? ? ?
Surprised that different opinion is allowed ? In a place called FORUM ?
Frenzy - two apparent facts ?
Who has mentioned (except you) that it is "crap" ???
Pointing to direction of improvement - "forget about it" ?

I don't know what is "negative post" by your criteria... but your post is nothing but burst of negativity.

"Moderators to jump on me" ? For what ?

***
( In my view - this forum is about Luftwaffe... If You call Gestapo in - keep it for your private life... and take your medicine on regular bases... world will look better, you'll see...:) )

If you haven't seen the hidden jewels from SOME of the clips and screen grabs then you haven't been looking. They are out there. This has nothing to do with Oleg worship. I've seen enough with my own eyes to know that the video released as the promo isn't on the finest settings and that there will be levels of detail and visual excitement to satisfy even the most jaded. Some only bitch because it's habit and know no other way of expressing themselves.

Now I (or any serious person interested in this game) don't mind actual criticism, but the truth is that there are a handful of whiners who appear under the guise of wanting to improve CoD. I say Bullsh!t. It's the difference between a boxer and a brawler. A boxer trains and hones his skill for the fight with an understanding of the sport and opponent. The brawler enters the ring and swings wildly not caring who or how they hit. They flail madly hoping to land a punch. Though they may get a hit in here or there, they are untrained, not good opponents and ultimately do nothing for the sport.

An interested hobbyist/boxer (if you will) who gives serious critiquing adds to the conversation and improvement. On the other hand I've seen whiners/brawlers say anything from, "The landscape looks like a 3 year old's colouring book" to "Oleg doesn't care about CoD. He has a new job." Are you going to tell me that THAT is constructive criticism? Those are attacks. There's a difference, and most forum regulars are tired of it. THAT sir is the point.




Another point? When's the last time Oleg's been in here? When he does he's attacked by the uncouth brawler. Sure there are those who worship at the alter of Oleg, but there are many more who go by the track record established in IL2 and truly want to know the progress of CoD without the childish antics displayed by some. And if you think they are bad here - you should see them on other forums.

People draw comments for negative statements that infer things like "we haven't seen the new clouds so there probably aren't any". So people remind him that they are still debugging them.

You infer that we're going to have to wait until the game is released to see what we're buying. I say they are still working on the final build, and we will probably see a few more complete screenshots and videos in March when the gold copy is off for pressing.

You prefer to be negative, others prefer to be positive, because they know the developers history of supporting his product. Untempered negativity only serves to drive away potential consumers of our genre. We only have one WW2 combat flight sim developer willing to stand by his product for years, so I would prefer to help him than drive him out of business.

tool
 

Oleg do you know what type of admin tool we will have in IL_2 COD ?
for the admin's online game play.

geez people, chill out

even if Cod has some imperfections there is something called a patch which fixes a game and brings it to a new version which people can download.

And i/you/everyone can garantee that there will be patches, not one game ever created was perfect.

+1

And even if all the imagined "faults" were real, it still would be the best ww2 combat simulation ever seen!!!
The whining happens at a niveau no other sim has reached so far.

Without doubt it will be the best ww2 flight sim, to date Il2 still is. I think people's expectations were raised to high by some of the early interviews that Oleg did, a lot was promised, and many expected the terrain, trees etc to look as good as the 3d models which look stunning. However we still haven't seen any finished 'in game' shots in high res with DX11, whilst this might be done for a reason many including myself begin to wonder why, add this to the fact that luthier as already stated that alot of features have been pulled from the intial release then its fair to say that some spirits may have been dampened slightly after waiting so long for our 'cinematic' flight sim. But you are right it will be the best there is, but probably not as good as we hoped it would be. :grin:

I never expected the trees to look as detailed as the 3d models, that is unrealistic and anyone who ever expected that should be slapped in the face, wake up..

That just isnt reasonable from a technical and optimization standpoint, this isnt a first person shooter..

Apart from the clouds that we have been told are not in at the moment as they are still being worked on, I think the features that have been removed/not added are the candy effect ones. little things like ground crew, cars driving on the roads and cows in the field etc. These are the sort of things that are not important for flying in the air and are easy to add later but hard to optimise when a dead line is looming. Graphical effects like the terrain and colours will be spot on I believe as they are very important. You just have to look at yours and other posts to know this ;)

At the end of the day we are talking about a photograph expert that lives and breaths the perfect shot. He will not let us down.

Neither pessimism nor immotivate optimism is justified. Wait and see.

Ins

Already got holidays for release week :D good job Oleg

dont sell it short, oleg's own tree's 6 - 9 months ago looked very close to the real deal, good enough to be a major leap forward in the direction he intended (just go back and look at some of his late screenshots on that build)

the problem is that "at the point where the rubber meets the road" (pc demand versus pc realistic performance), his own creation ended up to demanding for mr-average's pc in consumer land in late 2010. it is at that point oleg replaced them with the uglier speed-tree's we have now, and it completely changed the look at low altitude or on the ground (but gave him the performance improvement he needed, so it served its purpose). this was an interim compromise he had to make, and i am confident that as BoB/SoW gets refined and improved over the years we will get the better ground cover back (maybe even in one of the free updates in 6 - 12 months time)

as you already seem to understand, the most important issue right now is that the core of the new game engine is present and functioning well, so it can be rapidly expanded on once they have further time to work on it after release (and pc hardware improves over the years), AND that they can get it "out the door" into eager consumer hands for a fanbase that has been waiting a long time. in that sense it is good a company like ubi which is only $ oriented helped to push a final date and compromise (do most of us here really want to wait another 2 yrs to get our hands on it ? i suspect not )

tree-uk on the other hand will perpetually whine and moan, its simply what he is, and he has no other purpose in being here. dont expect a rational informed perspective from him, it is not his intention or purpose.

Fantastic shots, Oleg. It's truly a work of art!

However, the second screen shot seems to show the engine gauges of the BF-110 on the outer side of the engine cowling. That can't be right. Or is that cluster of three circular objects something else?

Those are breathing holes for the squirrels.

Maybe the nacelles were interchangeable, so they had the instrument cut-outs in both sides? I don't know if this was historically the case, just a thought since it would make sense for ease of maintenance. ;)

As for the quality of discussion here, i'm not even going to talk about the actual features, what we've been shown or not, or speculate about what will or won't be in the game.

The reason i won't is that most of the problems don't originate in people having different opinions, that's just fine. The problems come from people failing to realize that it's not what you think and say, but HOW.

Do i want to criticize something? Do i dislike something? Or do i disagree with the people who criticize and dislike things because i think nothing needs improvement and team Maddox are the gods of Olympus?

Fine, i can go ahead and tell the rest of you about it. I just don't have to scream and flail around like a headless chicken to make my point, because i'm not too bored to properly formulate an argument. People who usually go all dramatic on our a$$ are the ones who make the shortest posts, look around and you'll see it's true for the most part. The reason is that they want to make their point while typing as few words as possible and how can you do that? Easy, by using three or four "heavy" words instead of ten "normal" ones to add that "it must be true" tone to the argument, by which point a poster from the other opinion camp with equally poor posting habits will take the bait and gloriously rise to the occasion, and the circle continues :-P


Case in point, the now famous quote from a few months ago. Instead of saying "the grass colour needs a bit of fine-tuning, here are my references" and provide some links (but hey, this means googling stuff up, those 10 precious seconds required to find 5 pics of British cow-grazing territory is too much work!), someone said "this looks like a children's drawing" and left it at that. In this case the guy honestly feels the grass needs tuning and it's just fine, he's entitled to his opinion, he wants to convince us, but he's too bored to actually tell us why (which begs the question "why should we care if doesn't care enough to tell us why", but that's another topic), so what does he do? Worry not, for here comes the drama to the rescue of the conversationally challenged! Then, a high priest from the church of Oleg will come along to banish him to simulator purgatory and the usual circle-j*rk antics begin anew :grin:

See, i can be a pungent, ironic b@stad as well. Having read this post up to this point, think about how it makes you feel about me and how it makes me look. Congratulations, you now know how you look to the rest of the forum :cool:

The bottom line is that some of you guys must learn that if you want people to take your opinion seriously, you'll have to type actual sentences and maybe even paragraphs in order to take out the "rough around the edges" feeling of a potentially disagreeable or criticizing post. Sorry, but one liners don't cut it for meaningful discussion and constructive criticism.
What's funnier is that the one-liner crowd are also the first to take offence to other people posting the same way, even when it's clear that it's due to a language barrier and the use of online translators, where it's actually ok to cut the poster some slack. :-P

You're obviously new here.. Have you heard of Oleg Maddox and 1C ? :grin:

You should both be banned IMO.Turn on the TV and see what happened in Moscow a few minutes ago,while you spit at each other.

not another terrorist strike we hope ?

yes, another terrorist attack

JG52Uther, its a bit flippant and disrespectful of the dead and wounded, by trivializing the event with your disproportionate comment here

however intentioned, its in poor taste

Guys all this off topic BS doesn't fly.

Take it somewhere else.

This thread will only stay open a couple hours after this posting, if posters don't get ON TOPIC.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...1&d=1295624508

vs

http://image.gamespotcdn.net/gamespo..._screen006.jpg

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...9&d=1295624497
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...5&d=1295624597

vs

http://image.gamespotcdn.net/gamespo...0screen031.jpg
http://image.gamespotcdn.net/gamespo...0screen038.jpg
http://img.wallpaperstock.net:81/win...1_1280x800.jpg

Adman, what game is that 2nd shot taken from, it looks gorgeous?

Some gorgeous flight simulator for above, but ugly as hell if you are in a COMBAT flight simulator strafing ground units in low level flight.

People like a lot "textures". People cry a lot about terrain and clounds. I just want performance and the GORGEOUS ground units of IL-2 : CoD, and accurate terrain mapping.

But the need to compare apples with oranges urge! :)

A screenshot from the trailer ..look at the terrain. Also how do you post big pics all of mine come out as thumb nails. It happens at 1:15 in the trailer. Like Ilya said before most of this footage was taken of of his "Crap" PC ...god knows why but this part where this 109 zooms by smoothly must be off of a faster computer whith that terain too.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAjTwc4d8GA&feature=fvst

I think that may be a Microsoft game Tree although I may be wrong. The problem with them though is when you get low to the ground everything looks totally different as in pretty bad. That's what I hear anyway. Also I wouldn't trust any add from Microsoft until I saw in game footage

I think the trailer looks ok to me. Not the best I have ever seen,but I think it would get the attention of anyone interested in combat flight sims.Hopefully we will start seeing some up to date in game footage soon,on a good computer.

That is actually ingame from microsoft's FSX. However, i suspect there's some 3rd party payware terrain add-on involved in the pic with the Gladiator.

Don't get me wrong, i like some things in FSX a lot and even though i don't own a copy, i fly it whenever i get the chance when visiting a friend. However, the way FSX and its add-ons do certain things are inherently unsuited to a combat sim. The stock FSX terrain is not much to write home about for example and the most celebrated feature in screenshots, which is again part of a payware add-on, the clouds, are 2d overlays from real photographed clouds and not actual 3d virtual clouds.

It's great for flying around near your home town, doing transatlantic hops in an airliner with time compression and the mid-flight save capability, or zipping along at low level in some kind of STOL aircraft over a detailed aftemarket terrain add-on from a place you'll probably never visit in your lifetime like the airstrip on the foothills of Mt. Everest, pretending you are shuttling climbers there in your twin otter, there are even 3rd party developers that have managed to overcome some of its stock FM flaws (apparently, it takes special coding to get aircraft to spin properly in FSX) by clever usage of their own modules, but there are still certain limitations that would show big time in a combat sim.

I like it a lot and if i had money to burn i'd probably buy it and a bunch of add-ons (which is the high quality stuff really), but like someone else already said it's like comparing apples and oranges.

For starters, there are no satellite photos of 1940s Europe to texture the landscape with, even if there were they would take up an enormous amount of disk space, plus in a combat sim you will invariably spend a lot of time down low attacking ground targets and having the ground go all blurry on you because you're close enough to distinguish it's just a flat texture would destroy immersion completely. Also, no matter how cool the aftermarket 2d REX clouds look in comparison to the stock FSX 3d ones and the 3d ones we are getting in CoD, there's no way around the fact that for AI line of sight calculations and maintaining fair play in multiplayer we need clouds modelled in 3d. Otherwise, one could be thinking he's inside the cloud and safe, while another guy can see him just fine and is already diving on him. Just a few examples. ;)

my Fsx folder has more then 200 Gigs :cool:

Would be awesome bail out in 1º person, grab a gun, rob a car and return to the base.

But its not Battlefield =/

I don't expect the ground details to be like that of FSX (or its mods), but the screenies posted by Adman do demonstrate how odd the lime green terrain looks at this stage. I'm looking forward to seeing the finished product.;)
________
Lovely Wendie99

http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/5...reen006.th.jpg

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

This pic is nice, but I can already see areas where the satellite photo texture has been stretched and warped due to the 3D terrain. If you take this shot down to 500 feet or less you're going to see how ugly it can get.

Another thing to remember is that these are aftermarket add-ons that cost serious money and usually only cover certain areas that are either around airports or various scenic places you might want to visit. They look decent around airports where you will be getting lower and lower due to your approach, but pretty much everywhere else they look like ass. It's like the Slovakia map for IL-2. High up it looks like the real deal, down low it looks like a 5kb pic someone stretched to fit their 46" HD-TV.

Oleg is an accomplished photographer and a well known perfectionist. I'm betting the finished product will look a lot different.

Great shots, every friday my week gets better!!! This is great. The release news are great also. I've been following your updtaes Oleg for 3 years now, and what a stunning trasformation it has been. Please keep posting these screenshots most of us look forward to them!
__________________________________________________ _________________

I've never seen so much petty responces on a forum. I mean the grass does not look correct??? ah yeah the grass is really going to matter when you are 3,000m doing combat, or even when u are 1 m above ground going at 300km/h. Maybe sometimes you guys should post something nice: "the lighting looks good, but the grass needs a little more work" and not "if you not going to show us some AMAZING shots then don't bother posting".

Maybe Oleg should not post anymore untill the release, and then everyone will be WOOO AHHH NICE.

Flame me all you want, but thats just my 2 cents.

Raider.

I noticed that too, man. That terrain shot at 1:15 looks brilliant. "Cinematic" even. The atmospheric perspective, colors, trees, and textures are all spot on.

I've noticed that as well so I wonder if all the shots and videos with the limegreen terrain are just from an older build of the game that they repeatedly show. Occasionally we'll see shots, like what's referenced above, (from a later build?) where the terrain looks pretty darn good.
________
Toyota Pm History

I think we have yet to see anything close to the release candidate ground textures.

Call me a fanboy optimist if you want to, but I firmly believe that we are going to be stunned by the visuals in Cliffs of Dover.

And the mechanics of the sim will be even better.

;)

It's the low sun that reduces the terrain brightness/colour saturation, and the terrain relief is more visible that way. We've seen similar shots before:

http://fooblog.mexxoft.com/wp-conten...o_Still_09.jpg

Wow!!!

Thanks Oleg n Team for the continued updates. You guys don't have to do this with the game's arrival already set, but you do.

Peace out and much love from Amerika.



To the negative people:


Dude are some of these posts serious?


After all the effort Oleg & Team have done to keep us on the inside loop, you get people complaining the trailer doesn't suck or the graphics haven't been improved on in X and X years . . . or various other complaints.

I understand about little details, I do get that.

Some like to troll and get a rise out of people, ok well we know you like to vulch on any given server.

But some comments berating Dover?

Oleg just let us in the house and some of you just spit on the plate of food him and his team just spent hours preparing. Or just crapped on the finely upholstered seating or stained the sheets in the bedrooms (you weren't invited in there) with the diseased whores of negativity and malice some run with.

Some people need to go back to elementary and learn some manners and respect.

I'm going to stand by Oleg and his team, and I've got a hundreds of people willing to back me up.

This will get editor's choice and game of the year each time the series comes out, despite what gaming magazines say.

Not even an awesome game such as half life 1 commands this much play as IL-2 original series has.

+1

Couldn't agree more, Oleg has always pushed the bar, always.

This is very good!

Why are all the screenshots not of the same quality of the one published by the Kraken ?

The fear of getting too many customers ?

I think this is the best movie from IL-2 Sturmovik: CoD that I have seen so far:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EvpTp12IcM

Watch the movie in HD and look at how the Cliffs of Dover rise up and how great the overall terrain looks..


Edit: Spelling

We haven't been receiving screenshots from a marketing machince, we've been getting them from Oleg. While part of the reason he's been giving us update threads may be to help build interest in the sim, I think he also likes sharing the development with a community that he has an affinity with. Add to that the fact his main role is not releasing screenshots (he's plenty busy with everything else) and you see he's been showing work in progress, often at low detail settings. I think he's also stated that he deliberately wanted to keep some surprises back, and that might include the desire to hold back some eye candy.

If a Friday update doesn't show much new, it's easy to complain we haven't seen anything interesting that week - imagine if we get the game on release day and everyone feels they've seen nothing new, that they've already seen it all in update threads. It would be anti climax.

Instead Oleg has managed to show us some interesting developments (eg tracer smoke, mission builder etc) without spoiling the big event when we finally get the game.

Lastly, Oleg hasn't needed to show those on this forum how nice the game will look. We all know it will be nice, and we'll all buy it anyway. It's the rest of the market that need to see how good it is, and they really should be trying to put some finally quality clips together for them.

it's just called Gloster Gladiator, many of the games graphics leaves a whole lot to be desired but you can tell they dedicated most of their time on the terrain and the sky although it is likely a satellite image

http://image.gamespotcdn.net/gamespo...0screen001.jpg

still, I think satellite texture gives that look you simply cant achieve by placing objects. Maybe a combination of both techniques can be developed at some point.

the new engine does have tremendous lighting, maybe it will be the games strongest feature next to the planes themselves, and lighting can work wonders, it really is the key to realism. I'm sure at high res with full lighting and a good altitude/angle you will still be able to get some fantastic looking screenshots that come close to tricking the eye

However It seems it will continue to be one of the weaker aspects of the il-2 brand, not due to lack of trying. The moving grass is a great innovation, the attention to laying out towns very similar to how they were at the time, and the detail of the objects themselves are all great but laying them out by hand to make a realistic terrain is just too daunting of a task. Too hard to replicate the organized chaos that is nature and human civilization

Satellite imagery is a major failure in a WW2 combat flight sim for a couple of reasons.

1. There are no satellite images from the WW2 period. Any photos from space are just plain wrong in details.

2. Satellite image ground textures only look good from a distance. If you are taking off or landing, or involved in low level work of any kind the obvious pitfalls of this approach are all too obvious.

Dude have you even seen this trailer?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z469H...layer_embedded

Near the ending you can see the great ground textures here much better.
also watch this in 720p

Nice!

...and a WX coded Hurricane? A big "Woot" for historical markings! ...in this case No. 302 (Polish) Squadron.

Good as it is I can't help noticing an obscene amount of video stuttering and the eventual total lockup of the PC. It's running VERY roughly on that machine. Also the inputs to the stick seem to have far less effect on the aircraft than I would expect.

Having said that: what impressed me most was the shadows in and around the cockpit. Note the port wing with the shadow of the Hurricane's canopy on it and the dynamic shadows in the canopy glass and the console. Sweet!

I hope a lot as changed since then and i believe it has, Luthier said they have optimised the game since this beta which is good news, the whole games starts to lock up as soon as the land comes into view and you can see how objects start to draw themselves as they come into view just like they did in Il2.

IIRC that setting was on max and the hosting I5-750 PC only equipped with 2GB RAM. That stuttering is due to the low RAM and loading issues.

AFAIK it's been stated that 1C has already increased speeds with some of the optimization that has been done. In a nutshell, the more RAM, the better (assuming that's not your bottleneck).

We'll see :)

Cheers

They ran an unoptimized version of the game at max detail on below minimum specs PCs at that expo (CPU and GPU were fine, but RAM was below specs). Stuttering or not, it was playable enough to be shown that way in a gaming expo.

Just in case someone got confused, let me point out the important bits again:

Unoptimized version.

At full detail.

On a below minimum specs PC.

I guess that if the PCs had 3-4GB or RAM instead of just 2GB, it wouldn't need to buffer-read from the hard disk all the time and would be smooth enough. I also guess that after 2-3 months of pre-release debugging and optimization, the version we will have in our hands will be somewhat better still.

You know, it's amazing how much cause for alarm can be avoided if we take the time to put 2 and 2 together.
And while i can see that newcomers to the forum would not know about certain pieces of information to deduce all that, i can't understand why old-timers who post here multiple times every day would miss the same info. ;)

I reckon that my 12Gb of RAM might suffice then.
It's interesting to note that the first time I ran IL-2 many years ago (at something like 1024 x 768 ) it all but crippled my PC because of the required resource and my PC was quick for 2001/2. Now I'm running it with everything full on and at 1920 x 1200 and it hardly even raises the tempertures of my GPUs. Such is progress. It'll be fascinating to see if COD can stress a contemporary capable PC like IL-2 once did! :grin:

Do you really think Oleg would be dumb enough to release a game that stuttered constantly?

Oleg wouldn't, but UBI is another story.:grin:

Great! Thought the Bf-110 was going to be AI only.
And what version is that one?Is the G,in´t it? The C versions have a slope on the back of the glass that covers the gunner.(?)

A recent screenshot had both the C-4 and C-7 in it.

Now wether or not both will be flyable or only one of those, is a different matter. My money is on the C-4 only. Definately no G variant in 1940 though.

In 2000 I built a new PC. It had an Athlon 1GHz, a GeForce 2 GT/Pro 64MB and 256 MB of RAM. I already had a nice Hansol monitor capable of 1600x1200 but my 486 at 66MHz couldn't display more than 1024x(768?) on it. I played CFS on the Athlon before I bought Sturmovik, but at 1600x1200 neither stuttered. That was a high end system, particularly the graphics, you could buy faster Athlons at that time. I have little doubt that a high end system today will run Cliffs of Dover very nicely, but that might mean Sandy Bridge, and it might mean SLIed GTX 580s, or crossfired HD 6990s anything less is only mid-range.

I'm going to have to upgrade my system :), but I expect it to run Cliffs of Dover okay for now, even though it's not top notch any more (and it's not still that 2000ad Athlon).

The footage in the last 30 seconds of the trailer is obviously done with a better PC than Ilya had. I all looks smooth to me. Those adds coming up might spoil the Blenheim pass a bit



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVUSp1V3cVw

that's why you do a combination of both, you can take a satellite image, edit those images to remove things that dont pertain to the period. You can then use it as a template to lay out your 3d objects, trees etc. You could even just use it as a template pulling general layouts and textures from it then scrap the image itself or keep parts in certain areas. This is basically what was done for the towns/city, they had maps/satellite and were arranging streets and houses on top of the image. It doesn't look like they used the same technique as much for rivers, trees, and land plots.

also I think using individual trees has major limitations and is a performance hog.

And we would never be able to afford that. ;) But then I'm quite content with the eye candy in COD.

Nope. It's just some dirt on your screen ...

Do I see somebody running for his life towards the bow of that mercanter under attack?

No, you see a chunk of debris flying towards the front of the boat.

No it's a sailor

I was actually curious about the same thing, so when the link came up to download it in high quality i did and watched it again.

I paused it at that frame and it seems to me that it's a piece of the ship's cargo (a crate or something) that gets flung towards the bow from the explosions.

Yeah. It's a Lego Sailor. :D

I can't wait to see what he looks like close up.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e3...G8804_11_d.jpg



I must say, that for a blocky bloke he's pretty nimble.

I would like to see the Cierva from SoW in a video.How it flies and if when its shot down its start spinning like the Blackhawk in Black Hawk Down.

It's an autogyro, not a helicopter...If the rotor is damaged, there will be no spinning, only straight fall...There is no couple/anticouple on a gyro, so no this kind of force unbalance which would make it spin in case of damage to the transmission coupling.

Looks about right....and don't forget he needs to be at least between 10 and 15 feet tall.


/Daniel

al lot of guys think that of them selfes :)

15ft?!


http://www.poeghostal.com/wp-content...mallow-man.jpg

never mind, somebody posted at the same time as me regarding an update today