Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik

IL-2 Sturmovik The famous combat flight simulator.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-23-2010, 11:53 PM
AndyJWest AndyJWest is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,049
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by artjunky View Post
Yes, and let me continue your idea...'for things that I like.'

I totally understand that. As long as they focus on "your" areas of interest...(reports on how many bullet holes are in your plane, etc, etc...) that's where the resources should go? In another thread you said something to the affect that "This game is supposed to be about flying..." Well, that's an opinion but it's not held by everyone.

Had Oleg not thought it important, he wouldn't have bothered building all those beautiful factories and houses that the arbiters insisted would be cpu hogs.
Why should I 'let you continue'? Since you clearly can't read my mind I don't see why I should.

If you really don't think "this game is supposed to be about flying" then what do you think it is about?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-24-2010, 04:05 PM
artjunky artjunky is offline
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 9
Default

Yes, of course it's about "Flying." People differ in what they find interesting about this sim. Some geek out about the climb and turn rate of one plane vs another to others its about "experience" of flying. It's about feeling like you're immersed in a real world when you look out the cockpit at the objects below and feeling like you're somewhat in this world they have created.

It's bewildering to me to think that people are ACTUALLY arguing not to have more complexity to a Sim.

How dare people offer suggestions...
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-24-2010, 04:33 PM
zapatista's Avatar
zapatista zapatista is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,172
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyJWest View Post
Why should I 'let you continue'? Since you clearly can't read my mind I don't see why I should.

If you really don't think "this game is supposed to be about flying" then what do you think it is about?
what an absolute load of drivel, you weirdo !

where in the dark recesses of your somber mind do you now start to believe people here have to explain and justify ANYTHING to you about what THEY want to have included in oleg's flightsim project ?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-24-2010, 04:51 PM
AndyJWest AndyJWest is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,049
Default

Quote:
or somebody so new here to the BoB project you dont seem to know much about what detailed information oleg has provided on all of this
So you are claiming to be 'part of the BoB project' now are you zapatista? I think this is a clear indication of the usefulness of your postings, and their connection with reality.

Since neither of us is involved in BoB development, I'd say that my grasp of elementary principles on application design, whhich is evidently greater than yours, is much more relevant than how long I've been posting on this forum.

And isn't it rather infantile to use personal abuse when you don't have a better response?

-----------------

zapatista is back on ignore....
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-24-2010, 05:09 PM
zapatista's Avatar
zapatista zapatista is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,172
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyJWest View Post
So you are claiming to be 'part of the BoB project' now are you zapatista?
wow jeez gosh !! AndyJWest takes what is said and spins it to its absurd extreme and pretends it was what i said, how surprising ! used to arguing in donald duck forums with primary school kids it seems.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyJWest View Post
I'd say that my grasp of elementary principles on application design..
thats amazing, you just turned yourself into an experienced game designer of infinite wisdom and everybody else in this forum knows nothing about BoB eh, isnt the internet great ? you print your own diplomas to perhaps ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyJWest View Post
And isn't it rather infantile to use personal abuse when you don't have a better response?
short attention span combined with low IQ is a real problem when facing reality it seems. right now you have with your multiple monotone posts in this thread contributed EXACTLY NOTHING, can you spot a pattern there ? remember what these threads are for yet ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyJWest View Post
zapatista is back on ignore....
lol, you cant even get that right can you. wasnt i on ignore already or where you fibbing again ?

/note to lab: no increase in AndyJWest cognitive and reasoning ability despite repeatedly being given all information to solve simple clue's. behavioral pattern and genetic sequence of subject makes it unlikely they will ever contribute to the benefit of others around him

Last edited by zapatista; 04-25-2010 at 02:47 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-25-2010, 10:19 AM
kendo65 kendo65 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 908
Default

Don't want to get involved in what has become a very personal dispute, but thought i'd try to give my perspective on these issues. At the risk of being accused of 'copping out' I can see merit in both your arguments.

Zapatista, I don't think any of us would say that we don't want a 'living, breathing world' to fly over and interact with in SOW, and you are right that Oleg has told us that civilian traffic (buses, cars, etc) is modelled and will be included. This is definitely something that I have little doubt will play a big part in the future of this sim. I wonder though how much will be available and usable in the initial release?

This is where I think Andy makes a good point - the word is 'resources' - both in Maddox Games development time AND in PC processing power.

We are already aware that Oleg is aiming for a release later this year and that many crucial aspects of the game remain to be tuned and added. This means that of necessity some of the desirable but non-essential extras will be pushed back for inclusion after initial release. The best examples of 'desirable but non-essential' would be things like wildlife in the fields, civilian traffic, animated civilians (farmers, pedestrians, kids playing in the back yard, etc).

The issue of PC processing power is key here too. There will not be much point in developing and including all the features of this world if no-one has a powerful enough PC to actually enable and run it.

I think given this the most realistic result in BOB will be that some minimal amount of civilian traffic, wildlife, etc will be available for use. I fear though that attempts to make heavy use of it while simultaneously having decent-sized air battles will result in low frame-rates (similar to il2 over cities).

However, one thing that I'm sure will be ruled out for the foreseeable future is the possibility of continuing the game on the ground after the pilot has bailed out. The big difficulty here is in developing realistic AI to control all of the vast number of possible interactions between a downed pilot and his environment. It is not enough having cars with open-able doors or pedestrians that follow pre-programmed routes along designated paths. That kind of 'dumb' modelled world is perfectly believable from a plane at 2000 feet, but when you are standing next to the pedestrian or when you attempt to eject a passing motorist from his car - think of all the possible interactions that will have to be modelled to make it seem real....!

The only alternative I can see to this (initially) would be having your downed pilot in an unpopulated, dead environment - not very rewarding and not very realistic.

Last edited by kendo65; 04-26-2010 at 08:38 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-25-2010, 01:27 PM
zapatista's Avatar
zapatista zapatista is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,172
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kendo65 View Post
This is definitely something that I have little doubt will play a big part in the future of this sim. I wonder though how much will be available and usable in the initial release?
i dont disagree with that.

what got my reaction was that some late arrivals in this forum seem unaware there is a whole range of elements oleg has spoken about himself that he has incorporated already, and other elements he has factored into the engine and will be developed further as the later installments of BoB/SoW get released (or will be open to 3e party folks to develop)

Quote:
Originally Posted by kendo65 View Post
We are already aware that Oleg is aiming for a release later this year and that many crucial aspects of the game remain to be tuned and added. This means that of necessity some of the desirable but non-essential extras will be pushed back for inclusion after initial release.
i dont see it that way, and i believe oleg is well on track to release by his intended date. he indicated around the middle of last year that he intended to have "many 1000's of players" using BoB/SoW by the anniversary date of BoB in 2010. there are several possible specific dates for this, latest possible one being mid/late sept 2010. given he has been at the stage of integrating his completed components already in the last few months, jumping straight to beta stage with all elements working without the usual protracted alpha stage, oleg pretty much already knows what will be in the sim and what not. he wont waste adding months to develop/add some non core new feature just because of a discussion in a forum thread (as some here seem to believe might be the case).

Quote:
Originally Posted by kendo65 View Post
The best examples of 'desirable but non-essential' would be things like wildlife in the fields, civilian traffic, animated civilians (farmers, pedestrians, kids playing in the back yard, etc).
we already have several of those include, no need to be modest. we will have birds flying in flocks near cliffs at the coast (and causing bird strike when hit), and hopefully (but unconfirmed) some birds in other fields. we also have some civilian road traffic, working and modeled london buses oleg already mentioned several yrs ago (and posted screenshots). in a post in this forum he also confirmed some civilian road cars were working in the sim (but didnt say if would be included at release)

what hasnt been confirmed is static animals in farmer fields (oleg did say there would be no animated horses/cattle/sheep etc at release), but presumably adding some static animals would not be a big deal and i hope will be included (to be switched of in options for those wanting to reduce fps drain, just as you can do in rowan's BoB now)

oleg also didnt confirm or comment if there would be "farmer driving tractor in fields", or "civilian truck on roads", personally i think that is very simple to add and would take one of his programmers 20 min. you just set the tractor/ truck to drive at a preset loop on the road or field, and thats it (maybe synced to server time, so the farmer dont work his fields at night)

adding individual civilians walking around villages/towns is a bit much to ask for now, BUT we will have the equivalent on airfields, by having some form of animation of refueling/rearming etc on airfields, AND fire and ambulance trucks (presumably not ghost driven, so there has to be a figure inside). adding some static civilians in some parts of the map, on bridges, next to rivers, or passengers on a bus etc is not that big of a leap. we already have in il2 a troop truck with simple animated figures jumping out of it when strafed, is it that big of a leap of faith to have a more modern and better detailed version of a similar feature in 2010 BoB, i dont think it is ! will it be included at release ? no idea, but to me it is a very obvious possibility to be expanded on (either by oleg or 3e party)

since oleg already stated he hoped to include at release the ability to control at least a single vehicle, and probably a ship/boat at release or soon thereafter, then these vehicles/ships have to include a modeled driver/pilot. so again it emphasizes oleg's recent efforts in working on that aspect (as can be clearly seen in his detailed human figures, and a recent video of animated skeletal pilot entering/exiting an aircraft). will this be a simple animation ? will this be under player control in 1e or 3e person ? no idea, but to pretend it isnt part of BoB's future is just silly, it obviously is in some form.

i think some people here (not you, but people like andywest) should go and refresh there mind, or find out for the first time, on the extensive comments oleg himself has previously made on this over the years, much of which has been confirmed by development screen shots and video's.

and like another recent poster stated, these forums, particularly the ones oleg and Co read themselves, are as much a brainstorming resource and a place for idea's as they are a location for general fan/user discussion, so think big, and come up with suggestions for further improvements

Last edited by zapatista; 04-25-2010 at 01:31 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-25-2010, 05:11 PM
philip.ed's Avatar
philip.ed philip.ed is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,766
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zapatista View Post
what an absolute load of drivel, you weirdo !

where in the dark recesses of your somber mind do you now start to believe people here have to explain and justify ANYTHING to you about what THEY want to have included in oleg's flightsim project ?
Was his question directed to you? No, it wasnt, so calm down and stop being so aggressive. Name calling won't get you anywhere; all Andy wanted to know was what the chap felt he wanted out of the sim. Your reaction was completely over the top.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-25-2010, 05:40 PM
AndyJWest AndyJWest is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,049
Default

And perhaps Zapatista should stop assuming that the only people who read this forum are those that post on it. Until 1C:Maddox started giving regular details about SoW:BoB, and Team Daedolos started reporting on IL-2 patches, there was little on the forum worth the bother of commenting on, at least in my opinion.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-25-2010, 06:22 PM
philip.ed's Avatar
philip.ed philip.ed is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,766
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyJWest View Post
And perhaps Zapatista should stop assuming that the only people who read this forum are those that post on it. Until 1C:Maddox started giving regular details about SoW:BoB, and Team Daedolos started reporting on IL-2 patches, there was little on the forum worth the bother of commenting on, at least in my opinion.
Exactly; just because you joined at a certain date it doesn't mean that you haven't been watching the forum beforehand
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.