Friday 2010-08-13 Dev. update and Discussions

[lbuchele]

For some reason I prefer to aim with TrackIR on, just to deal with the extra difficulty of mantaining my head steady like a real pilot would.

[Sutts]

Thanks Oleg, another great update. That first shot is truly amazing. Trees look great up close too. I'm so looking forward to seeing the aircrew animations....they'll really highlight the human dimension of combat and could quite possibly stir the emotions. No longer are we shooting at just a simple lump of metal.

In terms of the map, will it be possible in SoW to zoom smoothly in and out of the map instead of the fixed zoom levels we have in IL2? I never really liked the interface in IL2 where you have to cycle through the zoom levels with the mouse click. Just a minor detail though.

Cheers

[SlipBall]

Originally Posted by Hoverbug

I've done it for real and wouldn't want to do it again, though I got out without a scratch (the 150 was a total loss though). Wing spars are pretty tough, so when they flex they can absorb a considerable amount of energy. The real trick is picking two trees that don't have another tree right behind them...

Wow, happy to hear that you were untouched. That must have been a very violent experience, good that you used your wits. Care to share the details that lead to the forced ditch?

[tourmaline]

Originally Posted by airmalik

I was thinking of the free software shoot . This allows you to record commands in your OWN voice and will issue the desired keystroke to the game. Because it's your own voice, there's no issue with recognition. When I used to play IL2, I had common voice commands like 'gear', 'flaps up', 'nav lights', 'fire extinguisher', 'smoke' set up and it was pretty cool to have the plane react to them. Felt like I had a copilot flying with me, performing what I asked him to do.

Before 'shoot' I spent a lot of time configuring my Saitek stick and throttle with modifiers keys etc. but couldn't always remember what button combo to press for a command. Shoot made it so much easier especially for the less commonly used commands.

Oh yes, if you have a severe cold, shoot might have a problem recognizing your commands since your voice sounds quite different. This has always been the case with voice activated software.

I prefer a hotas system anytime over shoot. You can record loads of keystrokes under a button. In real world situations it also doesn't work with voice command. Maybe some ultra modern airplanes might have it, but not the ones used in wow: BOB.

[Hoverbug]

Originally Posted by SlipBall

Wow, happy to hear that you were untouched. That must have been a very violent experience, good that you used your wits. Care to share the details that lead to the forced ditch?

Carb icing leading to a forced landing. I actually aimed for a gap between trees hoping to miss them both, but clipped one wing, losing 18" of wing and snapping the aileron cables (and ripping off half the aileron). The plane rolled with the damaged wing striking the ground and absorbing most of the energy. It could easily have been much worse or much better (having not hit the one tree at all).

[airmalik]

Originally Posted by tourmaline

In real world situations it also doesn't work with voice command. Maybe some ultra modern airplanes might have it, but not the ones used in wow: BOB.

It's up to you what you want to use the voice commands for. For instance, in the absence of hand signals, issuing commands to your wingman may be more realistic when voice activated rather than via keyboard/hotas button.

Being entirely optional, you don't have to use it if it doesn't work for you.

[zapatista]

Originally Posted by Splitter

Great points!

..... to move your "head position" in 3D....... the down arrow makes you "slouch" and the up arrow lets you sit up tall to see more landscape and less instrument panel. It is VERY helpful when flying on instruments such as in bad weather....................

It's just me, but I am much more interested in such functional feature than I am in leaf sizes and whether tree trunks are visible from the air. Most people will have to tone down the really neat visual effects anyway to maintain 30fps or more.

the point about including the potential for very high detailed scenery (and drivable ground vehicles, controllable ships, etc..) is that if this is built in from the start of SoW-BoB then it makes the sim engine scalable for the future as hardware increases, and then you end up with BOTH aspects (the best of both worlds so to speak). if you dont include those improved scenery and expandable aspects of the sim while you build it, like oleg is currently doing, then in 2 years it is looking very out of date again and you have to start all over again

Originally Posted by Splitter

Ideally, I would like a sim that fulfills the dual roles of combat flight and flight sim.

i have repeatedly asked questions to Oleg and Co allong those lines over the years, but i dont think the idea has received much traction, and i am not sure oleg entirely got my point either.
1) for your idea of having a "pure" civilian flightsim using the SoW-BoB engine i think is probably already possible at release time. "all you need" is for 3e party to build some civilian aircraft for you to fly, turn off all hostile aircraft and AA etc.., and you can VFR fly around peacefully at your hearts content. and as long as the 3e party civilian planes dont use instruments more complex then ww2 era (or the single russian modern day test plane we get included with BoB), then any civilian plane can be built for BoB imo.
2) what i am hoping/wanting more of however is to have many non-combat elements and other war related features possible in BoB, and have included many more other aviation elements that were part of ww2 aviation in a "wartime environment". eg:
- be able to fly supply missions (and ask for fighter escorts if required), do parachutists drops, fly photo reconnaissance missions, fly VIP's to certain locations (mission being to get them safely to their destination with hostile elements posibly being encountered),
- fly in supplies and replacement aircraft parts to airbases and troops under siege to keep that airbase or troop formation functional,
- be able to use real life tactics to reduce fighting ability of the enemy by damaging their supply convoys and bridges and fuel storage etc.
- have non combat missions like lying new replacement aircraft from the factories to specific airfields using VFR, maybe even fly some civilian liners or transport mission (inside the same active combat zone that is taking place on the dynamic server), fly red cross evac missions in and out of combat area's, rescue downed pilots from behind enemy lines (having to land for ex in a specific field at a partic rendezvous time, rescue pilots from the sea, etc..

none of those aspects would require much time or programing to add, all work with the already existing elements and just need a few different minor elements added. it would open up the sim to a whole additional series of potential customers, and adds a new area of interest for current il2 users.

Originally Posted by Splitter

I know that is wanting too much but all I have to do is fly a vintage WWII aircraft in X-Plane and then in IL-2 to feel the difference in flight model and functionality. I'd rather have better functionality than visuals IF I had to choose.

a better and more future proof BoB-SoW sim does not exclude having improved functionality and features like you listed. you just need to make a strong argument to oleg about what exactly to be included, because imho he might not have thought of it or even seen it as something that might be needed to make his new sim more complete

[AndyJWest]

what i am hoping/wanting more of however is to have many non-combat elements and other war related features possible in BoB
...
none of those aspects would require much time or programing to add, all work with the already existing elements and just need a few different minor elements added...

Have you ever done any computer programming, Zapatista?

[Romanator21]

Quote:
Originally Posted by JG52Uther View Post
Is my perception off? The crew of the Ju88 and Hurricane pilot look too small to me.

i noticed that to in the last set of screenshots but wasnt going to mention it. from previous comments from oleg on this it is a compromise they made while resolving a "collision bug" (if the pilot is modeled real proportional size, currently he pokes occasionally through the aircraft cockpit skin "boundaries" when he moves). if having the smaller crew is a short term compromise to get around this at the moment and will be fixed in one of the early patches, then i dont see it as a reason to cause current additional release delays. oleg also stated the 1e person view from the cockpit is visually correct and doesnt reflect having a "shorter" pilot.

The pilots here seem to be to scale.

In Il-2 they are a little large. In fact, there are two types of pilots in Il-2: One who sits in the plane, and one who falls through the sky and opens a chute. They happen to be different sizes (and wear different colored uniforms) for some reason, but the latter is more to scale.

As for collision bugs: Oleg stated that this was regarding crew animations. You cannot make the same animation for a Ju-87 pilot who uses a stick, and a Ju-88 pilot who has a yoke.

[Flanker35M]

S!

Nice update.