Friday 2010-02-25 Development update:Interview by Grégory Lemasson/Discussion Thread
 

As Oleg asked me here is the discussion thread about the interview !
As soon as he can I think he will come to answer all the questions you may have since this new update is out :-P

For those who doesn't know where to find the interview here it is :
http://www.checksix-fr.com/ and you will see the review in the news (with a special link for english people)

Answer for:
Originally Posted by SlipBall View Post
Great up-date! Oleg I am curious your decision to have "click-able"...and I'm not complaining either



the text itself (OM):

Decision was done very long time ago. However I will never tell what we will see in final untill the time when I'm sure that it will works really.

My principle never promise anything that may not happens. At least in realease but not after. However I'm, sure that some features that are designed and partially done may go later than in release. Same way as it was with Il-2. You know how fast was progressing Il-2 from the day of the first release. Simply becasue everything or almost everything was designed from the beginning of development...
Serious new thing was open in Forgottent Battles when we simply included the new 3D engine as a perfect mode. Just for example.

Still you may see with the modes of some good guys - Il-2 engine was so flexible...
Even more things we try to put from the beginning in the SoW engine and code that to make possible for third party much more than with Il-2. And almost from the beginning of the series, but not in the end...

But... you all know that modes should be really "certified"... So third party should be more organized than it was in the beginning when the code of Il-2 was hacked.
When its organized - there is really would be the best gameplay online.

I'm thinking already very long time about how to do it (in additional to what we plan in engine itself)... Maybe third party developers will offer me good ideas. Ordnung muss sein! Sorry, don't know how to say it in English.

Anyway... probably we will make separate discussion in future about this problem and we may find real solution for all of the players or groups of players. This is really important not for us, but for end user. And speech about it we will need to begin some time later, when I will be finally sure in some of the designed features and will tell about them here on the forum.

My dream - to "create" some third party serious uindustry around SoW. At first time - for the WWII (wwI) aircraft...then for the early jets... then.... God knows... it is depending of many things and at first depends of BoB success.

Ideas, if not crazy - welcome :)

PS. I'm sorry that I make some time mistakes, but I think my speech is understand-able. ;) Still Olegish English.

Thanks Snake for asking my questions about the FMB and third party tools and information. I would had liked more explanation about the FMB, and even some demonstration, but you cant have all. I'm more than happy with the interview, and some of the things mentiones make me drool all over the keyboard :D.

Oleg, hope yo dream comes true, because that would mean a better and bigger simulator for all of us.

Again, best friday update so far!

Thats really an amazing update. The smile on my face grew bigger with every line I read. Looks like the ultimate flight sim of my dreams becomes true.

You know, I'm not sure about which one made me happier in this sentence, the fact that Roman did a complex start-up or that he did it with a clickable cockpit.

Great interview, thanks to both Maddox Games team and Grégory!

Excellent interview, many thanks to Grégory and especially Maddox Games team for making their and our dreams come true. :)

Oleg ..... really disappointed in the Hardware your working with. It looks like we will still have the 'scale' problems and other issues that are currently in IL2. Really to my eye it looks like IL2 warmed over. I was hoping for a more


While I understand there are 'financial issues' at the moment.

It is very disheartening to see an 'High Definition' or 'Cinematic' 'Simulation' being created on such ancient and non representative hardware.

There is a saying in the west that I have always found has a lot of truth "The workman is only as good as his Tools"

I wish you well, but it concerns me greatly that even you the head of your company doesn't have a 'Basic Widescreen' 20-22 inch monitor on your desk. Its 2010 sir.

Since I don't expect and am resigned to the fact that scale and graphics are not going to be up to 2010 specs ....... can we at least get some 'gameplay' updates.

1. LoDs (dots for high resolution players)
2. Graphical User Interface/ Server Browser/ Friends Lists/ Squadron Tools
3. More information on 'Battle Engine' - What if anything can you tell us about your vision for online war in 2010.
4. What measures will be taken for anti cheat?
5. Will Dedicated Servers be available to host 'online war' so that Human Hosts (and their issues) can be removed.
6. Are we finally going to get rid of the 'Lobby' ?
**

P.S.
Did you get the Blu ray?

Will TrackIR v1 still work in SoW:BoB? After the sim comes out I first need a new (expensive) computer and would like to re-use as much peripherals as possible long enough. 6DoF will sooner or later come to me, too. But in the meantime my trusty TIR v1 (must have bought it pretty early in 2002 after more and more glowing user reviews on simhq) should do fine.

Thank you so much Oleg for allowing Greg to see your office and get so many news on the game. I had the privilege of a voice report by greg and must say that, even if i already knew you would blow us with your quest for excellence, i grew even more excited listening to all those features.


Following Greg's report i'd like to have a deeper explanation on a few subjects though.

How will oxygen be implemented ? If a pilot does not put his mask above 1000m, will he suffer of earlier fatigue ? If he forgets to put his mask (or if he puts his mask and forgets to turn oxygen supply open) and climbs above 3000m, will he lose consciousness ? If yes, how will it show on screen ? If pilot has oxygen mask set, supply open and line gets punctured by a bullet, what will be the consequences ?

How will fatigue be implemented ? After many manoeuvers in a short period, will pilot still be able to fully deflect commands ? Will it affect greyouts/blackouts ?

Greg says you're happy with IL2 greyout/blackout model. I had only once a greyout flying aerobatics, but discussed the fact with fellow simmers that also fly for real and all say, as it was for me, that the main result of a greyout is loss of color (you see in black and white) before field of view gets really restricted and view blurred. This would require some kind of postprocess, but is most probably doable with current hardware. Any chance of seeing this kind of greyout ?

Thanks a lot for taking some of your precious time to answer our questions :grin:

I think that their hard ware reflects what the masses would be using at the time of purchase of SOW

We have good hardware if to speak about quality. Professional CRT still rules in terms of much better features of colors and depth of color. It is calibrated... And really cost a lot.
If you mean wide screen - then it works without any problem.
If you mean PC itself - sure we have probably better than you have now in terms of power. However I always prefer not so much powered PC for programmers... because the result of their work directly corresponds to the power of PC. If it is too much power - then the code would not be so much optimized. Hope you got my point.

Other your questios. Please read my answer above. I never tell before I would know how it will be in final. I know the answers. But I can't tell.
I don't like to look later like promiosed all, but developed nothing...
You have many such samples in this industry I think. Especiually in flight sims niche. Beginning from B17II and finishing.... Should I show it by my finger? :)

Finally. Graphics Engine of SoW is way more advanced than Il-2.
Il-2 can be "warmed up" to the photographic look on the surface. But will never looks like SoW and its features. Trust me.
Maybe you understand me if I will tell comparison by other way:

Compare quality of images of these cameras:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...8_Digital.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...al_Camera.html


The first is Il-2.
The second - BoB at initial release.






Blue ray. No. I heard form Dmitry Goryainov about some Blue ray...

Can't tell you right now. Should test. I have one old still unpacked.

1. Probably like you asking. Close to this.

2. Can't answer this. We put it in a wish list and not as the main feature. Really flyinhg in online battle you are also will be tired very much... Just try to think about it. I saw the guys all of a sweat... just flying in online duel for 20 minutes.

3. I never saw myself any blackouts or readouts. I mean flying with -3 to +6G. Speaking to many different real pilots - all had different feellings. No one said the same thing. Currently - approximation of all their answers.

Oleg, will SoW have support for DX11?

DX9 DX10 and DX11

Great news, thanks!

Oleg, if you have time for one more question, have you tested SoW with the new ATI Radeon series of graphics cards that supports triple-screen through the 'Eyefinity' technology? I use this with IL-2 and it is incredibly impressive in 5760x1080.

We have not yet this card. However should works.

Thanks for a great interview and thanks to Oleg for answering so many questions today. I'm keeping my excitement levels at a moderate level but this is really really positive.

And your Olegish English is just fine :)

Hello once again,

Here are some questions. I have some very specific 3rd party projects in mind.


3d Modeling:

- Will it be possible to model African wildlife (eg. for a civilian 1930s addon)? What animation supports are there for elephants?

- Will there be support for wing warping (eg. in the Fokker Eindecker and other early aircraft)?

- Will it someday be possible to support distortions (bending) of damaged/destroyed aircraft like in Rise of Flight? Or will the game engine always be limited to the still wonderful approach to damage modelling seen in Il-2.


Artificial intelligence:

- Can the amount of variation between AI be set by the mission builder (ie. to simulate more highly drilled english pilots vs. the more unpredictable American pilots in 1943)?

- Is there support for higher level AI? More specifically is there support for formation level tactics (ie. Something in-between vectoring by ground control and a flights rotte/pairs)?

- Is there support for airplane specific AI (eg. Yak-7 and YAK-9 would have different AI modules)? Doing so would allow AI to change tactics depending on the airplane and mirror changes in tactics throughout the war (as later variants could use later tactics).

- How open will the AI be to tweaking and expansion by modders?[/quote]


Scripting:

- What support is there for music tied to in-game triggers? What about audio files? Will it be possible to have pre-recorded conversations that play out during gameplay?

- Also, is it possible to have the player activate a trigger via the radio menus?


Weather model:

- Will the weather model be open to 3rd party modification? (not only changing the weather to reflect a historic date, but changing the model: wind patterns near cliffs, wind from bodies of water etc.)

- How does the flight model function at >1 atmospheres (ie. a plane flying in a valley below sea level)?


Minor questions:
- Will it be possible to make minor features of an aircraft (eg. presence or absence of an armoured headrest) selectable via a separate tab (independent of the weapons tab)? This would be good for aircraft that went through many minor upgrades.

- Will it be possible for the 3rd party to make drivable trains (or will be be limited to trucks)?


I know it is early to get answers for many of these questions, but any hints will help with planning.

As always, many thanks and best of luck,

S!

Was the question regarding the release date not allowed?
If not then please what is your time frame for the release?
Thanks and best regards
HHF

Here Friday is 26/2/2010. ;)

Informative interview
 

For me, this interview has started puting all the pieces together for BOB/SOW - thanks Oleg and Gregory from Check-Six.
I liked the clickable cockpit option and engine management situation. These developments will give the fight sim much more immersion. The changing weather will also make flying much more realistic - I also liked the Stuka starting to 'ice-up' before puting on the anti-icing heating.
The fight simulator experience of flying a WWII aircraft in BOB/SOW will be a much more realistic experience than IL-2 - a lot closer to flying the real thing and I can't wait.
DFLion

Very nice questions!! Hope Oleg answer!

Hi, It's not fair! Every time I see one of these updates I get more eager and excited. They make it harder waiting for the release of this sim!

I'm in the process of updating the layout of my home made control pannel and after reading this interview realised that the layout was based more on systems represented in IL2 and not BoB. (I hadn't put in a switch for carby heat and I'm sure there will be a lot of other essential systems I have missed that would be best on my controller - Tube Shooter for instance????)

Would it be possible for you to release a list of systems and controls that can be assigned before the release of the sim so that we can make (and engrave) an appropriate layout for BoB on our home brew controls and cockpits?

Thank you for your time and effort.


There is also a saying that "A shoddy workman always blames his tools". From what I've been seeing and reading in these updates I get the impression that we are seeing a group of professional craftsmen and artists hard at work using the tools of their choice.

As a future client and user of this sim I don't think I would feel comfortable telling the artist what sort of brushes he should be using.

Grégory, thank you very much for that piece of journalism. Merciiiiii! :) I enjoyed reading it a lot. I am sure the translation was hurried out as well to get it to our greedy communities.

An English writing tip: the "!", "?" and ":", in fact all of the special signs, are written directly after a word, like this "That's right!". French puts in a space after the word. Just a difference, but the French way is quite noticable for the non-French people when reading :P

:lol:

Thanks.

I put quite a bit of thought into finding questions which Oleg won't have been asked yet and which are also likely to reflect what certain projects will need in a few years time (although this is always the hardest to predict).

Oleg,

thanks for the update and interview

2 questions:

1) the re-fueling and re-arming issue:

A) this has been extensively discussed in the last few years at ubi forums, simhq, and the other main flightsim forums. the conclusion was that historical evidence presented confirmed it is possible, and was done in real life, to re-arm and re-fuel a spitfire or hurricane in under 15 min during the busiest periods of BoB (iirc) when every aircraft counted and they had to relaunch aircraft as fast as possible on certain days !

i even still have the historical video footage that shows the whole rearming procedure for the spitfire or hurricane (one was easier then the other, iirc the hurricane was significantly faster then the spitfire because the ammo boxes in the wings were more accessible). with that footage you can time exactly how long it takes, it was either 9 or 11 minutes, using the normally available ground crews for that situation (they had a team of 2 men working on each wing, so 4 ground crew per aircraft)

note: historically you didnt usually have 15 aircraft all land together for quick refuel and rearm, but it was aircraft coming in solo or in little groups of 2 and 3. when a whole squadron came back from a mission and were debriefed, aircraft made ready for next flight etc, this would take much longer obviously, but that is entirely different.

if you have any doubts about this, then let us present some of those facts to you so it can be implemented, it makes a BIG difference in coops and online play, even for stand alone missions in solo play. obviously if you would land a plane at an airfield that has been extensively damaged by a recent enemy bombing raid, the airfield would be disorganised and crews and supplies might be damaged or destroyed, but that should not determine how quickly this can happen at a normal airfield. maybe add a pilot command to airfield "stand by crews for refueling and rearming", so that once landed and taxi to the pit spot, it can be done in historical time. if we dont pre warn the airfield, and it is chaos on the ground, maybe it can take longer.

in the options for re-arming refueling we also need a setting to choose for ex
a) realistic refuel rearm = 15 min
b) accelerated refuel and rearm = 3 min
etc..

B) if landing a damaged aircraft, or one that needs to be refueled or rearmed, we also need an option of "choose other available aircraft at airfield", with a small delay before we can start the new aircraft (equal to the time needed to walk/run to the next aircraft, and not have the instant refly we have now when selecting an aircraft for ex)


2) for the new complex engine management, will we get messages of the type of problem encountered ? eg:
- icing of wings/windscreen
- low oxygen for pilot
- "right wing ammo box exploded" etc ?

if you physically sit in a real aircraft, you get a lot of clue's physically with your body senses about what it happening to the pilot and aircraft, sitting behind a pc monitor we dont experience this. for ex low on oxygen an experienced pilot notices before blacking out and does something about it, similar with vibration of flaps are not retracted (or gear) etc.. the game software needs to SIMULATE this pilot awareness, if need be with some basic msg's flashing on screen (as an on/off option in preferences, so the fake-real people who want to fly deaf dumb and blind can do so to)

please consider :)

Many if not most systems, including all engine related, give no special clues to the pilot if in the real aircraft. Possibly some vibrations from something being unbalanced being the exception. Otherwise, only what you hear and see, which we can do quite well these days. If the monitors are too small and low resolution, and the sound quality is poor without detailed sound differences that should be present when an engine is acting strange, then, yes, something additional is needed.

But I think the sounds will be great, graphics great, systems simulated accurately and with the instruments finally working properly, there's no need for me to have any helmet projected display handicap to understand that something is wrong.

Having options for helmet mounted display projecting system status is is OK to have as an option, and I don't think it takes any development time away.

EDIT: in the example of the low oxygen, there's other more creative ways to give clues to that something isn't right (slightly blurred vision, more suseptible to blackouts, blacking out even when flying straight, a bit sluggish controls, some head-sway when moving around with headtracking). Imagine a drunk person - they often have such bad judgement that they cannot even understand that it is they who are the problem when trying to do something requiring accurate control, instead they can think something is wrong with the system.

Wing ammo box exploded: Just what kind of special thing does a pilot get that make is blind and deaf in comparison? Surely some loud explosion, major wing damage, severely affected handling (if the wing is still even attached). We have everything we need to figure it out similar to a real pilot.

Icing: This is already described. Check the temperature gauge, look at the ice on the windows (visually) and on the wings, and note how it affects the engine performance. If it also affects handling like it should, then you'll notice this as well when moving the stick around and seeing how the aircraft behaves in contrast to how it normally should.

Landing gear vibrations: Vibrations are trickier. It can be seen visually if the gears are out as the plane just doesn't fly without vibration (shaking the camera and the horizon a bit). Also, force feedback makes a big (trust me) difference here, but not everyone has such hardware. I think if the sound engine was more realistic, there would be some other sounds as well in those old planes, maybe rattles, squeeks etc.

Not true. You would not even notice that you were losing oxygen until it became far too late. I don't want to get into all the details right now, but do a quick search on hypoxia for more.

Besides the gauges for oxygen pressure and oxygen quantity, the pilot had to check his mask, and squeezed the tubing to make sure there was pressure and that no ice was forming.

Actually, no-one says this- you've misunderstood the phrase about a bad worker blaming his tools.

Great update, every time I get something that exceeds my expectations dramatically.

Then the task is to come up with a system that simulates SOME of the symptoms of it, in the same similar sneaky way. Then it is up to the observant virtual pilot to notice these symptoms before it is too late.

Seems like awesome fun. In that case, the 'already too late' symptom should come as a shock. Like a sudden blackout without any chance of acting on it (as the real pilot might simply be too affected by hypoxia to notice some of the more obvious-to-others signs, so they should not be blatantly presented to the virtual pilot to make an accurate judgement either).

If judgement especially is affected, what would be appropriate? :P Clicking the transmit button sporadically? :D Accidental discharge of weapons? Or wait, get this, having a friendly plane (spitfire for example) looks like a Nazi plane. Creeping at first, seeing swastika markings, but the shape yet looks like a spitfire. But then, even the shape. Other symptoms.. Perhaps instruments showing wrong numbers (reading north as south for example).

Making symptoms will surely be a challenge. It would have to depend on altitude firstly, but to make a creeping loss of consciousness is impossible unless our computers gradually injected carbon monoxide into the room.

For the purposes of a game, and to avoid possible lawsuits, it might be ok to just gradually dampen movement of the head and stick. This will be less noticeable during cruise when the inputs are more relaxed (but imagine being bounced at this point :) ). At some point the screen could go black, but by then there would be nothing you could do to wake up unless your plane was diving into thicker air. Whether or not you woke up before hitting the ground would also depend on many factors, but your chances are slim.

But I want my nazi spitfires! :P

Seriously, imagine (if playing without icons, which is the way it should be) your wingman suddenly engaging you, while talking on the radio that he's on the enemy's six but lost sight of you. Could happen during an engagement with real enemies. Talk about realistic simulation! :) And you're like "That's me you're firing at! You fool! Stop!", and he's like "No no, it's a 109". Then you go "Check your oxygen right now!".

Oxygen deprivation isn't necessary to make this authentic. Consider the 'Battle of Barking Creek': http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Barking_Creek
Sadly, inexperience combined with 'knowing' what you are looking at is quite sufficient to bring about this sort of cock-up. Almost makes me feel less guilty about doing much the same thing on UKDed2. Almost...

That is true, and yep, I am familiar with that tragedy. But some (many) of us know to not open fire unless the enemy is positively identified. If unsure, don't shoot. But we too could get affected when oxygen deprived. :)

My stats say I have killed one friendly aircraft online, but since I have only shot down two enemy fighters, the friendly must have been some freak random accident. Maybe a spawn collision or hit by a stray mk 108 30mm shell. Even the rear gunner could have hit a friendly far away that was already going down by mistake when spraying. The rules of FPS games, and Armed Assault, are like a reflex to me. Don't shoot until sure.

When we're talking about carburetor icing the diagostic would be reduction in Manifold Pressure with a constant speed prop ( reduction in RPM with a fixed or manual pitch prop) and eventually a rough runing engine leading to total failure in extreme cases.

I know atmospheric modeling will deal with temp, but will we be able to find relative humidity in BoB?

Most of avoiding things like carburetor icing comes down to preventive actions, knowing the conditions and using good airmanship so you don't get the problem. The instruments required to diagnose the problem will be modeled, but diagnosing the problem will be the hard bit (as in real life)!

Although unlikely, I wonder if fuel injected motors like the German planes will have similar problems with induction icing?
Cheers!

complete bollocks !

your saying there that there is only 2 states possible for a ww2 pilot in relation to oxygen supply
a) perfectly normal and healthy
b) "far to late" (presumably instant near death state, or death itself)

which is obviously total nonsense

even holding your breath for 60 sec is possible (ie instant no further new oxygen), so even if the oxygen tube is shot out or the system has a major leak (while breathing normally), it would take btw 30 and 90 sec or (even longer) for the pilot to be completely disabled, it is NOT instant. and in a gradual reduction of oxygen in a non pressurized aircraft climbing this would take place over a number of minutes, the pilot gradually getting a bit disoriented, trouble concentrating on his tasks, be more clumsy with controls and switches (fine motor control), getting a headache etc. blurring of vision and then blacking out is really the final phase.

my point is this:
1) in both those situations in real life you would get some physical indications from your surrounding, and the physical senses of your body. a trained and experienced pilot would also recognize those earlier then joe average from the street.
2) sitting behind a monitor in your living room is a very dulled experience compared to being in the cockpit and experiencing it, are you really going to argue that point ?

so to SIMULATE the experience of the pilot it would be helpfull to get some additional clues, and this can take many forms and is really what the discussion should be about
1) simple "oxygen status" msg flash on screen ?
2) having the oxygen dial "light up brighter" so that with an initial glance at your instruments you get increased awareness of the important one
3) etc ... etc... many ways to do it

take another example, wasnt the fuel tank right in front of the pilot in some of those aircraft ? damage to the tank could leak fuel into the cockpit, the pilot feels it on his face, sees the liquid maybe, it stings his eyes, he smells the fuel etc... and no not all those events meant that the pilot was instantly on fire either, so it is not about modeling the flames as an on/off status.
- so how do you "model" the pilot smelling the fuel in the cockpit ? if there was lots of fuel splashing about in the cockpit onto the pilot, a strong smell of fuel, and the pilot was in a dodgy dogfight situation, he might well decide to bail out rather then wait for the next spark to set him on fire. even if he stayed in the pit and flew on, he would make sure his goggles were on and he was ready to quickly bail out

again, some kind of visual msg or other feedback is needed to get that sensory information and SIMULATE the information the real pilot would have at that time, sitting behind your monitor just doesnt provide it.

1. :-)
2. Been doing that for almost a decade.
3. I am sure he will ship it with next load. Say hi, hes not talking to me cause I give you a hard time :grin:

When you coming to (demo) USA ?

I think he means that the signs are difficult to notice at all, in particular (and this is important) because the judgement is impaired, like with drunk people. Therefore there are signs, but when very quickly stepping into these conditions, the signs are probably easier for others to notice than for yourself. People with 'altitude poisoning' can do crazy things and don't realize what is really happening. But yes, I agree with you that there's not only two states, there's other things that we could and should notice. :) But these should not be so obviously apparent when just cruising that we always see directly what is happening.

Try to think beyond just 'smell'. How do humans react to strong fumes? Especially in your example of it splashing around.

If I was a designer for Maddox Games, I would:

1. Make the eyes mist (vision become foggy).
2. Coughing (sound effect & movement of the viewscreen matching the cough attacks).

And more things maybe, depending on what was appropriate. I think you will agree that these two points would be clearly noticable, even in a dogfight, just like it would be clearly noticable to the real pilot. It is true that we still don't smell it, and that is a disadvantage. But the other multiple signs are clear for anyone to understand that nasty fumes are in the air.

EDIT: (Sorry for editing, I just realized I had more I could reply to)

Good ideas. The on-screen message is appropriate if other proper signs are not there, or the user does not have good enough hardware to see the signs/instruments properly. Or if they just feel like having it obvious because of whatever reason.

The oxygen dial lighting up brighter is a great idea if the user does not quite have the hardware (you know, like need to zoom a lot to be able to read the instruments, while others with bigger better monitors and graphics cards can see it without much zoom), but still doesn't want the helmet mounted display message telling him that there is an O2 problem. Because then he can just look casually at the meter, if TRYING to check it, and see easier that it is not normal. Really great idea actually. I support it 100% as an option.

There is another solution here, that also solves the DRM issue discussed in another thread. SoW:BoB shold be sold with a stink-dongle that releases the appropriate aroma during flight - a scent of hops and new-mown hay as your Hurri lifts out of Biggin Hill, acompanied by the aroma of 100-octane fuel leaking slightly into the cockpit. Suddenly, a scent of saurcraut and jackboot-polish alerts you to danger. You notice the metallic tang of 20mm cannon shells as they whizz by, but also notice the undertone of inexperienced youth and a distinct odour of wishing to be back home in Dusseldorf. Before you know it the threat has gone, leaving nothing but the scent of a half-empty fuel tank and the vaguest hint of Hermann Goering's aftershave.

Flying back to base you notice the pleasant aroma of new-mown-hay (again), and a vague hint of singed Dornier from somewhere along the coast. Turning into finals, your senses are assaulted by the overwhelming smell of bacon. Yum, lunchtime!...

you are slightly missing my point, it is this:

for ex, when the hurrican pilot is in his cockpit flying around believing he is alone in the air, and suddenly
- some bang noises and a physical jolt (depending if large shell or small caliber hit, there might be little jolt or noise other then like rocks falling on a tin roof)
- his aircraft continues flying (so no major damage, and pilot initially unsure of what the jolt or sound was, or what it did to his aircraft)
- he feels liguid sprayed on his face and clothing
- strong smell of fuel
- no fire

there, in 5 sec the pilot know exactly what happened, how serious and threatening it is to him, and because of training knows his basic options and risks, and procedures to either evade (escape from cockpit), or reduce physical risk (put goggles on if not allready, close jacket, hand on canopy opening etc...). so how do you convey the same information to the virtual pilot sitting in his living room behind a monitor in the same 5 sec ? blurring some vision and making the pilot cough just doesnt convey the same information, especially since the same type of reaction could be from smoke or even glycol leaking into the cockpit and affecting the pilot (oks, not exactly the same, but you catch my meaning)

for a leak in oxygen, or sudden or gradual oxygen loss in supply to the pilot, the time delay in real life could vary from 30 sec to many minutes (particularly in a gradually climbing aircraft which might take several minutes)

so the problem is, for events like low oxygen, fuel leak into cockpit etc.. we need a way to convey the same information a real pilot has in the same time delay , other then using some "non real" messages onscreen or "virtual visual clue's" in the game to SIMULATE this pilot information i dont think it is possible to have our virtual pilots behave in the same way a real pilot experiencing a real life event would.

for those that dont like the idea or dont understand the concept, give them an on/off option in the preferences and they can fly around in a sensory deprived virtual space to their hearts content.

[QUOTE=AndyJWest;146586]You notice the metallic tang of 20mm cannon shells as they whizz by,
QUOTE]

Closely followed by the smell of soiled underwear !)

Cheers!

Answer to Avimimus:



I will answer a bit later. However you are right - many things for third party are more on the design paper or in my and main programmer mind. But some things already programmed.

I don't know the differences in how glycol and petrol affects the senses, so something should be done to distinguish them if there should be a noticable difference.

A principle can be followed in most cases however: if one sense cannot be simulated but others are enough to convey the same information adequately, then nothing more is necessary. But if it is not enough to convey the information, then exaggerating some of the other simulated senses can compensate for the loss of one sense.

Using text to spell it out should be seen as a failiure, only to be used as a last resort. For if it was not, then why do we even try to simulate anything, could just write everything with text instead.

If text is used, I would like it to at least limit itself to only replacing the lost sense. In IL-2, we have an instant "FUEL LEAK" 10 millisecond after a leak begins. If we talk about fuel leak into cockpit it would be better to just have, after several seconds "You smell gasoline" appear in an elegant way.

Cannot be 100% accurate, but can be a fair approximation. Just like anything else in simulators. Using the principle I mentioned above, as long as there is enough information, through the senses that can be simulated (sight, hearing, vibrations), or by exaggerating some of the information, in the same time that a real pilot would notice similar things; it is a good simulation of reality.

Your suggestion of spelling out exactly what is going on is the opposite of what you are concerned about - flying sensory enhanced, much better than real pilots. The 'symptoms' of something is then instead a line of text, impossible to miss, telling us what is happening, and we can respond like a pro and notice and diagnose the problems every time because we don't have to check for any symptoms at all. The same problem as with IL-2's hud log spelling out status about all the systems even though we already have information similar to a real pilot, even if it is not easy to diagnose problems easily (just like real life is difficult).

You misunderstood me completely. When one is oxygen deprived, they do not know they are oxygen deprived. It's not as if one is perfectly fine and healthy, and then suddenly die.

Try this experiment: Get only 5 hours of sleep a night for a week. You will not feel tired. In fact you may feel energetic and alert. However, you may notice that you are forgetting things more often, and making more mistakes in every day activity. You THINK you are fine, but really, you are dealing severely reduced mental capacity. You won't suddenly die at the end of that week either, but you may pass out. The difference is that passing out in a plane is pretty dangerous.

Again do a search for hypoxia and exactly what it entails. Here is a quick excerpt:

What this means is that you will be deprived of oxygen, but you won't be able to tell that you are deprived of oxygen because you are being deprived of oxygen. Carbon monoxide poisoning has similar effects of oxygen deprivation since CO attaches to hemoglobin in the same way as O2. You feel euphoric, maybe a little drowsy. But you are not in the state of mind to say to your self "I am drowsy, this is bad, I must be lacking oxygen". Instead you decide shut your eyes for a few moments...which ends up being the last thing you do.

As for training, you can not know the effects that hypoxia will have on your ability to PERCEIVE it until you've gone through it. I don't think the RAF had pressure chambers for the recruits. :)

3d Modeling:

- Will it be possible to model African wildlife (eg. for a civilian 1930s addon)? What animation supports are there for elephants?

OM: Probably yes. But not right from the beginning. For animation itself it is possible to use many professional and expensive tools, however the main thing is how to port it in engine. We’re planning to issue tools for importing external animations in time.

- Will there be support for wing warping (eg. in the Fokker Eindecker and other early aircraft)?

OM: In aircraft currently modeled it is impossible. If the longeron(main wing spar) is damaged to the moment when possible “warping” then the wing will be out. Simple physics. In realty it may happen, but not in air, say for such aircraft as Spitfire or Messerschmitt. More or less realistic “warping” of some panels due to damage – yes we have it.

- Will it someday be possible to support distortions (bending) of damaged/destroyed aircraft like in Rise of Flight? Or will the game engine always be limited to the still wonderful approach to damage modelling seen in Il-2.

OM: Like in RoF – never. I don’t think that to make incorrect things, replacing real physics is right way. This is my opinion as aviation engineer, but not as a programmer.
Of course for the very old biplanes with bracing construction in some really very rare cases may happens in air some shit damage, _looking_ like distortions, but it can’t be standard and usual situation or often (each time) happened damage.
Really what we are doing is many times more complex and realistic in terms of DM. RoF isn’t even close in comparison to our system modeling and its interaction. I said what I said. Hope you will understand it.


Artificial intelligence:

- Can the amount of variation between AI be set by the mission builder (ie. to simulate more highly drilled english pilots vs. the more unpredictable American pilots in 1943)?

OM: I think yes. There is an option to selects different character. I said character. It’s not a mistake. However it isn’t done yet 100%. But I can say now that we have AI restrictions by level of experience (or by other word – education) and also in additional - by character.
Don’t ask me the types of character. It will be known for all only when I will use it for real advertising later, but not for the speech with you all here.

- Is there support for higher level AI? More specifically is there support for formation level tactics (ie. Something in-between vectoring by ground control and a flights rotte/pairs)?

OM: I can’t tell you all details. I think in interview for the current moment all things were said enough :) And the short answer of Dima covering well the main part of you request.

- Is there support for airplane specific AI (eg. Yak-7 and YAK-9 would have different AI modules)? Doing so would allow AI to change tactics depending on the airplane and mirror changes in tactics throughout the war (as later variants could use later tactics).

OM: Such things were in Il-2. But in BoB it is way more complex restrictions and specializations.

- How open will the AI be to tweaking and expansion by modders?[/quote]

OM: Probably will be not open. Same reason as above about weather and online gameplay.

Scripting:

- What support is there for music tied to in-game triggers? What about audio files? Will it be possible to have pre-recorded conversations that play out during gameplay?

OM: Wish list. Not less then in Il-2. I can say that there are triggers with the regulating zone – making own mission you may put in some place of the map the point with own sound and define the zone (diameter) on which distance it will begin to work for you aircraft. This is minimum. However you should try to understand how much features such “simple” function may offer you.


- Also, is it possible to have the player activate a trigger via the radio menus?

OM: Interesting … Will put in a wish list. We have not such thing.


Weather model:

- Will the weather model be open to 3rd party modification? (not only changing the weather to reflect a historic date, but changing the model: wind patterns near cliffs, wind from bodies of water etc.)

OM: Can’t say right now. Maybe we will open. However first time – probably no. There is so many innovations, that I don’t like to show for all developers in the world. At least for the first time after the release.


- How does the flight model function at >1 atmospheres (ie. a plane flying in a valley below sea level)?

OM: It is depending of atmosphere density. It is one of the functions.

Minor questions:
- Will it be possible to make minor features of an aircraft (eg. presence or absence of an armoured headrest) selectable via a separate tab (independent of the weapons tab)? This would be good for aircraft that went through many minor upgrades.

OM: Only these things modeled in 3D model and given selectable in menus. Same for third party. So probably in life time of sim series such things will be also possible.

- Will it be possible for the 3rd party to make drivable trains (or will be be limited to trucks)?

OM. If BoB will go on the market with enough success then I can say yes. In principle any vehicles later will be possible to make dive-able. Including from third party without us.

O mighty Oleg,

IL-2 has tail gunners in Bf 110 that we cannot interact with in any way, and in multiplayer, they cannot even communicate.

I wrote suggestions on things I would like to see if you saw that. My question is: what might Storm of War might be offering regarding these important rear crew members (especially in multiplayer with AI tailgunner)?

I already answered that we have something changed in that area. In interview. How much will be done - can't say right now. You should understand my position and principles.

I already answered even more than usual was answering in time of the Il-2 peak.

Well yes, you said that the speech engine was 'new'. That does not say anything for if AI can even speak in multiplayer though :(

I was not here before IL-2 was released (I wish I knew about it) and I understand you do spend quite some time on posting here. And sure, I understand your position about not revealing before being sure, but I did not know that you were not sure ;) I heard no one talk about the gunners or even speech in multiplayer before.

There was some speech about it.

Community, that knows me for a very long time, knows that I remember almost all my answers and important questions from users.

(quote)
Happy with his little surprise Roman decides to show me something else on the Stuka, he begins showing the new physics engine and has fun letting mortar shells fall besides the Stuka on the ground. There is no possible comparison with Il2 anymore, the blast of the explosions damage objects and may even disturb them.





Is this to say that a bomb blast will move lite objects (light bulbs, chair/table, barrel etc.) that are a good distance from bombs ground zero, but yet close enough to be affected:)

Well, at least there is plenty of opportunity for the features :)

Ever thought about making an appearance personally in SoW? As pilot, instructor (that would be something) etc, both in voice and graphically? It would be a suitable easter-egg :)

What a fantastic update, thanks:grin: This simulator promises to be everything I'd hoped for and more. Thank you for going that extra mile for us. I'm truly staggered by the level of detail in this product.

Thanks to Grégory and the 1C team.

yes. Even cars. Its why we model them from all sides with so good details:)

(quote)
yes. Even cars. Its why we model them from all sides with so good details:smile:




Movie makers are going to love that:cool:

Sure. Some time it will looks like real cinema if to go by some simple rules.

Hi Oleg,

Just wanted to say "you're doing a great job, Sir!". Investing so much time and money in such a venture denotes a real passion for combat flight simulations, and passion + competence yields always good results.

I bought all the Il2 series as soon as they were published, I'll buy the BoB series too ... look forward to SoW, hopefully very soon! By the way, when? :D

Bye,
Insuber

to have seen how the cars are modeled I can tell it will be georgous :-P

Thank you for this great update, Oleg. I think SoW will be a very good sim!

Not me, but the whole team. We have very experineced programmers and modellers. Their level of knowledge is dedicated to aviation (some were working in Sukhoi bureau).
We also have Vladimir Veryugin, that knows I think everythng about tanks of all sides... And his many years hobby corresponds to his work. Of course he can make anything and now he and his co-workers doing other things... because modeling of ground vehicles is finished (that can be used in the next our sims also! The most hard to make the basis for the series!).

Yes, pilots who had not experienced it before didn't know what was causing the gradual change in how flying felt. Because of this I hope lack of oxygen will be modeled so that it's not obvious to the pilot that the problem is oxygen. There are some similar cases in IL2 already:
- when you turn too rapidly you may black out.
- If your plane dives and you try to pull up, plane controls may react slowly because of high speed

I hope oxygen deprivation would be modeled in some similar way, instead of showing the player some text which makes problem solving so much faster and easier.

We had this mornig some speech about it. Probably we'll have even graphics representation of the mask. It looks after a small test well.


As for the effect itself. I'm experienced myself in low oxigen situations. I was so many times in mountains and even over the 4000 meters altitudes. So don't worry. To miss the mind on such altitudes is almost impossible... what may happens when you move faster than possible - tachypnea (hope this is right term) and then if you are continue to move fast - even more frequent respiration and then the effect that looks close to blackout if you didn't stop movement even for a short time for the recovering of oxigen in the blood (recovering happens very fast). That is possible just in the first day of moving there at such altitudes. Then the human organism begins to get accustomed... and its already never happens. At least up to 5000 meters. Of course it is depending of the lungs volume. As more smaller lungs - more great time of adaptation. In terms of aviation and oxigen starvation - effect will be very different for different people. Say the good swimmer and trained phisically human will have no problem maybe up to 6000 meters. But these, say like vietnamese people may have the problem already at 2500 m. Some friends of my father (I saw and spoke with them many times during hunting in the forests in the past) told me very long time ago that for Vietnamese pilots there was special order to use mask right from the ground....they were not able to control aircraft in the same conditions as Russian pilots.

So.... we should have, like I pointed above with blackout-redout some average value. Roman knows it. So I expect that we satisfy all.


PS. movement in moutains and work in a cockpit - a different thing. Movement takes more oxigen.

Oleg, I know this may be a more technical question better suited for you programmers, can you say what sound API will be used, DirectSound3D, OpenAL or other? Windows Vista and Windows 7 no longer support sound card hardware acceleration for DirectSound3D but do support hardware acceleration with OpenAL.

Oleg, if you need any more info on the oxygen mask (RAF) then I am happy to help.

BTW, during the Battle of Britain, the RAF were using the type d-oxygen mask. This was made a wool, similiar to barethea, and the mask itself had no real self-sealing capability on the wearer's face (unlike the later rubber masks).

Now, if you are to model oxygen effects, then the next part becomes very important ;) Because the mask had no real sealing capablilities, a lot of the oxygen espcaped at the sides of the mask. In the event of a fire, if the pilot never turned off his oxygen then the mask would become a human-blow-torch, and the effects of this really speak for themselves; this was the fate of many BoB RAF pilots.
My question to you is, could SoW model this feature? It wouldn't be pretty, but it would be extremely realistic.

How ghoulish!

When you use a french default set writing software this is what you get... and like you said, it was hurried... no time to check everything, and some sentences are not as correct as I would have liked (I was subcontracted a part of the translation)

JV

Thanks for answering! It will be interesting to see how this all will work in the release version.

I've read some WW2 cases where a pilot with oxygen equipment malfunction lost consciousness. When the plane started losing altitude, in some cases he "woke up" and was able to pull up before the plane crashed to ground.

It is rather isn't it? But then, so is war ;)

Oxygen issues are really very difficult to notice: high profile accidents in business jets and light aircrafts (one pressurized in US, the other with a portable oxygen system in France) with highly experienced people (the light aircraft pilot was a test pilot on a ferry flight) in recent years and the countless accidents in the military tend to prove one thing:

- the pilot cannot (except by incredible and rare luck, or specifically trained to recognize deprivation initial symptoms) realize by himself he is is suffering of oxygen deprivation

- for him, everything appears normal up to the point he will brutally loose concisousness

- the only way to get out is to have a wingman (or sometimes ground control) understanding something is wrong and able to reach at whatever useful mind is still there by yelling orders...but usually when the problem is noticeable from the outside, it already very late in the drama, and only luck will allow a positive outcome!

- If for instance the aircraft is trimmed properly for cruise, there is not chance that the pilot will ever recover: if he did not died of oxygen deprivation the loss of power at the end of the fuel tank and the ensuing imbalance (no more torque, dissymetric loads) will precipitate the descent to such an extent that the pilot may very well have no time to wake up, as already pointed out before...

- so the only way to simulate is quite simple: for some reason (failure or battle damage) the oxygen is cut off...

- then if a blinker is present it will cease working (this is only "positive" way for the pilot to know in time something is wrong with the oxygen but he must be disciplined and trained to check his blinker often at altitude!)

- after a while depending on possible factors like fatigue, health, injuries and whatnot, the screen becomes black, with a message "OXYGEN", no more. At this point the pilot has no means of action, has a limited life expectancy (defined by the game), and may be allowed to wake up with a gradual removing of the black screen (much in the same way as blackout) and be given back his controls...if the aircraft reaches a breathable altitude and assuming it did not crash or be shot down before!
Once the oxygen is failed a randomly aired message may be given to the wingman or ground control to simulate a visible problem (random to simulate lack of awareness of the wigman/control).

Believe me it will be as realistic as it can get (I am quite familiar with hypoxia, having already flown up to 30000 ft with an failed oxygen mask and a friend with a good one!)

JV

Great update Oleg. I'm really looking forward to this game now :)

I'm just wondering, will the 'thing' Roman uses to shoot at the Stuka with the .303 guns come with the game so we can play with it and do experiments ourselves when it is released?

Edit: This is the 'thing' I'm talking about:

Edit2: Today is my birthday, and I believe that is a valid reason for demanding answer! :grin:

I don't disagree with your statement. I just don't think it's necessary or desirable to depict such a gross image in a flight simulation. Pilots got burnt on any area of skin that was bare - we mostly know that. In Britain many seriously burnt pilots received pioneering skin-grafts and facial rebuilds from Dr Archibald MacIndoe - we mostly know that too. I just think that requiring to see the human torch effect of the oxygen mask is morbid and macabre. We're not asking for a snuff movie, we just want a flight sim.

Probably no.

However.... even the simplest russian oxigen mask of 1930th had two valves - in and out. On the oxigen balloon was the simple reduction of pressure (same as we may see on the British balloon). That is enough when you are not using it - oxigen isn't going.... hovewer possible oxigen seepage in case of bad valves and for this of course is the close cock on the balloon.

Probably you are completely right.

As told me Rudolf Heiter(our sound engineer) when I noticed him about such a problem, he said that all there will be fine. More precise I can ask him on Monday.

S!

Good news since sounds have been a bit problematic in IL-2 during the years. Currently I am using a Realtek AC1200 sound chip installed on my motherboard. It seems to work just fine, even better than my Creative X-Fi I have there. That card caused popping sounds etc.

Probably you was need to minimize the channels and frequency, then - no problem.
However yes, the sound of Il-2 was designed for hiend sound cards and good speakers with subwoofer.
Now it is designed for both - entry level and high. Should works everywhere the same. Now it is independed of sound drivers of different producers that had different panning and other features and quality. For Il-2 the lowest was Creative SB Live - only on such cards you may hear the supercharger separately of other sounds.
modders simply killed it... :)

Oleg

Is Open GL dropped from SoW in favour of DX ?



Strange i have completely the opposite experience !!

Yes. Unfortunately.
And this is done also becasue of future possible portings. It is more easy from DX...
However to make better is still better in OpenGl... even it is harder now. But the life dictate us DX...

I shoulkd tell one strory... it was when we just finished Ace Expancion Pack (which was really like stand alone sim with the content, but was going like add-on with Ubi... ok... it is other story, back to the sound...)

Ossi, wellknown in the past German online player (now owner of own company producing add-ons), was in Moscow and I invited him to visit my home. First of all he was asking me to show something new. I had there betat of some new add-on and the first his question was what we did with the sound? He was so impressed...
I told - nothing... He didn't trust me....
Then I simply explained him why it sounds so good...
there was SB (don't remember model) connected by 5.1 to Inspire 5.1. He simply drooled off by the sound of 109.
First what he did when he was coming back in Germany - he bought the same or almost the ssame system.
And I had not time to show him if I would connect it to my home HiEnd musical modular system with B&W speakers of big size (9.1 system with Yamaha MZ system sound processor). I think if only I would show how it was sounding there... prbabl;y he would also to by something like this system...

Now Il-2 is on my Sony notebook. There is very simple 5.1 sound chip connected across HDMI. And I can't get the same quality sound.

Completely. It will be interesting to see what work-arounds the 3rd party builders will attempt for the 1905-1916 aircraft that didn't use aerilons. In some sims the wing-warping control technique has been attempted by making the entire wing out of an aerilon.

I have a great deal of confidence that whatever decision is made it will be the right one (although doing so with such a ground breaking project is never easy).

Thanks for the replies. I've never been disappointed with the answers.

- Avimimus

P.S. Actually, it is not quite true: I asked you ten years ago at Combatsim.com about modelling some of the challenges in photo reconnaissance. I'm still waiting to see the outcome... But, I am very patient.

We have soomething in design doc. But still not sure that it will be finally programmed as I want (fly mission, take photos and then see them in menu of the next mission with the pointed target).
Really not easy to make if we want this good.
And my principle for the whole life is
better to do nothing than bad.

Ahh Ok. Now understand other thing.
From the beginning Sow isn't designed for the visual effect of such thing - distortion of the whole wing surface (with cambric (percale) covering) around the main spar. But... if there will be needs in future... and for the long leight wing of glider for example... we will make it. Should be success with the first in series... then almost everything will be possible....
For the first time for the third party modellers I would remommend to develop aircraft having normal wing with aileron. And cockpits for already modelled other(AI) aircraft in the sim. This would be the great suggestion from our side. And for such developers that wil make it on a serious basis we will give these models (AI) to help them to make it well.

Dropping bombs on targets with a Stuka with Storm Of War might make me feel so bad that I'll just have to stick with my good old 109 if it's so realistic with the explosions. I'll drop a bomb and think..."MY GOD I"M HURTING PEOPLE!"....I always feel much better when I see my enemy bail out of his plane when I'm fighting in my 109 :)

- Following the lines of this great idea of Avimimus, i would as a wish the possibility to add radio options on the menu. I don't know if its easy, i don't think it is, but i mean it would be nice that we can add radio menu options for single missions that can attached to triggers.
For example, add in the radio menu the message "Anybody want to hear some music?" and that triggers an audio file of music of the time that sound like hearing on the radio. Or some other message that triggers an action from and aircraft, flight, whatever.

- Seccond, this also give the idea that it would be nice that you can set triggers that make and aircraft, vehicle, ship, house or something explode, set on fire, shut down, sink, and so on. So, for example, we can make in a mission an aircraft accidentaly set on fire and the pilot bail out or cry on the radio that its burning hiimself, or have to return to base, and so on. Increasing this way the deficult of the mission.

Just some ideas for making more "alive" and dramatic missions. :)
Guess this should be on the Luthier thread :)

The design of the british mask was so simple it didn't have this feature. The pilot would have to turn the oxygen off in order to stop the 'blowtorch'. I mean, you could call it gruesome, but all it'd have to be is virtual flames in front of your face until you turn off the oxygen, with the message on the screen saying pilot wounded (or similar).
Anyway Oleg, you know my e-mail is open so you can ask me for more info at any time.

This brings me on to ask whether you will model flaming parachutes, Oleg; so if your rear fuselage sets alight and your parachute catches, could the pilot bail out and have his parachute fail? :)

thanks for answering our questions :D

Firstly, sorry for the smiley in my last post as it makes me seem really morbid.

I am with you here on this, as I would not like to see the pilot being burnt in such a way. However, the effect I think should be modelled. War is hell, and I am for full realism. I don't neccesarily want to be in a bomber and see this happen to one of the crew close-up, but I think it should be modelled as an effect in front of your face when in cockpit view. A flick of a button, and the flames stop coming out; just like turning the gas off of a bunsen burner.

Good Greif philip what were you thinkin....now get out of MY forum.;)

:confused: :grin: hero, is this you? :)

Oleg I just visited the site showing your photo's, very high quality, so crystal clear, so centered. What sea creature is #34, is #28 a Angler fish?...oh and by the way #8 is a favorite of mine:grin:

edit: not #8 with the bird, #8 of the lady underwater

Yes young padawaaaaaa....its all in the avataaaaar;)

Best update so far and i think it will stay this way for some time, at least until we see videos of some of these new features at work some time later.

Big thanks to the entire developer team for working on such a big and detailed project. An equal amount of thanks to Gregory, who was not only kind enough to go to Moscow and get the inteview, but also asked us for questions that we wanted answered.

It looks like this is going to be the best simulator series of the decade, well worth the wait.
At least as far as i'm concerned, everything i liked in IL2 is being improved, the few things i didn't like are being improved and finally, a lot of new features that i always dreamt about in a combat flight simulator are being included. It seems perfect to me and i haven't seen any meaningfull amount of in-game action yet, although i imagine we will all find something to complain about sooner or later :lol:

The only negative thing so far, i'm glad they took their time to make this so detailed but never the less the wait is killing me :grin:

Me too Blackdog this waiting is torture but it's giving me a little time to buy the monster I need. That's the only positive thing about it.

My first time playing the IL2 demo doing circuits in the 109 I was blown away by the sound.
I was so impressed I went out and bought a new PC so I could play forgotten battles.
Because it had a NF2 motherboard with good sound chip I sold my SB Audigy. It took me a long time to figure why the sound wasn't as good as I remembered form IL2 demo.

Well, I'm reading the interview note, the first question is about the statement "Once we passed the security filters where I was nicely asked my passport I found myself in the middle of the very studios...',
A security filters in a Game studio? And foreign visiters must show their passports before entering, even accompanied by Oleg, the Boss? Is it true? Or just a welcome joke...

My dream - to "create" some third party serious uindustry around SoW. At first time - for the WWII (wwI) aircraft...then for the early jets... then.... God knows... it is depending of many things and at first depends of BoB success



the choice to have click pit may be the most important made to realize your dream. best luck to you

A sea turtle eating a jellyfish.

Oleg, will the onset of compressibility be modeled for every aircraft in SoW? Will each aircraft have an individual Mach number that determines when the onset of compressibility occurs if so?
Will each aircraft have its own individual structural load limit (I believe it is 13.5Gs for every aircraft in Il-2 at the moment, although I may be wrong)?
Really hoping you'll answer these questions, there's been a lot of discussion about it on the Ubi forums.

This is why I have never had a problem with the sound in IL-2. I have always been running it with an Audigy 2 sound card and a very nice 5.1 surround sound system. I can hear all kinds of little subtle sounds and effects in the different engines, including the turbochargers and little pings and knocks from the engines.

I tried out the sound mods but didn't like them. They sound more like being at an airshow than being inside the cockpit, so I went back to stock IL-2 4.09. I have over 8000 hours in Real Life flying as I am a commuter pilot on a DeHavilland Dash 8. I am quite used to what a prop driven aircraft sounds like from the inside, and IL-2 with higher end equipment is VERY good. I can't wait to hear the sounds of BoB!