Friday 2010-10-15 Dev. update and Discussion

[airmalik]

Hi Oleg,

Speaking of sun reflections off canopy glass, will SoW model such glints off aircraft beyond visual range? ie. the plane is far enough away that it can't be seen but a glint or flash of sun off it's canopy gives away it's position?

[Oleg Maddox]

I was curious what WoP would look like without the colour cast:

Original:
http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/3022/wopcompare2.jpg

Colour Corrected (Only colour balance changed. No contrast, exposure changes made):
http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/7465/wopcompare2cc.jpg

isn't both of these pictures incorrect?
Beginning from the coloring camo of the aircraft, then the sky, ground, water, how looks buildings, etc?
However as I think their goal was to make something like old films with distroted in time and from the beginning of that old time processes of film development colors. This like some auditory of users that do not interesting in simulation, but more in game itself.

[Spudkopf]

Oleg Did you ever get that training session in with your son??

[Oleg Maddox]

Oleg Did you ever get that training session in with your son??

No, he is still sick with a temperature and computer prohibited.

[Spudkopf]

No, he is still sick with a temperature and computer prohibited.

That's too bad, hope he gets well soon!

[albx]

Oleg, after the exibition in november, will you show us some photos of the event? please... :)

[Oleg Maddox]

Oleg, after the exibition in november, will you show us some photos of the event? please... :)

Ok
However I will be in a separate room. Not for all.

[Insuber]

i think ALL of us want that Insuber, IL2 is with out doubt the best sim(or game for that matter) that ive ever owned.
We all prob have 1000s of hours flying IL2 thanks to Oleg, i know i have.
And we all want the best for SOW, now if some of us spot things that we think could be closer to the real thing, then why not point them out?

Now if Oleg then agrees and changes these small things then whats the harm?
If he doesnt agree or hasnt time to change them, thats his choice, its his sim, he can and will do what he feels is right, its not going to make any of us not buy the game.


No problem in principle furbs, if we were in an ideal world with unlimited time and money. Maybe I'm wrong but I'm just a bit afraid of the disproportioned influence of noisy minorities, whose priorities are very far from those of the vast majority of the aficionados.

In short: the perfect is the enemy of the good, as Voltaire put it 250 years ago.

Have a nice day,
Insuber

[Dano]

A small comparison with WoP that has been mentioned here (got in a bit too low and some guy in a spit joined my 2 player host while going on my photo run and shot me down so no second attempt ;))

It's getting hard to say which one is best now...

The only place where WoP is winning is the city, looks great but in BoB it's just an IL2 style texture. Hopefully this is purely down to it being further away, WiP or due to settings. In all else BoB is superior.

Also, I appreciate that the BoB shot is at a different range but is it just me or are there some scaling issues there? Comparing the two it make the WoP shot look like it's an England populated with oversized fields, trees and towns?

[Romanator21]

WoP houses are enormous. That's probably the reason that they're visible at the height he's flying (1000 meters), and also why the town in the SoW shot is nearly invisible (looks like 2000m or so?). It looks good on the screen, but doesn't reflect reality.

[150GCT_Veltro]

In short: the perfect is the enemy of the good, as Voltaire put it 250 years ago.

Have a nice day,
Insuber

+1

Well said, i totally agree.

In a few words, before give us the Double decker with drivers included, please give us England.

P.S.: We'll have different landscape (textures) for France and England?

[ECV56_Lancelot]

Troops actions are not planned yet. Just some amount of animated people miltary and civil.

Maybe later in time

This is IMO very good news. Personally i think that animated ground crew its more important that animated pilots or gunners. Because usually the distace between aircraft is too big to really notice the pilot or gunner inside other aircraft. But when you take off or land, that's when having animated human figures of ground crew and pilots become important and make a way more immersive and beleivable "living" world.
I understand that animated ground crew demands a lot of resources, and its more dificult to achieve this in multiplayer because it more object that data have to be send and receive, but i think its a key point, specially for single player, to make the world more alive.

[ECV56_Lancelot]

A small comparison with WoP that has been mentioned here (got in a bit too low and some guy in a spit joined my 2 player host while going on my photo run and shot me down so no second attempt ;))

It's getting hard to say which one is best now...

http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/9885/bobcompare2.jpg

http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/3022/wopcompare2.jpg

People could like more the picture below, but its obvious much more realistic the first picture even if there still room for improvement.

[NLS61]

Oleg

As i perceive it you are always in search for sources that have information on ww2 airplanes.
Two weeks ago is was in the Czech republic where I visited a sailplane factory.
This factory also manufactures astounding museum quality models if you would like to
Have the information on this plz pm me as I don’t want to state their url as such on the forum.
ill promise you wont be disappointed.

Cheers,

Niels

[Trumper]

People could like more the picture below, but its obvious much more realistic the first picture even if there still room for improvement.
:( Both are awful as they stand at the moment.:(

[swiss]

Have a look at this :

http://www.youtube.com/user/orbxtube#p/u/4/fQ2kyHmXTss

Of course, I know we can't ask for the same levels of details in a combat sim (with all the other parameters to compute outside the graphical aspects), but something heading this way, at least for the color palette and the natural implantation of the elements.

1st: I watched it on 720p/fullscreen. Is it possible it has have micro-stuttering on fast moving objects? Almost made me vomit.

2nd: Those trees are a JOKE. Look at the red (beech?) at 2.13, I really dont need this crap.

[Hatch]

1st: I watched it on 720p/fullscreen. Is it possible it has have micro-stuttering on fast moving objects? Almost made me vomit.

2nd: Those trees are a JOKE. Look at the red (beech?) at 2.13, I really dont need this crap.

To me the red trees look ok.

Of course i see them almost daily from our office window.
Actually what I'm seeing is even more vivid than those in the vid.

Pity they're really starting to shed they're leaves now as i was planning to take some photographs as soon I get my camera back from a CLA.

[kalimba]

:( Both are awful as they stand at the moment.:(

Well, you should try this game shown in the thumbnail instead , if it's good enough for you...;) release date on their website : april 2022
:grin:

Salute !

[swiss]

To me the red trees look ok.


They are 2 dimensional!


http://img827.imageshack.us/img827/2056/treec.jpg :roll:

[dduff442]

The cranky complainers and the fanboisie are united in one thing: waiting expectantly for the SoW to come out. We're all in it together, people. Both sides show massive enthusiasm even if they don't say so.

[Richie]

Hey I guess it's already out LOL


http://www.1888freeonlinegames.com/download-storm-of-war-battle-of-britain-2483.html

[peterwoods@supanet.com]

Hey I guess it's already out LOL


http://www.1888freeonlinegames.com/download-storm-of-war-battle-of-britain-2483.html

But surely the "User Reviews" should have been written by Tom, Dick and Harry
:rolleyes:

[Hatch]

They are 2 dimensional!


http://img827.imageshack.us/img827/2056/treec.jpg :roll:

:eek: Darn , never noticed it.

Too much driving old racing sims.
They create a blind spot.

[Bearcat]

A small comparison with WoP that has been mentioned here (got in a bit too low and some guy in a spit joined my 2 player host while going on my photo run and shot me down so no second attempt ;))

It's getting hard to say which one is best now...

http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/9885/bobcompare2.jpg

http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/3022/wopcompare2.jpg

Not really.. not for us at least.. now WoP is best.. the old bird in the hand.. but once we finally get our mitts on SoW.... ;)

[WTE_Galway]

I would add - polarized sunglasses :)
Yes you are perfectly right. Not all but many was done by this way if it was professional photograper.
In my photos that I was shooting from the air myself I didn't use polarizer, however in a soft I was removing the effect what is doing the glass of windows and canopy.

Some of the forum comments like "hedgerows should be darker" definitely imply people are expecting SOW to look like a polarize filter photograph rather than real life.

There is also quite a difference between landscape photos with and without UV filters. UV filters remove a lot of the haze.

Of course the RAF flying goggles at the time actually had flip up polarizers so both views would in some sense be correct :D

http://www.flightgear.ch/Pictures/RAF%20B%20type/BTYPE%204050%20RAF%20CR%20P1.jpg

[ECV56_Lancelot]

...
Of course the RAF flying goggles at the time actually had flip up polarizers so both views would in some sense be correct :D

http://www.flightgear.ch/Pictures/RAF%20B%20type/BTYPE%204050%20RAF%20CR%20P1.jpg

Wow, didn't know this. This was available during the BoB also?. If they were, it would be could to have them and be able to use them.

[swiss]

Dear Oleg:

Is there a chance you could implement the option to set time of the cockpit clock ourselves? To real-life time.
[Or maybe take the real time from the OS/Bios]


When I fly at night, I usually play in the dark, so even the clock on my desk is worthless.
So, if I want to know what time it is I have to use alt+tab - but I actually got a clock right in front of my face in the cockpit, a useless one though.

[swiss]

Not really.. not for us at least.. now WoP is best.. the old bird in the hand.. but once we finally get our mitts on SoW.... ;)

Funny, whenever I am in the air, the ground looks grayish/blueish, without any fancy colors.
Picture number one comes pretty close.

[zakkandrachoff]

Not really.. not for us at least.. now WoP is best.. the old bird in the hand.. but once we finally get our mitts on SoW.... ;)



oleg said some times that sow will be best than wop in graphics too. and, of course, in simulation.

but now i see that images... and ...
...
Ooh, it makes me wonder
...Ooh, it really makes me wonder

There's a feeling I get
When I look to the west
And my spirit is crying
For leaving...
:eek:
:-P

[proton45]

Dear Oleg:

Is there a chance you could implement the option to set time of the cockpit clock ourselves? To real-life time.
[Or maybe take the real time from the OS/Bios]


When I fly at night, I usually play in the dark, so even the clock on my desk is worthless.
So, if I want to know what time it is I have to use alt+tab - but I actually got a clock right in front of my face in the cockpit, a useless one though.


Lol...funny.

[WTE_Galway]

Dear Oleg:

Is there a chance you could implement the option to set time of the cockpit clock ourselves? To real-life time.
[Or maybe take the real time from the OS/Bios]


When I fly at night, I usually play in the dark, so even the clock on my desk is worthless.
So, if I want to know what time it is I have to use alt+tab - but I actually got a clock right in front of my face in the cockpit, a useless one though.

Already in IL2_1946


ONLINE:

In IL2 if you are hosting the "tod" command on the chat line will do that. You would obviously also need to have your map set to allow time to progress on the server rather than stay fixed at "eternal noon".

Clearly if you are just a random player in an online server you can not be allowed to change time of day for the whole server. That would cause chaos,



OFFLINE:

Starting times of offline missions in IL2 can be changed by editing the mission files. Either in FMB for static campaigns or the text files for a DGEN mission.

[major_setback]

Oleg:
Will the height/mesh data of the terrain mesh be accurate? How accurate will it be approximately...anything like Real Scenery or VFR Scenery add-ons that are available for MFS? Is there a possibility for you to update/improve that data in the future (or for users/third-party to do it)?

Hills are relatively small in that region of England, so it would be nice to see them as accurate as possible, to give a feeling of realism.

http://www.chelmsfordyha.org.uk/news/IMG_0202-1.JPG

---------
---------

For those not familiar with the terms:

FAQs from Just Flight's webpage:

"Q. What is terrain mesh and elevation data?

A. The visual scenery you see when flying in Flight Simulator is all built upon a basic framework (a 'mesh') that represents the height of the ground at any point in the world. This provides the three-dimensional relief model of hills, mountains, valleys, cliffs, depressions, plateaux and so forth, upon which all other scenery objects and ground textures are placed. The vast majority of the area of the default relief model of England and Wales in Flight Simulator X is set at 76m between each reference point so this means that there are no relief detail changes between points 76m apart. This creates a very "soft" terrain where mountains that should be craggy appear as smooth rounded hills and individual features that fall between the points are lost completely. VFR Real Scenery includes reference points that are just 9.6m apart which provides a far higher resolution than the default. Even small ground features now become visible."

[Doogerie]

What town are you flying over in the Screen shot's it reminds me a littel of Southampton (well Sherly to be precise) I would love to see some shot's of Southampton mabey over the Guildhall or the Pollygon. or maby the airport (as it was back then) becaus that is where the Spits were made.

[BigPickle]

I will ask our sound engineer to prepare maybe something for the next updates in time.

Wow that would be great if we could have some sounds etc so we can see what the sound engine can do.
Thank you

[Xilon_x]

NICE PHOTO major set_back
3718

[philip.ed]

Wow, didn't know this. This was available during the BoB also?. If they were, it would be could to have them and be able to use them.

Most pilots either lost the flishields because they were so fragile or pulled them off themselves. They are useful for putting up at, say, a 45-degree angle to block the suns rays, but other than that they affect visibility.
The goggles here are post-BoB BTW. The earlier variant of this series were used in the BoB though. These are mark IV'bs. Mark IV's and IV-a's were used in the BoB.
Also the microphone here is post-BoB.
But the mask and helmet are fine ;)

[swiss]

NICE PHOTO major set_back
3718

I like the fact your air is falling down to the cliff. ;)

Also I would think the vortex is somewhere else.

[speculum jockey]

NICE PHOTO major set_back
3718

Not a problem! Every wind vortex in all of Southern England will be accurately simulated. You just need to upgrade your PC to take advantage of it. . .

http://img841.imageshack.us/img841/1077/bluegenel.jpg (http://img841.imageshack.us/i/bluegenel.jpg/)


Hope you can afford the electric bill required to run IBM's Blue Gene!

***Serious Time***

Xilon_x: you do understand that a lot of the stuff you are asking to be included in a COMPUTER GAME! Are commonly found being simulated by giant arrays of PC's so that companies don't have to rent out wind tunnels? Are you 12 years old or just really dumb? Even with a language barrier (translation troubles) I can't imagine anyone normal really expects this from a COMPUTER GAME.

[airmalik]

Xilon_x: you do understand that a lot of the stuff you are asking to be included in a COMPUTER GAME! Are commonly found being simulated by giant arrays of PC's so that companies don't have to rent out wind tunnels? Are you 12 years old or just really dumb? Even with a language barrier (translation troubles) I can't imagine anyone normal really expects this from a COMPUTER GAME.

To be fair, what he's asking for could be faked without modeling complete weather systems. I have no idea of SoW's internal workings but I'm sure if ridge soaring was deemed important enough, it could be modeled without requiring super computers.

I'd be happy with turbulence while flying behind larger aircraft, through or below clouds and mechanical turbulence over trees etc. near airfields.

[Insuber]

Actually his next request will be to replicate the REAL thermals and winds occurred during the period. This is a serious simulator, not a game, Oleg should not take shortcuts on such key elements.
After all it should be quite easy to recalculate the historical internal energy and motion of every single air molecule, starting from today's state and applying simple and well known physical laws. Boys, THIS would be a serious simulation! :\

[airmalik]

historical internal energy and motion of every single air molecule

:grin: :grin: :grin:

[julien673]

Not a problem! Every wind vortex in all of Southern England will be accurately simulated. You just need to upgrade your PC to take advantage of it. . .

http://img841.imageshack.us/img841/1077/bluegenel.jpg (http://img841.imageshack.us/i/bluegenel.jpg/)


Hope you can afford the electric bill required to run IBM's Blue Gene!

***Serious Time***

Xilon_x: you do understand that a lot of the stuff you are asking to be included in a COMPUTER GAME! Are commonly found being simulated by giant arrays of PC's so that companies don't have to rent out wind tunnels? Are you 12 years old or just really dumb? Even with a language barrier (translation troubles) I can't imagine anyone normal really expects this from a COMPUTER GAME.

+1 ;)

[major_setback]

I know there is a setting in FSX where you can visualise the thermals. I never used it though. This video looks like it shows that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXqmlLz31m8


Thermal discussion (breakdown):

http://forums.flightsim.com/vbfs/showthread.php?188417-Soaring-in-FSX

Nice gliding!:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEjqJ1skEqM

.
.

[major_setback]

Found this - Creating ridge lift in the mission builder of FSX:

http://carrier.csi.cam.ac.uk/forsterlewis/soaring/sim/fsx/dev/lift.html

"FSX has great tools for the creation of ridge lift in the mission editor, so you can design ridgelift boxes working in a very realistic way. Here's a screenshot within the Mission Editor using a development visualisation model: "


"A RidgeLift object is used to simulate the effect of a hill slope on the wind."

http://carrier.csi.cam.ac.uk/forsterlewis/soaring/sim/fsx/dev/images/ridgelift_fsx.jpg

http://carrier.csi.cam.ac.uk/forsterlewis/soaring/sim/fsx/dev/images/mission_scenery_usage_thumb.jpg


From that link:

"Here's a list of rules to make your thermals and ridge lift move realistic:
Thermals:

1. A lift strength of 5-6 knots (2-3m/s)would be a good day in most of Europe or the eastern USA.
2. Make them the kind of diameter you can circle in, but not much larger. I'll try and quantify this...
3. Thermals should NOT be designed to go above the cloudbase. Normal cross-country flights involve climbs to cloudbase and no further. Typical cloudbase in Europe and NE USA is 6000 feet.
4. Plant more thermals but make many of them weaker. Real gliding involves sampling and rejecting many more thermals.

Ridge lift:

1. Wind of 16-24 knots is good for ridge lift
2. Lift at ridgetop is typically 5 knots, so you can cruise at 100 knots without losing height.
3. Lift extends to 1000-2000 feet above the ridge but reduces in strength. At 2000 feet above the ridge you might be able to maintain height at best glide speed."

[ARGH]

does anyone know the release date for this game?

[swiss]

Actually his next request will be to replicate the REAL thermals and winds occurred during the period. This is a serious simulator, not a game, Oleg should not take shortcuts on such key elements.
After all it should be quite easy to recalculate the historical internal energy and motion of every single air molecule, starting from today's state and applying simple and well known physical laws. Boys, THIS would be a serious simulation! :\

lol, lol.

[6S.Manu]

does anyone know the release date for this game?
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=16401

[ARGH]

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=16401

The answers to these questions are:

1. The release date for BOB SOW is not known at this time.

i thought i read somewhere that november was the release date.

i built an overclocked i7 rig with gtx 480 to max out this game @ 1080p and judging by the pictures the graphics are on par with birds of prey so it should not be a problem.

[IceFire]

i thought i read somewhere that november was the release date.

i built an overclocked i7 rig with gtx 480 to max out this game @ 1080p and judging by the pictures the graphics are on par with birds of prey so it should not be a problem.

November? Not likely... If the release date was november the game would need to gold master probably this week and be student to distribution from there. It doesn't sound like a gold master is likely in the short term.

You'll probably be well served by your new system, however, Birds of Prey although good looking almost certainly will not have the same level of requirements that Storm of War has. Storm of War is significantly more complicated on the physics, AI, damage, etc. side (Birds of Prey is just a pretty IL-2 behind the scenes - even simplified from what I can tell) which will eat considerable RAM and CPU resources.

Graphics is huge for so many games in the industry but flight sims are pretty much the only products that truly stress the other components.

[philip.ed]

i thought i read somewhere that november was the release date.

i built an overclocked i7 rig with gtx 480 to max out this game @ 1080p and judging by the pictures the graphics are on par with birds of prey so it should not be a problem.

WoP/BoP has, in my opinion, tiny maps and simplistic FM and DM Models. I think this is why it can be run on even modest systems with good fps and excellent-perfect graphics. SoW will have a next-gen FM and DM model which should blow anything that's ever been made before out of the water. The main map will be quite large too.
SoW will also have many more features over WoP, so considering this I think it will require a pretty amazing system.
However, you're system looks great so if that can't run the game, it'll be a while before anyone can really ;)

[furbs]

Some of the forum comments like "hedgerows should be darker" definitely imply people are expecting SOW to look like a polarize filter photograph rather than real life.

There is also quite a difference between landscape photos with and without UV filters. UV filters remove a lot of the haze.

Of course the RAF flying goggles at the time actually had flip up polarizers so both views would in some sense be correct :D

http://www.flightgear.ch/Pictures/RAF%20B%20type/BTYPE%204050%20RAF%20CR%20P1.jpg

nar...i think they should look darker because thats what they look like when i look out of my bloody window. :)

[speculum jockey]

To those of you building new systems for SOW.

Single video card is the best way to go . . . UNLESS!

1. You are going to be playing at some crazy-huge resolution. Say around 2560x1600 or larger would be a good example of this. At these resolutions your single video card is going to be lagging because there is just too much area to cover itself. In an instance like this, having more than one video card would be beneficial.

2. You have More than one monitor. Lots of the extreme simmers like the idea of having three monitors to give them better peripheral vision. This is basically running into problem #1. Lots of area for one card to cover, and the new problem of maybe not having enough places to plug all them in.

In 90% of the other cases (single monitor, reasonable resolution) buying a single video card will be better than going the Multiple/SLI route. If you look at video card development, it usually only takes a year or so for a new card to be able to outperform two of the previous kings in pair. Buying a single card not only results in better performance (if you wait) but also it saves you a lot of money.

Just some food for thought.

[distant]

Hi Oleg,
It sure looks like a phenomenal flightsim that set new standard again. Thanks for the updates and your interaction on the forum.

You mentioned NVidia in one of the posts a couple dozen pages back: will SOW be in any way 3D Vision ready when release?

[robtek]

3D Vision is independent from the game, it's dependent on the driver of the graphics card.
The game-engine only gives the depth - information to the driver, independent if its 3d-display or not, the driver must calculate with it anyway.

[F19_lacrits]

To those of you building new systems for SOW.

Single video card is the best way to go . . . UNLESS!

1. You are going to be playing at some crazy-huge resolution. Say around 2560x1600 or larger would be a good example of this. At these resolutions your single video card is going to be lagging because there is just too much area to cover itself. In an instance like this, having more than one video card would be beneficial.

2. You have More than one monitor. Lots of the extreme simmers like the idea of having three monitors to give them better peripheral vision. This is basically running into problem #1. Lots of area for one card to cover, and the new problem of maybe not having enough places to plug all them in.

In 90% of the other cases (single monitor, reasonable resolution) buying a single video card will be better than going the Multiple/SLI route. If you look at video card development, it usually only takes a year or so for a new card to be able to outperform two of the previous kings in pair. Buying a single card not only results in better performance (if you wait) but also it saves you a lot of money.

Just some food for thought.

It's way too early to predict hardware requirements.. But your guess is as good as any ones ;)
Don't forget that like with many other games you can probably tweak alot of visual settings in SoW. Also you will have the uncertainty how the game will run on CF/SLI/Hydra systems on release.. It might need a few months maturing with driver updates from AMD/Nvidia. So, your average midrange to high end GPU will not hold you back from experiencing the game.. Though it might hold you back from running it with all visual effects turned on and maxed out.. But who knows, I sure don't and Oleg ain't telling at this stage.
Further, getting two new Fermi GF104 GTX460's and running them in SLI provides you more GPU horsepower than getting one GF100 GTX480.

If you want to upgrade for SoW I suggest wait until there are some reviews out and it's at least been flown by a good bunch of the community before deciding how to spend your upgrade money.. It could turn out that CPU and RAM is more important than having the highest end GPU.. Who knows?

[major_setback]

I want to ask - what is the best equipment to use with something that hasn't been made yet?
Reply for any question you like; and any answer will do.
But I neeed to know!! :-)

[Abbeville-Boy]

necessity is the mother of invention, we will find a way

[speculum jockey]

But who knows, I sure don't and Oleg ain't telling at this stage.
Further, getting two new Fermi GF104 GTX460's and running them in SLI provides you more GPU horsepower than getting one GF100 GTX480.

If you want to upgrade for SoW I suggest wait until there are some reviews out and it's at least been flown by a good bunch of the community before deciding how to spend your upgrade money.. It could turn out that CPU and RAM is more important than having the highest end GPU.. Who knows?

What I'm getting at is that SLI/Multiple card setups are really only logical for people with multiple monitors or people playing on 30" Dell screens at full resolution. You get more horsepower out of two cards, but you waste a lot of money and efficiency if you're playing on a typical monitor at regular resolutions. If you get the two G460's you spend "x" amount, if you wait 4 months you'll be able to get a card for that same amount or less, that will run the game better (at regular resolution on a single display).

Anyways, I'm going to wait about 6 months after the game is released (buy it on the first day still) and then build my system to play it. Given the way the market goes, waiting 1/2 a year is usually enough for a new flagship line of cards to be released and the previous "front-runners" who can still run the game all maxed out to drop in price dramatically.

When I play SOW I want it to look as good as it possibly can (at 1600x900 resolution).

[ARGH]

like i said, i built this i7 / gtx 480 rig for the future games. i watercooled it's components with a corsaid H50 on cpu and the new Coolit OMNI on the gpu for silent running because i do not like loud systems. it's also sporting a mild overclock on the cpu and gpu.

i built this system specifically for final fantasy 14 (too bad the game sucks right now, jesus!) and storm of war. it completely maxes out final fantasy 14 including 16x AA, Dof & AO enabled.

http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/ii83/ARGH28/omni3.jpg

http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/ii83/ARGH28/omni2.jpg

http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/ii83/ARGH28/omni1.jpg

the graphical fidelity of this game pretty much the same as wings of prey, although it will have more geometry and better damage model. i know wings of prey can almost be maxed out with a 260 GTX and the GTX 480 is over twice as fast so i am confident that it should max the game out. maybe oleg will state what the recommended system specs will be to play the game in ultra to high settings at 1080p?....

[swiss]

Can't remember asking him for any pictures either.

[Qpassa]

Can't remember asking him for any pictures either.

lol, this thread is for talking about dev update, but a water cooled pc? wtf? :grin:

[Hunden]

Nice rig, I woudn't worry about what some say. They can't help it they ride the short bus.:grin:

[Robert]

Nice set up, ARGH. I especially like that case and am interested in what you think of the vertical fans. Who makes it? Thanks.

[albx]

guys need to show their babes :D

[janpitor]

like i said, i built this i7 / gtx 480 rig for the future games. i watercooled it's components with a corsaid H50 on cpu and the new Coolit OMNI on the gpu for silent running because i do not like loud systems. it's also sporting a mild overclock on the cpu and gpu.

i built this system specifically for final fantasy 14 (too bad the game sucks right now, jesus!) and storm of war. it completely maxes out final fantasy 14 including 16x AA, Dof & AO enabled.

the graphical fidelity of this game pretty much the same as wings of prey, although it will have more geometry and better damage model. i know wings of prey can almost be maxed out with a 260 GTX and the GTX 480 is over twice as fast so i am confident that it should max the game out. maybe oleg will state what the recommended system specs will be to play the game in ultra to high settings at 1080p?....

I´m rather sure the water cooling is a bit overkill without serious overclock. I have i5 750 clocked to 4GHz on air (noctua nh-D14) and GTX480 in a very well ventilated case http://elements.thermaltake.com/ (the model with side fan). I have the upper fan set on 5V instead of 12V to lower RPM. With such configuration it is no more noisy than a mid range notebook. And yes, it can max out Rise of flight with mostly 60fps and 50-56fps over very large cities. and also fly pmdg J41 over 40-50fps

[Trumper]

:) If it is not a rude question what sort of price range are you looking at for that please?

[Oleg Maddox]

Not really.. not for us at least.. now WoP is best.. the old bird in the hand.. but once we finally get our mitts on SoW.... ;)

Questions that to understand what is important for you:

1. Stylish colors in game with overbumped textures
2. Unprecise models and cockpits (most part of which are direct port from old Il-2)
3. Simplified comparing to original Il-2 FM, DM, AI
4. Non historical use of aircraft
5. Absence of realistic weapon
6. non interesting online.

or

1. Correct pallete and more close to real things colors at different time of the day and canges with alitude with modeling of physics for these processes
2. Precise models and completely new precise cockpits that will set new standards in industry of military fligth sims how it was done by original Il-2 in 2001 for a years ahead
3. More complex in calculations comparing to original Il-2 FM, DM (as well as its visuals), AI (that will do many things that were historical)
4. Historical use of aircraft and its loading (and its modeling in principle)
5. Realistic physics of weapons
6. interesting online


My opinion:

You try to name the best the game that has other target auditory... Say from 12 to 16, that is of course great part of players. Yes, it is very good game based on ortiginal Il-2 with better or say better some modern graphics features (mostly effects) than the original Il-2... But simplified in general in many ways.

In the oher hand we are doing for the 12 to 100 age... that I'm in hope will be again the reference for comparison like it was Il-2 for its time. But 100% sure at least with some of the most important for the combat fligth sim features it will be really reference for comparison for a long time.

Still even Il-2 series is a reference for many things. There is a lot of things that was present for the first time in the world and on the sim market. Still many things that makes this sim playable by many even no after so many years.

Lets will return back to this speech after a year of BoB on the market.

[mungee]

You tell 'em Oleg!! Hehe! I have no doubt that SoW will "set the bar" for many years to come.

Just something I need to ask you Oleg - I fear that it may already have been answered before ... if it has, I'm sorry!

It's the AI that SoW will have - in IL-2 one's squadron/section often/usually leaves one way behind in spite of one trying to maintain a gradual and reasonably fast ascent - not wanting to test the ol' Merlin too much before she overheats!!

In SoW will the AI and the individual player's airctaft be "closer" performance-wise. I understand that the AI in IL-2 was near-perfect (perfect trim etc) and that's why guys like me couldn't keep up!

Keep up the graet work - it gives so many of us so much pleasure! It must really make you feel good!

[Dano]

BoB on the left, WoP on the right :)

http://stilettorevolt.com/2009/08/real-vs-fake-photoshopped-celebrities-before-after/

[Xilon_x]

basterebbe come punto di riferimento il-2 sturmovik 1946 e analizzare cosa manca cosa si puo' migliorare e cosa si puo' aggiungere come nuova idea ma soprattutto come puo' essere migliorata la giocabilita' online dato che tutto il mondo partecipa a un conflitto virtuale.
BoB dovrebbe esere un ottimo simulatore ma deve avere dei collegamenti che permettano di poterlo ulteriormente migliorare e sviluppare ne corso degli anni che verrano.
la cosa molto importante e che un aereo si comporti come un aereo e non come un ufo rispettando le leggi della fisica terrestre
bastano poche cose pochi aerei ma ignorare i comportamenti della fisica mi sembra sbagliato.
Ad esempio il-2 gli aerei che vanno sugli alberi non esplodono
gli incendi non si divagano i fumi vanno dritti verso l'alto un aereo incendiato che sta nel mare non si spegne ma sparisce.
questa e una mio pensiero sul nuovo simulatore non e' una critica so che OLEG MADDOX e un esperto e so che a lui piacciono molto gli aerei e il volo.
Grazie signor Oleg Maddox.



suffice as a point of reference at IL-2 Sturmovik 1946 and analyze what is missing something you can 'improve and what you can' add as a new idea but also how it can 'be improved gameplay' online as part of a worldwide virtual conflict.
BoB should exercise a great mortgage, but must have links that allow it to be further improved and developed it over the years to come.
The very important thing and that a plane behaves like a plane and not a UFO while respecting the laws of terrestrial physics
Just a few things a few planes but ignore the behavior of physics seems to me wrong.
For example, the-2 aircraft that are on the trees do not explode
fires are not amusing touches the fumes go straight to the top of an airplane that is burned into the sea off but not gone.
My thoughts on this and a new mortgage and do not 'know that a critical Oleg Maddox and an expert and I know him really like airplanes and flying.
Thank you, Mr. Oleg Maddox.

[Oleg Maddox]

basterebbe come punto di referimento il-2 sturmovik 1946 e analizzare cosa manca cosa si puo' migliorare e cosa si puo' aggiungere come nuova idea ma soprattutto come puo' essere migliorata la giocabilita' online dato che tutto il mondo partecipa a un conflitto virtuale.
BoB dovrebbe esere un ottimo simulatore ma deve avere dei collegamenti che permettano di poterlo ulteriormente migliorare e sviluppare ne corso degli anni che verrano.
la cosa molto importante e che un aereo si comporti come un aereo e non come un ufo rispettando le leggi della fisica terrestre
bastano poche cose pochi aerei ma ignorare i comportamenti della fisica mi sembra sbagliato.
Ad esempio il-2 gli aerei che vanno sugli alberi non esplodono
gli incendi non si divagano i fumi vanno dritti verso l'alto un aereo incendiato che sta nel mare non si spegne ma sparisce.
questa e una mio pensiero sul nuovo simulatore non e' una critica so che OLEG MADDOX e un esperto e so che a lui piacciono molto gli aerei e il volo.
Grazie signor Oleg Maddox.



suffice as a point of reference at IL-2 Sturmovik 1946 and analyze what is missing something you can 'improve and what you can' add as a new idea but also how it can 'be improved gameplay' online as part of a worldwide virtual conflict.
BoB should exercise a great mortgage, but must have links that allow it to be further improved and developed it over the years to come.
The very important thing and that a plane behaves like a plane and not a UFO while respecting the laws of terrestrial physics
Just a few things a few planes but ignore the behavior of physics seems to me wrong.
For example, the-2 aircraft that are on the trees do not explode
fires are not amusing touches the fumes go straight to the top of an airplane that is burned into the sea off but not gone.
My thoughts on this and a new mortgage and do not 'know that a critical Oleg Maddox and an expert and I know him really like airplanes and flying.
Thank you, Mr. Oleg Maddox.

3D Trees on the fields in original Il-2 are graphics features. That was done as a wish of users when the graphics cards were not able to render such things.
So they were done without clipping model especially.

Yes, In Il-2 is some things that look NOW not like we want (however let say that a fuel from aircraft in the sea may burn on the surface). And... with different difficulty settinmgs a lot of things in Il-2 changes in different aspects of the game. You should try maximized...

hard to understand electronic traslation....

[Oleg Maddox]

You tell 'em Oleg!! Hehe! I have no doubt that SoW will "set the bar" for many years to come.

Just something I need to ask you Oleg - I fear that it may already have been answered before ... if it has, I'm sorry!

It's the AI that SoW will have - in IL-2 one's squadron/section often/usually leaves one way behind in spite of one trying to maintain a gradual and reasonably fast ascent - not wanting to test the ol' Merlin too much before she overheats!!

In SoW will the AI and the individual player's airctaft be "closer" performance-wise. I understand that the AI in IL-2 was near-perfect (perfect trim etc) and that's why guys like me couldn't keep up!

Keep up the graet work - it gives so many of us so much pleasure! It must really make you feel good!

Can't tell you all details of AI. I would tell that it is more humanized in principle and doing very similar things to real things.

[Spudkopf]

How's the boy, is he feeling better yet has he lost his temperature?

[Oleg Maddox]

How's the boy, is he feeling better yet has he lost his temperature?

Its Ok, thanks, but I personally have no time at the moment to sit near him to play.
I just did for him several new simple missions where he can win with his entry level experience :).

[furbs]

Glad your boy is feeling better Oleg, how is moscow, getting cold yet?

And also...is there a chance of a sound update this week? :)

[Spudkopf]

Its Ok, thanks, but I personally have no time at the moment to sit near him to play.
I just did for him several new simple missions where he can win with his entry level experience :).

Good to hear that he is on the mend, as that is the most important thing. Thank you also for taking the time out of your busy schedule to chat as well as it is much appreciated.

[philip.ed]

Oleg, great speech, a tune of land-of-hope-and-glory in the background and it would be quite stirring.

Oleg; it's interesting what you say about the colours changing throughout the day.
have you ever looked into this, out of curiosity? ;)

http://www.windwardmark.net/products.php?page=windlight

[MD_Titus]

Oleg, I too, flew over England this year and Furbs' shot is an accurate representation of the colours of the English landscape. I am not trying to be rude, but have you flown over England? I think, perhaps, we may be able to judge the best. Obviously as you say a camera won't give a 100% accurate representation, but from experience I think those of us who live in the country can give a good idea of how it looked.
The colours currently shown for SoW suggest a spring-look, where the fields are quite a lush green. In the summer of 1940, it was one of the hottest summers' on record, and the fields would have had a burnished look.
I do understand your theories of colour though; it will differen between each PC, but this is just my observation ;)



Winny, there weren't rape-fields in England in 1940. I know you weren't saying there are, but I'm just pointing it out. It's interesting to compare a modern-day picture with one from 1940.

Yes I was in England say about 20 times and have a lot of my own photos, including from the air that I did myself.
zing!
Who said anything about no protection at all?

I am just saying, and many people will and do agree with me - that what RoF had at the beginning was a mistake. And the fact you have to pay for every additional plane? Thats just rubbish.

A bad decision like this can kill the sales. Just like it was with the last Silent Hunter. Fortunately for RoF players, they came to their senses and now the game can be played offline. I won't even go into 'the release without the dedicated server debacle'...
inclined to agree with you thor. the having to log in online to play aspect was a pita at first, but tbh i don't even notice it now. having said that, i have a reliable connection.

the pay per plane thing is, unless you manage to catch a deal weekend where they go for a couple of dollars, a mistake. i think there's an update bundle going for $90. for a game.

paid updates, with maps, missions and planes? fine

not single aircraft though.
Dear Xilon_x, if spaghetti not have the tomato is negative.
Tomatoes are important factor to Italian food.
EXAMPLE look of tomato.
SPAGHETTI not exist if not have Tomato.
Tomato cooked or raw.
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/5648/tomatolydecker.jpg (http://img217.imageshack.us/i/tomatolydecker.jpg/)

Spaghetti pot
http://img801.imageshack.us/img801/9153/pastapot300.jpg (http://img801.imageshack.us/i/pastapot300.jpg/)

oven control amount and intensity of heat.

**back to normal**

You just called Oleg Maddox an idiot! Not directly, but you just explained to a guy making a flight simulator that WIND IS IMPORTANT! Then you went on to explain that gliders need wind to fly. Maybe next you could tell him how to dress himself or tie his shoes. I'm sure he'd appreciate that as well.
except oleg's posts, this is the best in the thread.
http://www.condorsoaring.com/media/screenshots/scndr01.jpg

The clouds here look awesome.
seriously? cotton balls. the shading looks... overdone as well tbh, but is pretty good in comparison to say stock il2.
Its Ok, thanks, but I personally have no time at the moment to sit near him to play.
I just did for him several new simple missions where he can win with his entry level experience :).
glad he's on the mend, and the training regime goes on - maintain interest with gradual increase in difficulty is the best way.

[Richie]

A pretty good video to see...

A great looking G2
Pilot size for the 109 up close
Views of England from the air.


http://s1200.photobucket.com/albums/bb322/IIJG27Rich/?action=view&current=109andEngland.mp4

[furbs]

nice vid! and good view of fields of england :)

[Osprey]

Oleg, you have the patience of a saint in the way you handle some of these nonsensical questions. I eagerly await the release and in the meantime some more of your updates. Take your time and release when you are happy, it won't affect my purchase :)

And I'm surprised nobody said it in already but it's quite obvious that the SoW shot is better than the BoP one even though there is nothing to go on but that single shot. Are there some people here that have compound eyes?

[mazex]

Some more comparisons:

SoW:BoB - WIP 2010-10
http://img840.imageshack.us/img840/9885/bobcompare2.jpg
Battle of Britain II v 2.11
http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/6797/bob2comparev2.jpg
IL2
http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/3042/il2comparev2.jpg
Wings of Prey
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/6459/wopcomparev3.jpg

I vote for SoW:BoB even though it will surely get a better palette/shading etc. The important thing for me is that it's the only where the Hurricane can be mistaken for a real image, the other ones are not even close - and this is about aircraft - isn't it?

I hope image no 3 is ok here - it stands out as the least convincing to me so...

[peterwoods@supanet.com]

The picture below is a painting by well known aviation artist Nicolas Trudgian and is titled "Tangmere Hurricanes".
My scan does not do the colours of the original justice but that is not my purpose in posting here.

http://i646.photobucket.com/albums/uu181/2_Puff_Pete/Miscellaneous/TangmereHurricanes.jpg

There are various elements of the scenery which have been much discussed in this and other threads on this forum of late.

The aircraft are over-flying what was in 1940 a typical Sussex small town/large village railway station. The station is served by a single track line branching into two lines to serve the station's up and down platforms.
Two terminating sidings would have been used for all varities of freight for the local area, (very little freight was moved long distances by road in those days). The goods wagon (van) in the siding appears to be being unloaded with freight for the RAF, (although I have never seen an RAF vehicle marked in this manner, I suspect poetic/artistic licence in view of the subject matter).
The level crossing, which has already been closed behind the recently arrived passenger train, is typical of all contemporary road crossings of the railways in the UK.
The steam engine and three passenger carriages again are typical of Southern Railways branch lines at that time, main lines had a third, electricfied, rail.
The single deck Southdown Ltd bus is again typical of the time and it looks like "Olegs MG" is dropping off/collecting a passenger.
The wheat sheaves and the horse-drawn cart are also how it was done then.
The church with its Norman tower and the various houses are typical of the Sussex/South Downs countryside, as are the stone bridges carrying the railway and road across the small river and the rolling South Downs in the background.
All in all a perfect example of southern England scenery in 1940.

[Abbeville-Boy]

apples and oranges mazex

[furbs]

SOW wins on everything to me (apart from just the colour palette, that goes to battle of britain 2, but thats just my personal view)

[Abbeville-Boy]

The picture below is a painting by well known aviation artist Nicolas Trudgian and is titled "Tangmere Hurricanes".
My scan does not do the colours of the original justice but that is not my purpose in posting here.

http://i646.photobucket.com/albums/uu181/2_Puff_Pete/Miscellaneous/TangmereHurricanes.jpg

There are various elements of the scenery which have been much discussed in this and other threads on this forum of late.

The aircraft are over-flying what was in 1940 a typical Sussex small town/large village railway station. The station is served by a single track line branching into two lines to serve the station's up and down platforms.
Two terminating sidings would have been used for all varities of freight for the local area, (very little freight was moved long distances by road in those days). The goods wagon (van) in the siding appears to be being unloaded with freight for the RAF, (although I have never seen an RAF vehicle marked in this manner, I suspect poetic/artistic licence in view of the subject matter).
The level crossing, which has already been closed behind the recently arrived passenger train, is typical of all contemporary road crossings of the railways in the UK.
The steam engine and three passenger carriages again are typical of Southern Railways branch lines at that time, main lines had a third, electricfied, rail.
The single deck Southdown Ltd bus is again typical of the time and it looks like "Olegs MG" is dropping off/collecting a passenger.
The wheat sheaves and the horse-drawn cart are also how it was done then.
The church with its Norman tower and the various houses are typical of the Sussex/South Downs countryside, as are the stone bridges carrying the railway and road across the small river and the rolling South Downs in the background.
All in all a perfect example of southern England scenery in 1940.


i notice a singe track line entering

[mazex]

apples and oranges mazex

Be glad I did not put in a banana in form of CFS3 ;)

[peterwoods@supanet.com]

"i notice a singe track line entering" Abbeville-Boy

Track splits to two just to the right, ie before, the level crossing.

[ECV56_Lancelot]

SOW wins on everything to me (apart from just the colour palette, that goes to battle of britain 2, but thats just my personal view)

Mine too!

[Richie]

Someone put up CFS 3 just for laughs. It probably out sells everything else by 100 to 1 for some dumb reason

[Blakduk]

Does anyone who cares about flightsims still have CFS3 installed on their system? ;-)

[julien673]

lol no, but the campaign was close to SWOTL, i didn t like the one in il2... but its only the good part of cfs3

[Richie]

Here's a CFS3 Hurricane over what I do not know.

[mazex]

Fairness shall be done as CFS3 (aka the banana) has been requested into the fruit bowl ;)

SoW:BoB - WIP 2010-10
http://img840.imageshack.us/img840/9885/bobcompare2.jpg
Battle of Britain II v 2.11
http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/6797/bob2comparev2.jpg
IL2
http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/3042/il2comparev2.jpg
Wings of Prey
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/6459/wopcomparev3.jpg
CFS3 v 3.1a maxed out graphics
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/636/cfs3comparev1.jpg

Had to search long to find my CFS3 discs and sorry, there is no Hurricane in the orignal version so another Hawker will have to do...

Any more to add?

EDIT: Had to add that it was a nasty experience to have a go at the CFS3 FM again while positioning the Typhoon for the shot... Shudders...

[Xilon_x]

i prefer BOB is SUPER GRAPHIC.and good color.

[Gourmand]

Some more comparisons:

SoW:BoB - WIP 2010-10
http://img840.imageshack.us/img840/9885/bobcompare2.jpg
Battle of Britain II v 2.11
http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/6797/bob2comparev2.jpg
IL2
http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/3042/il2comparev2.jpg
Wings of Prey
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/6459/wopcomparev3.jpg

I vote for SoW:BoB even though it will surely get a better palette/shading etc. The important thing for me is that it's the only where the Hurricane can be mistaken for a real image, the other ones are not even close - and this is about aircraft - isn't it?

I hope image no 3 is ok here - it stands out as the least convincing to me so...
I am delighted that the graphics are beautiful and realistic, but for me what counts is the simulation and game-play, BoP is beautiful but still a bad play and bad management of the damage. that is why I no longer play a WoP and I play a IL-2 1946 ( i love landing too ) and I've waited impatiently WOP.

[Richie]

Fairness shall be done as CFS3 (aka the banana) has been requested into the fruit bowl ;)

SoW:BoB - WIP 2010-10
http://img840.imageshack.us/img840/9885/bobcompare2.jpg
Battle of Britain II v 2.11
http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/6797/bob2comparev2.jpg
IL2
http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/3042/il2comparev2.jpg
Wings of Prey
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/6459/wopcomparev3.jpg
CFS3 v 3.1a maxed out graphics
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/636/cfs3comparev1.jpg

Had to search long to find my CFS3 discs and sorry, there is no Hurricane in the orignal version so another Hawker will have to do...

Any more to add?

EDIT: Had to add that it was a nasty experience to have a go at the CFS3 FM again while positioning the Typhoon for the shot... Shudders...

I love this white tips on the horizontal stabs lol..Also the noses of the 109s in this sim always looked like they were missing their condoms. From the oil cooler to the spinner they were too long and the prop looked like it had a 50 foot arc.

[Dano]

Is there really any need to continue quoting the images repeatedly?

[KOM.Nausicaa]

@Mazex about CFS3:

Yes, if you compare stock games. (guess that was the intent)
But the CFS3 community (and they still exist, small but hardcore, to answer Blakduk) has modded the heck out of CFS3 in the past 7 years. CFS3, MAW, and OFF (which are based on CFS3) doesn't look like this anymore, not even by far.
But as far as go stock games, fair enough....but then it should be added that all those games are from different periods....

Coming back to the screenshots, in my opinion SOW looks best, even now, and I am sure that the terrain is far from being actually finished, or rendered in the final way, as I said earlier.

[=XIII=Shea]

thanks for the update oleg,did get to see it until now:)

[Qpassa]

no update today (yet)?

[Hecke]

i'm tense

[Gourmand]

this update was posted : 10-15-2010, 03:53 PM

so.. wait,... wait...

[Blackdog_kt]

Sorry to bump up a topic from previous pages when we're expecting the new update, but to be honest modelling thermals and ridge lift in a sufficiently accurate manner is already possible and done by freeware 3rd party applications for the MS flight sims.

To Xilon: Most of what you ask for is included in the description of a dynamic weather engine. Oleg said a lot of times in the past that SoW will have dynamic weather. Relax and don't worry so much :grin:

To the people shouting at Xilon: No, you don't need a supercomputer to run thermal, ridge and wave lift simulation in real time, as long as you are willing to maintain some approximations to cut down on the CPU load.

In FSX the stock thermals are simplified and ridge/wave lift needs you to specifically place "lift boxes" in the mission editor (aka they are not dynamic, they only work in pre-made missions). However, there are external tools that do all of it on the fly.

Some concessions still have to be made but on the whole it's pretty good. For example, the tool i'm familiar with places thermals in random cells around the map and uses a randomized atmosphere texture method, but it still manages to include thermal life cycles, thermal strength is dependant on time of day and season that the flight takes place, ridge lift depends on wind, there's also combined ridge and thermal lift when a ridge is heated by the sun and so on. And this is a freeware tool (recently a payware version with some extras was released, but the free one still works fine)...take a look here if you want, grab the download and have a brief read through the manual just to see what's possible with an external program: http://luerkens.homepage.t-online.de/peter/

If it's possible for FSX with all its shortcomings and in some cases shabby coding to do it by communicating with an external tool running on the background without any loss of frame rates, i'm willing to bet it's possible for SoW since it will be handled by a built-in part of the engine that's seamlessly "plugged-in" to the rest of the software.

[Redwan]

Thermals in BOB ? Do you think that Oleg will include a Standard Cirrus in the game ?

Or, technically speaking, If a had an enemy on my six and if I was flying around the inversion line (unfortunately, Oleg has never heard about the ‘inversion’ in aerial meteorology, phenomenon that forces the bases of cumulus to be flat like my ex-girlfriend – (but she had an ass like a cumulus ;-)), I think that I would try to fly under some cumulus. As they are the top of a thermal, maybe the turbulences they indicate could prevent the enemy from shooting … this is the only reason for thermals or ridge wind to be modeled in a combat flight simulation game.

By the way I would like to put in evidence the big lack of realism as far as clouds are concerned. The don’t look realistic at all ! Their look is unacceptable in a simulator that will be released in 2011-2012 !

Look at the difference of clouds in FSX and BoB ? Sometimes I wonder If Oleg has ever risen his eyes to watch the sky (although I now he is not a pilot and for a simple pedestrian admire a cloudy sky for hours is not a priority) ! For a guy who pretends to be a photographer and to focus on photorealism, he makes his game look like a cartoon or a painting from the impressionist period … everything but photorealistic !!!

Only the planes look good but the rest gives the impression of a simulator developed by some passionate guys but who don’t have a single idea of a way to make all this green salad look realistic.

In a flight simulator I don’t care if the ground doesn’t look so good seen from very low altitude because what is important in a Combat FLIGHT Sim (behalve the flight dynamics and shooting ballistics of course) is the realism of the sky and the clouds … ground and water must look photorealistic only from a certain altitude.

In BoB it’s the contrary! From close, things look good but on long range and landscape views it looks like a cartoon.

Look how some other products model the clouds.
1=BOB naïve cartoon clouds (I expect to see the plane of Mickey Mouse flying under)
2=FSX something more sophisticated.
It is clear that Microsoft had a real goal of photorealism but they had the capacity of a very large company and a shitload of devlopement teams to make it look good as the team of Oleg is too small, experience too thin, the budget too low and the time too short to produce something convincing.

http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/7344/bobfsx.jpg

Maybe Microsoft will produce a new version of it’s Famous CFS4 ? Even if they start to work on it from scratch now they might finish before B0B is released ;-)))))))))

Cheers

[winny]

Maybe Microsoft will produce a new version of it’s Famous CFS4 ? Even if they start to work on it from scratch now they might finish before B0B is released ;-)))))))))

Cheers

FSX uses photographs and only needs to be seen from one point of view... Multiplayer clouds are much more complex.

[NLS61]

the ‘inversion’ in aerial meteorology, phenomenon that forces the bases of cumulus to be flat Cheers

Sorry Redwan but that is incorrect the base of a cumulus seems to be flat
really it isn’t.
But from some distance the appearance is indeed flat.
This is because the rising ait has cooled so much it can no longer contain the moister in it which then condensates.
But the air still rises so the condensation also rises so creating an accumulation of condensate water on top of each other.
This forms the cumulus cloud.
Inversion is a thermal state of the atmosphere where the temperature rises with the altitude so effectively stopping air to rise.
Basically the dead of any thermal ;)

[Abbeville-Boy]

:grin:

[speculum jockey]

:grin:

I'm sure an out of engine sound file (wav,mp3,youtueb clip, etc.) is going to give us a really good idea what it will be like to play the game. :rolleyes:

How about Oleg posts whatever he wants and then you comment on it.

[Redwan]

Please don’t teach me the shape of a cumulus or about aerology. I’m a glider pilot for more that 15 years …

Photos taken a couple of days ago in flight over the south of Belgium.
The inversion is a straight line, clearly visible and all the cumulus’s are above. I have never seen this effect modeled in the BOB preview screen

Inversion at 1200 m.
Pictures taken at around 1000 m

From close you don’t see the shape but only mist:
http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/4988/85082710.jpg


But from far you can see the flat base:
http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/3721/33791683.jpg

To Winny: from which planet do you come dud ? You think that FSX is using photograph to model the clouds ? Nope, they are 3 D objects ! I think you make a naive confusion with ground textures.

FSX clouds: (for me the minimum quality of coulds that a sim of 2011 needs to have):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v73FuuP4NM8

I hate Microsoft and its commercial monopoly and I’m a fan of Il2 since it’s been out but now I have to say that I’m disappointed by the quality of BOB graphics. Although based on IL2, WOP looks much more professional.

I think that Oleg had a lot of success with IL2 because at that time people were not too demanding on graphics but in 2011 it’s another story and I’m afraid that good graphic environments are for professional companies and not for small teams’ like BOBs’ with small budgets … and no pilots (as graphic advisor) in the team.



http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/381/cheersk.jpg

Cheers.

[Flanker35M]

S!

With over 10 years with F18C and D I can say that in the FSX video that Hornet AB flame looks more wrong than forged money, literally CRAP. It does not act like that, be sure. IL-2 was ahead of it's time and could do things FS could only imagine of back then. Go figure.

[NLS61]

Please don’t teach me the shape of a cumulus or about aerology. I’m a glider pilot for more that 15 years …

Photos taken a couple of days ago in flight over the south of Belgium.
The inversion is a straight line, clearly visible and all the cumulus’s are above. I have never seen this effect modeled in the BOB preview screen

Inversion at 1200 m.
Pictures taken at around 1000 m

From close you don’t see the shape but only mist:
http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/4988/85082710.jpg


But from far you can see the flat base:
http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/3721/33791683.jpg

To Winny: from which planet do you come dud ? You think that FSX is using photograph to model the clouds ? Nope, they are 3 D objects ! I think you make a naive confusion with ground textures.

FSX clouds: (for me the minimum quality of coulds that a sim of 2011 needs to have):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v73FuuP4NM8

I hate Microsoft and its commercial monopoly and I’m a fan of Il2 since it’s been out but now I have to say that I’m disappointed by the quality of BOB graphics. Although based on IL2, WOP looks much more professional.

I think that Oleg had a lot of success with IL2 because at that time people were not too demanding on graphics but in 2011 it’s another story and I’m afraid that good graphic environments are for professional companies and not for small teams’ like BOBs’ with small budgets … and no pilots (as graphic advisor) in the team.



http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/381/cheersk.jpg

Cheers.

Sorry then

but it is normally my function to just that as I am a gliding instructor on our national gliding centre at Terlet the Netherlands.

so to keep in style :)

A temperature inversion is a thin layer of the atmosphere where the decrease in temperature with height is much less than normal (or in extreme cases, the temperature increases with height). An inversion, also called a "stable" air layer, acts like a lid, keeping normal convective overturning of the atmosphere from penetrating through the inversion. This can cause several weather-related effects. One is the trapping of pollutants below the inversion, allowing them to build up. If the sky is very hazy, or is sunsets are very red, there is likely an inversion somewhere in the lower atmosphere. This happens more frequently in high pressure zones, where the gradual sinking of air in the high pressure dome typically causes an inversion to form at the base of a sinking layer of air. Another effect is making clouds spread out and take on a flattened appearance. Still another effect is to prevent thunderstorms from forming. Even in an air mass that is hot and humid in the lowest layers, thunderstorms will be prevented if an inversion is keeping this air from rising. The opposite of a temperature inversion is an unstable air layer.

and here is a link to the page where i found this exerpt.

http://www.weatherquestions.com/What_is_a_temperature_inversion.htm


actually i see now that the drawing on the linked page is not an inversion but more like a isotherm for it to be a inversion the temp line should go to the right indicating an actual rise in temperature with increasing altitude

And I dont say it is impossible to have thermals below an inversion.
I am saying that an inversion cant be the reason the bottom af a culumus is flat.
It can how ever be the reason for their tops to be flattend.

http://www.twin-astir.nl/

Cheers,

Niels

[Spudkopf]

Not really wishing to continue this whole ground textures debate, however I was looking through one of my Ju-52 reference books when I came across a 1/2 dozen or so postcards that I forgot that I had, I purchased these a few years back after having the great privilege to go on a Ju-Air flight.

One of these post cards in particular caught my eye and I just had to scan it and post it here, if you can ignore the rape-seed crops you may notice another distinctive crop colour, that apparently does not exist?

http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l116/305th/purplecrop25.jpg

Yes I know it’s a fairly modern image, but I felt it may be relevant none the less, flame-on kiddies.

[Trumper]

:) I wonder if Oleg has seen the development for ROF
http://riseofflight.com/Blogs/default.aspx

[Redwan]

Sorry then

but it is normally my function to just that as I am a gliding instructor on our national gliding centre at Terlet the Netherlands.

so to keep in style :)

A temperature inversion is a thin layer of the atmosphere where the decrease in temperature with height is much less than normal (or in extreme cases, the temperature increases with height). An inversion, also called a "stable" air layer, acts like a lid, keeping normal convective overturning of the atmosphere from penetrating through the inversion. This can cause several weather-related effects. One is the trapping of pollutants below the inversion, allowing them to build up. If the sky is very hazy, or is sunsets are very red, there is likely an inversion somewhere in the lower atmosphere. This happens more frequently in high pressure zones, where the gradual sinking of air in the high pressure dome typically causes an inversion to form at the base of a sinking layer of air. Another effect is making clouds spread out and take on a flattened appearance. Still another effect is to prevent thunderstorms from forming. Even in an air mass that is hot and humid in the lowest layers, thunderstorms will be prevented if an inversion is keeping this air from rising. The opposite of a temperature inversion is an unstable air layer.

and here is a link to the page where i found this exerpt.

http://www.weatherquestions.com/What_is_a_temperature_inversion.htm


actually i see now that the drawing on the linked page is not an inversion but more like a isotherm for it to be a inversion the temp line should go to the right indicating an actual rise in temperature with increasing altitude

And I dont say it is impossible to have thermals below an inversion.
I am saying that an inversion cant be the reason the bottom af a culumus is flat.
It can how ever be the reason for their tops to be flattend.

http://www.twin-astir.nl/

Cheers,

Niels

"And I dont say it is impossible to have thermals below an inversion" ????

The termals occurs only under the inversion line !!! How could a glider pilot cannot say such a nonsense .... and the story about cumulus with flat tops is very funny too ;-))) Never saw that before ....

... I think that you have just learned what you know about inversion on the link that you posted ;-))))

Anyway, I d'dn't need a link for noobs to learn about inversion (I perfectly know what it is) but I just wanted to say that FSX is much better in the cloud modeling than the BOB.

[winny]

Please don’t teach me the shape of a cumulus or about aerology. I’m a glider pilot for more that 15 years …

To Winny: from which planet do you come dud ? You think that FSX is using photograph to model the clouds ? Nope, they are 3 D objects ! I think you make a naive confusion with ground textures.



Funnily enough I'm from Earth and I'm not confusing ground textures with clouds, nor am I naive, (wrong maybe but not naive). And you side stepped the bit about needing the clouds to be viewable by more than one player at a time, which I believe is harder to do than the FSX version.

You however, are full of your own self importance as is obvious by your 'look at me I'm a glider pilot so I know more than you about computer games" attitude. So I'll leave you to argue about your glider nonsense and I'll carry on waiting for SoW. You're obviously an expert.

[philip.ed]

Hmm, what an interesting discussion.

He is right about the clouds Winny; scientifically mostly all clouds will form with some type of flat-cloud-base for reasons I outlined in an earlier discussion topic. This seems to be missing at the moment from SoW.

However, Redwan, although FSX uses a 'type' of 3-d cloud system, they use 2-d textures. Consequently, the whole cloud is covered by this one texture. Consequently, as you move, so does the texture, meaning that the whole cloud looks the same from basically every angle. Consequently, FSK is not as advanced as one might think ;)

SoW is going to be completely different and far more complicated. Conversely though, a model change doesn't sound that hard, as all that's needed is for SoW's clouds to have flat-bottom and more defined shadows ;)

[robtek]

Just to say it again in case somebody missed it:

The flat cloud base is the result of the temperature drop with increasing height
and marks the limit where the cooling, ascending air can't hold the humidity it contains
any longer.

[GOZR]

Me flying
http://i426.photobucket.com/albums/pp344/GOZR/DSC_0039.jpg
http://i426.photobucket.com/albums/pp344/GOZR/DSC_0024.jpg
http://i426.photobucket.com/albums/pp344/GOZR/DSC_0023.jpg
http://i426.photobucket.com/albums/pp344/GOZR/DSC_0016colors.jpg
http://i426.photobucket.com/albums/pp344/GOZR/Yak903firstflightTEST.jpg
Me flying the Yak-9 #03
http://i426.photobucket.com/albums/pp344/GOZR/JFyak903.jpg
In 1993- with our famous screw driver on hand (long story ;) )
http://i426.photobucket.com/albums/pp344/GOZR/DSC_0344.jpg
Flying in pair 2010
http://i426.photobucket.com/albums/pp344/GOZR/DSC_0158-copy.jpg

My little one :) last week//
http://i426.photobucket.com/albums/pp344/GOZR/LiamLVK.jpg

[Chivas]

It's interesting that people can say that FSX clouds are better than BOB's when we haven't yet seen all of BOB's clouds due to bug fixing.

[NLS61]

"And I dont say it is impossible to have thermals below an inversion" ????

The termals occurs only under the inversion line !!! How could a glider pilot cannot say such a nonsense .... and the story about cumulus with flat tops is very funny too ;-))) Never saw that before ....

... I think that you have just learned what you know about inversion on the link that you posted ;-))))

Anyway, I d'dn't need a link for noobs to learn about inversion (I perfectly know what it is) but I just wanted to say that FSX is much better in the cloud modeling than the BOB.

Oh man you are a hard head.
Think what you think my friend it is of no importance to the truth.
And it is even better to not think but know.
And please relearn your meteo.

Happy landings

[Blackdog_kt]

Ok, just to clear up some widespread misconceptions.

The default FSX clouds are volumetric and 3D.

Redwan, the video you posted is not about default FSX clouds. It's about modified, non-default clouds that are part of a 3rd party payware add-on (real environment extreme). These are NOT advanced computer generated 3d clouds, they are photos of real clouds imported into the game.

[Richie]

It's interesting that people can say that FSX clouds are better than BOB's when we haven't yet seen all of BOB's clouds due to bug fixing.


I don't know why they even compare the two but the again I have a slight hatred for Microsoft sims lol