View Single Post
  #8  
Old 07-08-2011, 09:47 AM
6S.Manu 6S.Manu is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Venice - Italy
Posts: 585
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raggz View Post
As developing progress and new things are added like physics and other things, stuff has to be balanced. Add some and remove some. It's the way games are built. We just can't have it all and everyone want something different. It's been said a hundred times that the engine is built for the future. In i a few years we might have it all and be able to run it with good FPS. As of now there's no point bringing up all these things as we probably won't be able to have it playable with reasonable FPS with all the goodies.
I rather have great plane physics and models than trees blowing in the wind or water splashing on the beaches. The colors is another matter which is a matter of taste, more or less.

I'm not bashing heads here. It's just how it's done.
The bolded part make me gives me a bone chill.

Using "new" technlogies like WPF and WCF doesn't mean the game is made for the future: Multithreading, PhysX, DX11 and 64bit are. Modular applications (with SDK) are the future, where you add planes, tanks, ships and buildings to a WORKING physic/graphic/sound engine.
Not adding a incomplete physic/graphic/sound engine to a pair of well made planes.

We can only wait, but this was not designed as a game for the future.. sure it wasn't at the Euro release.
__________________

A whole generation of pilots learned to treasure the Spitfire for its delightful response to aerobatic manoeuvres and its handiness as a dogfighter. Iit is odd that they had continued to esteem these qualities over those of other fighters in spite of the fact that they were of only secondary importance tactically.Thus it is doubly ironic that the Spitfire’s reputation would habitually be established by reference to archaic, non-tactical criteria.

Last edited by 6S.Manu; 07-08-2011 at 09:55 AM.
Reply With Quote