Official Fulqrum Publishing forum - Friday Official Update, July 27, 2012

Official Fulqrum Publishing forum (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/index.php)

- IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/forumdisplay.php?f=189)

- - Friday Official Update, July 27, 2012 (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/showthread.php?t=33471)

It still doesn't explain why all the after screens have an average fps that is the same or actually lower. Degug mode was used for both tests so that kinda says that your avg fps will be the same or lower but with lower quality textures?

I'm somewhat hopeful here. My FPS have been frozen at 27 no matter what graphical combinations I choose, both low and high. "Five minutes" of testing does not seem very much, but if I can get just a little bit of en extra boost then the game might be playable for me at long last.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt (Post 448704)

Let me also say i support the next statement, at the very least the bombsights ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by AbortedMan (Post 448688)

Waiting until Monday essentially means waiting another week due to work/gf/life.

LOL!

Time to take responsiblity for your own life mate!

You need to set your priorities, time to stiffen up those sinues and tell those pencil pushers at work, and your girl friend that some thing more important has come up and you'll catch them on the flip side!

It's your life, get a grip on it!

[Skoshi tiger gingerly looks around to see if wife is reading over shoulder and clicks on Submit Reply]

As the panic is spreading (as usual) ;)

I guess the screens are from Luthiers old Core 2 Duo rig with a GTX275 (he has used that one before for screens posted here)...

And regarding the average FPS... As the screens are identical I guess they paused and then switched settings from "old mode" to "new mode" - so the average is still "the same"... How else should they be able to capture the same exact scene?

Just my .5

Quote:

Originally Posted by Force10 (Post 448653)

Ok...what am I missing here? The second post that has the 2 pairs of screenies:

The one with the ground attack on the tanks...

Before? FPS 7 AVG. 16 Max 24

After? FPS 11 AVG. 12 Max 24

Where is the big boost in framerates you guys are seeing?

That's about 50% more FPS and 30 % more AVG. A massive improvement! great work, luthier and team !

Next friday then ... or the one after that ..I'll believe Monday when I see it .

The average appears to be down however. Most perplexing. Just have to wait and see...

Quote:

Originally Posted by adonys (Post 448786)

lol.. don't tell that to anyone else.. they might lough at you :)

If people with no experience in game development want to laugh then let them.

But whenever you hear a developer talk about "optimizing" a game they mean not just cleaning up the code, but finding hackish solutions to decrease rendering time. Most of the time these solutions result in less accuracy but hopefully little visible difference.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Force10 (Post 448790)

Have you ever played a track? Haven't you noticed how the black death track switches camera angles and views around and they are built into the track? I don't think it's possible to get to the options menu while a track is paused. The shots are not exactly the same time....it's as if he was watching the numbers and pressed capture at approx the same time...hence why their different.

But the images are identical with regards to angle and timing. If you don't believe me then just open up two of them in separate tabs and switch back and forth.

And its from a dev build - we don't know if they can change settings while playing a track back or not (or even if this was a track being played back)

WOW 8FPS, thats more than double now.:grin: LMAO someone forgot so shut off the FPS counter