Friday 2010-10-29 Dev. update and Discussion

[d165w3ll]

Originally Posted by kendo65

Thanks Oleg for the update. As others have said it gets better each week.

Thanks also to Rodolphe for the various interesting posts - nice bits of extra information. Appreciated.

I'd like to add the perfect accompaniment to the night-time shot:

"Put that light out!..Put that light out!!!"


Believe we may have to wait for 3rd party update to get the animated ARP wardens

(This will mean nothing whatsoever to people unfamiliar with a certain well-loved British comedy show.....)

Oh - I've just seen Kendo has beaten me to it! AND found a pic of Hodges!

[fireflyerz]

Good greif, what a bloody mad house , gets worse every week....................

[Splitter]

I am curious...in the original post Oleg said that some structures are indestructible so as to comply with laws in those countries.

Are there really laws that prohibit such things in computer games?

I would think making those structures indestructible would fall more in line with good taste than illegal. Just curious.

Splitter

[Bogusheadbox]

If this has been mentioned previously, please forgive me. But a little criticism

The radio coms chatter. sounds to me like several comms at once and that is not possible. You should get a garbled carrier wave if one steps over the other on comms. Not hear two voices at once.

Unless i missed something that is the reason for the multiple voices

[imaca]

Originally Posted by philip.ed

Sorry, I thought you were trying to say that the .303 bullets carried the tracer inside them. On some levels this is right, but none of the .303 bullets intended to inflict damage did
The tracer-rounds, of course, would be in the shape/calibre of the round required to be fired.

From:
http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/BoB.htm

The incendiary ammunition was also variable in performance. Comparative British tests of British .303" and German 7.92 mm incendiary ammunition against the self-sealing wing tanks in the Blenheim, also fired from 200 yards (180m) astern, revealed that the .303" B. Mk IV incendiary tracer (based on the First World War Buckingham design – it was ignited on firing and burned on its way to the target) and the 7.92 mm were about equal, each setting the tanks alight with about one in ten shots fired.

[bf-110]

Why the (same) weapons sound are different?
The 50 Cal of IceFire video sounds to blow a person away,but at Xilon 50 Cal video it sounds like kid fireworks...

And BTW,is there any plans to add infantry to SoW,Oleg?

[Richie]

The other Battle Of Britain movie witch I actually like even more than the 1969 Battle Of Britain. Hope And Glory

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLJKI...mment_received

[Blakduk]

Wow!
The WIP video of SOW makes Il2-1946 look very old, especially considering that Il2 is fully mature product.
Who was flying the Hurricane? I was screaming at them to use a bit of rudder to line up their shot properly (I hope they were inaccurate on purpose and turned away to hide the damage modelling on the He111 )
I also noticed the first frame had the propellor frozen and gauges at zero. They quickly snap into action when the video starts playing and bounce around for a while. I hope this doesn't mean an airstart will automatically overstress the engine components (I've had this happen a few times in Il2 in sensitive planes such as the Me262 where an airstart has jolted the throttle once i've made an adjustment and exploded the engine). I'm certain that Beta testing will reveal any flaws like this.

The first time i played Il2 vs 1.2 (many years ago) i was astounded at the 'realism' of it. With each weekly update i am becoming more certain Oleg and his team will astonish me again.
Good luck at the trade show guys!

[Necrobaron]

Originally Posted by Oleg Maddox

5th - Simply some details of important places in London (such several objects will be impossible to destroy that to have no problems with the laws in some contries).

Fantastic update!

Can you or someone else explain what I quoted above? There are laws that prevent some buildings from being depicted as damaged or destroyed?

On another tangent, I am continually amazed at people who still whine about graphics. While graphics can be an important immersive aspect, what goes on "behind the scenes*" in a sim is infinitesimally more important. True sims run much deeper that what the graphics, in a screenshot or otherwise, might show and people need to remember that. Even if SoW looked exactly the same as the IL-2 sim we fell in love with nearly 10 years ago (which it certainly does not, contrary to what some petulant buffoons might suggest or imply), I'd be willing to bet that it is what we can't see that will be far more complicated and detailed, by several orders of magnitude, than what IL-2 could achieve. Because of this, SoW will demonstrate that it is a sim of this decade and not of the last.

*Flight modelling, atmospheric/weather conditions, damage modelling, environmental effects, etc.
________
BREAKUP ADVICE DICUSSION

[major_setback]

Originally Posted by Necrobaron

I am continually amazed at people who still whine about graphics. While graphics can be an important immersive aspect, what goes on "behind the scenes*" in a sim is infinitesimally more important.

In an update that consists of (mostly) 100 percent graphic material it would be surprising if were not discussed. Whining is another matter. I can do without that.