren't profitable, but because EA had lost money in other areas and felt they need to keep only them most profitable genres (or so I've heard).

Another example is B-17 II which almost got canceled (and was saved by showing off the graphics) or MSFS which gradually lagged more and more behind other developers despite (or perhaps because of) having large budgets and a major supporter.

The reason why Oleg (and the rest of the Triumvirate ED & 777/Neoqb) is able to produce the quality he does is because he is an engineer as much as a manager and a pilot as much as he is a businessman.

He is clearly aiming at both profound art and profitability. This is why he is profitable. But upper level managers typically found in big companies can't typically see this (or anything other than the lowest common denominator and the fastest buck).

[louisv]

...
"The reason why Oleg (and the rest of the Triumvirate ED & 777/Neoqb) is able to produce the quality he does is because he is an engineer as much as a manager and a pilot as much as he is a businessman.

He is clearly aiming at both profound art and profitability. This is why he is profitable. But upper level managers typically found in big companies can't typically see this (or anything other than the lowest common denominator and the fastest buck)."

+1

[proton45]

Two words chum; fan-boys :grin: It's best to be honest and compliment than suck-up and compliment :-P

...and in the end it doesn't really matter, after everything is said and done they will still make the game that they want to make. ;)

[nearmiss]

In the TOP STICKY threads that directly relate to SOW, IL2 and TD updates "ON TOPIC discussions" are all that will be allowed. The threads will be vigorously moderated. We want to continue to provide the developers with viable, constructive comments and responses in the Sticky threads.

The NON-STICKY threads will now allow constructive and sensible discussions that relate to AIR COMBAT, AIR COMBAT SIMULATION AND FLIGHT SIMULATION, not just IL2, SOW or TD.

Discussions about MODS or links to MODS is still prohibited content on the forums.

All the rules and regulations of the forums still apply.

[zapatista]

Zapanista --- CAN"T YOU READ! NO MODS DISCUSSIONS ON THIS FORUMS.

THE POSTING IS DIRECTLY ABOVE THIS ONE.

Guys this thread has been a major nuisance... all day.

I've erased content, deleted posts and banned users.

This thread is locked.

Next week on updates if we have a repeat of this week the thread will be locked immediately.

THat's a shame, because I think many of you enjoy the discussion and feedback from Oleg and Luthier.

The mods and admins have clear directives on this forums - NO MODS DISCUSSIONS OR DIRECT REFERRAL LINKS TO MODS.

[zapatista]

oops, my bad !

just noticed the mod had stepped in while i was typing my last post

on topic we are now :)

[Tree_UK]

Zapatista, for Gods sake take a day off, your begining to sound like some kind of disciple. It's all rather embarrasing. No offence of course. :-)

[JtD]

Thanks nearmiss for the moderation and thank you Oleg for the update!

Will the Hurricane have a gear up buzzer?

[Afreaka]

Nice tracers!! but must be nice see it in "real motion"... will we have a video soon?

Indeed. Time has come, (or has it?), to see some live motion to all these stills. A teaser, preview, leak or whatever. Something I would look forward to. :grin:

[kimosabi]

Good stuff! Can't wait to slap some AA on this baby! :grin:

[Insuber]

Oleg, Luthier,

Nice.
1. The planes look fairly detailed, nearly photo-realistic.
2. Reflections and shading are, by all evidence, a strong point of BoB.
3. In the 4th pic (Bf108 belly), it seems that the ambient light affects also the color of the planes, as in reality. Am I right?
4. I'm still not convinced by the isolated bullet holes (pic 1, Hurri), they look flat and repetitive, and moreover they are the same both on fabric and on metal skin.
5. Apart from isolated bullet holes, all in all I begin to like the damage model, from a graphical standpoint.
6. Smoke isn't that bad, despite it's WIP.
7. Flames cannot be judged by a screenshot, because of their very dynamic nature.
8. The sea is rather good from height, it reminds me of the real thing, as seen from airliners.


I wonder again about computer specs: when can we hope to get them?


Question: will all those polygons, shades, seagulls, trees, smoke and flames fx reduce the number of planes present at the same time in a map ?


Cheers,
Insuber

[KG26_Alpha]

1C Team

Thanks for the update :)

.................................................. .......

What fun trying to claw some sense from this thread :(

Regarding things hitting the windscreen on a single engine WWII fighter...........

There's a huge propeller ready to slice n dice birds and other unfortunate flying creatures that happen to be in the way of it.

Shell casings wouldn't stand a chance of getting through either due to the prop wash and weight of the casing being to light.

Of course I will stand corrected.




Edit for bad speeling.