Announcement of the game "IL-2 Sturmovik: Battle of Stalingrad"

[vranac]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

Yes but someone with a top flight 8800 should have been able to at least get the sim to run.. I couldn't even get it to run over water.. with one plane.. That was un acceptible and the main reason why CoD failed initially .. even if there were some who ran it with no problems..

+1.. On it's lowest settings it should have looked like IL2 on Medium or High..

Man, you're talking about gfx card from 2007. Even that gtx260 is two times faster than 8800gt.
And you're wrong, two of my friends were flying at the release. One had cheap AMD x2 and 9600gt 512MB (~15% slower than 8800gt) and he was flying online and shooting down planes, on low settings and 1300 res of course. Second one had gts250 1GB(=9800gt=8800gt) and he was getting 20-30 fps over land low @1920.
Those are pics from one friend that is still flying on 9800gt and he is regular on ATAG, big map, lots of action.





Does it look perfect? No, low res textures are noticeable on wings and in cockpit. But that doesn't look bad at all.
Same as in BoS but there are no hi-res textures at all. When I see a screenshot with look on a wing and those poor textures its like someone puts finger in my eye.

And I can imagine how the artist who made those beautiful cockpits of 109 feels when he saw them trashed in BoS.
He even wrote few lines on sukhoi. Sadness.

P.S. sorry for huge ss.

[SlipBall]

Originally Posted by vranac

Man, you're talking about gfx card from 2007. Even that gtx260 is two times faster than 8800gt.
And you're wrong, two of my friends were flying at the release. One had cheap AMD x2 and 9600gt 512MB (~15% slower than 8800gt) and he was flying online and shooting down planes, on low settings and 1300 res of course. Second one had gts250 1GB(=9800gt=8800gt) and he was getting 20-30 fps over land low @1920.
Those are pics from one friend that is still flying on 9800gt and he is regular on ATAG, big map, lots of action.

Does it look perfect? No, low res textures are noticeable on wings and in cockpit. But that doesn't look bad at all.
Same as in BoS but there are no hi-res textures at all. When I see a screenshot with look on a wing and those poor textures its like someone puts finger in my eye.

And I can imagine how the artist who made those beautiful cockpits of 109 feels when he saw them trashed in BoS.
He even wrote few lines on sukhoi. Sadness.

P.S. sorry for huge ss.

You are wasting your time my friend, it will fail on the mindless. Bearcat is a prime example of what is wrong in our genre. People who don't want to see these sims get too beautiful or complicated, because then an up-grade would have to be done to their rig. And so a great studio has folded, and reputations have been tarnished and even destroyed. The game was a masterpiece on release with bugs that would have been corrected in time, but should have been corrected only for strong PC's.(Oleg might have taken that route, we will never know) llya, the chopped up game that is out there today, is nothing but a sad remnant.

[KG26_Alpha]

Ok quit the personal stuff and keep it on track .

Thanks

[vranac]

Originally Posted by SlipBall

You are wasting your time my friend, it will fail on the mindless. Bearcat is a prime example of what is wrong in our genre. People who don't want to see these sims get too beautiful or complicated, because then an up-grade would have to be done to their rig.

Yes I know that mate, but I just can't stand when some people write stuff thats not true. You can see on one of those screanshots my friend TURK Can he was regularly flying with c2duo and gtx260, he had problems because Clod needs more than two cores and he upgreded graphic card to gtx670 but no joy , CPU power is needed also.

And I agree with you completely, someone wants nice graphics but don't want to upgrade PC.

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by vranac

Man, you're talking about gfx card from 2007. Even that gtx260 is two times faster than 8800gt.
And you're wrong, two of my friends were flying at the release. One had cheap AMD x2 and 9600gt 512MB (~15% slower than 8800gt) and he was flying online and shooting down planes, on low settings and 1300 res of course.

I am wrong... so you were in my house and looking over my shoulder..? I never said I had an 8800.. I had a 9800GTX actually.. on an Fx-60 processor.. and I could not run it upon release.. It was a slideshow. I said that a person with a high end 8800 .. a card that was a little less powerful than mine should have been able to at least run it.. The exact same rig runs it today... after all the TF work.. That is my entire point. My other point was .. had CoD been as scalable as it is now upon release it probably would have garnered more support as opposed to all the bad press it got. All that bad press was not just cheap schmucks who refused to upgrade their rigs.. Just because you and a few hundred others out of the thousands who bought it could run it on your PCs does not mean that it was flawless upon release and that the problems that people had were figments of their imaginations or manifestations of their tightwad nature..

Originally Posted by SlipBall

You are wasting your time my friend, it will fail on the mindless. Bearcat is a prime example of what is wrong in our genre. People who don't want to see these sims get too beautiful or complicated, because then an up-grade would have to be done to their rig. And so a great studio has folded, and reputations have been tarnished and even destroyed. The game was a masterpiece on release with bugs that would have been corrected in time, but should have been corrected only for strong PC's.(Oleg might have taken that route, we will never know) llya, the chopped up game that is out there today, is nothing but a sad remnant.

Originally Posted by vranac

Yes I know that mate, but I just can't stand when some people write stuff thats not true.

vranac: See the above post. You were not in my house on my rig trying to get the dadblamed sim to run so you have no cause to call me a liar.

Slip: That was totally uncalled for.. and Alpha, I am sorry but I have to respond to this post.

If this is what you think then you obviously know absolutely nothing about me based on the post you just made so you really need to get your facts straight before you go shooting off at the mouth about things you know nothing about. CoD was a piece of crap on the outset.. otherwise it would have sold much better and the people who did drop their cash for it and felt burned would not be such a large group of folks.. As I have said across multiple forums over the past year or so from M4T to SHQ, IL2 and even here.. even in this very thread.. it is better now than it has ever been as far as being playable by the masses.. Your attitude and the way that you and many who think like you do resort to insulting people who have or have had issues with CoD in the past is also just as detrimental to the success of the sim as it's buggy release and truth be told that very same attitude makes a lot of folks just wave CoD off to this very day and also keeps them away from here. Even though the sim runs much better by all accounts .. even if it isn't as whatever the heck it is you guys keep complaining about is missing from the sim since it was "stripped down" it looks pretty d@mned good to me.. and as I said the same rig that could not run it in 2011 regardless to settings now runs it decently enough to at least see some of what it is about. That should have been the case from day one. The fact that you guys keep jumping on this nonsensical rewriting of the history train in spite of the fact that 98% of the folks who may have had issues in the beginning, and complained about it, regardless to how tactless they may have complained back then, now say it is great .. tells me that you guys just want to argue and be rude and insulting to all those fools who obviously were not as smart or adept as you were or your handful of friends who managed to see CoD for the masterpiece it was upon release..

Ya right..

Neither of you know anything about me and my wallet or what I do and have done in the past to support this genre so I would appreciate if you would keep your misinformed opinions about me and my character to yourself. CoD is a great piece of kit now.. I hope that TF can get whatever they need to continue doing what they do and add more in the way of planes and maps etc... but I hope that you and people who think like you do really take a step back from this chest thumping BS thing you guys do.. because it is getting old and tired and totally uncalled for.

Originally Posted by SlipBall

BOS is very good for entry level, so I think the more new pilots the better for the genre.

Hahahahaha...


De Nile .. it's not just a river in Egypt... Have you actually flown BoS? I wonder with that statement..

Originally Posted by KG26_Alpha

Ok quit the personal stuff and keep it on track .
Thanks

~!S!~ Out............

[vranac]

Well, I don't know you but I can conclude something from your writing. You had ancient PC when CloD came out. You read forums, Oleg stated many times that the new sim will be very demanding. What have you expected with 4-5 years old PC (CPU 6 years) ?
But I prefer to believe to my friends whom I helped to set up the game.

I'll tell you one analogy. I started playing il2 online with old and slow PC and it was almost unplayable. So I decided to upgrade. Some Athlon AMD CPU from good batch and OC'ed it to 2.1 GHz, very fast for that time (Intel was faster but AMD was better in games then). I bought midrange GPU 6600 also chosen model which could run on frequencies like 6600gt.
That was decent midrange PC of that time. And you know what, when I joined populated server 50-60 pilots with some flak around I got clap, clap, clap... 15 fps.
And that was 4-5 years after the release of il2. Only release of dual core CPU's solved that.
On the other hand with CloD I upgraded before the release with fast CPU and midrange GPU and had no problems at all. There were bugs, but most of those affected mission makers. I have nice collection of tracks from that spring summer.

You're right about that CloD sold badly. My opinion is that there is no more than few 10.000 flight sim fans out there and 1C expectations was huge.

Do you think BoS will sell 200.000 copies ? I really doubt that.
That number is from Loft.
They'll be lucky if they hit 50.000.

[Bearcat]

I don't think 50k is unreachable.. and just touching on CoD ... the fact that I can play it now on the same "ancient" rig if I wanted to tells me what I heed to know. TF is doing some great stuff and the only thing I wonder is why the people who produced the sim and had all the marbles could not do that by 2012.

[vranac]

You didn't understand, everything under 200.000 is a disaster.

CloD was optimized by MG in official patches.Try last official patch. While TF is doing a great job and optimized particle effects,explosion effects,clouds...

MG team was working on a sequel which we would have been playing already (alpha was expected Q1 2013) on advanced engine.That was priority for them and like Ilya said, fixing CloD would not bring any income. However they patched CloD regularly.

http://s58.photobucket.com/user/rest...?sort=3&page=1


We got modded RoF WW2 instead which is a step back in every aspect.
I expected FM to be good at least but it won't. FM is final for LaGG and 109 and LaGG manual is very detailed for every flight regime with exact figures and behavior of the aircraft in specific situations. And in BoS it's waaay off.

[Igo kyu]

Originally Posted by vranac

I'll tell you one analogy. I started playing il2 online with old and slow PC and it was almost unplayable. So I decided to upgrade. Some Athlon AMD CPU from good batch and OC'ed it to 2.1 GHz, very fast for that time (Intel was faster but AMD was better in games then). I bought midrange GPU 6600 also chosen model which could run on frequencies like 6600gt.
That was decent midrange PC of that time. And you know what, when I joined populated server 50-60 pilots with some flak around I got clap, clap, clap... 15 fps.
And that was 4-5 years after the release of il2. Only release of dual core CPU's solved that.

You spent your money wrong. I had an Athlon 1GHz (not overclocked) and a Geforce 2 GTS (a £300 card in 2000 ad) and IL*2 ran fine, offline as I always play, but fine up to Forgotten Battles. For Pacific Fighters I went up to a Althlon 64 3000, and a Radeon X800, and again, no problems whatever. You want to game with a crap GPU you will have to put up with crap framerates.

On the other hand with CloD I upgraded before the release with fast CPU and midrange GPU and had no problems at all.

Oleg listened to the people who thought cheap GPUs were the answer. It was a mistake.

There were bugs, but most of those affected mission makers. I have nice collection of tracks from that spring summer.

You're right about that CloD sold badly. My opinion is that there is no more than few 10.000 flight sim fans out there and 1C expectations was huge.

Do you think BoS will sell 200.000 copies ? I really doubt that.
That number is from Loft.
They'll be lucky if they hit 50.000.

I dunno. I think that there are a lot of potential fans, but it will depend on what shows up, what the DRM is like (I have no problem with copy protection, but tell me I have limited installs and crap like that, and I won't play. I won't "pirate" but I won't pay either, and "freeware" with pay for everything after the install? not for me).

[vranac]

Originally Posted by Igo kyu

You spent your money wrong. I had an Athlon 1GHz (not overclocked) and a Geforce 2 GTS (a £300 card in 2000 ad) and IL*2 ran fine, offline as I always play, but fine up to Forgotten Battles. For Pacific Fighters I went up to a Althlon 64 3000, and a Radeon X800, and again, no problems whatever. You want to game with a crap GPU you will have to put up with crap framerates.

I was talking about online gameplay. Il2 was always running much better on nvidia cards because ATI drivers was always bad with OpenGL. And you couldn't use Water=4 (new water) IIRC.

Oleg listened to the people who thought cheap GPUs were the answer. It was a mistake.

Really don't know what you mean with this statement.