Author Topic: Pacific Fighters...pfft..... (Read 2699 times)

Waffle · « **Reply #30 on:** October 31, 2004, 01:44:42 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Furball

And waffle, your screenshots at the top are biased. you are using a player made skin vs. stock.

Even though it is a player made skin (mine, in fact) it shows that the graphic capabilites are much better than PF. Look at the new stock 109s or 190s wings. It's the texture map - we have 2-3 1024x1024 bmps to work with -THe il2/pf series only has one. We win in resolution.

Quote

thebest1 waffle make sure the graphix are turned up all the way befor you say things!

Settings were at perfect.

Quote

Originally by Pongo like the posters point.
Because AH2 uses much larger textures then any IL2 decendent. Things like the wings look way way better on updated planes.
And what is it that we see when we play? THe wings the cockpit framing...the tail feathers...

But the atmoshphere in IL2 just eats up AH2. THe mist in the valleys. the sun the clouds. In external view it looks way way better then AH2. But looking at your wing in a new skin like the camo jug 25s...AH2 looks fantastic.

And the ground terrain in AH2 while not as pretty from a post card stand point, is way way better from a tank game play stand point. There is no comparison at all.

at least someone's reading the post.
As far as the fog / mist, I've played with it offline in AH - the fog distance, ect....and it looks pretty good -only problem with having that in the MA is the visibility...can see the whines coming.

one more negative issue is the sound in PF....granted - the defaults in AH aren't that better, but the ah system can handle it if they ever get around to "ear candy" Trust me - been playing with the ah sounds alot.

One negative is the reverb over everything in PF...like they tried to put a EAX filter on the output side of the audio coming from the program. I'm not sure if this can be disabled in set up.

Karnak · « **Reply #31 on:** October 31, 2004, 02:14:23 PM »

I agree with a lot of what you said Waffle.

The biggest killer for me in the IL-2 series is the complete lack of readable intrumentation. In AH I can use my guages to read my aircraft's situation. To do so from the guages in the IL-2 series requires me to look down using an awkward key press and then slowly try to understand the smudges that are the guages.

Couple that with a pilot that seems to be wearing a back brace and a cervical collar and thus is completely unable to see out of his fighter and you game braking failures for me.

Langford · « **Reply #32 on:** October 31, 2004, 02:23:55 PM »

huh lol no dice?so u are jokin eh?,seriously i will buy it from u for 20 bucks,they dont have it where i live yet

United · « **Reply #33 on:** October 31, 2004, 03:28:05 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Waffle BAS
Even though it is a player made skin (mine, in fact) it shows that the graphic capabilites are much better than PF. Look at the new stock 109s or 190s wings. It's the texture map - we have 2-3 1024x1024 bmps to work with -THe il2/pf series only has one. We win in resolution.

Im not so sure about this Waffle. I believe I read somewhere from one of the HTC members that the B-24 skin is a single 1024x1024 bitmap. I would have never guessed it if I wasn't told, though.

aSTAR · « **Reply #34 on:** October 31, 2004, 03:40:13 PM »

LANG, you said u would buy for $20.00 and I pay for shipping:confused:

Karnak · « **Reply #35 on:** October 31, 2004, 04:38:56 PM »

IIRC, IL-2 skins are 512x512.

Dennis · « **Reply #36 on:** October 31, 2004, 04:59:22 PM »

IL-2 skins were 512 by 512, yes. I think a couple of people might still play the original game.

But IL2-FB, AEP, and PF all 1024 x 1024.
You can make'em 512 x 512 if you want, tho.

Splash1

thebest1 · « **Reply #37 on:** October 31, 2004, 05:21:07 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by TrueKill
i say IL-2s graphics are way better then AH the trees look real the sun looks real the water looks real clouds look real. IL-2 trys to make the whole game look real but AH just trys to make the planes look real.

this

vs this

too bad the IL2 pic is the B239 and the AH pic if the F4F

6GunUSMC · « **Reply #38 on:** October 31, 2004, 05:26:03 PM »

I prefer PF... IF they would release a server client capable of handling more than 128 clients I would drop AH like a hot potato.

Wotan · « **Reply #39 on:** October 31, 2004, 05:55:12 PM »

The original Il2 skins were 512 x 512 but since FB they are 1024 x 1024.

The difference is that with FB/AEP/PF the entire aircraft is crammed on a single 1024 x 1024 bmp. The AH skins are multiple 1024 x 1024 bmp's (those that have been upgraded). Who knows if they will stay this way. Pyro has indicated that the texture maps have changed to eliminate all the mirroring so we don't know what that will mean.

Look at the D9 wing bmp in AH and compare that top the wing section of the FB/AEP D9. The AH wing is 4 x times bigger. So a 1 pixel rivet or line in Il2 will look fat and blocky unless a good skinner gets a hold of it..

I honestly don't know what you all are talking about in that you can't read the IL2/FB/AEP/PF cockpit gauges. I can read them fine. On some AC some gauges get blocked by the stick, but most of you probably don't play full real anyway and have hud messages and the speed bar on to give you all the info you need. If that’s not enough then there's a number of 'device link' utilities that can give you even more info then what the AH gauges show.

If you don't know how to read your gauges or if you don't know the cockpit layout there's a number of webpage’s that have the cockpits labeled for you.

Some of you probably have all the chatter set to native language as well. If you can't speak German, Russ, Japanese etc then all you need to do is copy your sounds from the US folder and paste them into the German, Russ, Jap etc folder. There is also an accented German voice pack, British etc that you can dl. You can turn off all those words by adding these to your conf.ini.

NoSubTitles=1
NoChatter=1
NoHudLog=1

You can turn off lens flare as well.

NoLensFlare=1

I don’t have any ‘words’ on my screen when I play except maybe speed bar depending on the server I am on.

Box games are never as good as they will be out of the box. Once all the 3rd party stuff gets done and all the tweaks and adjustments find there way into the game it gets a lot better.

I don’t want to come off like an Oleg fan boi and will agree that IL2/FB/AEP/PF series has issues, some of them quite big and close to a ‘game killer’. Like aircraft visibility; a plane 500m out can virtually disappear against the terrain. The muzzle 'explosions' prior to PF were stupid as well. Also some of the 'dirty' canopy class is a bit much.

YMMV

4510 · « **Reply #40 on:** October 31, 2004, 06:26:42 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by gatt
Oleg is paying a lot of attention to cockpits and number of aircraft. Il-2/FB/AEP/PF has now some 200+ aircraft. No wonder the flight model quality has definitely gone.

UBI strategy doesnt help as well, they rushed PF, they couldnt put everything on 2 CD's, the game miss some important maps and skins and has the usual amount of bugs. Now they have to fix everything with a mega patch/add-on. As usual. Then they wont be able to support PF becouse work on BoB is beginning. As usual, same story with FB and AEP.

Business is business [/QUOTE

Possibly the difference is the business model...?

UBI makes its money selling the software.... the online is a side business....

AH makes its money ONLINE... thus does a better job of supporting that.

Wotan · « **Reply #41 on:** October 31, 2004, 06:34:08 PM »

Once they started adding US planes you could see what was going to happen. Oleg said as much early on and again in one of those 'why aren't .50cals uber' threads.

Amiwhiners are far worse then anything you ever heard form the so-called 'lwhiners'.

Planes dont stall because the Amiwhiners would though a fit the first time they spiraled in flying their 'war winning' hero planes like the Hog.

Since PF and AEP are mostly attractive to the Ami market and as indicated in a thread over at UBI less likely to be pirated in NA you can't blame them for wanting to maximize profits.

I am not saying that is whats going on but figured I would add to the conspiracy claims...

Mak333 · « **Reply #42 on:** October 31, 2004, 06:42:17 PM »

I agree with Furby on this one. Waffle BAS, your screenshots are biased. In AH2 you have your texture size maxed out. In the IL2 screenshot, its a stock skin. Other skins in that game have high texture sizes.

Sorry to say but IL2 graphics does beat the pants off AH2. But it should... All of the coding and scripting is alot more complex, they are working with Ubisoft etc etc. They have alot more people on the dev team aswell. Are they both fun? Yeah. But I would vote IL2FB/PF to be alot more realistic and have alot more eye candy than AH2 does.

Waffle · « **Reply #43 on:** October 31, 2004, 06:56:03 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mak333
I agree with Furby on this one. Waffle BAS, your screenshots are biased. In AH2 you have your texture size maxed out. In the IL2 screenshot, its a stock skin. Other skins in that game have high texture sizes.

Uhh - the screenshots are taken at both software's "perfect" setting.....therefore ah2 does beat PF and Il2 on those settings for aircraft texture.

Theres no bias there, there is fact. Fact is Ah2 uses 2-3 times more bitmap space for aircraft texture than PF does.

Langford · « **Reply #44 on:** October 31, 2004, 07:25:04 PM »

ok man astar how much is it all togther 27.95?