PDA

View Full Version : Building Pop Up


Tree_UK
03-15-2011, 06:20 PM
Hi Oleg, in some recent video we have seen footage of an aircraft flying over a city, unfortunately the buildings were suffering from the old 'building pop up' issue that Il2 also complained of. Is this because we saw a very early beta copy in use or is the Cliffs Of Dover game engine already showing its age?

trumps
03-15-2011, 06:26 PM
Tree, the only thing showing it's age is you! Blah, Blah, Blah, your a miserable old git, SHOVE OFF!

Craig

Sven
03-15-2011, 06:35 PM
It's just a question Craig, but unfortunatly Tree put in a way which makes it almost look like he doesn't even want an official reply, only to start up an argument.

already showing its age?

trumps
03-15-2011, 06:42 PM
Tree doing what Tree does, butter wouldn't melt in that trolls mouth if you believed him ;)

Tree_UK
03-15-2011, 06:43 PM
I would prefer someone who knows what they talking about to answer.

Oldschool61
03-15-2011, 06:45 PM
Tree doing what Tree does, butter wouldn't melt in that trolls mouth if you believed him ;)

Isnt your post "trolling" ??

*Buzzsaw*
03-15-2011, 06:51 PM
Salute

It gets old, this continual whining.

Guess what, the game is a simulation, which is scaled to use computers of different power, with their game settings at various levels of detail. With less powerful computers, the requirement is to set distance draw nearer, just like every other sim out there. Unlike FPS's which have artificial 'fog' laid in to obscure landscape at as little as 300 meters distance, this is a flight sim, and requires the distance at which we can see to be extended WAY out, to 50 km or even further. To expect a home computer to be able to draw in detail, every single object at 50 km distance is ridiculous. So there will be some degree of 'popup' even in the most powerful computer. With computers of lesser power, the distance at which we see 'popup' occurring decreases, and it becomes more obvious, since the distance models are larger. The promotional videos we are seeing are from computers of average power.

If you don't want 'popup', then get the most powerful computer you can find. If you don't want to spend the money, then accept the limitations of your computer.

Get your head around that, and get it out of where its stuck, and you'll enjoy this game more.

The good news is, as computers catch up with what this game engine is capable of, 'popup' will become less and less noticeable.

kimosabi
03-15-2011, 07:01 PM
If I can take an uneducated guess(Tree, you're a drummer so you're not in a position to take a swing at me for that), I suppose that pop ups will be in CoD as well. Too many damn objects to render at the same time for a regular everyday PC to run it without them. Monster rigs FTW!

:)

hashi
03-15-2011, 07:04 PM
Hi Oleg, in some recent video we have seen footage of an aircraft flying over a city, unfortunately the buildings were suffering from the old 'building pop up' issue that Il2 also complained of. Is this because we saw a very early beta copy in use or is the Cliffs Of Dover game engine already showing its age?

You seem a fan of implication by question. Perhaps you need to retake logic 101 and learn how to phrase questions that are constructive and not objectionable.
Is it at all possible that maybe...just maybe, a question consisting of "why did the the buildings suffer from the old 'building pop up' issue that Il2 suffered from" might ilicit a response from the devs?
I think your chances of getting an answer are infinitely higher if you don't seem to be trying your very best to iritate people. Unless of course you don't want an answer, and your intention is entirely to iritate people.

fruitbat
03-15-2011, 07:13 PM
Its just a dumb question, typical of tree, and that anyone with half a brain should know the answer to.

clue, not everyone's computer is the same.

clue, you don't write software, only for the highest spec computer around.

Extreme_One
03-15-2011, 07:16 PM
Actually, even as a long time advocate of the IL2 series and eagerly anticipating the new game, I'm curious to know if this annoying issue is any less annoying in the new engine.

Now that we have the available computing power to be able to run the original game at higher and higher settings I wish there was a way of making this issue less of an issue in the current engine.


Of course this doesn't stop me enjoying IL2 as it is and it won't stop me enjoying the new game but it would make my day if there was any improvement to the current situation.

Oh damn! I just fed the troll. :P

trumps
03-15-2011, 07:23 PM
nah mate you didn't feed the troll, if Tree's questions or requests were put forth in the same maner as your post there is a good chance that they would be much better recieved by the devs and general comunity.

Craig

JG52Uther
03-15-2011, 07:28 PM
I think you might need to get a new login name Tree, because no matter what you post the loonies jump on it!
I would suggest Tree_UK2,as it will take them months to realise its you! ;)

Tree_UK
03-15-2011, 07:28 PM
Actually, even as a long time advocate of the IL2 series and eagerly anticipating the new game, I'm curious to know if this annoying issue is any less annoying in the new engine.

Now that we have the available computing power to be able to run the original game at higher and higher settings I wish there was a way of making this issue less of an issue in the current engine.


Of course this doesn't stop me enjoying IL2 as it is and it won't stop me enjoying the new game but it would make my day if there was any improvement to the current situation.

Oh damn! I just fed the troll. :P

Its not a problem in Wings Of Prey, they have got some kind of fade thing going on which stops the buildings suddenly popping up. I would have asked the question sooner but with 10 days from release its the first time ive seen a plane fly over a city, so I think the question is more than relevant. Hopefully the asnswer will be that it was an old beta copy that was given out for review.

Now try and calm down a bit boys, someone needs to ask the awkward questions. :grin:

hashi
03-15-2011, 07:35 PM
Its not a problem in Wings Of Prey, they have got some kind of fade thing going on which stops the buildings suddenly popping up. I would have asked the question sooner but with 10 days from release its the first time ive seen a plane fly over a city, so I think the question is more than relevant. Hopefully the asnswer will be that it was an old beta copy that was given out for review.

Now try and calm down a bit boys, someone needs to ask the awkward questions. :grin:

Its not an awkward question, its a very, very poorly put question.
Again, the underlying "why the building popup" question is great, it needs to be asked, and idealy answered...but mate, dont use implication by question... you have a rubbish way with words that just makes people want you to have an infarction.

Tree_UK
03-15-2011, 07:40 PM
Its not an awkward question, its a very, very poorly put question.
Again, the underlying "why the building popup" question is great, it needs to be asked, and idealy answered...but mate, dont use implication by question... you have a rubbish way with words that just makes people want you to have an infarction.

I consider my questions to be more direct than others, I would agree with that, however I have experimented with what you would say 'correctly' asked questions and they usually get zero response, especially if there is some truth to them and the dev's just dont want to talk about it. Remember how many times I politley asked to see a screen shot in DX11, well over a year of asking and getting zero response told me that it had been dropped before the official announcement. The direct approach is best at least it stirs up some interest and gets us talking and who knows even the Dev's might just join in??!

Feuerfalke
03-15-2011, 07:58 PM
I consider my questions to be more direct than others, I would agree with that, however I have experimented with what you would say 'correctly' asked questions and they usually get zero response, especially if there is some truth to them and the dev's just dont want to talk about it. Remember how many times I politley asked to see a screen shot in DX11, well over a year of asking and getting zero response told me that it had been dropped before the official announcement. The direct approach is best at least it stirs up some interest and gets us talking and who knows even the Dev's might just join in??!

Yeah, you're awesome and we really have to thank you.
Here, a t-shirt for you:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_xxmmPuGRtKk/Se1g7SEtuNI/AAAAAAAAFvQ/LVB_B0T2ewo/s400/im_with_genius_t_shirt.jpg

hashi
03-15-2011, 07:59 PM
I consider my questions to be more direct than others, I would agree with that, however I have experimented with what you would say 'correctly' asked questions and they usually get zero response, especially if there is some truth to them and the dev's just dont want to talk about it. Remember how many times I politley asked to see a screen shot in DX11, well over a year of asking and getting zero response told me that it had been dropped before the official announcement. The direct approach is best at least it stirs up some interest and gets us talking and who knows even the Dev's might just join in??!

*shrugs*
Meh, whats the point. :confused:

Feuerfalke
03-15-2011, 08:04 PM
Nothing. Just another thread with good old Tree: "I just complain about everything and when something does turn out as planned, I tell them I saw it coming."


Be happy, with Tree we've got our very own Sandbox-Nostradamus.

Oldschool61
03-15-2011, 08:13 PM
Nothing. Just another thread with good old Tree: "I just complain about everything and when something does turn out as planned, I tell them I saw it coming."


Be happy, with Tree we've got our very own Sandbox-Nostradamus.

I know lets all pray that the pop ups go away!!

Tree_UK
03-15-2011, 08:19 PM
Nothing. Just another thread with good old Tree: "I just complain about everything and when something does turn out as planned, I tell them I saw it coming."


Be happy, with Tree we've got our very own Sandbox-Nostradamus.

Feuerfalke loves me really. :grin:

hashi
03-15-2011, 08:22 PM
"Oh great and terrible popup gods,
May you not rise up to afflict CLoD
May your buildings not fade
May the FM be true
May the DM be right
Oh great and terrible popup gods
May you go and afflict other games (but not Shogun 2!)
amen

pupo162
03-15-2011, 08:29 PM
geesus!


why so much hate???? tree made a perfectly acceptable question, and i suport it and would like to have an answer:

"how is the building "pop-up" handled in the new engine) is this tunable, from acceptable into unexisting? wahts the distance we can see buildings from?"

poor you tree, i have no idea waht did you do in the past, but a hell lot of people dindt like it....

chiefrr73
03-15-2011, 08:29 PM
I think you might need to get a new login name Tree, because no matter what you post the loonies jump on it!
I would suggest Tree_UK2,as it will take them months to realise its you!

I don t think we would take months to realise its Tree, it would be easy to recognise its him, because how could he change his personality..

Feuerfalke
03-15-2011, 09:09 PM
I know lets all pray that the pop ups go away!!

Absolutely true! Let's rather give Oleg another year, please! May God prevent us from a near release, that would give us the chance to test the simulation and see ourselves, if there are really pop-ups in the release-version on our PCs.

No, really, please, please, we want to push back the release so we can watch more videos from uncompleted betas instead and pi** our pants. Hell, if we see just one popping house, we most surely won't play this friggin FlightSimulation! Seriously, this is worse than Steam+StarForce+Full HDD-Scan+SingleActivation+SignATreatyWithTheDevil.

philip.ed
03-15-2011, 09:21 PM
Without unkowingly becoming hypocritical too, you lot really are hypocritical.
At the end of the day, all Tree has done is ask a question and the lot of you have trolled his topic. Whinging that Tree has whinged makes you what? Whingers? nah, surely not...

you may lack the intellect, but is it really so hard to ignore Tree's topics and let Oleg or Luthier answer if necessary?
Because topics like these just turn into a session where (grown?) men are talking about Tree...
not sure about you lot, but it's like a perverse form of a Tree fan-club.

At the end of the day, if any other user had posed this question, it would probably have resulted in '+1's' or people saying that it would nice to see fade implemented, but obviously it's not a priority to include quickly pre-release.

JG52Uther
03-15-2011, 09:25 PM
Without unkowingly becoming hypocritical too, you lot really are hypocritical.
At the end of the day, all Tree has done is ask a question and the lot of you have trolled his topic. Whinging that Tree has whinged makes you what? Whingers? nah, surely not...

you may lack the intellect, but is it really so hard to ignore Tree's topics and let Oleg or Luthier answer if necessary?
Because topics like these just turn into a session where (grown?) men are talking about Tree...
not sure about you lot, but it's like a perverse form of a Tree fan-club.

At the end of the day, if any other user had posed this question, it would probably have resulted in '+1's' or people saying that it would nice to see fade implemented, but obviously it's not a priority to include quickly pre-release.
+1
More than a bit of Tree envy going on here methinks,my gaydar is off the scale!

hashi
03-15-2011, 09:28 PM
Again, no issue at all with someone having questions about building popus etc.
it is only right and proper that questions get asked.

But the questions that were asked in this instance were not designed to get an informative answer...they were designed to inflame or iritate. Read the actual question again...the response requested was a yes/no to presupposed answers, both of which have seriously negative connotations.

If the question had been "are there still going to be building popups like in IL2?", yes, +1's all round. but if it is along the same lines as "do you take medication for your mental illness, or do you handle it some other way?"...THAT is entirely inappropriate and offensive...it is MEANT to be!

nearmiss
03-15-2011, 09:41 PM
Don't sweat Tree he has a penchant for worry that mirrors that of a woman, even though I suspect he is a man. :oops:

Tree_UK
03-15-2011, 09:42 PM
I don't care if they popup, just as long as I'm far enough away not to see it.

There is always that.:rolleyes:

Don't sweat Tree he has a penchant for worry that mirrors that of a woman, even though I suspect he is a man. :oops:

you suspect correctly :grin:

Feuerfalke
03-15-2011, 09:54 PM
Without unkowingly becoming hypocritical too, you lot really are hypocritical.
At the end of the day, all Tree has done is ask a question and the lot of you have trolled his topic. Whinging that Tree has whinged makes you what? Whingers? nah, surely not...

you may lack the intellect, but is it really so hard to ignore Tree's topics and let Oleg or Luthier answer if necessary?
Because topics like these just turn into a session where (grown?) men are talking about Tree...
not sure about you lot, but it's like a perverse form of a Tree fan-club.

At the end of the day, if any other user had posed this question, it would probably have resulted in '+1's' or people saying that it would nice to see fade implemented, but obviously it's not a priority to include quickly pre-release.


I absolutely agree on the part of Tree's question.

However:
...or is the Cliffs Of Dover game engine already showing its age?
... is not an neutral question. And it's not hypocritical. It's just a fully unjustified implication based on a personal opinion, neatly posted in a side-sentence to give the provocation an extra-weight. Sure, his goal was a reaction. And this is exactly what he got.

I bet once Tree learns to post questions instead of provocative statements, Oleg or Luthier would even start answering his requests.

But until that: What goes around comes around. Especially if you literally ask for it.

Extreme_One
03-15-2011, 10:01 PM
Hey, hey whilst I don't necessarily agree with Tree's style of questioning I do (did) agree that it was a valid question.

Actually, even as a long time advocate of the IL2 series and eagerly anticipating the new game, I'm curious to know if this annoying issue is any less annoying in the new engine.

Now that we have the available computing power to be able to run the original game at higher and higher settings I wish there was a way of making this issue less of an issue in the current engine.


Of course this doesn't stop me enjoying IL2 as it is and it won't stop me enjoying the new game but it would make my day if there was any improvement to the current situation.

Oh damn! I just fed the troll. :P

Would be nice if we had information on subjects like this prior to release but I suspect we'll have to wait until after release before we see how things really with these (minor) details.

TacKY
03-15-2011, 10:11 PM
People always seem to turn a simple question into a fight if it even in the least bit insinuates that IL 2 wont be perfect. Tree didn't ask anything that would be called trolling but everyone already has an opinion about him so you decide to act like this is some to defame IL 2. If it was anybody else, you would be answering question in a logical manner.

Dano
03-15-2011, 10:34 PM
Valid question from Tree, it's a concern that popup is so visible and appears to have no fade in of any type like many many other games and sims, WoP and RoF included, would very much like to know if it's due to it being a beta build or if it'll be present in the release. Given that it happens in IL2 I'd guess that it's just Oleg's way of doing things but would like to be told otherwise.

kestrel79
03-15-2011, 10:37 PM
I agree, I didn't like seeing the building popup either. Hopefully it can be adjusted. Maybe its a trick the engine uses to get more detail in on lower settings without sacrificing fps?

I swear there is older Igormir trailer footage, where in the last 30 seconds or so I think it shows a Spit flying over a city. There is little or no building popup, but there is some tree popup going on.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z469HXN0hlQ

Start watching at around 3:00, and this looks much better than what was shown in that video of the guy flyign the su26.

Dano
03-15-2011, 11:07 PM
Yep, could just be the settings used.

Chivas
03-15-2011, 11:43 PM
The pop up buildings are definitey an immersion killer and a valid question. Unfortunately Tree can't help adding a back handed put down in many of his questions.

nearmiss
03-16-2011, 12:50 AM
No one needs to defend Tree. Tree is competent to deal with critics.

This thread had a sensible question, but no answers from forum members will be adequate.

This is a question for Oleg or Luthier. Everything else is speculation.

nearmiss
03-16-2011, 12:53 AM
The pop up buildings are definitey an immersion killer and a valid question. Unfortunately Tree can't help adding a back handed put down in many of his questions.

That is the nature of the beast.

Oldschool61
03-16-2011, 02:20 AM
No one needs to defend Tree. Tree is competent to deal with critics.

This thread had a sensible question, but no answers from forum members will be adequate.

This is a question for Oleg or Luthier. Everything else is speculation.

Fly low to the ground so your view is only a couple hundred meters and you wont see any pop up buildings!!!

nearmiss
03-16-2011, 02:49 AM
Fly low to the ground so your view is only a couple hundred meters and you wont see any pop up buildings!!!

And there is that!

Skoshi Tiger
03-16-2011, 03:03 AM
Are there any flight simulations out there that popup building don't happen in?

At least the trees aren't turning towards you as you fly past them like in ROF! (Of cource the Developers might like Hurons out of LOTR!)

Cheers!

Robert
03-16-2011, 04:17 AM
Are there any flight simulations out there that popup building don't happen in?

At least the trees aren't turning towards you as you fly past them like in ROF! (Of cource the Developers might like Hurons out of LOTR!)

Cheers!
that's a feature. ;) The Ents are joining the battle

=XIII=Shea
03-16-2011, 01:02 PM
Pop up is very annoying when bombing from high alt

B25Mitch
03-16-2011, 01:10 PM
IN DCS: Black Shark, there were some objects that faded in as well as some that popped up.

BUT

What that meant is that if you used the Shkval targeting screen to zoom in really far, you'd see a mess of half-faded buildings and other objects, which is terrible when you're trying to spot camourflaged units in the midst of them.

kendo65
03-16-2011, 01:26 PM
I absolutely agree on the part of Tree's question.

However:

... is not an neutral question. And it's not hypocritical. It's just a fully unjustified implication based on a personal opinion, neatly posted in a side-sentence to give the provocation an extra-weight. Sure, his goal was a reaction. And this is exactly what he got.

I bet once Tree learns to post questions instead of provocative statements, Oleg or Luthier would even start answering his requests.

But until that: What goes around comes around. Especially if you literally ask for it.

I have to agree with what Feuerfalke says. Tree's question is totally justified and understandable.

It's the deliberate barbed comment at the end that has no purpose other than trying to get a reaction out of people.

CharveL
03-16-2011, 01:44 PM
Pop-up objects are a byproduct of the compromise between performance and visual quality for game programmers.

From what I understand objects are generally very cpu intensive for keeping track of where they are in the virtual space and because flight sims offer such a vast, visible area at times, drawing objects out to the end of visibility could encompass tens of kilometers. Fly over a city and you can see how things get out of hand, yet we don't want to limit view distance over countryside where a few buildings here and there may be well within available processing power.

Back in the day the only feasible way around this was to have less objects and as many objects "baked" into ground textures as you could get away with. The vertex and pixel shaders in newer video cards helps out and allows more or better quality objects but CloD really pushes the limit to make a believable cityscape so we are still butting our heads up against the limits of technology from what I see in the videos and screenshots.

With that said I also get the impression that Oleg and team have added quite a bit of personal control over video options including viewing distance for objects so it is also likely we will also have the "fade-in" objects at that perimeter as well like some other games have incorporated. I have no idea what the hit on resources is for that but I'm also hoping Oleg has tuned the LOD's to strike a good balance between performance and visual quality.

Bottom line is most of us will have to make some compromises even on newer systems. For me a minimum framerate over 40fps is the least I can handle so I may consider dropping the resolution below my native 1920x1080 and making up for the jaggies with AA since I will likely have more spare video card headroom than CPU (i5-750 overclocked to 3.8ghz which ain't too bad) then tweak the other video settings accordingly, but we'll have to wait and see.

I suspect CloD will run half-decently on even lower spec systems with enough concessions on effects and video quality, especially over the channel. Mark my words it will be flying at 1000m over cities that will kill you.

rakinroll
03-16-2011, 01:45 PM
Keep going Tree, hope you can have an answer from developers.

Skoshi Tiger
03-16-2011, 02:02 PM
I suspect CloD will run half-decently on even lower spec systems with enough concessions on effects and video quality, especially over the channel. Mark my words it will be flying at 1000m over cities that will kill you.

Luckly most of air combat over smoggy old London will be at 20,000 feet (roughly 5300 odd Metres). Hopefully enough of the buildings will have popped out to give us a good frame rate!

Cheers!

CharveL
03-16-2011, 02:14 PM
As for the real topic in this thread, you know, the one about Tree not his valid topic, he's simply figured out the same thing that RayBanJockey and a few others figured out here years and years ago.

You don't catch flies or get noticed by Oleg with honey.

Mixing in a bit of crap goes much farther around here.

Heliocon
03-16-2011, 11:31 PM
Dont pull the - graphics cant handle it bs. thats a lie.

If they had an iota of sense they would make building at a distance simple boxes with roofs, and have a very low res texture on them. As you get closer the LOD increases, and then they either have more LOD switches for less and less detail, or tesselate the buildings based on a second model from the first LOD switch. This means there would be no popping at all, and only 1 real model would need to be made (and houses are really easy to make, its what you do as a first project, however towns are a bit harder and I dont know what exact system they are using for that...).

In any case LOD popping completely eliminates immersion. I cant believe the rediculous opinions on this board when people obsess over the contrast or brightness of the terrain/land, yet the fact that buildings suddenly spawn into the word where before there were none is hardly argued over/mentioned. Its one of the MOST important graphical features, and can easily be handled by any modern computer (even low end ones). The amount of rescources needed to load buildings at a distance into memory is near nothing, they have very little geometry and at a distance low textures (which should increase when you get closer, but no point in highres textures if you cant see them!).

More and more there engine is coming off as inneficient, badly designed and planned it seems to me. Who knows it might be fine in release, but with the current pop it looks absurd.

CharveL
03-17-2011, 12:01 AM
Dont pull the - graphics cant handle it bs. thats a lie.

If they had an iota of sense they would make building at a distance simple boxes with roofs, and have a very low res texture on them. As you get closer the LOD increases, and then they either have more LOD switches for less and less detail, or tesselate the buildings based on a second model from the first LOD switch. This means there would be no popping at all, and only 1 real model would need to be made (and houses are really easy to make, its what you do as a first project, however towns are a bit harder and I dont know what exact system they are using for that...).

In any case LOD popping completely eliminates immersion. I cant believe the rediculous opinions on this board when people obsess over the contrast or brightness of the terrain/land, yet the fact that buildings suddenly spawn into the word where before there were none is hardly argued over/mentioned. Its one of the MOST important graphical features, and can easily be handled by any modern computer (even low end ones). The amount of rescources needed to load buildings at a distance into memory is near nothing, they have very little geometry and at a distance low textures (which should increase when you get closer, but no point in highres textures if you cant see them!).

More and more there engine is coming off as inneficient, badly designed and planned it seems to me. Who knows it might be fine in release, but with the current pop it looks absurd.

Dude, just...go read up on the stuff before trying to make comments about things you don't really get. I mean, you know some terms and what they're supposed to do but not how they work together collectively. You might as well give us your insight into nuclear physics since you read a wikipedia explanation about half-life (hint: not the game).

TheGrunch
03-17-2011, 12:58 AM
He's still right, though. The solution to building popup is just to create even simpler LODs. How much are a few hundred 16 tri buildings with 16x16 textures going to tax a modern GPU? Not much.

zauii
03-17-2011, 01:07 AM
I think Oleg and his team have a "slight" edge on the skills and knowledge required for the job than our Heliocon..
it might seem obvious in principle but truth to be told he has no clue how it actually works together and especially not in their environment.

I agree completely with Charvel.

Heliocon
03-17-2011, 02:25 AM
Dude, just...go read up on the stuff before trying to make comments about things you don't really get. I mean, you know some terms and what they're supposed to do but not how they work together collectively. You might as well give us your insight into nuclear physics since you read a wikipedia explanation about half-life (hint: not the game).

Charvel, really stop before I start using caps : http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?p=233795#post233795

I have little programming experience, but know a good amount about game design (from multiple sources, did a bit with Digipen) have a few years experience with Maya aswell. Now there are plenty of things I do not know about, and I always preface my post with that (for example compared to others here I know very little about flying and tactics, engines or plane mechanics, much of the wars history or even things like HOTAS setups). What I do know about is computer hardware and software, and enough about graphics design and engines that I feel confident in the comments I make. Like said I did a good amount of graphics design in Maya (7.0 then 7.5) which was bought out by Autodesk (the only other major competitor for CGI and game model/graphics) and while I would have to wiki to check now, I believe autodesk scrapped their autodesk app, and now Maya autodesk is really only used (maybe opengl is different, not sure on that one). Anyway I used the exact same software they are using for the game.

For the record the link is my "victory I told you so post", where I layed out many features and uses of DX11 and opinions on how it should be used/how they will use it along with comp hardware about 5 months ago-1month ago. Ironically during that time a dev himself said they were only thinking about tesselating "plane wheels" and forum members said dx11 decreased performance. I had been arguing for tesselation to reduce workload for modeling details and remove the need to LOD and multiple models to reduce popping. I also talked about using direct compute for physics modeling for flight and for water/particles, along with dx11 shader pipelines being much more efficient on mutli core machines and that they should aim for that. People like you dismissed it, just so you know- Then we had that nice new interview which nearly point for point repeated every single thing I had been saying (and getting responses like you made to me) for months and months (2010). Now I probably should not have dragged this out, but if you have a particular point I made in my post you would like to contest, thats fine with me. Until then, dont reply with that bs to my post, because I have a paper due and I am not in a good mood :rolleyes:

Wall of text over, continue :cool:

CharveL
03-17-2011, 03:51 AM
I won't pretend to be an expert either, hell only the developers really know where the bottlenecks are since there's often a big gap between supposed benefits of a feature and actual implementation. And that's kind of the point we're saying here. You were spouting off stuff that I'm sure makes a lot of sense to you and what you've gathered, but without taking into account that you don't have nearly enough knowledge in order to suggest the developers are incompetent, sloppy or lazy with such surety.

I have no problem with much of the negativity around here, Oleg's a big boy and can take it without crying himself to sleep at night, as long as it's accompanied by reasonable concerns. I know it seems only these types of posts tend to get a response so it's a valid tactic I guess when you want to stand out in a forum.

No offense, but some of the reasoning stuff you rattled off was just...silly...especially when you draw such conclusions from them. I do hope you get a response though because I'm pretty interested in the topic.

Kikuchiyo
03-17-2011, 03:57 AM
Pop up is a legitimate issue, but I suspect that it will be something that will always exsist (or at least until computers are capable of rendering all things at all times simultaneously). the power of your PC will determine how noticeable the pop up will be.

kestrel79
03-17-2011, 04:07 AM
Pop up is very annoying when bombing from high alt

This is what annoyed me most with pop up in IL2. I spend all this time in my B25 getting up to alt and then I cannot see the buildings I'm suppose to target until I'm right on top of it looking down the sight. By the time I move the rudder and let the sight settle it's too late.

I hope this gets improved in CoD.

Blackdog_kt
03-17-2011, 04:24 AM
Heliocon there's no need to be aggressive. Most of us are intelligent enough to understand that DX11 will obviously be better than DX10.

That doesn't mean it's a fully mature technology yet, nor that it can be done in time (they will need to get used to working with it first to the detriment of other stuff that are equally important for a lot of potential customers, like for example spending time on the aircraft), neither that everyone has a DX11 GPU yet, so i don't really share your anguish.

Granted, it's a matter of taste and i tend to focus more on things like "how do the airplanes fly, is it accurate?" and prefer it when they focus on that kind of stuff, but i don't think delaying the game for 6 months to add DX11 support before release would mean much for you.

You still wouldn't have a DX11-capable CoD either way until 6 months later.

As for the processing load, Luthier said that it's not so much the graphics but the positional references that hog the system resources. I think he said that they could reduce each house to a pixel and we would still get almost the exact same FPS: the CPU would still have to track each of that pixels' positions relative to the player's aircraft and we all know that a PC is only as fast as its slowest component for the given task. Even if our GPU could render everything just fine, in all likelihood it would probably have to "synchronise" with the rest of the components and wait for the CPU before fusing the complete set of data to present on the screen.

Heliocon
03-17-2011, 05:54 AM
Heliocon there's no need to be aggressive. Most of us are intelligent enough to understand that DX11 will obviously be better than DX10.

That doesn't mean it's a fully mature technology yet, nor that it can be done in time (they will need to get used to working with it first to the detriment of other stuff that are equally important for a lot of potential customers, like for example spending time on the aircraft), neither that everyone has a DX11 GPU yet, so i don't really share your anguish.

Granted, it's a matter of taste and i tend to focus more on things like "how do the airplanes fly, is it accurate?" and prefer it when they focus on that kind of stuff, but i don't think delaying the game for 6 months to add DX11 support before release would mean much for you.

You still wouldn't have a DX11-capable CoD either way until 6 months later.

As for the processing load, Luthier said that it's not so much the graphics but the positional references that hog the system resources. I think he said that they could reduce each house to a pixel and we would still get almost the exact same FPS: the CPU would still have to track each of that pixels' positions relative to the player's aircraft and we all know that a PC is only as fast as its slowest component for the given task. Even if our GPU could render everything just fine, in all likelihood it would probably have to "synchronise" with the rest of the components and wait for the CPU before fusing the complete set of data to present on the screen.

My problem with charvels response is that he never specified what he had a problem with, or disagreed with. The reason I said what I said is that if the devs statements of true it is poor planning. I dont think its "lazy" but they knew what they were getting into, knew what they wanted out of the engine and they should of planned it in a way that takes into account all these problems. What I see is a lack of foresight that can be crippling to a game engine.

Now as far as DX11 is concerned - I think they should of cut out dx10 completely and just gone dx11 and dx9, because dx11 builds on dx10, but is far far easier to work with, so the time they spent on 10 could of been spent on 11, and would of been completed far faster. Also it would mean that they would have alot less modeling work to do (although this depends on alot of factors). Now I think mechanics are as important if not more than graphics - but they keep saying they want fps fidelity, which is absurd because atm it has no where near the detail of an fps, and no where near the detail it should have as a flight sim either, because when buildings sprout from the ground it screams "cheap indie game". That should not happen at all in 2011, there is no excuse for it with modern hardware and tech. Now maybe on mid range systems it does not happen, but since they dont care to update their non russian community, we dont know.

The supposed CPU bottleneck on buildings is due to bad optimization and tbh makes no sense.
1. Its because the cpu keep track of every building, irregardless of LOD or distance and has to tell the gpu to render shadows and lighting interactions on each of them irrespective of if we can see the effects or not = Gpu bottleneck. If not and it is purely CPU then I have no idea what the hell they are doing because you dont need to track a houses position, the damn thing is stationary. Why do you need to track its position if it is not visible? Because it blocks another object? Thats crazy, who the hell makes maps / engines that way? Also adding to that there no reason why they would need to track stationary objects for anything BUT LOS rendering on the GPU. Computers can dome enormous amounts of calculations per second, but its like we are adding 1+1 and we get 33.33333x66.6666^infinity. It just doesnt add up and it should not be an issue in the first place...

-p.s DX11 has been around for two years now, its time to move on.

Chivas
03-17-2011, 06:32 AM
My problem with charvels response is that he never specified what he had a problem with, or disagreed with. The reason I said what I said is that if the devs statements of true it is poor planning. I dont think its "lazy" but they knew what they were getting into, knew what they wanted out of the engine and they should of planned it in a way that takes into account all these problems. What I see is a lack of foresight that can be crippling to a game engine.

Now as far as DX11 is concerned - I think they should of cut out dx10 completely and just gone dx11 and dx9, because dx11 builds on dx10, but is far far easier to work with, so the time they spent on 10 could of been spent on 11, and would of been completed far faster. Also it would mean that they would have alot less modeling work to do (although this depends on alot of factors). Now I think mechanics are as important if not more than graphics - but they keep saying they want fps fidelity, which is absurd because atm it has no where near the detail of an fps, and no where near the detail it should have as a flight sim either, because when buildings sprout from the ground it screams "cheap indie game". That should not happen at all in 2011, there is no excuse for it with modern hardware and tech. Now maybe on mid range systems it does not happen, but since they dont care to update their non russian community, we dont know.

The supposed CPU bottleneck on buildings is due to bad optimization and tbh makes no sense.
1. Its because the cpu keep track of every building, irregardless of LOD or distance and has to tell the gpu to render shadows and lighting interactions on each of them irrespective of if we can see the effects or not = Gpu bottleneck. If not and it is purely CPU then I have no idea what the hell they are doing because you dont need to track a houses position, the damn thing is stationary. Why do you need to track its position if it is not visible? Because it blocks another object? Thats crazy, who the hell makes maps / engines that way? Also adding to that there no reason why they would need to track stationary objects for anything BUT LOS rendering on the GPU. Computers can dome enormous amounts of calculations per second, but its like we are adding 1+1 and we get 33.33333x66.6666^infinity. It just doesnt add up and it should not be an issue in the first place...

-p.s DX11 has been around for two years now, its time to move on.

Unfortunately its impossible to plan for every eventuality, or how long it will problem. There is no foolproof blueprint for a developer to follow especially when your doing things never done in a combat flight sim. Even if there was one, nobody's going to give it to you. It is what it is, and there are plans to make it better for many years.

Tiger27
03-17-2011, 06:59 AM
Its not a problem in Wings Of Prey, they have got some kind of fade thing going on which stops the buildings suddenly popping up. I would have asked the question sooner but with 10 days from release its the first time ive seen a plane fly over a city, so I think the question is more than relevant. Hopefully the asnswer will be that it was an old beta copy that was given out for review.

Now try and calm down a bit boys, someone needs to ask the awkward questions. :grin:

Wings of prey has an horizon that appears to be much closer than Il2, in fact much much less going on in the background, fm's dm's etc so probably not a great example.

That poor horse of yours tree it wont even be good for glue by the time CoD is released ;)

Skoshi Tiger
03-17-2011, 08:11 AM
A10-C also has a haze that covers stuff up out towards the horizon. It's not too bad but there's a definite line with faded colours beyong the haze. It's ok for screen shots but just as killing of imersion as the pop up's in my opinion.

Tree_UK
03-17-2011, 08:12 AM
Wings of prey has an horizon that appears to be much closer than Il2, in fact much much less going on in the background, fm's dm's etc so probably not a great example.

That poor horse of yours tree it wont even be good for glue by the time CoD is released ;)

Are you stalking me??

CharveL
03-17-2011, 02:21 PM
I didn't respond with specifics because it's been explained to you in the past and when you throw out words like "liars" it becomes obvious that it's more about getting attention than actually absorbing what people are telling you.

In other words it's a waste of time.

I don't want to come across as being offensive to you but here's a good example of why it just seems futile discussing it:

The supposed CPU bottleneck on buildings is due to bad optimization and tbh makes no sense.
1. Its because the cpu keep track of every building, irregardless of LOD or distance and has to tell the gpu to render shadows and lighting interactions on each of them irrespective of if we can see the effects or not = Gpu bottleneck. If not and it is purely CPU then I have no idea what the hell they are doing because you dont need to track a houses position, the damn thing is stationary. Why do you need to track its position if it is not visible? Because it blocks another object? Thats crazy, who the hell makes maps / engines that way? Also adding to that there no reason why they would need to track stationary objects for anything BUT LOS rendering on the GPU. Computers can dome enormous amounts of calculations per second, but its like we are adding 1+1 and we get 33.33333x66.6666^infinity. It just doesnt add up and it should not be an issue in the first place...

It's just that you don't have any clue - or the rest of us - what the hell you're talking about. I'm sure it makes perfect sense to you though.

robtek
03-17-2011, 04:21 PM
Btw, they tried dx11, but atm it is still not stable enough the way it must used in CoD!
They still try to get it working in a later patch.
It's all been said already.

Heliocon
03-17-2011, 06:36 PM
I didn't respond with specifics because it's been explained to you in the past and when you throw out words like "liars" it becomes obvious that it's more about getting attention than actually absorbing what people are telling you.

In other words it's a waste of time.

I don't want to come across as being offensive to you but here's a good example of why it just seems futile discussing it:



It's just that you don't have any clue - or the rest of us - what the hell you're talking about. I'm sure it makes perfect sense to you though.

As of yet you have not made one valid/sustained or supported criticism about even one thing I have said, let alone a coherent argument other than "thats wrong" which is all that you keep repeating over and over without saying what exactly is wrong, how it is wrong etc.
The devs knew what they wanted out of the engine, they also have sold its features (fps like fidelity etc), but thats not the reality. Why should I care if I can see 1000 miles if I cant see a building 2 miles from me? They should implement a haze, which is 100% better then building pop,because haze is passive and in many ways completely realistic (often you cant see from horizon to horizon under the cloud layer, and above often clouds obscure any detail). On the other hand buildings popping up infront of you suddenly is intrusive, obviouse and distracting. If you care to converse on these points we can talk about them, but make sure to actually have an argument to back up your criticism.
Also if you check the link, the devs themselves are doing exactly what I said they should do months before that article came out and are addressing many of the problems talked about in this thread with the methods that I suggested previously (from the time I first started talking about dx11 just before it was pulled from the release version, to the time where they said they would only tesselate things like tires I was advocating strongly for every point and method they are now using DX11 to implement, and basically word for word for the reasons I stated).

@robtek - you need to make sure to read posts before commenting, because if you did you would see my link to a thread about a recent article/interview which is the first one every to specifically talk about dx11 features and implementation ever. I am also aware it will not be in the initial release.

zauii
03-17-2011, 07:04 PM
Wow, you work at 1C don't you helicon?, puns aside seriously don't dive into something you do not have a clue about.
Or maybe you've some inside info regarding their engine and work flow that you'd like to share with the rest of us?

/flameON

nearmiss
03-17-2011, 07:36 PM
You guys need to tune out the personal finger pointing the thread is losing it's value.

Couple more of the kind responses that precede this and thread will be closed.

It's your call!

Yammo
03-18-2011, 08:53 AM
Salute

It gets old, this continual whining.

Guess what, the game is a simulation, which is scaled to use computers of different power, with their game settings at various levels of detail. With less powerful computers, the requirement is to set distance draw nearer, just like every other sim out there. Unlike FPS's which have artificial 'fog' laid in to obscure landscape at as little as 300 meters distance, this is a flight sim, and requires the distance at which we can see to be extended WAY out, to 50 km or even further. To expect a home computer to be able to draw in detail, every single object at 50 km distance is ridiculous. So there will be some degree of 'popup' even in the most powerful computer. With computers of lesser power, the distance at which we see 'popup' occurring decreases, and it becomes more obvious, since the distance models are larger. The promotional videos we are seeing are from computers of average power.

If you don't want 'popup', then get the most powerful computer you can find. If you don't want to spend the money, then accept the limitations of your computer.

Get your head around that, and get it out of where its stuck, and you'll enjoy this game more.

The good news is, as computers catch up with what this game engine is capable of, 'popup' will become less and less noticeable.

Uhm... I'm only going to say
- Rise of Flight
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7C-dDxVFiY
- Apache - Air Assault
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_Pmym95DbM
- Wings of prey(Yes, horrible feeling, but the graphics was to die for)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmSZ6wPLrto


So, the only thing getting "old" here, is people like you who start screaming
"whine" as soon as anyone has anything to ask which may be interpreted in
a negative manner.

QED!!!

Matt255
03-18-2011, 09:06 AM
- Rise of Flight
Can't watch that video you linked right now, but in Rise of Flight buildings and planes (!) pop-up, depending on distance and FOV (or "zoom") ratio.

I love Rise of Flight, but that's a pretty big problem (more because of the planes popping up).

(i don't want to drag this into off-topicness, but just wanted to clear that part up)

winny
03-18-2011, 09:09 AM
Anyone who's making assumptions about CoD purley on the way it looks is missing the point.

The FM and DM will make or break CoD. They are the most complicated parts. It's all good and well comparing CoD to ALREADY RELEASED games but it's not particularly fair. Some of these complaints sound like you guys have already paid for the game..

WoP looks great but the terrain is HOPELESSLY out of scale. Apache AA is also set in very small maps. Neither of these games have very deep physics either.

Wait for it to come out, buy it, install it, then judge it. It's the only fair way.

Feuerfalke
03-18-2011, 10:09 AM
Anyone who's making assumptions about CoD purley on the way it looks is missing the point.

The FM and DM will make or break CoD. They are the most complicated parts. It's all good and well comparing CoD to ALREADY RELEASED games but it's not particularly fair. Some of these complaints sound like you guys have already paid for the game..

WoP looks great but the terrain is HOPELESSLY out of scale. Apache AA is also set in very small maps. Neither of these games have very deep physics either.

Wait for it to come out, buy it, install it, then judge it. It's the only fair way.

+100000

Besides that:

RoF and WoP are either based on an older engine or were patched and upgraded multiple times already. CoD is not even released yet.

You don't know how it will look on your PC. You don't know if the things you didn't like in the beta-previews will still be there.

Besides that, what lifts CoD far above and beyond any competitor will be under the hood: Damage-modelling, structural features, weapons-modelling, physics, weather, etc.

Tiger27
03-18-2011, 10:26 AM
Are you stalking me??

If posting in a thread started by you and responding to a post by you that I felt was, IMO misguided, is stalking, then yes :rolleyes:

I think you may be getting a case of the old swelled head there Tree, if you don't want negative responses to your posts then either stop posting, stop whinging, or post something that is actually backed up with some proof, currently all your negative posts are based on speculation or guesswork by you, fortunately we will all find out the truth soon enough and you can either say I told you so, or no doubt find something else to complain about.

Oldschool61
03-18-2011, 12:12 PM
Some of the pop ups may be caused by low system resources like low ram etc.

CharveL
03-18-2011, 03:25 PM
Really what it all comes down to is whether there is a fade-in system implemented like other games do. It might be harder for some technical reasons in this sim due to the sheer size of the map and number of objects but I will bet that it is available as a selectable option.

Osprey
03-18-2011, 08:30 PM
Tree is a knob. Discuss.

Heliocon
03-18-2011, 08:49 PM
Wow, you work at 1C don't you helicon?, puns aside seriously don't dive into something you do not have a clue about.
Or maybe you've some inside info regarding their engine and work flow that you'd like to share with the rest of us?

/flameON

No I dont work at 1c, and I know about their engine only through what they have shown, and what they have said.

I dont have a clue about what? Puns aside, when using the english language a sentence normally includes a noun...
Thats a clue saying if you are going to criticise someone about what they say, you really need to state what you are talking about and use something called an "argument/thesis" which you should base your post around.

Seriously one of the only forums where you get posts/trolls who cant even state what they disagree with. As far as the record goes (and I have no idea how accurate my analyses is other than from the pics/interviews) I believe my statements have more or less been confirmed by the devs. So until we see other evidence or info that explains the situation (engine, problems etc etc) better I would say that my post holds water, so if you have info that leads you to a different conclusion please post it, and if need be I have no problem with throwing what I have said out the window (I hope I am wrong).