![]() |
Quote:
But this one offers just several intersting things of hundreds that should be really done for a combat flight sim. So... if we want to get real combat sim with a long life on the market, comparable with life of Il-2 or even longer, we need to make own engine. Engine here means not only the feature to render ligth and 3D objects, but everything... and everything for using of third party with special tools. Really... we have way more complex system. Another thing - it is possible to render the great looking and superb detailed earth... then nothing have with the AI, FM, physics of explosions and car movement (I don't speak about a lot of details we model inside the aircraft.... - that is system that should work all at once. The graphics render and its presentation in a game is just a small part of the whole sim engine. Hope you understand my explanation. For more simple sample: there is very good Unreal engine... but it is completely impossible to use for other types of the games without very seriuos limits. And many things there simply is impossible to implement or change as we may need to have for the fligth sim. Another sample. it is possible to use third party 3d render engine, hovewer probabaly just for fully arcade games. finally for understanding of my explanation: the other code part than the 3D representation of terrain and sky is way more complex in our sim comparing to that part.... BTW: Really nice engine shown by a link. |
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
In our sim the tele position is more close to 50 mm focus leght (normal) like it is for human eye. the wider angle means wide angle lenses with all their ditortions... (less then in real lenses, but anyway presented due to perspective distortions) Sample of wide anle is here. I don't post such shots that to do not recall some voices that the plane is incorrect in proportions. Howere we need to have wider than in a life angles due to limits of monitors view. Sample of wide angle view in a sim. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
That could make sense, yes, but I am going by what I have seen in videos from the period, and I am of the opinion that it is best to go by what evidence you have at your disposal than what may be right. For example, despite the great damage model in Il-2, usually there are a few types of smoke seen which means that each type of smoke used for each type of aircraft damage has to be the most common type seen for that particular damage. So in some cases, the smoke might be massive, but in other cases it might be a lot smaller, and if the latter happens more than the former than this should be the type used instead. But I don't know how the damage-model works in this sense for SoW, so I'll wait for future updates for now. Also, I am only going by a few videos so more evidence will need to be shown to give a better judgement :-P |
Quote:
|
Looking awesome as usual Oleg :D
|
Great update as usual. I like the shots of the Ju88 aswella s the close-up of the 109. Would love a 109 in-cockpit video for one of the next updates.:)
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
The render engine looks to have an almost photorealistic potential, great !
Especially on both of these views : http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...5&d=1278064852 http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...9&d=1278064731 Just hoping that the colors of the landscape will look like the England countryside and that a good overcast sky will be available. |
No questions.. just encouraging comments. Those screen shots look AMAZING!
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 01:47 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.