AH2 graphics getting closer to real life

[rabbidrabbit]

These are all great suggestions Kweassa!  I may be missing something but they sound like great end objectives.  I imagine the primary focus is to get something out the door then add features as time moves forward.  I for one would love to see this baby be born and am willing to wait and let them refine the product once the engine is up running and proven.  It's a dynamic product not a boxed set.


I'm dying for someone else to say "It's Beta!!"..>   If you feel you must, please read  what folks are saying...

[_Schadenfreude_]

Not to worry Kweassa, your essays are always worth reading......ahem unlike some who will go unmentioned..

[Eagler]

make the lighting like Kweassa's after shots for better game play

too dark now

[214thCavalier]

Everybody agrees that as it stands the lighting in AH2 is too dark.
Dull and lifeless.

It desperately needs brightening.

[Gixer]

Interesting reading everyones posts on this subject, my main points regarding graphics. Remembering that I accept Flight Modeling and Gameplay as priority. But graphics create the environment and immersion and therefore also an important factor.

Firstly don't take this as slang at HT I've been involved with AH for 3 years now and really want to see AH2 do well and continue my support for another 3 years.

1. AH2 still seems to use the same engine as AH1 but with a few added effects. How old is the original AH graphics engine 5 years? Although still in beta and understandable has work to go even at this stage the appearence is extremely dissapointing. Also dissapointing that it still has the "look" of AH1. Especially the terrain which looks like AH with extra clutter.

2. I don't accept the argument that we have to design the game so that it can run on a average CPU Celeron 900 or what ever "average" is deemed to be. I don't expect to have to own the latest Intel and ATI board to get 30fps but I think the "average" is alot higher then what AH2 is planned to run on. Plus mobo's and graphics cards are so cheap these days it wouldnt cost to run much to run say the original IL2 at a good frame rate. And we all know how good the graphics of the original IL2 and still set a benchmark today.

3. Another argument is keeping the game size down because of downloading. People we are way beyone 14k modems these days and also have the ability to resume downloads from disconnection. Expecting a game today to still be under 100mb in size is totally unrealistic. Unless of course you want to keep the 10yr old graphics. Cripes I've downloaded whole DVD's off the net over night at over 1gb.

4. Look at WW2OL and the tarrain graphics there,the planes and effects. Other then for the clouds AH2 is way off the mark. WW2OL for example has good visible damage modeling now on a number of smaller aircraft sections with correct corresponding loss of control or reduced lift, increased drag etc.

5. I think eye candy is important to new players, us old hands can appreciate the flight modeling and details. However for new customers they are going to look at AH2 then the competition and take their $15 a month else where.

After the lack of support that's been going on with AH1, how long since the last update (18 months?) While they work on AH2 and with what we have been presented so far with AH2 beta. It still seems along way off from release. If it isn't and there are a few details yet to be added as far as graphics and effects then AH2 is going to be left way behind other MMPOG flight sims.



...-Gixer

[Vulcan]

Originally posted by Gixer
4. Look at WW2OL and the tarrain graphics there,the planes and effects. Other then for the clouds AH2 is way off the mark. WW2OL for example has good visible damage modeling now on a number of smaller aircraft sections with correct corresponding loss of control or reduced lift, increased drag etc.

I'll disagree with you on this. Some points to note, one of the most common complaints 'over there' is the visibility range, AH1/2 can do up to 17 miles, WW2OL can barely do 3. Fly to 20k in WW2OL and look at the ground, do the same in AH, notice the difference.

The visual damage in WW2OL is relatively primitive compared to AH1 and AH2. At the moment there is no visible damage applied to single engine aircraft, and visual damage in multi engine relates to wings, tails, and engines. The visual damage on AH1 has more components than WW2OL has.

And then theres the FPS... whoa baby. Some good lessons to be learn't there for HTC (like its time to think about two seperate optimized engines for air and land).

Lets not forget that AH players have contributed some great terrains with very nice colour balancing for AH1 (remember Midway), no doubt that will happen with AH2. You have to pinch yourself every now and then and remind yourself we're not tied to one map here gixer.

CRS have done a great job for the ground battle with the new terrain, but its shortcomings (for the air) show up in the air very quickly.

[Sikboy]

Originally posted by Gixer
 Unless of course you want to keep the 10yr old graphics.

Still have the boner for the 10 year old graphics? What games in 1994 had AH quality graphics?

Cyberia? Duke Nuke em 3d? Doom 2? lol.

-Sik

[flakbait]

Sound sources are another thing that could definitely use updating. Currently they are not mobile, so when you swing a gun you eventually hear the sound behind you instead of in front of you. The LVTA4 is a prime example of this. Swinging the Ma Deuce on the turret around to face front places the gun's firing sound behind you, making it seem muffled. If it's possible to attach a sound source to a vehicle, why not attach it to the gun muzzle? That way the gun sound is always in front of you regardless of where you point the thing. When you look around from a gun position using a stick hat or the keypad, the sound would accurately change to reflect the position in relation to your head.



-----------------------
Flakbait [Delta6]
Delta Six's Flight School
Put the P-61B in Aces High

[Gixer]

Originally posted by Sikboy
Still have the boner for the 10 year old graphics? What games in 1994 had AH quality graphics?

Cyberia? Duke Nuke em 3d? Doom 2? lol.

-Sik

Not as hard as the boner you have about 10 years, If it makes you happier say 7 years ago or 5 years ago. I was making a relative point that the graphics look dated.


...-Gixer

[Purzel]

Gixer,
I can understand you, but Hitech answered one of my questions/remarks on the first page of this thread, and said that they were aiming for the same age of video-cards they did in the beginning, meaning 3 years old.

I'm not sure, but I think they know what theyre doing, and AHI was very impressive back then for beeing a MMPOG, and I think with adjusted colors, some neat effects like this particle-stuff and lighting it could be looking very good. At least good enought to draw some customers.
AH will prolly never look as good as a boxed game, but the gameplay is the part that gets ppl. There is not much right now that can rival AH, but if the Il-2 successor implements some gameplay like AH has, even on a smaller scale, then ppl will begin to look closer and will change to the boxed game, esp since it is much cheaper.

Up to now, the SP as well as the MP of Il-2 sucks. And its biased. But its a potential threat.

[LLv34_Camouflage]

Originally posted by Purzel
Up to now, the SP as well as the MP of Il-2 sucks. And its biased. But its a potential threat.

Most of our squadron is nowadays flying mostly IL2FB. The AH participance has dropped significantly during the past year.  I'd say IL2 is a serious threat.

Camo

[BUG_EAF322]

IL2 doesn't suk AH doesn't suk either


In il2 the fm of all planes looks somewhat close to eachother
hate it that p38 can be outturned by 109 and 190
not like in AH

I like both for now i'm playing IL2 more than AH
I still like the graphics more than in AH2

i hope ah2 comes near this graphics

[Sikboy]

Originally posted by Gixer
Not as hard as the boner you have about 10 years, If it makes you happier say 7 years ago or 5 years ago. I was making a relative point that the graphics look dated.


...-Gixer

Do you always exagerate by a factor of two when trying to make a point?

-Sik

[Gixer]

Originally posted by Sikboy
Do you always exagerate by a factor of two when trying to make a point?

-Sik

Yes especially  in regards to boners.



...-Gixer

[Sikboy]

Originally posted by Gixer
Yes especially  in regards to boners.



...-Gixer

lol Touche

-Sik