Friday 2011-02-04 Dev. update and Discussion

[Defender]

Originally Posted by Redwan

Flight sims are making a small come back ? Did you know that Microsoft is ending the FSX serie ? It means that the rentability sucks .... You should reed the news ...

And in such a context, it won't be easy for BoB to take it's place on the market as the graphics will be very poor for a modern simulator (no wheather effects, cartoony clouds, problems with the aspect of trees when seen from far, unrealistic textures ...)

I read the news FSX closing it's doors that's ancient. I'm also aware that MS has a new series coming out "MS Flight" (Not that I care much about it personally). Microsoft stopped supporting FSX a long time ago, the only reason it's going today is because of third party developers who are still going VERY strong. I'm not sure it's very accurate to compare a civilian flight sim with questionable flight dynamics and zero plane/enemy/ground AI to a WWII combat flight simulation.

Lets name drop a few other developers releasing sims today; the DCS series is going strong, Rise of Flight is in the mix and Jet Thunder with A2A on board as a developer makes for a pretty strong case, oh and X-PLANE 10, Seven G and Fighter Ops (if it eventually comes to fruition.) Cliffs of Dover is a fort night away; that in all sense of the word..a comeback.

You're opinion based on the screenshots of Cliffs of Dover is short sighted, you obviously want a visual simulation more than a high fidelity combat sim otherwise you wouldn't be ragging on the cover art of a complex entity. (And you would know that in all the years of high fidelity combat sims, nothing has ever come out with state of the art photo real graphics). I've been simming for a LONG time and graphically this is what I expect from a new modern sim. Ooh and the weather system is there, just use at your own risk and has been mentioned it is being worked on. Obviously you haven't a clue at the complexity involved behind the scenes whilst developing a game.

Your entitled to your opinion of course, but asking me if i read the news when you quote information that's 7 months doesn't disprove my point. Besides, the best sims these days are being put forth by small studio type developers, (Oleg Games, ED, 777 studios, A2A, Bohemia).

My point stands, I've not had so many flight sims on my computer at one time since the late 90's...that my friend is signs of a comeback (not saying how FAR it will come back, but it's breathing new life into a previously desolate world).

[zapatista]

Originally Posted by Redwan

Flight sims are making a small come back ? Did you know that Microsoft is ending the FSX serie ? It means that the rentability sucks .... You should reed the news ...

you are the one that should read the news ms already announced in the last 6 months it is continuing its fs series but under a different format

Originally Posted by Redwan

And in such a context, it won't be easy for BoB to take it's place on the market as the graphics will be very poor for a modern simulator (no wheather effects, cartoony clouds, problems with the aspect of trees when seen from far, unrealistic textures ...)

in such context you are a rude little boy who should have his mouth washed out with soap and then have his Internet access revoked for 30 days.

oleg doesnt owe you (or me) ANYTHING. he is however a flightsim enthusiast who has made a great previous sim and deserves our support and constructive input to help him make the best future sim he possibly can. he is however working with a small team under difficult circumstances and with limited resources, and "just because you want it" doesnt magically make 30 million dollars fall out of the sky for him to use during development so he can compete with big bux console type gaming houses (who make products that last 3 months after which the ADD kids need something new to play with).

oleg is our only and last best hope for a great new realistic ww2 SIMULATOR, and for that he deserves all our constructive support and deserve to have people communicate to him in a civilized way.

[zapatista]

Originally Posted by swiss

Zappa:

There must be something wrong.

low-res: plane is 6-8pixels
high: plane is 2pixels

Do you still have the ntrk? If so, please host at somewhere I would like to conduct some tests too, but to do that we need the same picture.

this might make the concept easier to understand

below a screenshot of a B-17 (wingspan 30 m +) seen at roughly 5 km against blue sky with some clouds. for this aircraft the il2 engine keeps trying to draw the rough shape of the aircraft untill about 5.7 km when it suddenly and abruptly transitions to its generic display of "the il2 dot" being made up of 4 pixels ( 2 black and 2 grey)

the left image displays the "4 pixel dot", the right image is with the aircraft just a little closer (by 200 m), when the il2 engine now tries to draw the shape of the aircraft (and we get pop-up of the smallest LoD model being displayed). the sim does it roughly correctly by now showing 15 horizontal pixels for the wingspan (all credit to "lurch", an astronomer il2-flyer who made the calculations)



for the discussion in this thread the issue is about the "4 pixel dot" and how visible it is, and how realistic this visibility is compared to real life "spotting distances". if the aircraft was a me-109 with a winspan just under 10 m wide, this "lod to dot" transition point would have happened at about 1/3 the distance, being roughly at 1500 meters (which is indeed when it happens for that aircraft in il2).

and that is exactly what my earlier screenshots were intended to illustrate. if you have an me-109 below you somewhere at 1700 m distance, and hence he is displayed by the "4 pixel dot" then SCREEN RESOLUTION MATTERS a great deal (because on a monitor changing the resolution changes the pixel size).

on the 30' dell the earlier screenshots were taken on (snow scenery), the monitor has a pixel size of 0.250 mm, so the 4 pixels form a little square of 0.5 by 0.5 mm (2 pixels being grey, and 2 black as you can see in the zoomed in gunsight), but if you halve the screen resolution of that same monitor you suddenly have 0.50 mm pixels and the "il2 dot" has doubled to 1 mm by 1 mm. hence on the screenshots i posted earlier this is the critical change from "now you see it" to "now you dont"

this is something many online flyers have been using for years to "game the game", you reduce your screen resolution and bogey's are much easier to spot.

there is however an even bigger problem then that. these little 4 pixel dots still dont accurately represent what most real ww2 fighter pilots could/would see from their cockpits ! if il2/BoB is claiming to be a simulator then it is critical in my opinion this most important issue has a high priority (and oleg in the last few years has answered positively he is aware of this problem and is trying to correct it for BoB/il2).

ps: if anybody wants to play around with their monitor resolutions in il2, try and use exactly 1/2 your native resolution as a comparison point (this will double the pixels used in the 4 pixel il2 dots). using other comparison ratio's will require sub pixel blending of the "dot", creating a fuzzy and less describable outline. nice square blocks of full pixels are much easier to see as il2 dots

[swiss]

Originally Posted by zapatista

this might make the concept easier to understand

I do understand what you said.
Unfortunately I can't reproduce your resolution, I got a 22"/1680 here.
However I tested 1280 vs 1680. On both resolution the plane in the distance had the size of two pixels.

Maybe I screwed something up while taking the screenshots(dont think so tho')...
Anyway; here are the shots and the ntrk, 7.55mb zip
http://rapidshare.com/files/447028204/ss-and-ntrk.zip

[zapatista]

can you just post the shots here in the thread ?

easier to see and discuss

[swiss]

Originally Posted by zapatista

can you just post the shots here in the thread ?

easier to see and discuss

I just dropped the resolution down to 800*600.
This pixel doubling does not happen on my screen.

Would you mind posting your config, the resolution part?

[brando]

Originally Posted by zapatista

..... big bux console type gaming houses (who make products that last 3 months after which the ADD kids need something new to play with).

A good friend of mine is a big fan of PS3 games (and also WW2 aircraft) so I bought him WoP when it came out. 3 months later he phoned me up to say how cool it was, and that he'd played "all the levels"(?) and when was the sequel coming out? It's worth noting that he is forty years old, not exactly a kid, so it is definitely the console experience that is biased towards "get it, play it, bin it" credo. The guy is not stupid - it's just that his lifestyle is not geared to a pricey PC and all the kit that is needed to fly one.

... oleg is our only and last best hope for a great new realistic ww2 SIMULATOR, and for that he deserves all our constructive support and deserve to have people communicate to him in a civilized way.

+1

[zapatista]

Originally Posted by swiss

I do understand what you said.
Unfortunately I can't reproduce your resolution, I got a 22"/1680 here.
However I tested 1280 vs 1680. On both resolution the plane in the distance had the size of two pixels.

Maybe I screwed something up while taking the screenshots(dont think so tho')...
Anyway; here are the shots and the ntrk, 7.55mb zip
http://rapidshare.com/files/447028204/ss-and-ntrk.zip

the key point for using comparison screenshots is that:
1) the distant aircraft you are looking at must indeed be a dot (so past the lod model drawing distance, for single engine fighters this can be up to 2000 m or so)
2) have your monitor FoV correctly set for the monitor size so ingame objects are displayed in 1:1 ratio compared to real life, dont use a zoomed in/out FoV setting
3) use in cockpit viewing of the distant object, external views can distort and magnify
4) use 1/2 your native resolution to compare the 2 screenshots

[swiss]

Originally Posted by zapatista

can you just post the shots here in the thread ?

easier to see and discuss

Your wish is my order.
(Thanks for making me do that :/)




Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[zapatista]

you need to compare it at 1/2 your native resolution
and i am presuming you are changing the resolution in the game not just altering your monitor