Official Fulqrum Publishing forum

Official Fulqrum Publishing forum (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/index.php)
-   IL-2 Sturmovik (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/forumdisplay.php?f=98)
-   -   Friday update and discussions 2011-03-04 (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/showthread.php?t=19025)

Skoshi Tiger 03-05-2011 07:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by addman (Post 230946)
Here's a tip, don't log in on the forums for a week:) Seriously, I don't know why I'm still reading this thread. All I wanted was to see was Olegs update...oh! nice weather today, think I'll go out for a walk.:grin:

+1

T}{OR 03-05-2011 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lukeff (Post 230823)
i just wanna go one week without someone making yet another inane comparison with wop.

+1000

major_setback 03-05-2011 11:59 AM

A question to Oleg/Luthier:

The first video: The gunner does not look down the barrel of the gun. I don't think I saw it in any game so far except for first person shooters.

Is it possible to do? If you can't align the 1)ring and 2)bead (point) and 3)target so that these 3 points are in one line then you are just guessing when you shoot.

Or will 6 dof in itself make this possible?

Otherwise it would be good with a fixed cam attached to the gun looking through the sight, so it always moves with the gun (maybe as an option/keystroke), as if you had your head pressed against it.

Strike 03-05-2011 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by major_setback (Post 230996)
A question to Oleg/Luthier:

The first video: The gunner does not look down the barrel of the gun. I don't think I saw it in any game so far except for first person shooters.

Is it possible to do? If you can't align the 1)ring and 2)bead (point) and 3)target so that these 3 points are in one line then you are just guessing when you shoot.

Or will 6 dof in itself make this possible?

Otherwise it would be good with a fixed cam attached to the gun looking through the sight, so it always moves with the gun (maybe as an option/keystroke), as if you had your head pressed against it.

Dude, really.. I'm sure Oleg added the use of 6DOF for those who have trackers and conventional "gunsight view" button from IL-2 for non-trackers to place head infront of gunsight :)

Sasha 03-05-2011 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LukeFF (Post 230823)
I just wanna go one week without someone making yet another inane comparison with WoP.

OK... let's forget the mentioned game example... (far from my favorite)

So without it - Do You think that presented graphics achievements are impressive in March2011 ?

Or maybe clouds and land visuals are not important in video presentation of new generation flight sim, even combat one ?

Not heating up feelings... just interested in your simple answer.

Foo'bar 03-05-2011 12:40 PM

I think too many people here around try to compare a flight sim with a first person shooter. Of course there are shooters wich look more impressive. But compared with other flight sims Il2CoD looks really very real imho.

Perhaps in 10 years flight sims will look as phantastic as shooters.

ElAurens 03-05-2011 01:07 PM

+1

I don't think FPS players or people trying to compare a FPS game or an arcade flying game like WoP quite understand that it's far easier to have great visuals when you have a map the size of a postage stamp.

I have mentioned this before, ArmA II Operation Arrowhead's visuals are often held up as state of the art for "simulations", yet no one bothers to mention that the largest map in that title, "Takistan" is a mere 164 square kilometers. That makes it roughly 12km on a side, if my admittedly poor math skills are right. So it's slightly larger than one grid square on the original IL2 Kuban map. And even at it's small size, cranking up the visibility distance to a mere three kilometers will grind many current computers to single digit frame rates.

Think a bit folks.

Defender 03-05-2011 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sasha (Post 231000)
OK... let's forget the mentioned game example... (far from my favorite)

So without it - Do You think that presented graphics achievements are impressive in March2011 ?

Or maybe clouds and land visuals are not important in video presentation of new generation flight sim, even combat one ?

Not heating up feelings... just interested in your simple answer.

Look at the graphics of flight sims 10 years ago, then 20 years ago. Then look at the level of simulation that comes in the package. So with march 2011 you get upgraded graphics, high fidelity FM (that's not an easy achievement) 6DOF cockpit views, large landmasses modeled, ground and airplane AI. There is more, but I can't think specifics right now.

When comparing any game to 2011 standards, you can only really compare it to a) other HIGH FIDELITY flight sims on the market and b) the ENTIRE simulation picture. You can't just look at graphics and undermine everything else that's using more computing power that was available 10 years ago.

In the end though not everyone will be satisfied with graphical particulars. :)

BadAim 03-05-2011 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElAurens (Post 231007)
+1


Think a bit folks.

Whew! Busted a gut on that one, Mate. Aren't you asking a bit much? ;)

ElAurens 03-05-2011 01:26 PM

I suppose I am BadAim, but I have to try.

:cool:


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:58 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.