If a pilot does slump forwards, I wonder if the aircraft will respond accordingly and nose down?

P.s. Oleg, have you rectified the issue with damage overlapping on itself? I noticed in the Stuka shots from earlier that MG damage holes would sometimes overlap Cannon damage in areas it could not occur (usually hovering bullet holes).

@ Untano, In Rise of Flight they've done it nicely. If you have object ID on you see a small X (looks like a X-wing fighter). This at first annoyed me untill I realised that when you turn object ID off, the X dispeared and you see the vague outline of an aircraft. Looking very convincing. Not just a dot. Hope SoW goes a simmilar way. When you have Object ID activated it does not really matter if you see a dot or an X, it's unrealistic to begin with.

Thanks for that perspective, SJ, I was not aware of the European rules on depiction of blood/gore.
Anyway, as stated, I'm perfectly happy with Oleg's team not working on what I consider very low on the list of priorities.

This sim also needs to show your figure when flying as well, who ever heard of being invisable when flying. The biggest flaw with IL2 is when your in the cockpit looking around and low and behold there is no body flying the plane, the cockpit is empty. We should see a torso and legs on the ruddr pedals and a hand holding the flight stick. Any other look and its unreal.

Personally I don't need a pilot, that will just be in the way of my view of the instruments. Or another set of commands to move an arm or leg blocking the instrument view. The absence of my pilot is certainly not an immersion killer for me. I doubt that the developers will take the extra time at this point to model it, but if they do, I hope its an option you can toggle off.

We should see the physical reaction of the "damage model" on the humans/pilots/animals, but we should be spared the "graphic carnage"...

TO BE MORE CLEAR ON MY OPINION...body's should be thrown about (like "rag dolls") by the shock wave, but we should not see blood, or dismemberment. Bullets and crashes and other aspects of the damage model that are included in the new game should have a realistic impact on the "human analog" but ONLY in a "rag doll" effect...

What do you kind folks think?

p.s. Of course these options should be selectable... ;)


I have often imagined a "pilots reflection" in the glass or chrome or mirrors....

Apparently some here missed this post.

Its only one or two Mods that want us to stay on topic, which i can understand, but I really dont think Oleg and Luthier give a rats ass, they only answer the odd post, the rest mostly get overlooked.

I didn't think that my comments where completely "OT"...as Luthier himself had commented on "the pilots" and how their damage model might respond to physical "contact".

My thought was that the moderators where (for the most part) responding to the, near constant, bickering that seems to litter this forum...

What's this? Dec 31 but doesn't really look impressive.




http://www.ign.com/_views/ign/ign_ti...e=us&offset=50

What's that? Nothing really. A link to a website that seems to have the release date as either December 2010, or April 2008, depending where you look. Totally meaningless, without further information.

Thanks for the update. :)

Very wise variant! Rag doll! Perfect. No blood. Perfect solution!

I like that idea, much better than nothing at all, it would still be nice to have enable/disable full gore in config though.

Sorry

Mate, i was talking about shot pilots trapped in their safety belts. NOT about busses full of people.:cool:

It still sounds better then any other videogame sound.:cool:

Oleg & Co,

thx for the updates

excellent looking screenshot of the bomber crew looking out the window :)

one concern: the hurricane pilot still looks way to small, and i cant see the feet of the german pilot in the bomber reaching the rudder pedal ? i suspect the "small pilot" problem still hasnt been resolved ? (not a big deal, fix it after release if it takes to much time now)

Do you sit on your instruments??Last I checked most guages are in front of the pilot not under the seat. Next time your driving look down and see if your seat is empty, I'll bet you see something besides your empty seat.
And looking down in the pit and NOT seeing a torso and legs on rudder pedals does detract from immersion a bit. How is that going to prevent you from reading gauges? Most of the stuff you need to see is high enough above the flight stick that its not an issue. If this sim is going to be realistic in first person mode you need to see your body in pit. Anything less is unrealistic. Hell most first person shooters do this.

Yes and no... it has a richness to it yes but the sounds are not synchronized to events and they don't have proper characteristics when it comes to distance from the observer. They were added on top for appeal purposes only.

In some ways IL-2's sound is incredible... it does a lot of things right dynamically on the right sound setup. It's just that the limited range of sounds gives everything a more generic feel.

lol, for somebody like you who is a self confessed vandal and thief of oleg's private property, it is unsurprising you have such a deluded view of the world :)

sounds like a fair compromise

but its all speculation really, its fairly safe to assume oleg has already decided on how to represent killed/wounded crew and pilots (since we have such detailed modeling of humans now, and articulated movements etc). i suspect it will be something like figures slumping or collapsing, without much blood or gore

Excuse me

You're right, but the arms tend to block out quite a few instruments.

Skarphol

Realistically the only gauges you need to see are airspeed, altitude, manifold pressure and maybe one or 2 more and if im not mistaken all those are pretty much high enough so as to not be blocked by arms or legs. Fuel gauge is usually not necessary as most flights dont last long enough to worry about fuel.

+1, couldn't of put it better myself, although you did miss the 'no offence of course' at the end. :grin:

When you have your arms, legs visible they better be moving realistically. If not just leave em out all together. Looking down and seeing a stiff, non moving body is more of an immersion killer than having nothing at all. Can you imagine watching your hands moving to the panel to realign the DG with the magnetic compass. Reaching up to the canopy release latch before bailing out with a first person view of your arms and legs flopping in the wind? Have that body there but make it work! Probably not going to happen anytime soon but it would be nice.

A 1st person view of bailing out would certainly add to the emmersion. Also, I think it would be good if you could see 'yourself' in the cockpit and be 'thrown around' by the g-forces - as long as it didn't get in the way of course...

@ philip.ed

+1 :)

+1

"Do you sit on your instruments?"

A question like that doesn't deserve an answer. But it does prove you don't know what your talking about.

I humbly suggest the moderators to moderate this thread.

Is it Friday yet? We need a new reason for people to gripe and complain and take threads off-topic.

Speak for yourself. In both offline campaigns and online coops, fuel managment can be critical. And what if you get hit in a fuel tank. How else will you know how much you are leaking.

Yup...keep smokin that one boy...:rolleyes:

I think the bailing out thing would be a fantastic idea. Can we all see that fighter right behind us as we're trying to hit the silk? I know I can :)

:grin: LOL :cool:

5-star-reply, well put!

and now... pass on to the next thread, hope we'll get less gore obsessed talk this time btw...:mrgreen:

Patting eachother on the back in every other post really doesnt get u points on the credometer.

Grow up.

How about taking nonecentiall member bashing to PM instead of cluttering a update treadh with this unbelivebly unintresting drivel.

Sorry

How can you expect Oleg or Luthier to answer some of the very interesting questions asked with all the c... you are throwing at each other polluting this thread?

Hope it will not discourage Oleg of posting new updates as well.

I agree. But I think they have too much work to do to answer all our questions. If we look over recent updates, clearly the only questions that get answered are ones that are interesting to the team.
Either way, we should count ourselves lucky to get updates.

And I will apologise again for having my rant; it is intolerable. But clearly I spoke on behalf of a few members on the forum.

Anyway; this is all virtual so non-one was hurt ;)

And just to say that I edited all my posts before to apologise.

I still think this was an interesting question on page 15 in reaction on that tracersmoke

Well, back on topic somewhat...

Well, in many planes cockpits are cramped and in others some instruments are tucked away in some funny places, for example fuel gauges in P-51s. While i agree that seeing our own virtual body would add to immersion somewhat, there are practical problems as well. I also agree that having a pilot body that is totally still is worse than having none at all.

For example, bear in mind that due to the increased amount of realism there needs to be an increased amount of controls as well. Since most people have a HOTAS and keyboard at best and not custom-made simpits, the decision was made to allow the use of clickable cockpit switches in order to cut down on the amount of keyboard/button controls needed to operate the aircraft. A virtual pilot body in the cockpit would seriously hinder the use of that, forcing you to bind, memorize and use large numbers of keyboard shortcuts for things that are probably only used sparingly throughout the mission (so they don't have to be bound directly to keyboard/HOTAS), but still need to be operated.

Case in point, things like bomb selection/release panels and side consoles/electric controls panels. For example, in a P47 half of the electric controls switches would be obscured by the pilot's left leg if he was modelled in the cockpit. You need those switches to actually start the plane up but won't need them again until you land and shut everything down, so the obvious solution would be to not bind them to keyboard or stick buttons but operate them with the mouse once at the start and once before the end of the mission. If there was a pilot modelled in the cockpit, the view would be blocked and you'd have to bind them to keys/buttons.

I wouldn't mind seeing a pilot, but if he was interfering with controls there should be an on/off toggle switch or transparency option when hovering the cursor over him.

Just on a side note: Decision to make SoW open-ended has absolutely nothing to do with IL-2 mods, as it was adopted as early, as in mid-2003, when the very first concept of SoW evolved and by then there was no sign of any so called mods.

I think it's been said, and you can see from pics that it is 3D. I also seem to remember that it will not react to being flown through it as that would require a heck of a lot of resources and further work.

Really? OK, that could make sense. of course, there is no real evidence to prove either of us right, but I could go with that ;)

Ah, ok... thx Jockey, I must have missed it somehow.:cool:

Hmm, I raised the question of 3D smoke effects in the first place, because the fuel-leak effect looked a bit 2D in the pictures. It is so hard to get a feel of the sims movement though from the pictures.

Well I do know what I'm talking about contrary to your ill informed opinion. The lack of a first person body in the pit is an immersion killer. Most people wont be able to read the gauges anyways and will use the on screen overlays that have been used with IL2 for years. Why show AI crew if you cant see yourself? Fact is you should see yourself in the pit and have an option to turn off realism and go bodyless for your type of player.

I rather be invisible than ugly.

Which is more of an 'immersion killer': 'on screen overlays', or 'lack of a first person body'? Fact is this comes down to personal preference, and I don't need a 'first person body', I've got one of my own. I'd be interested to learn how anyone can state that ' most people wont be able to read the gauges' - don't you think there would have been complaints by now if they couldn't? If an on-screen pilot is an option, I'd have no objections, but don't try to justify insisting on it through dubious assertions about 'realism'.

With the varying resolution textures i've seen in stock and modded IL2 as well as in newer products like FSX, Black Shark, etc, it's entirely possible to read the gauges in a modern sim running on modern hardware and actually fly by the gauges instead of on-screen messages, not to mention how helpful 6DOF cockpits are in this regard.
Add custom snap views like the ones RoF has for hard to reach instruments and people who lack head tracking equipment, and everyone will be able to fly by the gauges and not by pop-up messages.

Again, i have no objections to a pilot body as long as i can turn it off on the fly when it obscures the instruments and switches i want to use. The instruments and controls are more important for me, because i don't have a fancy HOTAS set and i'll most probably will have to use the optional clickable cockpit for SoW. If i had a custom simpit with actual instruments and had everything mapped to actual swtches and buttons, then i might fly with the pilot body enabled all the time, but not until then.

Yes! This ease is exactly what I was aiming at. As an online pilot, I don't want to be at a disadvantage by using a higher resolution :)

If it could be made as realistic for the lower res users as higher res, that would be great, but currently in IL-2, the lower res enjoys the ability to see the dots A LOT further than with a higher resolution.

It would be really great if a game technical solution would be found to balance this.

-Untamo