Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover

IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover Latest instalment in the acclaimed IL-2 Sturmovik series from award-winning developer Maddox Games.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-28-2011, 04:41 AM
Tiger27 Tiger27 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 319
Default

If you are a fan of flight sims its unfortunate but you have to put up with delays and gradual progress, the reason is because of the popularity or lack of in flightsims compared to FPS games, CoD, ROF and DCS all run very small teams, maybe less than 20 full time, last article I read about Crysis 2 they had a staff of 160+, the upside of the tradeoff, is that while you may still be playing ROF, CoD and DCS in 5 years, you will probably be playing and have paid for Crysis 4 and BF-5 by then, most of these graphically beautiful FPS games become boring within 3 - 6 months and you move on to the next.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-28-2011, 04:56 AM
Feathered_IV's Avatar
Feathered_IV Feathered_IV is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,471
Default

The resources required currently are next gen. The ratio of eye candy to hardware is somewhat disproportionate however.

Depth of gameplay however is the real issue. When it can't even compete with a QMB from a decade ago, it really makes you wonder.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-28-2011, 05:10 AM
Heliocon Heliocon is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 651
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Feathered_IV View Post
The resources required currently are next gen. The ratio of eye candy to hardware is somewhat disproportionate however.

Depth of gameplay however is the real issue. When it can't even compete with a QMB from a decade ago, it really makes you wonder.
Agreed - the gameplay/meat needs to be present (and it isnt). However those who completely dismiss graphics are foolish because you need a believable world to fly in or it removes the immersion.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-28-2011, 05:57 AM
seiseki seiseki is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 51
Default

I honestly don't care that much about the graphics.
Shadows and high poly/high res cockpit makes it look quite stunning already.

If I'm going to nitpick however, I'd complain about the low res normal mapping which makes panel lines look too smooth and thick..

And the lack of proper HDR and bloom. (no not the overused cheap looking bloom in most shooters).

But I'm sure with all the future upcoming features implemented this sim will keep on surprising us when it comes to graphic fidelity in a flight sim.sim.

Last edited by seiseki; 04-28-2011 at 06:08 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-28-2011, 07:00 PM
Flying Pencil Flying Pencil is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 403
Default

Looks like I really stepped in it with my post in other forum.

Now I read in some ways this sim lacks quality compared to others, but that could change, things going our way.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-28-2011, 07:10 PM
Dano Dano is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Petersfield UK
Posts: 1,107
Default

What forum was it?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-28-2011, 07:57 PM
Blackdog_kt Blackdog_kt is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,715
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heliocon View Post
Well no not really right here. But to keep it simple:
1. DX11 advantages are far more than what you stated here. Also I was refering to DX9 support/engine which is absurd since about 95%+ of people own a DX10 card. Why make a game for an outdated dx version that wont be around in a years time (in releases, and the only reason its in now is because of consoles).
2. DX11 direct compute is an advantage but not really for what you are saying it is. Really the physics for nearly everything in this game can and should be handled by the CPU. What direct compute is good for is particle physics which is clouds, water, smoke etc.
3. DX11 is easier to program for than DX9, this is because with DX10.1 they basically laid down a guideline for hardware and software component capabilities which insures more or less uniformity and therefore its easier to program for a unified base.
4. DX11 features like tesselation really greatly reduce the workload on artists for models as they can have one or two models instead of multiple models for LOD. Then the engine will auto increase the LOD giving the model more or less infinit LOD versions depending on distance. Same thing for terrain and houses.
5. DX11 works far better with multi core cpus than dx10 or dx9
6. The issue was that they said 1. It would be DX11 on launch until a few months before release and 2 that it would be an engine that would last a decade... Like said they are competing with their own comments, not other games.

Please dont tell us what you think the benefits of dx11 are when you really dont. Also as it is offloarding anything right now to the GPU would be a disaster.
Well, i wasn't responding directly to you mate, neither did i say that i know exactly what DX11 does.

I'm just saying how it looks from where i'm standing, based on what i consider important for a flight sim. Graphics are important but not the top priority for me,that's all. It's a personal opinion that anyone can agree or disagree with at their own discretion. Cheers
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.