Friday Update - December 9, 2011

[addman]

Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES

When I read Chivas post.. I got the impression he was making a reference to the new CoD graphics engine..

That being it is killing alot of PCs today..

But with time the advancement of the PC hardware will make this a none issue.

As was the case with IL-2, when it orginally came out some 10 years ago, its graphics eninge was killing the standard PC of that time, but 10 years later what with all the PC hardware advancement even a cheap PC with a cheap video card can run IL-2 smoothly.

The analogy being, 3 to 4 years from now you will not see anyone complaning about poor FPS in CoD and it's sequals.

Yes this is a correct assessment if they create a stable platform to build from. Also what I meant was that even though newer and better hardware will help games perform better/contain more advanced features it doesn't make it any less of a gargantuan task for developers to push out stable and well performing software. I think for smaller developers like MG, it is crucial for focus instead of trying to create a jack of all trades that really won't be good at anything. What I think is that MG are on the right track now, it seems as if they have narrowed down their priorities. It's all in my mind of course but that's how I perceive it.

[Chivas]

Originally Posted by addman

I feel this is a very common misconception around here, the misconception that "with time, technology of high spec PC's will allow this and that and so on and so fourth". The problem in this day and age is that smaller game developers are having a harder and harder time to cope, making advanced PC/video games whilst lacking the mighty funding from publishers such as EA or Activision as an example. Yes, there are enormous possibilities for game developers right now but it also requires more manpower and funding behind them.

I think this might be one of the reasons why CloD was rushed the way it was. You just have to look in the control settings menu in CloD to realize the ambition that Oleg and his team had but alas, when the mighty dollar speaks, everybody has to obey. I bet it's actually easier to create something solid in a limited environment where choices are fewer then having too many options/ideas and leaving most of them half-baked. CloD is lacking focus, it's sprouting out in every direction, it doesn't have a foot-hold or a solid foundation to grow from yet but hopefully that will be rectified in the not so distant future.

You can't keep developing for the next generation and the next generation in mind only. You have to think about what you want to achieve, what you want to create first then you look which technology can help you achieve these goals, not the other way around. That's what happened to Duke Nukem Forever, they kept replacing game engines for like 12 years! and when it finally was released it barely looked like a DirectX 9 game and the game itself (the important stuff) was total and utter crap, I played the demo...unfortunately.

To the point, new technology is a good thing but it doesn't guarantee a good game.

I upgraded my highend systems a number of times during the life of the original IL-2 and will probably do the same with the new series. Technology makes a huge difference and I never once had to complain about blue screens, freezes, stuttering, fps, in IL-2 or COD on High settings. BUT your right it never guarantees a good game.

I also agree that MG may have tried to achieve to much, but you have to remember he wasn't designing a game engine for now, but one that could easily upgraded for many years. One of the reasons he divided the game engine in modules.

Unfortunately the game engine is so complex, and for many reasons has taken far too long to build. Once it is complete, then the developer can be more focused on which features and what time frame they would like to introduce these features.

[Insuber]

Originally Posted by Peril

For what it's worth I agree on the DM choices being made.

There is realism, and then there is 'sensationalism!' The latter is what game developers create to sell more games to kids (wow factor). FPS games for example, how many shots does it take to kill someone 'realistically'.

Planes don't fly apart because they exceed VNE on a single occasion, not unless it has a fault anyway. This kind of damage is more accumulative than instantaneous. Any high amount of G that would instantly break a plane up would likely kill the pilot first anyway.

Realism doesn't traditionally sell games/sims, lets hope they have a big enough market to stick to this hard line. In the end it's always about the money for a commercial enterprise to survive.

I understand Luthier's point that the g stress discussion is often inconclusive and tends to degenerate, but it should not be the excuse to do nothing. I believe that g stress damage is under modeled in CloD, and this gives undue advantages in some situations, namely to 109's strafing Hawkinge .
It is true that in general the frame damage is cumulative, and in the current gameplay you "create" a brand new plane at every flight, thus "repairing" any previous airframe damage.
But in some cases the Vne or g damages are immediate and traumatic and lead to the loss of vital parts, such as ailerons and elevators, or even wings. I have not yet experienced one single damage of this kind in CloD, after 150+ h in the 109 and 50+ in red planes, sometimes with deep and long dives, very hard pullouts and all, apart from one single time on a Hurricane (I lost an aileron after a VERY deep dive).
And apart from hard pullouts after a sharp dive, instant damages can arise from normal pullouts followed by a roll or turn, or hard maneuvers on a full loaded plane (fuel+bombs). Have someone seen them yet?

To avoid discussions on this thread I will open another one, but as a starter you may want to read this thread, and in particular the US Navy case studies about the "G Hogs", at the bottom of page 1.

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/pol...ire-22553.html

PS: the amount of "banned" people in this ww2aircraft forum thread gives you an idea about the touchiness of this subject ... and the bad temper of combat flight simmers ...


Cheers,
Insuber

[David198502]

Originally Posted by Insuber

I understand Luthier's point that the g stress discussion is often inconclusive and tends to degenerate, but it should not be the excuse to do nothing. I believe that g stress damage is under modeled in CloD, and this gives undue advantages in some situations, namely to 109's strafing Hawkinge .
It is true that in general the frame damage is cumulative, and in the current gameplay you "create" a brand new plane at every flight, thus "repairing" any previous airframe damage.
But in some cases the Vne or g damages are immediate and traumatic and lead to the loss of vital parts, such as ailerons and elevators, or even wings. I have not yet experienced one single damage of this kind in CloD, after 150+ h in the 109 and 50+ in red planes, sometimes with deep and long dives, very hard pullouts and all, apart from one single time on a Hurricane (I lost an aileron after a VERY deep dive).
And apart from hard pullouts after a sharp dive, instant damages can arise from normal pullouts followed by a roll or turn, or hard maneuvers on a full loaded plane (fuel+bombs). Have someone seen them yet?

To avoid discussions on this thread I will open another one, but as a starter you may want to read this thread, and in particular the US Navy case studies about the "G Hogs", at the bottom of page 1.

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/pol...ire-22553.html

Cheers,
Insuber

i was wondering this myself, as i have yet to loose a part of my plane only through g forces.(+700 hours of flying Emils)
but i introduced a friend of mine to clod, and we were both in a 109.i lead the flight, and after some minutes, he was eager to shoot something, so he decided to give a small burst at me.i noticed it and climbed away,and came back on his high six, and shot a really short load on his left wing.nothing on his plane seemed to be damaged.then he made a hard turn left at about 400kph, and suddenly his wing broke off.that was the first and only time i saw something like that.

[Caveman]

Originally Posted by superman

Simple maths

The more it looks like real world the more things you will find that are different.

When it starts to look almost real, the number of differences are nearing infinity and so also the potential things to complain about.


The problem a lot of people have is not with the game, it is that they are getting older an don´t have the imagination they had a few years back.

I think I remember a time when just playing with a toy plane was
"totally immersive"

+1 so true... I remember being "immersed" in Microsoft sopwith camel addition to a very early version of flight simulator. I played for hours on a IMB PC Junior ~1983 with a keyboard and thought it was the greatest thing since sliced bread... Can't understand the people that complain...

[Feuerfalke]

Really nice.

But I won't buy any sequel/addon/Payware-Patch unless the basic game I already payed for is fixed.

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Caveman

+1 so true... I remember being "immersed" in Microsoft sopwith camel addition to a very early version of flight simulator. I played for hours on a IMB PC Junior ~1983 with a keyboard and thought it was the greatest thing since sliced bread... Can't understand the people that complain...

it's because they like complaining...I'm sure one of them will be along soon complaining about your criticism of them....I hope you are familiar with the term 'fanboi' because they throw that one around a hell of alot, it's also something to do with them having to spend a few bucks on a game and now their children will have to starve for a year.

[Buchon]

Yeah they sometimes found a IL2-COD fan in the 1C / IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover forum

The world is doomed !!

[JG52Krupi]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

it's because they like complaining...I'm sure one of them will be along soon complaining about your criticism of them....I hope you are familiar with the term 'fanboi' because they throw that one around a hell of alot, it's also something to do with them having to spend a few bucks on a game and now their children will have to starve for a year.

LMAO nice one bongo

[Mad G]

Originally Posted by Feuerfalke

Really nice.

But I won't buy any sequel/addon/Payware-Patch unless the basic game I already payed for is fixed.

Me too!