Bf-109 in flight.

[1lokos]

"Multiplayer":


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwrPU-xW2-8&

:thumbsup:

Sokol1

[TheVino3]

I do quite like the way theyve made the planes "feel" visually in their engine, its quite pleasant to look at - but their terrain/environment still doesnt look up to scratch. Yes I know that this is still early days, but Im just saying to complete the look they really will have to pull their engine up and away from Rise of Flight.

War Thunder is a good example of well done environment making. They get the textures and feel to look quite pleasant; although other parts of the game are just too Hollywood, the terrain is *generally* quite good looking.

[Wulf]

Wow, I think they look absolutely superb.

[Dutch]

Wow, I think they look absolutely superb.

Yes, they do indeed.

[92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)]

aircraft models look amazing. that's true.

[Catseye]

aircraft models look amazing. that's true.

Pleasantly surprised.

They've also just released a flyby vid for audio. Still needs work.

Cats . . .

[Chivas]

The aircraft look very good, and the developers say the terrain will look photo-realistic in the finished product. I'm not a fan of the ROF terrain as it looks quite cartoony to my eye, but they will definitely have time to improve on it.

The external sounds are decent enough to my ear, and if the in cockpit sounds are of the same quality it will be fine by me, as 99.9% have no idea what the exact sounds should be inside the cockpit.

I would like to see an option to set the in cockpit sound level of the guns to suit our particular sense and/or sound equipment.

[Skoshi_Tiger]

The videos are looking good so far, a bit like the pre-release CoD video's that raised the communities expectations so high.

Interestingly enough they keep the camera pointed awway from the ground as much as possible. I wonder if this is just because they're keeping terain a secret for the moment or because of performance issues. Could it be like in CoD at release, the frame rates were great as long as you didn't have too much in shot?

I wonder if they can keep it looking like that when we're low down over the Stalingrad with thirty odd planes a side + decent number of ground objects?

[Royraiden]

The videos are looking good so far, a bit like the pre-release CoD video's that raised the communities expectations so high.

Interestingly enough they keep the camera pointed awway from the ground as much as possible. I wonder if this is just because they're keeping terain a secret for the moment or because of performance issues. Could it be like in CoD at release, the frame rates were great as long as you didn't have too much in shot?

I wonder if they can keep it looking like that when we're low down over the Stalingrad with thirty odd planes a side + decent number of ground objects?

They talked about photo realistic terrain today, so Im guessing they dont want to show it yet.But who knows.

[Chivas]

I doubt the photorealistic terrain, if even possible, is complete enough to show it. Its always a catch 22 situation for the developers, damned if you do, damned if you don't. Some people have no grasp, or simply choose to ignore the fact its in Alpha/WIP state. I have very mixed feeling about the whole situation, one part wants to see the BOS developer crash and burn, the other would like to see it succeed in building the type of combat flight sim I'd like to fly. If there was another developer, building decent sims, I'd spend my money there, but we have very few choices.

[Hoots]

I doubt the photorealistic terrain, if even possible, is complete enough to show it. Its always a catch 22 situation for the developers, damned if you do, damned if you don't. Some people have no grasp, or simply choose to ignore the fact its in Alpha/WIP state. I have very mixed feeling about the whole situation, one part wants to see the BOS developer crash and burn, the other would like to see it succeed in building the type of combat flight sim I'd like to fly. If there was another developer, building decent sims, I'd spend my money there, but we have very few choices.

Sorry, I just don't get this. Why would even a part of you want to see a developer crash and burn?! If the absolute worst that happens is that a decent flight sim with good enough graphics comes out what is the problem here exactly? I like clod, play it a lot, would I like another ww2 sim to come along, yes I would, will that make me drop clod and never play it again? No it won't. Some folk seem to think that somehow liking other things is in someway disrespectful to clod. Quite apart from the fact that all of what we do is just a game don't you think that's a bit silly. There are posts in this thread that intimate conspiracy theories "are they not showing the ground because of performance issues?" Really? Seriously folks, 777 1c are making another ww2 sim, it may be good, it may be bad, it may be straight down the middle ok, but whatever it is they are not doing it simply to piss on clod's parade.
Sorry, rant over.

[ATAG_Snapper]

Hi Hoots,

You're new here so your take on Chivas' comment is entirely understandable, although it's not where Chivas is coming from.

Thanks to the OP for the update. The 109's look great.

Cheers,

Snapper

[ATAG_NakedSquirrel]

The aircraft look very good, and the developers say the terrain will look photo-realistic in the finished product. I'm not a fan of the ROF terrain as it looks quite cartoony to my eye, but they will definitely have time to improve on it.

The external sounds are decent enough to my ear, and if the in cockpit sounds are of the same quality it will be fine by me, as 99.9% have no idea what the exact sounds should be inside the cockpit.

It's the same sound guy as the one that jumped on board with CloD a while back I believe.



War Thunder is a good example of well done environment making. They get the textures and feel to look quite pleasant; although other parts of the game are just too Hollywood, the terrain is *generally* quite good looking.

War thunder has smaller view distances and smaller terrain sizes in general. The texture resolution for terrain isn't that great, but they do a pretty good job of masking it with color choices and shading. I agree though, I do like the general look of that game (except for those ridiculous SFX, sounds, and complete lack of flight model or Damage model). Hell, I'd be happy if the old Il2 could steal those graphics.


Land visibility for the RoF engine is a little further, but it doesn't appear to be quite as far as CloD. The land looks pretty good, but they only made landscapes of France and southern England, which are flat and boring. RoF has pretty bumpy terrain in comparison though. It's hard to find an actual level piece of ground on the main maps. I guess it's to avoid the IL-2 / DCS title shortcuts of giving your plane 'jumping beans' when you aren't on a tarmac.

*shrug*

Games all have to cheat somewhere to make hardware requirements. Pick your poison.