3/21/08 update from Oleg [Archive] - Official Fulqrum Publishing forum

ElAurens

03-22-2008, 03:33 PM

I swear I saw pictures like that a couple of years ago. Quite bored by the whole vaporware BoB pipe dream these days. The only fun to be had from it is to poke the carcass with a stick now and again.

Another "doom and gloom" post from Feathered_IV.

I'd suggest going back on your meds. Seriously.

You are really gonna look foolish when BoB is released.

Bearcat

03-22-2008, 03:40 PM

I swear I saw pictures like that a couple of years ago. Quite bored by the whole vaporware BoB pipe dream these days. The only fun to be had from it is to poke the carcass with a stick now and again.

Well if that's your idea of fun..... I just don't understand where this notion that BoB is not forthcoming is coming from at all... jjst because we don't get weekly updates about it's progress..... I cant help but be floored by people who have thatattitude considering the proven history with IL2.

bhunter2112

03-22-2008, 04:41 PM

Well in his defence..... the release date was for Nov 2006 and I beleive that appeared on the bonus DVD didn't it?, I don't want to dig it out.

This game needs a web site and updates- bi monthly would be fine! and by that I mean videos.

The gauges in the current update were nice at least it shows a "game feature"

Robert

03-22-2008, 04:51 PM

Well if that's your idea of fun..... I just don't understand where this notion that BoB is not forthcoming is coming from at all... jjst because we don't get weekly updates about it's progress..... I cant help but be floored by people who have thatattitude considering the proven history with IL2.

How can you be floored by people with the above attitude considering THEIR proven history of whining wiith IL2? There's no difference today than there was six years ago.

Merell

03-22-2008, 05:31 PM

Well in his defence..... the release date was for Nov 2006 and I beleive that appeared on the bonus DVD didn't it?, I don't want to dig it out.

Well being the release date for 1946 WAS Nov 2006 I highly doubt that it says BOB would be released that same month.

Former_Older

03-22-2008, 06:04 PM

I swear I saw pictures like that a couple of years ago. Quite bored by the whole vaporware BoB pipe dream these days. The only fun to be had from it is to poke the carcass with a stick now and again.

Hi

vaporware is a project that gets hype and no progress, until it's abandoned

SoW has hype, and obviously shows progress periodically, and obviously isn't abandoned.

Unless of course you feel that Oleg spends his free time building this illusion so he can fool us all. I guess that's possible, but it seems unreasonable to me that the man would generate all these fraudulent update pics or use stuff he's had in reserve for years just to string you or me along.

But anyway, I can't understand how you call this "vaporware", in a thread that has an update. I can understand why you're disappointed by the slow progress, as we all are, but surely you have been around long enough (I know you have, very well, believe me) to know what happens with projects from Oleg- every one in Il2 has been completed. We got 1946, we got Pe-2 and we got SoM- and we weren't supposed to

So it's hard for me to look at that track record of always delivering, and then agree with your accusation that SoW is "vaporware"

I wish it would get finished too, but I think I'm a touch more objective than you are...in the meantime, I've got Corsairs and P-40s to skin!

Merell

03-22-2008, 06:10 PM

Just finished watching both the first release and the US version of the bonus disc for 1946. The video of BOB clearly states Work in Progress pre-alpha version. There is no mention of BOB being relased in 2006 in fact there is no mention of a relase date for it at all.

Avimimus

03-22-2008, 07:43 PM

I think I just fell in love with the Do-17...

Skarphol

03-22-2008, 09:42 PM

I think the pictures are nice.
But they are not really showing much progress.
If you compare the ingame Bf-110C-4 from IL-2, its fairly similar to the upcoming Bf-110..

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y1/Skarphol/Bf-110C-4IL-21946.jpg

http://files.games.1c.ru/il2pict/Bf-110C-4_05.jpg

I realize for sure that the numbers of polygons has raised considerably, especially on the enginecowlings.

Skarphol

*Buzzsaw*

03-23-2008, 03:04 AM

Salute

For those naysayers: TALK IS CHEAP WHEN YOU HAVE NOTHING ON THE LINE

Oleg is the one who delivers on his promises. He HAS the track record, he doesn't need to shoot his mouth off.

For Skarphol:

You've got to be kidding... If you think the BoB preview of the 110 looks the same as the IL-2 version, then you probably should go get an eyeglass prescription. :D

SlipBall

03-23-2008, 07:22 AM

Thanks for the update, all looking good

Skarphol

03-23-2008, 07:27 AM

Salute

For Skarphol:

You've got to be kidding... If you think the BoB preview of the 110 looks the same as the IL-2 version, then you probably should go get an eyeglass prescription. :D

Well, I have, and I was wearing my contacts when I wrote that post!!
Anyway, that was late last night. I've been looking at the pictures a few times today, and i realize that the polygons are very visible on the IL-2 picture, while they are not visible at all in the SOW:BOB-picture..
But these two pictures are supposed to be around 8 years of gaming development apart. And to me, that is not that obvious. Then again, I guess the great leaps of gaming development do not lay in the plane models themselves, but all the other stuff. And on that development, Oleg is keeping his cards close to his chest.

Skarphol

Robert

03-23-2008, 07:43 AM

Don't forget the IL2 version has lighting effects. The BoB version doesn't. That makes a difference too.

Friendly_flyer

03-23-2008, 11:32 AM

Well Skarphol, it's supposed to be the same aircraft, so if they look alike it should hardly come as a surprise. The differences is in the amount of detail. Note the flacking on the the latter (which is dynamic, mind you!), the lighting and reflexes and small details in the cockpit and spinner tips. Eye-candy it may be, but I don't mind eye-candy at all!

The shark-mouth marking is a neat detail. As far as I know, it is from a machine stationed at Herdla, Norway. I'm fairly sure this is a unit in-game marking, not the default for the 110's. Note that the marking is below the "panels and lines" layer. This is a radical new way of applying textures to the planes.

csThor

03-23-2008, 12:00 PM

Err .. what do people expect when they see a SoW 110 as opposed an Il-2 110? A new aircraft? A major re-design? :confused:

As others said in this stage (WiP Shot from 3DS Max) the only noticeable things result from 3D Model differences. The SoW 110 shows clearly an evolution regarding details (e.g. holes in the fuselage for the MG 17 in the bow), but the "bells and whistles" of the GFX engine are just not there so a true comparison is not yet possible. BTW anyone realized that the RLM 70/71 110 from SoW carries an ETC underneath the fuselage? That would make it a C-4/b ;)
I severely hope that Maddox Games enhances the 3D Models in that way, that the necessary attachments for droppable armament (bombs etc) are always there. There are more than a few examples of a missing bomb rack in Il-2.

Fighterduck

03-23-2008, 01:04 PM

and then again, is WiP and they are only screenshots. Personally i think, ok you can see improvements from pics, but the real diference will only appear in "moving machines", So, ill wait for some updated ingame videos, when they will be done ^^ ...im patient and i trust Oleg team, never faild till now. So no worries for me.

Avimimus

03-23-2008, 03:18 PM

Well, I have, and I was wearing my contacts when I wrote that post!!
Anyway, that was late last night. I've been looking at the pictures a few times today, and i realize that the polygons are very visible on the IL-2 picture, while they are not visible at all in the SOW:BOB-picture..
But these two pictures are supposed to be around 8 years of gaming development apart. And to me, that is not that obvious. Then again, I guess the great leaps of gaming development do not lay in the plane models themselves, but all the other stuff. And on that development, Oleg is keeping his cards close to his chest.

Skarphol

It will look better in the engine. Furthermore, most of the improvements will be in other areas than the aircraft 3d models.

If anything, this just shows that, if eight years of technical and technological development doesn`t produce obvious changes, we are nearing the pen-ultimate sim. Its too bad that deformations and bending of components isn`t going to be widely modelled, though.

Woody01

03-25-2008, 09:41 AM

I'm perfectly happy not to see updates, I can think of more than a sim or 2 through history that neglected the real work of programming a sim to please a hungry target audience with videos, the sims never got completed by there original designer. IL2 is the bench mark for anyone I think.

I hope there is more planed for the awesome British isles maps that have to be created for the Battle of Britain, I feel confident that soon enough we will be embarking on missions into Europe in all manner of Aircraft, including the ones we cant fly now but desperately want too.

Oleg and team have delivered far more than they ever set out to deliver so far, cant we just get on with testing 4.09b?

Feuerfalke

03-25-2008, 10:57 AM

I feel my point being somewhat supported by Skarphol's post.

Begging, demanding or "threatening" Oleg to post new pictures or videos does in no regard help the effort to advertise the game to the common user:

There are many people out there who have little insight in the programming and development depth of flightsim-programming or even little experience in the IL2-series, people who just look at the pictures and see an ugly-lit still of a 3D-modell with partially high fidelity textures, while other parts of the same plane are textured with extensive use of softners.

Honestly, from some pictures alone, there are a lot better detailed and more realistically skinned 3D-modells on the modding boards for LockOn and Falcon4 than this. Neither of them will have the high fidelity flight-dynamics, internal modelling and sophisticated simulation of damaged aircraft-parts or G-stress doing further damage and all the other things we will have in BoB, of course.

But exactly that background is needed to see the real magnitude of quality and experience in these updates and that is not guaranteed for everybody looking at this board.

I just think people should do a little more thinking before demanding something or feeling personally offended by the lack of news or something like that. ;)

Zoom2136

03-25-2008, 01:51 PM

LEXX

03-25-2008, 03:00 PM

Avimus:: If anything, this just shows that, if eight years of technical and technological development doesn`t produce obvious changes, we are nearing the pen-ultimate sim. Its too bad that deformations and bending of components isn`t going to be widely modelled, though.
In the working sim it may look better, but you are touching on something very interesting -- the possibility of seeing logarithmic return of higher and higher polygon numbers in aircraft modelling. In flight simmer words, that means we may reach a time when piling on more polygons fails to visibly increase gaming immersion. Once you reach so many polygons, a high polygon Bf-110 at 100 meters looks the same as an infinite or "ideal/perfect" polygon Bf-110 at 100 meters.

As for static screenshot competition between The Sims developers and their 3D artists, aircraft polygons and the development resources they devour can go to infinity and beyond.

Roy

03-25-2008, 10:22 PM

Avimus::
In the working sim it may look better, but you are touching on something very interesting -- the possibility of seeing logarithmic return of higher and higher polygon numbers in aircraft modelling. In flight simmer words, that means we may reach a time when piling on more polygons fails to visibly increase gaming immersion. Once you reach so many polygons, a high polygon Bf-110 at 100 meters looks the same as an infinite or "ideal/perfect" polygon Bf-110 at 100 meters.

As for static screenshot competition between The Sims developers and their 3D artists, aircraft polygons and the development resources they devour can go to infinity and beyond.

This is true, and it will eventually reach that point (unless they hop from polygons to something else), although screen res will lessen that effect. I'm sure that IL2's bf110 and bob:sow's bf110 would look almost the same at 100m at 640x480, save the effects each game can add to them of course; at 1920x1200 that's a different story though.