Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: stealth on June 27, 2013, 04:50:00 AM
-
Alright well first I have a question which game is better Aces High or War Thunder? Now I'm gonna try not to get emotional because I flipping love Aces High. Anyway the only reason I'm bringing this up is because I got some 17 year old kid thinking he knows ACM, the history of flight, history of aerial warfare, and all of the above. Just because he has been playing War Thunder for the past 2 weeks. I recommended Aces High well because it's a good game, since he liked aerial combat. Then he tells me "That game doesn't even look half as good as War Thunder, plus it doesn't have as many planes". Which didn't sit well with me, anyway if anybody wants to spill their 2 cents about this I would appreciate any form of feedback. Actually just spill your entire coin purse I wanna hear what you all have to say.
-
Here its is. War thunder is pretty...and that's it. here is a video I shot from it when a guy talked me into playing it during beta. When flying from first person you cant look backwards, infinite ammo, fuel, bombs. Heck during training they had me dropping torps from a Swordfish at 500 ft Minimum under AA fire any lower you drown the fish. I was flying a pre war bird in Beta against 51s, beaufighters, late war 109s and even some jets. It had its moments but it will never outdo AH at what it does. Now if you just love to point and click with your mouse then this is for you. In the video I think I should have been able to out maneuver a 109 pretty easy and the guns are default zeroed at 600 "Meters" crazy. I just couldn't hit the guy and I should have it was a good fight but boy was I upset I didn't get him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6oiZgNT2MU&list=PL7VvGQQXDHVDfPEaeSJDGMYwcP2Jxv9Fi&index=2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6oiZgNT2MU&list=PL7VvGQQXDHVDfPEaeSJDGMYwcP2Jxv9Fi&index=2)
edit: It also flew like crap maybe that was to make you move up in planes, I played it about 12 hours or so I found it a challenge and interesting at first then all its flaws just killed it.
-
Aces High is a simulator.
War Thunder is a plane based video game.
As for the 17yo - just challenge him to 1 on 1 in AH, let him fly whatever he wants - Zeke, Spitfire etc , let him pick your plane and show him how you cak kick his bellybutton using E tactics. Should be quite an education for him :)
-
Stay away from the Arcade mode, and you'll be fine.
The cpits are a fantastic place to sit and fight in and the immersion is excellent. The FX are what I have cried for AH to have since I made a post about it in2010. Considering that War blunder is using a Graphics engine of Wing of Prey (2008), kind makes my smile a little.
Full Real Battles are pretty good, I recommend hooking up with some AH players that have picked it up also.
Limited ammo and fuel are in this mode. And the Cpit view is forced, you can't look around too well because the game simulates you being strapped into the seat (and I challenge anyone you rotate their head 360'). Convergence can be adjusted as well as bullet type loadouts; from AP to HE rounds etc.
My problem with War blunder is the obvious Russian bias. Lagg3, La5 and 7 are insanely good, stupidly so. The 109F and E cant outturn either, even on full flaps. Also the 109E has the ata from a 109F, the G2 + F has 109E ata, the 109Es ammo counter doesn't work, so the game has a number of flaws.
The weather and the air feel a lot more realistic (AcesHigh air is so dense it feels like your flying through soup just point and you go), the transition into the clouds shakes you a little.
The ack is more realistic and hardly get any clean hits, but the shells exploding around you cause shock waves that shake you around a little.
People will argue that War blunder is poor because it looks pretty and the flight model is terrible, but they have only flown in Arcade (where the flight model is dumbed down for the children).
FRB is where it's at, and there is no horde which is a big plus. But you need a good pair of eyes because there is no icon in that mode, or stall horn for that matter.
AH players will find it a difficult transition without the AH Stall Horn to rely on.
It's a decent game and an acceptable alternative to AcesHigh. Plus if you like Early war like I do, you can get away with never having to pay a penny for the damn thing <G>
-
i play ROF and AH and got a beta invite for WarThunder dont know why :)
I deleted after a week and I will try ought for free :rofl
In AH you log on and take off :)
ROF is the same :)
War Thunder is worse then Birds of Prey for gibberish :old:
Eye candy is smoke and mirrors for poo game play :)
I am even more awesome this week then last week :old:
I know its unbelievable but true :old:
-
i wonder if anyone has noticed that all the planes fly exactly the same in warturder...
Stay away from the Arcade mode, and you'll be fine.
The cpits are a fantastic place to sit and fight in and the immersion is excellent. The FX are what I have cried for AH to have since I made a post about it in2010. Considering that War blunder is using a Graphics engine of Wing of Prey (2008), kind makes my smile a little.
Full Real Battles are pretty good, I recommend hooking up with some AH players that have picked it up also.
Limited ammo and fuel are in this mode. And the Cpit view is forced, you can't look around too well because the game simulates you being strapped into the seat (and I challenge anyone you rotate their head 360'). Convergence can be adjusted as well as bullet type loadouts; from AP to HE rounds etc.
how did you get into full real battles? i've been trying for weeks and it's always "this mode is not available at this time". if i have to pay for it, forget it, not worth the effort considering the flight models, damage calculations and the fact that if you're outside of that stupid little aiming guide, you don't hit anything at all. where are you adjusting convergence? i've poked everywhere and can't find anything to adjust.
i've figured out how to look straight back using my hat switch. it's just getting it to do it consistently that is a pain. i'd rather be able to do a look over the shoulder but there is now way to do it. the game was designed for keyboard/mouse or game controller, that's obvious from looking at the controls section.
The weather and the air feel a lot more realistic (AcesHigh air is so dense it feels like your flying through soup just point and you go), the transition into the clouds shakes you a little.
The ack is more realistic and hardly get any clean hits, but the shells exploding around you cause shock waves that shake you around a little.
you're playing a totally different game then...i've seen nothing to even match that description.
FRB is where it's at, and there is no horde which is a big plus. But you need a good pair of eyes because there is no icon in that mode, or stall horn for that matter.
AH players will find it a difficult transition without the AH Stall Horn to rely on.
again, where or how are you getting into full real? just judging from the controls, it looks to me like "full real" means nothing more than engine management...just like il2.
-
My problem with War blunder is the obvious Russian bias. Lagg3, La5 and 7 are insanely good, stupidly so. The 109F and E cant outturn either, even on full flaps. Also the 109E has the ata from a 109F, the G2 + F has 109E ata, the 109Es ammo counter doesn't work, so the game has a number of flaws.
I keep hearing this over and over. Not sure I could stick around very long if that was the case. Devs will always get things wrong, but I wouldn't be optimistic that this will ever be fixed. When patriotism spills over into game design it usually sticks around.
-
To get full real battles I'm pretty sure you have to be a level 4 or higher.
FRB is where you will see everything I have talked about.
-
I can't play it cause it has no snap views. Makes me feel like a cat in a sack.
-
dolby don't let them fool you with all these FRB nonsense it is still a turd dressed up for friday night.
If that is enough for you to enjoy it then more power to you but I would feel like a cheap hooker pretending that it is any sort of realistic interpretation of a MMOPG WW2 flight sim.
-
You have to get to level 4 before it becomes realistic :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
What a load of gibberish :)
Do i have to stand on my head and do a silly dance as well , then eat meatballs and pasta to play a flight sim :rofl
Is it Eastern European?
Rise of Flight was appalling until a colonial took control of the company :old:
-
To get full real battles I'm pretty sure you have to be a level 4 or higher.
FRB is where you will see everything I have talked about.
do the flight models get any better? i thought il2 was bad but, holy cow warturder is worse. every plane you jump into has the exact same feel, maneuverability, damage calculations and from what i've experienced, speed...i'm at level 3 hoping it gets better but, so far that is not the case.
-
I can't play it cause it has no snap views. Makes me feel like a cat in a sack.
Snap Views!? Ha, War Thunder works now officialy with the Oculus Rift! Who needs outdated Snap views :lol
-
I think it's funny that people who play WT refuse to play AHII solely because the graphics aren't the same. :rofl If they just gave AH a try (you get 2 weeks FREE!) they'd see just how fun this game is. I don't care if AHII ever gets a new graphics engine, I will not stop playing this game.
I'm downloading WT to try it out and see for myself what differences there are. I'm very curious with all the back and forth going on.
-
Alright well first I have a question which game is better Aces High or War Thunder? Now I'm gonna try not to get emotional because I flipping love Aces High. Anyway the only reason I'm bringing this up is because I got some 17 year old kid thinking he knows ACM, the history of flight, history of aerial warfare, and all of the above. Just because he has been playing War Thunder for the past 2 weeks. I recommended Aces High well because it's a good game, since he liked aerial combat. Then he tells me "That game doesn't even look half as good as War Thunder, plus it doesn't have as many planes". Which didn't sit well with me, anyway if anybody wants to spill their 2 cents about this I would appreciate any form of feedback. Actually just spill your entire coin purse I wanna hear what you all have to say.
Just tell him have fun playing War Thunder and move on. Honestly, who cares if he thinks War Thunder is better than AH? Does what he think stop you from enjoying AH?
ack-ack
-
Had some clown give me the same BS about AH and warturd. The idea of flight model being different for each plane was to much for him and every reply was AH is an old crappy game.
-
A guy at work was telling me that AH was inferior because of the graphics and the flight models were "old and outdated." The only experience he had with the game was watching videos on youtube, and watching me play. I made and account on the 2 week trial, sat his arse down, gave him a joystick (I should point out it took him an hour to figure out how it worked), went to the DA and I beat him in every plane he put me in.
The simple fact of the matter is that herpblunder is just an arcade game with some eye candy. The know it alls who think they know ACM can go on thinking that, but I'm sure that 90% of the AH community could beat them when it came to a real 1v1 fight in a game such as AH itself. Just because you are level 100 doesn't mean you have skill.
-
Meh, different games for different people. I liked Wings of Prey (basically WarThunder on single player), generally because it was just good ol fashion fun with quality graphics. Aces High made you work for your kills which in turn led to the fun/thrill of shooting down a plane, WoP let me screw around and do whatever to have fun.
TBH, the only flight sim that had me going was Rise of Flight, just too bad it was a WWI sim. If they had made it WWII, I would've left AH the moment it came out.
-
A guy at work was telling me that AH was inferior because of the graphics and the flight models were "old and outdated." The only experience he had with the game was watching videos on youtube, and watching me play. I made and account on the 2 week trial, sat his arse down, gave him a joystick (I should point out it took him an hour to figure out how it worked), went to the DA and I beat him in every plane he put me in.
The simple fact of the matter is that herpblunder is just an arcade game with some eye candy. The know it alls who think they know ACM can go on thinking that, but I'm sure that 90% of the AH community could beat them when it came to a real 1v1 fight in a game such as AH itself. Just because you are level 100 doesn't mean you have skill.
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
that's good
-
I downloaded WT to give it a try. Played it for about 8-10 hours and already I'm getting kind of bored of it. I can't understand the thinking behind arcade battles. "Let's remove every performance advantage a plane has, add an instructor that lets you pull tight turns at all speeds, and render ACM completely useless!" :headscratch: :bolt:
AHII still continues to be the absolute leader in WWII Fight Sims.
-
Snap Views!? Ha, War Thunder works now officialy with the Oculus Rift! Who needs outdated Snap views :lol
The wretched huddled masses would like to say "please give us snap views, oh please."
-
In the end our idea of 'ACM' is just what we are allowed to do inside the physics of Aces.. I remember first starting this game coming from AW.. I tried the same maneuvers but often they gave different results.. Is Aces the absolute best modeling of aircraft that is possible? As good as it is, probably not.. I would not begin to believe I could improve it myself though..
Any one of us could go play a seasoned WT pilet in their game using our 'ACM' and probably lose over and over simply because it is likely they are able to use their game's attributes better..
I played WT abit and did not see all the flight models the same.. Some faster, some climbed better, others turned better.. Stalls were abit different perhaps.. But it certainly felt different.. Kinda like Aces was when I left AW..
-
I downloaded WT to give it a try. Played it for about 8-10 hours and already I'm getting kind of bored of it. I can't understand the thinking behind arcade battles. "Let's remove every performance advantage a plane has, add an instructor that lets you pull tight turns at all speeds, and render ACM completely useless!" :headscratch: :bolt:
AHII still continues to be the absolute leader in WWII Fight Sims.
+100
some people get addicted to the needy instant gratification of achievements buzzing their screen every round. like whoa you did most damage most kills most assists your awesome!!!
I'm like level 65 spitfire, I must be a really good ww2 pilot i'm an ace!! :old:
-
So much for getting into Full Real Battles to make a balanced judgement such as I. :rolleyes:
No different to those saying AH sucks because of it's graphics. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
-
Gratification :rofl
-
AH players will find it a difficult transition without the AH Stall Horn to rely on.
I've never used the stall horn or the buffet warning, turned the sounds down to 0. I'm sure a lot of people have also
-
AH is still clearly the best of the air combat simulator games and the most realistic. But graphically it is beginning to look outdated. It's all very fine decrying War Thunder as 'eye candy' but that quality is now the norm. You only have to look at the likes of BF3 and Modern Warfare, Call of duty etc.
Also the very realism of AH could be off putting to the generation that is used to more arcade like games.
I've been disappointed that so far a properly realistic war game has never really been marketed. But I doubt if it would sell as well as the current games because like AH you can't just jump in. You really have to learn to fly first, then fight. That is all a bit much for the current generation of gamers.
In the long run, AH will have to improve it's graphics. I'm sure the people in charge know this and may even be working on it.
-
Have you not tried ArmA Cpxxx? Prbably the most realistic war sim so far.
-
Have you not tried ArmA Cpxxx? Prbably the most realistic war sim so far.
that's what they said about bf1942... :lol
-
Tried warthunder a few months ago.
1. Nice graphics, very nice terrains objects.
2. Couldn't get the views to work as I wanted to (key views, or POV hat).
3. Couldn't play anything but stupid arcade modes.
4. Saw the mosquito way down the list I have to grind through to get it.
5. Uninstalled the game.
ROF seems like a much more attractive alternative to AH if I ever have to change. Not planning to any time soon.
-
(http://creativegreenius.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/professor_irwin_corey.jpg?w=249&h=300)
War Thunder is, like, so cool and stuff!
-
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-V55ScRqFCiE/UPyVo5NWCyI/AAAAAAAAAE4/niFGk8hMWd8/s1600/Xbox+nerd+1.jpg)
warthunder ace
-
Put your money where your mouth is gyrene.
:D
-
Huh?
(http://www.vote29.com/newmyblog/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/moneymouth.jpg)
-
Put your money where your mouth is gyrene.
:D
:neener: ok...but you do know i'm right, that is the average in warthunder and world of warplanes.
-
:neener: ok...but you do know i'm right, that is the average in warthunder and world of warplanes.
Respectfully, is the 'average' really much higher here? ;)
Wiley.
-
Respectfully, is the 'average' really much higher here? ;)
Wiley.
lmao, makes you wonder sometimes don't it? :rofl
-
Agree with La-tro-beee.
I played it in beta as well...for about an hour, then declared it gay, deleted it, and haven't thought of it until this thread.
-
Unimpressed with WT.
-
Have you not tried ArmA Cpxxx? Prbably the most realistic war sim so far.
I have actually and yes it's probably the best of them. Also the original Operation Flashpoint. I was impressed by how it managed to it managed to simulate the confusion of battle. I'd like to see more of that type of realism.
-
So much for getting into Full Real Battles to make a balanced judgement such as I. :rolleyes:
No different to those saying AH sucks because of it's graphics. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
What kind of setup do you use for WT? Do you use a joystick?
-
What kind of setup do you use for WT? Do you use a joystick?
I use the same set up as I do for AcesHigh; CH all round, HOTAS and Rudder Pedals
-
I use the same set up as I do for AcesHigh; CH all round, HOTAS and Rudder Pedals
How do you handle the views?
-
my throttle has an analogue stick, I use that. Unlike in AH it smooth's out the inputs enough to make it usable without slowing it down.
-
So what, TrackIR doesn't work in WT?
-
So what, TrackIR doesn't work in WT?
Yes, it does.
-
There is only a few people who actually use joystick on wart hunter even if you ask on chat people laugh at you for trying to set it up as its awfull, I played it since first stages of CB for a little while as I wasn't playing AH2 at the time and the one thing the game did for me was make me want to play AH2 again so I resubbed and that was the end of wart hunter for me.
In short the graphics are very nice Dolby is correct when he mentions the flack shockwaves and stuff even the wetness on your cockpit glass when you go through clouds is epic but it feels so dumb and unresponsive using a joystick compaired to AH2 I couldnt cope with it. If you want a quick pick me up game this will keep you going for a short while but it eventually ends up a boring grind fest unless you purchase gold account for faster experience gain. It takes forever to kill someone even if your making clean hits the planes of some countries (mainly Russian) are waaaaaaaay OP not to mention anything that's british apart from the spit 1 is bugged they even admit it on there forums.......same with the bad joystick controls that they haven't fixed it since first CB tests, then there is the views wow they take so much fiddling about with to get sort of right its just not worth the time, ok maybe that wasn't in short :lol
All in all its safe to say I hate that friggin game so much........
quick edit: I searched there forums for a stick setup like a mad man even found one that the community suggested for my actual joystick and it still felt awfull even in FRB where I was told it would be much better, turns out only some planes fly decent with a joystick and none of them were british....don't believe me ask in the game and the community will tell you the same......
-
Yes, it does.
Ok. With all the complaints about views not working focusing on hat/analog stick it came across like TIR didn't work. Which would have been REALLY silly considering I can get it to work in frelling X-Wing Alliance[/b]...
-
Wow, jump on YouTube and look up "Lumberyak."
What did they build that thing from?
-
Maybe we should have a War High lol. A combination of War Thunder and Aces High. Or you could call it War Ace, Thunder High, Thunder Fly, etc.
-
No.
WT is pretty, but that's it. The farther you keep the rest of that nonsense from Aces High the better.
-
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=gLFlQNu99E8&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DgLFlQNu99E8%26feature%3Dplayer_embedded
A little fight over there with a g10 :bolt:
-
That is not the War Thunder I beta tested :old:
-
yea, 10 secs of that music was enough.
-
they had a marketing stall at Duxford on Sunday,
Just leaflets and TV screens with a film on repeat. The PR girl tried to shove a leaflet in my hand but I was all like, thanks but no thanks.
Evil marketing ploys I tell you :old:
-
You should have told her you fly a real game and proceded to rtb with her and and show her how fast a spit can get on some ones tail and screw up your day :devil
-
Was chick good looking at Duxford? :old:
-
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=gLFlQNu99E8&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DgLFlQNu99E8%26feature%3Dplayer_embedded
A little fight over there with a g10 :bolt:
Nice! --- FYI on your replays, when your plane is selected, assuming you haven't changed your keys from the default, you can use the semicolon to hop into the pilot's view that shows the cockpit view and recorded TrackIR views!
-
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=gLFlQNu99E8&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DgLFlQNu99E8%26feature%3Dplayer_embedded
A little fight over there with a g10 :bolt:
:aok :aok
-
Was chick good looking at Duxford? :old:
Not really :uhoh
-
Good looking enough for me? :old:
-
Here its is. War thunder is pretty...and that's it. here is a video I shot from it when a guy talked me into playing it during beta.
Ok, really pretty graphics
When flying from first person you cant look backwards, infinite ammo, fuel, bombs.
Arcade game.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6oiZgNT2MU&list=PL7VvGQQXDHVDfPEaeSJDGMYwcP2Jxv9Fi&index=2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6oiZgNT2MU&list=PL7VvGQQXDHVDfPEaeSJDGMYwcP2Jxv9Fi&index=2)
Was the 109 a bad AI, or a bad real person?
I will say that it made for a pretty cool aerial dance.
-
The ground looks like someone flew over the san Gabriel mountains near Los Angeles, filmed them, then digitized them as the map. Can't miss the brown grass in SCal during June. At one point it looks like they forgot to blank out a micro wave repeater tower.
-
Good looking enough for me? :old:
she was very small, skinny, dark haired, red lippy, funny sounding accent. Kind of like a Romanian Spy type.
I don't think you would have lowered your high standards Zack.
Now if HiTech can sub us some cash we could attempt to raise the game a little. :D
-
Ok, really pretty graphics
Arcade game.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6oiZgNT2MU&list=PL7VvGQQXDHVDfPEaeSJDGMYwcP2Jxv9Fi&index=2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6oiZgNT2MU&list=PL7VvGQQXDHVDfPEaeSJDGMYwcP2Jxv9Fi&index=2)
Was the 109 a bad AI, or a bad real person?
I will say that it made for a pretty cool aerial dance.
Bad person but that Fury was a POS too, one of the few times Ive yelled in disgust at the computer, you see how it rolled way past a point I wanted it at, wasnt smooth at all with the inputs and thats something I excel at. It had fine points but not enough to convince me, also this server had some realistic settings on.
-
Bad person but that Fury was a POS too, one of the few times Ive yelled in disgust at the computer, you see how it rolled way past a point I wanted it at, wasnt smooth at all with the inputs and thats something I excel at. It had fine points but not enough to convince me, also this server had some realistic settings on.
"some realistic settings" :D
The stuff that Dhyran has posted look awfully much like AH on FM side. When I tried WT I had no problems with control inputs lagging, perhaps your computer couldn't handle the graphics?
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWDzgA2SSaI&feature=youtube_gdata_player (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWDzgA2SSaI&feature=youtube_gdata_player)
:rofl
This is gonna get a little hairy cuz this is a game.
-
I would definitely say no. :old:
(http://warthunder.ru/upload/image/News/Flying%20Legends/018war-thunder.jpg)
-
good lord....get those away from the planes....
-
good lord....get those away from the planes....
:rofl
-
I had a great laugh watching the Mighty Jingles and his commentary about the Dehavilland Mosquito.
Only a few minutes into the clip and I couldn't watch any more. He was complaining about the Mossie's
agility in a high speed dive, then again about it's poor climb performance.
Watching the video, he hit over 700 mph in a dive..then DROPPED FLAPS! Then he was complaining
about only doing 370 at 300 feet and losing speed in a shallow climb! :eek:
Nice flight model there WT.... :rofl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACN9HOhRfL4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACN9HOhRfL4)
-
He is in arcade and not FRB mind you.
-
So how much different is ultra realism mode? Seems like arcade sets the bar incredibly low.
-
______ FRB
[some time following the bar later]
_____ Arcade
-
So how much different is ultra realism mode? Seems like arcade sets the bar incredibly low.
it is. frb is no icons, no hud, advanced engine management, very very little difference in the flight model from arcade.
oh and you're still flying aircraft that didn't actually see service, sometimes against aircraft that were never flown in combat with the country they represent.
-
it is. frb is no icons, no hud, advanced engine management, very very little difference in the flight model from arcade.
oh and you're still flying aircraft that didn't actually see service, sometimes against aircraft that were never flown in combat with the country they represent.
Spot on.
-
Like the x55 d13,
-
that is her Dolby! The one on the right.
I mean she isn't fit enough to make my dinner let alone stand infront of a P51!
-
She has the jawline of a greek god! :banana:
-
They got three million players now according to their FB post... Wow :huh
-
I would definitely say no. :old:
(http://warthunder.ru/upload/image/News/Flying%20Legends/018war-thunder.jpg)
well first get them out of their ridiculous disguise and then we can talk! What a load of pollocks
Get the game out on steam!
-
They got three million players now according to their FB post... Wow :huh
I've always wondered what HTC stance on their competition is? Do they not care? Are they scrambling to find a way to expand AH? Or what?
-
I've always wondered what HTC stance on their competition is? Do they not care? Are they scrambling to find a way to expand AH? Or what?
I seriously doubt HTC wants 3 million customers (I also think it's an exaggeration on WThunder's part. There's a huge difference in 3 million free downloads and 3 million customers).
-
probably closer to 250,000 actual active players...3 million registered to spam the forums with nonsense.
-
Either way, it's a number AH can only dream of having.
-
There's a huge difference in 3 million free downloads and 3 million customers).
I can't count the number of el-cheapo family laptops I've seen where the pre-teen kid has downloaded some both CPU and GPU demanding game just because it looks fancy and their friends do the same. None of them usually see anything more than a slide show, but they count as registered downloaders. Unless they have stolen their mom's credit card info, they aren't paying customers.
Three million flies can't be wrong, toejam must taste good...
-
and you thought a 3 vs. 1 was tough.
Try 245,000 Vs. 1 :lol
:pray here boy, see the game :) , ....... now go fetch. :devil
Ahh, that is better. Excuse me, Im going to go play AH now :airplane:.
-
Their news release: http://warthunder.com/en/news/216/current/
-
I'm seeing 30-40,000 players online at any one time in my time zone. To support that number every player on average has to play two hours a week to equal about 3 million players total. It doesn't sound unreasonable.
-
I've always wondered what HTC stance on their competition is? Do they not care? Are they scrambling to find a way to expand AH? Or what?
HTC can't compete directly in scale; if they want to they have to expand enormously. I think they have to find a niche that doesn't compete directly, like quality and realism for example. Gaijin is the biggest independent game developer in Russia with hundreds of employees (and cheaper labor).
-
They produced "wings of Prey" which is poo!
-
I downloaded War Thunder the other night, just to try it out. Figured I should configure the joystick and the realistic settings, relying on my hours of flying experience from AHII.. What a blunder.. :rolleyes: First sortie I went down like a tumbling stone. Second sortie, same deal.. Third or fourth attempt I finally managed to gain just enough control of the plane to barely go clear of the weeds and find something that looked like a level flight. More or less... But after trying to keep the dang plane level for about 2 minutes my hands were totally aking by constantly holding the stick pulled back and balancing the ailerons on the edge of a knife to prevent flipping to left or right.. I ended up setting the plane down onto a field, pulled it to a full stop, shut down the engine, logged out and never tried the silly game again! :furious
Is it really supposed to be like this? If so this is really not for me! I am sure a realistic plane don't flipflop around into a total spin if you don't pull the stick fully back and keep it dead steady. If I moved as much as an eyeball the stick clearly picked up the motion and sent my plane tumbling to the ground.
And the views, I clearly messed up that part too.. Could not see over the instrument panel, had to use sideviews to figure out how I was flying relative to the ground. :rolleyes: Did someone mention feeling like a cat in a bag?!
Meow.. :uhoh
-
ya SAJ, you had some serious stick setting issues going on there. in arcade mode it doesn't matter so much because it's not so sensitive, but if you got to historical or full realism with a bad stick setting, it's tough. the friggin game was designed for keyboard and mouse or console turds like a first person shooter, the joystick is like a red headed step child. i'm still tweaking my joystick settings.
-
I downloaded War Thunder the other night, just to try it out. Figured I should configure the joystick and the realistic settings, relying on my hours of flying experience from AHII.. What a blunder.. :rolleyes: First sortie I went down like a tumbling stone. Second sortie, same deal.. Third or fourth attempt I finally managed to gain just enough control of the plane to barely go clear of the weeds and find something that looked like a level flight. More or less... But after trying to keep the dang plane level for about 2 minutes my hands were totally aking by constantly holding the stick pulled back and balancing the ailerons on the edge of a knife to prevent flipping to left or right.. I ended up setting the plane down onto a field, pulled it to a full stop, shut down the engine, logged out and never tried the silly game again! :furious
Is it really supposed to be like this? If so this is really not for me! I am sure a realistic plane don't flipflop around into a total spin if you don't pull the stick fully back and keep it dead steady. If I moved as much as an eyeball the stick clearly picked up the motion and sent my plane tumbling to the ground.
And the views, I clearly messed up that part too.. Could not see over the instrument panel, had to use sideviews to figure out how I was flying relative to the ground. :rolleyes: Did someone mention feeling like a cat in a bag?!
Meow.. :uhoh
I had joystick issues too. I enabled FFB in the game and it felt like I was trying to steer a dumptruck without power steering. I would think it has a setting to scale FFB, but admittedly I didn't check. TrackIR wasn't right either. Not nearly as smooth or accurate as in AH. I suspect that has to do with my computer rather than WT, but I dunno.
My opinion: all of the "AH will alienate a lot of it's players if it jacks the graphics up" line is probably true. I can run AH with most everything turned down and stay between 40 and 60 fps. I don't have the computer horsepower to run WT even on it's lowest settings. I think I was getting 20 fps max. TBH, AH looks better than WT when your settings are in the basement. :lol
-
I really appreciate all your input guys, sounds like I saved alot of time not trying WT out.
-
War thunder IS IL2. Oleg Maddox sold his IL2FB software to Gajin when Gajin ported it to the console for him and retained rights to use all the software they ported.(xbox or PS I think). its IL2 in an online system with better online gameplay mechanics.
I find war thunder very enjoyable on historic and full realism. historic is more fun for there they are kill them stuff and frb is more fun for max realism hunt the enemy and then kill them action. The flight physics are fine to me overall but individual performance data is pretty bad for many planes, f4u and n1k2 being the worst offenders. takeoffs and landings are actually more realistic in WT from what i have experienced in real life flying T-6 Texans and various other planes.
you must have trackIR if you want to look around well.
avoid headons and roll through any shot taken at you and all the mouse aimers flying with an instructor are free kills as they follow their little arrow while you rolling scissors behind them and pop them.
in full realism everyone has joysticks etc and the good ones are using head tracking so expect a hard fight if they are good and an easy kill if they are trying to use their mouse too look around while they fly with joystick.
tail control cables are a great spot to hit on fighters. aim right where the vert stab and elevator joins for a good chance at jamming the tail mechanism.
the damage system is displayed differently based on a different ideaology than AH. In WT you are primarily trying to damage internal components of the airplane such as the pilot, gunners, control cables, engines, fuel tanks etc. when you damage the wings and fuselage they lose their ability to function incrementaly but instead of being show as blown off they are shown as being shot up worse and worse until with enough hits or a really big shell like 30mm or 37mm they will be blown off. but for most ammunition you want to hit components or pilot for fastest kill.
its not a better sim than AH by any means. but it is a fun game and it has me hooked at the moment.
I don't see it holding my interest like AH has for over a decade but for a couple months of dweeby fun it seems like a nice diversion till my AH itch needs to be scratched more and I click the fly AH icon instead of the WT icon instead.
-
also another thing to consider is the gameplay mechanic of WT is not persistent battle but a deathmatch of 12-30 or so players last plane flying wins the match. I doubt they will ever be capable of AH big arena programming.
to me it feels like flying a mini 30 minute FSO event with random players that can be good or very bad and if they are bad your side loses ussually.
also I think of WT as a third party knock off really. they are using years of work done for IL2. its so obvious as all the cockpits and planes available are all IL2 stock. It is in my opinion done by people who are good at making fun games but if you look at the planeset and compare it to the IL2 series you will see almost nothing new and begin to wonder if they even know how to actually code new planes with realistic performance or if it all really is just some flight sim amatuers sitting on IL2's shoulders and concentrating on making the game mechanics fun and hoping the IL2 software will be enough to make it realistic because they have no idea how to do what companies like HTC and 1C have spent so many years doing.
-
Rise of Flight shoot off bits and plane well reacts to it :)
All these people discussing Pro and Cons of Flight Combat sims is funny :)
If its any good people who are interested will play it :)
In ROF forums I read once saying AH people were clannish, the fact is AH people were not interested in ROF because they were "Not interested" nothing more :rofl
If AH did not interest me I would not play it nothing more :)
All I can say about developers of flight sims is that they cant get the basics right, Controls,Interfaces and graphics, AH and ROF seemed to have the right ideas in this respect :)
I am the customer and I am awesome :)
-
a pretty fair assessment from Fester,
in summary an old boxed game that has been out for years, re-dressed up as something new and shiny. Then conning lots of people to pay for added "extras" to improve their online chances over the poor boys sim pit.
What happens when the interest and fresh money dries up? You'll have a bunch of guys who think they are hot stuff with all their planes levelled to the max and they will get bored and move onto the next game that feeds their needy attentions.
-
a pretty fair assessment from Fester,
in summary an old boxed game that has been out for years, re-dressed up as something new and shiny. Then conning lots of people to pay for added "extras" to improve their online chances over the poor boys sim pit.
What happens when the interest and fresh money dries up? You'll have a bunch of guys who think they are hot stuff with all their planes levelled to the max and they will get bored and move onto the next game that feeds their needy attentions.
:lol that's pretty much happening now and it's not even out of beta yet. from all the whines in the forums, the pay to win thing isn't happening, even though a lot of morons thought that's what they would get by spending money on premiums. if they ever get the fms figured out, it could be a decent flight sim once you get away from arcade mode. i'm enjoying the way they have the battles set up. not a lot of choices to be made so all you have to think about is flying and surviving the battle. you can get into a battle with up to 3 buddies and wing up, if they know what they're doing, it wouldn't be difficult to win.
-
Then conning lots of people to pay for added "extras" to improve their online chances over the poor boys sim pit.
Newbies will buy extras (it is good as they will feed developers). Smart people will buy TrackIR instead. It is also good as it will make Full Real Battle arenas populated.
What happens when the interest and fresh money dries up? You'll have a bunch of guys who think they are hot stuff with all their planes levelled to the max and they will get bored and move onto the next game that feeds their needy attentions.
Newbies will end up paying lots of cash to level up to the top (which is good) and may end up leaving (who cares as they did their role and more will come on their place) or finally they will decide getting TrackIR. :)
It is win-win situation especially if you compare it to what is happening now with AH.
-
Newbies will buy extras (it is good as they will feed developers). Smart people will buy TrackIR instead. It is also good as it will make Full Real Battle arenas populated.
Newbies will end up paying lots of cash to level up to the top (which is good) and may end up leaving (who cares as they did their role and more will come on their place) or finally they will decide getting TrackIR. :)
It is win-win situation especially if you compare it to what is happening now with AH.
Your the most awesome person in this thread :old:
-
It's free, download it and play FRB.
It's a completely different game that Aces High... it is indeed a beta... and you aren't going to get a valid review from an Aces High fanboy.
That being said, while their MAY be 3 million accounts, the VAST majority of these play Arcade which is absolute horse balls. The next major slice plays "Historical" (B/S) Battles, which are basically horse balls that have been washed... then the RAZOR thin less than a tenth of a percent that are left play FRB.
FRB is really, really fun... it reminds me of FSO, where it gets white knuckle fast, and you're coming down off an adrenaline high for the next 15-20 minutes.
That being said, it's not at all a replacement for Aces High... and there is no way that they could make it a replacement for Aces High any time soon...
You are missing:
1. One Big Arena
2. A tight knit community - you get the mouthpieces on the forums, and the jerkbags, but you don't get the same we-all-on-the-same-retard-bus-family that you have here, and you never will
3. The Integrity that HTC has maintained to an extremely high degree for over a decade... I LIKE seeing prototypes modeled, part of me loves that these planes are flyable somewhere... but it is no Aces High and it will never be.
If you are sneering at it because of the fanboy hate and outright misleading statements of a few here, go try it for yourself. Once you get your johnson knocked in the dirt a few times in FRB, come share your thoughts. Because you can piss on arcade all you want, very few AH pilots are going to roll right into FRB and do anything at all without icons/map locations/clouds you can duck into/etc.
It's a nice diversion for a flight or two every now and then, but it'll never be Aces High.
-
Its the same thing as Birds of steel which is a game i have for the Xbox 360
-
... and you aren't going to get a valid review from an Aces High fanboy.
Actually, you have a much better chance of this that getting one from a WT 'fanboy.' My opinion can kick your opinion's arse. ;) :aok
-
Il-2 Sturmovik
http://il2sturmovik.com/ (http://il2sturmovik.com/)
"This new entry into this series will offer virtual pilots and players an even more accurate reproduction of the legendary air battles of World War II. A new, higher level of physics modeling, damage modeling and aerodynamics has been achieved. Battle of Stalingrad will include several famous aircraft that have been recreated from detailed drawings and blueprints and they will fly over the most ambitious and detailed reconstruction ever attempted in a flight-sim of the most critical battle on the Eastern Front."
:cheers:
-
Il-2 Sturmovik
http://il2sturmovik.com/ (http://il2sturmovik.com/)
:cheers:
You can already tell the Soviet planes are going to be over modeled. :lol I'll still buy it in any case when it gets released. Isn't this the one that 777 Studios worked with? If so, I hope they took everything good from RoF and added it here.
-
You can already tell the Soviet planes are going to be over modeled. :lol I'll still buy it in any case when it gets released. Isn't this the one that 777 Studios worked with? If so, I hope they took everything good from RoF and added it here.
Yep 777 and 1C
-
The films are awesum and the sound test film is cool
-
I tried it. I found it had nothing to offer me that I cannot find in Aces High already and does not offer many of the things that I can find here to enjoy. If you want to play a free game, well then it's better than nothing. Simply put, I'd rather play here at $15 a month than play there for free.
-
Downloaded the game yesterday. I lol'ed when I saw that I had to research several other planes before I could get to my beloved P38.... :rofl
-
Downloaded the game yesterday. I lol'ed when I saw that I had to research several other planes before I could get to my beloved P38.... :rofl
The learning curve is definitely high, considering you can't just fly a certain plane a certain way 100% of the time ;)
-
I played a few hours in the game and I find the historical battles to be quite enjoyable- especially for those who fly with the joystick. Not to mention you can win more XP and in game money faster in historical battles. Don't let the game mode fool you, though... the historical battles are hardly close to the real historical battles of WW2. I use a Hotas T-Flight Thrustmaster with detachable throttle and stick control.
A few observations about the game play in historical battle:
1. I've unlocked the P36C and it seems to be a real beast against level 1 planes you go up against (as it should be). The rudder authority for all of the planes I've flown so far seem to be a little awkward. Small adjustments to rudder tends to throw your nose around a lot, making precision shooting difficult (compared to that in Aces High). This could be because of my joystick settings, which I'm still playing around with as I go.
2. The view system needs improvement in my opinion... particularly the cockpit views. You don't have true 360 degree head movement as the game simulates your head being strapped to the head rest. Users with TrackIR do have a leg up on situational awareness in cockpit view but if you're stuck with the hat switch, you will be at a slight disadvantage unless using the external mode view.
3. Stall characteristics are very plain vanilla. Most of all planes in the game stall in the same manner, only difference being the speed and attitude in which the plane stalls at. I'm curious to know if the stall characteristics will better fleshed out with certain planes behaving differently at low speeds. I will also point out that engine torque effects are nearly non existent at this point. Flying at 2,000 feet doesn't feel too much different than flying at 18,000 feet (with exception to top speed for planes at ideal altitude).
4. The immersion is spectacular. AAA fire shakes your cockpit, flying through clouds leave condensation on your canopy, bare metal finishes reflect the surroundings. Graphics are very nice. You are also at risk from friendly fire. It is very possible to fly your plane using your aircraft's instrument panel just like you would in Aces High.
5. Good use of ACM will pay dividends in the historical battles. In arcade mode, ACM is less relevant simply because you have many mouse-flyers using the auto-lead marker to their advantage. Arcade mode is more or less an "all guns shootout" rather than the patient and careful dogfights presented in historical battles.
6. Taxiing around on the pavement is odd. I will taxi around at 25mph and watch my plane slide and skid around as if I'm on a wet, oily ice skating rink.
Overall, I think the game has promise. Hopefully the historical battles and full real battles get more fleshed out. If the developers stop expanding on the historical/full real battle side of things, the game would be a real big disappointment for me. I would also like to see more customizable settings for the joystick as well.
-
I played a few hours in the game and I find the historical battles to be quite enjoyable- especially for those who fly with the joystick. Not to mention you can win more XP and in game money faster in historical battles. Don't let the game mode fool you, though... the historical battles are hardly close to the real historical battles of WW2. I use a Hotas T-Flight Thrustmaster with detachable throttle and stick control.
A few observations about the game play in historical battle:
1. I've unlocked the P36C and it seems to be a real beast against level 1 planes you go up against (as it should be). The rudder authority for all of the planes I've flown so far seem to be a little awkward. Small adjustments to rudder tends to throw your nose around a lot, making precision shooting difficult (compared to that in Aces High). This could be because of my joystick settings, which I'm still playing around with as I go.
2. The view system needs improvement in my opinion... particularly the cockpit views. You don't have true 360 degree head movement as the game simulates your head being strapped to the head rest. Users with TrackIR do have a leg up on situational awareness in cockpit view but if you're stuck with the hat switch, you will be at a slight disadvantage unless using the external mode view.
3. Stall characteristics are very plain vanilla. Most of all planes in the game stall in the same manner, only difference being the speed and attitude in which the plane stalls at. I'm curious to know if the stall characteristics will better fleshed out with certain planes behaving differently at low speeds. I will also point out that engine torque effects are nearly non existent at this point. Flying at 2,000 feet doesn't feel too much different than flying at 18,000 feet (with exception to top speed for planes at ideal altitude).
4. The immersion is spectacular. AAA fire shakes your cockpit, flying through clouds leave condensation on your canopy, bare metal finishes reflect the surroundings. Graphics are very nice. You are also at risk from friendly fire. It is very possible to fly your plane using your aircraft's instrument panel just like you would in Aces High.
5. Good use of ACM will pay dividends in the historical battles. In arcade mode, ACM is less relevant simply because you have many mouse-flyers using the auto-lead marker to their advantage. Arcade mode is more or less an "all guns shootout" rather than the patient and careful dogfights presented in historical battles.
6. Taxiing around on the pavement is odd. I will taxi around at 25mph and watch my plane slide and skid around as if I'm on a wet, oily ice skating rink.
Overall, I think the game has promise. Hopefully the historical battles and full real battles get more fleshed out. If the developers stop expanding on the historical/full real battle side of things, the game would be a real big disappointment for me. I would also like to see more customizable settings for the joystick as well.
1. Try setting your nonlinearity settings for rudder between 2 and 3. Update your rudder sensitivity to a few bars less than full to reduce bounce. Keep playing with it until it works for your hardware. Don't get me wrong though, gunnery is much tougher in WT than Aces High.
2. Update your view to relative hat control with a button for center view and utilize the 'stepping'. It is more than adequate for HB but within FRB it would take more practice. There are also buttons to configure to move your head around the cockpit. TrackIR is an absolute dream. If that's not possible, I've read about some great success using glovepie to simulate TrackIR snap views (directional view and physical location in the cockpit with a single directional hat press, but will require configuring). A few people have posted their configurations on the forums.
3. All Flight models are not finished, keep leveling up and you'll see the differences in the more commonly used aircraft.
4. Yes, and runs spectacular on my 3 year old video card, and even older cpu.
5. HB is still pretty trashy. There are still mouse aimers with 'Instructor'. To really experience all this game has to offer you Need to fly FRB... Everyone there is playing by the same rules; however, as 80hd said above, the learning curve is steep. I would guess it would take the average player around 2 weeks to get comfortable spotting and tracking enemies. Once you get it, you'll never fly HB again.
6. Update Rudder sensitivity and nonlinearity, and ease into your throttle. Never go full throttle from idle, as you wouldn't in a real aircraft. I highly recommend rudder pedals for full immersion. The relative movement on a twistie just can't cut the mustard.
All the joystick customizations are there, just not in the format you are used to seeing in AH.
Hope this helps!
:salute Good Luck and good Hunting (if you play FRB you know what I mean)!
-
Has any one considered these really cool Ruskie Flight Sims are loading and collecting stuff they shouldn't? :bolt:
-
If you're gaming on a puter with personal, business or national secrets on it, you're a moron... ;)
-
If you're gaming on a puter with personal, business or national secrets on it, you're a moron... ;)
Plenty of people game with their work computers. I'm surprise people don't get fired more often for it.
-
Plenty of people game with their work computers. I'm surprise people don't get fired more often for it.
As long as you meet your quota I doubt they care as much as they should.
-
If you're gaming on a puter with personal, business or national secrets on it, you're a moron... ;)
Its genetic so i can't do anything about! :)
War Thunder is dead in the water when this new 777 and 1C development comes on line :)
-
As long as you meet your quota I doubt they care as much as they should.
Heh, aside from introducing huge security risks and potential system instability from non work related software?
-
Plenty of people game with their work computers. I'm surprise people don't get fired more often for it.
I play games on my work computer whenever I have some free time, helps break the monotony. I even have a 2nd set of CH HOTAS gear set up on my workstation for when I feel like taking a sortie or two at work.
ack-ack
-
When I'm bored at work, I pretend my sledge hammer is a joystick :old:
no worries about discos tho :rofl
-
Heh, aside from introducing huge security risks and potential system instability from non work related software?
Well I can't imagine it would be even possible to play a true video game title at work..(AH for example), Facebook games and browser games...yea. If you could somehow play AH at work..well, that's impressive.
-
Has any one considered these really cool Ruskie Flight Sims are loading and collecting stuff they shouldn't? :bolt:
Yep, and to unlock MiG-15 you need to be a member of a Communist Party. ;)
-
Aces High is the best WW2 simulator to date.
CLOD Team Fuzion IS THE ONLY, competitor worth noting. BoS will probably be amazing also.
However in terms of the overall best flight sim. WW1 sim RoF would probably be the best in my opinion. The only reason I'm a downer on it is that you have to pay for extra planes, however that said we pay monthly so overall RoF is actually cheaper than AH. The flight model and immersion in RoF is just insane. And the graphics are pretty.
-
Aces High is the best WW2 simulator to date.
CLOD Team Fuzion IS THE ONLY, competitor worth noting. BoS will probably be amazing also.
However in terms of the overall best flight sim. WW1 sim RoF would probably be the best in my opinion. The only reason I'm a downer on it is that you have to pay for extra planes, however that said we pay monthly so overall RoF is actually cheaper than AH. The flight model and immersion in RoF is just insane. And the graphics are pretty.
CloD isn't a competitor to AH as it's a single player game not a MMO like AH is.
ack-ack
-
Aces High is the best WW2 simulator to date.
CLOD Team Fuzion IS THE ONLY, competitor worth noting. BoS will probably be amazing also.
However in terms of the overall best flight sim. WW1 sim RoF would probably be the best in my opinion. The only reason I'm a downer on it is that you have to pay for extra planes, however that said we pay monthly so overall RoF is actually cheaper than AH. The flight model and immersion in RoF is just insane. And the graphics are pretty.
Yep, RoF is pretty awesome in pretty much every category. I'm hoping every single feature from RoF is used in the upcoming Il2. Namely the snap view system, the rather simplified yet realistic engine management and the 2D gauges. If they added a way to skip the extremely long and boring flights between action points in the campaign, it'd be wonderful.
-
CloD isn't a competitor to AH as it's a single player game not a MMO like AH is.
ack-ack
Maybe in your timezone...
-
I play games on my work computer whenever I have some free time, helps break the monotony. I even have a 2nd set of CH HOTAS gear set up on my workstation for when I feel like taking a sortie or two at work.
ack-ack
:devil
-
Well I can't imagine it would be even possible to play a true video game title at work..(AH for example), Facebook games and browser games...yea. If you could somehow play AH at work..well, that's impressive.
Yep most companies lock the workstations tight enough to stop users even installing games on their computers. Any company that lets users to freely use their computers is asking for extra trouble.
-
Any company that lets users to freely use their computers is asking for extra trouble.
Not necessarily. I have two work stations, one tied into the internal company network and another outside of the internal network, which is the work station I play my games on. In the 7 years I've been with my company, I've yet to have anything happen at all to my 'gaming' work station. Well, there was the time I got into a pretty heated deathmatch and accidentally knocked over the tower when I accidentally fragged myself and messed up the video card but since I moved the tower away so I couldn't 'accidentally' kick it, no problems at all.
ack-ack
-
Well, there was the time I got into a pretty heated deathmatch and accidentally knocked over the tower when I accidentally fragged myself and messed up the video card but since I moved the tower away so I couldn't 'accidentally' kick it, no problems at all.
ack-ack
Classic! :aok
-
I recently discovered this War Thunder game and at first I didn't think it was too good and quit after only about 20 minutes played. However, I went back to it and was shocked to see how much fun it is. I don't know that I'd classify it as a direct competitor to Aces High, but it certainly has several aspects where it outshines AH.
1. Terrain Graphics - This completely blows away Aces High, looks so much better and makes the environment much more immersive. The was clouds and flak are done is downright amazing, it really puts Aces High to shame.
2. Instant Action - Yes it's arcadish but it gets you into the fight *fast* less time wasted than the typical MA session where you might putter around for 20 minutes looking for a fight often to have it end before you even arrive.
3. Free2Play - I've spent nothing on War Thunder and had several hours of fun with it in the past couple days. Aces High is *still* charging $15 subscription just for a month's access regardless of how much you actually play.
4. Learning Curve - Starting new players in Arcade mode with simplified controls and fast basic tutorials makes the barrier to entry so much smaller. I've tried dragging several friends into Aces High, and unless they had a very dedicated interest in learning all the complexities involved they tended to quit. War Thunder starts you off in easy mode and lets your work up to the more realistic settings (I haven't gotten to those yet for comparison).
5. Playerbase/Average skill level - This game has a huge playerbase so finding a match is quick and the majority of players seem to be downright terribad at the game. I routinely dominate stats for my team sometimes racking up a dozen or more air to air kills in a single mission. A little bit of ACM knowledge really does help dramatically against the hordes of unskilled n00bs even in the arcade mode.
The Downsides:
1. Leveling system forces you into prewar trash tier planes to start with, and it takes a bit to even unlock historic or high realism modes.
2. No long term persistent world Arena with strategic objectives. This is probably most detrimental to the bomber players.
3. GVs not implemented for player control yet.
4. Flight model at least in arcade mode is a lot more simplistic than Aces High
5. View controls are a lot more limited/primitive
6. Damage modeling is also a lot more simplistic than AH and certain planes seem able to absorb a lot more damage than realistic
7. Simplified gunnery with lead indicator (not sure if this goes away in higher realism modes)
In short, I recommend it. It's surprisingly fun for no cost.
-
Not necessarily. I have two work stations, one tied into the internal company network and another outside of the internal network, which is the work station I play my games on. In the 7 years I've been with my company, I've yet to have anything happen at all to my 'gaming' work station. Well, there was the time I got into a pretty heated deathmatch and accidentally knocked over the tower when I accidentally fragged myself and messed up the video card but since I moved the tower away so I couldn't 'accidentally' kick it, no problems at all.
ack-ack
Trust me, if you have dozens of computers to maintain or even hundreds - you don't need even a smallest extra potential problem on them (such as users installing their own software, nice smilies with adware etc.)
-
Prilla downsides are enough to took at the floor instead.
WT is not very good l am sorry to say, the developers are making coin out of it
-
Prilla downsides are enough to took at the floor instead.
WT is not very good l am sorry to say, the developers are making coin out of it
The developers are making quite good coin out of it so business wise WT seems to do very well. It's just not AH.
-
The fifteen buck a month fee is a filter. Most folks, not all of course, that sign up for AH are interested more in the simulation than gaming. Take the filter out and the game becomes clogged with plane ram'ers, and the like. If you noticed even the two week free players for the most part are interested in the simulation part of the game.
I remember NASCAR 4 which was a wonderful online, racing simulation was constantly plagued by childish car ram'ers.
-
lol well the WT guys have something right, friendly collisions and FF enabled, tbh it is fun there, as when someone goes to steal a kill in AH you cant do too much, in WT I shoot down team mates on a regular basis because of this haha
-
lol well the WT guys have something right, friendly collisions and FF enabled, tbh it is fun there, as when someone goes to steal a kill in AH you cant do too much, in WT I shoot down team mates on a regular basis because of this haha
which makes me glad that you can't this in AH
-
Yeah, let's turn friendly collisions off...
*Player 1 Spawns on runway and fires up his engine.*
*Player 2 Spawns on runway.*
*KABOOM*
-
lol well the WT guys have something right, friendly collisions and FF enabled, tbh it is fun there, as when someone goes to steal a kill in AH you cant do too much, in WT I shoot down team mates on a regular basis because of this haha
I rest my case.
-
Yeah, let's turn friendly collisions off...
*Player 1 Spawns on runway and fires up his engine.*
*Player 2 Spawns on runway.*
*KABOOM*
Would be pretty bad coding to enable friendly collisions while on runway. It doesn't need to be that way. Collisions on when airborne sounds a lot better.
-
Would be pretty bad coding to enable friendly collisions while on runway. It doesn't need to be that way. Collisions on when airborne sounds a lot better.
From my limited experience in there, you don't collide while on the ground...only once airborne.
-
which makes me glad that you can't this in AH
In WT I find the kill stealing is about 100 times worse than in AH, I have had 3 cons chasing me, taken a wing off the guy infront of me, then 4 team mates swoop in ignore the easy kills behind me and go for the wingless guy in front of me, no I was joking when I said I shoot my own team down, but I have put a couple bullets into them before as an F off find your own kill message....
-
From my limited experience in there, you don't collide while on the ground...only once airborne.
You actually can collide on the ground in AH, when friendly collisions are enabled. It sucks :(
-
You actually can collide on the ground in AH, when friendly collisions are enabled. It sucks :(
Yep, I'm well aware of that, but we were/are talking about War Thunder. ;)
One of my first days playing around in WT:
Oh cool, friendly collisions are off (cuz I rolled right through someone on my takeoff roll). Coming back to land and re-arm...collided with a guy taking off while I was on short final. :bhead
-
I recently started playing Wt again, the last update was nice.
Soon they will have tanks and ship warfare implemented. "its already there just ai controlled atm"
I see these types of "free to play" games as killers of "pay as you play" type game dynamics. I fear in 1-2 more years Wt will be hammered out enough to be considered a real threat to other flight sim's. Right now it is lacking in some things like looking around and some other basic functions. War thunder also focuses on 1920-1950's planes.
The major downside is the gameplay itself is treated more like a rpg type game, where you upgrade parts of your plane and put points into your pilot skills to make them more effective in combat.
One you can pay to fly 15+ minutes to get into combat, while the other you simply log in,get your "i got a few kills" fix and go snuggle with the wife.
Then we have games like star citizen & eve VR that will throw people into a entire universe of such battles.
Its also all about numbers, at any given time i can log into Wt and fight 15k players or more, when its 2am here. If i try that with any other flight sim the servers are dang near dead, and hardly populated mid week, even tho its mid day. "and to pay for that!?"
I also like how they made the flight mode selectable from the start, and the training missions help too "even tho for any vet its a NO DUH" type ordeal. It makes it so people playing in the realistic arenas at least know how to use there aircraft, ie..taking off and landing .ect.
I fear gone are the days of monthly percriptions and in with the years of "play the game for free, but buy what you want to use" kind of system. Or the ever so better, pay once and play the product all you want how you want when you want "star citizen" and if you want more, pay more. But every once can EARN said ship/gun/suit/station/blah blahblah with time and effort. Try to keep up with that type of system if you inking 15$ per account. The math is just all bad for monthly perscription games.
-
Subscription... Sub... scription...
-
One level more in WT and I can unlock the Bf-109F4 which was my initial goal.
I appreciate the eyecandy and how easy it is to get in a fight due to the high number of players.
I hate the joystick implementation (wobble). Tried for fun keyboard and mouse flying today... much, much easier to aim... clearly this are the type of customers they are aiming for.
Their hit detection is very different from AH. Hit sprites and parts falling off is calculated on the client, but wether you actually hit is calculated on the server...
In practice you can see pieces and bits falling of your target but due to lag, the server sometimes sees it as a miss. Only if the server returns a hit message to you, the enemy takes damage.
Thats a hot topic over at their forum - I wonder how long till players demand the "what_happens_on_your_frontend _counts"-model :)
-
Its also all about numbers, at any given time i can log into Wt and fight 15k players or more, when its 2am here.
But they make you wait in a "Matchmaker" queue for others in your chosen plane's rank level, and their arenas only allow 32 players (16 on each of the two sides). I love flying the Hurri Mk1 in AH2, and that's the plane I spend my time in over at WT. It's a level 2 plane, so I sit and wait (sometimes 5 minutes or more) before I get to "join the battle"...because most everyone else wants to fly the faster and better armed planes from their "late war" tier of planes (level 8 or 10 or something).
-
Sure, that does happen from time to time, while other times its almost instantly.
One could say the same for aces high, unless your taking off from a base already under assault, you still must fly 10-15 minutes to get into the action.
Its a tit-for-tat kind of thing, guess it just depends on how much time and money someone has. ( i have substance abuse problems :cheers: ) For me if i have 15-20 minutes before work ill jump into a plane and go into instant action knowing my limited time WILL be spent doing some pewpew.
One thing i highly dislike is the rpg, plane lvl's and upgrades/enhancements and such.
But imagine if Ah had that type of system where bombs, bullet types and maybe even better octane for "perks" could be implemented.
Apples & oranges.
Im waiting for bigger and better games honestly, everything right now is still So stale. I want to play a war or combat simulator, not a one off of everything, or a one of everything arcade game. Something "like" ww2OL, but without everything that made it SUCK. "good luck with that one future game company's" Untill then im going to have to gravitate to games and company's who have that same outlook on future products, where "the sky is the limit, after that is space..and after that is another sky, on another planet..far far away"
-
But imagine if Ah had that type of system where bombs, bullet types and maybe even better octane for "perks" could be implemented.
<barf.gif>
Apples & oranges.
Bigtime. I really understand what's to like about WT. It is a style of gameplay that's very popular for the reasons you listed. Plus it's free. I am willing to accept the warts on AH because the gameplay is what I like, but not everybody is looking for this style of play.
Untill then im going to have to gravitate to games and company's who have that same outlook on future products, where "the sky is the limit, after that is space..and after that is another sky, on another planet..far far away"
Got my golden ticket... :rock It's the only game I can see pulling me out of here and turning me into a pretty much FSO only player if it's half of what they say it's gonna be.
Wiley.
-
With the recent introduction of WT on Steam, if you fork over $105 bucks, you get all the 'packs' which includes a few premium planes, some Golden Eagles and with the Steam pack, 2 single player campaigns.
I've been playing it a lot recently and while the eye candy is fantastic and really does help with immersion, the flight model just isn't that good, still has that 'flying on rails' feel WoP and IL2 had. There are rumors the FM team quit to protest how Gaijin is more focused on the arcade side of the game while ignoring the full realism aspects of the game. It also appears as though the flight model is adjusted for game balance reasons rather than something wrong with the flight model. I remember when WB started doing this after WildBill took over, one of the reasons why WB started its downward slide.
ack-ack
-
Ack-Ack, that is an interesting rumor. I wonder if this holds true for when they updated the flight model for the P38. I did not get a chance to fly the P38 in game yet because I am not leveled high enough. I am also wondering if this also explains why it has a level 10 requirement to fly as well. Personally I think they should lower the level requirement on the P38 to make it more in line with the historical period while not overpowering the other planes.
-
Look up Birds of Steel practically is an Xbox 360 version of War Thunder i tried birds of steel on full realism mode and its unflyable you have to keep you fingers on the buttons or your plane just rolls over on its back and crashes i dont like Birds of Steel much but play it when i am bored graphics are outstanding but that's about it
-
ok how do you earn "golden Eagles" :headscratch:
I went and spent all that I had :rofl
one thing I found quite funny about WT is the modern day mentality of "everyone is a winner"
I absolutely suked flying there at first flying it with just hat views and refusing to fly in F3.....I failed miserably at a mission(well many of them....ok....ALL of them...haha)
but yet I still get rewarded experience points and some lion currency :rofl :rofl :rofl
personally I think if you fail...you should get nothing....
makes me think what the hell why do I need to try to get better...I get perks for failing..... :rolleyes:
-
ok how do you earn "golden Eagles" :headscratch:
I'm pretty sure you have to buy them with real money...and is how the company makes their money.
-
I'm pretty sure you have to buy them with real money...and is how the company makes their money.
hmmm what about the planes that can only be bought with the eagles?
if it is truly a free to play game(which I was lead to believe it was) everything ingame should be able to be had by grinding through it.
-
Premium aircraft... like some tanks on WoT and some ships in Navy Field. They all do it.
-
Premium aircraft... like some tanks on WoT and some ships in Navy Field. They all do it.
ahhh so any "premium" aircraft must be bought with eagles...and they can only be had with real money except the few they give you when you start?
I knew there was a scam in there somewhere.
-
WT coming to PS4. Wonder if that's a good thing?
http://www.joystiq.com/2013/08/20/war-thunder-to-divebomb-ps4-launch-as-free-to-play-mmo/ (http://www.joystiq.com/2013/08/20/war-thunder-to-divebomb-ps4-launch-as-free-to-play-mmo/)
-
WT coming to PS4. Wonder if that's a good thing?
http://www.joystiq.com/2013/08/20/war-thunder-to-divebomb-ps4-launch-as-free-to-play-mmo/ (http://www.joystiq.com/2013/08/20/war-thunder-to-divebomb-ps4-launch-as-free-to-play-mmo/)
played some Beta WOT on xbox 360, just doesn't feel right using a control.
-
ok how do you earn "golden Eagles" :headscratch:
You'll need to fork over real money to buy 'Golden Eagles' or from purchasing packs (again with real money) that will sometimes include Golden Eagles as an item.
ack-ack
-
Like WoT it's freemium not f2p. It's not a scam, it's a business model. A few years ago Aces High had free 8-player, but you have to pay to get into the big arenas... Freemium.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemium
-
Like WoT it's freemium not f2p. It's not a scam, it's a business model. A few years ago Aces High had free 8-player, but you have to pay to get into the big arenas... Freemium.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemium
im old school...when someone says hey this is free.....(which they absolutely do big ol letters..."Free to play") I expect it to be free....not after I get it..oh by the way you cant have this part of it until we get cash money......
some may call it a "business model" I call it a scam.
Aces High is free to download and play offline...the 8 player arenas were free to use.....to play online it costs...no hidden fees....no misdirection....
that would be like me saying...hey I am gonna give away a tattoo for free...start the tattoo and say after I am half way through the tat...BTW color is 50$ oh sorry you didn't read the fine print it clearly states here in fine text only the outline is free.....
You'll need to fork over real money to buy 'Golden Eagles' or from purchasing packs (again with real money) that will sometimes include Golden Eagles as an item.
ack-ack
ya cc that
I am not feeling it anymore after this revelation.
-
How is it misdirection to say the game is free? It is free. If you want you can buy extra stuff in the game. You're like saying that optional extras on a car is a "scam" and it should be all or nothing. I think the free to play and it's many variations (freemium being one) is a good business model; I get to play the game for free, and if I really like it I can spend some money on extra content to make the game even better. To continue the car analogy: Wouldn't it be great if car dealers would let you own and drive cars for free? ... Only the basic models of course; you'd have to pay for the optional extras like AC and electric seats.
-
How is it misdirection to say the game is free? It is free. If you want you can buy extra stuff in the game. You're like saying that optional extras on a car is a "scam" and it should be all or nothing. I think the free to play and it's many variations (freemium being one) is a good business model; I get to play the game for free, and if I really like it I can spend some money on extra content to make the game even better. To continue the car analogy: Wouldn't it be great if car dealers would let you own and drive cars for free? ... Only the basic models of course; you'd have to pay for the optional extras like AC and electric seats.
I'm not sure how much of an edge the pay to play planes give you over the best you can earn without buying stuff in WT, but in a PvP game if buying stuff gives you the 'I win' button, it's easy to understand why it might sit wrong with people.
If WT is like over here, it's to a certain degree the plane, but the operator can make up for a lot. Maybe it's still possible to have fun and be competitive over there without paying a cent against the top tier planes, I don't know.
I find the rumor about the FM people leaving sort of funny, sort of sad because I was under the impression some of the FM people had jumped ship from here figuring they were going to 'do it right' and it was going to be ever so much better over there. If the rumor's true, it's the result I pretty much figured would happen.
Wiley.
-
Has anyone got a good word to say about WT :old:
apart from graphics :old:
-
Has anyone got a good word to say about WT :old:
Absolutely, it really helps you appreciate AH :)
-
Aces High is my favorite ww2 sim of all time.
as for war thunder...
skip arcade completely and only bother trying historic battles if you cant get a match quick enough in full realism.
the only thing War thunder has that is decent is their full realism mode which has only a handful of people and is an orphan that is basically unsupported by the developers. hell it was added by player request only lol.
full realism mode has everything I want in the way its setup... historic matchups, rapid action, no icons, great graphics that make no icons realistic and close to real world aircraft spotting, smooth fluid head tracking, decent flight model (its early Il2 FM quirky not so great at below stall speed modelling but close enough to be called usable). clouds, love them just wish long range dots were not visible through clouds though. (why am I the only plane thats VFR on top through a thick overcast layer? lol IFR currency is another big advantage when having to use these partial panel ww2 planes in thick clouds with no autopilot )
in such a scenario the more realism you add in the more you exclude regular players who havent had years of real world flight experience (or lots of flight sim experience is just as good perhaps but lots of experience using real world spotting techniques in the real world REALLY DO MAKE full realism spotting easy) to the point that they are just cannon fodder for players like me and they find it too difficult to learn or bother with and go back to Arcade or historical arcade modes and let the ai fly the plane for them while they point it at the nearest big neon billboard they want to shoot at.
when you think about leveling up mechanics in War Thunder and grinding and putting in the time in the game the irony that the more realism added to a game with a good setup could keep people hooked for a decade the way Aces High has because its so difficult may be lost on the masses and Gaijin War Thunders developers too. not just grinding stats to give yourself an advantage but getting better at flying and air combat maneuvers and spotting enemy aircraft and developing those skills through actual practice takes a long time for some. many are naturals, some will never get it. thats what has made Aces High continue for over a decade. it has become a form of golf with all the addictions and frustrations that that entails.
-
I've tried War Thunder and really didn't get into it...but I tried AH in 2005 and haven't stopped playing it yet. :joystick: :airplane:
-
Has anyone got a good word to say about WT :old:
WT FRB it is quite realistic:
1) No enemy icons
2) No radar
3) No autotrim/autoclimb
4) realistic weather conditions
5) progressive damage model
6) different choice of ammo belts
7) no ammo counters
8) no damage list
9) limited pilots stamina
10) flight model with short stall warning
11) midair friendly collisions
Now put on top superior graphics and you get quite fresh experience/immersion you've never seen in AH main arena in 10 years.
And 200+ planes already modeled. Not band for F2P, huh ?
-
And 200+ planes already modeled. Not band for F2P, huh ?
I'd rather have 20 planes with reliable and accurate flight models, than 200 with constant complaints about being over- or under-modeled.
-
Like I have stated on festers thread :old:
Like RoF but Gaijin needed cannot see wood for the trees :old:
-
Honestly, take RoF and and replace it with WWII planes and every sim out there would pale in comparison, AH included. Which is why I hope the upcoming Il-2 Battle of Stalingrad will be done right. Do it right and I'm won't even come back to this drama ego inflated cesspool. Sure will miss the friends I have here, but oh wells.
-
Do it right and I'm won't even come back to this drama ego inflated cesspool. Sure will miss the friends I have here, but oh wells.
What makes you think Internet egos are exclusive to Aces High?
-
What makes you think Internet egos are exclusive to Aces High?
Not so much if there is, as much as the amount of it. Here you see the same people everyday because the playerbase is puny. And it's the same sob story everytime. At least in other games, there's a variety of different people you interact with everyday, so that the occasional douch isn't a thing to dread.
-
WT FRB it is quite realistic:
1) No enemy icons
2) No radar
3) No autotrim/autoclimb
4) realistic weather conditions
5) progressive damage model
6) different choice of ammo belts
7) no ammo counters
8) no damage list
9) limited pilots stamina
10) flight model with short stall warning
11) midair friendly collisions
Now put on top superior graphics and you get quite fresh experience/immersion you've never seen in AH main arena in 10 years.
And 200+ planes already modeled. Not band for F2P, huh ?
take all that fluff (some of which is pure fantasy nonsense) and toss in prototype/theoretical aircraft as well as actual aircraft with crap flight models and you have fluffed crap...
Not so much if there is, as much as the amount of it. Here you see the same people everyday because the playerbase is puny. And it's the same sob story everytime. At least in other games, there's a variety of different people you interact with everyday, so that the occasional douch isn't a thing to dread.
you must ignore the chat window...there are more ultra melons in wt than there are here. i've never seen so many blatant f-bombs spewed in chat without consequences than i see in wt. not to mention the vast number of idiots spouting absolute nonsense about anything historical in the forums. according to the masses in wt, it's a game, not a simulation...which is the only thing factual about wt.
-
Perhaps ironically, Russian games are less censored than American games these days.
-
Honestly, take RoF and and replace it with WWII planes and every sim out there would pale in comparison, AH included. Which is why I hope the upcoming Il-2 Battle of Stalingrad will be done right. Do it right and I'm won't even come back to this drama ego inflated cesspool. Sure will miss the friends I have here, but oh wells.
You smell :rofl
:)
-
I'd rather have 20 planes with reliable and accurate flight models, than 200 with constant complaints about being over- or under-modeled.
Funny you say that... there are people in this game complaining about flight models for planes. But I do agree about the resentment towards Gaijin's approach at their flight modeling of planes. It seems they are trying to use a "one flight model - fit all" type setup and some planes don't fly exactly the way they should. The P47's roll rate is slower than in real life, and the F4F's turn performance in WT needs another review.
-
It seems they are trying to use a "one flight model - fit all" type setup and some planes don't fly exactly the way they should.
Here's the funny (and sad) part of it...
They admit that a number of planes are using "placeholder" flight models, until they get around to giving them real ones. Awesome for credibility...but I guess anything goes since it's technically "Beta" software.
I think it's hilarious how many people shell out large amounts of real cash to skip the grinding for more experience, or to buy a special plane, or whatever...in a BETA version game.
-
take all that fluff (some of which is pure fantasy nonsense) and toss in prototype/theoretical aircraft as well as actual aircraft with crap flight models and you have fluffed crap...
Speaking about flight models there are two main aspects - the flight dynamics and the flight data
Flight dynamic is modeled very well in WT. The main differences between WT and AH are:
1) Stall warning - it is very short in WT and you need to be very careful dogfighting near the ground
2) Inertia on X axis (elevator) - it is bigger in WT - that makes aiming harder
Everything else is pretty much the same in AH and WT
As for flight data AH was always good at it. To claim that WT is bad first of all you need to take timer and test the planes.
I did not see something wrong so far: for example Ki-43, Hurricane and He-112 turn very well, P-36C, G.50 and C.200 turn good and LaGG-3 turn not good which make sense for me. Plus you must take into account that in WT when you place new type of plane in service you get a second hand one and need to upgrade it to factory standards to get max performance. The additional factor in WT is limited pilot's stamina - if your "pilot" is not trained well he can run out of stamina in intense dogfight pretty quickly and after that the controls become too sluggish and you can not put the plane to it limits for sometime. If it happens in the middle of dogfight and for example you are in Spitfire you are a dead meat to 109 or 190 you fighting with.
To sum up it is still a question what is better to to play with precisely modeled planes in arcade environment (AH main arena) or to play in may be not that accurately modeled planes (it is in question though) but in realistic environment.
The second choice gives you much better immersion of the real fight and quite fresh experience.
-
Speaking about flight models there are two main aspects - the flight dynamics and the flight data
Flight dynamic is modeled very well in WT. The main differences between WT and AH are:
1) Stall warning - it is very short in WT and you need to be very careful dogfighting near the ground
2) Inertia on X axis (elevator) - it is bigger in WT - that makes aiming harder
Everything else is pretty much the same in AH and WT
As for flight data AH was always good at it. To claim that WT is bad first of all you need to take timer and test the planes.
I did not see something wrong so far: for example Ki-43, Hurricane and He-112 turn very well, P-36C, G.50 and C.200 turn good and LaGG-3 turn not good which make sense for me. Plus you must take into account that in WT when you place new type of plane in service you get a second hand one and need to upgrade it to factory standards to get max performance. The additional factor in WT is limited pilot's stamina - if your "pilot" is not trained well he can run out of stamina in intense dogfight pretty quickly and after that the controls become too sluggish and you can not put the plane to it limits for sometime. If it happens in the middle of dogfight and for example you are in Spitfire you are a dead meat to 109 or 190 you fighting with.
To sum up it is still a question what is better to to play with precisely modeled planes in arcade environment (AH main arena) or to play in may be not that accurately modeled planes (it is in question though) but in realistic environment.
The second choice gives you much better immersion of the real fight and quite fresh experience.
I saw the pilot training didn't know what that was all about...thats actually a cool idea.
-
WT FRB it is quite realistic:
1) No enemy icons
2) No radar
3) No autotrim/autoclimb
4) realistic weather conditions
5) progressive damage model
6) different choice of ammo belts
7) no ammo counters
8) no damage list
9) limited pilots stamina
10) flight model with short stall warning
11) midair friendly collisions
Now put on top superior graphics and you get quite fresh experience/immersion you've never seen in AH main arena in 10 years.
And 200+ planes already modeled. Not band for F2P, huh ?
you know what is wonderful about them. at any time they feel like it, they can nerf or overpower any airplane just for "the sake of gameplay". and to get the top airplanes you have to go thru a bunch of airplanes which includes some that were little more than drawings on a napkin.
semp
-
So?
-
you know what is wonderful about them. at any time they feel like it, they can nerf or overpower any airplane just for "the sake of gameplay".
May be considering arcade arena. I did not see nerfed/overpowered planes among the set I used to fly so far in FRB. From what I heard the developers did not want to adjust FM in FRB in the sake of balance. They try to put the additional planes to fill most gaps in planeset. For example early La-5 and La-5F are coming to fill the gap between LaGG-3 and La-5FN.
There are people who came from IL-2 hardcore servers and these guys are real threat whatever they fly as they used to play in hardcore environment.
and to get the top airplanes you have to go thru a bunch of airplanes which includes some that were little more than drawings on a napkin.
Yep, there are few experimental/gift/premium planes but they are available for cash only and you do not need to unlock these to level up your planeset or did you mean He-112?
If you do not want to fly it you may consider Italian line instead ( G.50, C.200, C.202 ) before jumping to 109s
Why do you need top planes anyway? Are you not fed up with them in AH later war arena? Fly early war planes like P.36C, G.50 or HurricaneI, etc - they are great fun to fly and very rewarding - your exp/level will rise quickly and cheaply. Or if you need a challenge - try MiG-3 ;)
-
Honestly, take RoF and and replace it with WWII planes and every sim out there would pale in comparison, AH included. Which is why I hope the upcoming Il-2 Battle of Stalingrad will be done right. Do it right and I'm won't even come back to this drama ego inflated cesspool. Sure will miss the friends I have here, but oh wells.
:rofl
-
Not so much if there is, as much as the amount of it. Here you see the same people everyday because the playerbase is puny. And it's the same sob story everytime. At least in other games, there's a variety of different people you interact with everyday, so that the occasional douch isn't a thing to dread.
Don't be so hard on yourself, you aren't that big a sweetheart.
-
War Thunder keeps the genre of WW2 flight sims alive. I don't see that as a bad thing and AH will probably get some additional subscribers out of it eventually. That said, (imho) not completing Combat Tour for AH was a mistake.
We as a community need to help the new players instead of giving them the 'alt-F4' treatment. It will pay dividends to not just HTC but to this community as a whole.
-
War Thunder keeps the genre of WW2 flight sims alive. I don't see that as a bad thing and AH will probably get some additional subscribers out of it eventually. That said, (imho) not completing Combat Tour for AH was a mistake.
We as a community need to help the new players instead of giving them the 'alt-F4' treatment. It will pay dividends to not just HTC but to this community as a whole.
I agree with you Del, I got a chance to play it a few times and its actually quite enjoyable - its built around quick combat (Arcade style) and easy game play. However when I tried to junp into Historical it took forever to find a game, I assume one realistic one life and long mission wasn't appealing.
I wish we would of had Combat Tour, even if its against the AI - my reason is because I absolutely love historical scenarios like BoB or Italian campaign, having to wait a year for 4 frames really sucks.
Arcade is the only style WT plays, although its fun and enjoyable (and far to easy) - it offers no learning curve, anyone with a mouse can be good since it shows you where to lead your bullets, F4 mode offers no cockpit so you can easily see around you without obstruction.
Simply said there is no challenge to anyone who wants to master the art of flying realistically.
When I see very few fights going on in Aces, I either play WT or Read a book.
-
Don't be so hard on yourself, you aren't that big a sweetheart.
Case in point. :aok
I'll throw a bone your way.
-
I wish we would of had Combat Tour, even if its against the AI - my reason is because I absolutely love historical scenarios like BoB or Italian campaign, having to wait a year for 4 frames really sucks.
Arcade is the only style WT plays, although its fun and enjoyable (and far to easy) - it offers no learning curve, anyone with a mouse can be good since it shows you where to lead your bullets, F4 mode offers no cockpit so you can easily see around you without obstruction.
Simply said there is no challenge to anyone who wants to master the art of flying realistically.
Hmm ... Have you ever played in Full Realism Battle arena in War Thunder?
You post doesn't make sense at all. If you like realism why do you play in arcade arena in WT ?
-
(http://i724.photobucket.com/albums/ww247/Glendinho/109FfromWT_zpsbe932e9f.png) (http://s724.photobucket.com/user/Glendinho/media/109FfromWT_zpsbe932e9f.png.html)
:D :D
-
(http://i724.photobucket.com/albums/ww247/Glendinho/109FfromWT_zpsbe932e9f.png) (http://s724.photobucket.com/user/Glendinho/media/109FfromWT_zpsbe932e9f.png.html)
:D :D
curious, do you whine over there as much as you do here?
semp
-
Watch out Dolbs, something's biting your ankle.
-
lol, everyone here knows as far as Titanic is concerned, if the pig looks good, that's all that matters.
There are people who came from IL-2 hardcore servers and these guys are real threat whatever they fly as they used to play in hardcore environment.
now there is an interesting statement. i played il2 "hardcore" for a short time and when i switched to ah i found out that "hardcore" unrealistic flight models are nothing compared to realistic flight models. been getting my arse handed to me ever since.
as far as the fm's in wt...it's common knowledge that a good number of them currently have "placeholder" flight models that are incomplete. and with the new "upgrade system", a base plane does not operate near it's real life performance, until all of the available upgrades are added.
-
Flight models aren't easy, I've been told.
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/03/22/article-0-1249F5E0000005DC-404_634x423.jpg)
-
now there is an interesting statement. i played il2 "hardcore" for a short time and when i switched to ah i found out that "hardcore" unrealistic flight models are nothing compared to realistic flight models. been getting my arse handed to me ever since.
as far as the fm's in wt...it's common knowledge that a good number of them currently have "placeholder" flight models that are incomplete. and with the new "upgrade system", a base plane does not operate near it's real life performance, until all of the available upgrades are added.
I'm talking about realistic (hardcore) environment. Playing without icons is a big difference to AH Main Arena you might realized already if you've played WT or IL-2.
Nothing wrong if you Like AH Main Arena - it is good for you and good for HTC. If HTC switch off icons, killshooter and turn on friendly midair collisions three quarters of players will quit on the spot.
But if you like to learn something new WT FRB is a good place for getting some new experience.
P.S.
As for FM's - I believe nothing wrong to use placeholders if modeling variants of existing planes (like the FM of La-5 is based on La-5FN with few adjustments)
If you think that all the planes are similar in WT you are very wrong. Take MiG-3, then Hurricane I, then He-112A, then LaGG-3 - you will see how different they are.
-
I'm talking about realistic (hardcore) environment. Playing without icons is a big difference to AH Main Arena you might realized already if you've played WT or IL-2.
Nothing wrong if you Like AH Main Arena - it is good for you and good for HTC. If HTC switch off icons, killshooter and turn on friendly midair collisions three quarters of players will quit on the spot.
But if you like to learn something new WT FRB is a good place for getting some new experience.
ya i know what you meant and flight models make a huge difference. and i've played no icons, limited distance icons, etc...and wt frb? been there done that. in ah flying a c202 i can put up a good fight against 2 p40e's...in wt, the p40e's flew like yak3s and the c202 flew like a brick.
P.S.
As for FM's - I believe nothing wrong to use placeholders if modeling variants of existing planes (like the FM of La-5 is based on La-5FN with few adjustments)
If you think that all the planes are similar in WT you are very wrong. Take MiG-3, then Hurricane I, then He-112A, then LaGG-3 - you will see how different they are.
never said the fm's were all the same...i said they were all wrong. getting better but, of the ones i've played, a couple are still off even after permanently disabling the instructor. haven't played much since the last patch so i don't know what has been improved or nerfed.
-
Aper your talking tosh!
I play ROF with no icons etc :old:
I had beta invite for WT it was appalling.
777 has got involved because the Russians cannot understand the concept of the market place :old:
Gameplay?
WT cannot even get the basic right :old:
Wings of Prey - @#$/
Il2 - #$$$/
ROF -#@#$ before a colonial got involved
AH log on - awesome concept :old:
-
I like how biplanes in warthunder cant turn as well at low speeds as monoplanes. I guess they figure the more expensive planes should handle better. And talk about ack huggers, you think AH is bad, that's pretty much all full real battles is. In warthunder you can buy powerups for your planes, like improved trigger and firing mechanisms for your plane, lol. And graphics are overly detailed yet human visual accuity and ergonomics isn't modeled at all, which results in always flying in soup ala IL2. Because the game is designed to be played in external view mode fuel gauges don't work, not sure which gauges work, there's HUD telling you how many minutes of fuel you have.
-
I'm talking about realistic (hardcore) environment. Playing without icons is a big difference to AH Main Arena you might realized already if you've played WT or IL-2.
Nothing wrong if you Like AH Main Arena - it is good for you and good for HTC. If HTC switch off icons, killshooter and turn on friendly midair collisions three quarters of players will quit on the spot.
But if you like to learn something new WT FRB is a good place for getting some new experience.
P.S.
As for FM's - I believe nothing wrong to use placeholders if modeling variants of existing planes (like the FM of La-5 is based on La-5FN with few adjustments)
If you think that all the planes are similar in WT you are very wrong. Take MiG-3, then Hurricane I, then He-112A, then LaGG-3 - you will see how different they are.
Yeah, no killshooter and no paid subscription requirement to filter out the riff-raff. I'll leave the results of that to your imagination.
-
-aper- I disagree about your assumption with the percentages of people leaving AH
-
.......
WT cannot even get the basic right :old:
Wings of Prey - @#$/
Il2 - #$$$/
ROF -#@#$ before a colonial got involved
AH log on - awesome concept :old:
Heya Zack,
that smell like fanboi §$% because they having over 3 million downloads, over 260000 active Forum Member, most online was over 19000 ppl on the forum, ingame most onle was 85000 as peak, currently average are 41000 during the week. So they running their business fine and making good money. They never being focused onto the complete sim scene, they went where the money is, and nothing wrong with that! Anyhow, even the pure native FRB got over 600 ppl average online each day, and much more intresting is the new event concept with historical plane setups, like BoB or Midway or battle of Korsun etc.
well,
after a lot years of flying Warbirds (started 1999) and AH2 (2007) i was invited to WT in december 2011. During the time i was mod and gamemaster and build as FM dev a lot of modells. First of all, it is fun! The new events mode with historical correct planesets are great fun! But the best part of WT is, that it simply brings new players into the sim scene, which would never come to the idea to buy IL2:BoS, or even preorder it, but they are dragged into the dogfight spirit which catches all of us one time long ago. Thats WT biggest point. It brings the "mouse shooters" to a point where they decide, "ok now i wanna really fly, i need a hotas and track IR". The current daily potential with around 35000- 45000 players online is bigger than any pure sim could ever deliver.
No other game brings in some many fresh blood into the scene like WT does!
Run FRB or some custom battle and it is fun, and thats what it is about
Last and not least, i meet every day a lot of old AH2 players at WT some are full into it, playing each day over 8h ..... and yes, i also preorderd IL2:Bos and being very intrested into it becasue i am a prophead, i love flightsims, i love the experiance to try something new. All i can say, try out things, like it or like it not, play it or play it, or don't play, but don't take position as a fanboi, Intel or AMD??? Really? As long you got over 60 frames in full HD who cares the rest?
take care
-
Heya Zack,
that smell like fanboi §$%
This is the Aces High forum and the Aces High community.
Fact, no other game brings in some many fresh blood into the scene like WT does actually!
'that smell like fanboi §$%' that belongs on the WT forum for the WT community. I'd recommend 'fan posturing' of this nature there. In 15 years, we can re-measure reproductive organs.
:D :salute :cheers:
-
This is the Aces High forum and the Aces High community.
'that smell like fanboi §$%' that belongs on the WT forum for the WT community. I'd recommend 'fan posturing' of this nature there. In 15 years, we can re-measure reproductive organs.
:D :salute :cheers:
hahahaaa maybe, but you can't cheat with those numbers they are dragging in, i installed AH2 on my both sons PCs, they find the graphics outdated, and sure its not cool if you play your daddys games ;-)
but they played WT, because it offers some easy access and got great graphics, but they hate the FRB no icon settings, so we never play the same game, i hang out at FRB events and they play arcade or HB...
AH got 13900 member on this forum, Most Online Today: 62. Most Online Ever: 351 (April 02, 2008, 09:09:15 PM) , just compare those numbers with the WT numbers, over 260000 active Forum Member, most online was over 19000 ppl on the forum, ingame most onle was 85000 as peak, simple conclusion, they must doing something right
-
hahahaaa maybe, but you can't cheat with those numbers they are dragging in, i installed AH2 on my both sons PCs, they find the graphics outdated, and sure its not cool if you play your daddys games ;-)
but they played WT, because it offers some easy access and got great graphics, but they hate the FRB no icon settings, so we never play the same game, i hang out at FRB events and they play arcade or HB...
AH got 13900 member on this forum, Most Online Today: 62. Most Online Ever: 351 (April 02, 2008, 09:09:15 PM) , just compare those numbers with the WT numbers, over 260000 active Forum Member, most online was over 19000 ppl on the forum, ingame most onle was 85000 as peak, simple conclusion, they must doing something right
I guess my points were either poorly aimed or your capacity to understand them is currently struggling. You're over here parading WT on the Aces High forum and calling players here who support this game (over WT) 'fanbois' - all the while shaking pom-poms for WT and whizzing all over this forum, game and community.
Are you representative of the WT community when it comes to poor manners, ill-conceived recruiting campaigns and ironic gestures?
WT is enjoying a large capacity of online players that are curious about this free-to-play game that is new. But don't pretend to ignore that Aces High is a game that has been supported and continuously developed for 15 years with a community that is loyal. Coming over here to behave in an asinine manner is not going to endear the AH crowd (overall). Like I said, 15 years from now AHII may or may not be around (though I'd be willing to bet it would still have members of this community that maintain fond memories and miss both the game and community, if it does go the way of Air Warrior - where I got my start). If you don't grow up over that period of time and WT is still around with the same degree of support AHII has always enjoyed, measure your crotch then and hope others are as impressed as you are with it.
-
I guess my points were either poorly aimed or your capacity to understand them is currently struggling. You're over here parading WT on the Aces High forum and calling players here who support this game (over WT) 'fanbois' - all the while shaking pom-poms for WT and whizzing all over this forum, game and community.
Are you representative of the WT community when it comes to poor manners, ill-conceived recruiting campaigns and ironic gestures?
WT is enjoying a large capacity of online players that are curious about this free-to-play game that is new. But don't pretend to ignore that Aces High is a game that has been supported and continuously developed for 15 years with a community that is loyal. Coming over here to behave in an asinine manner is not going to endear the AH crowd (overall). Like I said, 15 years from now AHII may or may not be around (though I'd be willing to bet it would still have members of this community that maintain fond memories and miss both the game and community, if it does go the way of Air Warrior - where I got my start). If you don't grow up over that period of time and WT is still around with the same degree of support AHII has always enjoyed, measure your crotch then and hope others are as impressed as you are with it.
oh my, did you read my posting? Well, just to remember, in 2007 the AH2 scoreboard shows over 6000 players monthly, when i left in 2012 it was down to around 3800, just figure out the last main scoreboard from september 2013: around 2300 (it may vary, important is the overall aspect of loosing players)
I saw the same downhill race over at WB, yes, their server is still active, you find around 30 players online each night there.... sad but the truth. The simple question is, will they change something to stop this trend?
A couple of new flightsims like IL2:BoS and DCS:ww2 will drag more numbers away, like it or like it not, call me names, it don't change anything! Like i said, i preorderd allready IL2 BoS and i will order the next gen sim in 2018, because the flight sim market is coming back!
-
I'm not going anywhere dhyran ..I think it shows poor taste to be pushing WT in here..
-
I'm not going anywhere dhyran ..I think it shows poor taste to be pushing WT in here..
Did you get it right? it has nothing to do with me or anyone as a person! No, the real question behind all of that is, what is the strategy of AH2 to get back more players, WT drags more ppl into the flight sim scene, but how can AH2 profits about it? I just gave some numbers, and numbers are facts, face it or not! Call me names is the worst answer...... anyway, WT is fun to play like AH2 is fun to play but its the questions about its future you have to answer, and therefor you have to deal with facts, numbers, the playerbase, if you can't it simply shows the lack of accepting the reallity
-
oh my, did you read my posting?
Closer than you read mine, it appears.
-
Gotta laugh at you dhyran, sorry, but the numbers you give on a free game are worthless.
Only the ones that think the product is worth paying for is worth mentioning.
To give an example; I've put about £10 into WT over many many months, and in the same amount of time AcesHigh has probably taken £100 or more off me. Why?! Because poo graphics aside, AH is worth paying for 10 times more than WT.
-
no the question behind all of that is, what is the strategy of AH2 to get back more players, WT drags more ppl into the flight sim scene, but how can AH2 profits about it?
HT probably can answer that better than I can..I know scuzzy is working on a video to attract more players and there's a thread that just got posted about a few people coming back to AH from other flight sim games
-
Gotta laugh at you dhyran, sorry, but the numbers you give on a free game are worthless.
Only the ones that think the product is worth paying for is worth mentioning.
To give an example; I've put about £10 into WT over many many months, and in the same amount of time AcesHigh has probably taken £100 or more off me. Why?! Because poo graphics aside, AH is worth paying for 10 times more than WT.
nothing wrong with your personal choice, but there are ppl who spends hundred of $ during just 6 month into WT, all a question what you wanna play and what its worth
-
nothing wrong with your personal choice
There, fixed your post to stop where it should have. You're welcome. Let me know if
anyone from the AHII community goes over to the WT forum to make a nuisance of
them-self. :D
-
I suppose I could trail over there and point out all the errors on the WT Wiki entry for the Mosquito, but I really can't be arsed.
-
that smell like fanboi §$% because they having over 3 million downloads, over 260000 active Forum Member, most online was over 19000 ppl on the forum, ingame most onle was 85000 as peak, currently average are 41000 during the week. So they running their business fine and making good money. They never being focused onto the complete sim scene, they went where the money is, and nothing wrong with that! Anyhow, even the pure native FRB got over 600 ppl average online each day, and much more intresting is the new event concept with historical plane setups, like BoB or Midway or battle of Korsun etc.
I'll take quality over quantity any day.
The one time I tried it, I was getting shot at by a friendly for "being in his way" the second I spawned in. That's right, I wasn't even between him and a target, he just didn't want me in front of him on his way to the fight.
While AH isn't without its tards, at least most of them are filtered out by the subscription.
-
There, fixed your post to stop where it should have. You're welcome. Let me know if
anyone from the AHII community goes over to the WT forum to make a nuisance of
them-self. :D
heheheee good one, yes, indeed, some where banned just after a week.....
-
heheheee good one, yes, indeed, some where banned just after a week.....
So you're here testing the AHII ban-hammer?
BTW, looked for familiar AHII squadrons on the WT forum. Yours appears to be about it.
-
So you're here testing the AHII ban-hammer?
....
Well, again, looks like you don't get my message, or even try to missread it as best you can ;)
And yes, we fly both, 20 LDs flying AH2 and about 20 LDs fly WT
-
Well, again, looks like you don't get my message, or even try to missread it as best you can ;)
And yes, we fly both, 20 LDs flying AH2 and about 20 LDs fly WT
Poor misunderstood (misunderstanding) dhyran.
-
Meh. Other than the fact that they're both somewhat realistic flight sims, WT and AH are two very different games.
WT is essentially counterstrike/halo in the air. Round based, short instant action style fights. This style of game is extremely popular. Couple that with F2P, of course they put up huge numbers. McD's is extremely popular. Doesn't mean everybody wants it or would enjoy it if all other sources of food became unavailable.
AH is an open somewhat persistent world. 'Rounds' as much as they have them can take days. A very different style of gameplay that is less popular, but at least for myself much more desirable than two sides taking off at the same time and clashing in the middle.
I understand why people like games like WT, but it just doesn't appeal to me. Until there's another game that has similar FM fidelity to AH and open world style gameplay, I'm not interested. That I know of, there's only two like this. AH and WB. I flew WB for a few years then came over here for a couple reasons.
If there were something that was as much of a leap in quality above AH as there was going from WB to AH that offered similar gameplay, I'd be there instead of here. That I know of it doesn't exist. I don't know for sure, but I think there's a fairly sizable contingent of people over here who feel the same way. The style of the game is what keeps us here, not the number of players or planes, or the graphics.
I think a large reason the FRB has such a strong pull for some people is they like no icons and finally have someplace that has decent numbers to do it in. I say good on them. I have fairly specific tastes in a lot of ways and know what it's like to want something that not many other people do.
For my taste, about the only thing that has a shot at dragging me away from this game is Star Citizen, if they pull it off. Even then, I'll still FSO.
Wiley.
-
hahahaaa maybe, but you can't cheat with those numbers they are dragging in, i installed AH2 on my both sons PCs, they find the graphics outdated, and sure its not cool if you play your daddys games ;-)
but they played WT, because it offers some easy access and got great graphics, but they hate the FRB no icon settings, so we never play the same game, i hang out at FRB events and they play arcade or HB...
AH got 13900 member on this forum, Most Online Today: 62. Most Online Ever: 351 (April 02, 2008, 09:09:15 PM) , just compare those numbers with the WT numbers, over 260000 active Forum Member, most online was over 19000 ppl on the forum, ingame most onle was 85000 as peak, simple conclusion, they must doing something right
how many were playing the same match?
semp
-
For my taste, about the only thing that has a shot at dragging me away from this game is Star Citizen, if they pull it off. Even then, I'll still FSO.
Star Citizen does look interesting. But, like you, I will always maintain my connection with AHII. It's my WWII dogfighter/bomber pilot/tank commander/PT boat skipper/task force admiral fix. :)
-
While AH isn't without its tards, at least most of them are filtered out by the subscription.
+1 and amen!
-
nothing wrong with your personal choice, but there are ppl who spends hundred of $ during just 6 month into WT, all a question what you wanna play and what its worth
sorry Dhyran but, i've been watching the goings on and wt is a dressed up pig. all those people who spend hundreds of $$$ are a joke, as soon as gaijin does something they don't like, they are in the forums squeaking about how much they spent and aren't spending another dime until "gaijin fixes it"...blah blah blah. most are worse than the turd rants that happened here after the last big graphics upgrade.
the frb population is no more than 10% of the overall active player base and that's because none of the 2.5 million console dweeb mouseaim monkey's would know how to take off if they were stuck in the cockpit with a joystick. and if they were stuck in the cockpit with a joystick and no training wheels background processes to keep them from crashing, there would be 2.5 million fewer players...
-
As a console dweeb, I seem to do fine. :mad:
-
how many were playing the same match?
semp
+1 ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJe0DoFvvLY
-
ya i know what you meant and flight models make a huge difference. and i've played no icons, limited distance icons, etc...and wt frb? been there done that. in ah flying a c202 i can put up a good fight against 2 p40e's...in wt, the p40e's flew like yak3s and the c202 flew like a brick.
You know it is very subjective opinion. The easiest way to figure out properly which plane is better is to create custom FRB arena and to test both planes wing to wing to see which is better in turn, dive, climb, roll, acceleration etc. But it is not the point. Each time you fight with the other plane you have some advantages and disadvantages in plane's performance and the same thing happens in AH. What makes a big difference is the environment.
-
While AH isn't without its tards, at least most of them are filtered out by the subscription.
Switch off killshooter and turn on midair collisions and see what will happen with the people filtered out by the subscription.
I believe FBR hardcore settings filter people better.
-
hahahaaa maybe, but you can't cheat with those numbers they are dragging in, i installed AH2 on my both sons PCs, they find the graphics outdated, and sure its not cool if you play your daddys games ;-)
but they played WT, because it offers some easy access and got great graphics, but they hate the FRB no icon settings, so we never play the same game, i hang out at FRB events and they play arcade or HB...
AH got 13900 member on this forum, Most Online Today: 62. Most Online Ever: 351 (April 02, 2008, 09:09:15 PM) , just compare those numbers with the WT numbers, over 260000 active Forum Member, most online was over 19000 ppl on the forum, ingame most onle was 85000 as peak, simple conclusion, they must doing something right
What have numbers do with anything?
You smell as well :rofl
-
the frb population is no more than 10% of the overall active player base and that's because none of the 2.5 million console dweeb mouseaim monkey's would know how to take off if they were stuck in the cockpit with a joystick....
10% of 2.5 mil .... yeah that tiny little amount.... whats wrong with them :headscratch: :rofl
I wish we had just 1/10th of that 10% here
:rolleyes:
-
hahahaaa maybe, but you can't cheat with those numbers they are dragging in, i installed AH2 on my both sons PCs, they find the graphics outdated, and sure its not cool if you play your daddys games ;-)
but they played WT, because it offers some easy access and got great graphics, but they hate the FRB no icon settings, so we never play the same game, i hang out at FRB events and they play arcade or HB...
AH got 13900 member on this forum, Most Online Today: 62. Most Online Ever: 351 (April 02, 2008, 09:09:15 PM) , just compare those numbers with the WT numbers, over 260000 active Forum Member, most online was over 19000 ppl on the forum, ingame most onle was 85000 as peak, simple conclusion, they must doing something right
Come on dhyran, old friend. By that logic McDonalds makes the best food on the planet ;)
-
Come on dhyran, old friend. By that logic McDonalds makes the best food on the planet ;)
hey fdski,
all i say is, WT brings fresh blood into the scene, thats their biggest point!
Noone have to go there and play it, everyone should plays what he likes, but don't paint it black, because its not!
And for all the others who calls the playerbase stupid or anything like console dweeb or mouseaim monkey's! sure might be there but its never black or white, its gray in gray, same like here
watch this one as a little light gray if you understand
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=vv-tpc7gliI#t=97
-
Come on dhyran, old friend. By that logic McDonalds makes the best food on the planet ;)
mcdonalds went down the drain the day they changed the oil for the french fries. and how about them chicken nuggets?, just like WT, they tell you what it is, it looks like it, but it doesnt taste like it should. you gotta have the sauce to make it edible.
semp
-
10% of 2.5 mil .... yeah that tiny little amount.... whats wrong with them :headscratch: :rofl
I wish we had just 1/10th of that 10% here
:rolleyes:
did have that many here at one time...you ran them off. :neener:
-
So we're running with the idea that War Thunder has 250,000 players in FRB? lol
-
Considering how long a session of FRB takes to fill, I'd say there is a good 50 people on at all times.
-
2 minutes in the tower is 10 in the air. nuff said. :rock
-
did have that many here at one time...you ran them off. :neener:
They probably got tired of his incessant whining or crying "cheat!" every time he got shot down.
ack-ack
-
Dyhran we still love you in a manly way only :)
I would own you in a Sopwith Camel by the way :)
-
If all the WT player videos are close to what your real visual experience is in that game. Then the flight modeling doesn't matter and never will to WT's fan base.
Have any of you watched a CGI movie you wished you could saddle up and be in the movie rather than watching? A good example of that kind of urge is portrayed in the animated series "Sword Art Online". And maybe in the next 20 years we will don a helmet with a neuro net interface and play AH in our minds. Then gray matter will count.
WT is a CGI like live action movie you can hop into and immerse yourself knowingly in to a virtual digital world with the ability to make independent actions creating unexpected outcomes.
Aces High is a reality simulator, and like military simulators, where everything is directly about your participation to achieve outcomes.
WT is simulated role playing in airplanes. AH is simulated combat with airplanes.
More people in the world like to role play with all of the eye candy glitter and glitz. Then want to go for it one on one to see what they are made of in a physics faithful simulated combat environment. WT is easy which is attractive to a broader spectrum of potential players. Neither group of people will ever understand the other. And while the role players are a much larger part of the market, War Thunder will get in the news because more eyes pass through there right now. It certainly is a great platform to make beautiful ww2 CGI like movies from. And to a role player that's like waving raw meat under a lion's nose.
-
AcesHigh isn't a reality simulator.
Just sayin'.
-
AcesHigh isn't a reality simulator.
Just sayin'.
And who wants that (I'm thinking that may have been a wrong turn of phrase on Bustr's part but I do think I can relate to what he's trying to say)? But it is the best flight model in the genre.
-
AcesHigh isn't a reality simulator.
Just sayin'.
more of a simulator than anything else in the mmog realm...and most of the console dweeb/retail box realm too.
-
The simulator simulator.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5jMtOJxUKg
-
more of a simulator than anything else in the mmog realm...and most of the console dweeb/retail box realm too.
I think this is the heart of the matter.
More people on the Internet looking for fun appreciate being in a beautifully presented, almost CGI like movie set. While shooting at things. Then like having to work their kesters off at managing their outcome in a our simulator and it's greater focus on the physics than being a CGI like movie environment.
The two sides will relate to each other much like atheists and Christians. Some will be friends and agree to disagree and live amiable along side each other. Even sharing in some of the same activities. Like some cross over playing our two games. The rest will do everything they can to prove the other is the downfall of their shared universe by existing.
Ergo the results of this POST.
-
Dhyran....you need to report back for duty.
Boo
:salute
-
Dhyran, do you still play WT?
-
Dhyran, do you still play WT?
yes, only the Events in FRB mode, a daily event, based on the real planessection, like Bob or iwo jima, or battle of bulge, and i start Fm building again. but i preorderd IL:Bos becasue since Flight on my old Apple II i nearly bought all flight sim dogfighting games. If AH3 will come out, i sign up again to test it for sure
-
:)
-
yes, only the Events in FRB mode, a daily event, based on the real planessection, like Bob or iwo jima, or battle of bulge, and i start Fm building again. but i preorderd IL:Bos becasue since Flight on my old Apple II i nearly bought all flight sim dogfighting games. If!! AH3 will come out, i sign up again to test it for sure
Thats a big if! :rofl
-
If War Thunder brings more players to AH, then I'm all for it. If it doesn't add or take away, then I am neutral on it. If it takes players away from AH, then I am against it. :aok
-
By the way, you guys are all off base -- the best flight modeling ever was in Battlefield 1942. ;)
-
By the way, you guys are all off base -- the best flight modeling ever was in Battlefield 1942. ;)
(http://philly.barstoolsports.com/files/2012/11/family-feud-x2.png) WRONG ANSWER!
Survey says...World War II Online had the best flight modeling. What other game could the Ju-87 be the most effective anti-tank plane by just flying down the road just feet above the ground and knock over trucks and tanks with just the landing gear? What other game had the Me 110 take off vertically like a helicopter? What other game had DocDoom making the flight model?
ack-ack
-
Battlefield 1942 had 40 mph fighter planes, with 100 ft. turning radii, carrying about 50 bombs each. That's the sort of realism that other sims just can't handle. It's just too real.
-
somebody doesnt understand the meaning of sarcasm.
semp
-
somebody doesnt understand the meaning of sarcasm.
semp
We're looking at you with our eyebrows raised. ;)
-
We're looking at you with our eyebrows raised. ;)
english is not my first language, but somehow I sense eyebrows=finger.
semp
-
See Rule #4
-
People can talk about other games, on this board as much as they like. However, if you come in here and start berating the community (calling them fanbois is derogatory on their own board), or taking cheap shots against our game, you will not be welcome here.
-
Dhyran....you need to report back for duty.
Boo
:salute
Something is telling me this might not be happening...
-
I was talking Dhyran on Sunday and he said he will only come back if we have the Gloster meteor or the westland whirlwind :old:
-
I was talking Dhyran on Sunday and he said he will only come back if we have the Gloster meteor or the westland whirlwind :old:
Now the question becomes... do you think that's motivation for them to include them, or to exclude them? :noid
Wiley.
-
english is not my first language, but somehow I sense eyebrows=finger.
semp
No, not that. I meant just that Ack-ack and I were both being sarcastic the whole way through. Raised eyebrows were meant only to convey irony. No bad attitude intended at all, my friend. :aok
-
Wait a minute, I consider being called a "fan of AH" to be a compliment to me! :aok
-
Wait a minute, I consider being called a "fan of AH" to be a compliment to me! :aok
^This. (If it makes sense anywhere, it makes sense here.)
-
Bye Bye Dhyran :( :banana:
-
No, not that. I meant just that Ack-ack and I were both being sarcastic the whole way through. Raised eyebrows were meant only to convey irony. No bad attitude intended at all, my friend. :aok
probably so, but my understanding is funnier :aok.
semp
-
I have this footage from the day I spent playing around on it again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVzRPNTpeGg
It's all ingame FRB footage. Nothing special.
-
Lots of it looks beautiful, but without icons, I can't see any of the planes unless the background is blue sky. Maybe it's better in the real game as opposed to Youtube video, but it is easy to keep track of an airplane in a close-in fight in real life, regardless of background, which is why I'm in favor of icons. I hated how WWII Online did icons, for example, years ago. In WWIIOL's quest to make the situation more realistic, it actually made it horribly less realistic.
In the first few minutes of the video, did you have tracers turned off? I didn't see any tracers or flashes of hits despite lots of firing, it looking like you were on target enough, and the enemies sometimes not maneuvering all that hard.
Is there any thought on how well they model planes vs. flight-test data?
-
Brooke,
Majority of the planes' flight models are a work in progress. The Russian planes seem to have the most UFO-like flight modeling compared to the rest.
-
Majority of the planes' flight models are a work in progress. The Russian planes seem to have the most UFO-like flight modeling compared to the rest.
Do not spread the rumors from people playing in UFO (Acrade) mode :)
Or is it based on your personal experience in FRB ? Which russian plane do you call UFO ?
Try to start in FRB with MiG-3, LaGG-3 and Pe-3 then do the same with Hurricane1, Spit1 and Beaufighter and you will get the valuable experience. And do not listen to what other people say. Judge it yourself.
-
C2 experiment
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEk5uuIBok4
:D
-
C2 experiment
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEk5uuIBok4
:D
I like this :) Nice skin for c.202. I've not seen it before.
P.S. Was Spit critically damaged already? If not his pilot could do better ...
-
I caught the Spit off guard, he pulled quite a lot of high G moves, but couldn't sake me.
-
Wow, this is just sad...
http://cheezburger.com/7870113792
Note: This was NOT an Aces High "You Have Collided" vs. "Someone Has Collided With You" front end issue. That Zero DID take damage from the collision.
Judging from the comments, it sounds like this is an ACTUAL STRATEGY employed by Zero pilots because of how the aircraft's wings were modeled.
-
Looks like an exploit.
-
Hurrah! for Kamikaze!
-
I hear Russian planes in WT can fly into trees and take no damage.
:noid
-
Lots of it looks beautiful, but without icons, I can't see any of the planes unless the background is blue sky. Maybe it's better in the real game as opposed to Youtube video, but it is easy to keep track of an airplane in a close-in fight in real life, regardless of background, which is why I'm in favor of icons. I hated how WWII Online did icons, for example, years ago. In WWIIOL's quest to make the situation more realistic, it actually made it horribly less realistic.
In the first few minutes of the video, did you have tracers turned off? I didn't see any tracers or flashes of hits despite lots of firing, it looking like you were on target enough, and the enemies sometimes not maneuvering all that hard.
Is there any thought on how well they model planes vs. flight-test data?
Yeah like I said they've concentrated on modeling the enviorment and have totally neglected modeling human vision. Which results in the feeling of flying in IL2 style soup.This is a mistake that almost every flight sim makes, a bad idea in a dogfighting game. One example, when I first tried WB and later AH I was kind of put off by the wider angle view, later I came to realize the wisdom in the decision to make the views that way. Because it is more true to real life visual ergonomics.
You'll notice in that video that besides everybody hugging ack, everyone is on the deck trimming the tree tops because they're taking advantage of the unfortunate vision model of the game. Now people are going to respond to that with, well the object of every war thunder game session is to destroy ground targets. To which I'd respond, who cares, my mission in any dogfight video game is to shoot down planes. And who's idea was it to have Leeroy Jenkins voice acting? "A little more effort and victory will be ours"
The bottom line is it's a game designed to be played by mouse in external view with the object being to earn levels and power ups, and ultimately buy them, thus giving the edge to players that are willing to spend the most. The "full real battles" (I guess they thought calling it full realism would be stretching it) was added as an after thought which is why things like fuel gauges aren't functional. It's also something that less than 1% of the players participate in and the only time of day you'll be able to play on a "full real" server is US prime time, as any other time of day there will not be enough players looking for a full real battle to populate the server and meet the requisite launch limit of a dozen or so people.
And to people who are going to say, "well it's still beta", then why are they charging money for anything?
FULL REAL YO!
-
Floob, the 109 fuel gauges work fine. And all the other planes I've flown in the FRB.
-
Why haven't you flown the hurricane?
-
War Thunder is simply a game where realism doesn't exist... other than graphics. Example. The B-17 in War Thunder will push 400-480 before you run into problems. The thing is RIDICULOUSLY tough, and did I mention about how easy bombing is?(https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/459582_649085728440524_2072615100_o.jpg)
Pete okay back there? I know the 17 is supposed to be one MEAN and TOUGH girl, but it has it's breaking points. War Thunder stretches it a bit.
-
War Thunder is simply a game where realism doesn't exist... other than graphics. Example. The B-17 in War Thunder will push 400-480 before you run into problems...
Oh the irony...
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,355178.0.html
-
Oh the irony...
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,355178.0.html
(http://www.blogcdn.com/www.urlesque.com/media/2011/02/oreillycantexplain1.jpg)
-
I tried flying the Typhoon for a bit in WT. It can hang on its prop at about 60 mph, then flips around like a P38 in AH! :banana: :banana:
-
Typhoon stall speed at combat weight is around 80 mph, and that's with wings level. Why shouldn't a vertical Typhoon hang on its prop at 60 mph?
-
Typhoon stall speed at combat weight is around 80 mph, and that's with wings level. Why shouldn't a vertical Typhoon hang on its prop at 60 mph?
You cherry picked the wrong part of that comment. That he says it flipped around as well as a plane known for it's easy and precise hammerheads is what should make you ask yourself, "Self, WTF?"
-
Making proper hammerheads have always been a problem in AH. I don't know why, but it's one of this game's little quirks. What you should ask yourself instead is: How easy was making hammerheads in the real Typhoon. When you have that answer you can start making comparisons to this game or the other. Making a comparison between two simulations without knowing the real-life baseline is pointless.
-
Making a comparison between two simulations without knowing the real-life baseline is pointless.
one of the two you speak of is not a simulation...unless you want to base the concept off of a simulation of a simulation.
-
Truth be told, they're both games, not simulators. However both representations of the Typhoon in those games are simulations.
-
Making proper hammerheads have always been a problem in AH. I don't know why, but it's one of this game's little quirks. What you should ask yourself instead is: How easy was making hammerheads in the real Typhoon. When you have that answer you can start making comparisons to this game or the other. Making a comparison between two simulations without knowing the real-life baseline is pointless.
Hammerheads are super easy in a 38 in AH. The only issue you can really have is bad timing on the throttle/rudder. Even that just makes you wash out a little at the bottom.
I really don't have a dog in this fight, but if someone tells me a Typhoon in one simulation hammerheads like a 38 in another, that doesn't inspire confidence in the flight model. You bring up a valid point, though. We have no hard data to look at, but seriously, does it make any sense at all that a Typhoon could be as stable and responsive in low speed vertical maneuvers as a P-38?
-
Truth be told, they're both games, not simulators. However both representations of the Typhoon in those games are simulations.
absolute truth be told, one of them does a far better job a simulating the dynamics of flight while the other is simply an illusion of flight.
-
Hammerheads are super easy in a 38 in AH. The only issue you can really have is bad timing on the throttle/rudder. Even that just makes you wash out a little at the bottom.
I really don't have a dog in this fight, but if someone tells me a Typhoon in one simulation hammerheads like a 38 in another, that doesn't inspire confidence in the flight model. You bring up a valid point, though. We have no hard data to look at, but seriously, does it make any sense at all that a Typhoon could be as stable and responsive in low speed vertical maneuvers as a P-38?
Yep, but in real life hammerheads are fairly easy in single prop airplanes as well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZ8SqRAizkg
-
absolute truth be told, one of them does a far better job a simulating the dynamics of flight while the other is simply an illusion of flight.
It's the old Il-2 vs AH argument all over again. Both Il-2 and WT (in FRB mode) simulate the aerodynamics of flight.
-
It's the old Il-2 vs AH argument all over again. Both Il-2 and WT (in FRB mode) simulate the aerodynamics of flight.
Hell, a frisbee more than simulates. Thanks for the video of the stunt plane and how
WT uses that to 'accurately' simulate each individual plane it models. ;)
-
:lol
-
It's the old Il-2 vs AH argument all over again. Both Il-2 and WT (in FRB mode) simulate the aerodynamics of flight.
tried frb in both...nope. i will give credit to wt in that at least the efluffied up fms are different, il2 were all the same.
-
Making proper hammerheads have always been a problem in AH. I don't know why, but it's one of this game's little quirks. What you should ask yourself instead is: How easy was making hammerheads in the real Typhoon. When you have that answer you can start making comparisons to this game or the other. Making a comparison between two simulations without knowing the real-life baseline is pointless.
HiTech can do hammerheads in Aces High all day long. The problem most players have with hammerheads is not having the input a real pilot has to go by. It is one of the limitations of any computer sim. HiTech has flown enough to be able to use only the instrumentation in the game to do it.
I have had several World War II pilots call and compliment us on the accuracy of our flight modeling. I will take their words over anyone, any day.
I have said this before. I'll say it again. You want to talk about other games, then fine. You WT shills need to stop trying to make comparisons with your arcade game to us. Trying to say it has a better flight model is just ignorant. Go back to your board and say whatever you want, but here you need to show a bit of common sense and realize this is OUR board and we have been doing flight modeling longer and better than WT will ever be able to.
If you try to argue this point, on our board, you will not be welcome here. WT is a different game and that is not a bad thing.
-
HiTech can do hammerheads in Aces High all day long. The problem most players have with hammerheads is not having the input a real pilot has to go by. It is one of the limitations of any computer sim. HiTech has flown enough to be able to use only the instrumentation in the game to do it.
I have had several World War II pilots call and compliment us on the accuracy of our flight modeling. I will take their words over anyone, any day.
I have said this before. I'll say it again. You want to talk about other games, then fine. You WT shills need to stop trying to make comparisons with your arcade game to us. Trying to say it has a better flight model is just ignorant. Go back to your board and say whatever you want, but here you need to show a bit of common sense and realize this is OUR board and we have been doing flight modeling longer and better than WT will ever be able to.
If you try to argue this point, on our board, you will not be welcome here. WT is a different game and that is not a bad thing.
:aok Well put.
-
Thanks Skuzzy :salute
-
While WT works to address its flight modelling issues is AH doing the same and working to address its visual deficiencies?
-
Hammerheads are super easy in a 38 in AH. The only issue you can really have is bad timing on the throttle/rudder. Even that just makes you wash out a little at the bottom.
Hammer heads are still a problem for me in the 38. Can you give me the sequence of throttle and rudder. I do have separate throttles.
-
While WT works to address its flight modelling issues is AH doing the same and working to address its visual deficiencies?
It's a give and take. As most know by now.
You want new planes?
You want new tanks?
You want more naval warfare additions?
You want more maps (that have to be surveyed by the HTC team taking their time)
You want more different types of bases?
Or
Do you want better graphics?
Besides taking time and resources it would take money to get a better system. And would (even if you don't want to hear it and think it bulls ht) isolate the lower quality computers out there.
I honestly do want HTC to improve the graphics of Aces High. But the problem is it would isolate the community even more. I don't know if HTC could make Aces High graphics on par with Far Cry 3 (or higher) and still make it so that the graphics could be scaled down to what they can be now; and still make it playable and interactive for both parties.
If they can, then +1 for graphics. But sadly, that (like mentioned) takes a toll on resources and time that could be used addressing other problems from planes/vehicles that need to be added, to possible bugs or the like.
No disrespect or flaming intended here.
Respectively,
Tinkles
<<S>>
-
While WT works to address its flight modelling issues is AH doing the same and working to address its visual deficiencies?
AH doesn't really have 'visual deficiencies.' It has some players that want more eye candy but
the game if visually sufficient. An accurate flight model, otoh, makes a world of difference. Let's
not try to pretend that we're talking about two halves of the same coin. We're not. So if you're
going to take a stance of challenging HT and co. to make this game ... like ... some other game
consider this - the other games either don't want to be like AHII (which is nearly 15 years ahead
of them) .... or they can't be. And if you're merely turned on by graphics ... there's always the movies.
-
Hammer heads are still a problem for me in the 38. Can you give me the sequence of throttle and rudder. I do have separate throttles.
PM sent.
-
The AH graphic engine is inefficient, it requires a lot of computer for little return. I'm not saying its ugly, its just not as good as it should be.
The reflections and shadows are twice the resource hogs they should be for example.
WT runs on an engine from 2008 and from Wings of Prey for goodness sake. Their maps may be small by comparison, but every tree and building that is on the ground texture is matched by a corresponding object. AH just copy pastes large textures that plonks trees and farm building in the same pattern that bare no resemblance to the texture under it, its disappointing.
AH should be upping it's game in the visuals department; Post-FX would go along way to help bridge the cap. Some effort to improve AHs look would help pull people back from WTs FRB.
-
The AH graphic engine is inefficient, it requires a lot of computer for little return. I'm not saying its ugly, its just not as good as it should be.
The reflections and shadows are twice the resource hogs they should be for example.
WT runs on an engine from 2008 and from Wings of Prey for goodness sake. Their maps may be small by comparison, but every tree and building that is on the ground texture is matched by a corresponding object. AH just copy pastes large textures that plonks trees and farm building in the same pattern that bare no resemblance to the texture under it, its disappointing.
AH should be upping it's game in the visuals department; Post-FX would go along way to help bridge the cap. Some effort to improve AHs look would help pull people back from WTs FRB.
You make it sound like it's a relatively simple thing that doesn't have any sort of coding repercussions nor will it have any sort of negative impact on AHII as it exists. Why aren't you asking yourself why it hasn't been done? Surely it would be exactly what you want if it's such a simple thing.
-
The AH graphic engine is inefficient, it requires a lot of computer for little return. I'm not saying its ugly, its just not as good as it should be.
The reflections and shadows are twice the resource hogs they should be for example.
WT runs on an engine from 2008 and from Wings of Prey for goodness sake. Their maps may be small by comparison, but every tree and building that is on the ground texture is matched by a corresponding object. AH just copy pastes large textures that plonks trees and farm building in the same pattern that bare no resemblance to the texture under it, its disappointing.
AH should be upping it's game in the visuals department; Post-FX would go along way to help bridge the cap. Some effort to improve AHs look would help pull people back from WTs FRB.
You do realize AH also has a MUCH longer view range, right? I think someone measured the draw distance at double or greater than that of War Thunder.
-
You do realize AH also has a MUCH longer view range, right? I think someone measured the draw distance at double or greater than that of War Thunder.
It's only been mentioned dozens of times on the forum (even by HT). :cheers:
-
It's only been mentioned dozens of times on the forum (even by HT). :cheers:
Thought so. And if the draw distance is double, the actual visual area is exponentially greater than that. As was pointed out to me previously: AH's visible area at WT's graphics level would require a PC with some SERIOUS horsepower. PC's that run WT without problems (like mine, when I tried it out) would choke on it if it had to render as much area as AH does.
-
You guys want to compare Aces High's 17 mile view range over 512 square mile terrains to another game using a 5 mile view range and 15 square mile terrains. Right.
The scale we operate at is huge compared to WT. It takes a lot more resources to do that, if it was easy, all flight sims would do it. We could easily make a 15 square mile terrain that would rival WT. Easily. And it would run great, just like WT. Better actually, but that does not fit with the scale of the game we have. We would have to cut back on the number of players in the arena as well. Not going to happen.
If you do not want to play in large scale environments, then WT is just fine as long as you are not concerned with the flight models.
Does that mean we rest on our laurels? No. We never have.
-
Does that mean we rest on our laurels? No. We never have.
I love AH but you guys need to hurry up and add the Boomerang fighter, its the only item that keeps making me want to download that game...
(http://i1213.photobucket.com/albums/cc464/bilby1968/Classics%20Jets%20Fighter%20Musuem%202013/044.jpg)
Please? :pray
-
You guys want to compare Aces High's 17 mile view range over 512 square mile terrains to another game using a 5 mile view range and 15 square mile terrains. Right.
Wow, three times the view distance? I underestimated, lol!
I don't think any of us are saying we'd rather have smaller arenas and view distances and better graphics, tho. In fact my point was that AH's draw distance and map size is by far superior.
-
You guys want to compare Aces High's 17 mile view range over 512 square mile terrains to another game using a 5 mile view range and 15 square mile terrains. Right.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Thunder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Thunder)
"The average size of maps in the game currently range from approximately 65 km x 65 km to 100 km x 100 km to 200 km x 200 km, although the engine powering the game is likely to achieve larger map sizes in the future, estimates are said to be about 300 km x 300 km."
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Thunder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Thunder)
"The average size of maps in the game currently range from approximately 65 km x 65 km to 100 km x 100 km to 200 km x 200 km, although the engine powering the game is likely to achieve larger map sizes in the future, estimates are said to be about 300 km x 300 km."
A) it's wikipedia
B) We're talking about view range.
-
In WT dot range is 30 km. The dot changes to a plane at 3 km.
-
Played for the first time this week. Graphics were cool but didn't out way how garbage the fm was :rolleyes
-
Hammer heads are still a problem for me in the 38. Can you give me the sequence of throttle and rudder. I do have separate throttles.
:bhead dude u have a 38 with dual throttles... How much easier can it get? :eek:
-
I feel like comparing AH to WT isn't really a fair comparison. Both are meh games that does its own things relatively well. Rise of Flight and AH would be a much more interesting comparison. The map sizes are nearly the same (excluding some of AH larger maps, like Trinity), yet RoF graphics are 10x better. The flight modeling for RoF is decent (never flown a WWI plane but hey), maybe even excellent. I play with max settings and get 30-60FPS depending on the amount of players within visual range. One thing to note, even at 30FPS, the game runs smooth and fluidly. AH at 30FPS is next to impossible to play, while it has one of the worst graphics seen in a game during this time and age. Triangle hills, blocky textures and a myriad of other flaws is some 2005 stuff.
-
Played for the first time this week. Graphics were cool but didn't out way how garbage the fm was :rolleyes
Are you playing in Arcade Arena ? From level4 you can go to Full Real Battles - FM is good there.
-
I feel like comparing AH to WT isn't really a fair comparison. Both are meh games that does its own things relatively well. Rise of Flight and AH would be a much more interesting comparison. The map sizes are nearly the same (excluding some of AH larger maps, like Trinity), yet RoF graphics are 10x better. The flight modeling for RoF is decent (never flown a WWI plane but hey), maybe even excellent. I play with max settings and get 30-60FPS depending on the amount of players within visual range. One thing to note, even at 30FPS, the game runs smooth and fluidly. AH at 30FPS is next to impossible to play, while it has one of the worst graphics seen in a game during this time and age. Triangle hills, blocky textures and a myriad of other flaws is some 2005 stuff.
bye
-
One thing to note, even at 30FPS, the game runs smooth and fluidly. AH at 30FPS is next to impossible to play, while it has one of the worst graphics seen in a game during this time and age. Triangle hills, blocky textures and a myriad of other flaws is some 2005 stuff.
FPS is very relative. When I was playing on a laptop, I only started to think the game was unplayable after it got into the teens.
I'm curious though, how does it make sense to you that the same FPS is smooth and fluid on one game and completely unplayable on another?
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Thunder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Thunder)
"The average size of maps in the game currently range from approximately 65 km x 65 km to 100 km x 100 km to 200 km x 200 km, although the engine powering the game is likely to achieve larger map sizes in the future, estimates are said to be about 300 km x 300 km."
Then you should follow the source links for those claims. They appear bogus when I follow them. Also, using some common sense, with only 32 players in an arena, how are they going to find each other in 90,000 square miles.
In one of the first videos I saw, there was a quick view of the terrains CBM. After going to Google maps and comparing, each grid line in their CBM is ONE MILE. The terrain used in the video was 15 x 15 miles and pretty much matched the distances covered in the video. If someone wants to post some screenshots of their CBM, then we can talk about how big their terrains really are.
In WT dot range is 30 km. The dot changes to a plane at 3 km.
What's 30 km, 20 miles? Sorry, no way.
Also, someone mentioned trees. I don't know how their trees look from right underneath, but the trees in the videos posted on their site all look like 2D stage props to me. They're not bad, and yes, they aren't laid out in cookie cutter order, but AH trees with their alpha's look much better to me.
Actually, how about you guys who have accounts posting up some screen shots of their CBM/Kneeboard maps. I'm always interested in terrains from other games. Thanks in advance.
-
Aces and War Thunder are two completely different animals. Aces' really is the most approachable combat sim. It really walks the line well between a DCS and a War Thunder. Where WT nails it is in the approachability of the game.
The arcade setting in WT is just that, arcade. Its fun but it's not really a sim, its a 6dof shooter. I enjoy it but it has it's downsides and a lack of depth which really gives it no staying power with me. The other modes are also problematic too and don't do well what Aces does.
The full real battles fall short of a DCS experience. The engine management, trim and view system on Full Real Battles isn't well implemented. Nor is it at the study sim level of DCS. So it's not a great simulation nor a great "air combat game", it's mediocre at both. The game play suffers because of the realism and the realism isn't real enough.
The Historical Battles setting seems to be where WT is most trying to compete with Aces. In that they are attempting to provide an air combat sim with realistic aircraft performance, at level of simulation below a study sim. Though I find the execution lacking in WT. The mouse aim aspect and instructor skews it a bit to arcade-ish. While the controls and maps inevitably lead to a predominance of "boom and zoom" play. Which in the parlance of WT means climbing as a high as possible and diving on some one with a lesser climb rate.
WT doesn't do the fundamental things well that are necessary to translate a real world experience into a video game with authenticity. Is Aces the most authentic representation of reality, no. Though I think it's best blend of authenticity and gaming. WT skews more toward approachable and I think suffers for that. Though 30,000 some people who playing today seem to be fine with it. Again, it's all preference.
I am more surprised that Hi-tech never took their know how and understanding and developed an air combat game that skewed more approachable. Really it was wargaming and WOT that indicated there was a huge untapped demand for this game. Now it might to late, the market is pretty saturated with mouse driven flight games. Though if the did do one, they should cut the competition off at the knees, release jets as the starting tier and go up all the way to current combat aircraft.
-
Skuzzy. glad you are see you are taking hitting back on this thread.
-
We will never create a version of Aces High to cater to the 1% of the market. If the priority of a player is the graphics first, then we are not going to attract that player. WT will attract the twitch/arcade player who is in it for graphics first. No doubt about that. If we tried to get away what they get away with in providing temporary flight models, I cannot imagine how bad it would be here. WT can get away with it because the players, generally speaking, do not care about the accuracy of the flight model.
Aces High and WT are very different games. Do we wish there were 30,000+ players whose priority would be the flight model? Sure we do, but it would mean sacrificing things we do wish to sacrifice. We certainly could crank out things faster if we did not spend months researching the models, but it would not be something we would be proud of either. This not just a game for us. It is our passion.
Our priorities have always been the flight model first. We are harder on ourselves than anyone could ever know, as it pertains to the accuracy of our flight model. We also provide an environment when you can see and fight hundreds of planes/vehicles at one time. This makes large scale events possible. No other game/sim approaches what we have accomplished in this area. No other game approaches what we have managed to do with such a small installation. We do not have 6GB of artwork, yet our current generation of planes look very good. Our old planes look like crap and we are working on that. Yet, there are those in this thread who would post a picture of our oldest plane and represent it as a current model for the purposes of berating us.
We are not perfect. We never will be. The good news, neither is any other game. For over 14 years, this is what we have been doing and this is all that we have been doing.
-
I am saving my perks for the redone tempest :)
-
We will never create a version of Aces High to cater to the 1% of the market. If the priority of a player is the graphics first, then we are not going to attract that player. WT will attract the twitch/arcade player who is in it for graphics first. No doubt about that. If we tried to get away what they get away with in providing temporary flight models, I cannot imagine how bad it would be here. WT can get away with it because the players, generally speaking, do not care about the accuracy of the flight model.
Aces High and WT are very different games. Do we wish there were 30,000+ players whose priority would be the flight model? Sure we do, but it would mean sacrificing things we do wish to sacrifice. We certainly could crank out things faster if we did not spend months researching the models, but it would not be something we would be proud of either. This not just a game for us. It is our passion.
Our priorities have always been the flight model first. We are harder on ourselves than anyone could ever know, as it pertains to the accuracy of our flight model. We also provide an environment when you can see and fight hundreds of planes/vehicles at one time. This makes large scale events possible. No other game/sim approaches what we have accomplished in this area. No other game approaches what we have managed to do with such a small installation. We do not have 6GB of artwork, yet our current generation of planes look very good. Our old planes look like crap and we are working on that. Yet, there are those in this thread who would post a picture of our oldest plane and represent it as a current model for the purposes of berating us.
We are not perfect. We never will be. The good news, neither is any other game. For over 14 years, this is what we have been doing and this is all that we have been doing.
You guys do great stuff, and you do it in C, which is even more impressive. When all of the planes look as good as the new Macchi C.20x, Ki-43, Me-410, Lancaster, etc., I think it will make a huge difference. The world of AH with full graphics enabled, from the cockpit of those birds, which is where you spend all of your time in a game that has (intentionally) very limited camera views, looks fantastic. Sure, the GV stuff isn't as good looking, but that isn't and never will be the priority, in my understanding. With the flight model combined with things like TrackIR or Oculus Rift (soon?), as well as a stick+throttle+rudder pedals, this is about as real as it gets.
Y'all keep on doing what you're doing. Let me know if you ever need any coding help.
-
FPS is very relative. When I was playing on a laptop, I only started to think the game was unplayable after it got into the teens.
I'm curious though, how does it make sense to you that the same FPS is smooth and fluid on one game and completely unplayable on another?
Jittery/stuttering begins at 40FPS on my PC with AH although it rarely ever gets there, only when there's 50 people in the same area or more. I can play other games at 30FPS and still have no stuttering.
-
Jittery/stuttering begins at 40FPS on my PC with AH although it rarely ever gets there, only when there's 50 people in the same area or more. I can play other games at 30FPS and still have no stuttering.
Because no two games are the same or use your computer's resources the same, your experience between them will never be the same. Some are heavy on the GFX card, some on the CPU, and some hit both pretty hard. If you have a screaming hot GFX card and a marginal CPU (or vice-versa) you will cause some games to choke.
-
Jittery/stuttering begins at 40FPS on my PC with AH although it rarely ever gets there, only when there's 50 people in the same area or more. I can play other games at 30FPS and still have no stuttering.
How many other game allow you to see for 17 miles with an unlimited number of objects in view? Rhetorical question as there are not ANY games on the market that do, except ours.
Our per screen vertex rendering count is higher than WT's because of that.
Getting really tired of people who continue to compare Aces High to other games that are not comparable and then complain about ours being a problem. You have been told over and over again why, and you keep on whining about our game. It ends now. We have been as patient as anyone can be with people like yourself. We are done wasting our time trying to educate people who refuse to listen and keep on complaining.
You don't even play the game anymore.
-
How many other game allow you to see for 17 miles with an unlimited number of objects in view? Rhetorical question as there are not ANY games on the market that do, except ours.
Our per screen vertex rendering count is higher than WT's because of that.
Getting really tired of people who continue to compare Aces High to other games that are not comparable and then complain about ours being a problem. You have been told over and over again why, and you keep on whining about our game. It ends now. We have been as patient as anyone can be with people like yourself. We are done wasting our time trying to educate people who refuse to listen and keep on complaining.
You don't even play the game anymore.
*slow clap* :salute :rock
(http://gifs.gifbin.com/1233928590_citizen%20kane%20clapping.gif)
-
14 pages of discussion on wt and the same people keep trying to push the same ridiculous arguments in favor of wt in spite of the facts presented...
Are you playing in Arcade Arena ? From level4 you can go to Full Real Battles - FM is good there.
i've played in frb and it's il2 with worse flight models...i have specifically tested the flight models on the 109e4 between wt and ah...forced off all training wheels the game tries to automatically put in place by editing a game file. the ah flight model doesn't feel like you're flying a ball of cotton in a wind storm. the game was designed to be mouse and game controller friendly, which means certain aspects of flight cannot be simulated properly. everything the devs are implementing to achieve some sort of simulation quality is purely superficial. it serves to give the player the false impression that the flight models are simulated correctly.
some of you guys touting the graphics in wt should take a deeper look at how it's accomplished and the cost of getting the quality. the wt graphics engine has a 3km dot range, not 30km.
-
Yeah it's annoying when guys post crap statements about terrain comparisons and related this and that without the slightest evidence to back it up.
-
How many other game allow you to see for 17 miles with an unlimited number of objects in view? Rhetorical question as there are not ANY games on the market that do, except ours.
Our per screen vertex rendering count is higher than WT's because of that.
Getting really tired of people who continue to compare Aces High to other games that are not comparable and then complain about ours being a problem. You have been told over and over again why, and you keep on whining about our game. It ends now. We have been as patient as anyone can be with people like yourself. We are done wasting our time trying to educate people who refuse to listen and keep on complaining.
You don't even play the game anymore.
(http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130415115308/glee/images/8/83/Yes_ye_syes.gif)
-
How many other game allow you to see for 17 miles with an unlimited number of objects in view? Rhetorical question as there are not ANY games on the market that do, except ours.
Our per screen vertex rendering count is higher than WT's because of that.
Getting really tired of people who continue to compare Aces High to other games that are not comparable and then complain about ours being a problem. You have been told over and over again why, and you keep on whining about our game. It ends now. We have been as patient as anyone can be with people like yourself. We are done wasting our time trying to educate people who refuse to listen and keep on complaining.
You don't even play the game anymore.
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/bill.gif)
-
Thank you Skuzzy, not sure my ignore list could fit another. :pray
-
Its a outrage :old:
-
Are you playing in Arcade Arena ? From level4 you can go to Full Real Battles - FM is good there.
yes I am.
Hard to level up :(
-
I find it hard to believe that AH views cons and unlimited objects to 17 miles, the dar ring is 12 miles.
If you are seriously expecting me to believe for one moment I can see out side the dar ring... You must think I was born yesterday.
I'd say the furthest a AH con can show up at on screen co alt is as a dot at 10 miles and is updated every 3 seconds or so at that distance until closer.
Ground detail range is 4miles, after that it's a flat texture. AH does not do as you are claiming, even the objects range on the slider is set at 4miles max.
I love AH, it's my passion, but I won't have the wool pulled over my eyes.
-
I find it hard to believe that AH views cons and unlimited objects to 17 miles, the dar ring is 12 miles.
If you are seriously expecting me to believe for one moment I can see out side the dar ring... You must think I was born yesterday.
I'd say the furthest a AH con can show up at on screen co alt is as a dot at 10 miles and is updated every 3 seconds or so at that distance until closer.
Ground detail range is 4miles, after that it's a flat texture. AH does not do as you are claiming, even the objects range on the slider is set at 4miles max.
I love AH, it's my passion, but I won't have the wool pulled over my eyes.
bye
-
Bear, I don't think pointing out inaccuracies in Skuzzy's statement is grounds for "bye".
You can go into the game now and see that objects are limited to 4 miles, and I challenge you to see an enemy at 17 miles, that's 5 miles outside the dar ring, on your screen.
-
I find it hard to believe that AH views cons and unlimited objects to 17 miles, the dar ring is 12 miles.
If you are seriously expecting me to believe for one moment I can see out side the dar ring... You must think I was born yesterday.
Why not? What does the size of the DAR ring have to do with view distance when it is set to maximum? Aircraft dots show at ranges far, far beyond icon range.
-
The dar ring from your base is 12 miles, a set distance. Take off circle your base and have a test with a co-alt friend, before he leaves dar you'll have lost his dot.
-
Bear, I don't think pointing out inaccuracies in Skuzzy's statement is grounds for "bye".
You can go into the game now and see that objects are limited to 4 miles, and I challenge you to see an enemy at 17 miles, that's 5 miles outside the dar ring, on your screen.
Check Titanic3's status. Calling Skuzzy a liar is pretty much inviting a ban.
-
I'm just going out on a limb here, but I would bet Skuzzy is smart enough to know that there are a lot of guys on this forum with not much else to do who can and will test the things he says. I doubt he'd say anything he knows to be untrue or misleading for that reason alone.
-
Bear, objects slider 4 Miles it's not 17.
I did a test using the film viewer the nearest Enemy is set at 9.5K when the dot shows.
I don't know what the distance measurement is in the film viewer but 9500yards = 5.39Miles.
-
Why not? What does the size of the DAR ring have to do with view distance when it is set to maximum? Aircraft dots show at ranges far, far beyond icon range.
Icon range is generally 6k. Aircraft dots are displayed up to ~10k (which is also max icon range for 88 and 4" AAguns), which is about 5.6 miles. No cons can be seen beyond that.
When tank town on CraterMA is crowded enough, the most distant tanks are starting to dis- and reappear depending on the number of contacts around you.
-
Film maker and Pie charter within .21 of a mile of each other, but I wont doubt Snail, 5.6miles it is.
-
I think Skuzzy is referring to ground objects. I just did an offline test, and ground structures like fields, (hangars, runways) appeared at such a range. But at such a distance, they are (at least to me) only visible at favorable conditions (lighting) and are hovering in the air:
(http://i1145.photobucket.com/albums/o507/Snaildude/hover_zps3cabf628.jpg)
-
Ah Snail I see, selective set pieces appear at 17miles.
Ground objects (trees and barns) have a 4mile limit, cons a 5.6mile limit but Field objects are separated and set to 17miles.
-
Bear, I don't think pointing out inaccuracies in Skuzzy's statement is grounds for "bye".
You can go into the game now and see that objects are limited to 4 miles, and I challenge you to see an enemy at 17 miles, that's 5 miles outside the dar ring, on your screen.
The four miles is for rendering of ground objects like trees, I believe. The 17 miles is for things like mountains and bases. You can see plane dots at about 8 miles, I think.
-
A general PSA for everyone that knows the mechanics of the game better than the people that are really in the know:
(http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/bc/83/eb/bc83eb7a2c057b438072b0f486989ae4.jpg)
(http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/68/3c/7e/683c7ea78f97c8f563a5b428a8a19fce.jpg)
-
I did not mean to talk down AH, and I'm sorry if that's how it was perceived. I simply wanted to point out the absurdity of claiming one game does something wrong by comparing it to another game, instead of comparing it with real life.
-
I did not mean to talk down AH, and I'm sorry if that's how it was perceived. I simply wanted to point out the absurdity of claiming one game does something wrong by comparing it to another game, instead of comparing it with real life.
how would you compare a game to real life?
semp
-
For example: Top speed of [insert favorite plane] in game vs. documented top speed of [insert favorite plane] in real life.
-
For example: Top speed of [insert favorite plane] in game vs. documented top speed of [insert favorite plane] in real life.
but the game only simulates speed. aces high has always been about simulating combat using ww2 airplanes. but one of the best things about aces high is something that isnt coded and the other games cant duplicate or havent duplicated yet. I'll let you figure that one out on your own.
semp
-
I'm not in that, or any other discussion here, except the "FM in game A sucks because it is different from the FM in game B" argument, which is silly.
-
Nm...
-
I know it's Friday so I have to ask: Are you even aware of what you are writhing?
I thought the same for Arlo's pics
-
I'm not in that, or any other discussion here, except the "FM in game A sucks because it is different from the FM in game B" argument, which is silly.
If both games are developed at the same time, with similar development strategies, you're right. If Game B has a reputation for slow and deliberate development and focuses heavily on FM fidelity, you can afford to give the benefit of the doubt to Game B when FM's between the two games are in conflict, right?
-
If both games are developed at the same time, with similar development strategies, you're right. If Game B has a reputation for slow and deliberate development and focuses heavily on FM fidelity, you can afford to give the benefit of the doubt to Game B when FM's between the two games are in conflict, right?
Interesting point. Think of Jane's WWII Fighters and European Air War, both released in 1998:
Janes was certainly prettier. But for some reason, they decided to take more of an instant-action/arcade approach to the game.
By contrast, EAW was FAR more of a sim. It was certainly not as pretty, but a lot more attention was paid to flight and even campaign modeling (EAW's dynamic campaign was a blast).
-
To my knowledge WT is based on Il-2 technology bought from C1. Il-2 is a game franchise that is 12 years old now.
-
Also the original Il-2 was closer to a study sim than AH, with complex engine management, complex damage modeling (even minor damage affected the aerodynamics of the plane), and atmospheric modeling (weather effects, turbulence, slip streams from other planes).
I'm not saying it was better... I'm saying it was different.
-
I haven't read that the folks at Gaijin bought the FM's from Il-2, so as far as that goes, I don't think they can claim development heritage. From what I've seen, the FM's in WT were developed by regular gaming folk who volunteered and had some sort of credentials to show they could handle FM development. I can't say that it's wrong, but I also can't give that kind of approach my benefit of the doubt.
-
In any case, my point is that claiming something in a game is wrong because another game is different is silly in my honest opinion. That's all.
-
I thought the same for Arlo's pics
As in, they're inaccurate? You really do know more about the game than the people who designed it and support it?
-
As in, they're inaccurate? You really do know more about the game than the people who designed it and support it?
Pretty much inaccurate, just as saying that AH has a view range of 17 miles for unlimited objects.
17miles is a half truth, in that the only thing at 17miles is the set pieces (Airbases and Towns), not ground objects (trees and barns, 4miles) and contacts (5.6miles).
In that respect it could be said the average view distance is what, 9 miles.
AH is the best FM, WT the best graphics, put the 2 together and you get the perfect game.
-
AH is the best FM, WT the best graphics, put the 2 together and you get the perfect game.
Overly simplistic statement. Kinda like "If apples and oranges grew on the same tree, what a grove we'd have."
(Skuzzy has afforded you a lot of grace. I wouldn't try to test that.)
-
AH is the best FM, WT the best graphics, put the 2 together and you get the perfect game.
that could be true, but put together a computer that can play that game and I doubt if you want to spend that kind of money.
semp
-
that could be true, but put together a computer that can play that game and I doubt if you want to spend that kind of money.
semp
Lets see the cost of AH to me...
5 years...
lets say that's £120 a year, £10 a month. £600
Sticks...
X3Dpro x2 £20 = £40
CH set up £360
Computer upgrades...
£600 and £900
Programs...
Bandicam and Sony Movie Maker. £50
There seems to a lot of money afforded by me to the playing of this game; I did say it was my passion.
-
AH is my main hobby.
I am thankful that this universe has AH in it! :aok
-
Lets see the cost of AH to me...
5 years...
lets say that's £120 a year, £10 a month. £600
Sticks...
X3Dpro x2 £20 = £40
CH set up £360
Computer upgrades...
£600 and £900
Programs...
Bandicam and Sony Movie Maker. £50
There seems to a lot of money afforded by me to the playing of this game; I did say it was my passion.
that's not what I asked you. I said put together a computer than can play with the graphics of wt and the fm of aces high including the view up to 17 miles.
as much as you want to troll, you wont be able to afford a computer than can do it.
semp
-
I'm not even trying to troll, I simply showed you that I am willing to spend money to get the end result I am looking for.
Which answers the question rather easily.
-
I'm not even trying to troll, I simply showed you that I am willing to spend money to get the end result I am looking for.
Which answers the question rather easily.
then just post the parts for a puter that can play what you are won't for.
semp
-
I'm not even trying to troll, I simply showed you that I am willing to spend money to get the end result I am looking for.
Which answers the question rather easily.
Your willing/able to spend that kind of money, but how many of the rest of us are?
-
Fugi, semp asked me and what I would.
But for those that don't want to, there are sliders that dial down the graphic intensity.
You didn't make much sense semp but I think this is what you are after;
On this Radeon 5770, with an intel i3 1680x1050
WT;
x2 AA and x2 filter.
High Texture, Shadows and Max Clouds
WT has the sliders all the way up for everything except, for SSAO 1 notch, 1 notch for Shadow blurring.
I turn off lens flare and the motion blur.
Benchmarked
Limited to 60 FPS
Min FPS 34.2
Ave FPS 50.4
AH
x2 AA
Max Textures
Default setting without the terrain bump map.
Limited to 60FPS
Min 50FPS
I could bump the settings up for AH to include 512 smoothed shadows and bump mapping and reflection at the 2nd notch.
But once you get 20 planes and any hangers burning it drops to 30FPS, and just isn't smooth.
-
dolby in other words you dont have the system to play the aces high we have now with full graphics. but you are asking for better graphics so you cant play it at all.
that's basically it.
semp
-
Efficient Graphics.
-
I'm not in that, or any other discussion here, except the "FM in game A sucks because it is different from the FM in game B" argument, which is silly.
but it's true. game ah has flight models that are far closer to reality than game wt...fact.
Efficient Graphics.
efficient in what way? do you know what graphics engine wt is using? (it requires directx 9, not 10 or 11)
-
complex damage modeling (even minor damage affected the aerodynamics of the plane)
AFAIK, so does AH in the WWI arenas. Which I really wish they'd bring over into the Mains.
-
Efficient Graphics.
so how do you explain that you cant play wt with full graphics?
semp
edit: and btw if you want better graphics first update to 1920x1080. then come back.
-
I think WT and AH are both DX9. WTs graphics engine is from 2008.
Efficient as in, more eye candy for the same PC power. IE so that all of us can run the settings on AH higher.
I guess you guys are happy to settle and watch other games snap up the player base, while Skuzzy PNGs anyone who dares to have a voice that something need to be done?
-
edit: and btw if you want better graphics first update to 1920x1080. then come back.
I run 16:10 not 16:9.
-
I think WT and AH are both DX9. WTs graphics engine is from 2008.
Efficient as in, more eye candy for the same PC power. IE so that all of us can run the settings on AH higher.
I guess you guys are happy to settle and watch other games snap up the player base, while Skuzzy PNGs anyone who dares to have a voice that something need to be done?
i'm very curious to know what you believe is "not efficient" vs "efficient". look up directx, and what wt is using is directx9.0c that came out with sp3 of windows xp...same as ah.
if htc decreased the map sizes, decreased the object rendering ranges, decreased the number of objects rendered within 3 miles, used false horizon object backgrounds and only allowed 30 players per side, they could crank graphics to the same levels as wt.
-
There is nothing more I can say that isn't covered in my posts in this thread, aside from;
WW1 arena is small and the graphics barely run better.
-
I think WT and AH are both DX9. WTs graphics engine is from 2008.
Efficient as in, more eye candy for the same PC power. IE so that all of us can run the settings on AH higher.
I guess you guys are happy to settle and watch other games snap up the player base, while Skuzzy PNGs anyone who dares to have a voice that something need to be done?
I'm pretty sure if I went into the WT forum and berated their game and promoted another game, the same would happen.
-
I am neither promoting nor berating.
-
I guess you guys are happy to settle and watch other games snap up the player base, while Skuzzy PNGs anyone who dares to have a voice that something need to be done?
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-yleEs15g51w/TlrawTwZSrI/AAAAAAAABQY/gnyx4k2pzcQ/s1600/tommy-lee-jones-implied-face-palm.png)
-
No Combatsim for Old Men? ;)
-
Hey Dolby, I just wanted to point out that while I cant see a dot at 15 to 17 miles, my squaddie Poppy can on his rig. We have tried to figure out why this is....... some sort of combo involving his GPU and monitor, I cant say for sure, time and again he sees cons (dots) at approx. 3/4's of a sector. So just wanted to let you know that it is possible.
<S>
Carver
-
I ran the film viewer to when cons were observed, 9.5k. Snail man observed 10K, 88mm range...
Poppy must have all the bells and whistles to manage 3 times the view range as the rest of us.
-
Hey Dolby, I just wanted to point out that while I cant see a dot at 15 to 17 miles, my squaddie Poppy can on his rig. We have tried to figure out why this is....... some sort of combo involving his GPU and monitor, I cant say for sure, time and again he sees cons (dots) at approx. 3/4's of a sector. So just wanted to let you know that it is possible.
<S>
Carver
I have been informed you have glasses like Mr Magoo
-
I think WT and AH are both DX9. WTs graphics engine is from 2008.
Efficient as in, more eye candy for the same PC power. IE so that all of us can run the settings on AH higher.
I guess you guys are happy to settle and watch other games snap up the player base, while Skuzzy PNGs anyone who dares to have a voice that something need to be done?
We draw more vertices, per screen, than WT does. We do not ship 6GB of artwork for our game. We ship 300MB. What we do with out tiny bit of art is far, far better than what WT could do with it. By all engineering definitions, our graphic engine is incredibly efficient. Just because you cannot see something does not mean it is not being rendered. There are times when a single pixel is not small enough to display what is rendered. That is a bit out of our control.
It does no one any good to keep people around here who continually make detrimental remarks about the game or the service. It does not help any one. Quite the opposite. While I am having to deal with these situations, there is a lot of positive contributions, I can make, that are not being done.
You are not helping at all. We know, far better than you will ever know, what we need to do and what we will do. If you want to be a part of that, I strongly suggest you find a way to become a positive contributor to this forum and stop making declarations about things you do not have no knowledge about.
Here is an opinion;
"The terrain graphics could stand some updating."
Here is you;
"The graphic engine is not efficient."
The first statement is accurate. We agree. It really does not hurt us. It is the truth. The last statement is a lie, at best. No matter how many times I have told you there is a difference between a graphic engine and artwork, you continue to belabor a point which has no basis in reality. You continue to promote a fallacy. When you do, we have to stop whatever we are doing and address it. Like it or not, this bulletin board is also a form of advertising. The fallacy could keep away a new customer if we do not address it. It is highly counterproductive. It does nothing to help anything, nor anyone.
We are happy to allow people here who state an opinion, even when it is stating the obvious. We will not tolerate anyone who comes in here and spreads lies about our product and/or service.
-
We draw more vertices, per screen, than WT does. We do not ship 6GB of artwork for our game. We ship 300MB. What we do with out tiny bit of art is far, far better than what WT could do with it. By all engineering definitions, our graphic engine is incredibly efficient. Just because you cannot see something does not mean it is not being rendered. There are times when a single pixel is not small enough to display what is rendered. That is a bit out of our control.
It does no one any good to keep people around here who continually make detrimental remarks about the game or the service. It does not help any one. Quite the opposite. While I am having to deal with these situations, there is a lot of positive contributions, I can make, that are not being done.
You are not helping at all. We know, far better than you will ever know, what we need to do and what we will do. If you want to be a part of that, I strongly suggest you find a way to become a positive contributor to this forum and stop making declarations about things you do not have no knowledge about.
Here is an opinion;
"The terrain graphics could stand some updating."
Here is you;
"The graphic engine is not efficient."
The first statement is accurate. We agree. It really does not hurt us. It is the truth. The last statement is a lie, at best. No matter how many times I have told you there is a difference between a graphic engine and artwork, you continue to belabor a point which has no basis in reality. You continue to promote a fallacy. When you do, we have to stop whatever we are doing and address it. Like it or not, this bulletin board is also a form of advertising. The fallacy could keep away a new customer if we do not address it. It is highly counterproductive. It does nothing to help anything, nor anyone.
We are happy to allow people here who state an opinion, even when it is stating the obvious. We will not tolerate anyone who comes in here and spreads lies about our product and/or service.
BOOM! Headshot! :aok
-
I ran the film viewer to when cons were observed, 9.5k. Snail man observed 10K, 88mm range...
Poppy must have all the bells and whistles to manage 3 times the view range as the rest of us.
I wonder if this is simple resolution at play. If a guy playing on a 2560x1440 can see aircraft dots further out than I can playing at 1440x900 because the computer determines that the dot is too small to render using one of my pixels but is still appropriate to render using one of his smaller pixels?
-
"The terrain graphics could stand some updating."
The first statement is accurate. We agree. It really does not hurt us. It is the truth.
Honestly I think you'd get much more bang for your buck if you updated the lighting, tweaked the color palette a bit, and perhaps added some filtration. What gives Warthunder it's look is heavy use of saturated colors, lots of diffused light, and graduated filtration. That's what makes those graphics pop. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the poly count in the Aces Model was higher than the WT.
(http://warthunder.com/upload/image/1000x700/206.jpg) Vs (http://www.hitechcreations.com/images/stories/news/yak/yak9t_1.jpg).
Lighting will enhance the work you've already done and make it stand more. Computationally it tends to be less demanding than adding more vertices; It tends to be more scalable for the individual user. IE allowing them to disable specular and diffusion maps, the same way we can with bump maps. While the terrain could use a pass, I'm not sure the yield on that investment is very great. It will be a lot of work having to remap the terrains with the new tiles too. If you just add more vertices what do you get? More models hidden by the same flat palette and vanilla lighting system.
As an example of what i mean; In Photoshop I pushed up the saturation, added some slight diffusion and an ND filter, of the aces Yak-9-t. Notice how the colors separate and everything stands out, it's vibrant with out being cartoony
(http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/7230/pekh.jpg)
-
I wonder if this is simple resolution at play. If a guy playing on a 2560x1440 can see aircraft dots further out than I can playing at 1440x900 because the computer determines that the dot is too small to render using one of my pixels but is still appropriate to render using one of his smaller pixels?
The 88 and 5" gun position have the greatest magnification levels in game. Thus you never see a dot at maximum magnification. Fully zoomed in you can clearly see the three bombers of a formation being rendered in fine detail @ 10k yard distance even on my 'small' 23" monitor.
But once the bombers go past 10k distance, they disappear (along with the icon), they don't even go into dot mode.
From that it's pretty obvious that it is not a GC limitation, but a game one. Which I did not found to be variable with any graphic settings I tried.
-
Honestly I think you'd get much more bang for your buck if you updated the lighting, tweaked the color palette a bit, and perhaps added some filtration. What gives Warthunder it's look is heavy use of saturated colors, lots of diffused light, and graduated filtration.
So basically you're saying, "Real Is Brown (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RealIsBrown)."
-
So basically you're saying, "Real Is Brown (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RealIsBrown)."
I dunno. The photoshop example looks like real is a green filter (though I read the cute link). :D
-
Honestly I think you'd get much more bang for your buck if you updated the lighting, tweaked the color palette a bit, and perhaps added some filtration. What gives Warthunder it's look is heavy use of saturated colors, lots of diffused light, and graduated filtration. That's what makes those graphics pop. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the poly count in the Aces Model was higher than the WT.
(http://warthunder.com/upload/image/1000x700/206.jpg) Vs (http://www.hitechcreations.com/images/stories/news/yak/yak9t_1.jpg).
Lighting will enhance the work you've already done and make it stand more. Computationally it tends to be less demanding than adding more vertices; It tends to be more scalable for the individual user. IE allowing them to disable specular and diffusion maps, the same way we can with bump maps. While the terrain could use a pass, I'm not sure the yield on that investment is very great. It will be a lot of work having to remap the terrains with the new tiles too. If you just add more vertices what do you get? More models hidden by the same flat palette and vanilla lighting system.
As an example of what i mean; In Photoshop I pushed up the saturation, added some slight diffusion and an ND filter, of the aces Yak-9-t. Notice how the colors separate and everything stands out, it's vibrant with out being cartoony
(http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/7230/pekh.jpg)
I am sorry Curly, but the AH original image looks more real to me. The WT colors look like a painting and the saturated yak pic you made looks like there is something wrong with my monitor. WT does have nicer mountains in that image, but some trees there look like they are 200 feet high.
-
So basically you're saying, "Real Is Brown (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RealIsBrown)."
Not at all, they certainly don't have to, nor should they copy WT's aesthetic. Though as it stands Aces has very little in the way of lighting or lighting effects. The difference between this
(http://warthunder.com/upload/image/1000x700/WT_screenshot_3.jpg)
and
this (http://www.hitechcreations.com/images/stories/news/yak/yak7b_2.jpg)
is lighting effects. I dont think adding more polygons to the trees really will raise the bar as much improving the lighting.
-
Um ..... I see plenty of lighting effect in the AHII. Are you saying clouds equals lighting?
-
I don't have a problem with AH graphics and I play ROF which has nice graphic as well.
My PC is rater awesome which might have something to do with it.
Water effects are nice in ROF but I don't think this adds to game play.
Track IR makes a big difference in AH to how the game looks as well.
AH you log on and you play in WT you stand on your head eat a bowl of carrots and then you get a biplane to fight a 109.
WT is poo that is why 777 studies has got involved, on the ROF forums they have locked a whine thread about how 777 has left ROF to wither on the vine.
They have just a update as well :rofl
If AH was poo I would not play it, its pennies a day to play and keeps me out of the pub :)
How do I become a moderator?
-
Um ..... I see plenty of lighting effect in the AHII. Are you saying clouds equals lighting?
Look at how the WT has more of a sense of depth, the way the light reflects not just of the canopy. The way the plane pops off the background. The Aces looks flat. Where is the sun coming from in the aces pic the pilots 11 o'clock maybe? It's hard to get a sense cause other than from canopy because the light seems to be coming from everywhere at once with the same intensity. How about when you look at the sun in the cockpit, Does the light flare and defuse or does it just get bright when get within and angle of the sun. Does that brightness vary with the time of day? Other than in the clouds, does the intensity of the sunlight vary. Does it vary under the clouds? Light is more than just shadow and reflectivity.
The beauty of all that stuff is it's run client side and is scalable and can be shut off if one's cpu doesn't have the muscle for it.
-
Not at all, they certainly don't have to, nor should they copy WT's aesthetic. Though as it stands Aces has very little in the way of lighting or lighting effects. The difference between this
(http://warthunder.com/upload/image/1000x700/WT_screenshot_3.jpg)
and
this (http://www.hitechcreations.com/images/stories/news/yak/yak7b_2.jpg)
is lighting effects. I dont think adding more polygons to the trees really will raise the bar as much improving the lighting.
curly the two pictures you posted are really out of context. the wt plane looks shiny as it if it just came out of the factory. the aces high picture looks worn out as if it has been baking in the dessert for too long. and that is how the ah skin is supposed to look.
semp
-
This is the observable;
con range 5.6miles
terrain objects 4miles
bases/towns 17miles
cons fade in and out when the maximum is reached.
There is no fallacy here.
-
This is the observable;
con range 5.6miles
terrain objects 4miles
bases/towns 17miles
cons fade in and out when the maximum is reached.
There is no fallacy here.
I was expecting someone else to mention this.
Terrain (texture) ground range is 17 miles. It's set by the Arena Settings variable, FogVisibilityMiles. The default is 14 miles and I usually reduce that to 10 miles in my AvA setups because I push your hardware with custom objects and textures.
-
Recently tried WT. Catalina can take cannons like a man :noid
It's just another arcade game people are claiming as a simulator.
Not to mention the toughness of the standard armored car, takes plenty of strafes to "kill" :noid
My honest thoughts are that it's not a bad game, but it isn't near AHII's level.
:devil No War Thunder for me
-
Look at how the WT has more of a sense of depth, the way the light reflects not just of the canopy. The way the plane pops off the background. The Aces looks flat.
(http://imageshack.us/a/img36/5093/0e79.png)
-
(http://imageshack.us/a/img513/8448/forp.png)
-
oooh, you missed with that bristol picture...cartoon city.
-
oooh, you missed with that bristol picture...cartoon city.
Actually, it all depends on the angle versus the sun. The Bristol is a very nicely rendered plane.
You're also dealing with canvas covering on most of the aircraft. I was delighted to see the pilot's
head dip and raise and move side to side in relation to the elevators and rudder (I know, such
has been seen in the sim world before). It's one of my favorite tee designs.
-
curly the two pictures you posted are really out of context. the wt plane looks shiny as it if it just came out of the factory. the aces high picture looks worn out as if it has been baking in the dessert for too long. and that is how the ah skin is supposed to look.
semp
The purpose of posting that picture was to illustrate that the polygon count of both models was similar. Poly-counts use to be the go to standard on how graphical fidelity was judged. Adding polygons won't make the game necessarily look better. It's really the most brute force approach to graphics.
Just from playing with graphics settings, I think there still a ton of overhead to play with in both the pixel shading and the geometric shading. Pixel shading and geometric shading combined is where you're going to get the most bang for your buck. While lower end GPU's don't handle geometric shading well. I think its more scalable than a vertex approach because you're not using render distances as the control of performance, ie FPS.
It also allows the player to customize the graphics more to their liking. IE they can say, I will live with short render distances, but have more eye candy in those short distances. I think that's where part of the false allegation of inefficiency in Aces' graphics engine comes from. In that if you cull the view distances there isn't much more atmospheric enhancement you can do. The only enchantments beyond the vertex shades are the bump, and specular maps. The function of which is binary as its either totally on or off.
When people go for max graphics, they go shadows, bump maps and max textures and view distance. What kills the frame rate is the view distance. You end up rendering so many vertices they fill that graphics pipeline so fast that the frame rate drops, while all the other parallel pipelines remain mostly idle. Which why even modern rigs can be very taxed when running aces at max settings. If one simply adds more vertices to the terrain textures view distances have to drop exponentially in relation to the number of vertices added to the terrain. The engine becomes better suited to being run on workstation optimized to render vertices rather than a desktop card which tends to optimize texture fill rates.
Which is why I say you get more bang for buck by looking into lighting effects as a means to enhance graphics. Ambient occlusion, Anisotropic Filtering, and some post processing would go all further to enhance the graphics.
-
curly the polygon count has been shown as not being almost equal by any count. as for the rest of what you are saying, I just take skuzzy's word that ah does a better job than any other game. and that is because i trust skuzzy more than I trust you.
not saying you are wrong but skuzzy somehow has a track of actually knowing what is going on unlike you.
semp
-
curly the polygon count has been shown as not being almost equal by any count. as for the rest of what you are saying, I just take skuzzy's word that ah does a better job than any other game. and that is because i trust skuzzy more than I trust you.
not saying you are wrong but skuzzy somehow has a track of actually knowing what is going on unlike you.
semp
Not the total count per frame rendered, the count per model. Aces renders more models with the same or higher count polys per model than WT per frame. That's exactly what Skuzzy has stated. Where WT is getting is looks from is slightly higher resolution textures, lighting effects and post processing. Further more I'm not in disagreement with Skuzzy anywhere. Skuzzy never stated we're upping the poly count to enhance the graphics. All Skuzzy said is the terrain is hurting us. What I've been saying if you want to look at enhancing the graphics these are ways to do it. I'm certainly not looking for your approval or consensus on the matter. As you clearly have no idea what your talking about. I'm just offering my two sense on how to improve the game while your commentary as usual adds nothing to the conversation.
-
Actually, it all depends on the angle versus the sun. The Bristol is a very nicely rendered plane.
You're also dealing with canvas covering on most of the aircraft. I was delighted to see the pilot's
head dip and raise and move side to side in relation to the elevators and rudder (I know, such
has been seen in the sim world before). It's one of my favorite tee designs.
The difference is aces uses bump, opacity and specular maps. There is no ambient occlusion, hdr effects, post processing, anisotropic filtering ect. Aces has very limited effects, mostly as function of the number vertices rendered simultaneously.
Simply put here are aces high lighting effects
http://www.reallusion.com/iclone/Help/iClone3/15_Multiple_Channel_Texture_Mapping/Types_of_maps.htm
This is cryengine
http://mycryengine.com/?conid=8
There is no way to run a full balls to the wall cryengine game with scale of Aces. Though it's probably possible to run it on the same scale with a few of the lighting enhancements. Though there isn't even an option to do that.
-
There is no way to run a full balls to the wall cryengine game with scale of Aces. Though it's probably possible to run it on the same scale with a few of the lighting enhancements. Though there isn't even an option to do that.
I'm not convinced even you know what you're asking for, at this point.
AHII's lighting is actually fine.
:salute :cheers:
-
Not the total count per frame rendered, the count per model. Aces renders more models with the same or higher count polys per model than WT per frame. That's exactly what Skuzzy has stated. Where WT is getting is looks from is slightly higher resolution textures, lighting effects and post processing. Further more I'm not in disagreement with Skuzzy anywhere. Skuzzy never stated we're upping the poly count to enhance the graphics. All Skuzzy said is the terrain is hurting us. What I've been saying if you want to look at enhancing the graphics these are ways to do it. I'm certainly not looking for your approval or consensus on the matter. As you clearly have no idea what your talking about. I'm just offering my two sense on how to improve the game while your commentary as usual adds nothing to the conversation.
ok curly go back to the beginning of this thread and you will find the answer to all the bs you just posted. first you posted about how the plane skins are so much better in wt, when I posted that the "faded" ah skins are meant to actually look like that then you switched to something else. now you re talking about something else that doesnt even mention your fist post.
how many guys like you are gonna post about how ah can or should do when you dont even develop games like aces high.
semp
semp
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #4
-
You guys need to calm down. It really is not advancing the discussion.
We know all about the various technologies and we also know our own shortcomings very well. Various game engines are geared towards extremely short view distances, which make them useless.
We will not introduce technology which would serve to alienate a huge portion of our player base. There are things we avoid which could give a higher end system a visual advantage over a lower end system.
When the time is right, for us, we will introduce various technologies into the game.
Curly, you made the statement about objects appearing flat, that you cannot tell where the Sun is because we appear to light everything equally. Sometimes screenshots cannot convey details well, so I attached a short video. If you cannot tell where the Sun is, then let me know. Do not bother pointing out how it could be better, we already know that.
There is a lot going on in that static shot. I could show even more dramatic action shots, but I used this to keep the file size down and the quality up. Action shots are more difficult to compress down, without losing a lot of detail.
Visually, all I did was speed up the video. It is 100% untouched game footage.
-
There is a lot going on in that static shot. I could show even more dramatic action shots, but I used this to keep the file size down and the quality up. Action shots are more difficult to compress down, without losing a lot of detail.
Visually, all I did was speed up the video. It is 100% untouched game footage.
Thanks. Exactly what I was pondering how to make. I've been taking tons of screen-shots offline lately for a variety of reasons. I like to set the time to somewhere between 14:00 and 15:00. That really does make a huge difference depending which way you turn the plane or camera. It makes it plainly clear that lighting and shadow in AHII is anything but static (and it shows off skins modeled or remodeled in higher resolution well).
-
See Rule #4
-
When the time is right, for us, we will introduce various technologies into the game.
What kind of timeline are we looking at for that to occur?
-
*ahem*
"Two weeks."
:bolt:
-
AH is my main hobby.
I am thankful that this universe has AH in it! :aok
:aok
-
Aces High is a hobby is an understatement, it's an addiction.
100th forum post.... Aces High and every part about it is consuming me... :noid
-
So basically you're saying, "Real Is Brown (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RealIsBrown)."
:aok
I am totally against doing things that a gamer thinks looks "more realistic" when in fact it is less realistic.
-
I am totally against doing things that a gamer thinks looks "more realistic" when in fact it is less realistic.
Aye!
-
I tried WT this weekend. Loved the graphics a lot. Controls were to jerky with a joystick for my tastes. I loved shooting all the noobs though.. First sortie got three guys on my six and by the time I entered the third turn of the flat scissors two had over shot... (nothing like in the MA) Needless to say I got 3 planes in a matter of about 4 min...
Defiantly going back there when I need to shoot noobs. Otherwise it was horrible.
-
War Thunder + Max Flight Stick + Rift
for those who still dont know how VR works. (I need this flight chair!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFyAgRtToL4
-
How many other game allow you to see for 17 miles with an unlimited number of objects in view? Rhetorical question as there are not ANY games on the market that do, except ours.
Our per screen vertex rendering count is higher than WT's because of that.
Getting really tired of people who continue to compare Aces High to other games that are not comparable and then complain about ours being a problem. You have been told over and over again why, and you keep on whining about our game. It ends now. We have been as patient as anyone can be with people like yourself. We are done wasting our time trying to educate people who refuse to listen and keep on complaining.
You don't even play the game anymore.
Well said :salute
-
I played War Thunder for about a week.
Game play is garbage garbage garbage garbage in Arcade mode...
Historical was a little better, but not much.
I tried numerous times and never once got into a Full Real game... Just wait wait wait wait for the matchmaker to find me a game. Never did.
Garbage garbage garbage!
Quit that crapola pretty darn fastola...
Then I re-subbed here.
-
Its an outrage!
Warthunder is awesome Dhyran says so :)
-
I am sure that Aces High is higher on the pie quotient than any other game.
-
War Thunder + Max Flight Stick + Rift
for those who still dont know how VR works. (I need this flight chair!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFyAgRtToL4
Dang that chair is sweet!! It would take me forever to get used to that kind of set up but I so want one!! :O
-
Imagine AH with those graphics
but yeah, AH is definitely way better, there is 0 communication and way to many HOtards in WT, and since when can a P-26 dive with a P-40??
-
I am sure that Aces High is higher on the pie quotient than any other game.
I Watched 'Sweeney Todd" played by 'Ray Winstone' and there were some awesome pies in it :)
I will get a Screen Shot said Savoury delights
Does AH have an influence upon climate?
-
I Watched 'Sweeney Todd" played by 'Ray Winstone' and there were some awesome pies in it :)
I will get a Screen Shot said Savoury delights
Does AH have an influence upon climate?
I speak from experience when I say that making pies from your neighbours seems like a good idea fiscally you only end up getting into trouble in the long run.
Maybe chav pies? Nobody would miss them :old:
-
Good idea Danny, although it is vital to tenderise the meat before it dies
-
Good idea Danny, although it is vital to tenderise the meat before it dies
:rofl
-
Sweeney Todd is a great pie movie and play. (Titus Andronicus has some delicious pie in it as well.)
I had a pie last night in honor of Zack. I had a cider with it. I hesitate so say so (in case it is a horrible faux pas in Britain) but instead of chips I had pommes frites with it. Does that make me a bad person?
If War Thunder and Aces High were pies, I believe that the Aces High pie would be more savory and wholesome.
-
but instead of chips I had pommes frites with it. Does that make me a bad person?
I'm no authority, but I'm pretty sure that it does...
-
Hair pie?
-
Hair pie?
:confused:
-
Not at all, they certainly don't have to, nor should they copy WT's aesthetic. Though as it stands Aces has very little in the way of lighting or lighting effects. The difference between this
(http://warthunder.com/upload/image/1000x700/WT_screenshot_3.jpg)
and
this (http://www.hitechcreations.com/images/stories/news/yak/yak7b_2.jpg)
is lighting effects. I dont think adding more polygons to the trees really will raise the bar as much improving the lighting.
I think you need a reality check. From what's been posted here, WT has prettier terrain I'll give it that. But in all the aircraft images you've posted here the AH ones look way closer to reality to me.
That WT Typhoon looks like it's made out of shiny plastic. While the AH Yak looks like faded flat paint on aluminum/fabric, like it should. I even see a lot of little details on the AH Yak that really make it, the worn off paint around the wing root, the stains behind the fuel filler cap, paint chips on the cowling and leading edges, visible rib lines through the fabric on the control surfaces, etc.. Trust me, I work on old, hard working aircraft every day, the only planes you'll see as shiny and perfect as that WT Typhoon example are show planes and hangar queens. Planes that actually get out and fly/work don't stay that pretty for very long, especially old piston engined planes that spew oil and smoke every time they start up.
As far as lighting effects you speak of, I don't get it either, they both have highlights and shadows in all the right places. The WT plane just looks like a shiny plastic model, while the AH plane looks like a real working aircraft. In your previous example all you did was take the lovely looking AH Yak and crank up the green saturation to the 'have-to-cover-my-eyes-to-keep-from-vomiting' level. Even when it comes to the terrain, the way he AH graphic has the coastline fading into the haze of midday sunlight looks pretty realistic.
Anyway, I don't really have a dog in this fight, I've never played WT, and play AH pretty seldom these days (though when I do, I don't worry about the graphics) Real life and all gets in the way... ...
-
I agree I have a £2000 gaming pc and graphics are good :old:
In Rise of Flight the graphics are nice :old:
-
I agree I have a £2000 gaming pc and graphics are good :old:
In Rise of Flight the graphics are nice :old:
This sounds about right.
-
On PC, AH is the only game for me. WT is however said to be a future release for the PS4 which I will probably download. I think WT as a whole is better suited for console rather than PC.
-
.... stuff.....
Anyway, I don't really have a dog in this fight, I've never played WT, and play AH pretty seldom these days (though when I do, I don't worry about the graphics) Real life and all gets in the way... ...
The statement above in bold is the reason no one should take your opinion into consideration. By saying that the Typhoon (or any plane) in Aces High looks more "realistic" is really up for interpretation. There are people who skin aircraft in AH, some skins are top-notch artwork while others are outdated or poorly done. Yes, there are fabric covered surfaces that are noticeable in War Thunder. You should actually download and play War Thunder before spewing out biased opinions. If your computer hardware is up to par with the average computer system today, you will see much more detail in game than you will ever see in the screenshots.
Graphically speaking, War Thunder is exceptional. The planes are just as detailed- if not- more detailed than any in Aces High. War Thunder even takes it a step further by adding more detail to the cockpits (more instrument panel gauges, dirt/grime on the canopy glass, levers, and switches). Flight modelling in War Thunder on the other hand, there is much to be desired.
-
I actually got a pretty fair idea of WT looks and gameplay while watching Mighty Jingles videos
on Youtube. The arcade is funny..nose low 9G turns and the lead computing sight were interesting.
Even in historical, hearing people say that it's easier to fly with a mouse than a joystick pretty much
sealed the deal for me. Pretty is only skin deep.
-
dirt/grime on the canopy glass
Not realistic for any ground crew that cared about their pilot and plane.