With all the updating of Graphics...

[jbroey3]

Can we start to get houses and ground effects as seen here?

It would definately lead to a Ground war that would be truely remarkable.

I dream of having the Depth of aces high multiplayer action with the possibility of an arena that can has this level of detail.

Just imagine a ground vehicle without a giant neon placard above it saying.. "shoot me.. shoot me.. im right here"

[Wilbus]

OUCH, what porgram is the picture made in, doubt it's from a game...

Would be nice with better grpahics for the ground war, that isn't seen from the air. People might get too big FPS hits

[Voss]

I prefer to set my line with one of these.

[Fariz]

Considering, that FPS is planned for Aces High, probably number of group objects shall be much higher that now. I doubt we will see it prior to summer anyway.

[Wilbus]

Uhmm, looking at the textures of the Tank it probarly is from a game, but which one?

[snafu]

It's from our old friend Maddox games (IL2 fame). Still in development but looks bloody amazing.  Go here for more screenies..... http://games.tiscali.cz/clanek/screen_detail.asp?id=3073&img=imgj.jpg&ord=35

I can hear my ageing Athlon groaning even as we speak.....

TTFN
snafu

[ccvi]

That won't run in high res (1600x1200) at good fps any time soon - at least not on the next generation of graphics cards. The one after that, maybe.

Supporting just high end hardware keeps too many players away.

Also, I don't think download size would allow something like that.

FPS die even with geforce4 cards when 30 aircraft are sitting on the runway.

[jbroey3]

You guys, this is from a game yes, one that is in development, but that is not even my point.

Il2 currently has graphics for a ground war that looks very simular minus the grass part to the screenshot posted above.


Anyway my point is... have you guys seen another game called BattleField 1942? its really where I would like to see aces high.

Now dont get me wrong, im obviously not talking about the Flight model or the modeling of physics within the game as a whole, but the Ability to have a TRUE Air/Land/Sea War all in one arena is really awesome AND to have really nice graphics in the process.

My computer is a 1.4 Athlon thunderbird (NOT athlon XP)/512ddr ram/geforce3 (original geforce3) and I consistantly get 75fps(refresh rate) at 1024x768.

Considering that im getting 75fps, I have PLENTY of room for graphics improvements to knock it down to a STILL playable 30fps.

For all the guys here who are running Anything Less than a 1 GHZ machine, I just checked on http://www.pricewatch.com and found 1ghz and up CPU/Motherboard combos being priced at 70$$$.  

[Sixpence]

It's not just the processor. If they increase the graphics it's going to out date alot of current customers' computers. It doesn't take much of a computer to run this game, opening it up to more customers. If you make the game to where only top of the line video cards and computers can run it, not too may will play it.

[Wilbus]

For all the guys here who are running Anything Less than a 1 GHZ machine, I just checked on http://www.pricewatch.com and found 1ghz and up CPU/Motherboard combos being priced at 70$$$.

yeah, it doesn't cost very much, but most of us who have less then 1 GHz CPU also have old mainboards and RAM. updating the Mainboard (to a fairly good one that alowes for updates) would cost 150-200 US dollars in Sweden, same if I order from Pricewatch due to shipment and Swedish Customs. The RAm would cost anouther 50-120 to get 256-512 mb. Then the CPU, 1Ghz is just silly to buy now, it should atleast be XP 1800 or so which costs around 100 US. So could count on, a system update that can be further updated, with RAM, Mainboard and CPU, for about 300 US dollars.

I will buy new stuff next year, just don't have the money now

I am running a 700Mhz and often go down as low as to 10fps with 20+ people in a fight

[ccvi]

Originally posted by jbroey3
My computer is a 1.4 Athlon thunderbird (NOT athlon XP)/512ddr ram/geforce3 (original geforce3) and I consistantly get 75fps(refresh rate) at 1024x768.

Considering that im getting 75fps, I have PLENTY of room for graphics improvements to knock it down to a STILL playable 30fps.

30 fps isn't really playable. neither is 1024x768. Also, max fps doesn't matter, what matters is fps in those nasty situations when you need it, e.g. bunch of bomber formations ahead - with 30fps in an empty area you're going to drop to <10, which noone sane would consider playable.

I've played at 1024x768/30fps. With my new box i'm getting 70+fps at 1600x1200. Suddenly calibrating the bombsight is easy as i noticed in yesterdays CAP (the two times i tried before i completely sucked, now it just worked perfectly). Bouncing at landing has reduced to almost zero. The big ship guns I could hardly move before (sometimes 5 fps or so) now move smoothly. I still have to work on my gunnery though
But even now when on the runway with 30 other aircraft fps drop to 10 or 20 (when all ac are at the spawnpoint).

There's no room for graphical improvements, unless using reduced resolution, which is IMHO not an option for a flight sim.

[Wilbus]

30 fps isn't really playable. neither is 1024x768. Also, max fps doesn't matter, what matters is fps in those nasty situations when you need it, e.g. bunch of bomber formations ahead - with 30fps in an empty area you're going to drop to <10, which noone sane would consider playable.

1024 is definatly playable IMO, not lower though. And as long as FPS is abouve 26 there is no problem really. I think Jbroey said he had 30 at the lowest...

[jbroey3]

That is correct Wilbuz.

CCiv I really do not understand how you can say that 1024x768 is not playable... uhmm..

Everything that I play is at 1024x768.. simply because it is the sweet spot between Good graphic detail (fine resolution) and Smooth framerates. Aces High/IL2/Battlefield /X-plane etc....

Sure I can Crank up the resolution to 1600x1200 and get about 65-70 constant but why?... I dont want to have to read and look at the gages when the numbers are 3 pixels wide.


In a situation with over 32 guys, 10 more.. people blowing @h#$% up.. and clouds.. I get around 60fps.

Hitechs models.. are not seemingly Polycount intensive because of the way that flat single 2D textures are laid out in order to form specific parts of the aircraft where polycount would add up quickly.

30fps.. if you can attain it.. in anysituation is .. still 30fps.. And still faster than 24 for the TV.

You would see smooth motion at that rate.

[715]

30 fps is certainly playable, even for a flight sim.  Around 20 fps it could start affecting dynamic performance.  However, for the ground war even 10 fps would be playable- 70 ton Panzers don't move at 400 mph and they certainly don't do rapid break turns.  Terrain and object detail could certainly be programmed different for flight and driving so that grounders could have the detail for immersion and hiding and flyers could have the frame rate for rapid targeting.  (I do forsee a whine there- a grounder might try to hide in a bush or behind a building that an air attacker doesn't see on his FE.)

HTC has already said both that they will be going to more ground stuff (FPS) as well as supporting DX8 graphics cards.  They just choose to go more slowly in that direction than some would like.  However, they, perhaps correctly, prefer to go slow and maintain stability and profitablity.

[GScholz]

HTC could make the gfx scalable. Like different levels of texture res, pollycount and lightsources.

Would make the game able to run on older systems, yet be visually better for high-end systems.