Official 1C Company forum

Official 1C Company forum (http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/index.php)
-   IL-2 Sturmovik (http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/forumdisplay.php?f=98)
-   -   Friday 2010-09-24 Dev. update and Discussion (http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=16627)

Dano 09-30-2010 10:49 AM

I'd happily settle for a little information rather than screenshots or videos as a Friday update Oleg, you know while you're waiting for the lackeys to unpack and alphabetically arrange your aviation books maybe you could (pretty pretty please with cream, cherries and lots of sprinkles on top) give us a bit of an insight as to what we can expect to be doing on release day whenever that might be :D

Abbeville-Boy 09-30-2010 10:50 AM

:grin:
Quote:

Originally Posted by Oleg Maddox (Post 185856)
You are right. However new office - new problems. Just I have external emal, not working yet network as it should, etc... We are even not unpacking completely, especially me with my couple of thousands aviation books....


And main thing.... from my home PC there was attempt of grab the very early version of BoB (without any interface and other things... ) by special spy program (probably that was done especially for this purpose and it was unknown)
Antivirus company spend two days to solve problem with my home PC.

However this spy program wan't able to grab SoW... due to fact that my home network is too slow at the moment...

In my practice it is the second such case. First was with Forgotten Battles or Pacific (don't remember exactly). there we identified from where was attempt. Now... hackers became more and more smart...



oh that. no that was just philip.ed with some grass coloration change's just to "get things right" don't forget that he is the masterbeta :-P:-P

Oleg Maddox 09-30-2010 11:13 AM

Video
 
Looking for some old files of video (I can't at the moment to make new) I think it is possble to post some cuts tomorrow, but only if you all will understand that it is old middle of summer videos, when not all things were implemented (not all effects, present bugs, etc).
I simply have no ability to make real adv videos currently... we are busy with bugs removing, reworking some effects, etc... Say with polishing of product. That is really great work due to greatest complexity of the code (Just for example: for the aircaft we calculate now from 350 to 500+ single parameters, that need to be calculated simultaniosly almost all the time of flight for each airctaft doesn't matter is it AI or controlled by player. And it is if not speaking about any other parts of code....). So I simply can't ask my guys to compile specially the version just for friday update.... and especially without network....

Ok, I will think and see is it possible or not.
Nothing promised....

major_setback 09-30-2010 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BG-09 (Post 185741)
Two weeks guys! Just two looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong weeks!
After 10 years of waiting, I am ready to wait another 10 years! The Storm Of Waiting will be over soon!
/I have bought a bottle of fine Champaigne for that Glorious moment!/
~Cheers!

I will miss the wait.
Can't we wait another couple of years? Please!! :-(

mr71mb0 09-30-2010 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oleg Maddox (Post 185870)
Looking for some old files of video (I can't at the moment to make new) I think it is possble to post some cuts tomorrow, but only if you all will understand that it is old middle of summer videos, when not all things were implemented (not all effects, present bugs, etc).
I thinmply have not ability to make real adv videos currently... we are busy with bugs removing, reworking some efects, etc... Say with polishing of product. That is really great work due to greatest complexity of the code (say for the aircaft we calculate now from 350 to 500+ single parameters, that need to be calculated simultaniosly almost all the time of flight for each airctaft doesn't matter is it AI or controlled by player). So I simply can't ask my guys to compile specially just for friday update.... and especially without network....

Ok, I will think and see is it possible or not.

Yes please Oleg !!!!!! :-)

furbs 09-30-2010 11:17 AM

Thanks Oleg...im sure everyone would love to see some more videos :)

Flanker35M 09-30-2010 11:25 AM

S!

Anything is better than nothing, but really..the priority should be settling in to the office, get things rolling again and then if time permits, post something here :) Not every developer shares this much and we can be happy to have weekly updates here and now with the release getting close, soon a new benchmark to work with :D

Insuber 09-30-2010 11:26 AM

I humbly suggest a Bf109 video then ...

major_setback 09-30-2010 11:30 AM

Please can you give us the hacker's name and adress.
We will deal with the problem ;-)

pupaxx 09-30-2010 11:30 AM

Hi Oleg,
I appreciate very much your daily contribute in this forum beyond the usual friday date.
Please, can you give us an example of 'bug' you are currently trying to solve in SOW? just to have an idea on what kind of complexity SOW has in his internal routines or features.
Thanks, thumbs up for your work.

albx 09-30-2010 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oleg Maddox (Post 185870)
Looking for some old files of video (I can't at the moment to make new) I think it is possble to post some cuts tomorrow, but only if you all will understand that it is old middle of summer videos, when not all things were implemented (not all effects, present bugs, etc).
I simply have no ability to make real adv videos currently... we are busy with bugs removing, reworking some effects, etc... Say with polishing of product. That is really great work due to greatest complexity of the code (Just for example: for the aircaft we calculate now from 350 to 500+ single parameters, that need to be calculated simultaniosly almost all the time of flight for each airctaft doesn't matter is it AI or controlled by player. And it is if not speaking about any other parts of code....). So I simply can't ask my guys to compile specially the version just for friday update.... and especially without network....

Ok, I will think and see is it possible or not.
Nothing promised....

thank you Oleg, much appreciated...

BG-09 09-30-2010 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oleg Maddox (Post 185850)
Unfortunately, I'm not the guy in the whole company who decided such things...

rgr.

BG-09 09-30-2010 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by major_setback (Post 185881)
Please can you give us the hacker's name and adress.
We will deal with the problem ;-)

Yep. He is already d*ad!

caprera 09-30-2010 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oleg Maddox (Post 185855)
I can't tell myself it untill it will be offically anounced.

Thanks anyway, i really appreciate your presence here answering questions and managing the whining :grin:

Thunderbolt56 09-30-2010 12:29 PM

Thanks immensely for taking the time to fill us in Oleg. Having to deal with stuff like moving offices and thwarting hackers is distracting no doubt and taking the time to come here and fill us in is much appreciated.

1:C set the standard for developers interacting with the general community, and it's good to see that's still the case despite the years of whining, demands and criticism.

Thanks

Oleg Maddox 09-30-2010 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pupaxx (Post 185882)
Hi Oleg,
I appreciate very much your daily contribute in this forum beyond the usual friday date.
Please, can you give us an example of 'bug' you are currently trying to solve in SOW? just to have an idea on what kind of complexity SOW has in his internal routines or features.
Thanks, thumbs up for your work.


At first we eleiminate interface bugs.
Then 3D engine bugs (say not so nice effect, not so nice border of the river, etc)
We check each aircraft for each parameter... for the damage... Say if you missed the wing... then the gun that was there shouldn' continue to shot :)
Something like this.

Also... we did a lot of different objects... We still place some buildings and other ground objects on the ground... manually that to get good looking picture without crossing each other objects....

Such bugs that are visible for the first or second look of user should be eliminated at first.
Other internal bugs, if is, could be even found later... As more complex product - more complex to find the bug.

1C has own test department. And they begun to "damage" our product for this purpose...
So we eliminate what was known ourselves and what discovering test department.

Maybe I tell too much in comparison to anybody else. But I always fair with users.
This is my principle of life.

Talbot 09-30-2010 12:43 PM

Hi Oleg.
I have a small request, as it is with ati crossfire (nvidia SLI), will work? I ask because I have a chance to sell my 2x ati 5870.Please! Sorry for my english!:cool:

Oleg Maddox 09-30-2010 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Talbot (Post 185900)
Hi Oleg.
I have a small request, as it is with ati crossfire (nvidia SLI), will work? I ask because I have a chance to sell my 2x ati 5870.Please! Sorry for my english!:cool:

We tested it just on one PC currently. It works.
Luthier has such PC.

pupaxx 09-30-2010 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oleg Maddox (Post 185897)
At first we eleiminate interface bugs.
Then 3D engine bugs (say not so nice effect, not so nice border of the river, etc)
We check each aircraft for each parameter... for the damage... Say if you missed the wing... then the gun that was there shouldn' continue to shot :)
Something like this.

Also... we did a lot of different objects... We still place some buildings and other ground objects on the ground... manually that to get good looking picture without crossing each other objects....

Such bugs that are visible for the first or second look of user should be eliminated at first.
Other internal bugs, if is, could be even found later... As more complex product - more complex to find the bug.

1C has own test department. And they begun to "damage" our product for this purpose...
So we eliminate what was known ourselves and what discovering test department.

Maybe I tell too much in comparison to anybody else. But I always fair with users.
This is my principle of life.


...thanks a lot for your reply...very interesting..
ok send me a copy of SOW and i'll test it for you....for free naturally;)..
I promise I'll be very confidential and I'll never divulge anything about SOW to anybody....:-P:-P:-P
Ciao, thanks again

Insuber 09-30-2010 12:48 PM

Hi Oleg, can we hope to play with SoW before the end of this year? :)

Foo'bar 09-30-2010 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oleg Maddox (Post 185061)
Publisher will tell it.


Hmmm... that probably means that UBI isn't any more. Why making a secret out of it when after reading the facts from the past all of us have to believe that UBI still would be the publisher?

;)

Talbot 09-30-2010 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oleg Maddox (Post 185901)
We tested it just on one PC currently. It works.
Luthier has such PC.

I am happy, thank you for the great news!

proton45 09-30-2010 01:01 PM

Hi Oleg...

Do you think that we might expect a "SOW game demo" when you are ready?

and

Has work resumed on the Korean war "add-on" or is that team still working with your crew on the game engine?

Oleg Maddox 09-30-2010 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by proton45 (Post 185908)
Hi Oleg...

Do you think that we might expect a "SOW game demo" when you are ready?

and

Has work resumed on the Korean war "add-on" or is that team still working with your crew on the game engine?

It is not probably possible to produce the demo.. Simply no time.
Il-2 demo was born due to fact that we had real additional time. Just remind the hirtory: Ubisoft bought Bluebyte and all dates of release were hanged in air. We had some time to think what to do and decided to make demo, that was unusual. Simply very short complete game. That was very right decision.
Now we have not any additional time like with the case of Il-2.

However, when I had similar question in the past about Forgotten Battles Demo on the conference in England, my answer was very simple: Il-2 (the first) is a demo of Forgotten battles. Now lets think that Il-2 series is demonstration of what we can do... that was in the past. And get the image how we plan develop new series in future step by step using experience of Il-2 development, realistic suggestions of users, etc.
I really think that in future the Sow as a series will be expanding and growing with us and third party.

IceFire 09-30-2010 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foo'bar (Post 185904)
Hmmm... that probably means that UBI isn't any more. Why making a secret out of it when after reading the facts from the past all of us have to believe that UBI still would be the publisher?

;)

Does anyone really still think Ubisoft would be publisher? I still thought so in 2007 ... but given their total lack of involvement in 2010 I don't think so :)

=XIII=Shea 09-30-2010 01:31 PM

I would really like to see 1c publishing it,They are a fantastic company and all the admins are so helpfull on the forum,s.1c FTW:)

mr71mb0 09-30-2010 01:42 PM

Oleg,

thanks for the updates. It's great to have such responses from you.

As we are apparently so close, would it be possible to have some indication of system specs and frame rates? Will our Quad core cpu, 5870's machines explode on lowest detail?

Any chance of comparison screens? Low, mid & High detail?

Many thanks.

Oleg Maddox 09-30-2010 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr71mb0 (Post 185917)
Oleg,

thanks for the updates. It's great to have such responses from you.

As we are apparently so close, would it be possible to have some indication of system specs and frame rates? Will our Quad core cpu, 5870's machines explode on lowest detail?

Any chance of comparison screens? Low, mid & High detail?

Many thanks.

I can tell it only when we will have master candidate. Because we still eleminating and optimizing some part of code.

mr71mb0 09-30-2010 01:47 PM

Fair enough, I understand.

worth a shot as you are being particularly verbose today :-)

Thanks for the reply.

Daniël 09-30-2010 01:55 PM

Would it be possible to show some night pictures to us? I can't remember that we have seen any night pictures in previous updates.

mr71mb0 09-30-2010 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniël (Post 185921)
Would it be possible to show some night pictures to us? I can't remember that we have seen in night pictures previous updates.

apart from this one at the beginning of the thread I can't remember any.

Daniël 09-30-2010 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr71mb0 (Post 185922)
apart from this one at the beginning of the thread I can't remember any.

I meant actually outside of the aircraft. For example the results of German bombings on London. A burning city from the air at night.

Foo'bar 09-30-2010 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IceFire (Post 185913)
Does anyone really still think Ubisoft would be publisher? I still thought so in 2007 ... but given their total lack of involvement in 2010 I don't think so :)

Where did you read they wouldn't be anymore?

Genosse 09-30-2010 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foo'bar (Post 185925)
Where did you read they wouldn't be anymore?

Are you here implying something? :?:

*runsfaraway* :razz:

SlipBall 09-30-2010 02:35 PM

I would be very surprised if 1C were not the publisher:grin:

Blackdog_kt 09-30-2010 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oleg Maddox (Post 185870)
Looking for some old files of video (I can't at the moment to make new) I think it is possble to post some cuts tomorrow, but only if you all will understand that it is old middle of summer videos, when not all things were implemented (not all effects, present bugs, etc).
I simply have no ability to make real adv videos currently... we are busy with bugs removing, reworking some effects, etc... Say with polishing of product. That is really great work due to greatest complexity of the code (Just for example: for the aircaft we calculate now from 350 to 500+ single parameters, that need to be calculated simultaniosly almost all the time of flight for each airctaft doesn't matter is it AI or controlled by player. And it is if not speaking about any other parts of code....). So I simply can't ask my guys to compile specially the version just for friday update.... and especially without network....

Ok, I will think and see is it possible or not.
Nothing promised....

The bold part is better than an actual update for me. With that many parameters for each aircraft, imagine the detail of the FM/DM.

Mr. Maddox is right, i know i want to see something new in the update but if they are tweaking an updated version it's lost coding time to compile the code just to snap a few screenshots.
Don't get me wrong, i'd very much want to see some new screenshots or even a slightly longer video with actual ingame sounds but i understand it might not be possible.
If you think about it, it's better in the long run if they keep fixing bugs instead of having to stop for 5-10 hours to compile, run the software and snap a few pictures. That's 5-10 hours that SoW could be finished earlier :-P

However, there is still a way to have a Friday update without screenshots and without video.
I think a good idea would be if Oleg and/or Luthier gave us some developer commentary detailing certain features of the sim. Or for example, describing how a mission plays out in technical terms, from spawning in the hangar to landing and touch down.

I think this would give people a far broader understanding of what to expect in terms of gameplay. A single post with a play-through narrative of a mission would be awesome, sort of a mini-review. Of course, not all features could be talked about if they are not sure about including them, but it would still be good enough to get an idea of how things in SoW happen. We know the graphics are up to the job, we've been told the sounds will be improved, the single thing we don't know is how the gameplay is going to be. That's why people want to see videos, to see actual gameplay. Since we can't have videos, describing it is just as good and even better sometimes, as in videos you might miss something that you wouldn't miss when reading an article that explicitly points it out.

If you have the time for it, i'd be happy if you think about my suggestion for a small commentary this Friday. Keep up the good work and thank you for keeping us informed ;)

philip.ed 09-30-2010 02:38 PM

Thanks for answering all these questions Oleg. Screw the Friday update, a Q&A session with you is much more fun IMHO (unless the two can be combined).
But your main aim is to work on setting up in your new location, so I think we could easily miss an update this Friday if we were patient enough for a video next week or the week after ;)

Oleg, will there be bailout problems? I ask as the Defiant is modelled in the game, the rear gunners had specific difficulty in bailing out.
Also Oleg, the Defiant gunners wore a special type of suit known as GQ parasuit (GQ as in the brand which had contracts with the AM) and this suit contained the life jacket and the parachute. It was made specially for the gunners so that they could fit through the small opening to the turret, but in many cases the use of the suit wasn't neccessary, as on bailout the turret was a bitch to open (to put it politely).
I can send you references for this suit if you want Oleg.

=XIII=Shea 09-30-2010 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SlipBall (Post 185930)
I would be very surprised if 1C were not the publisher:grin:

exactly my thought;):)

chiefrr73 09-30-2010 02:40 PM

Thank you very much for answering questions and all the information we get, Oleg. We do apreciate it much!

Insuber 09-30-2010 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oleg Maddox (Post 185870)
(...) for the aircaft we calculate now from 350 to 500+ single parameters, that need to be calculated simultaniosly almost all the time of flight for each airctaft doesn't matter is it AI or controlled by player. And it is if not speaking about any other parts of code....)

Dear Oleg, just to understand better, how many parameters did IL2 1946 calculate simultaneously?

Hecke 09-30-2010 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oleg Maddox (Post 185870)
Looking for some old files of video (I can't at the moment to make new) I think it is possble to post some cuts tomorrow, but only if you all will understand that it is old middle of summer videos, when not all things were implemented (not all effects, present bugs, etc)

This would be far better than pictures and endless better than no update.
I know we all apreciate it and will keep in mind that it is old middle of summer videos (2010?).


Does new office also mean that you got new hardware? Directx 11 card that is also able to do anti anti-aliasing and stuff?

Hearing you say that Luthier has a crossfire or Sli system makes me wonder if screenshots postet by him were not low/mid range.

brando 09-30-2010 03:27 PM

It's really good to hear from you Oleg. I know Storm of War will be worth the wait.

cheers and good health to you

brando

caprera 09-30-2010 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SlipBall (Post 185930)
I would be very surprised if 1C were not the publisher:grin:

One is the Developer, another is the Publisher; they are distinguished subjects and only in some cases the two coincides...

IceFire 09-30-2010 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foo'bar (Post 185925)
Where did you read they wouldn't be anymore?

Fair point - nowhere has Ubisoft said that they wouldn't be publishing it. However, since 2006 when they announced the product in the first place, they haven't said a single thing. Furthermore some forum members did try and contact their marketing/PR department a few times (perhaps a year or two ago now) and they had never heard of the product so it's not on their radar either.

I suspect Ubisoft parted ways a long time ago and it just wasn't worth their mentioning in public. Or I suppose they could be sort of a second tier publisher and will redistribute for 1C? Not sure if that happens or if Ubisoft would even do that?

Splitter 09-30-2010 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt (Post 185931)
The bold part is better than an actual update for me. With that many parameters for each aircraft, imagine the detail of the FM/DM.

You know, I much prefer disagreeing with you over world politics than agreeing with you on this kind of post :). But, once again you are exactly right.

I would rather get a verbal description of the game play than new screen shots. Heck, even what Oleg has said today is tantamount to a weekly update in my eyes. Anything more is just icing on the cake.

An older video, if found, would be great but I can see people who did not read the end of this thread criticizing it. I WANT the video, but it's not worth that IMHO.

The parameters being checked by SoW lead me to believe this program will simulate "flight" very well....much like other flight sims that are out there currently. My worry with that is the impact on performance and frame rate, but I am sure they are doing everything possible to optimize the code so hopefully my worries are unfounded.

I can see myself and others having to learn to fly airplanes in the Oleg simulation world all over again which is EXCITING! If this things combines a true flight sim with the combat elements promised...well, it will be heaven.

Splitter

julien673 09-30-2010 04:19 PM

Maybe Battlefront

www.battlefront.com

Great game and really good compagny for the support etc

I'm curious to see that video to, but i will prefer to see your work now :)

Sry again for the english

Friendly_flyer 09-30-2010 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oleg Maddox (Post 185870)
(Just for example: for the aircaft we calculate now from 350 to 500+ single parameters, that need to be calculated simultaniosly almost all the time of flight for each airctaft doesn't matter is it AI or controlled by player.

Per aircrafts!?! Wow!

How dies this compare to the last IL2 version you published yourself (4.08 I believe). How many parameters running simultaniously there?

Ravenous 09-30-2010 06:28 PM

My curiosity as to who the publisher is just overwhelmed me as I have nothing better to right now, so here goes a few that maybe someone here CAN answer

why exactly is it that most people doubt that Ubi will be the publisher?
(I have apparently not been lurking around here long enaugh:)

what possible reason would any publisher have to not announce what games they are going to release in the near future?

and lastly; did I read Oleg right when he said that he was not allowed to say who the publisher is, or did he mean that he will tell us when he knows who will publish?

anywho, I'm greatly appreciative of the Friday updates, and looking forward to check if my track-clip is mounted correctly on my cap just after I've bought 2 months worth of supplies and welded my door shut while this game installs;)

Splitter 09-30-2010 06:40 PM

It sounded to me like he cannot announce the publisher until the final deal is finalized. I know nothing, just going by my interpretation of what he said.

Ubisoft was the previous publisher and I think some people found dubious evidence of their plans to publish SoW.

I'm not one of the old timers here so someone else may chime in to answer your questions more thoroughly.

Splitter

Bobb4 09-30-2010 06:49 PM

In his statment "The 1c team have their own testers" who are obviously putting the game through its pacesm I would be very surprised ifr 1c is not the distributer :)

Ravenous 09-30-2010 06:57 PM

dubious you say...hmmm...well that could explain why so many apparently believe that Ubi is out of the loop, and Oleg not saying anything officially before the deal is final is reasonable I guess..

kinda strange if they opted to wait for this long before securing a publisher isn't it? I would have thought that it would among some of the very first things to check off on the list, but then again I'm clueless when it comes to software development.

and as you said, maybe some of the 'older' guys (based on the date you registered:-P ) have more info/insight on this..

"In his statment "The 1c team have their own testers" who are obviously putting the game through its pacesm I would be very surprised ifr 1c is not the distributer "

if I'm not mistaken here, that is the case in russia atleast. But I can't really think of any games produced by 1C that have actually been published by themselves in europe and the U.S though?

505games springs to mind as they were the publishers of both NecroVision and Men of War in Europe

BG-09 09-30-2010 07:16 PM

Oleg, please look here - flames from the exhaust tubes - Merlin engine at P-51
 
Oleg, please look here - flames from the exhaust tubes - Spitfire - Merlin engine at P-51!
Unbelievable - this is how Spitfire have to look at engine start! Look at this feature from the start of the video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrxy4...eature=related

~Regards!

lbuchele 09-30-2010 07:16 PM

What company are distributing 1C company games in US right now?

Urufu_Shinjiro 09-30-2010 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobb4 (Post 185975)
In his statment "The 1c team have their own testers" who are obviously putting the game through its pacesm I would be very surprised ifr 1c is not the distributer :)

I believe 1C is going to be the publisher in Russia, but in Europe and USA is the question. Also, some folks have spoken with a few people up the chain in Ubisoft (supposedly anyway) and they had no idea what this Storm of War stuff was. Back in like 2006 is the last Ubi said ANYTHING about it and back then it was just Battle of Britain. If Ubi was the publisher, then there would be no need to keep the name of the publisher secret since Ubi announced BoB in 2006, but since Ubi is NOT the publisher, then the new publisher is the secret.

Tree_UK 09-30-2010 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urufu_Shinjiro (Post 185982)
I believe 1C is going to be the publisher in Russia, but in Europe and USA is the question. Also, some folks have spoken with a few people up the chain in Ubisoft (supposedly anyway) and they had no idea what this Storm of War stuff was. Back in like 2006 is the last Ubi said ANYTHING about it and back then it was just Battle of Britain. If Ubi was the publisher, then there would be no need to keep the name of the publisher secret since Ubi announced BoB in 2006, but since Ubi is NOT the publisher, then the new publisher is the secret.

100% Correct, It was me who spoke to Ubisoft's James O'Reilly, he confirmed over a year ago that Ubi were no longer involved - I did post it here many times but i was obviously called a liar and rubbished by the usual suspects.

Hecke 09-30-2010 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tree_UK (Post 185991)
100% Correct, It was me who spoke to Ubisoft's James O'Reilly, he confirmed over a year ago that Ubi were no longer involved - I did post it here many times but i was obviously called a liar and rubbished by the usual suspects.


But if so, there shouldn't be any problem for Oleg to confirm that UBI S**t are no longer involved because I don't think there are people only buying this when UBI publishes it.

winny 09-30-2010 09:39 PM

I reckon there's no way it's Ubi..

Ubisoft were gonna publish IL-2 BoP on consloles, they switched over to Hero's over the Pacific (or whatever it was called, it was awful!) so BoP was published by 505 Games (this turned out to be a huge mistake as they pulled support for it within 6 months and left the xbox version un patched).

I don't know if this is relevant or not, Gajin (Russian console devs responsible for BoP linked with 1C/Maddox Games) are due to release an Apache 'sim' on Consoles next month, the publisher is Activision.

Now some wild speculation.. How about Activision?

ElAurens 09-30-2010 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BG-09 (Post 185980)
Oleg, please look here - flames from the exhaust tubes - Spitfire - Merlin engine at P-51!
Unbelievable - this is how Spitfire have to look at engine start! Look at this feature from the start of the video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrxy4...eature=related

~Regards!

The stack fires in that video do not always happen. Generally it's because the engine has been over primed.

proton45 09-30-2010 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splitter (Post 185971)
It sounded to me like he cannot announce the publisher until the final deal is finalized. I know nothing, just going by my interpretation of what he said.

Ubisoft was the previous publisher and I think some people found dubious evidence of their plans to publish SoW.

I'm not one of the old timers here so someone else may chime in to answer your questions more thoroughly.

Splitter

"Reading between the lines"...I would agree that Oleg has (probably) made a deal with a publisher, and I would guess that the publisher has the legal responsibility for making any (and all) announcements that might effect promotion for the up-coming game.

Oleg is probably forbidden (by agreement) from making any announcement that might concern any aspect of "how the game will be sold". Its one thing for Oleg to post screen shots of the beta or explain rudimentary aspects of their work...and yet another, for him to announce the publisher, release dates, or web site, ect....

major_setback 09-30-2010 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by proton45 (Post 186005)
"Reading between the lines"...I would agree that Oleg has (probably) made a deal with a publisher, and I would guess that the publisher has the legal responsibility for making any (and all) announcements that might effect promotion for the up-coming game.

Oleg is probably forbidden (by agreement) from making any announcement that might concern any aspect of "how the game will be sold". Its one thing for Oleg to post screen shots of the beta or explain rudimentary aspects of their work...and yet another, for him to announce the publisher, release dates, or web site, ect....

Yes. To me it seems quite normal that he can't comment on release...it is the distributors concern, not his. It would be strange if he signed a contract with a company to do marketing and distribution; and then went out and told everyone when and who is releasing it...it is just that that is their job!

Chivas 09-30-2010 10:16 PM

Ubisoft is probably not involved but their lawyers could be. Ubisoft would have to recoup monies they distributed for SOW's development (2004-2007), unless the selling of last few addons until IL-2 1946 covered their cut.

There probably hasn't been a new publisher announcement while the details are ironed out by Ubisoft and the new publisher (IC?) With the immanent release of SOW, it does sound like this might be behind them, an announcement and website should be forthcoming.

This is all speculation !!!!!

SlipBall 09-30-2010 10:21 PM

I prefer the term WIP:grin:

Qpassa 09-30-2010 10:36 PM

The end is near, keep workin'
:)

WTE_Galway 09-30-2010 11:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElAurens (Post 186004)
The stack fires in that video do not always happen. Generally it's because the engine has been over primed.

Yeah stack fires mean the pilot stuffed up.


http://www.spitfirespares.com/Spitfi...h%20flames.jpg

WTE_Galway 10-01-2010 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElAurens (Post 186004)
The stack fires in that video do not always happen. Generally it's because the engine has been over primed.

Yeah stack fires mean the pilot stuffed up.


http://www.spitfirespares.com/Spitfi...h%20flames.jpg



Below is a Spitfire being started correctly. I shot this short clip at Williamtown airshow a few weeks back.

Note at the end of the clip the guy walking off with a fire extinguisher. He was there in case of a stack fire. The jet whistle in the background is a Sabre getting ready to taxi out.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sl9TbvNFsGg

Richie 10-01-2010 12:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BG-09 (Post 185980)
Oleg, please look here - flames from the exhaust tubes - Spitfire - Merlin engine at P-51!
Unbelievable - this is how Spitfire have to look at engine start! Look at this feature from the start of the video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrxy4...eature=related

~Regards!


They probably flame so much because they have carburetors instead of fuel injection witch doesn't seen to flame when started. I really only think it happens
though when they are over primed and you get a lot of fuel vapore in the air.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIc4awnOw_c


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nj77mJlzrc


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_a_TETqe1Cg

swiss 10-01-2010 12:58 AM

or the timing is off at low rpm.

You can see the same effect on old racecars. you'll get flames below as well as over the perfect rpm range.

IceFire 10-01-2010 01:45 AM

I've seen dozens of Spitfires and Mustangs start up over the years... only seen the flames come shooting out a few times. The one time they seem to have trouble getting the engine to start..... then flames... some turning and then the Merlin roared to life.

Richie 10-01-2010 01:49 AM

I agree with IceFire. I think stack fire are pretty rare.

Rall 10-01-2010 04:57 AM

Thanks for posting those vids Richie :grin:

I just LOVE the sound of the Bf 109 :!:

airmalik 10-01-2010 05:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oleg Maddox (Post 185897)
We check each aircraft for each parameter... for the damage... Say if you missed the wing... then the gun that was there shouldn' continue to shot :)
Something like this.

Please leave this bug in. Call it a feature :) or fix it in a patch. I'd love to saw off someone's wing and see the attached guns spraying bullets wildly as the wing tumbles to the ground.

Joking of course but I'd still enjoy this 'bug' :)

Blackdog_kt 10-01-2010 05:39 AM

Would be nice if it was modelled according to the amount of priming.

Since different ambient temperatures demand different amounts of priming (more priming for cold weather starts), it is entirely possible to over-prime if you misjudge the effect of atmospheric temperature and get the flames.

Apart from experience with operating the engine, the other way to prevent unburnt fuel from dripping out the exhaust is to slightly under-prime before turning the engine, then as it's turning prime further until it starts and seems to stabilize in RPM. However, you can't do that in most fighters because they lack the capacity to run their starters for a long time.

Multi-engined aircraft had continuous direct drive starters or hybrid inertia and direct drive starters. The B17 had the latter, the inertia starter would spin up (energize phase) and then coupled to the engine to start turning it (start phase) but if it failed to start instantly the starter kept turning the engine, albeit at a lower RPM, driven by battery power.

However, most batteries of the time couldn't reach a sufficient capacity to run a continuous starter without the battery weight becoming prohibitive for use on fighters. That's why most fighters used pure inertia starters or even cartridge starters (blank shotgun shells that when fired, provided the energy to turn the engine). I think cartridge starters were more common on RAF types.

US and German ones mostly used battery driven inertia starters. Instead of spinning the entire engine the battery is used to spin a metal disk to very high RPM and then that disk is connected to the engine via a clutch mechanism, transferring its rotational motion to the engine's axis (the crankshaft, isn't this what this is called?) and turning the engine for start. Since the metal disk is essentially a free spinning flywheel that doesn't have to work against piston compression, it's easier to spin it without draining the battery. Of course, the amount of energy transferred between each system is the same (minus the friction/heat loss), but for brief periods of turning the engine (assuming it will start within 2-3 attempts with the inertia starter) the drain on battery would probably be less than using a direct drive mechanism.

Some of the German planes even used hand-cranked inertia starters. This is widely visible on videos of aircraft using the DB engines, like 109s and 110s, where the mechanic is manually winding up the starter.

However, in the videos posted by Richie we can see the 109 G-10 starting on its own. I'm not sure if it was like that originally, or the mechanics at EADS took advantage of modern technology and installed a battery capable of powering the inertia starter without the need for hand-cranking.

WTE_Galway 10-01-2010 06:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt (Post 186068)
Would be nice if it was modelled according to the amount of priming.

Since different ambient temperatures demand different amounts of priming (more priming for cold weather starts), it is entirely possible to over-prime if you misjudge the effect of atmospheric temperature and get the flames.

Apart from experience with operating the engine, the other way to prevent unburnt fuel from dripping out the exhaust is to slightly under-prime before turning the engine, then as it's turning prime further until it starts and seems to stabilize in RPM. However, you can't do that in most fighters because they lack the capacity to run their starters for a long time.

Multi-engined aircraft had continuous direct drive starters or hybrid inertia and direct drive starters. The B17 had the latter, the inertia starter would spin up (energize phase) and then coupled to the engine to start turning it (start phase) but if it failed to start instantly the starter kept turning the engine, albeit at a lower RPM, driven by battery power.

However, most batteries of the time couldn't reach a sufficient capacity to run a continuous starter without the battery weight becoming prohibitive for use on fighters. That's why most fighters used pure inertia starters or even cartridge starters (blank shotgun shells that when fired, provided the energy to turn the engine). I think cartridge starters were more common on RAF types.

US and German ones mostly used battery driven inertia starters. Instead of spinning the entire engine the battery is used to spin a metal disk to very high RPM and then that disk is connected to the engine via a clutch mechanism, transferring its rotational motion to the engine's axis (the crankshaft, isn't this what this is called?) and turning the engine for start. Since the metal disk is essentially a free spinning flywheel that doesn't have to work against piston compression, it's easier to spin it without draining the battery. Of course, the amount of energy transferred between each system is the same (minus the friction/heat loss), but for brief periods of turning the engine (assuming it will start within 2-3 attempts with the inertia starter) the drain on battery would probably be less than using a direct drive mechanism.

Some of the German planes even used hand-cranked inertia starters. This is widely visible on videos of aircraft using the DB engines, like 109s and 110s, where the mechanic is manually winding up the starter.

However, in the videos posted by Richie we can see the 109 G-10 starting on its own. I'm not sure if it was like that originally, or the mechanics at EADS took advantage of modern technology and installed a battery capable of powering the inertia starter without the need for hand-cranking.

The other common one was compressed air. See the Fiat at 0:58 here:

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

proton45 10-01-2010 07:18 AM

I'm giddy with excitement...I wonder if Oleg is going to post the old video clips he spoke of?

I'm really curious about what they might show... :)

Kudlius 10-01-2010 07:19 AM

Hm. German tanks? Maybe it means France occupation war.
If it is so, maybe you can show Morane in screenshots?

Bobb4 10-01-2010 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kudlius (Post 186086)
Hm. German tanks? Maybe it means France occupation war.
If it is so, maybe you can show Morane in screenshots?

That would be the in the first expansion I am guessing?
Followed rapidy by the war in the Med/Africa before we are taken to Barbarossa :):):)

Richie 10-01-2010 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rall (Post 186059)
Thanks for posting those vids Richie :grin:

I just LOVE the sound of the Bf 109 :!:


You're welcome Rall. 109's are great!

swiss 10-01-2010 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by airmalik (Post 186064)
Please leave this bug in. Call it a feature :) or fix it in a patch. I'd love to saw off someone's wing and see the attached guns spraying bullets wildly as the wing tumbles to the ground.

Joking of course but I'd still enjoy this 'bug' :)

Just kill the pilot while he's firing - same effect. ;)

HanneG 10-01-2010 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt (Post 186068)
Some of the German planes even used hand-cranked inertia starters. This is widely visible on videos of aircraft using the DB engines, like 109s and 110s, where the mechanic is manually winding up the starter.

However, in the videos posted by Richie we can see the 109 G-10 starting on its own. I'm not sure if it was like that originally, or the mechanics at EADS took advantage of modern technology and installed a battery capable of powering the inertia starter without the need for hand-cranking.

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

German secret tech in a 1970's Russian car, licensed by Fiat, no less. Maybe the resident Italian crank (pun intended) wants to chime in ;)

Insuber 10-01-2010 12:18 PM

In the 60's and 70's several models of western cars had hand-cranked emergency start as well. I remember among others many Citroen and Renault models. It makes a lot of sense in very cold climates such as the Russian one, often far from a mechanic shop.

Richie 10-01-2010 12:25 PM

Very true..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_a_TETqe1Cg


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Nm4z...eature=related

I think thank some restorers use an adapter electric motor though to get that fly wheel going

Blackdog_kt 10-01-2010 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WTE_Galway (Post 186079)
The other common one was compressed air. See the Fiat at 0:58 here:

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

Yes, you're right! Totally forgot about that one. I think it operates on the same principle as the cartridge starter, just with a different source of air.

This place is becoming a self-aware, hive mind intelligence, aviation encyclopedia correcting its own mistakes :grin:

Splitter 10-01-2010 02:22 PM

You forgot the F4-U's shotgun starter :). Anything to save weight, apparently it didn't work well.

Splitter

ElAurens 10-01-2010 04:45 PM

Black powder cartridges were used to start the English Electric and US made Canberra jet bombers as well.

Blackdog_kt 10-01-2010 09:19 PM

Isn't a shotgun starter the same as a cartridge starter?

ElAurens 10-01-2010 09:50 PM

Yes it is.

bsams 05-05-2011 03:47 PM

Korean air war?

MOG_Hammer 07-18-2011 03:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rall (Post 184322)
I have one suggestion. I think that when your sitting in the cockpit you should be able to look down and see the pilots legs, feet, right arm with hand on stick and left arm with hand on throttle.

It's just not right to look down & see nothing. Am I right?


Great update by the way!

German genetics engineering has gone too far. They have managed to render everyone invisible. Then the British reversed engineered the technology so that now everyone in the Battle of britain is invisible. The only thing is that only the pilot himself cannot see himself, since you still see others in their cockpit in order to get a clear shot in their head. So my own belief is that some drug induced effect on the brain can be the real cause, so invisibility was never invented, but faked. And even then, everything said above is not true anyway... :mrgreen:

Kidding aside, I agree with your idea, that would be awesome. That would really put a final cutting edge touch to the already wonderfull sim.

But now that the game is out, no there is no 3D First Person pilot modeled. But it would have been cool.

MOG_Hammer 07-18-2011 03:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zakkandrachoff (Post 184448)
hope oleg are talking about trees! are very complex. so much resources for trees taken from the videocard. or options low quality trees at least.

in 2008 talk about clouds have its own turbulences and dynamic weather system. That stuff take so much resources of the cpu and memory.

I can't think of any other think right now that oleg concerned

Trees have been made with SpeedTree modeler, used also in some Unreal Engine released game. That tree modeling software can produce very realistic trees without impacting too much on your cpu and vid card. Leaves actually are well placed textures. And you know that SpeedTree can even model weather effects on trees such as wind, tornados, tropical storms? Modeled trees are not much more taxing then everything else modeled in the sim. Even the grass on the ground in CoD is moving. Forget about flat grass, now you have quality rendered 3D grass, seeable when on the ground. Your average AAA game made nowaday pretty much use it extensivelly without impacting performance much.

Why everyone talks about CPU and memory when everything that you see is done by your graphics card? CPU in mostly used for calculations of things not related to graphics, such as map positions, AI planes position, alt, heading, bullets shot, AI itself, flight behaviour of the aircraf, particle systems for fire, tracers, bullets, explosions, network online gaming. They are then transfered to the graphics engine to be displayed on your screen. Texture placements, models, colors, lighting, shadows, bloom, and the likes are all managed and generated through your graphics card. One example of a good optimisation on a system is to produce less particle, but having better quality textures to render them. A graphics card is light years beyond CPU for calculation speed performance, nowaday.

Since it is a new game, released as a next-gen computer game, yes you may have to upgrade your setup. If you already happen to run on a dual core processor on a 775 socket and have access to PCIe 2.0 16x, and have enough DDR2 memory (4 GB is a good spot), then only a good new videocard would be needed to run all the eye candy that the sim provides. It is not much of a investment, you could have a GTX570 for around 350$ as I'm writing this.

There is a good reason why they don't make games that could work flawlessly on outdated legacy hardware, the reason being that most games developpers today will try to make use of the new technology, to create more and more realistic sims. There is a point, a limit a system can take. A game of that quality could not run at full settings with outdated hardware. So there is an obvious choice to make. And the only way is up.

SO yes, in conclusion, you will need a good REAL gaming computer. I happen to run the good ole IL2 1946 on a system pretty much up to date and still some time the sim can bring that system on its knees. I am running it on a AMD Phenom II x4 965 3.4 ghz processor, 4 gigs of mem, EVGA GTX570 SuperClock (let me tell you that vid card is ludicrously fast), SB X-Fi Titanium Fat4l1ity Pro, Windows 7 Home Premium Fr. I know not everyone can have a system like that (although it's not that costy, since I build my own computers), but pretty much everyone today have at least half of a decent system. Sometime only a small change can bring a system up to specs for today's gaming. Remember, IL-2 is before everything else a video game, released by a company that also create a lot of games besides flight sims. They have to follow the market if they want to stay in business.

Personnally I would dislike having to buy a game with yesterday's standards, with outdated graphics, when I continually try to keep up with newer hardware to meet the recommended requirements of today's games, including flight sims.


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:55 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 1C Company. All rights reserved.