Friday 2009-11-27 Screenshots Update discussion thread

[mark@1C]

Originally Posted by HenFre

What in the world are you talking about

HAHA...
His meaning is that,
the hangar itself looks outmoded,just like a one built in WWI,when the well-known ace Manfred von Richthofen lives.
and fortunately,it's not a Work in Completion one.

[JVM]

Originally Posted by mark@1C

HAHA...
His meaning is that,
the hangar itself looks outmoded,just like a one built in WWI,when the well-known ace Manfred von Richthofen lives.
and fortunately,it's not a Work in Completion one.

May I laugh heartily? Yes? Aaaah, thanks, it always feel so good...

1) The WW1 (fighter) hangars were mostly canvas over wood structure, sometimes wooden constructions, but not often...

2) The hangar shown is a very faithful reproduction of a Bf-110/Ju-87 class german hangar, as still (partially) existing in Rely/Norrent-Fontes airfield in North of France.

3) Its only caveat is the fact that it is weathered too much: this was not the case when this hangar was in use: it was brand new (camouflage paint instead of rust, no "old" interior paint...) and possibly that there was no white paint or whitewash in this class of hangar (usually the brickwork was apparent), but this could be construed as poetic licence...Nobody will come forward to say the opposite with any manner of certainty!

Many german fighter hangars are variations around this theme (and they were really many, many variations: out of my mind, only for France, at least 15/20 types just for concrete/masonry T-based hangars for Bf-110 or lower aircraft classes)...
Add to this fully wooden hangars, U-based hangars, simple revetments...then we could look into the bomber hangar variations then the workshop hangars variations...

These hangars were the real thing!

JVM

[AdMan]

Originally Posted by JVM

May I laugh heartily? Yes? Aaaah, thanks, it always feel so good...

1) The WW1 (fighter) hangars were mostly canvas over wood structure, sometimes wooden constructions, but not often...

2) The hangar shown is a very faithful reproduction of a Bf-110/Ju-87 class german hangar, as still (partially) existing in Rely/Norrent-Fontes airfield in North of France.

3) Its only caveat is the fact that it is weathered too much: this was not the case when this hangar was in use: it was brand new (camouflage paint instead of rust, no "old" interior paint...) and possibly that there was no white paint or whitewash in this class of hangar (usually the brickwork was apparent), but this could be construed as poetic licence...Nobody will come forward to say the opposite with any manner of certainty!

Many german fighter hangars are variations around this theme (and they were really many, many variations: out of my mind, only for France, at least 15/20 types just for concrete/masonry T-based hangars for Bf-110 or lower aircraft classes)...
Add to this fully wooden hangars, U-based hangars, simple revetments...then we could look into the bomber hangar variations then the workshop hangars variations...

These hangars were the real thing!

JVM

This is the second time someone has brought up the issue of something looking too weathered for what is suposed to be new equipment/structures (the first being cockpit interiors). I wouldhave to agree this is a concern I share. Just saying.

[fuzzychickens]

Originally Posted by AdMan

This is the second time someone has brought up the issue of something looking too weathered for what is suposed to be new equipment/structures (the first being cockpit interiors). I wouldhave to agree this is a concern I share. Just saying.

That hangar has clearly been nerfed. I bet the Brits get nice shiny hagars.

I won't stand for this. I will bomb the Brit hangars first chance I get.

[mazex]

Oleg or Luthier... I understand you get annoyed by the embarrassing off-topic discussions about how your office looks etc, but is it possible to get some comments regarding the C# code we've seen on the shots? When did you start using that? As MDX is deprecated and does not support Dx10, are you using XNA (or even SlimDX), or does the render loop run on C++? What are your experiences? After writing some C# test game in Dx9 MDX way back when I gave up after they rewrote the API every release, with obvious lack of management backing. However, they seem to put a lot of effort into XNA now - and it feels like it has more internal backing etc...

I understand if you are not interested in commenting on this, and I suppose you regret releasing that shot where the code is visible Just curious as the rumors about just some percent or two in performance loss compared to C++ on the latest iterations of managed DX sounds really interesting...

/Mazex

[luthier]

Originally Posted by AdMan

This is the second time someone has brought up the issue of something looking too weathered for what is suposed to be new equipment/structures (the first being cockpit interiors). I wouldhave to agree this is a concern I share. Just saying.

"New" stuff looks horrible in a video game, plain and boring, like something out of 1997 or a cell shaded cartoon.

That is all.

*weatheringwhiners

[AdMan]

Originally Posted by luthier

"New" stuff looks horrible in a video game, plain and boring, like something out of 1997 or a cell shaded cartoon.

That is all.

*weatheringwhiners

makes sense, without interesting textures might as well just apply standard materials/shaders to objects and be done with it, which would result in a very "Toy Story" look (plastic).

But there will be weathering of plane exteriors, so will you be able to repaint your plane or get new markings? Perhaps take it into the hangar and get some repairs? This would be similar to what most driving sims have.

[JVM]

Originally Posted by AdMan

makes sense, without interesting textures might as well just apply standard materials/shaders to objects and be done with it, which would result in a very "Toy Story" look (plastic).

I can understand that but it's a matter of degree: to put some dirtying, imperfections and oil spots is one thing, to get a corrugated sheet covering entirely rusted 2 months after installation is another...

JV

[AdMan]

Originally Posted by JVM

I can understand that but it's a matter of degree: to put some dirtying, imperfections and oil spots is one thing, to get a corrugated sheet covering entirely rusted 2 months after installation is another...

JV

I admit I'm on the fence with the whole weathering thing, the hangar doesn't bother me really. I understand this is likely not going to be but it would be damn cool if the cockpits slowly showed wear and tear over time, every scratch would be a badge of honor and I would imagine endear you to the plane.

just thought I'd indulge myself for a moment