![]() |
You guys only talk about remove it, don't put it and etc.
Think big, this is a free world - make it switcheable, then everyone's happy. And, guys, for heaven's sake, stop thinking you know more about flying than the devs do. I don't remember where I saw it, but if I remember correctly, Oleg was (is?) a pilot himself, so I'm pretty sure he knows how does it work. The Storm of War x Wings of Prey debate is pointless. Two different approaches, with different public as well. While one tries to make graphics look only realistic, without making it too fancy, the other introduce a rather darker atmosphere, that gives a sort of dramatic feeling to it, and calls for more action. Would be interest to have both as an option, though. However, I'm not sure if it fits Maddox Games' general idea for Storm of War to have unrealistic eye-candies just because they give a nice movie-style feeling to the whole thing. I won't go any further because this is a thread dedicated to the updates, and not whining and another WoP debate which will end with WoP guys defending it blindly and the rest flaming it completely. Also, people like to point to the devs that 2+2=4 and etc. without even reading the Q&A on the requests thread. Most things people complain and ask about have been explained more than a hundred times by the poor developers. They know how it should look, trust me. Got a bit immersed in the rant and forgot to comment on the update! Ilya, the screenshots are amazing. Nice look from the BR.20 cockpit. The Lorenz looks very nice (curiously, it's different than Team Daidalos one for Il-2). The detail on ships sometimes make me wonder if this is a new Silent Hunter or a flight simulator. Truly amazing. The water looks very nice. Now where's my life-jacket? Now Ilya, let's admit it: MuxaHuk totally stole your thunder this time. And, hell, he should do it more often! Unpolished or anything you want to call it, that's still a piece of art! Very pleasant sensation of being in a smooth level flight... and then jumping to a hardcore roller-coaster. Really, really nice. I can't get tired of seeing that Spitfire cockpit. Absolutely perfect. And yes, unfortunately (:mrgreen:), you'll probably have to feed us with some moving action more often |
Quote:
I was saying that it was not a surprise that the shadows were moving. Not that I didn't see them moving. :lol: Like the movie said to us: "Hey look... moving shadows!" And I go: "Oh nice... but I didn't think they were just painted on in the screenshots" Sorry again for the confusing exprimation. @virre89 I am not disrespectful at all... you are just too touchy. I don't know if you are part of the Maddox team but I'd expect one of the team members to be not too pleased with my comments and I wish my words will be taken just as a critique from a singular point of view... my own. If it helps pointing some areas of things that should be in focus for development updates, improvements or final release... I'd be happy it helped. But if you are not part of the team... then your reaction is just "fanboyism" and I think is very dangerous for a team to listen only praises. |
Quite frankly, I don't see a problem with the water in this game. From the air it looks just fine. Again, there is an issue of visual range. In SH the water is nice, but I noticed in their videos that the waves start to repeat and form a "quilt" pattern after less than a mile. This is fine if the camera is at the surface, which is 99% of the time in SH.
A flight sim has to render water waves which should not have a visible pattern for maybe 10 miles at least. So, in the same way that ground textures will not appear in a flight sim the way they do in a FPS, so too will the water. The visual representation of the shaking is maybe much. As has been said, there is a dampening effect because of our biology. It should be felt, not seen, but that is impossible to do for a computer game. My suggestion, would be to have shaking of loose items (like the canopy pull handle) while dampening the camera vibrations. Save for the vibrations, I would say the movement of the head was very realistic. There's obviously compression into the seat from G's and it goes side to side while making hard banks. Very nice. However, I noticed a bug with your gunsight. It seems to show a hard horizon and brown color above. http://i970.photobucket.com/albums/a...pitfireavi.jpg I would imagine that because of this the gunsight is more than just a texture. So, will it be refracting light? The clouds look good. I would like to know of there will be a greater variety of shapes besides the "cotton balls" that show up after a rainy day. Will there be changes in thickness (up and down)? Will there be a possibility of seeing a towering cumulonimbus maturing into the anvil shape? Will there be multiple layers? Will high altitude clouds also change, or are they bound with the map as in Il-2? |
Quote:
I second Zealu's points. Seeing that video, i know it is beta, but anyone but fanboy can see and speak what doesn't look right. Self shadow is gorgeous and poly count is impressive but cloud and water is that of il-2. How about coop with gaijin entertainment guys.(kidding, that would be impossible) Their flight game is no where close to il-2 in sim aspect but did outstanding job in graphic, atmosphere, and clouds. (Behold overcast clouds in wop) I know you're busy, but I appreciate you taking the time to play WoP and find what is missing in il-2 and BOB beta video. Writing it on phone so plz bear my spells. |
Quote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xasBd...eature=related |
Quote:
|
[QUOTE=Romanator21;138939]
.... The visual representation of the shaking is maybe much. As has been said, there is a dampening effect because of our biology. It should be felt, not seen, but that is impossible to do for a computer game. .... ....However, I noticed a bug with your gunsight. It seems to show a hard horizon and brown color above. http://i970.photobucket.com/albums/a...pitfireavi.jpg QUOTE] I think Ilya maybe forgot that Spitfires don't have combat flaps, and they got stuck..it looks like the sort of buffetting you get with (stuck) full flaps to me. The gunsight is slightly shaded/tinted I think, or polarized maybe (I know some aircraft in WWII had polarized gunsights) - so the sky can look darker through them, and reflections are cut from the shine on the sea. Great video 1C!!!!! We want more :-) |
Quote:
|
Quote:
You really shouldn't act like some kind of expert when you obviously don't know your subject matter. The reflector sight optics are designed to stay put while your head shakes and moves about. Watch this demonstration on youtube if you need proof. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXsVg8F91t8 I think there are more constructive ways of making your point without resorting to that kind of blunt attack packed full of negativity. That video was a materpiece and it isn't even finished yet. There's just no pleasing some folk.:roll: And no, I'm no fanboy...just someone who believes in giving credit where credit is due. |
Yeah, Zaelu definitely got his looong analysis of a reflector gunsight dead wrong. And the thing about the shadows, but he went back on that, it seems. But he's not short on self-confidence when it comes to "giving the team advice" so that's excellent! :-)
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 10:14 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.