Official Fulqrum Publishing forum - Oleg Maddox's Room #1

Official Fulqrum Publishing forum (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/index.php)

- IL-2 Sturmovik (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/forumdisplay.php?f=98)

- - Oleg Maddox's Room #1 (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/showthread.php?t=2039)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antoninus (Post 60353)

Planes could already break apart or explode in Il-2 and FB 1.0 and it could happen in RL as well. Besides your gunnery skills the frequency mainly depends on the caliber of your weapons. Use machineguns and you won't see structural failures or explosions as often as when using 30 mm cannons with exploding shells, which are arguable overmodeled. I've not noticed any change during the games evolution.

You are kidding right ??

There were never exploding planes in the original Sturmovik you mention v1.0 like there are in IL2 1946.

IL2's used to fall apart from FW190 20mm back then but not this silly damage modelling we have in IL2 1946 with aircraft exploding into millions of pieces.

Il-2 demo 2, ca. early 2002

Crimea map, Fw-190 A5 default armament

Plane exploding, plown into a million pieces:

http://img373.imageshack.us/img373/1...0001lb2.th.jpg

aircraft cut in half:

http://img373.imageshack.us/img373/5...0002qr4.th.jpg

wings getting cut off:

http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/3...0004wo4.th.jpg

Yes the IL2 exploded back then after a heavy pounding from a FW.

And I remember the chewing up of ac rudders and elevators with the propeller too if you ran out of ammo.

But there's a difference in IL2 1946 with exploding aircraft from the early sim, they explode too easily and unrealistically.

well here's some slo-mo footage from the BoP demo that shows the "too small" explosions I talked about before - I know the demo isn't final but what is shown here leaves much to be desired

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i8...f?t=1228180153

lets hope a different approach is being taken for BoB

any aircraft could explode but I would have to agree the instant incineration effect isn't very realistic and kinda "hollywood" or what I would simply consider as videogame-like

as far as tail sections and wings being shot off that happened a lot, especially tail sections

Well BoP is a videogame for the console market, thus I am not surprised to find videogame-like behaviour. Oleg has said that he is not directly involved, BoP is no preview for BOB.

Multiple SOW development screenshots have shown that the internal structure will me modelled in great detail. I think we can surely expect a very detailed and realistic damage model, not something like X hits and boom.

http://s58.photobucket.com/albums/g2...t=cap002-1.jpg
http://s58.photobucket.com/albums/g2...nShots_002.jpg
http://s58.photobucket.com/albums/g2...nShots_001.jpg
http://s58.photobucket.com/albums/g2...Hurry_dam3.jpg

Quote:

Originally Posted by csThor (Post 59732)

@ baco

So real liefe pilots can switch between squadrons, choose missions they want to fly and enter the cockpit inflight? ;)

I think you misunderstood my words. I didn't argue against dynamic campaigns - I argued against placing Falcon 4 on a pedestal as a shiny example when - in my opinion - the campaign presentation was very basic and uninspiring at best. It did not create immersion for me, it lacked everything which draws me "into" a campaign. Red Baron II never had an underlying engine as F4 did, but it had a nearly perfect presentation which created enormous amounts of immersion. In comparison Falcon 4 was sterile and soulless.

Hi aggain, yes you are right about a lot of thing sin ypur post: teh Falcon 4. camapign presentation and reports is radder uninspiring and yes there is no better example for presentation of a campaign as Red BAron II, that game was all about inmersion, no fancy graphics, no eycandy, pure soul jeje.

----------------------------------------------------------------

About wind drift: guys even modern jets with triple redundant computers and guided weapons consider wind drift a very important factor.

Not considering wind drift for AG ordinance is like not considering balistics efects on cannons and machine guns. Up to the invention of smart guided weapons every AG mission acounted Wind as a factor to decide the IP and course to traget, and attack parameters.

I can understand that Oleg might not want to add another cpu demanding task to the engine, but to say it´s a minor issuer not worth considering is ridiculus.

Not onlly the efect on the ordinance, but the efect on the plane should be considered.
With medium to strong winds the nose of the aircraft is not ussualy pointing to the vector, or line of movement in witch the aircraft is taveling. So theres not onlly ordinance drift to compensate but the planes own drift influences if you hit the target or not.
Then aggain that is an entrielly new world of realistic navigation taking into acount wind to plot a course...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baco (Post 60782)

I can understand that Oleg might not want to add another cpu demanding task to the engine, but to say it´s a minor issuer not worth considering is ridiculus.

Not onlly the efect on the ordinance, but the efect on the plane should be considered.
With medium to strong winds the nose of the aircraft is not ussualy pointing to the vector, or line of movement in witch the aircraft is taveling. So theres not onlly ordinance drift to compensate but the planes own drift influences if you hit the target or not.
Then aggain that is an entrielly new world of realistic navigation taking into acount wind to plot a course...

Of course the effect on the plane has to be taken into account, it's a very big factor. My point was, that once the effect on the plane is taken into account, that naturally takes into account most of the effects on the ordinance, and the remaining effects on the ordinance are very minor.

oleg, you still plan for sow forum, when you announced, it seemed so close to being up and running in a week:confused:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abbeville-Boy (Post 61477)

oleg, you still plan for sow forum, when you announced, it seemed so close to being up and running in a week:confused:

Yeah this forum is getting a bit stale.
For a 2009 release nothing is happening fast.
Not trying to point fingers but Rise of Flight have screenshots, ingame footage and a hell of a lot more and they say they are good to go early 2009.
Last update we had here was system specs May 2009 and Q4 release.
If that were true ingame footage should be available by now, or at least closed beta announced.
What do we have?
A lot of nothing.
Guess it is time to reset the clock to May 2010 specs release and 2010 Q4 release...