I wonder with all this IL2 stuff..... What...

[DeeZCamp]

Does HTC really think of it.?..

Do they feel like they are behind on the curve? or At equal?

Not even speaking Graphics wise... But The idea of IL2 becoming or having the ability to host 128 players at a single time.(heard that this may be within its future)

As well as an already establishd land/air(sea?) configuration.

Does HTC see anything that they may implement into Aces??  

As for the graphics part... is the Aces 3D world expanding in this type of direction?as far as Graphic api's ..possibly opengl support?  

Just a few questions to understand where And what thier thoughts on Il2 are.

We have heard from many here. What do you guys think?

[Russian]

I wouldn't mind knowing what Hightech team thinks about it.

[Creamo]

They told me personally because they respect me so much, that's it's the best thing since WWII Fighters.

WWII Fighters had better cockpits, but thats their opinion.

GAd you guys beg for a beating.

[Nash]

If and when IL-2 can go online at the same scale as Aces High, then you could compare the two. Right now it can't be done. No matter how ya slice it IL-2 is a box game, and no comparison is possible.

Is HTC behind the curve in cockpit models and water reflections? Or is IL-2 behind the curve as a feasible MMOG? Get what I mean?

[ 08-27-2001: Message edited by: Nash ]

[Dinger]

Conventional wisdom for y'all: the IL2 cockpits are in a world of their own.  No other sim spends quite as many polygons on the cockpits; and no online sim can afford to.  So don't expect to see IL2-quality cockpits in ANY online sim.

[Staga]

Yes I do. Its nothing but matter of time.

[GRUNHERZ]

Il2 and AH are much different games.

Yes they are both flight-sims covering WW2, but in all honesty thats where the similarity ends.

The only time to even begin comparing them would be if Il2 came up with a 24 hour dedicated arena, with historic maps of the east front and with the many options for fighting AH gives.

Until then there is no way to compare the two.

Il2 wins on graphics and cockpit.

AH wins on scale and the dedicated 24 hoyr areana. BTW I find the AH graphics excellent in every way, and this is from a guy who came from Janes WWII Fighters.

[Possi]

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
[QB]Il2 and AH are much different games. QB]

 

You are correct,the better Game is IL-2!

[Staga]

Possi both games are top in their own area. I like Il-2 but I also find your spamming disturbing.

[Fester']

IL2 is awsome.

Aces High is awsome.

both in different ways.

[Hristo]

If nothing else, Il-2 really raised the dust  .

I am beginning to like it more and more.

[Westy MOL]

Exactly Hristo.  In much the same way EAW did a few years ago. It takes time for online games to cath up to box games because it takes time for the average system specs to rise altogether.

 The "catch-22" is if we had most of what IL2 does (graphicaly and damage model wise) the min/recommended system specs for AH would sky rocket and so would the host connection requirements.
 
 Westy

[Skuzzy]

It really is a balancing act.  HTC could double the poly count of the planes and make them as realistic as anyone could, but the cost of this would be higher system requirements.
There really is no easy way to just dynamically allocate polys of a 3D model base on the system speed.  It could be done, but it might take 10 minutes for a game to initialize, or longer, in order to reconstruct the models, realign textures and so on.

When you throw the network code into the frame loop of a 3D game, you have to give up quite a bit of processing power that could be used in the graphics engine.  The more visible players/objects allowed in the game, the more network code has to do.  

Balancing all the things a multi-player 3D flight sim has to do is more of an art than a science, if you want the game/sim to run on as many different type of systems as possible.

Comparing AH and IL2 is going to happen.  I just thought I would lend a technical voice here  .

[miko2d]

I can honestly say that outside aircraft detail of WB 2.x and ugly but functional cockpits of AH are quite enough for me.

 I would rather see any extra performance applied to more planes/vehicles visible, clouds, smoke, condensation trails, and of course more terrain objects and detail (including trees, roads, etc).

 As for programmer's time, I would rather have it dedicated to strat then bells and whistles.

 Il2 is a brand new game. It would be strange if it was not better looking then the game with 3+ year-old graphics engine.
 There was a time when EAW blew everything else off but that did not cause WB players cancel subscribtions.
 If Il2 is so good, many of us will buy a box and continue playing AH.

 miko

[DeeZCamp]

Skuzzy, Minko... have you guys tried Il2? yet???

It runs extremly smooth using opengl, like in Quake 3.

It also supports T&L so alot of the calculations for all the bells and whistles are done by your graphics card.
(assumine that now a Geforce ddr is a standard)


The Qulaity of net connections that ive seen so far are amazing, and the LOD for everything else is insane without a FPS hit.

For the LOD and/or the way the imagery is displayed, nothing comes close. I have heard rumor of 128 player cability.

Anyways.. all the calculations are done on the  players PC then just transmitted like in aces. So should be same connection when larger scale.