Film of the competitors! (Boo Hiss!)

[Skoshi Tiger]

Hi,

I was just over at SimHQ and found a video of the 'soon to be released' DCS A10 sim.

Even though the film has been manipulated with filters and the the like it is still pritty impressive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUu4SV3GjVw

I wonder how long it will be until we see a similar video from SOW?

After seeing videos like this, I guess there might be room on my PC for a couple of sims


Some of the things I've noticed lacking from the film (and it was based on a early build) are:
The cockpit instuments look flat compared to the ones shown in the spitfire video and mages of the 109 cockpit;
Lack of dynamic shadows in the cockpit as the plane moves (compared with the spit fire cockpit video)
The models of the boats early on are quite crude and out of place (I wonder if they are from the same sim or are just put in from another for effect????)

Cheers!

[Feuerfalke]

The cockpit instuments look flat compared to the ones shown in the spitfire video and mages of the 109 cockpit;
Lack of dynamic shadows in the cockpit as the plane moves (compared with the spit fire cockpit video)
The models of the boats early on are quite crude and out of place (I wonder if they are from the same sim or are just put in from another for effect????)
1. They are not just simple textures on flat surfaces. You can see that on some earlier screenshots (note the reflections on the instruments):
http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/img/technology/A10C/HUD-2.jpg
2. The video is WIP, much like IL2 is. The video shows the game in DX9. The final version will support DX11.
3. As Oleg mentioned for his boats, they are pretty simple, because you will swish over them with 400kp/h.
Now think what you will see when flying by with 900kp/h. I promise you, you won't notice the difference, which boat was modeled with more polygons.

Of course you can always find something negative, if you search hard enough for the simple fact that nobody and nothing is perfect.
If you find something better or more realistic than SoW or DCS, please let me know. If it really think you could do better, get a 3D modelling program (several are free, some with free trial-period), build one and send it to them.

[Romanator21]

I guess SoW is somewhat unique in the flight sim department in that it supports self-shading for aircraft interiors as well as exteriors (RoF also has this feature).

However, I understand why the DCS team would have chosen not to represent these - the cockpits of modern jets are very busy, and they would obscure the fine text and markings on the panels. It's very much a technical simulation than a graphical/arcade one.

The terrain detail is far less than that of SoW so far, but you can't help but like the colors and photographic textures.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1FYIVMn9zs

http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/img/technology/A10C/Weapons.jpg

[tagTaken2]

Don't really think of DCS as competitors... it's a different, or even complementary market. I'll buy both, and given the money/hours of play value of both games I'm not sure there will be many people agonising over which one to spend their money on. The only real problem is that they may both come out at the same time (SoW two weeks after A-10, naturally), and I won't know which one to play first.
The point of this post was actually to ask if Oleg has played Black Shark, and impressions taken, just curiosity.

[Viking]

Thanks for the video! Flight sims have com a long way, almost photo realism to day.
I find that its realistic down to the detail that the opponents lack weapons to defend themselves with. Impressive!

Viking

[Xilon_x]

FANTASTIC the DCS is good software hause is professional and airplane are realistic wirtual cocpith clicable cokcpit and is very hard simulators. i have black shark and lock on flaming clif2 are fantastic.hard game hard simulation.

[Skoshi Tiger]

Like I said, I'll probably be buying both sims.

One of the reasons I posted a video of a 'State of the art' sim is to put our weekly updates into a bit of perspective. Compared to the A-10 what we've seen of SOW looks fairly good.

Now I haven't spent as much time trolling around the DCS forums as here but from what I've seen it's a much more positive and constructive feel to it. There seems to be a higher percentage of negative comments about updates on this site than over there.

1. They are not just simple textures on flat surfaces. You can see that on some earlier screenshots (note the reflections on the instruments):



Your right it does look a lot better in that screen shot. Very similar to the Spitfire and 109 cockpit we've seen. Hopefully it will get the lighting and shadows in it's release.


2. The video is WIP, much like IL2 is. The video shows the game in DX9. The final version will support DX11.


I guess I'll be having to get a DX11 card by the end of the year then. :)


3. As Oleg mentioned for his boats, they are pretty simple, because you will swish over them with 400kp/h.
Now think what you will see when flying by with 900kp/h. I promise you, you won't notice the difference, which boat was modeled with more polygons.


Yes your right! The thing that made me doubt if it was the same sim was the difference in detail between the boats and the other ground objects in the video.



Of course you can always find something negative, if you search hard enough for the simple fact that nobody and nothing is perfect.
If you find something better or more realistic than SoW or DCS, please let me know. If it really think you could do better, get a 3D modelling program (several are free, some with free trial-period), build one and send it to them.

Never have any truer words been posted on this forum! (Well there was the time where I posted that I was suave and debonair but I'll let that one slide for the moment!)

Although I am a Systems Analyst/Programmer by training and former occupation (currently working as an Educator), my field was databases. I doubt my 3D modeling skills would extend past a paper aircraft design :) . I'll leave that one to the experts.

Cheers! In this crazy mixed-up world, it good to find a like minded soul!

[Skoshi Tiger]

I guess SoW is somewhat unique in the flight sim department in that it supports self-shading for aircraft interiors as well as exteriors (RoF also has this feature).

However, I understand why the DCS team would have chosen not to represent these - the cockpits of modern jets are very busy, and they would obscure the fine text and markings on the panels. It's very much a technical simulation than a graphical/arcade one.



I didn't know about that decision.

I guess that when your developing a sim like these there is always going to be a trade off between the features that you implement and the performance that your trying to achieve.


The terrain detail is far less than that of SoW so far, but you can't help but like the colors and photographic textures.

....

http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/img/technology/A10C/Weapons.jpg

Maybe they decided to model arid terrain because they couldn't get the right colour green for a European theatre. ;)

I like the way tufts of grass fit in quite well with the landscape. Looks quite realistic.

[Skoshi Tiger]

Don't really think of DCS as competitors... it's a different, or even complementary market. I'll buy both, and given the money/hours of play value of both games I'm not sure there will be many people agonising over which one to spend their money on. The only real problem is that they may both come out at the same time (SoW two weeks after A-10, naturally), and I won't know which one to play first.
The point of this post was actually to ask if Oleg has played Black Shark, and impressions taken, just curiosity.

A post like that would be quite interesting reading.

My problem over here in WA is that it takes an extra week or two for new sims to get into the shops compared to you guys on the East Coast. Do you know how hard that is to take! It would drive a man to buy the game off the Internet!

cheers!

[Feuerfalke]

I think the difference between the boats and the vehicles is a matter or priorities, which was between the lines I wrote.

You are much more likely to take a closer look at a combat vehicle or user-placed object, either through your targeting pod or with the external camera than some random traffic vehicle like this boat.


Still I have no doubt that SoW will soon look as good as DCS, in some parts maybe even better. Let's not forget that these two simulations have two completely different origins:
Because DCS is based upon the largely modular engine from LockOn, which again is based upon the experiences, data and engine of Flanker, we see a constant development and improvement of an existing sophisticated engine.

Oleg is doing the same thing, just that he's at the beginning of his modular engine, because the old IL2-engine was not enough modular and flexible to allow a similar evolution. IL2 simply has grown too far beyond its boundaries.
Given todays possibilities in programming and computing, new insights and the experience based from the successes and weaknesses of IL2, I bet that SoW will improve even faster than DCS, once the engine is completed as the solid basement.

That's why I don't think we can compare the two sims in any regard and I also don't think they compete with each other.

[Skoshi Tiger]

Thanks for the video! Flight sims have com a long way, almost photo realism to day.
I find that its realistic down to the detail that the opponents lack weapons to defend themselves with. Impressive!

Viking

"Skilled and calculating is he who takes the high ground." -Sun Tzu


Cheers!

[Skoshi Tiger]

I think the difference between the boats and the vehicles is a matter or priorities, which was between the lines I wrote.

You are much more likely to take a closer look at a combat vehicle or user-placed object, either through your targeting pod or with the external camera than some random traffic vehicle like this boat.


Still I have no doubt that SoW will soon look as good as DCS, in some parts maybe even better. Let's not forget that these two simulations have two completely different origins:
While DCS is based upon the largely modular engine from LockOn, which again is based upon the experiences, data and engine of Flanker, we see a constant development and improvement of an existing sophisticated engine.

Oleg is doing the same thing, just that he's at the beginning of his modular engine, because the old IL2-engine was not enough modular and flexible to allow a similar evolution.
Given todays possibilities in programming and computing, new insights and the experience based from the successes and weaknesses of IL2, I bet that SoW will improve even faster than DCS, once the engine is completed as the solid basement.

That's why I don't think we can compare the two sims in any regard and I also don't think they compete with each other.

I'm sure your right.

I guess I should have put more thought into my thread title. Both title will will a completely different niche in the market.

Cheers!

[Feuerfalke]

I think the title is okay.

You are free to have your own opinion and if you think it may be a competitor, that's fine. I think there are much worse titles and posts on this forums - LOL

[Viking]

"Skilled and calculating is he who takes the high ground." -Sun Tzu


Cheers!

"You must look down on the enemy, and take up your attitude on slightly higher places"
Musash

Cheers! In Beer Chang.

[Flanker35M]

S!

Gonna get that A-10 sim for sure. One of the very few jets I like. Do not see it as competition to SoW as they are so different. In the contrary it is good to see some still produce high fidelity flight sims in the world where "boom headshot" sells more ;)

[Immermann]

Maybe they decided to model arid terrain because they couldn't get the right colour green for a European theatre. ;)

I like the way tufts of grass fit in quite well with the landscape. Looks quite realistic.

No, that is the Nevada training area map. The main action will take place in the same place as the rest of DCS/Lock On, Georgia.

[ZaltysZ]

However, I understand why the DCS team would have chosen not to represent these - the cockpits of modern jets are very busy, and they would obscure the fine text and markings on the panels. It's very much a technical simulation than a graphical/arcade one.

I think DCS engine needs to be blamed more, than good readability of instruments. Lots of (bad) things were inherited from previous engines, some were fixed, but some just could not be fixed quickly. I think no cockpit shadowing and "incorrect" lightning fall into such category together with wrongly rendered water above sea level. However, eventually they will be fixed.

[JG27CaptStubing]

I guess SoW is somewhat unique in the flight sim department in that it supports self-shading for aircraft interiors as well as exteriors (RoF also has this feature).

However, I understand why the DCS team would have chosen not to represent these - the cockpits of modern jets are very busy, and they would obscure the fine text and markings on the panels. It's very much a technical simulation than a graphical/arcade one.

The terrain detail is far less than that of SoW so far, but you can't help but like the colors and photographic textures.

I can answer some of these questions for you... The reason why DCS doesn't show off some of the latest "self shading" technologies or techniques has everything to do with where DCS comes from. DCS BlackShark the first release is based upon the LOMAC engine DX 8. The premise being that today's modern simulator isn't going to get a bunch of funding. I think Oleg's project is one of a kind. There is a lot of risk taking on a simulator. Just look at the pages if criticism in this Forum alone and SOW hasn't even been released. Remember Modern Flight Sims has a very strong following but it's far smaller than the masses purchasing Halo Reach right now. With that said Wags started the DCS projects and he built some success by using the older Game LOMAC and adding a Helo to it. They also greatly enhanced the terrain to support a low level flying game such as BS. They were very successful with BS and it's a fine sim if you haven't played it yet. It's now compatible with the new Re-Release of Flaming Cliffs 2 which adds LOMAC back with several enchancements in that title and compatibility with DCS Black Shark.

This next project A10C is continuing to add to the franchize but it will add support for newer technologies. It's pretty clear to me they are self funding this stuff by selling these earlier titles with enhancements.

[JG27CaptStubing]

I didn't know about that decision.

I guess that when your developing a sim like these there is always going to be a trade off between the features that you implement and the performance that your trying to achieve.



Maybe they decided to model arid terrain because they couldn't get the right colour green for a European theatre. ;)

I like the way tufts of grass fit in quite well with the landscape. Looks quite realistic.

Actually this would be incorrect... They have a European theater but this screenshot is for the new map they are adding which is Nevada USA a desert training center and home of Red Flag.

[proton45]

I'm sorry but the smoke doesn't look right...the grass doesn't move and the colors look to bland. ;)


Where are the "nit-pickers" when you need them... :)

[JG27CaptStubing]

I'm sorry but the smoke doesn't look right...the grass doesn't move and the colors look to bland. ;)


Where are the "nit-pickers" when you need them... :)



Nice of you to point out problems with a game clearly under development. But hey to each their own.

I would look at the movie again and get back to me. I could care less if the grass moves as long as my FM, Radar, and Weapons modeling works properly.

[Romanator21]

He's just pointing out the irony of those picking at the SoW updates...also a WIP

[JG27CaptStubing]

Sorry didn't see the joke in it...

[Skoshi Tiger]

I could care less if the grass moves as long as my FM, Radar, and Weapons modeling works properly.

It really depends on how our virtual world is modelled. We've been told (I think!) that were are going to have moving air masses.

- Will this wind effect rising smoke columns?
- Will this wind effect the trajectories of the bombs we drop?
- Will we need to take into account wind when we're shooting our MG's/Cannons?

At the moment we just don't know. If it will have an effect, any indicators of wind speed/direction will be invaluable.

Though not noticeable at altitude, at least correctly moddled moving grass will tell us about crosswinds when we're landing. If it's not correctly modeled we are probably better off without it.

One of the problems we've got is that there is so much we just don't know about the SOW.

A few videos of SOW might help us answer those questions (or raise a few hundred more!!!).

I guess there will be alot that is hidden until the release.

Cheers!

[zakkandrachoff]

oleg don't have competitors. maybe jet thunder and strike fighters , they maybe are enemys simulators. but ww2, are nothing in the front. Ejem! we are talking about Oleg Maddox here! he dont have competition

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWokP4ARdfc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKrQuHeUlgs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2MI5pQs1Q4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQtTrMMV-m4&feature=related

[Skoshi Tiger]

oleg don't have competitors. maybe jet thunder and strike fighters , they maybe are enemys simulators. but ww2, are nothing in the front. Ejem! we are talking about Oleg Maddox here! he dont have competition

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2MI5pQs1Q4



I tend to agree with you.

Stike fighters is starting to show it's age in that video- I guess it is comparable to IL-2.

I find ROF of interest because it is fairly new and shows off more modern technology . (I own ROF by the way - still getting the hang of it

cheers

[proton45]

Nice of you to point out problems with a game clearly under development. But hey to each their own.

I would look at the movie again and get back to me. I could care less if the grass moves as long as my FM, Radar, and Weapons modeling works properly.

Oh come on...I'm so clearly making a joke. :)

[Flanker35M]

S!

Got also Rise Of Flight. The more I fly it the more I like it :) And the plans to take it to DirectX 11..wohoo!! Sure not perfect, but great fun and about an era when aerial warfare was born and developed.

[Feuerfalke]

It really depends on how our virtual world is modelled. We've been told (I think!) that were are going to have moving air masses.

- Will this wind effect rising smoke columns?
- Will this wind effect the trajectories of the bombs we drop?
- Will we need to take into account wind when we're shooting our MG's/Cannons?

At the moment we just don't know. If it will have an effect, any indicators of wind speed/direction will be invaluable.

Though not noticeable at altitude, at least correctly moddled moving grass will tell us about crosswinds when we're landing. If it's not correctly modeled we are probably better off without it.

One of the problems we've got is that there is so much we just don't know about the SOW.

A few videos of SOW might help us answer those questions (or raise a few hundred more!!!).

I guess there will be alot that is hidden until the release.

Cheers!

If you think the features of DCS: A-10C Warthog are a well kept secret, I recommend taking a look at this site:
http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/index.php?lang=en&end_pos=2452&scr=default#p17

[whatnot]

Thank god there are two jaw-dropping sims in the funnel so it's more likely that atleast one of them have to be out sooner or later! I just hope for my sanitys sake that they won't come out at the same time.

Glowing Amraam sure knows how to make videos too, maybe he could put something together for SOW too unless Oleg has is own ideas.

One thing that has troubled me for a long time is the damage models of the vehicles etc and how they come to be to be more precise. It's like frame 1: perfectly working tank and then when hit frame 2: destroyed tank. Is it too time consuming to create some type of evolution in the breakdown?

I guess one can argue that you won't see it happen anyway flying x00 miles an hour and being half a mile away but it would be nice for the movies atleast :-P

It also applies to the buildings, especially big ones like the factory we saw in a recent update that was hit by Stuka. Instead of the whole 200m wide factory being hit it would be great to see damage that a few bombs would actually cause which in my books would be something like a hole in the middle. God knows what that would take to develop but just sayin.

[Feuerfalke]

BlackShark already abandoned the frame1-frame2 thing.

If you hit a unit, it starts smoking or burning, then it explodes after a few seconds of burning. Some targets also cause secondary explosions.

[whatnot]

BlackShark already abandoned the frame1-frame2 thing.

If you hit a unit, it starts smoking or burning, then it explodes after a few seconds of burning. Some targets also cause secondary explosions.

That sounds promising, need to re-install BS while waiting for Maddox and ED to finalize their work.

[proton45]

I would welcome an up-date of the "BlackShark" series....

[Cap Loz]

Latest news from the producer.

Originally Posted by Wags
"Although the team has been working hard on DX11 support, there is still a long way to go and it will not be ready in time for A-10C unfortunately. Work continues though and we hope to have it in the next DCS aircraft."

[Skoshi Tiger]

Latest news from the producer.

Originally Posted by Wags
"Although the team has been working hard on DX11 support, there is still a long way to go and it will not be ready in time for A-10C unfortunately. Work continues though and we hope to have it in the next DCS aircraft."

Thats not good. I guess it would have been the first flight sim to incorporate DX11.

I sort of was going to using it as a justification to upgrade to DX11 card. Guess we'll have to wait and see what happens with ROF and SOW!

But I guess there are pressures to get the sim out of the door.

It does highlight the point that Black Shark and the A-10 series are two seperate title.

I guess we are lucky that in the past Oleg&Co have been giving us compatable upgrades and expansions.

Cheers and thanks for the news.

[Feuerfalke]

It does highlight the point that Black Shark and the A-10 series are two seperate title.

Sorry, I don't understand. How is the fact that now both titles use the same DX9 an indicator that they are not compatible?


I also don't think that leaving DX11 out is a bad decision. As posted in another thread, the main advantage of using DX11 is to speed up rendering. But rendering of the world graphics is much less a priority for DCS as the phyiscs behind the FM, the DM and the avionics. So buying a top-notch DX11 card for DCS was a pretty superficial excuse. ;)

@proton45:
It was posted a long time ago, that it's planned to upgrade older modules with the enhancements published in newer versions 1.) to maintain compatibility between the modules and 2.) because the system is designed modular, just like Oleg's SoW-engine.

So, unless something unforeseen happens, I bet there will be an update for BlackShark.

[Skoshi Tiger]

I'm probably be wrong, but my understanding was that A10 would be released as a seperate sim. Both sims would work together in multiplayer a bit like Silent Hunter and Destroyer Commander (or Comanche and Werewolf if you want to go back further). They were two seperate titles that could work together in multiplayer.

This is different to the IL-2 series that the newer version merged in with the older ones into one sim.

Like I said I might be completely wrong but that was the impression I got.

Cheers!

Sorry, I don't understand. How is the fact that now both titles use the same DX9 an indicator that they are not compatible?


I also don't think that leaving DX11 out is a bad decision. As posted in another thread, the main advantage of using DX11 is to speed up rendering. But rendering of the world graphics is much less a priority for DCS as the phyiscs behind the FM, the DM and the avionics. So buying a top-notch DX11 card for DCS was a pretty superficial excuse. ;)

@proton45:
It was posted a long time ago, that it's planned to upgrade older modules with the enhancements published in newer versions 1.) to maintain compatibility between the modules and 2.) because the system is designed modular, just like Oleg's SoW-engine.

So, unless something unforeseen happens, I bet there will be an update for BlackShark.

[Xilon_x]

Silent Hunter and would be great to combine IL-2 Sturmovik 1946 and arma2 3 simulations in a simulation all connected with an excellent interface.

[winny]

I'm probably be wrong, but my understanding was that A10 would be released as a seperate sim. Both sims would work together in multiplayer a bit like Silent Hunter and Destroyer Commander (or Comanche and Werewolf if you want to go back further). They were two seperate titles that could work together in multiplayer.

This is different to the IL-2 series that the newer version merged in with the older ones into one sim.

Like I said I might be completely wrong but that was the impression I got.

Cheers!

I think that DCS is the title and that A-10 is purley an add-on. They have a standard 'base' version of the software (I'm guessing that this is the engine part), when A-10 is released the base version will be upgraded across all versions. So you won't be able to play the A-10 without upgrading your current version to the new 'base' version.

I think SoW may go down this route..?

[Feuerfalke]

I'm probably be wrong, but my understanding was that A10 would be released as a seperate sim. Both sims would work together in multiplayer a bit like Silent Hunter and Destroyer Commander (or Comanche and Werewolf if you want to go back further). They were two seperate titles that could work together in multiplayer.

This is different to the IL-2 series that the newer version merged in with the older ones into one sim.

Like I said I might be completely wrong but that was the impression I got.

Cheers!

No, if you meant it this way, you're right. (though I still don't get the idea how you concluded that from what you wrote before)

BlackShark and Warthog are two separate modules of the same series, but they are not separate titles or series, just to make that perfectly clear. It's aim is to combine all modules of the series and upgrade earlier modules with patches to bring them up to latest release standards. Well, at least that's the plan.

The decision to have modules rather than upgrades is a question of the business-model and of course workload and detail.

1.
- Modern aircraft have a lot of avionic systems that need to be modeled additional to mechanical and DM. These things are also not only limited to the aircraft itself, but also in terms of multiplayer-features, as you have very high-tech systems interacting with each other. This limits the number of aircraft and new features included in each release - for DCS that's one aircraft a time.
- When adding a WW2 aircraft, the number of different avionics is rather limited, the way the function are even less. The implementation is also rather limited to the plane itself, as it can simply be added into the game without any complex dependencies. This way, if you have the basic engine, it's comparably easy to add new planes. As such, more planes can be included into an addon. Especially, if they are "just" modifications of the same plane.

2.
- Oleg's business-model was criticized a lot for the need to buy the modules. If you wanted to play at later states, you not only had to download a large number of free updates, but you also had to buy addons or bundles. If you didn't you were stuck with the old version and unable to play with other people with more upgrades.
- ED releases single aircraft modules, which work together with previous and later releases. As such, you can choose the aircraft you want to fly, buy the addon(s) you want and the only downside is, that you are limited in your choice of aircraft.

IMHO each has it's pros and cons.

[Skoshi Tiger]

Cool, some more video of SOW!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wwIzRlohpE

I like the articulation of the gun mount. It gives a new insight into the difficulties of actually using one of these guns.



Cheers

[Feuerfalke]

ED now offers Pre-Purchase for A-10C.

If you buy the full digital download version, you will get instant access to an Open Beta!

http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/

Details:
http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=58300

[The Kraken]

Great news and a good move from ED.

Still hope Oleg won't do the same. This forum just wouldn't be the same without the Friday updates and mostly unrelated follow-up discussions...

[zakkandrachoff]

i forget it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7ZiG5rsOw8

by the way, this is the tape.
http://www.freakingnews.com/pictures/29500/Fly-Simulator-X--29886.jpg
:-P

[Skoshi Tiger]

i forget it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7ZiG5rsOw8


This ones better than the promo for CFS!



by the way, this is the tape.
http://www.freakingnews.com/pictures/29500/Fly-Simulator-X--29886.jpg
:-P

LOL!

Cheers!

[Skoshi Tiger]

ED now offers Pre-Purchase for A-10C.

If you buy the full digital download version, you will get instant access to an Open Beta!

http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/

Details:
http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=58300


Thankyou very much! I will head over that way and take a look!

cheers!

*Edit* Couldn't help myself - downloading the Beta now though it looks like it will take some time!

Thanks again!

[major_setback]

Those remind me of this one from a few years ago...I think the MFS team did it as a bit of fun.

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j178/owenhewitt/blog/fsx_duck.jpg?1286317247

[JG27CaptStubing]

Yeah I bought it too... Played very little but so far it looks really good.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=58300