Author Topic: Damage GRAPHICS....they are a bit dull now arent they? (Read 630 times)

Obear1971 · « **Reply #15 on:** August 11, 2002, 06:14:51 AM »

TOAD, is that true???

Well then we ALL know what to do know

If we all want kick bellybutton AH graphics we all need to invest in a GeeForce 4 graphics card

E mail HT telling him so

Then when 95% of the community all have gee force 4 cards, the can then get to work on a new engine or whatever

So what are you all standing here looking at the screen for

GO BUY A GEEFORCE 4 !!!!!!! NOW

We have the power to start the next big upgrade to AH and we could all get it started TOMMOROW

Targo · « **Reply #16 on:** August 11, 2002, 09:25:55 AM »

HTC uses multigen tools to create models for AcesHigh, I'm not sure if they use another tools form multigen to develop graphics-engine,flightmodel etc, but if you compare the screens on multigen-site with AcesHigh you could conclude that they are using thesame graphics engine.

take a look
multigen

btw: they have already implemented the most important thing which is particle sysytems, with particles you can create explosions etc.
Also the texturinging and poly count is improved on the latest models just compare texturing/polycount of c47 with SBD

they are on the right track, we just have to wait a bit

hazed- · « **Reply #17 on:** August 11, 2002, 10:03:52 AM »

would adding an explosion or two to bomb hits need a graphics engine overhaul?
would adding the explosionsfrom others bombs need a re write?

surely not, consider the water splash for bombs that we already have.
couldnt we do a 'dirt' one and while we are at it double the size of the splash/dirt thrown up?

couldnt we use the same programme that adds the explosion to a critically hit aircraft , change its apearance slightly and add it to the bomb crater programme?
instead of just adding craters you get explosion then crater?

I think the aircraft models are fine.I think the terrain is fine for now.The buildings are a little dull but are acceptable.Ships are good but possibly need a little more 'life' to them such as guns moving and pointing where the player controlling them is shooting.

if it was up to me id add as much as i could to what we have rather than wait a year for a major overhaul which quite frankly could destroy the feel of AH that we know and are so used to and is a much bigger risk.
If they add very small changes and they dont improve peoples overall enjoyment then they can be taken out again.
Ive never understood this notion that anything added has to be forced to work.
HTC has a very unusual situation in AH.I and others are prepared to help them test new stuff AND continue to pay a subscription! Most games have to use expensive beta testing.Here they can throw in a few new features and wait to see if they are well received.

Come on HTC, just a few things while we wait for this overhaul?

my suggestions:

1. exploding bombs (we have particles, lets have a particle mud/dust 'puff')
2. ALL hits/craters with bombs displayed to all players
3. damage to cockpit glass and or instruments
4. new engine damage sound file
5. exhaust puff on startup
6. dust thrown up by vehicles (over certain speed?) and wheels on touchdown etc
7. FLAMES IN the cockpit

8. better gun muzzle flash on ALL models not just new ones
9. how about a bail out option in burning tanks? maybe a bailing crew ?

~~hazed~~

hitech · « **Reply #18 on:** August 11, 2002, 10:13:50 AM »

You meen like new smoke trails last version.

Modas · « **Reply #19 on:** August 11, 2002, 10:34:53 AM »

Lets give HTC a chance to fix the CTD/lockup bugs first before we start asking for eye candy and a new game engines.

Yes, graphics are outdated, but compare to AW???? The graphics are fantastic compared to AW.

baby steps gentlemen, baby steps. I'll take improvements as I get them, cuz I KNOW HTC is working a hell of a lot more hours at their job than I am at mine.

Toad · « **Reply #20 on:** August 11, 2002, 12:36:15 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by hazed-
Come on HTC, just a few things while we wait for this overhaul? ~~hazed~~

Which would you put first, this stuff or the Mission Theater?

Just curious.

Hristo · « **Reply #21 on:** August 11, 2002, 01:21:36 PM »

Hit sprites need reworking, they are downright gamey.

Scott E · « **Reply #22 on:** August 11, 2002, 01:25:41 PM »

what i miss most of all is seeing other players in formation and somtimes enemy planes when you sneak up on them drop their drop tanks.

was always so cool to watch em tumble back but now when other players drop em they just disapear.

same thing for buffs in formation, dont see other players bombs

brendo · « **Reply #23 on:** August 11, 2002, 06:43:58 PM »

Well, my opinion is, that I am an AH player DESPITE the old graphics engine.

Believe me when I say that I had to put the out of date graphics out of my head, and focus on the excellent product behind the visuals.

I expect that in 2002, my simulations should have graphical effects of the nature of IL2 and WBIII.

The fact that AH is so graphics engine..... retro (ie advanced for 1998) and I am still a customer is a very big complement to the HTC crew.

At the end of the day AH is a very well rounded and polished feature rich simulation.

Having said all that, I still would like better grahics and special effects

If you think you need a GF4 for decent graphics, check out WBIII on a $50 junk GF2. You may be pleasantly suprised

BenDover · « **Reply #24 on:** August 11, 2002, 07:19:51 PM »

are MA settings differnet to h2h, i always see crators and bombs/dts in h2h

Vulcan · « **Reply #25 on:** August 11, 2002, 09:48:51 PM »

MORE POLYGONS FOR THE SHEEP!

vorticon · « **Reply #26 on:** August 11, 2002, 09:52:38 PM »

actually it sounds like a good idea but it should just be one or 2 new graphics every version...for the bomb graphics anyway. not some huge giagantic leap that will leave older systems wanting. or hitech could set up a high graphics version for newer computers and what we have now for older computers.

Toad · « **Reply #27 on:** August 11, 2002, 11:32:55 PM »

I hereby publicly apologize to HT. I will absolutely keep my mouth shut about anything else we discussed.

I am sorry Sir!

hazed- · « **Reply #28 on:** August 12, 2002, 09:10:39 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by hitech
You meen like new smoke trails last version.

er HT i said on the particle smoke if you'll re read it

this isnt a demand for intstantanious update HT.dont go on the defensive please, its merely a few things i think would add to the AH experience which to me dont sound like too much of a problem programming wise.Obviously i dont know what it would take but if you were to tell me the present system is the best you can do until a major re write then id stop pestering you.
The problem we have as customers on this BB is whatever we say or ask for that isnt in the game we are immediately called whiners or time wasters or impatient or ungrateful for what we already have.
I think most of the people who have seen quite a lot of thestuff we discuss written before when you managed/wrote War Birds years back forget that some of us were'nt there and we dont really know what it takes to add stuff to this engine.
Im asking as a customer for a few additions and if thats ungratefull im sure i dont understand why.I like AH and id like to see it get better and better.Im impatient because I look forward to seeing the new stuff.whats so wrong about that?

seems to me people are too fast to jump down each others throuts.Ok so my dumb list would waste valuable programming time... so shoot me why dont you all

Toad · « **Reply #29 on:** August 12, 2002, 10:20:09 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by hazed-
Obviously i dont know what it would take but if you were to tell me the present system is the best you can do until a major re write then id stop pestering you.

Now don't go all defensive or anything.....

But I'm thinking very, very few of us know what it takes to program a game like this. Additionally, I think very few of us have any idea of how much work it takes (and what other changes would become necessary) to make what we would consider a "minor" change. I'm thinking HT knows the answers to these quite well.

Quote

Originally posted by hazed-
whatever we say or ask for that isnt in the game we are immediately called whiners or time wasters or impatient or ungrateful for what we already have.

I think "presentation" is the issue here. There are lots of folks that can ask for things or point out potential problems or flaws without being called whiners, time wasters, impatient or ungrateful.

Then there are others on this board that don't have that ability.

And it is an ability. It takes a little planning, forethought, common sense and respect for others. It's a tough thing to do for those who habitually "shoot from the lip".

*******

Now, to inject a little realism into this... I think some of the stuff you mention would be nice. However, I'm mindful of the fact that we have a team of (basically) 3 researchers/programmers, 2 artists and 2 customer support people that comprise the entire operation.

We know they are deep into work on the Mission Theater and we all know there are only so many hours in a day......

So, my question above remains: Given that some of this stuff would be nice, do you prefer that they "down tools" on the Mission Theater and work on these items? Or should they follow the resource allocation plan that has obviously been thought about and implemented already and work these items in if and when they can?

There's a nice, mature question with no overtones.. I'm just curious.