Friday 2010-10-29 Dev. update and Discussion

[klem]

Oleg, thanks very much.

A couple of questions.

Will there be adjustable turbulence at various altitudes? What we get in IL-2 seems to be quite coarse/rough. I'd like to see more use of turbulence but I think the mission builders leave it out because it is too coarse/crude especially for upper layers.

On the Tracer question, there were 'flame' type tracers which IceFire showed so well in his post. There were also the spiral (vortex?) smoke types but the third type the RAF used did not 'trace' the trajectory but gave a visible 'splash' on impact to confirm correct aim. It was called "DeWilde" ammunition and was very popular with the pilots. Will we have that?

Will the undercarriage modelling be better in SoW. Even when I pull of a 'greaser' in an IL-2 Spitfire there is a good chance it will still bounce around like a drunken turkey. The Oleo compression doesn't seem to be modelled too well (sorry). I asked a friend about this who travelled a lot in a 2 seat Spitfire (and took control etc) and he said that it might bounce in the direction of flight but it wouldn't usually 'wobble' very badly laterally. It isn't only the Spit though.

Wikipedia says you say November 2010.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storm_o...tle_of_Britain
2 Weeks even?
I won't hold you to that but..... this year? :-0


Thanks

[Skoshi Tiger]

Very Good work Oleg&Co!

The wait for this sim to be released will be hard!

Originally Posted by bf-110

Why the (same) weapons sound are different?
The 50 Cal of IceFire video sounds to blow a person away,but at Xilon 50 Cal video it sounds like kid fireworks...

And BTW,is there any plans to add infantry to SoW,Oleg?

Microphones on consumer vidio cameras have a very limited range compared to proffesional ones and vary in their capabilities. Also the noise is too loud or if a camera is too close to the sound source it can be pushed beyond their range.

There are other factors such as in some video's are in the open field and the another (with the flares) looks like it was shot from the deck of a boat (sorry - ship!). From the ship you would get echo's from the hard surfaces which would completly alter the sound.

Cheers!

[swiss]

Originally Posted by kalimba

ANd in the end, it is allways witch company will do the best drivers for such and such game...
SO if you are eco-friendly, ATI is the way to go....

ATI don't produce better cards, they produce different cards.
Sometimes ATI leads, somtimes nvidia, and it's not only about the drivers.

I consider myself eco friendly - I believe 100% in nuclear power, that's also what I have(you even have to tick away water energy in Switzerland).
NP maybe is not the final solution, but it will do until we got the fusion under control.
Now, I really hate Ati for the sole reason, whenever they come up with a new driver, it may increase fps for some games, but same time produces new problems, problems which have been thought to be already solved with the previous driver.
Nvidias are like V8 engines, loud, consume a lot, generate a lot of heat, but reliable.
Atis are like boosted up mini displacement engines, cheaper at the gas station, but the require a shitload of maintenance.
(and once you got it back from the garage, you'll have to deal with new issues...)
nv ftw.

[swiss]

Originally Posted by Splitter

I am curious...in the original post Oleg said that some structures are indestructible so as to comply with laws in those countries.

Are there really laws that prohibit such things in computer games?

I would think making those structures indestructible would fall more in line with good taste than illegal. Just curious.

Splitter

In fact, I just heard today the Bristish gov. caused some trouble to a gamemaker(was it arma?) because you could pick the side of the taliban.
No sh*t, they had to remove it, and now you can pick the "opposing force" instead.

Cute, isn't it?

[=69.GIAP=TOOZ]

Firstly I loved seeing the cockpit in action and seeing all the dials jumping around, it really looks amazing!

And the screenshots are cool - but why can't I blow up them bloody germans in Buck House?

Anyway, I was looking at the London map and as I live in London just now I wanted to see where I live in comparison to what is shown in this screenie. So, I had the idea of getting a current map of London and trying to scale it so that it overlays reasonably accurately onto the SoW map posted.

I went to multimap and brought up London and chose the sattelite view as I figured the easiest way of aligning both maps was by using the Thames. So, I took a screenie, measured the height in pixels of the big curve just east of the Royal Vic Docks on both maps and adjusted the multimap screenie so it would fit roughly.

I then laid the multimap screenie on top of the SoW screenie and line em up and I found that I had done a reasonable job of scaling the curve in the river, but then I noticed that the further west you went the more out of sync the two maps were.

Now I know that the Thames has changed its course a little over the last 70-odd years but it wouldn't account for this amount of disparity. I also compared the locations of the royal parks and they were more or less the same size on each pic but were way off in alignment.

So, I wonder what was used to draw the map for the game? Did you use ordinance survey maps of the time, or aerial photographs from the time, or a combination?

Of course, the multimap pic could be wrong, and I could have mucked the scaling, but there just seems to be far too much of a difference between the two.

Anyway, what do you think: Here's my layered pic and I hope you can make out the course of both rivers for comparison:

[carl]

So everyone is equal now ! May the best win !
lol but oleg had a meeting with nvidia monday gone, so at least at first there driver/card combo could be the best

[Blakduk]

Originally Posted by Necrobaron

On another tangent, I am continually amazed at people who still whine about graphics. While graphics can be an important immersive aspect, what goes on "behind the scenes*" in a sim is infinitesimally more important. .

Necro- i assume you meant to say 'infinitely'.
Infinitesimal basically means something is so small as to almost be unmeasurable.
I agree with your post but couldn't resist being an irritating net-nerd and correcting your grammar

[Splitter]

Originally Posted by swiss

In fact, I just heard today the Bristish gov. caused some trouble to a gamemaker(was it arma?) because you could pick the side of the taliban.
No sh*t, they had to remove it, and now you can pick the "opposing force" instead.

Cute, isn't it?

If I recall correctly, that started here in the US with the military banning the sale of MOH on bases. I'm not sure how I feel about this. I don't think it makes anyone go out and join the Taliban. But it is the military's right to say what is sold on their bases.

I like FPS shooters, but I would be a bit queasy playing a game that involves an ongoing war. It might not make sense, but I would feel that way playing for either side.

Thank goodness for WWII

Splitter

[major_setback]

Originally Posted by =69.GIAP=TOOZ

Firstly I loved seeing the cockpit in action and seeing all the dials jumping around, it really looks amazing!

And the screenshots are cool - but why can't I blow up them bloody germans in Buck House?

Anyway, I was looking at the London map and as I live in London just now I wanted to see where I live in comparison to what is shown in this screenie. So, I had the idea of getting a current map of London and trying to scale it so that it overlays reasonably accurately onto the SoW map posted.

I went to multimap and brought up London and chose the sattelite view as I figured the easiest way of aligning both maps was by using the Thames. So, I took a screenie, measured the height in pixels of the big curve just east of the Royal Vic Docks on both maps and adjusted the multimap screenie so it would fit roughly.

I then laid the multimap screenie on top of the SoW screenie and line em up and I found that I had done a reasonable job of scaling the curve in the river, but then I noticed that the further west you went the more out of sync the two maps were.

Now I know that the Thames has changed its course a little over the last 70-odd years but it wouldn't account for this amount of disparity. I also compared the locations of the royal parks and they were more or less the same size on each pic but were way off in alignment.

So, I wonder what was used to draw the map for the game? Did you use ordinance survey maps of the time, or aerial photographs from the time, or a combination?

Of course, the multimap pic could be wrong, and I could have mucked the scaling, but there just seems to be far too much of a difference between the two.

Anyway, what do you think: Here's my layered pic and I hope you can make out the course of both rivers for comparison:

I opened London map from 'Google maps' in Photoshop Elements and layered it with the game map. I coloured the 'Google Thames' red, and showed it above the game map. I needed to rescale (keeping proportions correct) and rotate about 1 degree. They match very well. I didn't mark the airfields.

The gaps in the colour are where road and place-names were.

[proton45]

Thanks Oleg...

I have been listening to the video with headphones....and I like the direction your taking, as is indicated by the sound(s) of the clip. The sound of the machine guns indicates a lot of weight and force (they sound deadly). I'm really curious to hear what it sounds like to get hit (damaged)...

Question: Will each hit make its own sound? Will a glass hit make a "glass sound" and will aluminum sound different then steel? Example...will a hit that penetrates an aluminum skin and then hits the armored back-plate make the appropriate sounds?

Thanks you very much