Quote:
Originally Posted by Romanator21
Again, the *[RoF]* developers probably didn't consider that we would be flying these kites straigt into the ground intentionally from any altitude in order to see just how extensive the DM was. Shame on them.
|
a predictable RoF-fan type statement that ignores any rational logic whenever some criticism is raised. because you like the game, it doesnt mean you have to abandon all common sense and any recognition about some of its obvious flaws. yet this seems a traumatic concept for the RoF fanbase (to the point their north american distributor has to turn up here and try to brush away its flaws)
i would sugest instead that if their game indeed uses accurate physics modeling of forces and objects interacting (like their fanbase is deliberately misled to believe in the marketing hype), then no matter at what speed, one of their aircraft interacting with other solid objects it encounters in the game world should have an accurate and realistic outcome, and it simply doesnt. for lower speed crashes it looks reasonably nice (for a 2009 sim), but thats about the limit of what they created. and they use this same type of "standard crash" sequence for all events, no matter what the circumstances.
my point simply has been that for RoF, no matter what its eye candy might delude you to believe, that
accurate physics modeling is simply not present, and you can illustrate this VERY obvious flaw by flying an aircraft at high speed into a solid object (like terra firma), having it go bouncy-bouncy and then crumple like a 30 km/hr plane crash is just not realistic
still, all of this was simply raised by some posters here (in a BoB forum discussing a BoB development update) in the hope/belief that BoB will be able to model this more correctly. the damage model of some of the BoB aircraft we have seen so far would provide high hopes for this (individual components of the airplane frames are modeled in 3D for ex, and the damage from individual shells being factored in)
add to that some of the recent statements like:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by saqson
Since visual damage is pre-modeled by designers, it's up to them, to learn what the blades (or any other AC parts) were made of and model damage according to the material and damage conditions.
You should understand, that visual damage and physical damage are like two different worlds, with the later being actually invisible to a player, while the first one serves as visual representation of it.
|
and ....
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by saqson
"To my knowledge, on all SoW:BoB models visual damage is modeled respectively to the materials the damaged parts were made of in RL and to their physical properties. Besides, some of the 1C modelers are former aviation industry engineers with experience in airframe design and material strength. So, they know very well, how materials in general and airframes of different design in particular behave/look like under damage.
So, here I wouldn't worry. Within the general game limitations the visual damage will be modeled as close, as possible to the RL and, certainly, will depict the physical damage modeling with the highest possible fidelity. "
|
so i have high hopes SoW-BoB will model these crashes much more realistically, and that the extent of damage to the aircraft in various crashes will more correctly reflect speed and the forces involved
06-24-2010, 06:24 PM
I LOL'd. It's quite funny sitting pack and watching people make fools of themselves. 
Linear Mode
