Friday 2010-08-13 Dev. update and Discussions

[tourmaline]

Originally Posted by zapatista

interesting comment, i never thought that might be a good way to reduce energy of a "crash in progress"

They do, the wings hit the trees and absorb most of the energy and fall or rip off, the rest of the fuselage will stop quite quickely...

it's much better then actually hitting the tree with the fuselage, LOL.

[Hoverbug]

Originally Posted by zapatista

interesting comment, i never thought that might be a good way to reduce energy of a "crash in progress"

I've done it for real and wouldn't want to do it again, though I got out without a scratch (the 150 was a total loss though). Wing spars are pretty tough, so when they flex they can absorb a considerable amount of energy. The real trick is picking two trees that don't have another tree right behind them...

[proton45]

another beautiful update....thanks to the team

[SlipBall]

Originally Posted by Hoverbug

I've done it for real and wouldn't want to do it again, though I got out without a scratch (the 150 was a total loss though). Wing spars are pretty tough, so when they flex they can absorb a considerable amount of energy. The real trick is picking two trees that don't have another tree right behind them...

Wow, happy to hear that you were untouched. That must have been a very violent experience, good that you used your wits. Care to share the details that lead to the forced ditch?

[Stukadriver]

Beautiful screen shots. Very nice, indeed and I applaud your work. Genius.
Some time ago, a question of what could be suggested to make the simulation more realistic in terms of events. You clearly have the image quality in hand. I was wondering if having the mission scrubbed and called back due to weather changes would add to the realism. Engine issues could come up for the player and/or his wingman. Losing elements of a flight due to engine problems or your AI wingmen becoming too scared to fly could make missions more precarious if a player decided to carry on with the mission without all the flight's units.

[philip.ed]

Oleg, any input into the trees? I ask as the trees shown recently look excellent, but in England these trees look more like garden ones. The main types of trees are a lot rounder and denser foliage wise. excellent work

[Novotny]

^^ Either you are a master troll or incredibly stupid. Could be both, mind.

[philip.ed]

Originally Posted by Novotny

^^ Either you are a master troll or incredibly stupid. Could be both, mind.

What the hell? I wasn't writing from an anal point of view but fly over blighty and the trees look nothing like what's been shown recently from above . Up close, maybe (as up-close the trees look great here) but otherwise it isn't how the trees look in England when grouped. I have posted pics before to demonstrate, and so have others.
Don't talk out of your arse; I'm not a troll, I just wrote a comment.

[Novotny]

'The main types of trees are a lot rounder and denser foliage wise'

Look, at some point a concession must be made. No singular aspect of this software - or any other title, for that matter - is going to be perfect, regardless of the development time expended on the perfecting of any graphical representation therein concerning vegetation.

Simply put: Oleg could put SoW back another year and fully concentrate on developing your trees. Nevertheless, you would still be able to nitpick faults if you tried hard enough or felt inclined to do so. And to what end? Just how important are these trees to the big picture?

This obsession with finding faults and loudly proclaiming them is extremely tiresome and I've already proposed bans for unconstructive criticism.

'fly over blighty and the trees look nothing like what's been shown recently': you don't even understand that this is both very rude and completely unhelpful. If it were up to me I'd ban you.

You admit to nitpicking. A definition of which follows:

When used as a verb:
1. to be excessively concerned with or critical of inconsequential details, or
2. to criticize by focusing on inconsequential details.
When used as a noun, refers to:
3. a carping, petty criticism.

Why not just leave it?