|
|
|||||||
| IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover Latest instalment in the acclaimed IL-2 Sturmovik series from award-winning developer Maddox Games. |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
06-24-2011, 10:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Real is ACTUAL GAMEPLAY, with solid +40 FPS in low level flight, straffing and bombing things... As I said: fixed benchmarks are stupid sometimes, and lead to some equaly stupid conclusions... People really don't learn... That's why readers that don't tried CloD yeat need to filter all stupidity out of this forum... 
|
|
#2
06-24-2011, 11:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Trying to catch up to your post. I know that it isn't actual gameplay. It is a benchmark and frame of reference. Your standard for graphics performance and mine are clearly different. I expect the BlackDeath track to run smooth and stutter free at 30+ fps at all times. That's my standard because that's what I have now in UP/46'. I'm not going to trade my graphics standard for better DM/CEM. It's not enough for me. I really had an expectation that this game would perform better graphics wise given the changes in technology the past 10 years. Maybe they need to go back to Open G/L. It always ran better than Direct X in 1946.
|
|
#3
06-24-2011, 11:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
 (crap, someone's just gonna make one up now, eh?) Last edited by ATAG_Dutch; 06-24-2011 at 11:08 PM.
|
|
#4
06-24-2011, 11:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Lol, probably.
|
|
#5
06-24-2011, 11:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Actually i'm glad they invested more in how the aircraft fly and operate than in the ability to run everything maxed out. It's easier to improve an engine's performance over time and gradually turn on dormant features, than introduce completely new game mechanics at a later date.
Lobi runs with original size textures and i'd risk a bet that's his main resource hog there. I'm running it fine on two year old hardware: i7 920 @ 2.7 Ghz, Ati 4890 1GB and just 3 GB of RAM, win 7 64bit. My settings are: 1680 x 1050 (native monitor resolution), roads/grass/shadows/vsync on, SSAO off, AAx2, building detail and forest on low, buildings amount unlimited (to get rid of the pop-up), land shading high and everything else on medium. I consistently get 30-60 FPS (capped there due to Vsync), unless flying over London. Even over London though i have to fly at low altitude to get below 30 FPS and even so it's a steady 22 FPS in the stock QMB mission, unless i go below 400-500 feet. That's the only scenario where it gets the hiccups for me, skimming the rooftops over London. In fact, since the recent beta and now with this patch i managed to increase my building amount to unlimited which i had set to medium before. This does gives me an occasional FPS drop the first time i'll spawn in a mission or when a chuck of textures are loading, but on average i get better and better performance with each patch, enabling me to even increase a graphics setting from time to time. My only wish is that the bombers would get some love in the next patch because there's a few known issues with some of them and a couple are in need of a revised control scheme/logic when on the bomb run. That's pretty much the only thing i miss right now, some gameplay specific fixes, because it already runs as well as can be expected on my PC. On a final note, that E-1 is a beast. It's not very good against bombers, but it chews up fighters like nobody's business with four of those fast firing MGs. I think it will become the prime air superiority platform for blue pilots online because its lower weight, high rate of fire and ample ammunition supply are ideal for properly hosing down enemy fighters and making a quick getaway.
|
|
#6
06-24-2011, 11:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#7
06-25-2011, 09:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
BD track 1680x1050 everything on medium, grass, roads etc ON. Original textures. min 17, max 130, avg 62.144 i5 2500K @ 4.0 GHz, Gtx 560 Ti @ stock. Both can be clocked a hell of a lot more. And regarding minimum fps, read my pervious post and use your head. Just because u say its crap if minimum 30 fps isnt achieved in a set track doesnt make it so. Just shows u make up anything to be able to whine. If u have the game its real easy finding out the flaw in your reasoning, if u dont, well..... Btw, did a quick test yesterday and flew a single mission (German column attack) with a total of 90 ac`s in the air. Had some stutters in a few places but nothing worse than i could have in IL2 online. Completely playable with same settings as mentioned (and i didnt even clear my catch folder) with column and airfield being strafed and bombed. Last edited by Baron; 06-25-2011 at 10:16 AM.
|
|
#8
06-25-2011, 12:02 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
A couple of things. First of all regarding what kind of hardware is needed to play this game without performance issues. Some of the system specs I've seen here should be able to run 2xCrysis 2 on full detail without any problems whatsoever and they have problems with CloD which is not by any means a "2011 graphics standard game". It's so obvious that it's poorly coded that it's embarrassing when someone is trying to say it's not. Get this in to your head, this game is not state of the art in the graphics department, if you don't agree then you probably aren't very up to date with the rest of the gaming industry. It's a good looking game and I love it but not to the degree where it should demand NASA like specs to be played fluently.
The second thing, how come the three blue stripes horizon is gone when luthier told us it was a graphics driver issue and not something they could correct? Good news that it's fixed but how come he told us it was AMD's problem in the past? Conflicting indeed...
__________________
|
|
#9
06-25-2011, 12:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Second: I run CloD fluid in a cheap quadcore, with cheap RAM and a middle range - but modern - VGA. I don't have "NASA like specs" and run the sim with great visual quality and fluid FPS. Upgrade your CPU and VGA, or use lower settings ingame.
|
|
#10
06-25-2011, 12:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
Hybrid Mode
