Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: sutpid on June 29, 2002, 05:09:41 PM
-
i was jsut checkin a sight for the game warbirds and it looks alot better that Aces high i am yet to fly this game but if the pics are at all like the game is DAMN. but the draw back i see so far is well over 100megs which is gunna take time to d/l. i dont know how many planes are in it but i wont change its $25 a month and i'd rather stick to $15.
-
Originally posted by sutpid
i was jsut checkin a sight for the game warbirds and it looks alot better that Aces high i am yet to fly this game but if the pics are at all like the game is DAMN. but the draw back i see so far is well over 100megs which is gunna take time to d/l. i dont know how many planes are in it but i wont change its $25 a month and i'd rather stick to $15.
Lemme see if I got this right. Too big to download, costs too much and you won't switch to it. Yet you think Aces High is doomed? Maybe you should change your handle to Stupid. ;)
-
Warbirds? Really? I dont believe too many people here in AH have heard of that Simulation. If it looks that good, I may switch tomorrow!!
What is the URL so we can all check it out??
Thanks!! :)
-
Hows the fishing? Looks kinda slow.
-
didn't i see this episode on "fishing with stoooooopid"?
The Tuckster
How's My Flying? Call 1-800-BITEME
(http://members.aol.com/tuck0006/images/lawnd2a.gif)
(http://members.aol.com/tuck0006/images/tucksspita.jpg)
-
htc originally made WARBIRDS so its alot like AH ...... when u r play'n warbirds ... i have WB2 and 3 ....2 is free with a free host
hitech and pyro are AI planes with other designers
-
thats offline with AI planes .... i like WB2 better than 3 but not as much as AH got some of pyro ....... but i like ti motion blurr my shots
-
Wow sounds cool
I heard they have tanks too.
I might have to try it...
-
Okay guys Sutpid is new.;)
Sutpid most of the guys flying here came from Warbirds, Airwarrior, or both. I flew Warbirds 6 years, this is just my opinion, but Warbirds will never kill off AH. In fact you have it backwards AH has pretty much killed off Warbirds.:p
-
I fly WB's 3 and AH..Believe me WB's 3 aint going anywhere..
SrLoin WB's player name.
-
Aww c'mon Jay if you're gonna spam the AH board as well at least do it under your own name :)
-
Aww c'mon Jay if you're gonna spam the AH board as well at least do it under your own name
Funny, I was thinking the samething.. thats sad if true.
-
Either that or one of the professional trolls from SimHQ have found the board...surprising really I would'nt have thought they could even see their monitor's from all the foam round their mouths from my last post there :)
-
Cobra, a second pic looks like Ki-61 for me. ;)
-
I think that WB3 has better graphics and leaves Ah in the dust. AH graphics start to age. The really cool thing about WB3 is that you can edit the planes skins. I could finally have my Gabreski D25 with stripes and get rid of this Brazilian jug like a bad nighmare.
In anything else, flite model and INOVATION/creativity ... WB3 is wayyyyyyy back there.
let say that I'm not 100% pleased with AH, especially the graphics, but HTC keeps amazing me. Maybe 1.11 will be graphics/plane models to match the newer generation of flight sims.:D
-
Agreed Frenchy. :D
-
To me WBs3 sounds as if its in a bad way,yup,I love the graphics etc,and the ability to use your own skins(WHEN they turn this feature back on that is) all these 'free' weekends etc they have hints theyre having a lot of trouble attracting new folk,20-30 guys in a main arena is not my idea of fun,and thats in the evening here in the UK,in the morning in the UK I can find usually about 80-100 guys on AH,added to that the 24.95 a month for unlimited play,thats why I dumped WBs3.Whoever thought that one up needs a good kicking.
-
added to that the 24.95 a month for unlimited play
If that had been the price a few years ago I could have probably retired now from all the additional savings. How unfondly I remember my multi-hundred dollar monthly bills from WB.
I do agree that WB graphics is something to look at but I wonder how much those extra visuals detract from the overall game play. I think I would prefer moderate graphics and great game play instead of the reverse.
I do also wish AH had a better off-line AI but I prefer to have them working on the on-line game...keep up the good work HTC.
-
IMO, what WB has over AH is only graphics. It is beautiful, but hey...it took them what, 2 years to develop it.
2 years only to come up with new graphics, a handful of new planes and minor FM tweaks. Some manage build new games in 2 years.
-
I personally will take AH over any WW2 Flight Sim...
AH has best all around features !
We compromise a bit on graphics for a great FM and playability...
I would compromise on the eye candy as my first choice in order to attain the rest... Besides, I have full confidence in HiTechs theory of "Lets make it work first, then make it pretty" Which seems to be just the opposite of any other Sim I have been involved in... AW and WB's and WWIIonline...
Salute HiTech
-
The one thing I would not like in AH is the player created aircraft skins. This would only be feisible if it was limited. IF someone had a squadron, 357th Fighter Group for example, the only skin allowed would be one that are of the 357th Fighter Group. Same color scheme but different call numbers and a little personal artwork. I would not want to see pink and orange Me109s flying around, or red F4Us. I also would not want to see Japanese A/C in British markings and so forth.
Non historical squadrons would have to get a specific scheme and stick with that. As long as the skins were not abused it might work.
-
I found wbIII suspiciously similar to wb . I'ts not another game, just another version of the same game . Would be like calling AH 1.15 AHII and charging a seperate subscription rate for it. It's the same old wb with eyecandy upgrade .
-
Originally posted by Swager
The one thing I would not like in AH is the player created aircraft skins.
Why not? This was one of the best parts about AW, when members of my squad came up with a method of customising aircraft skins, and I would love to see it possible here.I would not want to see pink and orange Me109s flying around, or red F4Us. I also would not want to see Japanese A/C in British markings and so forth.
If a similar setup to what we had in AW could be implemented, you would only see aircraft as you want to see them.... it was, after all a Scenario Aircraft Converter, so the idea was to have historically accurate skins for each scenario we ran. Anybody using silly colour schemes would only see them from their own computer, and as the colours don't show until the aircraft are very close, it wouldn't give them any advantage! For more on SAC and how it was used, see the following websites:
http://www3.mistral.co.uk/mthuff/index.html
http://www.zeb.clara.net/sac.htm :)
-
im a flight model hoar. and after one week of il2 i canceled my ah sub. if it goes multiplayer with strat ah will lose 70% of its base. imagin a flight model where you cant make a 45 deg out of flight path snap shot at 400 mph without having a accelerated stall like ah. its nice
towd
-
Hey guys, the AI in particular seems to be a very interesting feature that adds a lot to gameplay. CM's will be allowed to plot and manage AI missions for any vehicle in the game.
http://agw.warbirdsiii.com/bbs/showthread.php?s=&threadid=7493 (http://agw.warbirdsiii.com/bbs/showthread.php?s=&threadid=7493)
Stridr
-
Flossy, I think people are concerned about the kind of problem that IL2 (when played online) suffers from. Never mind whether a skin is silly or not, if someone enters the game with a skin that your system hasnt encountered before, your system has to download it. Thats one of the main causes for people having problems both connecting to IL2 and getting stutters in-game. If we had that in AH, it wouldnt bear thinking about!
However, the ability for all planes in an arena to have appropriate camouflage schemes would be nice. NOT individualised skins, mind, same scheme for all planes of the same type, plus their units emblem, of course. An additional feature that would be nice would be plane ID markings. I have heard that in some FPS games one can type words or messages that will appear on a vehicle skin. If something similar was implemented, limited to something like proper LW, RAF, USAF, IJN, RA, etc. IDs, it could provide a way of telling who was whom in formation without icons.
For instance, anyone seeing a Ju88 with the markings U5+EA would know it was me, and any Ju88 with the prefix part reading U5 would clearly be a KG2 plane. If the conversion between the text you type in for your plane ID and what appears on the skin were done in a standardised manner, the FPS hit should be small. And a few possible combinations would need to be barred, to stop silly kids having IDs that were rude words...
Esme
-
Although I never subscribed to AW (tried it and then went to WB..was'nt my cup of tea) I did like the SAC utility and posted links to it several times down the years when playing Warbirds as an example of how a skin system could be done. iEN seem to have the right idea by requiring the plane skins to be in their own native .vfc format but the PDC seems to lack the organisation to push enough of these through to make it a cool feature. Take a look at the pic below, the original Spitfire MkI looked horrible but this one by a player called Baal looks stunning, panel lines even warning lettering next to panel work etc
(http://www.furball.warbirdsiii.com/media/jpg/baal_spit5_ver1a.jpg)
That being said I much prefer the progress that HTC has made in gameplay and better features such as the superb AHVoice, strat and bomber updates than a cosmetic feature like skin support.
PS JOC I still have the skins you made for me on my HDD :)
(http://www.101squadron.co.uk/images/wbsquad/B25101-5.jpg)
-
Easy guys
Sutpid is not a plant from the AGW boards nor is he Jay or Wild Bill come to take a look.
He's a new guy thats new to sim's and he was just sharing what he's found. Nothing wrong with that he just doesn't know most of us left there years ago.
Lowe has it right. AH has almost killed off WB.
-
Originally posted by Esme
if someone enters the game with a skin that your system hasnt encountered before, your system has to download it.
SAC didn't work like that! All the information was kept on your own computer, and only you saw the skins you specified! Nobody else saw them, and in fact somebody else would probably have them set differently, and only they would see them as they had set them up. Combined with customisable terrains (we could change the look of a terrain in the same way to look like desert, snow, etc), no two players would see things exactly the same unless they set the same skins/terrains as each other. Everybody else not using SAC would see the default colours - not a problem at all! :)
-
Lowe has it right. AH has almost killed off WB.
Nobody is killing anyone off, each sim is getting new subscribers but it does seem like AH and WW2OL are getting the lions share but I believe there are enough customers to go around to keep them all afloat. The only people that can be accussed of killing of Warbirds were the last bunch of suits who controlled iEN. Wild Bill did his best to kill off WB last time with the whole CD release debacle but it seems this time they have got their sh*t together and the box release this time will include proper offline missions, new planes and better artwork making it something worth buying. Time will tell how it all pans out but you can be sure that HTC will still be there quietly churning out new release after new release without any of the hype and pomp its competitors employ.
IL-2 is a nice sim but the overwhelming majority of servers are dogfight servers and that gets very boring it also fails to cater for those like me who like to fly bombers. I like to fire up Hyperlobby from time to time for a quick blast but that's all it is.
-
Originally posted by Flossy
SAC didn't work like that! All the information was kept on your own computer, and only you saw the skins you specified! Nobody else saw them, and in fact somebody else would probably have them set differently, and only they would see them as they had set them up. Combined with customisable terrains (we could change the look of a terrain in the same way to look like desert, snow, etc), no two players would see things exactly the same unless they set the same skins/terrains as each other. Everybody else not using SAC would see the default colours - not a problem at all! :)
So a player could setup these skins so that enemy planes were a bright neon green instead of the original camoflage? If so, then this is what would kill it for most people I think. If would effectly negate any of the various camoflage schemes used. Need to spot those NOE C47s sneaking into your base ... color em bright pink. ;)
I like the idea of HTC controlled skins for different campaigns ... camoflage was different in the desert than it was in the Pacific, etc...
-
Originally posted by Exile
So a player could setup these skins so that enemy planes were a bright neon green instead of the original camoflage? If so, then this is what would kill it for most people I think. If would effectly negate any of the various camoflage schemes used. Need to spot those NOE C47s sneaking into your base ... color em bright pink. ;)
Although that was possible - how soon can you see the colour of an aircraft anyway? I think we can see the icon before the colour, so what would it matter what colour it was? :p
Where SAC comes into it's own is when flying in formation, especially during a scenario! Seeing a group of historically accurate aircraft skins is an awesome sight, and adds to the whole atmosphere of a scenario.... :)
-
Player skins is a whole lot of fun. I've got my stable, took me months to put together, wasn't flying much.
(http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid24/p2f3ae5590881cc7e3ac8df43144ba704/fd97975e.jpg)
I disagree on terrain though. While the plane skins and cockpits rock over there, I think there terrain sucks. It's called green jello. That and while the sky and sun are very good, there is a permanent cloud layer. ALWAYS grey over there. Like a summer in San Francisco. And I've had enough of those ;)
I found the terrain here suprisingly good. In fact I REALLY like it in comparision. Mate the sky from there, with the terrain from here:D
Have the latest update over there, checked the Main, 70 people......
It echo's in there.
HT can look foreward to more pilots ;)
-
Well put Flossy, I've heard these arguments again and again everytime I brought it up in Warbirds all tose years ago, the SAC really opened my eyes to what we could have and all those I remember shouting about cheats are now industriously working on their own skins :D It can be done and the effect on cheating even if someone can hack these files is minimal due to the icon system and the range that planes are skinned by the engine anyway as Flossy quite rightly points out. I think in the long run things like this should be limited to squads anyway as is the nose art, HTC could check the skin just as they check the noseart uploaded. For scenario's then we could have special art packs released by the CM team for a particular event.
-
i love WB2 and AH the same ..... AH a lil more beacause its way better but i play WB2 with hundreds of ppl for free so i like massive wars in WB2 and i like gameplay in AH ...... and soon ill like alot of other games i dont play now bbut im finally old enough to get a job and ill be like stupid .... the "newb" and ill be comparing WWIIOL to AH ..... ill have my ups and downs for both but that doesnt mean one isnt better than the other .... just IMO but other ppl might like WB3 for the custom skins and more tanks ....maby even the F86 Saber is the reason ..... he is just showing ppl what he likes hes introducing ppl to a game like ppl did to get alot of you ppl in this game ...... a friend told me about WB2 and this game ...... and some other games that i didnt like but he did i respected him for that but i didnt play them i tryed them i still have them i get on them when he is on but thats about it........ps i have to post a pic from WB2 while i was online :D its the true non edited 3d graphics.....they arnt to good but hey its a game
-
I actually like AH graphics, they look fine, and they dont look cartoonish and wierd like in other sims. Plus AH terrain is awesome.
-
Originally posted by sutpid
i was jsut checkin a sight for the game warbirds and it looks alot better that Aces high i am yet to fly this game but if the pics are at all like the game is DAMN. but the draw back i see so far is well over 100megs which is gunna take time to d/l. i dont know how many planes are in it but i wont change its $25 a month and i'd rather stick to $15.
All I will say is L O L !!!!
-
Heheh Revvin,forgot about that,I loved makin skins for WBs3,especially the Hurricane,and I had a lot of fun in AW making terrains and skins for SAC,Id love it if we had the chance to do the same in AH,but as has been said,theres always some sad person who would do their best to cheat,Im not sure about the best way to implement something likes skins etc. :/
-
Exile the enemy planes in AH allready are bright red unless you turn icons off . I think SAC for AH would be great .
-
It would make a huge difference if a player could have all bad guys show up in neon green. huge.
anyone that says different has never been in a canyon fight,
nor shot at a ground vehicle.
-
Originally posted by cobra427
i love WB2 and AH the same ..... AH a lil more beacause its way better but i play WB2 with hundreds of ppl for free so i like massive wars in WB2 and i like gameplay in
FH:(
-
Ideally, and IMO, a sim should have plane graphics of WBIII, cockpits, terrain, damage model and effects of Il-2 with both Il-2 and AH parts of FM model.
Player made 3d models would be cool aswell. Can make some if HTC will be interested.
-
whats wrong with FH adds some really cool planes for free
-
Originally posted by cobra427
whats wrong with FH adds some really cool planes for free
whats wrong with it?
I'm not going to even touch that one. I'll let some of the other sim vets handle it.
All I'll say is there is a damn good reason why even the mention of freehost on AGW gets a post locked down quicker then you can say gunman26
-
Read the news, player customized plane skins coming to AH !
-
AH Graphics is fine... ofcourse it could be better..
(http://www.savanne.org/ah/tbm.jpg)
-
This is AH ? I seriosuly doubt it, never seen a lense flare in AH. You showing us an edited screenshot, eh ?
DL WarbirdsIII. Take the P47D in the external view. Roll the plane and watch the reflections and shading. Same with P51D. Then take P47C - watch the textures. Then 109K and 109G-6. Then Ki84 and Ki43. They are just beautiful. Not even Il-2 is close.
Now if only they had shadows.
AH cockpits are crying for reworking. Il-2 has followed the landmark set by Jane's WW2 Fighters (too) long ago.
-
Yep.. it is edited but it sure is from AH. :D BUT I only added lensflare and some lightning effects.
-
Yup, default shading looks a bit flatter ;).
How about sun effect. Anyone compared it to Il-2 sun effect ?
I repeat, if you are curious about how superior plane graphics look, take p47/p51d of WBIII in external view.
P.S.
Isn't the placement of the lense flare illogical ? I mean, it should come from bright light sources, but the shading suggests that light comes from behind the camera. Just being a nitpick ;).
Anyone seen lens flares in Battlezone, 4 yrs ago ?
-
Yes. It is illogical but most people dont understand it. :D
-
The thing with custom skins is that you would either not see it as what the person who done the skin wants you too see it, or like some one said earlier when ever you log on you would have to download all the skins to your computer that are being used in the arena. I used to fly CFS and if some one had a Plane you didnt have or had changed the skin, then they were flying a B17, or thats what it looked like.
-
Does WB look like this???
NON EDITED AH!!!
I can't wait till we can do skins:)
(http://www.graphixOne.net/images/new-2.jpg)
(http://www.graphixOne.net/images/new-3.jpg)
(http://www.graphixOne.net/images/new-4.jpg)
(http://www.graphixOne.net/images/new-5.jpg)
(http://www.graphixOne.net/images/new-6.jpg)
NUTTZ
-
NUTTZ, WBIII planes look better than AH Ki61. I am at work now, so I can't go snap some screenshots. Just go and download WBIII and then compare. Compare the shiny Ki61 of AH to the shiny P51 or Ki84 in WBIII.
As for terrain, it looks nice. But it is just a flat texture. Il-2 terrain has it beat, IMO.
-
Originally posted by Hristo
As for terrain, it looks nice. But it is just a flat texture. Il-2 terrain has it beat, IMO.
As for shiny planes... The ones in WB3 are sometimes shiny way too much... As for terrain please keep in mind that AH is 30MB download and Il-2 is 650MB CD stuff... So lets say that basic engine of Il-2 has also lets say 20MB (which I doubt) so they have 620MB of space for shiny graphics, sounds etc... go figure yourself...
For the record:
AH is still No. 1 for me and no other online sim comes even close to it so far. IL-2 is not a masive multiplayer game. WB's graphics maybe looks better (WB3) but its FM is total BS. WW2OL ehm... all planes there are even worse UFOs than NIK has been before modification :)
-
Size doesn't matter (tm) ;).
Seriously, I'd DL even 300 MBs with my 56k if it offers me great graphics.
Otherwise, AH graphics has still glitches. Hit sprites - visible ar any distance no matter of round type that causes them. How about clipping ? You still see hit sprites through the instrument panes.
-
No offense, but your comparing the planes of AH with the planes of WB and the terrain textures of AH with the terrain of IL-2. Are we comparing all 3?
NUTTZ
Originally posted by Hristo
NUTTZ, WBIII planes look better than AH Ki61. I am at work now, so I can't go snap some screenshots. Just go and download WBIII and then compare. Compare the shiny Ki61 of AH to the shiny P51 or Ki84 in WBIII.
As for terrain, it looks nice. But it is just a flat texture. Il-2 terrain has it beat, IMO.
-
well why not ? all to the benefit of the player ;)
Terrain in Il-2 really adds something. The feeling of speed when you fly 500 kph at 15 meters height - something that is missing in AH. Even WB lack this.
Right now you can fly at sea level with 500 mph in a 262 and yet it looks little different than driving in your car. Is it a view angle, ground objects or textures - I don't know. I've always imagined flying at this speeds that low as something that makes your heart pump ;).
-
Originally posted by Hristo
Seriously, I'd DL even 300 MBs with my 56k if it offers me great graphics.
Otherwise, AH graphics has still glitches. Hit sprites - visible ar any distance no matter of round type that causes them. How about clipping ? You still see hit sprites through the instrument panes.
Nope, I'm on the opposite side of this one. WB made a huge error, IMHO, (but one common in the game industry) of putting a massive amount of time and effort into appearance of the planes before attending to basic game-play issues--i.e. what you would be able to do with those planes.
I really appreciated the craft that went into the WB planes, and the realistic cockpits in particular are something that I miss (although, the full 3D make-up of the AH planes actually feels better to me; when I'm flying in a JU88, it feels like I'm sitting in a glass house, whereas in WB it just feels as if I'm sitting in the middle of some great art work), and IL2 as well (although bringing that into the MMOG conversation is like comparing apples and oranges). But AH is where it's at for me because of their level of attention to the combat environment.
But WB is still trading on the idea that they have the best-looking sim around (although I've heard that Fighter Ace has them beat on that score, but it depends on who you talk to). They don't seem to realize that there is a lot more to simming than how good the graphics are, and that astounding graphics are never going to make up for crappy gameplay (and that, by the way is why IL2 is so good, not because of its graphics, but because the graphics are married to some great flight models, a lovingly detailed historical environment, and some pretty good gameplay).
-
I honestly think that AH graphics are Excellent better than any other sim(havent seen WB3) I have seen, I mean even down to little things like moving control surfaces, Decent looking moving prop even the dam undercarage moves up and down(semi realisticly).
IMHO ;)
-
Yup, you put it great in your last sentence. Il-2 managed to round it all pretty good (except for the online part).
Please make no mistakes, I don't consider WBIII a better game than AH (otherwise I wouldn't be here). Not in FMs, not in other features - geez, they fired a guy who coded droptanks and they still have the same old 1 fuel tank system !
I only consider the WBIII plane graphics better than AH graphics - and by a lot. Try the shiny planes in WBIII.
As for view systems, head positioning etc - AH beats WBIII.
Face it, AH is not the best game in everything. It might be best overall online sim, but it has its problems. Graphics being on top of my list. All the question of priorities it seems.
-
Which of the threee runs best (and not too shabby at that!) on a PIII600 with a TNT2 Ultra 32mb vid card, costs less than the most expensive of the three, has superlative customer suppoort and has more variety and players online than the other two?
:)
Westy
(p.s. WB III aircraft do look very, very nice in these external view screen shots. But not from inside the cockpit when looking out, imo).
-
NUTTZ, saddly my AH doesnt look like that.
Nice textures, they are 100 times better than the present ones in AH (that is, MA maps).
-
Mandoble you need to get out into the CT & SEA more often.
AH often DOES look like that.
Nuttz along with others have been doing fantastic work.
Take a look at tunesia sometime.
-
I know Ghosth, what I cant understand is why these superb textures cant be used by actual MA maps. Actually, AH is MA, and MA is MA maps.
-
Originally posted by poopster
Have the latest update over there, checked the Main, 70 people......
It echo's in there.
HT can look foreward to more pilots ;)
Hehe, were those the MAC pilots? :)
-
I just left WB after 4 years for AH. WB3 was the most anticipated release for us in years. Many spent hundreds or thousands to upgrade their machines to handle it. Many spent hours on dialup lines downloading the 100+ Meg files. Many kept the faith for over a year of "alpha/beta" play in the hopes that one day it would all come together. Many spent hours tweaking settings to be able to see a dot outside of 2000 yards. I spent most time squinting, trying to find the greenheaded fly against the green featureless ground, often times never finding anything....and yes, I set my .bgminrenderrange many different times.
Guess what? I spent 5 minutes downloading AH, including the help file. An hour reading the help file. The last 4 months enjoying the hell out of this sim.
I don't agree with the statements that AH beats WB3 in everything but graphics - it beats WB3 in everything.
-
I think graphics is excellent in AH, and they would prolly loose me as customer if they made AH so beautiful that FPS took a big hit.
Im surprised at the fact that I can play AH in 1024x768 16bit coulor and get 50-60 fps on my laptop.
They may loose other customers that also run on laptops and older computers.
WTG HTC for making such beautiful graphics and gameplay available for modist computers.
You must be excellent programmers, so keep ut the good work and don't forget us that doesnt have GF4 with 20000mb of ram.
Tried WB and it was like runnig throug glue...had 5fps WB sucks in playability and strat system aswell. AH rules the skies.
running AH on IBM Thinkpad T23 with 16mb S3 graphics chip with external monitor and bla bla bla bla bla
-
>Have the latest update over there, checked the Main, 70
>people......
>Hehe, were those the MAC pilots?
Hehe. I was thinking the same thing. The whole mac thing is their biggest mistake IMHO. Not very intelligent to limit what you can offer to the vast majority of gamers in order to pander to a vocal minority.
I can't believe, with the competition they are facing, that they are holding back all kinds of cool features simply because "the mac can't handle it."
If they had half a brain, they would separate the mac people into a mac arena and support it as much as the little machines can handle, then open up the flood gates on the PC only arena and give them every bell and whistle they can imagine. I can't believe there has not been more of a backlash from PC users being denied features because "the mac can't handle it." I guess there has been, but its been quiet. Players just quietly walk away, taking their pocketbooks with them.
Wab
-
Anybody know why my WBIII terrain looks like moldy old commanche terrain ?
(http://home.satx.rr.com/suvorov/WBIII.jpg)
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
I know Ghosth, what I cant understand is why these superb textures cant be used by actual MA maps. Actually, AH is MA, and MA is MA maps.
Not for all of us..
check out CT this week. Catch it at sunset for a spectacular view.
CT
-
AH looks pretty good, and performs a hell of a lot better in the fps department. I think warbirds is not going to be around much longer - how long can the afford to keep running with so few players?
I hope they hang around - competition is good, better product and keeps prices down
-
WBIII doesnt support as many video cards as it used to
-
Take SWOTL and AH. Which one does run better on DX286 whatever ? ;)
For every ugly screenshot of WBIII I could get 3 ugly screenies of AH. IMO, of course.
-
The graphics in AH are the most useful out of all three of the games mentioned. They are clean, crisp, you can tell what something is at long range... It seems to me that a lot of graphical features that are added by some games to improve the 'realism' actually muddle the view, and while at first glancing look more 'realistic', are in fact poorer representations of what the human eye can truly see.
AH is very easy on the eyes, very playable, and I think strikes the perfect combination for the current technology level. In a few years, when graphics cards can really push things to a truly photorealistic level, then all this realism stuff will have a place, but at the moment, it hurts more than it helps in a lot of cases.
-
Hristo, I downloaded WB3 last night to check out the difference.
I don't want to get into a pissing contest which is better. But I DO like to see both sides of the coin.
First : I can't really comment on the FM's WHY? Because I am no expert, I couldn't tell you who's is right or who's is wrong. MY expertese is what I see visually.
But personally I like AH's.
Also I would like to add that "IF" a flight sym was to recreate ww2 planes FM to a T, it would be to hard to fly for me and probably 99% of the customers and if it means 'scaling" back for playability and enjoyment while maintaining some degree of difficulty and learning curve, I think HTC has it PERFECTLY!!!!
I do like Il-2 But since massive online flight syms have a trade off for connection and end user computer specs, I would like to compare apples with apples and leave IL-2 out of the discussion.
IMO, althou WB planes were nice, I would hardly say they were ahead of the graphics game. Now this is just my personal prefrences. I actually liked a few of WB's planes , very nicely done, But I personally like the vass majority of AH's planes better.
Terrains: Hmmmmm One plus WB's has over AH is Bitmapping within a vortex. (some maynot follow this , some may) and I 'm not going to explain it.
Trees: AH wins hands down.
terrain ground textures: We'll I am bias on this answer because I have played with the Terrain editor and made a few maps. But AH smacks a grand slam in this department.
SKies & clouds: I havent seen any clouds yet in WB's so my comment will only be from the screenshots i saw.
AH clouds Are freakin' awsome at times and horrible at others.
Below and above the clouds in AH it's so realistic looking, Once inside the solid "grey" is not to pretty:( I'm not sure if this is intentional for low end computers or not but "I" personally would like to see transparency to some degree..
WB's clouds can't comment, but look nice from the screen shots.
The shadow the storm front cast could also use some work.
SKies: I like the high altitude cloud look of WB's better than AH "plain Jane" blue fade.
Flying at low level: WB's gave me a better feel for speed over AH I would have to admit, BUT this is a big BUT. The availability to turn on this "clutter" as HTC calls it, IS there in AH, and from what I have heard THIS Can be changed for every map. Althou I have had no luck changing this clutter, and HTC's default clutter does nothing for me. Once this "clutter" hurdle can be jumped I would give the edge to AH. But as it stands Wb's low level flight has a better immersion ( under 500 feet) with HTC's clutter off, Although Clutter over AH's water is done pretty nicely I like the water clutter but not the land.
I can't comment on tech support but HTC's is Unmatched and so personal, they make me feel like "I AM" their best customer whenever i call. The only comment i can give about Wb's is some responses I've seen on the thier BBS, and it seems some are defensive, short tempered and down right rude. ( I am not talking about players who post on the BBS).
This Is just my perspective , and Althou i know this will be looked at by some, and i'm sure arguements for both sides will be posted. I want to stress this is just My personal views, I wish WB's and their community all the best and know many fly both.
I can't wait for what HTC has instore for us around the corner, I feel I've been spoiled with a great product, continuing upgrades, and unrivaled staff at HTC.
NUTTZ
-
Il-2 Terrain sure like the way the rivers look with the sun glint off of them and the tree lines look great.
WarbirdIII plane skins graphics.
AW cockpits with realistic gauges still think AW had some great looking cocpits.
FM: WB and AH are very similiar.Il-2 can't get Force Feed to work in demo. so not sure about FM. AW well we all know it was planes on rails but lot of fun for it's time.
Il-2 cockpit are very detailed like that.
Playablity AH strats. and sheer numbers of players.
If WB and the clouds of AH would be great.
FPS: WBIII on a 600Mhz duron with a Geforce2 Pro 64mb card at 1024x768 res. 50- 90fps
FPSl AH on a 600Mhz duron with Geforce2 Pro 64mb card at 1024x768 res. 29-65fps
Had to upgrade processor to get better framerates in AH. Now fps is 68 on runway to 100 in air and not lower than 30 with intensive graphic load. WBIII droped in fps near towns also when there was a lot of Planes in the area to 15-25fps
AH did the same before upgrade but not with as many planes as WB had in one place.
I like seeing lot of missions with lot of bombers and escorts. AH has them now WB 2.77 or earlier had them then.
Reason for being in AH sheer number of Targets LOL. Price was second with graphics coming in last. Wish cockpit graphics were better since we tend to see them more that anything else.This would be a plus. Damage model being one of the reasons i left AW to play WB's is also very important. I like the bullet riddled cockpits of IL-2 just AMAZING. Dont like the oil stain glass get some glass cleaner for Il-2.
I guess i could go on and on. I have to stop myself. :D
-
Originally posted by Griego
...and not lower than 30 with intensive graphic load. WBIII droped in fps near towns also when there was a lot of Planes in the area to 15-25fps
AH did the same before upgrade but not with as many planes as WB had in one place...
Dang, your lucky, I get 40fps at the best times, and it usually goes down to about 8 in combat, I'm used to it though. With such high framerates it must be like playing Counter-Strike or Day of Defeat. I have two computers, I play AH on the older one cause the new one doesn't work with the joystick for some reason, it sucks cause old one is POS, constant lcok-ups, while new one is PIII with about 2GhZ or something.
-
it beats WB3 in everything
No way. The single biggest thing that rules AH right out for a lot of folks that play warbirds is that its a ALWAYS 1945. Simple as that. Nothing could be more dull than a persistent arena that never changes. The lack of S3's in AH is another issue :)
Stridr
-
Originally posted by Stridr417
No way. The single biggest thing that rules AH right out for a lot of folks that play warbirds is that its a ALWAYS 1945. Simple as that. Nothing could be more dull than a persistent arena that never changes. The lack of S3's in AH is another issue :)
Stridr
Thank you for that well informed firsthand account.
:D
-
I flew WBIII. I do not find the graphics better than AH. AH seems more playable to me!
IMHO
-
"No way. The single biggest thing that rules AH right out for a lot of folks that play warbirds is that its a ALWAYS 1945. Simple as that. Nothing could be more dull than a persistent arena that never changes. The lack of S3's in AH is another issue
Stridr"
Hiya Stridr.
Sorry, that argument doesn't wash. The MA might be stocked with the latest, greatest planes available, but so was the old WB MA - nothing but ponies, spits and doras as far as the eye could see. However, if you want the greatest machine available here, you have to pay for it. Controls things nicely.
The CT is a varying time period/theatre in which Axis vs Allies compete. The maps are absolutely fantastic, with everything from Stalingrad to the South Pacific and everything in between.
S3s? Well, the TODs are certainly as good as the S3s with high numbers, great flying, registered squads...blah blah blah, so I don't see the difference.
FWIW I used to be opposed to AH also. I had many (incorrect) pre-conceived notions about it. I was horribly mistaken (in my opinion) and am very happy here. Warbirds was my home for years, I begrudge it nothing and wish it well. Aces High is my new home.
Stridr, my regards to 417.
-
Chanter, good points--MA in Warbirds also suffers from uber plane overkill. When I started playing WB3 last year every second plane was a 262, it was ridiculous.
Nuttz, I haven't been back to WB3, for some time--do they have shadows yet? That was always a minor irritation for me. Plus, the water looked like crap, even in the last update I saw.
-
water to land transition, well In WB there wasn't any. Absolutely is my worse nightmare, I HATE the lack of water to land, the abruptness. When I see water in a line to land I don't feel the immersion, I feel as if i am flying in a coloring book or on a chess board.
Il-2 has IMO the BEST water reflection against the sun absolutely increadable, But also have that abrupt straight edge to land with really i can't stand.
The water to land transition is the BEST thing IMO HTC did for the game.
NUTTZ
Originally posted by Taiaha
Chanter, good points--MA in Warbirds also suffers from uber plane overkill. When I started playing WB3 last year every second plane was a 262, it was ridiculous.
Nuttz, I haven't been back to WB3, for some time--do they have shadows yet? That was always a minor irritation for me. Plus, the water looked like crap, even in the last update I saw.
-
I'd like to see AH have and offline play like in Wb thats all i played or atleast add planes that fly and shoot unlike the ones that just circle around and do nothing. i like to practice bombing offline but theres no challange. but i found with wb the nme planes seem to have killed me alot more than i would have liked.
-
One of Nuttz's great works of art
-
Roscoroo, that's awesome, which terrain is it from?
Nuttz, you do good work man.
-
A lot of people seem to think WB's graphics are somehow better than AH's. Here's my 2 cents on graphics:
- cockpit graphics: I don't care how photo-realistic the cockpit graphics are, I want gauges I can read without squinting or having to pan down. In a real plane the pilot is not even concious of glancing at his instruments, but in a sim with realistic gauges he is, because realistic gauges on a 17 inch monitor are too small to easily read. I like HTC's decision to go with unrealistic looking, but functional gauges. Maybe in a future release HTC could have an option for realistic cockpits for those who want them. I'll stick with the Mickey Mouse cockpit.
- plane graphics: WB's plane graphics are crisper and more detailed, but this is only noticable when you zoom in for a screen shot. If your oppenent is 50 yards or more out the differences between AH and WB airplane graphics are negligible. As one of the few people still using a stone-age computer I don't have a problem giving up a tiny bit of eye candy. People who have excess capicity on their CPU's/video cards always want more graphics.
- clouds: AH clouds sure aren't perfect, but they have the desired effect of allowing you to hide in them and sometimes escape an opponent. I've had some really cool cloudfights. In WB AFAIK there is only a haze layer which divides low alt aircraft from higher alt aircraft, they aren't really clouds.
terrains: IMHO AH's are better.
Anyway, if graphics are that important to you, Il-2 is your game, the graphics there kick butt.
ra
-
IL-2 is a lot of things, and I dare say it is about the second best flight sim game I've ever played.(AH is still #1 to me :) ) I actually enjoy flying IL-2 as much as AH, and in some aspects IL-2 is better than AH(personal opinion).
The general FM in fact feels a lot like AH(they feel very simular to me..), but in some subtle areas the IL-2 planes perform in a bit 'unpredictable' way compared to AH.
Maneuvering is crisp and joyable in AH(probably has to do a lot with combat trim, but even with combat trim off it's pretty 'crisp'), but I think I like the feel of "unpredictableness" in IL-2 better. This 'unpredictableness' or 'not-so-crispness'(but I don't think you can call it 'mushy' either.. I just can't find a right word... :D) adds a lot to immersion and pilot skill.
For example, in AH, when you put up a Bf109G-6 against a La-5FN, you know the La-5FN turns better than the G-6. Unless the pilot in the G-6 is VERY skilled, or the La pilot totally sucks, in a turn fight the G-6 most usually loses, and the 5FN wins. The results within set parameters are predictable - because it's crisp and very clear.
In IL-2, tight turning takes a lot more work than AH, and the results are not always clear, because there somehow seems to be more factors working in the FM. Besides, the stall characteristics are treacherous in IL-2, very hard to recover.
To put it simply, it takes a lot more effort and practice to reach "the edge of the envelope" in IL-2 than AH.
The gunnery model in IL-2, I think, is better than AH too. Now, some pilots like funkedup claim they get same range hits in IL-2 as AH(500 yard shot would be about .50 range in IL-2). I believe what funked says, but the thing is, in my case, I can get 500 yard shots in AH but not in IL-2. I can't dream of hitting anything further out than 300 meters, unless the target stays totally level. The "get in close, then go in closer" really has some meaning in IL-2. I think this means skill levels in gunnery show more drastic results in IL-2 than AH. Pilots like funked have way better aim than someone like me, but I can get 500~600 yard shots in AH despite the difference. In IL-2, the skill difference shows.. funked can get those shots in, I can't.
..
But what IL-2 lacks so much is a good multiplayer environment. Those hyperlobby games are as dull as it gets.. AH might be a little worse off in subtle areas such as I mentioned, but overall, for a MMOG, AH ranks absolutely first. If I get two hours to play every day, I'd gladly put every single second in AH rather than IL-2.
:D
I hope AH will continue its awesome evolution.. (and hopefully implement some of those things I liked in IL-2 into the game)
:)
-
Update, Sutpid is *still* flying AH. Ever try WB's Sutpid? ;)
-
Why would he want to do that? it's just full of problems left by the old team's code according to Hotseat explaining why the latest addition to their planeset the P39 climb's like the space shuttle in a hurry. Comes to something when they have to blame a team that left WB around 4 years ago now?
-
Excellent screenshot, did you edit it with photo shop? I'd LOVE to know how to do that...
Anyway, I would also enjoy having personal plane skins, as long as they were of official squadrons, and not some pink/orange polka dotted scheme we'd ceretainly be seeing on the "just-got-a-new-fancy-computer-newto AH-long-live-the-La-7," contingent. I would be changing the P51B's in a heartbeat..to this :)
-
lol revvin..
and I always thought the Tuskegee airmen flew D's
-
Originally posted by Chanter
I had many (incorrect) pre-conceived notions about it. I was horribly mistaken ...
Same here. I was with AW ( "Corsr," and "" since 1995, and we heard pretty bad things about the AH community. We had no choice but to come to AH when AW went dark, and the community (and gameplay) here blows AW out of the water.
'nuff said. I never played WB, nor do I wish to. I'll stick with AH!
Gainsie
BTW...UNPERK ME!!! :D
-
I dont edit any of the terrain screenies I post, there as I see them in the game. ( I actually make them alittle less intense by converting them to jpeg to post here )
All the terrains can look as good as that, but it does give the frame rates a small hit .(as soon as everyone has 1+ghz pc's and 64+mb grafic cards I bet were gonna see alot more of this)
If you havent seen the previews of CFS 3 well ... now theres a sim i cant wait to test fly .But I doubt it will run AH outta the skys because of its 8 player rooms over at msn's zone.
P.s, I forgot what terrain that was from ... ive got over 170 user made terrains, along with some of my own disasters.
-
Originally posted by Wlfgng
lol revvin..
and I always thought the Tuskegee airmen flew D's
Theystarted in the P-39's in North Africa, then were transferred to Italy and flew Jug-25's then were given C-ponies, they were later given the D's when the other squar=drons were all upgraded. They ended the war in D's. This is what col. Charles McGee told me back in february 98.
Gainsie
-
that's pretty sweet. I like the red-tail B paint scheme
-
Originally posted by Swager
The one thing I would not like in AH is the player created aircraft skins. This would only be feisible if it was limited. IF someone had a squadron, 357th Fighter Group for example, the only skin allowed would be one that are of the 357th Fighter Group. Same color scheme but different call numbers and a little personal artwork. I would not want to see pink and orange Me109s flying around, or red F4Us. I also would not want to see Japanese A/C in British markings and so forth.
Non historical squadrons would have to get a specific scheme and stick with that. As long as the skins were not abused it might work.
id like to see this sort of thing too.
-
compare wb3 26 people on 3pm est. Ah 143people smaller map. If you like flying around then by all means go to wb3 its pretty. But if you want a combat sime with live action. aces high is only place to be.
Fighter aces by VR1 cheap arcade game 9.95 wb3 3 sims for 24.95 but no player base and piss poor company. ah 1 sim lots of players and attack options, so far ask question or call support they answer phones., In wb3 call support but you never get call back. And support is only there fri and sat.
-
some people are so shallow..
its the players that make this game great...
-
the terrain is called "Shorty"
LOL, I loved the spray painted "Tag" I did on the mountain:)
NUTTZ
Originally posted by Roscoroo
I dont edit any of the terrain screenies I post, there as I see them in the game. ( I actually make them alittle less intense by converting them to jpeg to post here )
All the terrains can look as good as that, but it does give the frame rates a small hit .(as soon as everyone has 1+ghz pc's and 64+mb grafic cards I bet were gonna see alot more of this)
If you havent seen the previews of CFS 3 well ... now theres a sim i cant wait to test fly .But I doubt it will run AH outta the skys because of its 8 player rooms over at msn's zone.
P.s, I forgot what terrain that was from ... ive got over 170 user made terrains, along with some of my own disasters.
-
what turned me away from the other flight smis and to ah is
1 ah has a free 2 week trial then after that if you dont want to pay you can continue oplay in 8 person hth
2 ah actually has a well thought out website (i never could find the download or mb in the other sims web pages)
3. ah has a huge selection of planes and is always getting more
4. i can play ah with my mouse (no joystick)
anyway ah looks like its going to be here for good then when it goes down it will be remembered like some of the previous gameing greats
But I doubt it will run AH outta the skys because of its 8 player rooms over at msn's zone.
AH does NOT have 8 player rooms at msn zone
its 8 player rooms are in the the and thats BUILT IN to the game
(sorry if you were talking about a diff game)
-
"The reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated." - Mark Twain (and probably HTC.)
-
Has anyone here seen the new smoke and small explosions on planes when you hit them with bullets. WOW it's like the WWII gun cams. Except in color really exceptional. Then if they're on fire they seem to blow up after a little while. atleast it did it in the offline version i got unless it was some sort of delay.
Warbirds even has road now.
Just wish the terrain and the water were more like IL2 and clouds like AH.
the cockpits are definitely looking good there also.
numbers could be better also.
Flight Model is the same as AH there really is no difference that i can tell except for the speed of some planes may differ. Aileron and elevator trim is the same. The only real difference is that when you throttle down there the planes slow down more than they do in AH. In AH if you dive Your in danger of compressing and not being able to get out of dive in all planes. I know that in some plane this was a problem like the p38 and some others but i don't know if it was this way for all off them.
Wish they had the views of AH though. really like being able to look from side to side around the canopy bars.
When i get bored with AH i go offline and play Warbirds 2vs2 the AI is pretty good except they seem to hold alot of e LOL. Can't seem to get them to fall of like i'd like them to heehee.
I got the new CD with the offline missions. don't know if the regular download has them but they might. Haven't played Warbirds online in a while.
Read that there going to have a new update soon that might fix the water texture and add few other planes. Hope they would do a little more with the terrain than they have.
They just added two versions of the p39.
any ways the price and the # of ppl there keep me here. I like a targert rich environment.
-
Thanks again Nuttz .... I thought it might be that one...
If anyone wants to see some of these great works of art ... just ask me when Im in the main and if im not to busy (squad night ect) i'll gladly open a h2h room so you can grab it.
hopefully ill have a site up soon to DL these from .
-
hmm i cant beleave how many replies i got for this and i stoped lookign at it after the first 10.
-
lol sutpid, thats how i usualy am... for more information of warbirds/dawn of aces check out
agw.warbirdsiii.com
bbs.warbirdsiii.com
http://www.totalsims.com
warbirds and aces high both have a long ways to go untill they are even close to being finished... but thats half the fun of being apart of a community like this.. helping determin how the sims comes out!
S! everyone from both sims, we all know why we are really here :)
to be famous :D
-
Originally posted by sutpid
hmm i cant beleave how many replies i got for this and i stoped lookign at it after the first 10.
:p Welcome to the 90+ reply/3 page club!:p http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=60482 (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=60482)