June 24, 2011 - v1.02.14821 Release Patch

[LoBiSoMeM]

Originally Posted by MadBlaster

Thank you for that dose of reality.

No, it's not real.

Real is ACTUAL GAMEPLAY, with solid +40 FPS in low level flight, straffing and bombing things...

As I said: fixed benchmarks are stupid sometimes, and lead to some equaly stupid conclusions...

People really don't learn... That's why readers that don't tried CloD yeat need to filter all stupidity out of this forum...

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by LoBiSoMeM

No video yeat, but I run the BD track and had 26 FPS average, with drops to 16 FPS minimum in the big blasts in runway. Some anoying stutters when view is change, with ugly texture loadings. With these settings:

1680x1050

AA 4x
SSAO OFF
VSYNC ON

Model Detail HIGH
Buildings Detail VERY LOW
Land Detail HIGH
Forest LOW
Visual Effect MEDIUM
Texture quality ORIGINAL
Damage decals HIGH
Buildings amunt LOW
Land Shading MEDIUM

Shadows, Roads and Grass ON

Please could you now do the same test @ 1920x1080, with all settings on medium, but with roads, shadows and grass on; ssao, v-synch, epi, and AA off, so I can make a direct comparison with my benchmark?

As I may be in the market for a new graphics card it would be very useful.

Oh, by the way, it would also be nice if you could post the benchmark result in standard FRAPS format.

Thanks!

[LoBiSoMeM]

Originally Posted by MadBlaster

What are you afraid of? Just show us all the truth and quit the fanboy crap. Maybe dose of reality will bring you back to 46' when 3.0 goes final.

I still flying 46, but I'm tired of that:

http://www.warbirdsofprey.org/Stats_...reMkIX25lbsCLP

http://www.warbirdsofprey.org/Stats_....php?id=La-5FN

Boring sim now, planes on rails, poor engine management, just some "point and shoot" crap. Prop pitch? LOL! The old engine can't hold all the improvements we have in CloD.

I'm ok with "reality" and tired of shooting RC like planes in full real servers of 46, modded or not...



P.S. By the way, "fanboy"? I'm a MP pilot above all, hate fight AI planes - they are stupid and easy. And MP is broke as hell now in CloD... I'm just stick to the point: the PERFORMANCE in CloD now is OK! If you don't believe, isn't up to me to convince you... Believe it or not, I don't really care.

[jimbop]

Originally Posted by LoBiSoMeM

I still flying 46, but I'm tired of that:

http://www.warbirdsofprey.org/Stats_...reMkIX25lbsCLP

http://www.warbirdsofprey.org/Stats_....php?id=La-5FN

Boring sim now, planes on rails, poor engine management, just some "point and shoot" crap. Prop pitch? LOL! The old engine can't hold all the improvements we have in CloD.

I'm ok with "reality" and tired of shooting RC like planes in full real servers of 46, modded or not...

Yeah, I'm with you there LoBiSoMeM. 1946 is just not cutting it any more in comparison with the flashes of brilliance in CoD. CEM is the main difference for me, too.

[MadBlaster]

Originally Posted by LoBiSoMeM

I still flying 46, but I'm tired of that:

http://www.warbirdsofprey.org/Stats_...reMkIX25lbsCLP

http://www.warbirdsofprey.org/Stats_....php?id=La-5FN

Boring sim now, planes on rails, poor engine management, just some "point and shoot" crap. Prop pitch? LOL! The old engine can't hold all the improvements we have in CloD.

I'm ok with "reality" and tired of shooting RC like planes in full real servers of 46, modded or not...



P.S. By the way, "fanboy"? I'm a MP pilot above all, hate fight AI planes - they are stupid and easy. And MP is broke as hell now in CloD... I'm just stick to the point: the PERFORMANCE in CloD now is OK! If you don't believe, isn't up to me to convince you... Believe it or not, I don't really care.

That's fine. I'm not trying to change your mind. We just have different takes at this point in time. Remember, I have the game. I can play it on low settings offline and have done so. So it's not like I'm oblivious to the CEM and DM it brings to the table. I have several hours invested in CLoT controls script written too, so I had to figure out what was going on with the anthorpromorphic crap...etc. to even write those because I almost always fly full real. Anyway, UP 3.0 runs smooth as glass to me. The sounds are awesome, more content, min FPS on BlackDeath is ~30 with vsync on...etc. Those things matter more to me than open/close the fuel cock. I just don't get that. What is so great about that? There's no real fuel flowing...it's still just pixels and number crunching, albeit, more number crunching. Anyway, I will jump to CLoT eventually (hopefully). Ha, ha, I call it CLoT because it giving everyone a heart attack. But not now. Even if I buy 580 gtx with 3 gb, I know I will be dissappointed in the frame rates and graphic performance. It's just not worth it to me now. I keep hoping that the next patch will change this. So I come here now and again to check to see. I'm thinking it will be at least a year at this pace.

[LoBiSoMeM]

Originally Posted by MadBlaster

That's fine. I'm not trying to change your mind. We just have different takes at this point in time. Remember, I have the game. I can play it on low settings offline and have done so. So it's not like I'm oblivious to the CEM and DM it brings to the table. I have several hours invested in CLoT controls script written too, so I had to figure out what was going on with the anthorpromorphic crap...etc. to even write those because I almost always fly full real. Anyway, UP 3.0 runs smooth as glass to me. The sounds are awesome, more content, min FPS on BlackDeath is ~30 with vsync on...etc. Those things matter more to me than open/close the fuel cock. I just don't get that. What is so great about that? There's no real fuel flowing...it's still just pixels and number crunching, albeit, more number crunching. Anyway, I will jump to CLoT eventually (hopefully). Ha, ha, I call it CLoT because it giving everyone a heart attack. But not now. Even if I buy 580 gtx with 3 gb, I know I will be dissappointed in the frame rates and graphic performance. It's just not worth it to me now. I keep hoping that the next patch will change this. So I come here now and again to check to see. I'm thinking it will be at least a year at this pace.

Ok, you bought the sim and can't run in your outdated rig OK. And believe that nobody can do that.

Bad for you. The simple point is that this sim runs OK in a x4 3.4Ghz CPU, 4GB of RAM, and a 560Ti. Live with that.

You are REALLY comparing UP 3.0 with Cliffs of Dover in terms of FPS performance? Is that a joke? I run 46 here with 60 FPS anytime, any track, any mod. 46 is based in an old graphic engine, and modern hardware runs it easy.

Another case of "I can't/don't fly CloD and I hate it!"

[ATAG_Dutch]

Pretty Please?

[maxwellbest]

Havent read through all these posts. Just a note to ask where are we at? I havent been playing this sim, mostly HSFX il2 which I find amazing. Last time I checked in, things like CEM and the altitude model were broken, correct me if I am wrong. Note: I have this sim and regard it potentially as ground breaking for ww2 sims. And fingers crossed, the way forward. Its just that I dont have time to test all its features, put up with the frustrations. Hence my focus on HSFX 5.1 Il2. I can just jump in and go. Thanks.

[Baron]

Originally Posted by LoBiSoMeM

Because, to say clear, fixed benchmarks are stupid in some cases.

That's one thing that people have trouble to understand. The "Black Death" track don't recreate gameplay. This track has a lot of changes in views/objects, leading to a lot of texture/LOD loading that don't exist in actual gameplay. So, the average FPS and stutters is "Black Death" are massive.

I don't use fixed tracks like that to verify better gameplay performance. By the way, I'm spending my time flying in this sim instead of talking crap about "bad performance" in this forum.

Really tired of that; If people think that this sim is a "crap" and I can't run it fluid, I don't care. I'll go fly now! Bye!

And they dont relize that it was exactly the same in BD track in IL2. Didnt matter what rig u had, the fps would at at least once place ALWAYS drop to minimum fps and that was when the view changed from one ac to another abruptly. Iirc it was when the Sturmoviks started thire dive against the column just in the beginning of the track. Same, i think, when the La and FW collided and exploded, but especially when changing views. Benchmarks is always worst case scenarios and i, personally, always had higher (very often much higher) fps during actual gameplay.

[Remo]

Originally Posted by Baron

And they dont relize that it was exactly the same in BD track in IL2. Didnt matter what rig u had, the fps would at at least once place ALWAYS drop to minimum fps and that was when the view changed from one ac to another abruptly. Iirc it was when the Sturmoviks started thire dive against the column just in the beginning of the track. Same, i think, when the La and FW collided and exploded, but especially when changing views. Benchmarks is always worst case scenarios and i, personally, always had higher (very often much higher) fps during actual gameplay.

Have to agree with Baron and LoBiSoMeM here . If I go by the BD benchmark I would not even consider playing the game. But since the last official path the game is playable even for my on an old 4870 , the benchmark remain bad with lots of stutters , however online gaming is much smoother for me, and high(ish) framerates 40+. Sure I have the textures on low , and not full resolution of my screen (2560x1600), but it is playable.