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.

View Poll Results: What should be IL2: CoD's primary focus?
Cliffs of Dover should focus on realism 250 95.06%
Cliffs of Dover should focus on accesibility 13 4.94%
Voters: 263. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-18-2011, 11:13 PM
SEE SEE is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,678
Default

realism? Would that include restrictions on rear view ability even when loosening shoulder straps. Heads on swivels?

Lets face it, 6DOF, mouse lookaround and check yer six POV hat assignments are equally unrealistic with little penalty for being 'unstrapped' in combat even in full switch!

Just wondering how far people would be prepared to go or do they have a cut off point? In which case the arguments 'for and against' are not quite so black and white!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-18-2011, 11:48 PM
Robotic Pope's Avatar
Robotic Pope Robotic Pope is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Hertfordshire,England,UK
Posts: 1,520
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SEE View Post
realism? Would that include restrictions on rear view ability even when loosening shoulder straps. Heads on swivels?

Lets face it, 6DOF, mouse lookaround and check yer six POV hat assignments are equally unrealistic with little penalty for being 'unstrapped' in combat even in full switch!

Just wondering how far people would be prepared to go or do they have a cut off point? In which case the arguments 'for and against' are not quite so black and white!
How would people like this for realism? The first time you crash and die you are booted back to the desktop and the game is automaticly deleted off your hard drive and you are unable to re-install it ever again.
__________________


XBL GT: - Robotic Pope
HyperLobby CS: - Robot_Pope
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-19-2011, 12:11 AM
frenchfly frenchfly is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 31
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SEE View Post
realism? Would that include restrictions on rear view ability even when loosening shoulder straps. Heads on swivels?

Lets face it, 6DOF, mouse lookaround and check yer six POV hat assignments are equally unrealistic with little penalty for being 'unstrapped' in combat even in full switch!

Just wondering how far people would be prepared to go or do they have a cut off point? In which case the arguments 'for and against' are not quite so black and white!
I think since we don't have the benefit of peripheral vision, some compromises have to be made in regards to views. Unless you have a 360 degree projection system set-up?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-19-2011, 12:41 AM
RAF74_Winger RAF74_Winger is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 46
Default

Just another viewpoint, I'm all for more realism - but it has to be accurate. The issue with the needles (and there still remains an issue with the ASI and Altimeter) and the negative G cut-out thing really revolves around a perception of what should be realistic and not experience of what really is.

For all I know, the original 0.25 and 0.5g figures for the cut-out may well be absolutely correct, I suspect that the problem arose from the inertia of the carburettor components not being considered - resulting in the rather strange cut-outs in turbulence.

The bouncing needles thingy is a bit strange too - though I'm not really qualified to talk about mechanical tachometers, all the aircraft I've flown have used tachogenerators AFAIK - but it is somewhat perplexing that the ASI and Altimeter behave in the way that they do, and the VSI doesn't - though it should be even more sensitive than the other two instruments

The fact is that these instruments don't behave in the way they're depicted here. Before anyone jumps in to say 'Aha - but these were old fashioned instruments!'; the technology hasn't changed much since the 20's - except if you're talking about really modern stuff with ADCs etc.

So what would I like to see in terms of realism?

Well; I think that although the landing phase probably has to be modelled with a bit less fidelity than could actually be achieved in order to retain playability, I think it could do with being bumped up a few notches in this game - the aircraft here are much too tolerant of poor touchdown technique and roll out very straight (I've not noticed any tendency to an impending swing in any of my landings).

Another thing would be the tailplane effects (I've mentioned this before), the aircraft seem very sluggish to swing over the top in a humpty or stall turn, and there's not much swing on take-off - though I do appreciate the fact that the rudder is immediately effective, unlike the original IL2 where you'd actually have to get a bit of airspeed on before it would do the job.

Just my opinion, make of it what you will. Certainly won't stop me flying the sim.

W.
Reply With Quote
Reply


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 07:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.