Friday 2010-01-22 Screenshots AND Discussion Thread

[AdMan]

graphics push gameplay and vice-versa, that is the evolution of gaming. Like was said, in this age there is expected to be both and in-fact you can't have one without the other, it's much more than "eye candy", it's turning a simulation into an experience. I for one stopped playing Il2 about a year and a half ago, it's simply too dated now compared to the quality if game I'm used to playing, but I am also a retro gamer so one day years from now I will pick it up again for some nostalgia.

[Matze81]

Originally Posted by AdMan

graphics push gameplay and vice-versa, that is the evolution of gaming. Like was said, in this age there is expected to be both and in-fact you can't have one without the other, it's much more than "eye candy", it's turning a simulation into an experience.

I agree 100%!

Up to date graphics are very important, cause that's the first thing that pulls the player into the world / scenario the game presents. Of course once your "there" the gameplay has to be just as good for the imersion to be complete.

[Jg2001_Rasputin]

For the `There is to much shaking guys`

In my experience, I flew with Ju 52 and an An 2, the shaking is just right, if not too less. As far as I remember the was a lot of movement of the plane due to the engine.
Here is a short video of me as a passenger in the An 2, during the Hahnweide 2009. I think you can clearly see how the plane is shaking on the ground and in the air, alltough the pilot didnt nearly fly manoeuvres like shown in the SOW video.

http://vimeo.com/6454534

[proton45]

Originally Posted by Jg2001_Rasputin

For the `There is to much shaking guys`

In my experience, I flew with Ju 52 and an An 2, the shaking is just right, if not too less. As far as I remember the was a lot of movement of the plane due to the engine.
Here is a short video of me as a passenger in the An 2, during the Hahnweide 2009. I think you can clearly see how the plane is shaking on the ground and in the air, alltough the pilot didnt nearly fly manoeuvres like shown in the SOW video.

http://vimeo.com/6454534

The shaking I see in the video clip seem accurate, but only if you where holding the camera in your hand as you filmed. Usually the personal experience (and memories) of the cameraman is very different from what we later see on the film. In times of stress the mind & body compensate for things that might impede our performance. Human vision doesn't work the same as what we see on film...in real life our eyes dart back and forth, and we focus our attention on a small details (like a temp gauge), we blink and scan the horizon. The mind filters out distracting information as best it can.

Just as "IL2's" field of vision is an approximation of a humans "field of view", we need to approximately represent the shaking of the aeroplane and its occupant. When we drive the human eye darts back and forth focusing on many small details (all the time adjusting for changes in "depth of field" and posture), but the brain puts all this information together into a single big picture. The in-game image is equally rich in detail from the center of the screen to the edge...also the "depth of field" sharp from up-close to far away. The game represents the world in this way so that "we" as the player can immerse ourselves in the world of the game.

So the real question is NOT whether or not the shaking in the video clip is technically accurate, BUT the question is how do we want the shaking of airplane and pilot to be represented in the game...


p.s Its 4 AM here and I'm getting a bit blurry (lol)...I hope my ideas are easy to read.

Back in the old days their where many interesting discussions at the "ubi zoo" about the "field of view" and the "depth of field" issues. I assume that Oleg still has the same opinions.

[TheGrunch]

Originally Posted by proton45

Human vision doesn't work the same as what we see on film...in real life our eyes dart back and forth, and we focus our attention on a small details (like a temp gauge), we blink and scan the horizon. The mind filters out distracting information as best it can.

Someone should maybe take one of these up with them when they fly.

[ZaltysZ]

Originally Posted by TheGrunch

Someone should maybe take one of these up with them when they fly.

That device helps only to decrease unintentional camera movements induced by operator. In other words it is for people with shaking hands and not for environments in which whole operator (or just camera) is shaken by some other external force.

[TheGrunch]

Originally Posted by ZaltysZ

That device helps only to decrease unintentional camera movements induced by operator. In other words it is for people with shaking hands and not for environments in which whole operator (or just camera) is shaken by some other external force.

Hmmm, for some reason that very sensible observation escaped me when I posted that. Oh well, good website anyway.

[airmalik]

Originally Posted by proton45

The shaking I see in the video clip seem accurate, but only if you where holding the camera in your hand as you filmed

Originally Posted by proton45

p.s Its 4 AM here and I'm getting a bit blurry (lol)...I hope my ideas are easy to read.

Good post Proton.

[PilotError]

I thought I might add a comment or two about the shaking in the video which seems to be creating a bit of controversy.

I think both sides of the argument have valid points.

There is bound to be a lot of shaking and vibration in any warbird with those massive brutes of engines along with aerobatic maneuvers in turbulent air ( although sadly I've not been lucky enough to experience that for real ) .

On the other hand the human brain does an amazing job at filtering out and editing what we see from what our eyes actually see.

The point I noticed though, was that in the video even when there was quite a bit of shaking going on, the gunsight didn't seem to be shaking all that much. I reckon I could still have been able to line up the sight on a target even through all that buffeting . I'm not saying I would've been able to hit anything LOL, but the sight wasn't bouncing about that much that you couldn't look though it.
Run the video again but concentrate on the crosshairs to see what I mean. The sight does disappear a few times but that seems to be more like the pilots head moving due to pulling G's than due to shaking.

Another point is that right at the end of the video the engine rpm drops. Has the engine shut down ? Was a lot of the vibration coming from the ( rough running ? ) engine rather than turbulence ?

Just adding my tuppence worth.

[Richie]

You know that the cross hairs are a reflected image right? Here's a German Revi site