Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: fscott on March 17, 2001, 01:44:00 PM
-
I just flew over water for the first time today, and I couldn't beleive my eyes. I don't know how they did it, but it's a first for flight sims as far as I know. There are actual waves in the ocean, and the effect is almost mesmerizing I almost forgot about the bogey on my 6.
Say what you want, but WB3 is taking this to an all new level of graphic wonderment. The clouds, the water, the terrain, the planes. And it's still a freaking beta. The aerial combat is better than AH, becasue it is so much mroe fluid and the planes behave in a believable manner. I'm still sticking with AH, but if WB3 changes that crappy FM, I'm outta here!
fscott
-
You haven't played it online yet... I'd hold off an saying how fluid the air combat is until you see it online.
While I think the water effect is very cool, I know for a fact that above 1000ft you don't notice much down on earth unless you stare at it for a good minute or two. At 10,000ft, you don't notice any movement except from cars.
You haven't noticed anything peculiar with the planes? Take a good long look at the 109E's wings... then at the fuselage.
Is that an OompaLoompa's plane? It's really stubby and the wings are out of proportion.
I'm not biased, I think it's a nice terrain engine. They just need to fix the plane's scaling.
-SW
-
CC fscott,
The environment is fully active, not semi-static.
I suppose one could argue that the environment should not be CPU intensive but new machines pretty much appear to be able to handle it well.
Y
-
My machine runs WBIII BETA just fine. I don't see the "oompah-whatever-the-hell-u-mean" effect, either. If in "external-view", and you zoom-in REAL CLOSE, the plane gets a little out-of-shape visually. From inside-the-cockpit the wings get "stubbier" when you use the 75 deg. and 55 deg. POV. This hardly matters(if i recall, AH's wings do the same with the shorter POV)at all.
I don't see any "blurred" external plane-art. In fact the plane-art(except for the cockpits) is stunning. Better than ANY i've seen anywhere. I still prefer the 2D cockpits to ANY 3D cockpit i've yet seen.
I don't see any need for FSAA at the higher resolutions, it's almost crystal-clear with no jaggies. The Terrain and the Clouds are the best i've seen in ANY flight-sim. The Ocean is OK, it's just a placeholder for now. However, this Ocean is still something to see, and it contains Submarines.
The muzzle-flashes are awesome. The tracers are not. Custom gunsights will be necessary. The Prop is a placeholder, so i don't know how this will look. Ordinance art is excellent. Buildings are excellent. Vegetation is just placeholders. Figures are animated.
The Flight Model is terrific, as good or better than any available. Very smooth. Not sure about stall-spin characteristics. Need more testing. I've mostly just been checking out eye-candy.
The program installed and ran easily the first time. I've had no crashes, no video artifacts, and have had no "stutters", or any other problems. All in all, not too shabby for a BETA. The potential of WBIII looks phenomenal. Time will tell.
Of course, i read the "readme", i know how to configure gaming hardware and software for best results, and i build my own PC's. After reading some of the other "reviews" in this Forum, i got the impression that many of the "reviewers" did not possess the same level of knowledge, had obsolete hardware, or some other problem.
The only other sim i have seen that approaches WBIII is IL-2, and IL-2 has MUCH better cockpits. IL-2 could possibly EXCEED WBIII in many ways, except for two points: Eastern Front only, and of course, the multiplayer aspect.
Chances are, though, that if your machine runs WBIII poorly, IL-2 will probably choke on your machine as well. Don't know for sure, haven't seen or played an IL-2 BETA.
Specs:
AMD 1.1 gig CPU/MSI KT133A Pro-2A System Board/
Hercules Geforce 32MB DDR w/Nvidia 6.50 drivers/256MB PC133 CAS 2 HSDRAM/Twin ATA100 IBM 7200 RPM HDD's/SB Live PCI Soundcard/21" Sony Trinitron monitor/Windows 98.
Flame away,
Cabby
Oh yeah, almost forgot. I like Aces High too.
------------------
=44th FS "VAMPIRES"=
"The Jungle Air Force"
Welcome To The Jungle!!!"
[This message has been edited by cabby (edited 03-17-2001).]
-
God forbid someone critique your game Cabby... Do you send mail bombs to game sites that review WB and give it a review you don't like?
-SW
-
Originally posted by fscott:
I just flew over water for the first time today, and I couldn't beleive my eyes. I don't know how they did it, but it's a first for flight sims as far as I know. There are actual waves in the ocean, and the effect is almost mesmerizing I almost forgot about the bogey on my 6.
Looks like the water from Quake 2 (at least that's where I've seen that effect before)... it is two texture maps moving at about 45 degrees to each other, one on top partially transparent to allow the one below to show through.
I know it's a work in progress, but I'd make the "ripples" in the texture smaller and have them move slower. If they could find a way to have mini whitecaps appear it would be a even better. All in all though, the water is a very nice effect.
-
The water looks like EQ "majic water". Ain't what real water looks like when you fly over it for sure.
-
hmmmmm, I think now I have an answer to a question I posed awhile back. Eye candy costs!!! I just flew over WBIII water, it sure looks great,but I could tell my system had high demands (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
If all the parts of the sky and the water are not in place, when they do get in place will a 1.5G cpu have to be used and a GeForce 3 not be needed? I don't know. I would say WBIII is going to push the puter technology. This looks nice now and when they get it all in place I hope I will be able to see it with a 866 and GeForce 2. Will keep eyes peeled for next update. Anyone know when the next one is????
-
Ive noticed that flying low over the water without any terrain as reference, I appear to be flying nowhere, Like Im motionless. This is one aspect of the water that will need further review.
Also, I could not see any waves laping up at the shoreline, just a clean merge between water and land. How do I see the waves?
Cc cabby, externaly the planes are exceptional beyon doubt but I clearly prefer the AH cockpits and view systems and Im so damned used to the FMs here.....
Im definately Upgrade bound before any online work can happen with WB3, unfortunately I need some other life type things before I wash any money into this PC
Y
[This message has been edited by Yeager (edited 03-17-2001).]
-
Quote:
"you send mail bombs to game sites that review WB and give it a review you don't like?"
Of course not. I've never seen a "game site" worthy of my interest ever give ANY version of Warbirds a "bad review". On the contrary, Warbirds wins awards year-after-year. I am fairly certain HT, and the many other people who helped create WB's, are proud of that fact.
WBIII is a beta and betas don't get "reviews". Only "previews".
Just want some folks who read this BBS to know that there is more than one opinion of what WBIII beta looks like.
Cabby
-
I commented only on the features that were implemented and were not placeholders. Those parts are not beta. Therefore I gave a review of it.
-SW
-
"Oh yeah, almost forgot. I like Aces High too."
<cough<roadkill,roadkill,blowjob,roadkill<cough>
-Westy
-
Cabby, the only reason Warpbirds get awards is because there's nothing to compare it to. Now that AH is winning awards, we won't need your opinions anymore.
I like compitition, but having the opposing teams cheerleaders come to our side and tells us they're gonna whoop us and their team's the best, is just low.
------------------
Semper Fi, Do or Die! Kill, kill, kill!!!
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
[This message has been edited by texace (edited 03-17-2001).]
-
I've seen that water effect before...
In QUAKE.
To me, it just doesn't look right for a flightsim. Especially since the bullets don't seem to make any noticable splashes.
J_A_B
-
can someone please tell me where I can Download WB3 beta? someone posted and ftp link but there are like 6 files there I have no clue which one to download.
-
Never mind. Got it and have the white screen of death.
Why they are making a game that only supports near-high-end graphic cards is beyond my comprehension. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
-
Seems to me that iEN is like Rolls-Royce and Lambroghini. They only make cars that the rich can afford. What I don't understand is that 60% of their customer base is below min. requirements and can't afford to upgrade (like myself.)
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/confused.gif)
------------------
Semper Fi, Do or Die! Kill, kill, kill!!!
;):D
-
Although my sytsem is at minumum specs, and in the CPU department below min specs, WB3 have postioned themselves nicely for the next few years with this engine.
The bummer for me is twofold:
1) AH graphics have become largely obsolete
2) AH has many design features that are, IMO as a customer, better than WB3.
I can honetly say that the best sim is currently between the two and unavailable to me as a consumer.
HTC will need to do a serious evaluation of WB3. What becomes of that evaluation is anyones guess.
If I had the system it would be a definate must to have access to both at this time.
But I dont.
Yeager
[This message has been edited by Yeager (edited 03-18-2001).]
-
TAC, I think this is typical of a problem in folders/files arrangement. Make sure that when unzipping the files you set the original preferences of the zip archive and that should to it. Running it OK here at 1024*768 32 bits, 24 bits z-buffer on a Celeron 400@500 with GeForce 2 MX, 256 MB.
-
Seawulfe:
Good comments.
There are some bugs that have been identified with the 109 as you pointed out. Also the gunsight is not centered on that plane and you can't get snapshot views. All these issues will be fixed in the next update.
One thing though, on the "stubby" wings out of proportion, what field of view (FOV) were you looking at. I know there are 3 fields of view 55, 75 and 90. And that each one provides a different effect, the 55 one does make the wings look stubby and I'm wondering if its in all the views? I will have to look.
Field of view is something new to WBs and I'm not used to it just yet.
On the water thing, I'm not happy with it yet, and we have been told the water effect is not complete, nor are the clouds, tracers and a number of other things. So we will wait and see how it gets tuned up.
I'm also learning that they have recoded the Flight Model system, and that needs to be checked out. As you all know once you mess in that area, all hell can break loose. So far I've seen subtle differences in Spin control, and I think those will be fixed soon once we get into online beta.
For texace:
As for the high end issue, that is always an issue for on-line flight sims, they will always push the envelope of graphics and computer power, isn't that the way we want it?
Ram1
-
"on the "stubby" wings out of proportion, what field of view (FOV) were you looking at"
The propblem is the 2D cockpit screen overlay from WB 2.77 combined with the new 3D-ish type of view. The cockpit frame work doesn't change where as the external perspective does. They both need to change or it look "wierd," as it does now.
-Westy
-
The water effect is a placeholder, this has been stated by the iEN team.
Yes i agree without having shadows the water does look disorientating and lack of depth, in time this will be retified.
The current water effect we are experiencing in Warbirds III beta is in no way the same as Quake or Everquest, these two games both use a game engine that are at least 2 years old.
-
RAM1,
I'm not quite sure which FOV I was looking through, because I did it at work for only a few minutes before I left to go home. My home system has a V5 5500, and after seeing the lucky charms rainbow effects I didn't feel it was worth 6+ hours to d/l on my ancient 56K. :-)
I will go back to work and check it out Monday, but I believe it was the view forward and left, forward and right, back and left, and back and right.
-SW
-
"I appear to be flying nowhere, Like Im motionless. "
You mean, just like flying over real water? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Honestly, though, the water does need to be worked on, which according to HS will happen.
Daff
------------------
CO, 56th Fighter Group
www.56thfightergroup.org (http://www.56thfightergroup.org)
This is Yardstick, follow me"
-
Originally posted by AKSeaWulfe:
You haven't noticed anything peculiar with the planes? Take a good long look at the 109E's wings... then at the fuselage.
Is that an OompaLoompa's plane? It's really stubby and the wings are out of proportion.
http://agw.dogfighter.com/agw//Forum3/HTML/019381.html (http://agw.dogfighter.com/agw//Forum3/HTML/019381.html)
Guess I wasn't the only one after-all.
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKSeaWulfe:
They just need to fix the plane's scaling.
http://lists.ient.com/ubb/Forum35/HTML/000381.html (http://lists.ient.com/ubb/Forum35/HTML/000381.html)
Wasn't wrong about that one either.
-SW
-
OK, thanks for catching those Seawulfe. I'm sure they will get corrected in indeed they are wrong. That what beta's are for.
Ram1
-
Some are just not seeing the big picture when it comes to the WB3 engine & water.
These things you speak of are just FX that can be changed with a few key strokes, they are minor.
What is inportant is how the water & terrian is modeled.
VERY impressive! Read up on it, great stuff.