Future of computer simulator

[Xilon_x]

3480

3481

[Xilon_x]

3482

3483

[Viking]

Yeeeeeeeeeeessssss.........?


Viking

[Feuerfalke]

If there is a future for computers and simulations, it will hopefully come with a better resolution and a manual.

[rakinroll]

Xilon, we can not see those pics well. Could you please explain what are they?

[T}{OR]

Xilon, we can not see those pics well. Could you please explain what are they?

His desire for a merged and compatible sim world of ArmA, SoW, Silent Hunter and what not...

[mazex]

His desire for a merged and compatible sim world of ArmA, SoW, Silent Hunter and what not...

I also hope that some day someone will do it - and Oleg sure has hinted about his desire to expand SoW this way... I remember when Operation Flashpoint came out and the exitement over a more serious large open world game where you could both play it as an FPS and a car/tank/heli/air/tractor game. Unfortunately the vehicle part of that game and all of the follow ups are way too arcadish and the AI never got as good as we hoped...

[proton45]

3480

3481

Well...of coarse this type of simulation is the "Holy Grail" of combat simming.

We can only hope that at some point, someone will produce such a simulation.

[Flying Pencil]

I also hope that some day someone will do it

One already exists.

http://wwiionline.com/

Ground and air work very well.
Sea exists, but is limited.

Its also a 10 year old game (some parts show it)
EDIT: note, the game has been updated, but some parts show its old age.

[VectorForFood]

Some parts show it? WWIIOL has to be the clunkiest sim I've ever played... even when I first tried it 6-7 years ago, it never really impressed me.

[Flying Pencil]

Some parts show it? WWIIOL has to be the clunkiest sim I've ever played... even when I first tried it 6-7 years ago, it never really impressed me.

But it CAN do what other sim games dream of.

Its not pretty, parts of it are certainly less then what you expect, but as a virtual playable world it is functionally better then all the others.

[Feuerfalke]

But it CAN do what other sim games dream of.

Not, "but" - because!

Because it can do what other sim games dream of, it lacks major sectors in all parts it simulates. The planes have a simplified collision boxes, like the soldiers have, including 2m high boxes for 30cm wingfoils, etc.

[bf-110]

It would be like Battlefield,but,seriously,a lot bigger.1 terabyte the complete game will have.That would be an orgasm (sorry the term,couldn´t find a better one).Maybe in 2030 we can have this...

Till now,the future of simulation is this:
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=16627

[swiss]

Those sims exist: For military use - tactic as strategic.

What we're facing here is not only a software, but also a hardware problem.

These simulators are in the 3digit million$ range.

Of course such stuff will be standard - way beyond 2020.

[Xilon_x]

3490


no windows sistem but computer canche new operating sistem have WORLD.
in this sistem your aplication is simple.
AIRPLAN TANK SUBMARINE SOLDIER any tipe of program is simple.
also online sistem is simple and have all aplication.

[The Kraken]

Maybe you could post a video of your proposed design to make it more understandable.

[Romanator21]

Aces High II is also an all-around simulator. Despite some serious drawbacks, it has some features that, dare I say it, I wish Il-2 had. You can drive trucks and tanks, switching to various positions, and you can also control PT boats (not a fan of those features myself). But I just love that it had two AI which shadowed you if you were a bomber. It's an instant formation for online play - no waiting for friends, no going into the hornet's nest alone.

The best part was that people complained that the P-51 was porked, just like they did in this game (Ahaaaaa!!!) :grin: It's especially ironic since this game was developed by an American team (people were citing Oleg's patriotism as the cause for "porking" the American fighters).

That said, the overall FM, DM, and physics of AHII are balls.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5yQElB83go&feature=related

[winny]

It's a good idea in theory but in practice who is gonna want to play as a tank or soldier when there are real people flying planes? You are not gonna last very long.
It would be hard to simulate everything because of the balance of the different modes. In any aircraft you'd have a massive advantage (which would be good news for us guys!) online, and from my experience of other unbalanced games would mean that everyone ends up not wanting to play as a certain type.

Actually, it could work if Aircraft could only attack surface targets having been requested to do so by another freindly surface unit.. but then you'd have no targets of opportunity..

Maybe one day there will be 500 of us in the air and 500 on the ground.. tie it all in with a strategy game? Then we could all bitch in the recreation room about the rubbish orders we have been getting from some armchair general somewhere... Total war, top to bottom :)

[swiss]

Maybe you could post a video of your proposed design to make it more understandable.

ROFLMAOSTC!!!
Almost fell of my chair laughing!

awsome!

[Romanator21]

It's a good idea in theory but in practice who is gonna want to play as a tank or soldier when there are real people flying planes? You are not gonna last very long.
It would be hard to simulate everything because of the balance of the different modes. In any aircraft you'd have a massive advantage (which would be good news for us guys!) online, and from my experience of other unbalanced games would mean that everyone ends up not wanting to play as a certain type.

Actually, it could work if Aircraft could only attack surface targets having been requested to do so by another freindly surface unit.. but then you'd have no targets of opportunity..

Maybe one day there will be 500 of us in the air and 500 on the ground.. tie it all in with a strategy game? Then we could all bitch in the recreation room about the rubbish orders we have been getting from some armchair general somewhere... Total war, top to bottom

Three letters: MDS

"Moving Dogfight Server" for the uninitiated. ARMA works with AI soldiers right? And even though you and I are plane nuts, I think there are more people who would rather play FPS than fly.

[zauii]

His desire for a merged and compatible sim world of ArmA, SoW, Silent Hunter and what not...

Keep on dreaming, as i've been a bitching bout before, not gonna happen
within the next 15 years.

[SQB]

you would be pleased to know this already exists, it is called The battle Sim.

You would then be very angered to know that it exists only for the army and there are NO plans for it to be made available for us, non-empowered folk. :evil:

i will link you a vid in a sec.

EDIT:
here they are:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8XBx0lttB0&feature=related - Promo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oi-XCdg1jT0 - JTAC

[T}{OR]

you would be pleased to know this already exists, it is called The battle Sim.

You would then be very angered to know that it exists only for the army and there are NO plans for it to be made available for us, non-empowered folk. :evil:

I am not impressed, to say the least. Lock On anyone?

The Fighter Collection Simulation Engine

The Fighter Collection Simulation Engine (TFCSE), developed for TFC by its associate company, Eagle Dynamics, is currently integrated into the commercial entertainment software pro-duct "Lock On: Modern Air Combat". "Lock On" is a high fidelity first-person perspective flight simulator that allows the player to operate one of several US or Russian jet fighter aircraft (A-10A Warthog, F-15C Eagle, Su-27 Flanker B, MiG-29 Fulcrum A, MiG-29 Fulcrum C, Su-25 Frogfoot, Su-25T, Su-33 Flanker D).

Lock On models a large portion of the Black Sea region, including the Crimean peninsula and the western Caucuses. The area is highly detailed and includes more than 180,000 buildings, 50,000,000 trees, 21 cities, 1,700 towns and villages, 500 bridges, 18 airfields and 8 naval bases.

From: http://www.thebattlesim.com/index.php?lang=en&end_pos=148&scr=home

[Blackdog_kt]

It's a good idea in theory but in practice who is gonna want to play as a tank or soldier when there are real people flying planes? You are not gonna last very long.
It would be hard to simulate everything because of the balance of the different modes. In any aircraft you'd have a massive advantage (which would be good news for us guys!) online, and from my experience of other unbalanced games would mean that everyone ends up not wanting to play as a certain type.

Actually, it could work if Aircraft could only attack surface targets having been requested to do so by another freindly surface unit.. but then you'd have no targets of opportunity..

Maybe one day there will be 500 of us in the air and 500 on the ground.. tie it all in with a strategy game? Then we could all bitch in the recreation room about the rubbish orders we have been getting from some armchair general somewhere... Total war, top to bottom :)

Actually it's a matter of scale just like you said. Believe me, if there was a flight of four to twelve aircraft that respawned in a position which is at best a half hour trip to the front line (accounting for take off, formation and cruise to target in a sensible, tactical way thanks to the extra systems modelling and operating limits), but enemy soldiers respawn 5km and vehicles 10 km from the front line, they don't have any systems to manage but just point the mouse where they want to go and walk/drive there, there's 200 of them and they are shooting at you with everything from rifles to machine guns to light flak, they'd be anything but disadvantaged. They'd just die a lot but also respawn a lot faster and closer to the battle area ;)

I'd really love to fly in such an environment with realistic threats, where all you can afford is a single pass over the target and you have to get the drop right or risk blowing up your own troops in contact with the enemy.

Of course, the basic layout is a totally different discussion from the amount of processing power and network traffic it will need to work, but we can dream can't we? If we didn't dream we'd still be flying secret weapons of the luftwaffe, but it seems some people can't grasp the fact that what's possible today only happens because some designers started off to do the impossible a few years ago. Too many grumpy old folks sitting on their porch with their shotgun on their lap and yelling "get orf my lawn" to the kids around here and no, i'm not referring to you :-P

[winny]

Actually it's a matter of scale just like you said. Believe me, if there was a flight of four to twelve aircraft that respawned in a position which is at best a half hour trip to the front line (accounting for take off, formation and cruise to target in a sensible, tactical way thanks to the extra systems modelling and operating limits), but enemy soldiers respawn 5km and vehicles 10 km from the front line, they don't have any systems to manage but just point the mouse where they want to go and walk/drive there, there's 200 of them and they are shooting at you with everything from rifles to machine guns to light flak, they'd be anything but disadvantaged. They'd just die a lot but also respawn a lot faster and closer to the battle area ;)

I'd really love to fly in such an environment with realistic threats, where all you can afford is a single pass over the target and you have to get the drop right or risk blowing up your own troops in contact with the enemy.

Of course, the basic layout is a totally different discussion from the amount of processing power and network traffic it will need to work, but we can dream can't we? If we didn't dream we'd still be flying secret weapons of the luftwaffe, but it seems some people can't grasp the fact that what's possible today only happens because some designers started off to do the impossible a few years ago. Too many grumpy old folks sitting on their porch with their shotgun on their lap and yelling "get orf my lawn" to the kids around here and no, i'm not referring to you :-P

I'm not being deliberately negative for the sake of it. I just thought that with the calibre of your average fps player seemingly quite low that populating the ground may be a problem. It's not about what's possible (I'm quite a progressive thinker) it's just an observation on what I think would be the main problem. I would love it to happen one day as it's the holy grail of online war-ing, but getting it balanced would be difficult. There's nothing grumpy about that... now get off my lawn! :)

[Blackdog_kt]

I wasn't referring to you either :-P

I'm not trying to insult people, i just find that "never gonna happen/it's impossible/etc" attitudes are simplistic and lack vision. My only point is, there's quite a difference between "never" and "in 10 years time", but in order for it to happen people must voice support for it, otherwise no developer will spend time to make something that lacks a potential market.