How much more is realistically fixable

[addman]

I actually started playing IL-2 1946 again today. The graphics are not up to par with CloD, especially the cockpits BUT having WORKING COMMANDS whilst flying with a.i was like heaven.

Given time, I'd say everything is. The goal has always been to use this as the foundation of a series. Some things may not get implemented without further development. They have been furiously working on fixing performance and stability related things first and I must admit they have come a LONG way in terms of performance.. comparing the original release with current, I get more than 100% improvement in fps. As for stability, the only crash I have is when I make certain video settings that require a restart it does not restart on its own.. if the game said "You must restart the game for changes to take effect" and make me manually do it like some games I'd never know it was an issue. The recent patch pooched multiplayer adding stuttering... I'm not sure if its caused because of mixed versions on servers or not, that is a possibility.

But mate, check out your specs, you have a TOP gaming rig. The game wont run well for anyone under your size system, thats the problem at the moment. Plus i think that 1C has a serious communication problem, take this latest Beta, we have the Dev Lead announce full screen is fixed, 1 load of the game shows it isnt, maybe he should not trust and check. Maybe we a shouldnt go round in these circles aching about wether it will be fixed or not.
I'm inclined to think that if it can be fixed they would have done it by now to a degree that made it playable for all. There is no way its ready for US release especially if they are going to keep whats written on the box cos they'll have some idiot try to sue them.
Sorry to be pessamistic but I've seen this before, i hope i am wrong anyhow.

[JG14_Jagr]

Originally Posted by BigPickle

The game wont run well for anyone under your size system, thats the problem at the moment.

Thats not true.. Looking through the forums there are plenty of people playing the game at reasonable framerates with a system on par with yours. You will NOT be able to run the game at MAX settings if you have a MINIMUM system. I've seen people complaining that they should be able to run at MAX settings and then see they have a 3 year old system with a 4 year old graphics card.. thats just not realistic. And if you've gamed at all, you know that the "minimum system specs" are always too low and the "recommended" is always more like the minimum..

[Remo]

Basically 1C under estimated the bugginess/eccentricities of Direct3D. This will probably just take some time for 90% of people with problems to be fixed, though I do suspect there is at least 10% of ppl that currently have problems that will never be solved with their current hardware/os. The main performance issue currently seems to be Video cards with less that 1Gb VRAM, and I dont think this is realistically going to get fixed. You cannot render these huge textures wit only 512MB VRAM , not now , not ever.

Personally I'll keep an eye on the performance of the game , and once it settles , and most of the other issues are settled (like FM etc) , I'll go shop for better Graphics card..

[JG14_Jagr]

Originally Posted by Remo

Basically 1C under estimated the bugginess/eccentricities of Direct3D. This will probably just take some time for 90% of people with problems to be fixed, though I do suspect there is at least 10% of ppl that currently have problems that will never be solved with their current hardware/os. The main performance issue currently seems to be Video cards with less that 1Gb VRAM, and I dont think this is realistically going to get fixed. You cannot render these huge textures wit only 512MB VRAM , not now , not ever.

Personally I'll keep an eye on the performance of the game , and once it settles , and most of the other issues are settled (like FM etc) , I'll go shop for better Graphics card..

512 I agree with.. this game would need to be ground up redesigned for that.. There are however enormous textures that can be reduced to make it work well with 1 G of VRAM I'd wager..

The larger problem is that every G Card company writes their drivers and "cheats" the specs a bit to gain advantages here and there.. Then players have all versions with various driver sets and are using all sorts of after market tweakers to adjust settings.. Combine that with software written to "cheat" in certain areas and you end up realizing why some people with the same hardware are having completely different experiences with the game.. I have a top end (for now) rig and have never had a single issue.. others with the same gear are having issues.. there are just so many external variables..

Add to that that the game stores files in confusing locations and STEAM is involved.. I would bet that 50% of the people trying the Beta installed it wrong

Originally Posted by JG14_Jagr

Thats not true.. Looking through the forums there are plenty of people playing the game at reasonable framerates with a system on par with yours. You will NOT be able to run the game at MAX settings if you have a MINIMUM system. I've seen people complaining that they should be able to run at MAX settings and then see they have a 3 year old system with a 4 year old graphics card.. thats just not realistic. And if you've gamed at all, you know that the "minimum system specs" are always too low and the "recommended" is always more like the minimum..

True yeah i guess, but my mate who has a lower end but still within specs, cant run it at all. Guess i just feel dissapointed for people like him too.

[baronWastelan]

I can garantee that everyting in the sim is fixable.

That was easy.

[ip3]

time will tell, I won't rush to conclusions like some here...

[ATAG_Doc]

When people who are on the fence about it decide to take the plunge or leave it alone and put it to rest.