Is CoD going to be patched to a 'final state' ?

[Bounder!]

I can only speak from my own experiences with CoD and the biggest improvement I have found is investing in a new PC.

Pre beta patch the game ran ok on my old PC but I did get stuttering online in dogfights and big furballs were a no-go. About the time of the beta patch I bought a brand new PC and that fixed it for me. Performance wise the game now runs extremely smooth on full settings - I have no slow downs, no fps issues, no stuttering etc etc in the largest online furballs and I have no CTDs anymore. I know not everyone can do it right now and I don't want to be harsh but CoD is still a reasonable new game and if you want to be able to run a next gen game flawlessly you need a high end PC. People trying to run a next gen game on old hardware are going to have performance issues unfortunately. Hopefully the devs will be able to streamline game performance but I imagine there's only so much they can do.

[skarden]

Originally Posted by Force10

Yeah...we get the division of labor thing. 3d modelers being different than people that work on code. I would say that BOM is the reason we won't see any more planes for COD or any type of real campaign system, because these people have been working on BOM for quite awhile now, while COD has not been fleshed out into a real BOB sim. Oh....almost forgot....blah blah blah.

Well if you get the division of labor then whats not to understand? people ARE Working on improving the game and getting the new patch out, what so the people who aren't working on that should just be sitting around doing nothing? why not have them working on BOM, it makes sense to have them doing something productive doesn't it?, and you don't know which teams of people are working on BOM and who's working on COD your just taking wild stabs in the dark without any evidence to back it up.

And as far as it being fleshed out into a real BOB sim, to me it's always been more of a hardware limitation then a software one, the only sim that I know comes close is wings of victory II BOB which while actually being quiet good and can get close the numbers of planes used in BOB it doesn't have a tenth of the depth of modeling that COD has, and use's a MUCH older game engine to achieve it, which again doesn't anything close to the complexity that COD has ( with the exception of the AI, which is outstanding! )

The amount of depth COD has comes at a price, and that price is needing to have good hardware to run it, you can't create a game/sim that is planned to be expanded on for the next 10 years while catering to yestedays hardware, I know that seems harsh, but to me it's the truth of that matter, some of the great games of the last few years weren't able to be cranked all the way up until a couple of years after release, and I honestly think COD will be one of those great games.

[Anders_And]

Originally Posted by skarden

Well if you get the division of labor then whats not to understand? people ARE Working on improving the game and getting the new patch out, what so the people who aren't working on that should just be sitting around doing nothing? why not have them working on BOM, it makes sense to have them doing something productive doesn't it?, and you don't know which teams of people are working on BOM and who's working on COD your just taking wild stabs in the dark without any evidence to back it up.

And as far as it being fleshed out into a real BOB sim, to me it's always been more of a hardware limitation then a software one, the only sim that I know comes close is wings of victory II BOB which while actually being quiet good and can get close the numbers of planes used in BOB it doesn't have a tenth of the depth of modeling that COD has, and use's a MUCH older game engine to achieve it, which again doesn't anything close to the complexity that COD has ( with the exception of the AI, which is outstanding! )

The amount of depth COD has comes at a price, and that price is needing to have good hardware to run it, you can't create a game/sim that is planned to be expanded on for the next 10 years while catering to yestedays hardware, I know that seems harsh, but to me it's the truth of that matter, some of the great games of the last few years weren't able to be cranked all the way up until a couple of years after release, and I honestly think COD will be one of those great games.

Skarden, your system is very similiar to mine... I have have a I5-760 at 4ghz otherwise we have exactly the same systems.. How is your game running? Since last beta patch my frames might be in general higher but the stutter close to the ground with trees and grass became alot worse... :I fly with Vsync ON and in general i have 60 FPS all around but the stuttering is terrible!! Made me go back to the pre beta where everything is smooth as a babys skin!

[Anders_And]

Originally Posted by skarden

Well if you get the division of labor then whats not to understand? people ARE Working on improving the game and getting the new patch out, what so the people who aren't working on that should just be sitting around doing nothing? why not have them working on BOM, it makes sense to have them doing something productive doesn't it?, and you don't know which teams of people are working on BOM and who's working on COD your just taking wild stabs in the dark without any evidence to back it up.

And as far as it being fleshed out into a real BOB sim, to me it's always been more of a hardware limitation then a software one, the only sim that I know comes close is wings of victory II BOB which while actually being quiet good and can get close the numbers of planes used in BOB it doesn't have a tenth of the depth of modeling that COD has, and use's a MUCH older game engine to achieve it, which again doesn't anything close to the complexity that COD has ( with the exception of the AI, which is outstanding! )

The amount of depth COD has comes at a price, and that price is needing to have good hardware to run it, you can't create a game/sim that is planned to be expanded on for the next 10 years while catering to yestedays hardware, I know that seems harsh, but to me it's the truth of that matter, some of the great games of the last few years weren't able to be cranked all the way up until a couple of years after release, and I honestly think COD will be one of those great games.

Skarden, your system is very similiar to mine... I have have a I5-760 at 4ghz otherwise we have exactly the same systems.. How is your game running? Since last beta patch my frames might be in general higher but the stutter close to the ground with trees and grass became alot worse... :I fly with Vsync ON and in general i have 60 FPS all around but the stuttering is terrible!! Made me go back to the pre beta where everything is smooth as a babys skin!

Btw, are you scandinavian? Seem to remember u from Il2 1946 warclouds server

[Al Capwn]

Originally Posted by jf1981

Hello,

and on top, my controls are lagegd (they are a small portion of a second behind the actual joystick moves).

I just wanted to add that I also experience this same phenomenon (I would say maybe a .1 second delay) And yes, it only happens in ClOD. I have not encountered this in any other product/game, not in any DCS product, not in IL-2 1946, not in FSX, not in anything. I also noticed that if you use keyboard input, there is no more delay observed. Just for kicks I tested 4 different joysticks from different manufacturers; In multiple USB ports, and I even tried this on 3 completely different PCs with very different hardware.

I have also turned off anthropomorphic controls, as well as disabling steam cloud and wiping the 1csoftclub folder just for testing and it seemed like it may have helped a little but it's most likely a placebo effect.

Also this happened before and after my last full wipe. I have a theory that this is experienced by everyone, but most are not as susceptible to it; similar to how many gamers swear by v-sync but I've never been able to play anything with the input delay/floaty feeling cursor that v-sync creates. However this of course needs testing and data to back it up.

I really would like someone who owns some other sims like DCS to take a short video of them with their joystick and the ClOD cockpit in frame and do full stroke movements to get the most obvious start/stopping (also use the keyboard . Then do the same test in say DCS P-51; you'll see there's absolutely no delay. I'm going to do this myself once I borrow a friend's camera. Also make sure to list your average FPS for ClOD during the test for comparison purposes; it would be interesting to find if lower framerates help mask the issue (In the air I'm usually over 60fps with the alpha patch), although even at 30fps there's only a 33.33ms delay between frames so I would imagine it should still show.

This isn't keeping me from enjoying this absolutely fantastic sim, but I can find it to be irritating. That said, I know the game has a some ways to go and many important issues are being addressed with the upcoming patch. However I have not seen anything official on this issue so it would be great to shed some light on what's going on.

Good luck flying out there and I look forward to testing this further with your help, thanks!

[skarden]

Originally Posted by Anders_And

Skarden, your system is very similiar to mine... I have have a I5-760 at 4ghz otherwise we have exactly the same systems.. How is your game running? Since last beta patch my frames might be in general higher but the stutter close to the ground with trees and grass became alot worse... :I fly with Vsync ON and in general i have 60 FPS all around but the stuttering is terrible!! Made me go back to the pre beta where everything is smooth as a babys skin!

Btw, are you scandinavian? Seem to remember u from Il2 1946 warclouds server

Hey Anders, for the most part I get pretty good performance, prob between 25 - 35 over land depending where I am on the map with everything turned up and 60 + over the ocean, although Clouds do cut my FPS in half pretty much instantly which is a bit of a bummer, not a show stopper for me but I'm definitely hoping that they fix that one soon.

Close to the ground I do get a little micro - stuttering but it's only really noticeable if I'm really looking for it, if I'm dogfighting close to the ground or straffing targets it's not really noticeable, to me at least, although I pretty sure I play with vsync turned off (I'm currently oversae's atm so I can't check) so maybe that has something to do with it.

Na I'm not scandinavian, I'm Australian,although I did play on the warbirds server whenever I got a chance under skarden, a great server with great missions, I always had a blast, I love full switch

But unfortunately I havne't played IL-46 in ages as I bought some new peripherals to indulge my want to get into racing sims ( loving it too!) and now IL-2 won't recognize the right controller's input due to the bloody 4 controller limit, a hell of a shame as there has been some great release's on the mod front :/

[philip.ed]

Originally Posted by Skoshi Tiger

No Philip! Those are your words.

I would like a continual improvement of the series so as new content and features are introduced they become available in the previous titles. Just like in the original IL2 series.

Earlier theatres in IL2 never became stale because as the series expanded the improvements effected the entire series.

The 'final state' that this topic is titled means that it will not change or improve thereafter. That will be the death knell of the title.

Do you want COD to enter a 'final state'?

Cheers!

I see what you mean, and I agree with you. 'Final state' sounds very foreboding.
However, I'd rather see an effort made to move it closer to that state, instead of diverting resources to new products.
Finish Moscow (by finish I mean get it up to a more than acceptable level) and then revisit CloD and work on it, model the later channel battles after the BoB, perhaps go back and focus on the BoF and then use the existing models to expand into the MTO.

[Stublerone]

@Skoshi: You know what I mean with my post... Just wanted to say that higher viewing range on same detail have big effect. That is, why shooter are looking so detailed: because they drastically screw down the distance to get more detail, or polygons, as you say.

On the detail where clod is graphically and what is happening on the playground and with reference to the disadvantages of a streaming engine, we shouldn't wonder, why this game is so hungry on ram, vram, disc speed, cpu and gpu.

Sure it is not satisfying for most of us, bit this should be taken into account, when comparing the game to a shooter. Arma is also not running very fast. It is buggy, bit also uses streaming engine and has a lot of events going on on the map. In arma you just get the fps, which the server is able to provide u.
Warfare at the beginning =sufficient fps and after some hours of playing, there is so much to calculate for the server, that your fps decrease more and more.

Streaming engine =a lot of cool possibilities and recommended for big maps and scenarios, but on the other side still not fast performing due to high workload for server and some restrictions in current hardware.

I bet, that it will run great, if hardware gets the suficcient ports to interact fast enough in all kinds of ways.

[jf1981]

Originally Posted by Al Capwn

I just wanted to add that I also experience this same phenomenon [...]

Hello,
Just to add that this phenomenon is not an isue until you push the aircraft to its limits or follow someone moving very quickly, hence, in critical maneuvers, one portion of a second is always the difference between alive or gone, touch or miss.
I really hope this issue will find its ends somehow.

[jf1981]

Originally Posted by philip.ed

I see what you mean, and I agree with you. 'Final state' sounds very foreboding.

Fully agree with you, not final state in that sense, only end of the main issues that prevent it from its potential.