homepage Forums Read Only Forums Read Only Forums IL-2: Cliffs Of Dover (Read Only) Wow!

The question is are you serious? In 6 years the devs released (not going back to check), maybe, a total of 5 videos that were over 1 minute long. Hmm. Where's all the hype again? The question is what are you smoking?

Of course the lack of vids running over land should have been your 1st clue of how it was performing. Especially when still clearly stated as a WIP. And what about all the vids at the Russian show? They ALL SHOWED MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF STUTTERING! And the majority of them were over water. Let me guess, that didn't sink in either right?

But as of right now, I get 40-60 FPS over land. This is on the only pc I have where I'm at. Happens to be a laptop FFS. Let me tell you, I'm soo upset about that, that I was thinking about crying. But really, I knew what to expect because I followed along.

Again, you only have your self to blame. But somehow you keep crying like a little baby on these forums. The only person that has zero credibility is you. You are like an emotional roller coaster.

And you obviously have no idea about Oleg or Luthier for that matter.

1) The number of vids they showed prior to release is irrelevant. What they showed is.

2) The stuttering at the Russian show was explained away as down to insufficient RAM in their PC.

You are wasting your breath.



And i agree, someone who can put 2 and 2 togheter isnt nearly as dissapointed as somone who can`t.


Personally i cant belive anyone can even run CoD on all high to begin with (bugs and missing features aside)

@ghost_swe

Don't forget that Luthier said, before the moscow show, that CoD would be playable in MEDIUM - settings on todays HIGH-END machines!

robtek

Thats what i meant . I was suprised that some, including me, could even run it on so high settings to begin with. To boot, i didnt think it would look as good as it does on medium settings either.


If one would try to match CoD and IL2 in graphic quallity (no dynamic lighting etc) You will get better fps in CoD than u do in IL2. (at least i do).

When was the Moscow show? Were the Sandybridge CPUs and 400/500-series GPUs available then?

SoW Igromir Nov 2010

Sandybridge came in january 2011.
GTX 480 3/2010
GTX 580 11/2010

robtek

Thanks Rob.

I can only assume they hadn't gotten their hands on the 400-series GPU by the time of the Moscow show and actually thought the borked code was running badly only for want of decent hardware. Yeah, right.

Fact is I can run this game maxed out (in all respects that are meaningful) and the only issues are not those of hardware but of flawed code. It might be the case that once FSAA and AF are working I'll have to dial it back a bit, but with those two items working properly I think 1920x1200 will look good enough.

Just as a remark, there is actually NO optimized Software on the market today!
Except for some demos for the c64, amiga or atari.
The hardware evolution during the last 25 years was so fast that the software developement couldn't follow.
The hardware was and is so powerful that we don't realize obsolete or bad programming.
The problem is that developers dont want to invent the wheel again for every software, so a reliable program code is used,
regardless that the new hardware could do it with a optimized code many times faster.
So, if one invents a new engine one can use many obsolete software codes or invent a optimized code to reach his target.
The problem with new code is that it is usually buggy, its a new territory after all.
I believe that maddox-games has invented new coding, found many bugs and installed placeholders with obsolete coding just to get it running.
As the bugs are worked out, obsolete code will be replaced and the possibilities will multiply.

robtek

Fixed your quote for you.

As far as the Nov show, they were running a 460 GPU, so yes they were out and being used.

As far as the sandy bridge cpu is concerned, it doesn't really matter considering the EE i7's on the 1366 platform were out then. A 990x is just as good for gaming as a 2600k, and a whole lot better in other areas. It's still the best all around CPU in the market. So the argument of hardware not being released at that time is irrelevant. But the words from 1c saying the sim was designed for 2013 (hardware-wise) very much is.

This is a refreshing and informative take on this sim and it's condition

complete and utter bollocks

we're not talking people converting code to assembly - we're talking about designers and coders writing efficient code.

I had a few chances to shoot tracers from an assault rifle. They had always looked pretty similar to CoD. With an only exception that when you shoot them yourself you see only a kind of moving bright dots. If you see the tracers being shoot by a someone who lies e few meters side of you, they look very close to Star wars, a bit less thick probably but very similar bright white or a bit orange strokes. As regards of smoke trails I have never seen them also but I guess it depends of what kind of a tracer ammo you have.

ps. By the way, a laser beam is only visible when it comes through a smoke or something, generally you don't see laser beam at all, even pretty strong one. And even while it's visible it never looks like moving. So what you see in Starwars have nothing to do with actual laser beams

So what you're saying soaringbird is that even the laser beams are modelled wrong in this sim, Jeeza

No, I tried to say that what I see in Cod looks pretty much believable, and nothing exaggerated in contrast to what I see in other games and movies. It's like if you see in a movie when someone is thrown through a window by a bullets of a double-barrel gun with bullets not being even supersonic you know that you would never see it in reality.

Yes and that piece is interesting too, but I really like your reminder about laser beams, it's so ironic that when we complain about accuracy, in this case our argument is based on science fiction. It's great.

'The tracers look like laser beams!'
'Um, what's a laser beam?'
'You know star wars.'
'oh'

Brick Tamland: I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE YELLING ABOUT!!!!!!!

Bisher said:

It is complete and utter tosh.

Compilers, de-buggers, assembler, run-time de-buggers, memory-management monitors...are just some of the terms Robtek might wish to research.



The above sounds vaguely impressive...until you look for genuine meaning.

Cells multiply. So do bugs.

Ben

Keep pushing those sales!

What I'm confused about WV is that if you can run it maxxed out, admittedly with a highend PC, then, although it took a few weeks after release, they have delivered a playable game, I can play it on medium to high with a low to med spec PC, so doesnt that make the charge you made about them being liars a bit harsh, ok they didnt quite deliver on time and lets not forget it hasn't been officially released in the Nth American market yet, but as you admit it is working "in all respects that are meaningful".

As for the meat, well it does look like a lot of it is there, just needs a lot of work and some documentation, they had also always made it clear that this sim would be easier to mod than Il2, so things like sounds etc are going to be fixed one way or the other, really when you look at the big picture, we have certainly been given an unfinished piece of software and are basically at the moment beta testers, but comments like "Oleg Maddox can state what he likes, he has about as much credibility with me as a hooker in a habit. " and "Oleg's and Luthier's credibility...ZERO." are going too far really. Dont they deserve a little leeway for what they have delivered with Il2 over the last 10 years?

You bought CoD fully convinced it had a lot of problems, yourself, Tree and others had made that quite clear, comments like unplayable and broken come to mind, yet here you are claiming you have been lied to whether thats the case or not, you did buy into it with your eyes wide open.