Friday 2010-08-27 Dev. update and Discussions

[rga]

After seeing so many complains about the quality of a not-yet-releashed product, I make up my mind and join the fun.

First of all, thank you Oleg and Luthier for IL-2, THE great game that remains in my hard drive for over 7 years, and for SOW, the upcoming sim that makes my dream of flying almost true.

Second, for anyone who is still not satisfied with the weekly update pictures: you only see ONE part of the game, and this part is probably on LOWEST settings (sorry for the uppercase here, no intention of yelling, just want to make it clear).

Making game, like making any software, needs to be made in parts. The update pictures show us clearly, which part is being worked on. If today update is about aircraft, it's very likely that the terrain you see is only place holder. I personally bear no ill will against someone who detects the errors and shows them to the developer, in constrast, I believe it's very helpful and needed. Two eyes always see better than one. But any conclusion about the sim's quality is short-sighted and ridiculous if it's just based on analyse of WIP features (which can and must be changed several times), and worst, based on place holder features which will never make themselves to the releashed game.

I know most of you have high-end computer, so the eye candy aspect is probably your only concern. If some new games come to new life, your first quesion would be: "how does it look on highest settings?". Have you ever tried games like Company of heroes in the LOWEST settings? It looks like a completely different games: soldiers with box-like head, rifles like some firewood, tanks like they're made from plastic... But that's all what my stone-aged laptop can handle. And nevertheless I enjoyed every minutes playing this game, even more than some ego shooters who have 2000 Euro gaming laptop but know nothing about WW II. I'm convinced that what we see is on lowest settings:low resolution, level of details minimal, no AA, limited numbers of light sources, even simplified modell... everything that give someone like me the chance to enjoy a 2010 game.

With the current work of DT on IL-2, with their new features that were considered "impossible for 10 years old game engine" not long before, with their beautiful cockpits and modells but no FPS drop, I have complete faith in the ability as well as the qualify standard of any "Oleg games".

[winny]

There's alway's a lot of critiscism of little graphical 'faults' when the update comes along.

It's easy to pick faults with a screenshot from any game, WIP or released. Ultimately it's the videos that will really show us what's happening. (Surley there must be something video wise soon?)

Sometimes I think that posting the stills is counterproductive because it gets down to very minor details very quickly as there's so little to see.

[philip.ed]

I think we've been spoilt with some pictures that show incredible details; I feel, though, that a video would just be awesome to detail some of the great new features. That would be enough to cover a load of updates, which clearly must be a nuisence for the team.

A video every 2 weeks instead of pictures and everybody should be happy.

And a video doesn't need more time to capture.

[winny]

Originally Posted by Hecke

A video every 2 weeks instead of pictures and everybody should be happy.

And a video doesn't need more time to capture.

I'd be happier seeing a crappy wireframe version of a dogfight with loads going on than a close up of something thats just flat in every sense.. (no matter how good it may be)

If you stare at even the most beautiful persons face for long enough you'll find fault, video would show us the games soul, give a better sense of the overall feel feel of it. What's going on inside.

That short video of the spitfire over the sea has told me more about what SoW is going to be than the screen shots. I've never seen a sim move quite like it.

I'm not hasseling anyone for videos by the way! In your own time!

Originally Posted by winny

There's alway's a lot of critiscism of little graphical 'faults' when the update comes along.

It's easy to pick faults with a screenshot from any game, WIP or released. Ultimately it's the videos that will really show us what's happening. (Surley there must be something video wise soon?)

Sometimes I think that posting the stills is counterproductive because it gets down to very minor details very quickly as there's so little to see.

By all accounts the game isn't in Beta yet so a video may be some time coming.

[kendo65]

cue Zapatista..........ah, here he comes now...


or maybe not...you might have got away with it Tree - maybe he's on holiday?!

[Eries]

Originally Posted by Tree_UK

By all accounts the game isn't in Beta yet so a video may be some time coming.

Mommy!..... say it aint so !!!

****fixed****

Originally Posted by Eries

Mommy!..... say it aint so !!!

****fixed****

Excellent post again from you Eries, its just like being back at school all over again, i take it your still at school though right?

[AndyJWest]

Originally Posted by Tree_UK

By all accounts the game isn't in Beta yet so a video may be some time coming.

I've finally figured out the 'Tree' phenomenon.

We've been working on the assumption that 'Tree' is a person posting on the forum, and trying to make sense of the postings accordingly. This has proved impossible, but if instead one assumes that 'Tree' is a computer-generated pseudo-forum-poster, his idiosyncrasies make sense. His endless predictions about the future release date for SoW:BoB, each different from the last, can only be indicative of a program which is reset on a regular basis, and thus has no knowledge of previous predictions.

Sadly, I suspect that 'Tree' isn't yet in the Beta stage, so accurate predictions may be some time coming.