WWII Online

[Mickey1992]

"Once the free trial has ended, players can extend their subscription using a major credit card or other form of approved payment. Each monthly online subscription is $9.99 USD. Accounts will not be billed for online play until after the 30 day trial has ended."
 http://www.playnet.com/bv/wwiiol/intelreport.jsp

[Vulcan]

Well, I hope it does succeed. One way or another I keep seeing the Everquest and other rpg numbers and wishing there was an equally big type of sim out there.

I'll definitely try simply cos I'd like the troop combat.

BTW... Does Gryf = Gryf from WB?

If so... snob-squeak!

-vlkn-

[Dangerous Game]

I hear SUPERFLY and HT are going to WWII, Seems they have been working so hard on AH they decided it was time to take a break.


"Did I forget the and get a giggle part?"  

[Torgo]

 

Originally posted by Degas:
 In the FM, you are not going to have a 6 view.  There is going to be a roughly 45 degree "blind spot" at your six in all AC.  This is modelled this way to better reflect real life (i.e., no one can swivel their head 180 degrees backward in real life).
(edited 05-15-2001).]

This strikes me as idiotic to an extreme.

I just took my chair, aligned it directly facing away from a thermostat on the far wall behind me, kept it aligned straight ahead, and attempted to look behind me by twisting my neck ONLY (no shoulder movement to simulate being strapped in).

I could EASILY see the thermostat in my peripheral vision, even though it was 180 directly behind my straight-ahead view. Not as good of a view as my straight ahead view, but enough to see an AC on my dead six in firing range (of course, this would be cockpit design permitting in a real plane.

[Downtown]

I am 37 and it was pure luck.

------------------
"Looks Mean as Hell! Clare Lee Chenault.

When?
"Downtown" Lincoln Brown.

[Degas]

Torgo:

I never said I agree with it.  I, too, think that this feature (or lack thereof) sux  

I don't know, sometimes it seems to me that the only way to truly model peripheral vision in a flight sim is with an external mode view.  But, in order for external mode to work, you would have to also have access to a targeting reticle outside the cockpit (similar to a third-person shooter).  With this system, the only reason to ever enter the cockpit would be to check your gauges (unless information such as altitude and compass heading were available in some form in the interface in external view mode).  And pure flight-sim enthusiasts are never gonna go for that.

So, peripheral vision simply can't be modelled in a sim where you fly from the cockpit.

Humans are infinitely adaptable, however.  So, just like in AH, I'm sure that wwIIol pilots will learn to work with the views.

[Torgo]

 

Originally posted by Degas:
Torgo:
I never said I agree with it.  I, too, think that this feature (or lack thereof) sux  

I've also heard that you cannot see any instruments in your forward view and you can't see anything other than your instruments when you look at them? That seems even worse.

I'm not a beta tester of this but I think I know what's going on.

They're going for the people that wrongly assume ANYTHING that's harder is automatically MORE realistic.

After WWIIOL comes out, there are gonna be endless flamewars here, on Argo's WB site, from WWIIOL partisans babbling about how much more "realistic" WWIIOL is an an air sim. And I have little doubt all this view stuff will be a main pillar of that.

The problem is...even ACES HIGH and Warbirds NOW have the view system HARDER and MORE restrictive than real life....by necessity, because none of us own a fully enclosed screen cockpit like a multimillion dollar miltary fighter simulator would have, or a full VR setup.

You cannot simulate peripheral vision using 15-17" flat screen monitors; to see something well off to one side that I can see enough to know it's there in real life with peripheral vision, or see pretty clearly with a 1/20th of a second dart of my eyes, in a flight sim I have to take 1/4th of a second to move my thumb on a view hat to slew a view over and take a look.


Incidentally, I tried the same experiment in my car; strapped in a seatbelt, raised my seat back high; I could easily see my exact direct 6 peripherally with pure neck and head movement, shoulders flat against the seat; with even as little as 1/2 to 1 inch of shoulder movement, I could see REALLY clearly around my headrest to my dead 6.

And the cockpit thing is just silly; you can look at an instrument and still see out of the front with peripheral vision to some degree. The current AH/WB system isn't QUITE restrictive enough, but the proposed WWIIOL system (as I understand it) goes way too far; if the WWIIOL system were reality there would be a GUARANTEED auto accident EVERY time someone in a car looked at their speedometer, changed the radio station or turned on the AC, etc.  

[Dinger]

In all fairness, the reviewer probably doesn't know what he's talking about in this case.  If you assume from their screenshots that WW2OL uses a 90-degree FOV, then looking straight left will give you a perfectly clear sight of what's directly behind you.  If they allow you to move your head beyond 90 degrees, you'll get an even better view of your six.  If they allow you to look directly behind you so you get the 90 degree arc with the tail in the middle, then that's both silly and unnecessary.  Think about tracking a moving object behind you.  Do you just swivel your head from 90 to 180 to 270 degrees?  No! you watch to about 135 then snap your head to the right to about 315 and pick up the action.  Since (Imo) the screen should represent the data presented to your head (and not the eyes), the movements of the POV should match those of the head.  Can you look directly behind you? Hell yes! Can you swivel your head back there? No.

[Vila]

What makes you think Spits and 109's couldn't go in endless circles?



------------------
Vila <Flying Pigs>
Oink! Oink! To War!

[Vila]

Torgo,

Now, sit in a chair with a seat back up behind you and and a head rest...and oh yeah... a BIG HONKIN PLANE.  a direct 6 view isnt that realistic IMO... especially some of the "magic" views available in AH.

In any case, the view in WWIIOL does extend to directly behind you... the views are 45-back views that, by defintion, extend to directly behind you using the 90 deg FOV.  There just happens to be seat and airplane back there.

On the instruments.  You CAN see most of the instruments in the forward view, and I find them perfectly usable.  However, they are harder to read than in AH or WB.  Also, depending on the lay-out of the cockpit, not ALL the instruments are visible in the front view.  That all seems fine to me... some cokpits were designed better than others.  And if I DO need a clear view of all the instruments (which I never do in a fight), then there is a view which provides a closup on the instruments.  

That's certainly different than a lot of current sims, but then again, just because you're USED to a paradigm, doesn't make that paradigm correct.

In any case, if you don't like WWIIOL, don't play it... it's that simple  



------------------
Vila <Flying Pigs>
Oink! Oink! To War!

[Vulcan]

Vila you plan to stay in WWII after it goes beta?

IE, if you're planning on staying its likely I'll be poking my head in for abit (not leaving AH though ... need ma tiffie-drug).

[easymo]

 While watching the movie trailer for Dark Blue World. I was amused to see a rearview mirror shattered When the cockpit was slammed with ammo.  Clearly the makers did no research. Everyone knows that no one in that time period could figure out how to look behind them.

 If I was going to model one in a sim. I would have to give it its own view, due to the limited space on a computer screen. I would probably make it the back view, that makes sense. Mirrors are adjustable. So I would set it up so you could move it around. When I was done you would have..... well, you would have the AH view system. Gee I guess its already been done.

[Vulcan]

Oops looks like I had a little rethink.

The link to get the boxed version of WW2 online means I pay $40 PLUS $35.00 for shipping. Hmmm at current exchange rates that equals NZ$178  

God knows when the local shops will stock it (if ever). Oh well, maybe it will pop up in the news groups or a warez site somewhere. I have a high-speed connection to the net, so maybe some kind soul will post it.

If anyones still reading this thread take note AH does support us non-US guys  

[Skybax]

Yes Darling, those are 78th FG Mustangs in your sig pic.

BTW, one of my favorite female vocalists is from Iceland.

[Westy MOL]

 Well I wanted to reply about the WW2O "six" view issue bad enough I broke my own self imposed vow of silence with these boards. ;-)

 Wel. Reality is most USAAF pilots did not strapped themselves iinto those fighter planes as if they were in a Saturn V rocket to the moon. Thier heads were not nailed to that head rest nor were thier shoulders pinned back and make them inflexible. Every Jug, F4U and F6F pilot I've ever talked to (at open cockpit days at a couple of the local museums here) said they had no problem looking back on thier six even with that fuselage behind them - except for a VERY narrow dead spot of a FEW degrees DIRECTLY behind them. They were strapped into thier seats for sure, not nearly as tight as some of you proponants of 'no six view' even try to make it sound.  I've sat in themmyself. Strapped in as they would have been (while they were talking about thier experiences and showing me things) and while these 'razor back' aircraft did not have the fantastic view a bubble top Jug or 51 may offer there certainly was no problem moving the upper torso, neck and eyes to see the rear stabilizers and horizintal tail. Maybe the 109 being as cramped as they are had problems. I doubt as bad as it's made out by some however.

  So 45 deg either way is the best CRS can do? That's a whole 90 degrees of vision removed for <cough> "gameplay"? Eliminated due to some false perception of what a WWII pilot could/should be able to see from years of web board debates? That and perhaps in applicable experience in light acrobatic aircraft in civilian life? What a crock.

 Same with the forward view having no readable guages. There's no excuse for that baloney at all.

 These are two real bogus "features".  Along with no 3D cockpit?  What a shame imo.

 As for the FM? too soon to really debate. If it's done and being released as is? Then there is no debate. I think we should discuss it when WW2O version 1.04 comes out in about eight months to a year?

 I do believe MO said what is in place is final and no future tweaking will take place.

 It could be fun to tank though or lug a rifle around!

   - Westy

[This message has been edited by Westy MOL (edited 05-18-2001).]