now this is the kind of meaningful contribution i was expecting. good job on the new colour grading, can't wait to test fly over it

Could we not just send this fix to luthier, and let him put it in the next patch? Ali fixed in a day what oleg as been working on for 6 years, way to go Ali!! :grin:

luthier or whoever just needs to see that image and a spare 20 minuites to apply the changes. im sure he has more important things to do first though.

That's excellent Ali, just doing that has brought the much needed contrast and depth to old pasty light green watercolours.

good work, I want some :-P

thanks. BTW the trees are too dark when down low on the hi poly models :grin::-P:grin::-P:evil: and i think thats what the low poly tree colour model is based on. but i know what i prefer. also isnt it amazing that by changing one colour it allows our eyes to not be affected by the cosmic green goulash.. its about balancing the scene really not so much any individuall texture. and the trees have just worked a treat in that respect. i believe it all needs an extra shader to really work properly.

Hello,

Don't mean to intrude, just because some here said nobody would be working on any other flight sims. Gaijin announced this today:

http://forum.gaijinent.com/index.php...irds-of-steel/

Best,

MAC

http://i.imgur.com/O4uzl.jpg


The way to go! Now I can smell tea! Thanks! Looking forward to your mod.

That is no sim, it's a arcade game.

I will buy it and support it. I just do that. We as a group of people regardless of the infighting need all of them we can get to be a success on whatever level the publisher and developers consider it to be a success. I probably will only end up using the disk as a coaster or most likely give it my daughter to play. But yes I will buy it. I usually buy and try'em all.

Hi robtek,

I don't think it's an Arcade game, although there may be a mode in the game that allows a more Arcade style gaming experience. On the question of 'Flight Sim' or not, you're right, strictly speaking. Flight Simulators are certified training aids for real pilots. Everything else would best be called a Flight Simulation Game, but I'm okay with calling them sims. No difference there to Cliffs of Dover. By the way, it's hard to tell from the announcement only how good or bad the game will be exactly, isn't it?

Anyway, my only point was that the genre is receiving attention from different developers (WWII aviation that is).

Best,

MAC

Yes, but they will port it to PC for the peer to peer "Sim-Lite" market.

LOL. i was sensing that "Birds of Steel" thread was gonna turn into yet another 50+ page debate over the graphics. But the moderator promptly locked it. Good work! :grin:

Nope, color doesn't explain everything in this matter. I constantly hear praising of how gorgeous CloD looks, especielly up close. Well hey, this is no FPS, so why bother?
This is a flight sim and I wanna see things from above - way above - and this is were CloD seems to fail.
I've posted some screenies - a polite request from my dear friend David :cool: - and on those screenies (not made by myself) it is clear, how this games GFX engine is outdated or not up to the 2011 standards.

My ten commandments (screenies), who depicts some of the GFX problems this game is battling, and which hopefully will be fixed in near future (though I do not trust to hope):
1. 3D objects and buildings are way to sharp in contrast to the softening surroundings (rendering or LOD problem's?).
2. The blurry landscape in the horizon, looks like a cotton blanket.
3. The grey smudges representing cities at high altitude are ugly as hell and are in fact GFX leftovers from il-2 sturmovik (a game, that now is 10 years old).
4. The water is wronly scaled (compared to the surroundings) and it is terrible colored (no water in N-Europe is colored that way!)
5. The awful shore, that seems to hover above the water.
6. The smoke colomns, that are limited in hight (again leftovers from il-2 sturmovik).
7. The weidlooking trees, that look like small lullypops.
8. The clouds that looks like small cottonballs (totally unrealistic - we need real atmospheric cumulus clouds!)
9. The overall colorpalette is somewhat flat and unrealistic.
10. The compleely missing immersion effect of being high above the ground/water.

Alot of the above features are actually well modelled in WoP. I'm no fan of that game, to arcade, but the terrain GFX are some of the best I've seen. Furthermore, though I sincerely hope, that CloD will prevail in the long end, I don't want to delude myself by stating, that CloD at the present state is the best and most photorealistic game out there (or having the potential to become), cause at the moment, it simply isn't (far from it).

Hopefully you've been seeing this post aswell, David...

Just to support my earlier post...

...and again

Edit: Wow, I'm totally impressed by the game GFX's (Not!). I'm actually terrible dissapointed, yet hopes that things will change...

...and just to stir things up (an older GFX engine and what it is capable of - WoP):

Funny thing is in my opinion trees set to low or very low look better than in higher settings. Which seems illogic.

...and yet again (ducking for cover):

Despite what people say WOP looks awesome. The Berlin map pure awesomeness

Points 4 and 8 have been confirmed as in development various times. Meaning, there is transparent water and dynamic weather in the works and it will come with the patches.

As for the rest i can't be sure, but the sim is what it is for now. I'm more concerned about actual gameplay issues because the graphics are functional enough as they are now and you guys keep hogging all the attention with graphics related requests :-P

Does anyone actually fly these planes or are we all just looking at them for the most part? :grin:

its a tough life being graphics in il2. here's an objective look at what our scenery is going through.
http://youtu.be/XUa_viVGNNs

I think 'functional' is a good word for the current state of play in a lot of the terrain graphics features.

People obviously have different preferences and opinions about the most important features of the game.

What would worry me is if the devs were to settle for merely 'functional' looking terrain and devote all their attention onto other technical aspects. There should obviously be a balance achieved between the quality of the different elements (graphics, fm, dm, gameplay, AI, etc, etc) with most effort being addressed to wherever the sim is currently weakest.

So I'm actually pleased that threads like this draw the devs attention to the terrain aspects as something that many of us would like to see improved.

Having said that, maybe it's now time to move on. I think they'll have got the message by now.

But it would be nice to hear from luthier what their take is on this issue - we know some terrain improvements are on the way, but what will be the extent of future improvements?

I wish the landscape graphics were functional. If you haven't got a very good system they're anything but unless you turn them right down in which case landscape hardly describes the undulating, blurred wasteland populated by the occassional poorly skinned box representing a building of some sort and the odd lonely windmill spinning gently in the breeze. If we're going to have a functional placeholder of a landscape why not stick with a pimped Il-2 46? At least that ran like greased owl effluent on my rig.

I've a Q6600, GT9800 1GB, 4GB RAM, Vista32 so granted, tepid at best, and perhaps I deserve to be exiled to on-line maps and mid-Channel actionand have unreaslistic expectations of being able to fly round in a believable simulated environment.