Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik

IL-2 Sturmovik The famous combat flight simulator.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-11-2010, 02:45 PM
csThor csThor is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: somewhere in Germany
Posts: 1,213
Default

We've had a similar discussion before, Flanker. It was, IIRC, on loadout polygon limits and the answer was the same: We stick to official Maddox Games standards 'cause they fit the environment of the game engine. Claymore is of course free to rework his textures to standards (Caspar and Viikate know the limits) and apply for cooperation via the usual way (email).
  #2  
Old 04-11-2010, 03:05 PM
Flanker35M Flanker35M is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Finland
Posts: 1,806
Default

S!

That's the key, to KNOW the limits IL-2 has. Like secret club information This info is not floating around anywhere, there is no guide or tutorial posted. But good thing is that TD is ready to work with these talented guys. Given them the standards, parameters or whatever, they will for sure make things within them

And had to check the minimum requirements of IL2, having the boxes on the shelf, I bet no-one has a setup like that anymore except the OS (WinXP) Anyone with a computer like that can not play anything these days, merely a paperweight

But..not dissing or bitching TD's work here. Just threw in suggestions, got answers and happy with that Thanks.
  #3  
Old 04-11-2010, 04:38 PM
daidalos.team daidalos.team is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 187
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flanker35M View Post
This info is not floating around anywhere, there is no guide or tutorial posted.
Sorry, but not true at all, Flanker. One of the main modding sites has a full tutorial posted on IL-2 modelling specs. This tutorial was originally made by 1C as well as 3rd party modelers and was available for a long time on Netwings.org forum. In addition, since the file encryption of IL-2 was broken and the files are accessible, there are plenty of "sample" models. It is only up to the modelers to follow them.
  #4  
Old 04-11-2010, 05:41 PM
Flanker35M Flanker35M is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Finland
Posts: 1,806
Default

S!

IceFire, I know there might be some people around with very dated computers. But when SoW comes..what then? There is no progress without some compromises or even sacrifices.

And again if the new additions, be it effects or cockpits or whatever, are done within the limits of the IL-2 specs/parameters/whatever they should not suffer that much. And IMO if someone with a computer barely meeting the minimum specs can NOT wait to get an experience seen in the screenies or videos nor demand it. It will be low resolution, minimum effects/eye candy to keep the frames at some playable level and even then a lot of AAA etc. will slow this minimum machine down.

This can be seen in many games, not only IL-2. Minimums are to please the crowd but in no way meaning the game is at it's best then nor one should expect that either.

TD..modding sites have a wealth of information yes, but is it all 100% accurate? What about an user that wants to approach MG/TD instead of going to these sites? Wouldn't it be a good sign if the official source had all the needed on their official pages for the aspiring new content maker? He comes to IL-2 forum with an idea/concept etc. and finds a FAQ or similar answering most of his questions, rest he could ask from the official forum and get the info from there. All would be good.

Now the situation is that there are modders of many kind, like web pages too. Better and less good ones. Even they have a lot of info, not all of it is from MG but gathered in other ways, by trials and testing etc. Modding sites can not claim, and do not claim, that their info is what is the IL-2 standard. Some mods surpass the IL-2 standard visually or otherwise, some not. The variety is big. So as stated above, info from the official source would give everyone wanting to create something for IL-2 a solid base to start from..released in official patch or not. Agree?

Now this derailed the whole thread I think. But as a bottom line the co-operation between the community and TD/MG is the key to get new content released in official patches when all had the EXACT and OFFICIAL information how to make it meet these requirements

Enough of this..now back to waiting for 4.10.
  #5  
Old 04-11-2010, 05:52 PM
IceFire IceFire is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,879
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flanker35M View Post
S!

IceFire, I know there might be some people around with very dated computers. But when SoW comes..what then? There is no progress without some compromises or even sacrifices.
Oh SoW should definitely require a completely different set of hardware specifications. That is even expected. So those people if they want to upgrade to the new software will also need to upgrade their hardware. Many even have been saving up for that day

But IL-2 is already out. I don't think it'd be very fair for Daidalos to suddenly make the game inaccessible to them. I'm glad that they aren't.

Next time around (SoW) it will be a totally different ballgame
__________________
Find my missions and much more at Mission4Today.com
  #6  
Old 04-11-2010, 07:36 PM
Hawker17 Hawker17 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 32
Default

Well, about progression... Newer (SOW) isn't always better. Graphically SOW looks nice, for sure, just like my IL2 1946 install does. Although my specs are high enough for SOW, i will surely stick to IL2 1946, if playability isn't improved in SOW. By the way, as soon as SOW is released, we have so much more modded aircraft in IL2, we don't play SOW anyway!

Team Daidalos, thanks for making this sim even better after all those years!

Last edited by Hawker17; 04-11-2010 at 07:45 PM.
  #7  
Old 04-11-2010, 08:28 PM
philip.ed's Avatar
philip.ed philip.ed is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,766
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawker17 View Post
Well, about progression... Newer (SOW) isn't always better. Graphically SOW looks nice, for sure, just like my IL2 1946 install does. Although my specs are high enough for SOW, i will surely stick to IL2 1946, if playability isn't improved in SOW. By the way, as soon as SOW is released, we have so much more modded aircraft in IL2, we don't play SOW anyway!

Team Daidalos, thanks for making this sim even better after all those years!
With regards to your last point I highly disagree. For one, the only decent BoB sim out at the moment is Wings of Vistory (Il-2 just can't capture the same feelings of battle as WoV does) and that is itself dated. SoW should be the numero-uno of flight sims, and if it does the BoB the justice it deserves, then it will be the best flight-sim for BoB fans like me.
However, modded Il-2 is timeless, and I think I will always be playing it until SoW has all the planes that Il-2 has
  #8  
Old 04-11-2010, 04:05 PM
philip.ed's Avatar
philip.ed philip.ed is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,766
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by csThor View Post
We've had a similar discussion before, Flanker. It was, IIRC, on loadout polygon limits and the answer was the same: We stick to official Maddox Games standards 'cause they fit the environment of the game engine. Claymore is of course free to rework his textures to standards (Caspar and Viikate know the limits) and apply for cooperation via the usual way (email).
Does the same account for any mod? eg, effects mods?
Closed Thread


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.