Awesome!
 

Take your time Oleg, deep down i think we all want the best possible sim for its time. Btw 109 pit is FANTASTIC! Thank you.

Thanks,

Great overview. The Lesson screen cought my attention. I'm a bit curious how she will handle.

The thing that stands out in the cockpit is of course the reflections in the glass of the instruments. And in that, the thing to stand out the most is that the plane crew (well yes, only a one person crew) is missing.

1. Are these reflections real time calculated, or are they an environment map? Or a combination?

The propellers are rendered well now in screen shots (with motion blur). I can't see it in the 109 cockpit view, but I am sure it is fine.

In past images, a 'glow' artifact could be seen on the aircraft in many circumstances. I have seen this type of effect in so many games since I don't know how long ago. Even now it is common to see. The shaders can create them (the blue sky reflection on the wings). The glow can look unrealistic and strange. But it seems to be more under control now. Maybe they have been tweaked. Or maybe it is about the resolution and AA.

Shadow vs sunlight contrast ratio: In the cockpit view the shadow area (that is lit by the ambient light) is not much darker than the sun + ambient light lit areas. In reality it feels more sharp to my eyes. But maybe this is because the renderer has not been tuned to deliver an 'experience' suitable for a certain dynamic range monitor but instead the range of the human eye. Then it would solve itself by just using a display that is set to high enough brightness and contrast. I prefer this solution if that is how it is.

____

Does anyone know how the Luftwaffe pilots (109, 110) carried their maps, and how these maps looked like? I'm interested in getting something comparable when flying to more closely replicate how piloting was like for them. (Getting printable versions or pre-made nice quality ones bundled with the game would be most welcome).

Also, in the case of the Bf 110, did the pilot do everything except rearward gunning and reloading the weapons, or did the bordfunker help out with more duties, such as navigation and radio?

there is just no AA in Oleg's shot.;)

great screenies Mr.Oleg. fantastic work. just something that bothers me ever so slightly. The planes Skin texture. In real life you have this spot on. they really do look like that. (spitfire at least) please dont take offense here because its only my humble opinion and if you where to release the plane skins as they were then that would be fine. But the 109 and the wellington look very "flat and plastikky"in certain parts is this WIP? is so i`ll shut up and retire to my stone...here is a picture of the Wellington i found to back up my concerns.


http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d7...el/welling.jpg
note the texture of the fuselage.more promenant on stretched fabric. Is this going to be like in il2 that can be fixed by our fantastic skinners?. Looking back you seem to have this rippled texture sorted for the tiger moth`s wings.
Again my aplogies if im being over critical.

That's excactly why I'm asking ;)

do you really think they wouldn't be? You can tell they are by the reflection of the sun and clouds etc they are in fact real time traced

I think it is a very much higher poly-count model. FSX doesn't need to calculate AI manoeuvres and tactics, have as many aircraft in the air, calculate bullet trajectories, etc. so it can accommodate better models and still keep a high frame rate.

I remember when this B25 came out for FS2004. http://www.maam.org/flightsim/PACKAGES/BT.htm It was so much better than anything that could have been flown in FB.

I am hoping that we will see very high poly count aircraft available for SoW from third parties...I would be willing to fly them non combat if that was what was necessary.

I suspect that it will only be a few years before we will see updates with very high poly-count default aircraft like the one you posted in the game. Hopefully there will be lots of modellers out there trying to improve on the default models. After all, they would only have to make the exterior, the rest is already done!!

Thanks MS, that's what I thought but I don't understand enough to really jugde. And it's probably not only the number of polys, it seems to be also the texture and the bump-map size. I'm just not sure what is the most important piece in the puzzle and if the appearence of the SOW models will significantly improve with AA and other display settings.

But I don't think that all the physics calculations are the reason for the (relatively) low poly models since they are taken care of by the CPU.

You've also got to consider texture size, ground object density, and the fact that FSX doesn't really NEED a consistent 30fps+ framerate to be playable in addition to the things major_setback mentioned, and you've got probably the whole list. :) Completely different specification for models needed. I agree that the screenies could really use some AA, though.

@Mysticpuma and Tbag:

I do 3D modelling myself and there is no visual improvement between the SoW models that have been shown and that B-17, at all. At least from a polycount point of view. Every poly more than the SoW models have is a waste and pretty much inefficient.

As for the textures, take a look at this shot of the B-17:

http://www.a2asimulations.com/wingso...eenshots/4.jpg

Without the polished finished it actually looks rather dreary compared to the SoW models.

Besides, why would you want to absolve a combat simulator from its very purpose, simulating combat, just to look at a plane model, which you could do better in an environment like FSX? That doesn't makesense to me at all.

Will we be able to open the sliding sections of the 109 canopy? May give a slightly better view to the front.

Cheers!

LOVE THOSE PICS.. EXCELLENT!! Thank you very much for the up dates, looking forward to the release.

Quoted for truth.

Well said.

Don't you like to model Bombs with lots of polys? :P

Judging by your last comment you wouldn't mind to stick to the graphics of IL2 and only improve the physics. I don't believe that you really mean that. Furthermore, you can do as much 3D modelling as you like but if you can't see a visual improvement between the different models (SoW and A2A) you must be somewhat blind. Just look at the nose section of the 109 or the engine cowlings of the Ju88 or Wellington - lots of ugly(ish) edges.

Now don't get me wrong: I can appreciate that there is a tradeoff between graphics and physics modelling and I'm happy with the SoW 3D models that we've seen so far. I'd just be a little happier if they looked more like that A2A B17. :)

The way this sim is coming together is simply BRILLIANT!
I love the details such as the individual damage modelling of the prop blades, and the 109 cockpit looks almost too good to be true.
What's really exciting for me is the view of the furball near the coast with the 109 about to dive in.
I can hardly wait to see a video from inside the cockpit of a plane diving through clouds- one thing i believe IL2 didn't do well was the transparency of clouds when going through them. In IL2 you only have to touch the edge of a cloud and you're blinded- i hope this new engine manages it better.
You're raising the standard for all other games/sims Oleg- well done.... and keep going!

I only increased the polygon count to a pount where there was no gain for overall quality beyond it, just like the SoW models. It is easy to throw around with polys, but there is no real gain in the longrun to do it just because you can.

Besides, where are those ugly edges on the Bf109 cowling? I can't see any. All I can make out are rough contours due to the lack of AA.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...8&d=1274690208

All the little bumps and the air filter, they don't blend in with the rest of the model but have a very sharp "edge" where you can count the polys. Also, the parts of the aircraft that you can see from within the cockpit look rather crude compared to the A2A models.

Mmmmmhmmm! My re-introduction to WWII flight sims will be an epic one...no doubt.

Outstanding work to the team!

Oleg - it is good to see your personal updates again with some regularity - like you used to do in il2 days...

Is SoW going to use open GL or DX12 for rendering?

will we be able to adjust things like gamma correction in the game GUI, just as in Rise of Flight? and will there be other items like they call 'post effects' ?

Since there was so much complaining by fans in il2 days regarding 'muzzle flash' and engine 'lawnmower' sounds and MG sounds - have you considered making those effects adjustable in the game (maybe by use of a slider to increase/decrease the visual or audio depth) within the GUI ?

thank you for continuing to work on PC combat flight simulations - I think I can speak for many when I say we are fortunate to have you and your tremendous dedication (and whole team @ Maddox as well)...

Is Ilya (Luthier) still with you and is there still a Korean era flight sim in the works?

The SOW game engine will be DX 9, 10, and 11. I'm sure if Oleg still plans to make SOW into a complete series over the next 10+ years it will also be able to migrate to DX12, and beyond.

Luthier is still working with Oleg. I know Luthier stopped working on the Korean sim for the time being to help Oleg complete BOB.

wonderful.

eagerly looking forward to get my hands on this little gem.

and money is already put aside for beefier video / memory / cpu, not to mention control sticks and throttles.

not to mention the compass glass in the 109 is curved.

not just a flat bitmap over animated needles.

excellent.

yes http://www.a2asimulations.com/wingso...eenshots/4.jpg

good model good cockpit clikable but FSX not is WAR SIMULATOR BUT CIVIL SIMULATOR non exist combat flight simulator X

They're all down to a lack of AA or the shadows, nothing to do with the poly count.

The poly count is quite good and barely noticeable but there are some instances that I've seen where I can count the polys, for instance on the Wellington cowling it looks pretty clear that it seems to be a 16 sided cylindrical shape.

...BUT, this may all be irrelevant as poly count is less of a concern for modelers with the new tessellation features of DX11 and the latest graphics cards. GPUs are now doing things like refinement algorithms which acts sort of like a smooth modifier does in 3dsmax. Of course there's no way to tell if this is being/has been implemented by looking at these screenies (pretty sure their all dx9 anyway) but if it is or if it can be applied in the future, advanced tessellation could probably make that 16 sided cowling look like a melted lump of butter. AND this can be applied to pre-existing models since it is a real time rendering process, the only question would be if you could apply the smoothing to specific polys without it adversely affecting the entire model.


read more here:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/tessellation.html

I really hope Oleg is not using Speedtree... it's more than a flight sim requires and will kill the CPU and graphics card.
Also, frankly, the trees look wrong. The trunks are too thick, even their "European Beech" doesn't look like the beeches I see in SE England. Something wrong with their fractal dimension it seems to me.
One of the characteristics of the vegitation here is that the trees & bushes all merge together in both hedgerows and woods because the rainfall is pretty high (one day I'll try and post some pictures if I can rope in a friend's Cessna). Single trees needing this level of detail are a small proportion of the total number of trees. An improvement of something less flat than the current "flat trees" would be absolutely fine.
As an aside, artists for thousands of years have been struggling with exactly this problem, how to represent trees without painting every leaf? There's nothing really new! Also streaming particles through stochastic mixtures in science.

56RAF_phoenix

Oleg has already stated it is speedtree with customised trees if I recall correctly.

To my eyes the SOW models look better than the B17. I am pretty sure that it is the comparative lack of AA in the SOW shots that is creating the apparent difference.

I think Tbag has a misunderstanding about what a polygon in 3D modeling actually is ..

With the great ambiance of light. One can almost hear the birds singing in the background. And those other sounds of the farm landscape that accompany them. This sure to be an immersing experience.

Me-109 Cockpit
 

The refelections on the flight instruments of the Me-109 seems to be a kind o painting on the glass rather than real reflections. The pilots point of view is to the rigth side of the cockpit, and the "reflections" are centered...exception is the Clock and the turn-bank......or maybe is just my imagination...
Anyway its beautifull....even whitout reflections is one of the best images of a ww2 cockpit.....
Thank you Oleg
:)

great shots, thank you :)

@Derzasi,
quite contrary to your opinion the reflections are all depending on the point of view.
Please look again, that is real time rendering!

Splendid!

it's 2010 people, you dont need bitmap images to fake reflections.

I had to have a double look of the He-111 and the 109 cockpit as they look real!:o

Amazing work

Well anyway, I think it has a high poly count. And also a big sized skin.

http://www.a2asimulations.com/forum/...p?f=29&t=21385

http://www.a2asimulations.com/wingso...enshots/14.jpg

http://www.a2asimulations.com/wingso...enshots/10.jpg


And I don't think we've seen this level of detail in SoW WiPs:

http://img251.imageshack.us/img251/2290/fortress02.jpg




__________

Wow, wow, wow.

Amazing work Oleg.:grin:

The B17 is for sure a very well done plane. However, I have always the impression of artificial light ("plastic light") in Microsoft flight sims. That is so in all of the FS series, and was the same in the CFS series.

Getting accused of not knowing what a triangle is.........I hope this B17 discussion is at least good PR for A2A hehe

SoW will need a quite strong computer to run...

On the first picture of the 109, I make out about 27 aircraft in the background, mostly bombers. What frame rate would you get out of flightsim with 27 of those B17 in close formation?

Olegs job is NOT easy, trying to combine modern graphics, large plane numbers, special effects, the over head of a multipalyer game and still try to get playable frame rates.

Cheers and thanks for the great effort Oleg&Co!

I'm sure the engine will be able to deliver 30 bombers with assorted escorts and interceptors in the mix at very high graphics quality, with pre-arranged expandability to accomodate even bigger formations in the future. I'm also sure that 99.9% of us will be forced to tune it down in order to maintain playable frame rates when closing in for the kill (European Air War is still unsurpassed in that regard, it could do 256 aircraft at once and in very good graphics for its time).

See, i used to have this problem with one of the IL2 titles in the past. It would run fine except everytime i fired rockets i had to be in the zoomed out view, otherwise i'd get a 1-2 second "freeze" thar resulted in crashing my plane on top of some Panzers, because my Geforce MX400 couldn't render the rocket smoke well enough.

In the same sense, i'm sure i'll be able to run SoW nearly maxed on an i7 with a 4890 in DX9 mode and maybe with 60-70% of the detail options enabled in DX10. That doesn't mean it will be playable too. LOD optimizing can go a long way, but in the end this still remains a combat sim of the "guns only" era. Sooner or later we'll have to get close to those 30 bombers and that's exactly the point where the worst thing to happen to you is FPS hiccups.

Short version, i'm sure we'll be seeing equal or better detail in SoW, i just don't think we'll have the hardware to run it for a few more years. I'm not really worried about this though, as the developers have proven in the past that their titles scale well across PC specs of varying power. I could be flying this sim in the no-AA mode i see in these screenshots and it would still be an improvement over IL2, so no worries from me.

will

Will cows and sheep react on airplanes as they fly over? Can they get killed by bullets?

Probably kills will be prohibited. We don't make animation for killed animals with details.
My principle.

But will they run away as airplanes fly over them?

Perfectly right.
In additional we made own very complex program engine(3D, physics, etc), but not using the engine that is impossible to use for the good combat flight sim.

To make just one aircraft with the teaching how to fly it using other (not own) 3D engine and to make combat flight sim with the superb details - the work is way different. In our case it is way more complex in total.
However our work as a basis in future perhaps will be using by third party for such and other modeling. But I hope they will use our features for more details of gameplay with new units than to make just one plane several years with training to fly it.

Our goal is other - superb looking and very good gameplay with the "basic" features in release and very much growing features in future with our new updates and new sims (like PF into all others previous) and updates from third party developers.

"basic" means that it will have way more things and more complex in programming that was in Il-2 in terms of features. But they are basic in a new sim.

They are animated, but not all things ready for that to speak yes or no. So I wont say now what we will have with animals.

Hello Oleg!
These latest pictures are wonderful!
I have a question about skins.

You mentioned earlier that there will be different "layers" on how skins are displayed on airplane.

For example that the skin will become dirty or paint chip missing after a while.
I guess this needs several layers of skins to be created? or is it generated randomly?

And another question that nobody dares to ask.. :)
Will the community have something to play with before the full release of SoW?

- A Limited demo like in the IL2 days? (this is what got me flying)
- A skin or template with explanation how skinning works?
- Or anything else you can think of so the community can get their hand-trembling curiosity a rest.

I guess im just like all of the rest here.. very curious.

that is excellent news !

having some moving/living animals in fields and near airfields makes the sim world "come alive". instead of having an empty world to fly in

thanks for including those elements in your "great plan" :)

Hi Oleg,

When will computer specs be released, if I may ask ? ;)

Great images, by the way ... Thank you Oleg & co.!
Insuber

+1 :)

1. User may change the skin, but not the part of weathering. Weathering is a part of each aircraft model in internal source code. This is neccessary for the right online gameplay and many other things. So in this part user limited to change it.

2. No, we don't plan to have demo. Simply probably impossible due to limit of time and technology of sim creation. With Il-2 we simply have some time in the period when the game was ready and publisher still was Blue Byte, but then the date of release changed for later dates due to fact that Ubisoft bought Blue Byte and we had some time to make the demo from already ready product for the release.

3. Yes, I think we will release the skins (or just templates) before the release of the sim.

4. maybe. I think some will get couple of our samples for 3D modeling, when all things that will be in release will be incorparated in 3D and code. Not earlier because I don't like later to say that this or that was skipped due to lack of time before release. So all things that are not go in release currently should be removed that to do not confuse third party developers. But them maybe we will open these things that wasn't finished, but was planned.

oleg when do you think the publisher will be revealed to us?

At the day of release. If serious, I have no right to say it at the moment.

Thank you for the answers Oleg.

As always we feel lucky to be so priviliged to have direct contact with dev.team.

So we expect nothing, rather hope... and these latest images gives fuel to the fire of hope.

Here is a different type of question..
There is a lot of "we-want" from the community, but lets flip the coin..
Besides from buying the future Battle of Britain, what do you think the community could do for the SoW project before release, and after release?

Im not thinking so much in terms of development, rather what we can do while we are waiting.. and after Battle Of Britatin is released..

- Creation of fansites
- Media attention
- Contests etc.
- Bug reporting
- Suggestions etc.

Im hoping this will be the most successful combat flight simulator release of all times.. for the sake of future develompent in this narrow line of digital entertainment.

It seems the simulator genre is tiny and a lot of other types of games grab the attention.

Thank you Oleg & team

Sounds somewhat "ominous". I just hope it means we're spared the cr@p Ubi calls a DRM scheme. :rolleyes:

With the way their DRM got creamed I seriously doubt it will last much longer.

That said I would not mind, a small price to pay for SOW :grin:

Oleg - You have mentioned before a more involved/complex online play environment. Will we be getting an update on the multiplayer aspect of the game anytime soon?

The image taken from inside the 109 cockpit, was a head tracking devise used (trackir) or is the position of the pilot's head offset to the left inline with the gunsight? I hope it is the latter?

there is a price to pay to keep the game secure, i won't mind too much

Honestly: No game developer or publisher decides when my own PC has to be online. I may grant them the right to check the validity of my copy after installing it (or maybe once a month, after asking me for my permission to do so), but I will absolutely not tolerate a game which tries to force me to stay connected to some online server all the time. Because that, in my opinion, is the stealthy attempt to introduce pay-to-play even for offline games and I will most certainly not stuff my hard-earned € down some publisher's throat (not to mention that the marketing department would surely like to bombard me with tailor-made spam mails).

If SoW follows this trend then I have to bear the pain and not purchase it for I absolutely refuse to sign away my own rights as customer and PC admin.

YES YES I PAY MUCH BUT I HAVE A GOOD SIMULATION NOT A FAKE

i prefer waith most time for working developer for a good simulation game

FSX gold edition+ flight simulator accelleration cost 48€euro i prefer spend 70€euro but i have a good product.


1C is Russian company i loock official site and product hight quality of game
i like the professionist and i spend more money for good work and good company.

another professional company is BOEMIA remember ARMA2 or OPF
http://www.bistudio.com/ have good product i a spend money for good product.

Great update Oleg. Those ground pictures were great and shows the great detail level you've put into the game compared to IL2. Hopefully we will be able to try SoW:BOB for our selves this year :grin:

I thought was a great idea, a minor detail but a detail that would be great for immersion, just hearing that there is livestock is great to know :cool:

...do they make motion capture suits for animals? :-)

Relax, take a deep breath. If Ubi were still the publishers AKA Nov 2006 announcement then I am sure Oleg would have no problem saying so :grin:

I share your opinion. At release day with online requirement for single player, I would still buy it but only if it was very inexpensive (say 7€). Without that crap, around €50. More if maps, box etc. More restrictions & surveillance = value (and willingness to buy) drops a lot. I skipped Rise of Flight because of the online requirement, but when they removed it I wasn't interested enough anymore with SoW around the corner. But it is possible I will revisit it if SoW turns out to have the same problem.

Animals - Interesting. May add a sense of scale, and of a living breathing world where it isn't just aircraft and buildings etc. I don't care if we can't shoot them. But perhaps to be able to crash into them somehow when ditching.. Oh whatever, as long as they run away from us.

Don't Panic!
 

I have it on good authority that SoW:BoB is to be published by a joint company formed by British Petroleum, the Israeli Defence Force, and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. It is clearly in safer hands there than at Ubi. :rolleyes:

+ 1.000.000

You are absolute right. For the same reson I did not buy SH5. I have purchase all the others. If they decide to do the same with SOW Im not buying it!

RED DRAGON remember.......Fascist or Nazi swastika and symbols are banned in the forum such as in the previous post, the moderators have deleted my avatar of a pilot of the SS could also put the Roman eagle fascist but 'forbidden.

Law and 'the same for everyone and then apply it if you have applied to me.

+1.

Wow! I was just making jokes, Oleg, and not seriously expecting you to provide sheep and cows in the scenery! Incredible!

Now I'm too embarressed to ask about the pretty 'milk maid'!

I feel the same way, bro! Unfortunately the system seems to work and a lot of people don't seem to mind the new copy protection (or complain about it and buy the game anyway!). So I guess more publishers will jump on the bandwagon. Sucks!

no one likes DRM :/

As posted in questions about SoW, it goes on with the check function.

Animals! Great. Just make sure Daniel stays away from the sheep.
I bet he is from Maine, USA.
Maine, where the men are men and the sheep are nervous.;)

About the DRM, stayed away from RoF because of it. Now that they
got rid of it I'll buy the boxed Iron Cross that will be released soon.

I think StarForce ProActive (such as seen in DCS: Black Shark and Lock On: Flaming Cliffs 2) is the way to go.

It is easy to use, doesn't install any driver and works with activation. Once you type the activation key, it removes itself from the computer. Then it's just having fun with your brand-new game without worrying with any DRM.

I've never seen any problems related to that - it works for both sides: makes a pirate's life harder without bothering the costumers.

I can't see why it shouldn't be used.

Of course not in matters of BoB dev screenshots :)

Because it's starforce and regardless of how harmless it is in it's current form people do not easily forget the way the company treated people, some will refuse to buy on principle alone.

You'll never make everybody happy.

Used to make me mad seeing all the IL2 pirates in Hyperlobby, if you can afford a pc to play BoB on you can afford to buy BoB, but we all know that many will pirate it and I'd dearly like to see the community shun those chose to deny Oleg and crew from their hard earned cut.

I hear that Maddox 1c company bought Volvo!
:-)

@ Oleg Maddox.

I have two questions.

1. is it final that on the instruments reflection theres no pilot to see (ghostflyer)?

2. Might be bit Off topic but in other thread noone recognized it or ...
Will the game support 5.1 or 7.1 surround sound?



Thx,

Hecke

I've been flying along the coast from Dover to Bembridge lately. I posted some photos on SimHQ before but I thought it couldn'd do any harm if I posted them here again :)

Near Seaford:

http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/1572/p1000764j.jpg

http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/5228/p1000759tl.jpg

http://img202.imageshack.us/img202/4927/p1000760s.jpg

Isle of Wight:

http://img693.imageshack.us/img693/8418/p1000767bb.jpg

I'm not being facetious, but will you really hear a difference between having 5 speakers and having 7?
Why would you feel such a great need for having that difference as to ask the developer about it? Can you hear a difference?
Surely whatever sound we get will be recorded/synthesised/sampled in some way, in order to recreate an as original sound as possible. I can't possibly imagine this would be done in 7 channel sound, though I might be wrong.

Oleg, if you have recorded 7 channels of sound for each engine, please speak up!

I think his question has more to do with his hardware...if you have spent the money on a 7.1 set-up...you want to use it.

+1
Remember RoF and SH5.

Here is my suggestion for future

The cockpit screenshots reveal all panels to be quite worn.
Paint chips, scratches etc.. it looks cool. but.. it seems as if they were modelled and painted to resemble an aircraft that has been in service for a long time or rough treatment.

(perhaps modelled from a WWII survivour in a museum?)

I dont have any accurate data, but someone should probaly know how many logged flighthours the average Bf109 in BoB had.
From factory to frontline to end of service or written off/destroyed.

I mean not ALL planes would have looked this way.. some planes must have been "all brand new" considering the rate of how many planes were produced/delivered..

But for the future.... It would be AWESOME if the cockpit too would "degrade" just as the aircraft skins do. Entering a cockpit in the game would perhaps have two or three versions of "wear". It would be really nice for the immersion factor... because the cockpit is the "office" of a pilot. (And not all offices look the same.)


In an online enviroment I can just picture the following scenario when two squadmates enter the cockpit just after game loaded:

Pilot 1: "Oh no...."

Pilot 2: "What?? whats wrong..?"

Pilot 1: "Im in #46, "Old betty".. damn.. this plane needs some paint!!!!!

Pilot 2: "Yeah.. sure.. like some paint is gonna improve your shooting skills.."

Pilot 1: "Oh shut up!"



Maybe a feature for your next project Oleg?
:)

Other than the data plate above the altimeter, I don't think the cockpit looks overly worn for an airplane in front line use. Anyone who's been in the military for any length of time knows that military equipment doesn't stay unscratched/not scuffed up for very long.

have to agree on this one, im in a government job and the kit we sign out, that isnt personal issue, is indeed worn and very well used.

frankly, shiny new kit is rare.

scratched, worn tired looking stuff is very familiar.

Quite true!. As a kid i had the chance to see shining new light tanks and vehicles just arrived, and six months laters they look like they were used for years.
Consideraing that lots of german planes, if not the majority, most likely were used on the Battle of France campaign, and probably also in Polonia campaign, i would bet that most of tha aircraft would look very worn. The same with hurricanes. Spitfires might be an exception that there were more new units, but after a month of use, on combat conditions, the "new look" would be long gone.

No i just want to know if there will be sourround (5.1) or only stereo sound.

Seeing as how IL2 had multi speaker options I cannot see SoW getting less.

I am not worried about graphics, sound at all. I am more worried about better simulation and physics characteristics.

In my opinion immersion is first simulation and physics than graphics or sound. To me screenshots Oleg shows here are beyond my expectation about graphics, many complain about WIPs graphics. I do not worry about that!

I am interested in the new level of simulation SoW will bring us. Most interesting feature i read at the moment is about clickable cockpits and more complex control of your aircraft. Yes, this is a great advance.

Oleg can you bring us next updates some advances that sow ll allow at level of sim n physics?

Hi BigC208,
I'm not from the USA, I'm living in the Netherlands:-)

+1. I really am looking forward to SoW, but will not buy it if it has DRM that requires I be online to play. I don't expect it will, but chimed in just to be sure my smallish vote is heard. :wink:

Well I will buy it, DRM or not. Oleg deserves sales for this incredible work, independently from my opinion about DRM. I will support him anyway.

It's your 'more bullets' sig that has him confused, he has fallen prey to the common misconception that trigger happy rednecks only live in the states. Truth is we can be found all over the world. (but mostly in the more rural areas) :)

Ok, I'm going to risk it, and I'll finally start to let myself get excited !
Desode:grin:

Well, I only play online - I mean, I couldn't care less.

Eventhough I don't like this kind of DRM

In your DP, is it this 109:

http://www.k-silmailumuseo.fi/userim...yttelykuva.JPG

Just visited that museum last Saturday in the squad meeting. ;)

EDIT: it now has the engine cowling closed, and some planes around it have changed.

Right, Erkki! I found the picture on http://www.virtualpilots.fi/en/hist/...mersukansi.jpg
Although I live in the Netherlands I speak Finnish. I'm bilingual.