![]() |
|
|||||||
| IL-2 Sturmovik The famous combat flight simulator. |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Oleg tells us SOW will be close to this. ![]() By furbs9999 at 2010-10-25 ![]() By furbs9999 at 2010-10-25 ![]() By furbs9999 at 2010-10-25 ![]() By furbs9999 at 2010-10-25 |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I don't have FSX, i fly it on a friend's PC quite often though and what most people talk about here are widespread misconceptions. Actually, the way it works is the way Splitter described it. When you need to be scanning the sky outside, you can be scanning the sky outside. The rest is just an accurate simulation of a real pilot's workload, because in a real aircraft you have things to do even when nothing's happening. How is that a bad thing for a combat sim, having stuff to do during the uneventful cruise to the combat area, when it won't even detract from your ability to wage combat when you need to? You see, it's simply about personal preference. Some people like wonder woman view, some like unlimited ammo and some like cockpit view and limited ammo. It's the same thing with this as well and there is a market for it, especially now that MS closed down their FS franchise. The procedures are the tip of the iceberg. Up until the 30s there were no checklists in the real world either. Why did they invent them? Because planes got complicated and people were crashing left and right when they forgot to turn on switches, that's why. SoW might lack the checklists but since it will have the systems modelled, you are going to need them anyway sooner or later and then you'll have to come up with them on your own. Which is a good thing to be honest, because then people will realize that it's not a big deal at all for 40s designs that lack computerized instruments and complex electronics and they all share the same type of engine operation. Then they'll realize that it gives them stuff to fiddle with during the uneventful parts of the sortie and stuff to exploit in combat and it will all settle down. The single FSX aircraft i've flown most is a payware Catalina add-on and it's quite a handful initially. However, it don't fly it with a book on my lap. I know the operating limits and fly according to them, because the knowledge is not in memorizing row upon row of numerical data (most of the times instruments are color coded anyway to show the permissible and non-permissible ranges), the real knowledge is knowing how each parameter affects the other. Then i can fiddle with keeping the neeldes in the green and by the time i've done this while settling into cruise after the climb out, i've shaved 5 minutes off the boring trip to the target area by doing something that matters in my aircraft's ability to perform well. This is what's been missing from prop sims, taking care of the ride so to speak. Clickable pits and procedural checklists are a by-product of this complexity, not the main goal. If you want to fly the complex way that's closer to reality you'll need to make a few notes,mental or real, and a way to interface with the switches, that's all. If not, then by all means go to your options panel and set these options to "off", but let the other people fly the sim the way they think it's fun for them. I've said it before and i'll say it again, my feeling is that some people in the IL2 community don't want to lose their full switch "bragging rights" so they try to dumb down the difficulty level collectively for everyone, in order to be able to say they still fly at what the sim calls 100% difficulty. Let's face it, people who fly full switch in IL2 but don't want to learn about intercoolers, carb icing, over-torque or how a real engine works, will not be able to fly full switch in SoW now that systems modelling has been confirmed by Oleg Maddox. A guy who's used to executing 10000ft dives with radiators open, climbing with rads closed and running WEP on low prop pitch will have lots of nasty surprises and broken engines in SoW. That rubs some people the wrong way i guess and instead of choosing a difficulty setting that corresponds well to their lack of willingness to learn new stuff, they want to limit the scope of the sim because they're ashamed to say they don't fly full switch anymore. Quote:
|
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
I know not yet released the hardware requirements for the game.
but I'm buying a new video card to play the ROF, and I wonder if I will at least be able to run the SOW BOB with this new GPU ... I thought the GTX460, will this card will run the BOB so nice? what GPU you use in this pics Oleg ? |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Philip.ed and furbs.
You guys realise you sound like a stuck record? I have read a lot of post from you two (maybe hundreds from Philip) and reached the conclusion you are not cabable of a reasonable thinking and therefore I will suggest that you guys will give it a rest. I absolutely mean no harm or try to be disrepectful, honestly. Not trying to say I'm any better than you just a friendly suggestion to make this forum as pleasant as possible. Nothing wrong about the asking/suggesting stuff but there is some kind of limit of the guestion asked and the way they are asked. This manner and limit is something that each induvidual have figure out themselves. I suggest you go back read your posts and try to think if there is something that you guys could do differen't. These above are of course my subjective opinions and I could be wrong. Cheers Kammo |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I agree that I have posted similar things more than once, but it's only for Oleg to read and comment on. He doesn't have to comment, but seeing as though he is posting a lot recently, I thought this might interest him. I'm not sure how I'm not capable of reasonable thinking. I sent Oleg dozens of research pages for SoW which he was grateful for and has used. If that didn't need reasonable thought, then thank-you for calling me a genius. If you have a problem with me, PM me. But please, don't turn this topic bitchy. The information I have posted may interest others; it doesn't all revolve around you. Also, I always try and post pictures as well. We can't help it if we feel a certain way. The terrain is an important feature and we may feel more strongly about it than you. However, others might feel more strongly than us. Obviously we can't please everyone, but then neither can Oleg. It's interesting to see users, who have in the past moaned at me for saying I don't like the clouds, post and say that they won't buy the game because the clcikable-cockpit element isn't extensive enough for them. Clearly everyone has their own ideas of their ideal sim, and for a sim to reach that it would require unlimited processing power, an infinite amount of graphics cards, and a budget that could wipe Africa's debts. Of course there will be areas that some may feel need more work, but then SoW has the time to develop. The discussions, opinions, research and pictures are here for Oleg to use (if he wishes). Thankyou. Back to discussion. Last edited by philip.ed; 10-25-2010 at 02:38 PM. |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
OK, that's fine then.
I think that Oleg is onto a winner with what he's shown us terrain wise. My last post was purely to show how England looks from a similar height at a similar time of year |
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
I for one am getting tired of these modern photos being held up as something to follow. Haven't you guys any understanding of modern, intensive farming as practiced since the 50s and its enormous effect on the agricultural landscape? Being shown areas where the old hedgerows have been torn out, ponds filled, fields enlarged, roads straightened, modern fertilisers used and arrow-straight hedges laid, is not at all conducive to the developers' understanding of how South-east England looked in the early Forties.
P.S. How many trees were lost in the great storm of 1987? "The storm caused substantial damage over much of England, downing an estimated 15 million trees....." Wiki. I think that might have changed things a little, views-wise.
__________________
Another home-built rig: AMD FX 8350, liquid-cooled. Asus Sabretooth 990FX Rev 2.0 , 16 GB Mushkin Redline (DDR3-PC12800), Enermax 1000W PSU, MSI R9-280X 3GB GDDR5 2 X 128GB OCZ Vertex SSD, 1 x64GB Corsair SSD, 1x 500GB WD HDD. CH Franken-Tripehound stick and throttle merged, CH Pro pedals. TrackIR 5 and Pro-clip. Windows 7 64bit Home Premium. Last edited by brando; 10-25-2010 at 04:10 PM. Reason: Additional info |
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Of course the field patterns are completely different, and new crops like rape have been introduced, but the photos are just there to show the colours and the trees and hedges (I know I'm repeating myself again) I know how Oleg feels about photos like this, but if he has lived in England when there's been a long stretch of summer days that are very hot (very hot for England I might add) then he's know that the burnished, golden, browns and greens are the norm. This is missing from the SoW shots we've been shown. PS-so if so many trees were lost, you're saying the game needs more? I doubt SoW will have every-tree modelled that was around in 1940. IMO, it's better to use modern field patterns and road networks (that are known to have existen in 1940) than to just make it up. However a fair amount of original aerial shots from the period exist, and Oleg has used what he can find. Modern shots are in no way representational of the correct field patterns but they still show how the trees look like from certain heights and also how the colours varies....(debateable, I know) Last edited by philip.ed; 10-25-2010 at 04:25 PM. |
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
|
Holy crap, stunning cockpits and artwork. Excellent Oleg
__________________
I7-3930K CPU w/ Corsair H60 liquid cooling. 16Gb Corsair Vengeance 1866mhz. Asus P9X79 Deluxe Motherboard. Asus GTX680 2Gb SLI Auzentech Home theater 3D Soundcard. Corsair HX850 Modular PSU. Win 7 x64 Ultimate TM Warthog HOTAS. TM Cougar MFD's. Saitek Flight Pro pedals. TrackIr 5. Samsung Syncmaster 2770FH LCD. |
![]() |
|
|