Is this real ingame footage ?!!
 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zerc6...layer_embedded

Quite impressive if so....

Salute !

ps3/xbox Dumbing down the potential for the pc market.

In my opinion, having played the demo on the PS3, I can say that this title will have next to nothing to offer the combat flight sim enthusiasts. There is absoutely no element or feel of flying a plane what so ever. The immersion isn't taken away from you in any way because they was none to start with; just eyecandy. 'Dogfight mode' & 'evasion' is purely watching a couple of needles aligning themselves before punching a few buttons simultaneously.

Fairplay to the devs; they have only ever strived to aim their product at the arcade market & to the action gamer & this title is certainly doing that en masse.

With every Ace Combat, Hawx & any other console flight title to come & go, it just saddens me to think of just how bloody brilliant 'Over G Fighters' actually was for a console flight title. Sad because it's brilliance was so short lived.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7BabsOGaoY

Also remember that the entire map is probably just that city. If the speeds were realistic, which they very likely are not, you could fly across the whole map in like a minute.

If it looks good...it must be good. ;)

always bitchin'
 

Come on guys...Of course nothing at this time equals or surpasses COD's sim's quality in terms of accuracy, but....We have to admit that in this video the terrain rendering is very impressive...NOw THAT is photorealistic ! OLeg's expression of course... I would trade bigger maps for this quality
when we fly over London, or other future cities. ANd I am pretty sure that if large maps were in their priorities, they could certainely achieve that goal...
I suspect that by the time COD is ' completed', it will look a bit obselete compared to the competition...ANd of course, when I say competition, I am reffering to the hundreds of top games out there that we all find very mpressive too...So in terms of perception, it rises the bar quite high for a small team like Luthier's one...

Salute !

helicopters do barrel rolls at 0 feet lmao

Bit more advanced than F18 Interceptor for the Amiga.... :-)

Bit more advanced than F18 Interceptor for the Amiga.... That carrier takeoff just takes me back to 1988.

:-)

you will take this a totally insane but:

ITS REAL FOOTAGE ALIVE unless youre a stager

Yeah it's real footage and the map size isn't that much of an issue. You could build a map like this even for games like CloD. Using zoning e.g.
And of course it's not realistic - the console market just isn't meant for hardcore simmers...

But still, most of this is procedural and / or bought. The reason why most sim companies don't include such beautiful landscape is not because they couldn't technologically but because it'd add additional costs for the objects they need to buy. They don't just sit there and create models of buildings for years.

So yeah, there is no such thing as an engine limitation responsible for this. Usually it's just money.

arcade crap , might look good , but under the hood its all kinder garden physics .:rolleyes: , aimed for console fanboys ..

Speaking of fanboys, or boys rather. All "physics" in todays games are crap, if you didn't know that yet. Even those in CloD. They don't even remotely come close to the real thing.

Also looks is important as well. You think it's so easy to make games look good? Fine, then how about making hardcore sims look that good mh?

Both achievements are impressive. And unless there is a combination of great graphics and awesome physics (not just fake ones) it's all just crap.

Fly over an hour ? Gosh..I'd like to have that luxury.....BUt seriously, when I see
cartoonish houses and building puping out at 300 meters surrounded by empty grey streets , I wish I had this kind of quality when flying over London.
And how big do you need the map to be to have fun chasing ennemy planes in a dogfight ? And why is it not possible to have both detailed and large maps ?

Salute !

So you are saying that COD would not be a better game with this kind of graphic quality...Interesting...

Salute

It's pointless to debate with them over such things as map size. Airbus hobby pilots would laugh at their faces and ask them if they're insane - after all what good would it do for them to have a tiny map like the one we have right now? :-P

What they don't realize is that it's not the size that matters but the application :rolleyes:
But without wanting to investigate further into the reasons behind their "size issues" I say we leave it at that. ;)

For those who are actually thinking about things for just a second it is clear that: A game that provides a scenario which fits into a certain map size it's unnecessary to have a bigger map. For some games that's just a little board, others might have a city, others a part of a few countries and other games need the whole globe or a huge galaxy as the playground.
That's the reason why CloD doesn't have a world map - it doesn't need a bigger map. And if there was a game that required a bigger map the developers would make a bigger map. Simple as that. For us :-P

Got to remember this is a game, and from my memory of past Ace Combat releases, a game with a good story.

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

Well, you are right...this is always the same thing on this forum...Somebody comes up with a good exemple of a nice game production, and the first reaction is " this is crap, this is arcade, this is this and that..."
The truth is COD is quite average looking and not photorealistic at all by "outsiders" standards. And why not say : COD would be a killer with those graphics !!! That is all...

Salute!

i get slightly, only slightly perturbed, by comparisons between games and sims. particularly flight simulations. which have specific problems of theyre own..

to apply photoreal images to cliffs..would be possible, if the photos...and they have to be fit for purpose...were in fact available...recent arieal photo mapping wont do....and they cost quite a bit to obtain...

for modern photoreal, alternatives are available..but they only really are of use for small areas...modern airfields, etc...

if the right type of colour corrected photomapping, was avilable for the cliffs area..carried out in 1940...and not costing a huge sum of cash to use..it would be possible...BUT...the first question would be, what about the terrain mesh...how accurate would you like it...say 10cm....you would need a cray computer to run it on, and thats just the terrain mesh...

building a small fictional area is easy...building a high quality photoreal london is entirely possible...i have such athing on my system...a modern london...most peoples pc cant cope with it...but modelling 1940 london..it would require completely different techniques..

a simulation is not a game...a game is not a simulation...high bandwidth internet, cloud based simulations,games. will in time help to improve this..

and while ime ranting...all information, fibre,cable,etc all travels at the same speed....but have varying bandwidth....the electromagnetic wave that carries info down a copper cable, travels at pretty much the same speed as info down a fibre optic cable...its just that light has a theoretical infinite number of phase angles...hope this helps the erudite and gentlemanly discussion..jim