Friday 2010-04-09 Discussion Thread

[Novotny]

Interesting! I agree. I went visual to sonic to game art.

[airmalik]

Originally Posted by Insuber

And people didn't understand as well, I gave them the seagulls, now they dispute over their AI, I gave an English tree, now they dispute about branches ... buuuh!

True.

I'd much rather prefer development notes rather than screenshots/videos which are likely to change from week to week until the Beta is ready. Even though we know that posted screenies etc. are WIP, it's frustrating to see elements in images which aren't up to the expectations from IL2's successor.

For instance, I'd prefer updates like "Working on enhancement to cloud generation code to allow for flat bottommed clouds." or "Enhancing maps to include sandy beaches with rocks along coastlines." or "clouds now generated automatically over thermal producing areas" or "integrated optimized forest generation code in stable branch" etc.

This would probably reduce distressed posts by panicked fans when they see WIP imagery. Might also allow Oleg to talk in greated detail about more 'revolutionary' features without giving away implementation details.

[major_setback]

Originally Posted by airmalik

True.

I'd much rather prefer development notes rather than screenshots/videos which are likely to change from week to week until the Beta is ready. Even though we know that posted screenies etc. are WIP, it's frustrating to see elements in images which aren't up to the expectations from IL2's successor.

For instance, I'd prefer updates like "Working on enhancement to cloud generation code to allow for flat bottommed clouds." or "Enhancing maps to include sandy beaches with rocks along coastlines." or "clouds now generated automatically over thermal producing areas" or "integrated optimized forest generation code in stable branch" etc.

This would probably reduce distressed posts by panicked fans when they see WIP imagery. Might also allow Oleg to talk in greated detail about more 'revolutionary' features without giving away implementation details.

+1

[philip.ed]

I agree as well. Although it'd be nice to pair that info with a few screenies

[zapatista]

Originally Posted by Zorin

Well sorry, but that bump map is ridiculous. Germans actually knew what flush riveting meant and any odd real picture of a Dornier 17 or 215 will show you that.

oleg's rivets look perfectly fine

just look on the right hand side of the 1e picture you posted yourself, and you will observe the rivets in some sections of the plane really stand out. the parts of the plane where you cant see the rivets as obvious has mostly to do with the angle that section of the wing/fuselage is looked at (AND the fact you posted a scanned picture of a very low resolution aged photograph )

if you then look closely at oleg's plane, you will see the rivets in some part of the aircraft really seem to stand out, and in others they are almost invisible, it all has to do with the angle you look at the surfaces, how close you are, and the lighting (and image resolution of course)

i suspect are you one of those people who believes that 100 yrs ago the people in the early cinema reels actually walked in that funny accelerated matter in real life as well all the time

[zapatista]

on a more cheerful note, is anybody here keeping an eye on the russian forums that oleg posts updates in ? there might be some other pics/vids we havnt seen there

/says i hopefully

[jannaspookie]

Originally Posted by zapatista

oleg's rivets look perfectly fine you rude little twit

i suspect are you one of those people who believes that 100 yrs ago the people in the early cinema reels actually walked in that funny accelerated matter in real life as well all the time

Wow. I'm surprised such flagrant disrespect is allowed in these forums. It's one thing to disagree with his statement, but to personally attack someone is entirely different. Besides, if you knew anything about Zorin, you'd know that he is fairly knowledgeable about WWII aircraft, and especially German ones.

[zapatista]

Originally Posted by jannaspookie

Wow. I'm surprised such flagrant disrespect is allowed in these forums. It's one thing to disagree with his statement, but to personally attack someone is entirely different. Besides, if you knew anything about Zorin, you'd know that he is fairly knowledgeable about WWII aircraft, and especially German ones.

i replied in kind to the tone of his post, did you find that hard to spot ?

[MikkOwl]

If those small AP bullets do what anti tank penetrators do, then if striking at an angle, they either deflect and deform (denting the surface possibly), or they penetrate, with the projectile bending/turning into the surface. Even if it bends inwards, I'm sure the hole is not completely round, nor oval. Probably slightly heart-shaped (but rounded on the upper edge). Either way, it is insignificant. Round is pretty close for most situations. The rivet issue is more important. Even if ENEMY planes may be far away, friendly planes may fly very close, close enough to see. More so, seeing one's own plane from the cockpit (especially noticeable in twin engined or more). That's close enough to notice.

[Skoshi Tiger]

Sometimes the smallest details are probably the most important.

Maybe my issue with the .303 bullet holes was that the even though the rivets have a shape and look natural (to someone who doesn't know one end of a Do-17 to the other) the bullet holes are flat and look out of place with the rest of the detail.

I wonder if they could alter the displacement mapping (bump mapping or what ever they call it) of the aircraft's skin to reflect the damage. It would mean that each aircraft woulds need its own map, but ones the damage is incorporated to it, it would take no extra resources to display the detail.

Cheers!