Author Topic: you be the judge: side by side comparison of ah1 vs ah2 at 16k (Read 3362 times)

JB73 · « **Reply #30 on:** December 26, 2003, 11:46:11 AM »

sorry if you took it as a personal atta fester.

i know you are not happey with the current state of AHII, but i havent seen you say anything positive yet. kinda depressing.

i have my opinions too.. good and bad. but i dont slam the game creators every time a want to say something. it just seems like 1/2 the time many here are saying "hey HTC you suck fix this" and gets annoying to read IMHO.

again sry if you felt its a personal attack. will refrain from quoting or commenting on your posts from now on.

Citabria · « **Reply #31 on:** December 26, 2003, 12:18:04 PM »

its not a slam jb73.

the positive parts of ah2 is it looks awsome from very low altitudes, the planes look much better with higher res textures, the flight model is more complex and aside from the 109g10 and a few others it is better.

when I stop posting about things I think can be improved its because I no longer believe the developers are interested in listening to community feedback and attempting to improve their product. but by then I and most other players would have moved on to some other wwii mmog and giving the developers there headaches.

I've been posting detail change requests and gameplay requests since the origional aces high beta, and when I can change somthing on my own to more my liking I do it (building a new MA terrain)

if you didnt notice jb73 i am often misunderstood. clearly you see some malicious intent where there is none.

Tilt · « **Reply #32 on:** December 26, 2003, 02:15:30 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Citabria

when I stop posting about things I think can be improved its because I no longer believe the developers are interested in listening to community feedback and attempting to improve their product.

but posting it here is really lobbying...........is it not?

You stated your opinion's very well in the AH2 forum

FT_Animal · « **Reply #33 on:** December 26, 2003, 02:29:13 PM »

>Agreed, but I would think the intensity of the graphics would be a factor at low alts, where the detail is visible.

Whether you can see the detail in the distance or not it's being drawn. When you are up high the magnitude is greater because now your PC is trying to basically draw the whole map.

>At 10K or 16K it should not be any different.

Well I dunno if I just trying to prove a point or just get you to see things my way . The higher you are the more art that is being drawn. Just because it's not including ground clutter etc. it's still drawing art\detail to a point. The art *detail* may drop off at a certain distance, but it's still doing some art. This could be observed, in a way, by using view settings. In games these are usually set to stop drawing certain art at a set distance.

>I think they jst try new things to see if we like them. Anyway, its just an opinion.

Absolutely, and I’m sure it’s a little of both. But it’s a very fine line between the two, one where HT will need to make that balance work for both. It’s not really an opinion it’s a technicality, one of which we are only assuming because HT isn’t here decribing it in exact detail as to his intensions. More like educated guesses.

>My FPS on AHI is 37 to 45. With some adjustments on AHII I got the same performance flying low through the fields.

Whether you are close up (low) and drawing ground clutter and objects, or high and just drawing mountain ranges,..etc, it has the same effect. When you are down low you’re not drawing distant art, it’s trading off the distance for the close up detail.

This is the way I understand it, I might not just be explaining it well.

Quote

Originally posted by dedalos
Agreed,
but I would think the intencity of the graphics would be a factor at low alts, where the detail is visible. At 10K or 16K it should not be any different. I think they jst try new things to see if we like them. Anyway, its just an opinion.

My FPS on AHI is 37 to 45. With some adjustments on AHII I got the same performance flying low through the fields.

SELECTOR · « **Reply #34 on:** December 26, 2003, 05:38:26 PM »

i like the current version better at the moment..the ah2 looks wishy washy.. not much reference points which is handy in a hi to low lvl fight..
im dont know anything about code or making games but...
graphicaly it still looks a bit behind times(compared to il2)
also i seem to remember sombody mentioned that graphical detail can be altered in game by quite a lot..if this is the case everyone should and prob will reduce it to lowest lvl, otherwise you will be at disadvantage.. so why spens so much time on somthing no one will use... to make game fair all should have same graphic detail and veiws..or am i wrong?

eye candy is nice when enemy is not around..

BenDover · « **Reply #35 on:** December 26, 2003, 05:42:56 PM »

I found the settings, just thought I'd say

JB73 · « **Reply #36 on:** December 27, 2003, 12:00:24 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Citabria
clearly you see some malicious intent where there is none.

rgr that. if that is the case... i misread or misunderstood.

i hope that you do understand and see my viewpoit. not as a slam on you.

<> and see you in the skies.
yes i quoted you and commented lol sry

mia389 · « **Reply #37 on:** December 28, 2003, 07:43:34 PM »

"doing my part to help metatron get laid"

Do your part and help me now

beet1e · « **Reply #38 on:** December 29, 2003, 02:49:26 AM »

Fester -

I thought you might be interested in this picture I took on 29th November, 1998. I was flying over the West of England - near RAF Lyneham and RAF Brize Norton, for those who know the area. Altitude was 3500' which gave me a height of about 3000'.

Ideally, VFR pilots in Britain try to get above the layer of haze which we know as the inversion layer. The problem is that in the London area, VFR traffic is compressed into the levels between ground and 2400', while IFR gets the airspace from 2500' upwards. I've flown in the Chicago area, and the VFR pilot got a much better deal, even quite close to O'Hare. But when you're forced down to 2,400' that haze can be so bad that you can see nothing in front except a white void. Over water flight around England can also be quite interesting. Often there is no horizon - just a blue/grey void.

Busher · « **Reply #39 on:** December 29, 2003, 05:16:43 AM »

AH2 - Looks like permanent SMOG over LA. Needs a large cold front to pass

Replicant · « **Reply #40 on:** December 29, 2003, 05:30:17 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Busher
AH2 - Looks like permanent SMOG over LA. Needs a large cold front to pass

Hey Rick

Have you got any pics at 16k, or can you do some?

dedalos · « **Reply #41 on:** December 29, 2003, 04:45:33 PM »

Cool

Quote

Originally posted by FT_Animal

vorticon · « **Reply #42 on:** December 29, 2003, 05:00:53 PM »

ah2 looks like your flying through smoke from a forest fire thats about 50 miles away...not only that the sky colour is all wrong...perfectly clear around here right now and one look out the window proves me right

acetnt-2nd · « **Reply #43 on:** December 30, 2003, 12:22:48 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by beet1e
Fester -

I thought you might be interested in this picture I took on 29th November, 1998. I was flying over the West of England - near RAF Lyneham and RAF Brize Norton, for those who know the area. Altitude was 3500' which gave me a height of about 3000'.

Hello Beetle,

Your picture may be real but I still prefer the way AH1 looks to AH2. Its a game so it doesn't have to completely mimic real life. I'd hate to have to up on a dreary landscape everytime I log on, that'd be too depressing.

Anyway its a beta yet so maybe this will change.

Acetnt

Puck · « **Reply #44 on:** December 30, 2003, 01:39:42 PM »

I was putting around in the beta arena and I whole heartedly agree with you Fester (oh, THAT hurt...

). It was like flying downwind from a major forest fire or diving black water. Give me clear skies and unlimited visibility any day.