Another terrific WWI update from Gennadich.

[FlyXwire]

LOL......nope......but I did get a "Mr. Machine" for Christmas!

Really......a toy wind-up robot originally made by IDEAL in 1961 (I was six years old then).



One thing I've always regretted was taking apart my Mr. Machine on a Chritsmas Day long ago, and then never being able to put it back together again......and with no one at home able to reassemble it either, my bright new toy went back into its box....in pieces....and eventually into a closet, where it stayed until given away to Goodwill charities years later.

I have searched for years when antique shopping with my wife.....for a Mr. Machine, and then when I heard from a friend that the toy had been re-issued....it was time to make childhood amends.

Yep, got a Mr. Machine for Christmas this year guys, and although it's not something like a new computer, or some high-tech piece of hardware....it's one gift I'll always cherish.

(btw, I'm not taking it apart this time either)

Merry Christmas Guys!!!

[rabu]

Well, I'm not expert, but one thing I noticed is those guys at GT and some of the others over there like Gathering, seem to have hit on some really efficient game engine design. If you have ever played Mafia, Wings of War, or some others, you notice the tremendous amount of animation and 3d detail, and it still runs extremly smoothly on less robust systems.

[Xeidos2]

From what I've been told by others, the reason the world in Wings of War ran so smoothly and had rich detail was that it was kept really small, smaller than what you would want if you were trying to do a historical re-creation.

Personally I felt that KOE went overboard in the other direction. The programmer who was in charge of the terrain was a geography nut and loved the idea of making the entire western front.

Somewhere in between the two examples is probably a workable balance.

Originally Posted by BLOWHARD

I'd still like to know how well these (seemingly HUGE) models will fly online or even offline in lage groups. Rendering 4-5 of these things at once with the terrain and effects makes me think nothing but the biggest baddest computers will run it. Of course, for this detail, it would be worth it

FlyX, I didn't mean put us, the WW1 builders, out of biz. I meant EVERY flight sim. If you can get this much 3D detail to run smoothly in numbers needed for typical WW1 combat on a moderately fast computer, they've got a BIG leg up on the rest of us

IL2/FB/AEP/PF is very efficient graphically. The series has gotten more efficient as time has gone on, and on max settings is incredible looking, including fog, mist, atmposheric hazing, rippling water, and even "waves" that move up and back on the shore. Even the buildings and models are massively detailed.

They cheat with trees though. They look so-so from up high, but are 2D - they can't be seen from the side (has caused many an accident too lol). And large city maps, like Berlin, can be a frame rate killer, but overall, it's quite fast.

Those renders are a step above many PF models, but not all. I'm guessing they are just counting on the advance of computing power to handle the slight increase in detail.

But as it stands now, we often get 32 players or more on a dedicated server, where every plane is using the full (player) FM, and it doesn't choke. (PF, that is)

[Polovski]

Well the 3 year old CFS3 engine can handle many 1000's of polys (some planes in Over Flanders Fields are 15-20K polys(+VC even more)) and they work well. So I am sure the modified IL2 engine can handle lots too. I am sure they'll make sure it runs OK on all the various PC specs out there witht he usual variable detail settings.

[David_Layton]

Red Baron 3D had the entire front, but only a section of it would actually be in the game.

I would think that to do a true geography you would need a resource, like a set of Michelin maps from 1914.

As far as game maps and terraing, the 'gold standard' from those I have played is the IL-2 Russian maps.

[BarkhornXX]

Go to the update page and see the Spad VII !!!



Barkhorn.

The S.7 does look nice. Great textures.

The DH9 looks good too - even without textures - nice clean mesh.

[Polovski]

Yep great textures are what make these models look so good. Poly wise they are good but not higher than most modern sims, but if you have great textures you can make even simple models look great. Unreal 2007 uses such tecniques, and looks stunning. Basically render a high res model with great texture to a texture, then use that on the more basic lower poly object.

Great stuff anyway.

[FlyXwire]

Well, I've got some thoughts about this subject too........

Here's a link to a thread and a conversation I had with TK over on the Third Wire forums some time ago on this very subject:

http://bbs.thirdwire.com/phpBB/viewt...t=1562&start=0

Of course we always think we want more from a consumer's standpoint (not always a good thing), but I feel a reasonable balance needs to be struck between the end results and the time/effort it takes to achieve these end results.

So much can be immersively rendered with textures, and without the need for high-poly modeling. From a gaming perspective (and also from the perspective of an aircraft skinner), I would favor more effects achieved through texturing rather than always from more and more modeling complexity. To a degree the discussion may orient around whether you're making aircraft models for a sim, or making a simulation that needs a fair number of aircraft models to be a viable product offering. Again, it's all about balancing resources.

As far as 3D wonders, we're about to see one of the most beautifully modeled aircraft to debut in a simulation here shortly, in Robby's Bristol F.2b for CFS3/FS9/ and OFF(?), and this will probably blow my above theory totally out of the water (or the sky that is).

Still, when you've got a "production line" of aircraft models waiting to be built, that reasonable balance between complexity, time, and results has to be struck (in my mind), and so much can be achieved from a simulation standpoint thru texturing techniques alone.