Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: miko2d on March 14, 2001, 04:59:00 PM
-
WBIII open beta is available for download.
ftp://lists.ient.com/pub/WarBirds/WBIII
Let's see...
miko
-
Looks about 70 megs total.
-
got it
-
nm, got it
[This message has been edited by Raubvogel (edited 03-14-2001).]
-
I am not saying that I expect WBIII to be a total disaster, but I am sure a lot more people will suddenly appreciate how good job HTC people have been doing so far.
miko
-
Thought you said WW2OL beta is available.
Doh!
A little bit dissapointed now... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Start. Hit fly. Loading terrain... See a cockpit for a second. Crash...
Gateway P3/500 with 32 MB ATI Rage 128GL
-
Is this going to work if you don't have a current Warbirds account? I thought it wasn't.
AKDejaVu
-
I downloaded and its running fine except in game all the textures are messed up...?
-
Bugs and tweaks. Gotta work with em.
Initial impression? AH isn't threatened. Sure it's beta but the basic graphics are on par, if as good.
Here's someone elses' example (the WB MAC guys will have a woody being able to have 3D finally)
http://agw.dogfighter.com/agw//Forum3/HTML/018934.html (http://agw.dogfighter.com/agw//Forum3/HTML/018934.html)
-Westy
[This message has been edited by Westy (edited 03-14-2001).]
-
I flew around for a while offline. Seems like the same product with prettier graphics heh. Still no 3d cockpits. Tracers are a little better. Plane skins seem nice. Terrain looks ok....a bit plastic looking, but ok. Certainly not going to pay for a WB account just to fly an open beta online.
-
I think I unzipped 'em incorrectly...
Where do you place the .sit file?
-
guys its a BETA open BETA! Most of the features are not enabled its just the very first release, don't compare it to AH just yet thanks..
Pup out
-
.sit file is for MACs.
-Westy
-
Pup,
We know its a beta. We also know that we will talk about anything here in the Aces High O'Club that we, the Aces High players, see fit to talk about.
Thanks for stopping by.
AKDejaVu
-
rgr AKD, I do fly AH too ty very much, so get on with your little life and try and start something with someone else no bite here....anyhow, what I was saying this is just the very first initial beta, this isn't even the version that IeN has, lots of the graphics are just place holders for the main release, they have left out a lot of stuff(their words) because this first release is just for "load testing" so give it a while..
Pup out
[This message has been edited by Pup (edited 03-14-2001).]
-
<YAWN>
You can take an old ugly hooker off the street, bath her and give her a new dress.
Shes STILL going to be an old ugly hooker under the fresh wrapper. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
The HTC team did a fine job in developing WB... they surpassed it long ago with Aces High.
[This message has been edited by jihad (edited 03-14-2001).]
-
I see the "i don't know WTF i'm talking about" crowd is still here.
Jihad especially.
BTW, "experts", WBIII DOES have a few 3D 'pits in this Beta release.
HTC has done a fine job with AH, but so has the Warbirds Team with WBIII. And that's a fact, Jack.
Cabby
------------------
=44th FS "VAMPIRES"=
"The Jungle Air Force"
Welcome To The Jungle!!!"
-
Only the diehard WB fans are going to enjoy this beta. Anyone who has never played WB will dump it so fast...
We'll just have to see how they work with it.
------------------
Lt. Col. Aaron "txace-" Giles of the 457th BG
"Fait Accompli"
In arena: semperfi
-
Originally posted by cabby:
I see the "i don't know WTF i'm talking about" crowd is still here.
Jihad especially.
BTW, "experts", WBIII DOES have a few 3D 'pits in this Beta release.
HTC has done a fine job with AH, but so has the Warbirds Team with WBIII. And that's a fact, Jack.
Cabby
WTF are you talking about Cabby? I flew WB for years, I wasted the time to download WB3 today and tried it offline. <deleted the waste of time shortly after>
The facts are regardless of the new game engine/eye candy its still the same old game you've played for YEARS!
When/if the team at iEN comes up with something better than AH I'll give them their props, until then the analogy is right on.
-
I wonder what they've based the roll inertia data on.
The SE-2 Islander twin engined underpowered 1961 plane used by my skydiving club has less roll inertia than the Bf-109E.
Runs quite slowly on my lowly 707 mhz machine.
A work in progress, but apart from eye candy i cannot see any major changes in roll inertia. Seems sluggish to me.
One nice feature is German text in German aircraft and no damned ammo counters.
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://stsanta.tripod.com/stSanta.jpg)
"Live to pull, pull to live"
-
Quote:
"The facts are regardless of the new game engine/eye candy its still the same old game you've played for YEARS!"
Funny, that's what i think about AH. Thanks for proving my point.
Cabby
-
Jihad, AH guys, you are all wrong. HS put it in words right here....
Quote HS:
3. Please do not compare WBIII to AH, sorry, no way to say this easy, but they really can't be compared. WBIII systems are far beyond what many of you see or understand.
Here's the link... http://agw.dogfighter.com/agw//Forum3/HTML/019014.html (http://agw.dogfighter.com/agw//Forum3/HTML/019014.html)
Not trying to stir trouble, but I could see what would happen if HT or pyro got on the BBS and said something like this about WB's. Remember not too long ago, when WBIII screenshots could not be released because they were sooo advanced, the competiton might see them, they had to be kept secret?!
Geez!
-
I see the "i don't know WTF i'm talking about" crowd is still here
You do have to get a new tagline/greeting Crabby. That one is so pass' these days.
So what brings you across town to our neighborhood? Thought you put away the cape, mask and the "WB righteous net cop" outine?
As for WB III? It never should have seen the light of "open" beat in the shape it's in. It's the least ready and worset polished of any released beta I've ever tested. FA 2 included. There are reasons it must have. None of which are "load testing" (well, maybe to test the how much the community will accept thier roadkill "load"), "more player input" and it sure as all heck isn't "let's be nice to the WB's community and bring them in early."
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) Bulls-eye Hblair!
-Westy
[This message has been edited by Westy (edited 03-15-2001).]
-
Originally posted by hblair:
Jihad, AH guys, you are all wrong. HS put it in words right here....
Quote HS:
3. Please do not compare WBIII to AH, sorry, no way to say this easy, but they really can't be compared. WBIII systems are far beyond what many of you see or understand.
Not trying to stir trouble, but I could see what would happen if HT or pyro got on the BBS and said something like this about WB's.[/B]
I am sure they ment that the graphics detail in their new engine was supposed to be adjustable, so a direct comparison of visual quality and frame rate would be pointless unless done on the same machine. HS does not have much tact, but I do not think he intentionally tried to offend his customers.
miko
-
Quote HS:
3. Please do not compare WBIII to AH, sorry, no way to say this easy, but they really can't be compared. WBIII systems are far beyond what many of you see or understand.
ROFLMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
------------------
May the Force be with you.
-
Originally posted by cabby:
Quote:
"The facts are regardless of the new game engine/eye candy its still the same old game you've played for YEARS!"
Funny, that's what i think about AH. Thanks for proving my point.
Cabby
hehe cabby, how ya been dude? Yes I realy hate the way AH modeled those same old clouds, same old mission editor, same old terrain editor, same old 8 player head to head, same old clouds, same old stars, same old 3d cockpit and improved head movement abilities, same old fuel management system with fuel tanks and diferent internal tanks, same old choices of diferent amunition load outs, same old tanks and ground vehicles, same old manable guns on the ships, same old PT boats, same old squad nose art, same old GREAT customer service, same old 2 week free trial, same old low cost, same old friendly collisions, same old squad, mission and wingman hilighting, same old automatic roger wilco integration ,same old playable frame rates at 1024x768 and same old huge 11 meg download, but wait WB3 is 70megs already?
I'm kind of tired of your same old squeak'n, now please go away....
udie
-
Udie, you forgot same old clouds. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
ok DAMNIT FOR THE 3RD TIME!!!!
same old clouds (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Udie
-
From what I can tell, having played it a bit more:
Graphics are modern, but need work. Why do the planes look "squished"? OTOH, if this issue is resolved WB3 will be top of the heap for graphics (at least until the next game comes out).
Despiste the high sys requirements, the game runs excellent on my P3 500--actually it runs almost as fast as AH at the same resolution (only about 5 FPS less). Overall, their graphics engine is well programmed, and not as much of a system hog as I had originally thought. The game might actually run WELL on a min-req system.
Flight model is about the same as previous WB's. On the plus side the planes are easy to handle....the downside is inertia is WAY too strong. This will hopefully be altered. (One plus side of the strong inertia is it might possibly reduce warps, as the game has more time to react to plane direction changes. But it is definately not realistic.)
Gunnery model also seems the same, except no longer reliant on tracers. I was perplexed that there is NO effect whatsoever when bullets strike water. Indeed, water in general needs major work--it looks like water from QUAKE. Still, with some work it could look great.
The ground is great. Buildings look beautiful, and the land actually looks like land, even when up close--IMO a first for a flightsim. Now if WB3 only adds real towns and houses, and changes it from an arena into a WORLD, they might have something wonderful happening.
Sky: Kind of purple-ish. The cluds look great and are clearly better than any others I've seen. I don't particularily like their choice of sky color though (purple).
Cockpit: Dunno, as I cannot get them to work right. Head movement is restricted to what a real person can do (no rotating head syndrome), but seems to move too slow. From inside the plane wings still have that "sqished" look on all visrange settings (55, 75, 90).
As stated before, the interface is clearly in an early stage. It is very poor for now, but that will surely change. Clearly it's designed with MACs in mind.
Overall impression is it's nowhere near complete. I don't understand why they would release it in this condition--it doesn't do their vision of it justice. For people who have yet to download it, I advise waiting at least a few weeks.
J_A_B
-
There must have been pressure from somewhere to release it in it's current state. I realize it's beta, but like others I haven't seen a beta this rough looking in a long time. They couldn't even finish the propellors??
Anyways, I'm happy for WB players who have been waiting a long time for this. I just hope they're not in for a big letdown.
bowser
-
WB3 is real promising methinks.....one thing for sure though: I was getting sort of burned out in AH and after some time in WB3 Ive found a new freashness and respect for what HTC has done. Not a slam on WB3 at all, just has given me some new perpsective.
I hope HT can find a way to give us squadron skins and a painter for H2H and offline work.
Yeager
-
Udie:
Captured any "Flags" lately???
Thought so.
Cabby
-
After some fiddling around, I'm starting to suspect that the gunnery model *has* changed.
Dispertion seems larger and now, at last, every round is modelled...but also, the rounds seems to drop off more when pulling G's.
Daff
------------------
CO, 56th Fighter Group
www.56thfightergroup.org (http://www.56thfightergroup.org)
This is Yardstick, follow me"
-
Originally posted by cabby:
Udie:
Captured any "Flags" lately???
Thought so.
Cabby
Not sure what you mean, there aren't any flags in AH. I have been in on several land, air and sea base attacks and captures.
udie
-
Tis just Cabby talking out his blow hole Udie. You know that.
-Westy
-
I want to address the "flag" debate.
It seems to me that warfare, when broken down into its most basic form, is capture the flag.
When you play chess, your goal is to capture the opponents king, or flag if you will.
When you bash in your neighboring cavemans head and steal his woman, you have captured the flag.
When you kill an opponent in a plane you have captured the flag.
AH as well as WB will always have a flag to capture. Thats warfare.
Cabby is one of these guys that is always talking about how much strategy is lacking in WBs as well as AH and I can see his point. But honestly, what are you going to do?
You are going to beat your opponent and thereby capture the flag.
End of debate.
Strategy, on the other hand, deserves its own thread.
Yeager
-
Originally posted by J_A_B:
...Graphics are modern, but need work. Why do the planes look "squished"? OTOH, if this issue is resolved WB3 will be top of the heap for graphics (at least until the next game comes out)...
The "squishing" seems very pronounced to me too. It like when movie credits/intros were squished horizontally to fit on tv screens, before they had letterbox. I really only notice it in external view, but it makes the planes look very short and fat, epecially the f6f.
Interestingly, AH is just the opposite. It expands the hoizontal image (or squishes the vertical) but I never noticed it untill I actually measured on-screen plane dimentions.