Friday 2010-08-27 Dev. update and Discussions

[kendo65]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

...
...we've reached a point where we can't deduce much more from still images, in fact i'm guessing that a lot of misunderstandings arise from this fact. A lot of things that might look strange or funny in screenshots could be looking perfectly natural when seen in motion. This might be seen as an effort to coax the developers into providing some video goodness and in a sense it is, but it also shows how far the title has come during the last few months.
A short video showcasing some of the core elements would not only help to pacify the restless among us, but also fuel the excitement even more.

As far as i'm concerned, i don't even need to see full detail DX11 graphics glory if there's interesting stuff being done in the video.
...

I was thinking along similar lines. I recently made the move to Win7 and was able to re-watch the 'leaked' Spitfire video, only this time on full screen, and it completely blew me away.

The thing is that it looks SO much higher quality than most of the screenshots we have seen - the three-dimensional realism and excellent lighting really comes out.

Is it because that video has been done in DX11 or DX10 mode with AA, while most of the screenshots are pretty rough quality (no AA,etc) DX9 ?

Interestingly the other video showing the British vehicle convoy looked much closer to the quality in the screenshots. Was that DX9 too or just much lower-res than the Spit video?

Still, it leads me to think that the final quality of all this when seen in motion in the game will be far ahead of what is hinted at in the screen shots.

[luthier]

Originally Posted by arjisme

Interestingly, the propellers in the first two shots don't look like that.

Exposure. First shots were paused at 1x speed, the others at 0.25x.

Originally Posted by major_setback

I would prefer the Hurricane pilot to be immobile rather than placed too low in the cockpit. It is very noticeable.

Yeah, he accidentally got set into different plane position, leaning back sports-car-driver style. I was really late with the update so I didn't want to waste more time asking him to be reset.

Originally Posted by Zorin

2. The Ju88 model does show its age, which is sad. Your Do215/17 already has modelled thickness for the hull and canopies, which the Ju88 doesn't have and results in a IL-2 look I had hoped not to see in SoW.

You're kidding, right? Look at the Il-2 Ju-88 model again. The BoB model has almost 10 times the number of polygons and 4x the texture.

I just took a screenshot of the Ju way, way too close (Oleg will be mad). All models have a finite level of detail - get close enough, and you will see the edges. Today's computers have nowhere near the power that can render a super-detailed model that distance.

Originally Posted by Zorin

3. Will the aircrews on multi-crew crafts all have the same face? I thought they would not, but the screenshots lead us to believe otherwise.

The two guys in the front of the Ju-88 have different faces. They just both have a mustache.

There will be different heads and different faces, and all appearance of each crew member of every plane will be fully customizable.

Originally Posted by Zorin

4. Does the Ju88 skin shown in the shot show a bump map yet? It doesn't look like it. There is a hint of a specular map in the "bail-out" top shot, I believe, though.

Some questions put me in a temporary stupor sometime.

Yeah, there is a normal map on each of our models. Always been.

[Zorin]

I do not mean to be offensive, so please try to accept my statements as mere observations.

1. Screen: Old model. Hull with no thickness and AlphaCut windows.
2. Screen: New model. Hull with no thickness and AlphaCut windows. Correct shapes and all, but still.
3. Screen: Your very own Do215. Hull thickness modelled and therefor can be shot that close without a problem.

I know that this is a result of the long development time and therefor there is no one who could be blamed for this. It is just something that will be noticed like the IL-2 Ju88 being out of shape and blocky compared to later twin engined planes like the A-20 or B-25.

As for the texture maps, the normal in the Do215 shot, in the "model viewer" environment, had strong and noticeable panel lines and rivets, something completely absent in the Ju88 shots, that is why I asked.

[Pierre@]

On screen #2 above, posted by Zorin, where are pilot's feet?

[PhilHL]

olegs pc.. as said ofter here.. has very low performance (he uses THIS pc with intention i guess)... you see the textures are very blurry.. no one would paint textures like that in photoshop... they are downscaled in the wip pictures...

and if hes running on low graphic settings...then the plane modells are also with "low" settings. watch those and you see how many details the JU88 have: http://www.stg2immelmann.de/FeedItem...-Storm-of-War/
.. Oleg must be mad always to repeat that this is NOT the final graphic result..

one hint to luthier and oleg... please wrote just one line in every friday update. that THIS GRAPHICS ARE STILL WIP AND DO NOT REPRESENT THE QUALITY OF THE FINAL GAME...

[Bloblast]

Originally Posted by Zorin

I do not mean to be offensive, so please try to accept my statements as mere observations.

1. Screen: Old model. Hull with no thickness and AlphaCut windows.
2. Screen: New model. Hull with no thickness and AlphaCut windows. Correct shapes and all, but still.
3. Screen: Your very own Do215. Hull thickness modelled and therefor can be shot that close without a problem.

I know that this is a result of the long development time and therefor there is no one who could be blamed for this. It is just something that will be noticed like the IL-2 Ju88 being out of shape and blocky compared to later twin engined planes like the A-20 or B-25.

As for the texture maps, the normal in the Do215 shot, in the "model viewer" environment, had strong and noticeable panel lines and rivets, something completely absent in the Ju88 shots, that is why I asked.

I must agree that the Do17 looks to have very sharp textures. But this Ju88 is a major step forward with IL-2's Ju88.

[David603]

Originally Posted by Zorin

I do not mean to be offensive, so please try to accept my statements as mere observations.

1. Screen: Old model. Hull with no thickness and AlphaCut windows.
2. Screen: New model. Hull with no thickness and AlphaCut windows. Correct shapes and all, but still.
3. Screen: Your very own Do215. Hull thickness modelled and therefor can be shot that close without a problem.

I know that this is a result of the long development time and therefor there is no one who could be blamed for this. It is just something that will be noticed like the IL-2 Ju88 being out of shape and blocky compared to later twin engined planes like the A-20 or B-25.

Its true that the Ju88 only has alpha cut windows where the Do17 family has windows modelled into the 3D.

Scroll down to the 2005 pictures on this link, and look for the pictures of the Ju88 and Do17/215 together.

http://fooblog.mexxoft.com/category/...spiele/page/9/

Since both models seem to be a similar age, I would assume that when they where made there were not set guidelines for the modellers as to whether windows should be made with alpha cuts or modelled in 3D.

Its unfortunate to have this kind of difference in quality between two aircraft of such similar size and complexity, this is the kind of difference that would seem more reasonable between for example a Bf109 and a He111, or between a He111 and a Sunderland flying boat. Apart from the windows, the rest of the two models seem very close in quality, so I do think it was just the choice of the person making the model.

[Dano]

Originally Posted by luthier

Exposure. First shots were paused at 1x speed, the others at 0.25x.

That's just nuts

Now has Oleg merged his photographic interests to give us a virtual camera for screenshots complete with aperture, shutter and iso settings?

[philip.ed]

Dano; that's exactly what I was thinking! It's awesome that the propellor looks different on different game-speeds; I would love it if the player could choose (for a screenshot/movie perspective) different ways that the propellor could look like through different shutters

Luthier; is prop refelction modelled? I ask as when I first saw this used in WoP I thought it was overdone, but after being to an airshow recently I noticed the reflection of the sun on the spinning prop quite vividly

[Jumo211]

Originally Posted by philip.ed

Luthier; is prop refelction modelled? I ask as when I first saw this used in WoP I thought it was overdone, but after being to an airshow recently I noticed the reflection of the sun on the spinning prop quite vividly

Here it can be also seen at 0:42 , propeller is pretty visible under some angle view with light reflection :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89ZAONQVF5I