Friday update and discussions 2011-03-18

[Insuber]

Originally Posted by sallee

Do you know, I'm a 47 year old solicitor. I've got three children. I've been fascinated by aviation since I was about 5 years old. It may be even longer because I think one of my first memories is of aircraft circling around above me and my father tells me that we stopped in a lay-by to watch what was presumably the filming of the film "Battle of Britain". I read about aircraft, a lot.
I've played just about every flight sim you can name. When I was a child the closest we came to a flight sim was chasing each other on our bikes.
IL2 was an absolute miracle to me. The images, the pink sunset moving across the instrument panel, all amazing and miles ahead of the "opposition".
In the last year or so, I've been playing Rise of Flight which is as amazing to me as IL2 when it first came out. I've flown PA28s, Chipmunks, a Jodel Robin, a Harvard and Tiger Moths. Any of the people involved in serious flight sims I hold in the highest regard. They'll never make a fortune out of it. The enthusiasm and love of flight which is palpable in the teams which have created Rise of Flight and the IL2 series is a cause of genuine rejoicing to me. I'm not naive and I'm not a simpleton. I'm as critical as the next man. My reaction to this stuff is visceral, it eirher convinces or it doesn't.
Now, what is it that makes some of the negativity here so distasteful? It's not because I want to marry Oleg. It's because someone has devoted his life and huge amounts of effort and (who knows?) has struggled to persuade people, like his publishers, of the commercial viability of flight sims because of a real love for what he does. I've got a reason to admire him and his team. A real reason, not a blind stupidity and I can do without people telling me not to have that admiration or why I should not have it. This stuff is pure gold. It's amazing it exists at all. My critical faculty is impressed and overawed by it.

I think the videos are amazing. Some things are not perfect, but, good grief, this is as near as it gets.

Sallee,

You wrote the best post I've ever read here. I'm a 47 years old engineer, and I share every line of your post. "It's amazing that this thing exists at all". Amen.

Cheers,
6S.Insuber

[Oldschool61]

Originally Posted by Heliocon

You take the retard cake.

@Chivas- "General insults, LMFAO, you should try reading your own posts. While your at it try using sound reasoning and evidence before you declare COD antiquated for years to come. ."
.

If people actually took the time to do this we wouldnt have all these religous wackos either. And we might actually have a planet without jihads and crusades....oh well I guess I can dream..

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by Heliocon

Then quote me saying what you said I said... and that means using a forum quote and not paraphrasing, also link it. Thanks.

No offense, but I don't take orders from the voices in your head.

Originally Posted by Heliocon

Depends, if its american please only send samuel adams

O btw - when you posted about the engine being a starting point, and not an end point, I totaly agree. Good point and good post so I will toast to that!

Not american...Choose any top rated micro-brasseries from Montreal...

And from what I have seen and understood from Oleg, to get close to photorealistic graphics for this flightsim at a decent framerate with current affordable PC, it is still better today to run the game with less ultra-high-tech and "unstable" technology but with more optimized and tightly tweaked well known API...We still dont know to what extend this new engine will be able to be upgraded and how it can be done...But I am no expert here...If I am correct, Luthier said that the new clouds and weather systems were already implemented, but were unplayable at this time due to the lack of optimization...Do they need to use DX11 for those f/x or any new technologies ? Maybe...Time will tell ...

Salute !

[Insuber]

Hey you,

Hypercritics, if you are here I assume that you are interested in prop flight sims, as I am.
So, have you considered the alternatives to ClOD, if you look today for a good WWII flight sim? Zero. Nothing. Nada. No market = no investments. Only a huge passion could produce Il2 then, and CloD now.

A "thank you" to Oleg and team could be added here and there to your deluge of criticism, I think.

Cheers,
6S.Insuber

[Insuber]

Originally Posted by david hayward

no offense, but i don't take orders from the voices in your head.

rotfl!

[MD_Titus]

Originally Posted by Heliocon

I never said it wasnt going to be. But you would know that if you could read....

And that's where I stopped paying attention. Heliocon, you've got to be one of the rudest posters I have seen round here.
dx11 will make the game look better, but with a significant performance hit. You think fully implemented tesselation effects wouldn't reduce th gwme to a slideshow on 95% of people's rigs? This market share you talk of is deceptive. It may be around 30% for people with dx11 capable cards, but how many run games well, hell, how many games actually use it? Quality of frame rates and number of titles would be a better indicator of market share.

Originally Posted by David Hayward

I haven't missed the point. He thinks that not implementing DX11 will make CoD so soul-crushingly disappointing that it will reach back in time and also make IL-2 less enjoyable to play. Am I close?

Lol

Originally Posted by David Hayward

Apparently CoD will be the best antiquated WW2 flight sim available. Thanks for that insight.

And lol again

Originally Posted by sallee

Do you know, I'm a 47 year old solicitor. I've got three children. I've been fascinated by aviation since I was about 5 years old. It may be even longer because I think one of my first memories is of aircraft circling around above me and my father tells me that we stopped in a lay-by to watch what was presumably the filming of the film "Battle of Britain". I read about aircraft, a lot.
I've played just about every flight sim you can name. When I was a child the closest we came to a flight sim was chasing each other on our bikes.
IL2 was an absolute miracle to me. The images, the pink sunset moving across the instrument panel, all amazing and miles ahead of the "opposition".
In the last year or so, I've been playing Rise of Flight which is as amazing to me as IL2 when it first came out. I've flown PA28s, Chipmunks, a Jodel Robin, a Harvard and Tiger Moths. Any of the people involved in serious flight sims I hold in the highest regard. They'll never make a fortune out of it. The enthusiasm and love of flight which is palpable in the teams which have created Rise of Flight and the IL2 series is a cause of genuine rejoicing to me. I'm not naive and I'm not a simpleton. I'm as critical as the next man. My reaction to this stuff is visceral, it eirher convinces or it doesn't.
Now, what is it that makes some of the negativity here so distasteful? It's not because I want to marry Oleg. It's because someone has devoted his life and huge amounts of effort and (who knows?) has struggled to persuade people, like his publishers, of the commercial viability of flight sims because of a real love for what he does. I've got a reason to admire him and his team. A real reason, not a blind stupidity and I can do without people telling me not to have that admiration or why I should not have it. This stuff is pure gold. It's amazing it exists at all. My critical faculty is impressed and overawed by it.

I think the videos are amazing. Some things are not perfect, but, good grief, this is as near as it gets.

Excellent post

Originally Posted by Insuber

Hey you, hypercritics, I assume that if you are here you are interested in prop flight sims, like me. So, have you considered the alternatives to ClOD, if you look today for a good WWII flight sim? Zero. Nothing. Nada. No market = no investments. Only a huge passion could produce Il2 then, and CloD now.

A "thank you" to Oleg and team could be added here and there to your deluge of criticism, I think.

Cheers,
6S.Insuber

Concur!

[Immermann]

Another view on the DX debate:

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/gra...l-to-directx/1

Not that it matters too much, flight sims are generally CPU-limited anyway.

[Kikuchiyo]

Correct me if I am wrong here, but didn't last weeks update show that tessellation was already implemented?

and Helicon said best himself:

Originally Posted by Heliocon

Also there is a reason why its called "cutting edge/new tech/next gen" why? Because the first few programs to use the new tech are making next gen engines, once everyone starts using them then its current gen technology...

and that my friends and fellow posters, and even Helicon is exactly what the CloD ENGINE is. It is the next/newest/next gen flight engine. Just because it doesn't (you presume) have the newest graphics hardware implemented doesn't mean it's last gen. It's the ENGINE that is next-gen.

Your brain seems to be rather antiquated, and poorly oiled. You spew vitriol and then get upset when others return it. Before you post breathe a bit, and calm down. No one is attacking you personally (well before you started doing it.) On the same note we've all gotten rather savage lately, anticipation obviously a factor, and we really need to step back and be a bit more cordial towards one another and the devs.

[JAMF]

Originally Posted by Immermann

Another view on the DX debate:

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/gra...l-to-directx/1

Not that it matters too much, flight sims are generally CPU-limited anyway.

3000 draw calls, that limits the number of aircraft to 300 (10 possible moving parts) and if you add bombs, parachutes, ground vehicles and ground objects, it will detract more from the aircraft numbers.