Another Fan Made War Thunder Video

[Feathered_IV]

Very well edited clip. Timely too, being Battle of Britain month so to speak.
The clip does tend to highlight some of the things that WT fails on. Namely the jet black all or nothing smoke effects, and the foggy canopies and plastic prop animations. The effects team don't appear to have the same artistic flair as the landscape people do.

[Mysticpuma]

Originally Posted by GloDark7

I'm afraid I have very little confidence in that area sadly. After all this time since CloD's release there have been no major breakthroughs with updates to the engine and it's difficult to be optimistic about it at all. Hearing that the sequel will be using this same engine fills me with dread.

Yes, I am a fan of Gaijin's work and also an IL-2/MG fan for many years before this. I am very impressed with Gaijin's WoP (Dagor) engine. Regardless of what you may think about WoP as a title and entry to the genre, it's graphics engine set a new bar. It may have had an unusual green filter on the Britain map(!) but the engine itself was a breakthrough. It makes perfect sense that Gaijin would use this foundation and improve upon it for their next project. In stark contrast 1C have an engine that was broken on day one, has seen little improvement after over a year and THIS is the foundation for their sequel! How can this instil any confidence? It certainly doesn't for me I'm afraid. This engine has gone as far as it can go in my eyes. IT is the bottleneck, not the hardware.

Now, we are getting one last update for CloD. A make or break update really. Sadly CloD is already broken so it either 'makes' it or it stays broken. Then how long till the sequel arrives that uses the SAME engine?

1C may not learn from their mistakes, but the fan base will.

Glo

I would also add from a "GRAPHICS ONLY" perspective...Glo made this video...it's just brilliant! (Check out the clouds too!!!!!)

http://youtu.be/XXh1ggW4AHo

[Sandstone]

Originally Posted by Mysticpuma

I would also add from a "GRAPHICS ONLY" perspective...Glo made this video...it's just brilliant! (Check out the clouds too!!!!!)

http://youtu.be/XXh1ggW4AHo

That is absolutely stunning!

[RedToo]

Very good apart from the animation of the propeller disk - far too dark and visible. Very off putting.

RedToo.

[hiro]

The props look like they are like a 8 or 10 bladers


WOP can pull of some nice graphics . . .


IIRC ROF's goodness started of pretty rocky . . .



Some good stuff on the recent posts . . . this place is always funny because of the mis reading of things. The devs throw the answer down, and then its skipped over, like that co-op thang.


As for the devs not knowing what features / improvements or what not due to their lack of playing their own game or the competitor's game . . .


They have what we've given them, they have the history of IL-2 to draw from, and they have all the promised features to implement. That's a lot of work already.

And who knows? Once they have a better working game for the sequel, that they will have the time to R & D and play other sims or flight games to find features that are useful.



Yes its hard to trust what the Luthier is saying. Yeah he's broken it with alot of undeliverables. But the devs did stick to improving the game, and getting it working.

We have that to work off of. The devs have a proven track record of fixing stuff as resources allow.

Hopefully the sequel's engine will be in a far better condition that CloD's and instead of leading from behind and doing damage control and putting out fires, they will be able to lead from ahead and have time to develop and add features. So we'll have more features to enjoy in the sequel. And if its not as optimized as it should, at least we'll know they'll stick to it and make it better.



---------


Q Do you consider that you've achieved about as much as you can, performance wise, with the game engine at the moment and that people's systems now have to be improved to improve performance?


A
Yes, we’re pretty of the same opinion. We’re not doing further optimization at this time, we’re improving features instead. Specifically landscape geometry and clouds for starters, but all that is for the sequels.



my note: the context behind it I wonder if the 'no further optimization' is answered in terms of the Clod development only (since only one patch left for it) and only features to the engine (and more features given to the sequels) will be put in the final patch? Because one can't have too much optimization. Optimization is always good.

OR

that the sequel's engine is relatively bug free / optimized and they are just adding features to it. Heck maybe they might be having two engines, one detail rich for the sim BOM and a dumbed down one for hte MMO.

That could explain why they can't work on CloD because they have a sequel and a mmo . . .But I'm just speculating . .



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


Q. Do you still have some of the original engine coders?


A
Yes. We even still have the core of the original 2001 Il-2 team working on the products.


This is nice

-----


Q
I know you stated the next CloD patch will be the last, so that means any fixes, advances and such into the game engine that come from the sequel will not be translated at some time or another back into CloD? Will Clod be completely abandoned in whatever state the final patch leaves it with no hope small updates, etc?


A
Why would you think that? We've never done that before, and I've always stated that our plans remain the same. There were many issues in the original IL-2 in 2001. After a few updates to the original, Forgotten Battles was released and there were no more updates to the original Il-2. That doesn't mean it was abandoned however! You can still play all of the original Il-2 content with 1946, all carried over and updated with the rest of the engine.


------

I like this; that they will improve the engine and carry over to previous games in the series. So Clod development maybe be stopped now, but later fixed and updated with added fixes / improvements future iterations of games will bring.

[Mysticpuma]

Originally Posted by RedToo

Very good apart from the animation of the propeller disk - far too dark and visible. Very off putting.

RedToo.

Can you imagine how good it would be in Clod if we could say to Luthier that the only problem we have with the graphics is a dark propeller, lol!

The thing is with the WoP game engine is that it looks visually stunning! All it would need from 1C is a co-op, Fmb, qmb and the detailed cockpits as well as the updated fm and dm. Ok that's too simple a comparison but the lighting, skin detail ( skinners have access to Uv, light, shadow and bump maps), clouds and land textures are just brilliant!

Comparing the immersion generated by the graphics engine, WoP wins hands down. Comparing them as Sims, CloD is a head and shoulders the grand daddy!

I do wonder what the future holds graphically for BoM if it uses the current engine. To my eye there is too much carry over from the original Il2 legacy, including popping up of buildings and textures, clouds not having a dense opaque level and popping up, trees flickering, in fact so many issues I wonder why they will persist with it?

Anyway, time will tell

Cheers, MP

[Trumper]

Originally Posted by Mysticpuma

Can you imagine how good it would be in Clod if we could say to Luthier that the only problem we have with the graphics is a dark propeller, lol!

The thing is with the WoP game engine is that it looks visually stunning! All it would need from 1C is a co-op, Fmb, qmb and the detailed cockpits as well as the updated fm and dm. Ok that's too simple a comparison but the lighting, skin detail ( skinners have access to Uv, light, shadow and bump maps), clouds and land textures are just brilliant!

Comparing the immersion generated by the graphics engine, WoP wins hands down. Comparing them as Sims, CloD is a head and shoulders the grand daddy!

I do wonder what the future holds graphically for BoM if it uses the current engine. To my eye there is too much carry over from the original Il2 legacy, including popping up of buildings and textures, clouds not having a dense opaque level and popping up, trees flickering, in fact so many issues I wonder why they will persist with it?

Anyway, time will tell

Cheers, MP

That video is excellent ,the shine on the metallic P51 and the reflectionsd off the canopy look stunning.
The real engine sound even down to that P51 whistle [i believe from the gun ports]
Compare with this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOm4nOTHMlc

[JG52Krupi]

Originally Posted by Trumper

That video is excellent ,the shine on the metallic P51 and the reflectionsd off the canopy look stunning.
The real engine sound even down to that P51 whistle [i believe from the gun ports]
Compare with this

That's because he took the engine sounds from a video and applied it to the video! Read the description.

[Chivas]

The only way Warthunder will draw most of the IL-2 community is larger maps, fairly realistic FM's, DM's, AI, AI Commands, FMB etc. If it uses the map sizes of WOP it will fail, and it will be interesting to see if they can keep the terrain looking as good, and trees with a damage model if and when they release much larger maps. I hope they succeed and we have two decent WW2 aircombat sims.

[He111]

Originally Posted by Trumper

That video is excellent ,the shine on the metallic P51 and the reflectionsd off the canopy look stunning.
The real engine sound even down to that P51 whistle [i believe from the gun ports]
Compare with this

That video is an excellent example why the P51 pips the post on the Spit for best WW2 fighter - same engine, same thin wing but the P51 has it's wing set further back, giving a more balanced aircraft. Well thats my theory anyway!

.