After watching this video i am even more in love with the sim!
 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7DBhT2iLM0

It's so amazing!! we need more videos like this!! 1c, you have my money and my full support!

what about this one?....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1s4x...layer_embedded

It's a bug, it will be solved.

Does the plane fly faster that way? :)

Agreed,

Lots of bug solving to be done, but it is a game for 2013.

Oh boy I'm actually going to whine a bit here :evil:. I'm still not 100% convinced on the "it's an all new sim" line, there's still too many IL-2 left overs in CoD for my liking. Sounds, AI, FM. I guess I'll make my own judgement when I get the game in 3 days. I thought I'd pull the pin when the epi issue blew up but I can't resist the need to have this sim. I'm so confused as a paying customer right now.

Gunkan you might remember me as a member of SYN. Que tal mate:)

And yes this video !es muy magnifico!!!

Cheers mate

ROFL, the allied Tie Fighters are back

\Fantastic :)

ICE (in cockpit entertainment)......do you get to choose the tracks?

Where you read about Hurripedo can't fly??? :grin::grin::grin:

Close this book forever!!!! :evil:

Looks fantastic.

Nah,that's not a bug it's Britain's answer to the V1 threat.

It's enough to confirm again my order.

Thank for this, is wonderfull.

I'm always most impressed by the way the camera moves in response to g-forces (you know, turbulence, rolling, diving, pulling stick back, etc). It adds a huge amount of immersion for me. I first saw this amazing feature in the leaked spitfire video way back. When landing, (roughly) I expected the head to bounce more than it did in this video however.

The ground rendering, uses bump mapping skillfully to make fields, roads and ditches appear to be 3D. It looks amazing when you reach above 100 meters of altitude.

The popup of stuff is harsh and eye-catching (not so much in this video, but others I saw over crowded areas). The best effect to lessen this is probably to load the new 'pop-up' terrain features before displaying them, then fade them in over 1-3 seconds. That way, the eye will not be so attracted to sudden changes in the landscape. The fading in method I have seen in sims and games since at least "Apache vs Havoc". Fallout: New Vegas, that uses the "Gamebryo" engine that I play now skillfully uses the fade system to good effect.

The sound - what is that sound in the beginning when the plane is still without the engine on? It sounds a lot like as if it is rolling over a grass field. Is it appropriate?

The first video is great and the wingless Hurri bug will get a few laughs in the Maddox games offices. Luthier said the project had even funnier stuff happen during the development. They obviously have a sense of humor and will need it, if they read these forums.

Scene I love most is when he throttles back on approach and fuel is ignited in the exhaust pipes. Gorgeous little details.

So what did their beta testers actually do? No one can honestly believe that something as obvious as this can be overlooked... Lets all pray that no game tester has yet recieved a copy or they can stop pressing copies right away cause the reviews will be devastating.

+1 lol!

I'm sure their will be enough great points in the sim to avoid devastating reviews. The reviewer should no the history of the developer to support his products. I'm not overly worried about that. Any software this complex will have a multitude of bugs especially as it appears the sim was forced out the door early.

Do people still read reviews these days? I don't. I figured with forums , youtube , this is the best review you can get.

Not really.

Forums and Youtube, as you can see with CoD and other titles mostly present the downsides. There are not many people on forums saying: "Yay, this is a good game, buy it."

If you have professional testers, they are much more like looking into details and also aspects of games normal players don't even see. Of course, that depends on the reviewers ;)

Head bob is good.
Textures are mediocre - if they had those current textures and the game ran flawlessly/without lag then I would say it looks like a current gen title. Nothing spectacular or outstanding about it. It looks how it should look for a game coming out in the 2008-2010 time range. It doesnt look bad either, but given the fact that it lags horribly atm cancels out the quality (this is not even counting the popping).

I dont think its a bug...

If I were to bet money, I would say that the Rocket Jockey in the Hurri
has set the FM to the most basic arcade setting there is and turned
off Stalls and Spins & any other feature of realistic aerodynamics.

Pretty cool to watch, I did a double take when the vid started.

Even with arcade settings a plane should not fly without wings. That is just daft!

You missed the point- the vid is not about textures (there set to med/low) but about the FLIGHT. The flying is on different level to Il2:1946 and looks wonderfully alive.

a) It is not the job of a reviewer to support a product. Period. His job is to give an objective review of what he is being presented.
b) Who do you think will buy into the "forced out the door" story, true as it may be, after a developing time as long as COD's?

Even the most professional reviewer, seeing all the details, will be stumbed by a flight sim that allows planes to fly with no wings. Disregarding on which difficulty settings.

Yes, I think it is all the various parameters (that are constantly monitored) that are slowing it down, not the textures. If you had a simpler game then there would be room for better graphics.

Can't say that's a bad thing - Remember getting the original IL2 and not being able to run it respectably on the kit I had then - forced me to get into upgrading my PC and lead to a massively great time playing IL2. Get a life, be patient - good things come to those who wait :-)

Same issue in ROF they say it is not easy to fix, something to do with how the damage graphics aren't as detailed as the dm, or something like that.

Yup, the Handley Page 0/400 in RoF does the same thing.

No one has stopped playing RoF because of it either.

Tempest in a teacup, as usual around here.

Wellllllll the thing is there that you have a game with minuscule maps for a flight sim, oh and also a 2001 flight model and no damage model at all to speak of. There are just going to be way, way more resources to put towards the graphics.

Don't get me wrong those guys put some nice visuals in that game, though they are more cinematic than realistic.

Anyway look at pictures of IL-2 in 2001 and then load it up and look at it now. Give CloD some time and some Moore's Law action and things will get nuts. Heh of course we will see the graphics improve slowly over time so it will never drop our jaws, until we look at 3 year old screenshots.

You can always play WoP or Hawx.If is your cup of tea,exchange realism for graphics, is a matter of taste,I respect your choice.

Will the real CoD please stand up?
 

This video looks good.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxIwu5py_zA

I don't see any buildings popping in and out.

I had exactly the same thing happen in release version of DCS:A-10 the other day I ejected and the plane traveled straight and level (without wings) for about 10KM before flying into the ground.

Also in DCS:A10 I had a win blown off but the maveric missile was still attacked to the aircraft on a non-existant hardpoint.

All these sims are new and are sill being refined and debugged. It doesn't detract from my experience playing with state of the art sim! All there is to say about it really!

Cheers!

i think it's a bad sign that oleg hasn't popped up on this board this weekend with any kind of post whatsoever.

the only "official" stuff we got was from nike.

alarm bells ringing.

I'm glad they've finally released Cliffs of Dover- at least in Russia for now. Patches will no doubt come thick and fast to polish the system and guides to tweaking systems will be posted by the community to get some life out of old systems (I know i found them invaluable when i first got hooked into Il2).
I'm not surprised that there are problems with it, especially as a lot of people seem to be running it on low/minimum spec systems. It's understandable that people are disappointed as they are comparing it with Il2 which has been refined for over 10 years. The first time i played it the AI could do the most incredulous stall turns and the bugs (most of which were related to the graphics card drivers) were almost a show-stopper for me. I recall having to maximise my system as much as possible to achieve playable frame rates with almost all the eye-candy turned off.
A lot of posters seem to be focusing on the epilepsy filter and blaming it for all the failings of the 1.0 release- it is an issue but there are a number of others as well. The solution 1C have created to abide by licensing rules is obviously a rushed job, as they themselves have admitted. This is a totally new engine and the fact that it is pushing systems to the limit is a good thing.

BTW- i hate epilepsy, it's what kept me from getting a pilots licence. Fortunately i don't have photosensitivity epilepsy (seizures provoked by flashing lights) but i have to take medication every day and some years ago doctors wanted to drill into my head to fix it. Having worked with a lot of surgeons however i was loathe to let the scalpel jockeys mess around in my skull. Fortunately for me a new medication was released which worked brilliantly for me. Now epilepsy seems to be interfering with my virtual flying as well

PS- I do recall often reading a lot of posts by people in various forums shouting 'JUST RELEASE IT NOW' and work out the bugs post release. All i can say is 'Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it'.
I still can't wait to try it on my system- i recently got a new PC to replace one destroyed in a storm just before christmas

S!

Visually Cliffs Of Dover is nice, even we still have a lot of IL-2 legacy(clouds, pop-ups etc.). The sound is what bothered me most. You sit behind a 1030hp Merlin engine and it sounds like a Briggs&Stratton found on a lawn mower?! Also the switch sounds were louder than the engine sounds. Many of you have read or even heard WW2 pilots telling that the cockpit was a noisy office where other sounds were muffled by the roar of the engine.

External sound is straight from original IL-2, which is a dissapointment. And there was no difference in sound levels with cockpit open or closed, not even when the guy popped his head out. Should be quite a deafening experience don't you think?

The buggy Hurricane just makes wonder what other things lurk there, but for sure will be ironed out with time. Will get this game, but seems have to wait a bit for it to be more mature.

Maybe my wording could have been better, but I meant the developer has a history of supporting his products, not the reviewer.

Most reasonable people could easily buy the "forced out the door" story.

Missing that the Hurri could fly with both wings missing could be missed by the beta testers. Not often would you lose both wings and the beta tester would probably bail out in that situation. This could also be a arcade flight model issue. Beta tester won't find all the problems, and even if they did, the developer probably couldn't fix them all in a timely manor. Luckily we have a developer who supports his sims after they are released. So with a little foresight its quite easy to cut the developer some slack.

Sadly will never have Battle of Britain atmosphere without more planes in sky.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2Q1VZZDL5Y

"Notice no weird texture or object pop-ins. You can see buildings for miles and miles."

And people blasting the "save the private Ryan" filter of WOP (I hate it too) are the very same ones saying nothing about the "teletubbies" green of Clodo :rolleyes:

We all should have a pragmatic approach to the bugs and to the lack of optimization of certain aspects. We should ask ourselves the question "what is the alternative?", namely to rushing out the game today.

Oleg explained in an interview in 2009 that the project budget was to be depleted by December 2010. Missing the deadline would have possibly meant the cancellation of the project. Not all projects succeed, you know. No BoB, bye bye, back to Il2 (or jets ... Bleah! Or hell-icopters ... Double Bleah! :))

IMO it is largely preferable to have the game rushed out and bugs ironed out progressively with the wider community feedback, and with some fresh cash to finance the developers team, rather than continuing the development for months and months and doing beta test with a handful of volunteers. Or, worst, canceling the project.


Personally, I will be glad to give my money to the devs, contribute to the polishing by reporting constructively bugs, and in the end enjoy all the marvelous things that Oleg and Ilya prepared for us. I expect to have a great time with CoD!

Cheers,
Insuber

I'm just gutted to see the usual suspects of IL2 appearing after so much development time.

Why are there still the 'straight-line' breaks? Why don't the wings tear at different points? I don't expect the game to have hundreds of break points, but maybe a jagged diagonal tear on the wings would be more interesting than the IL2 usual straight-line break. Even if they add a little bit of fluff to the edges now.

Disappointing and hardly an improvement over other websites adaptions to an old IL2 engine.

I do feel I will buy this at some point in the future, but I now worry that we could be looking at a SH5 scenario and that is not good for any future of the Sim.

Just watched the video....was impressed apart from the big Blue Square and then tragedy!!!!!!! 4m and 42 seconds, external view!

So much interesting internal cockpit audio, well above the stock IL2 (10-year-old IL2!!!) and then like a Tomahawk Missile in Libya, the external audio makes an appearance and gives you a sucker punch to the head!

OMG!!!!

Why after so-much time have they left the IL2 audio there?

MP