Friday 2010-08-06 Dev. update and Discussions

[kendo65]

Originally Posted by kendo65

I was referring to an apparent 'floating' effect on the trees in the foreground in Pic 1 - viewed on my work pc they look slightly as if they're suspended in mid-air. As no-one else seems to have commented on it , it may be down to viewing it on low-spec machine / screen.

I'll check it later on my LCD at home.

For the record, I've checked out the pics on my home PC monitor (Samsung 2232BW) and the trees in Pic 1 look fine.

Of course, the rest of you already knew that

Strange, viewed on 15" bog standard monitor earlier, the foreground trees at bottom of Pic 1 really did look like they were floating 'magic carpet'-like 50 feet above the ground

Very excited about the work being done with crew animations. Can't wait to see the videos.

Have to respectfully disagree with those who voice the opinion that graphics don't matter too much, or matter less than FM, DM, AI, etc, etc. For me graphics are just as important in creating a realistic and believable experience.

Il2 already does a pretty good job in FM, DM, AI and is being improved again in 4.10 (and beyond). Where it falls down (by 2010 standards) is graphics.

Also - at the risk of reigniting a recent discussion/argument - SOW will not be fulfilling the same function as a military-grade training simulator, where the trainee's appreciation of the environment's graphical quality is not an important issue. Let the die-hards scoff, but I and many others 'play' flight-sims and computer games primarily for enjoyment and relaxation and only secondarily as a 'serious' learning tool, though that is a great aspect of the experience as well.

To release a technically superb but graphically compromised game/sim in 2010 is commercial suicide and a mistake that the developers will not make.

[tourmaline]

Originally Posted by kendo65

For the record, I've checked out the pics on my home PC monitor (Samsung 2232BW) and the trees in Pic 1 look fine.

Of course, the rest of you already knew that

Strange, viewed on 15" bog standard monitor earlier, the foreground trees at bottom of Pic 1 really did look like they were floating 'magic carpet'-like 50 feet above the ground

Very excited about the work being done with crew animations. Can't wait to see the videos.

Have to respectfully disagree with those who voice the opinion that graphics don't matter too much, or matter less than FM, DM, AI, etc, etc. For me graphics are just as important in creating a realistic and believable experience.

Il2 already does a pretty good job in FM, DM, AI and is being improved again in 4.10 (and beyond). Where it falls down (by 2010 standards) is graphics.

Also - at the risk of reigniting a recent discussion/argument - SOW will not be fulfilling the same function as a military-grade training simulator, where the trainee's appreciation of the environment's graphical quality is not an important issue. Let the die-hards scoff, but I and many others 'play' flight-sims and computer games primarily for enjoyment and relaxation and only secondarily as a 'serious' learning tool, though that is a great aspect of the experience as well.

To release a technically superb but graphically compromised game/sim in 2010 is commercial suicide and a mistake that the developers will not make.

That's because the trees are casting a shadow, hence they appear to be floating in space...Especially from that height.

[kendo65]

Originally Posted by tourmaline

That's because the trees are casting a shadow, hence they appear to be floating in space...Especially from that height.

Absolutely, yes. It's just that on one screen it looks believable and realistic, while viewed on another it looked really off and bad.

May have hit on a reason for some of the disagreements going on around here - ie people viewing the same shots on different quality monitors

[kendo65]

Originally Posted by kendo65

Have to respectfully disagree with those who voice the opinion that graphics don't matter too much, or matter less than FM, DM, AI, etc, etc. For me graphics are just as important in creating a realistic and believable experience.
...
To release a technically superb but graphically compromised game/sim in 2010 is commercial suicide and a mistake that the developers will not make.

Quoting myself here , but wanted to make an overlooked point: the people on this forum may not be representative of the average punter who will buy SOW - in fact who will HAVE to buy SOW if it is to be a commercial success.

For many of us enthusiasts - those who actually know (or care about ) the difference between the E3 and and E4 sub-variants of the 109, or what kind of propellors the Hurricane used, or the precise layout of the instrument panel in a Spitfire Mk 1 - there will be many more (hopefully !) buyers who don't know and don't care (at least initially). They may buy the game because of a general interest in the Battle Of Britain; they may not know or care that it is Part 1 in the new, state of the art flight-sim series.

For these people what will matter is the BOB gameplay experience and graphical quality.

Maybe we overlook the importance of the standalone aspect of this game? I, and I'm sure most here, are firmly fixed on SOW as being PART 1 in the great new flight-sim scheme - we are already casting our eyes excitedly to the North Africa / Korea follow-ups and thinking about the improvements that Oleg will add as it progresses.

An overlooked question? - will SOW:BOB cut it as a standalone gaming experience? Will it recreate the Battle of Britain experience in an exciting, fun way or will it be mainly of interest to diehard, technical afficionados?

[furbs]

Landscape looking better, but and i know its WIP but the colours still look nothing like england to me...too bright, too much yellow and vivid green... to me when you look into the distance in england the colours seem to blur into dark green, brown and purple...here the look all wrong....too light and bright....esp at the horizon.

people have been saying just this about the colours for ages and we keep getting told its WIP dont worry...but ive not seen one pic yet of a english coloured landscape...just hope they will get the colours spot on for release.

planes, cockpits and other details looking fantastic as normal

[Tbag]

Are those also speedtree?





Look like the perfect flight-sim trees if you ask me!

I may be wrong but I dont think they are using these Trees anymore, these were the good tress.

[Sutts]

Originally Posted by Tbag

Are those also speedtree?





Look like the perfect flight-sim trees if you ask me!

>>I may be wrong but I dont think they are using these Trees anymore, these were the good tress.


If that's the case then it's a great shame. The colour and density of these trees is very good indeed.

Great update by the way Luthier. The landscape is looking nicely populated and very interesting...varied patches of woodland and irregular fields etc.
It's great to see trees way off in the distance now. Also notice how the trees border the fields - no random placement here.

In response to the earlier comment regarding field sizes...they're spot on for this period. It was only post war that hedges started to be ripped out on a grand scale to produce the machine friendly large fields we're accustomed to seeing today.

I think this level of ground detail will make ground attack very exciting and real. Just think of the feeling of speed you'll get as all those features zip by. Much easier to gauge height too.

The aircraft of course are absolutely superb in every way. I've got a good feeling about this product. I think we'll be in for a real treat.

Please don't let the whining get in the way of the regular updates. You know we're all addicted to them.

[airmalik]

Originally Posted by Tbag

Look like the perfect flight-sim trees if you ask me!

Agreed. These old trees look a lot better that the current ones at this distance. Perhaps they were too compute intensive or didn't degrade well to lower LODs for longer view distances.

[tourmaline]

Originally Posted by Tbag

Are those also speedtree?





Look like the perfect flight-sim trees if you ask me!

I think it's not so much a matter of trees, but a matter of lighting...
The trees are the same, but lighting is different...

Remember that the summer of '40 was very hot and thus much lighter then usual...Lots of sun.