[VIDEO] SOW update 2010-02-12 - Printable Version
+- All-Aircraft-Simulations (https://allaircraftsimulations.com)
+-- Forum: Cliffs of Dover (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=274)
+--- Forum: Cliffs of Dover (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=331)
+--- Thread: [VIDEO] SOW update 2010-02-12 (/showthread.php?tid=68544)
+- All-Aircraft-Simulations (https://allaircraftsimulations.com)
+-- Forum: Cliffs of Dover (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=274)
+--- Forum: Cliffs of Dover (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=331)
+--- Thread: [VIDEO] SOW update 2010-02-12 (/showthread.php?tid=68544)
- Axial - 23.02.2010
Anybody with at least 4GB of RAM, a half-decent CPU, and an upper mid-tier GPU will be able to run it on very high settings. The crunch only starts coming into play when you want extreme view distances as well as uber detail on the cities. I'm sure most of us will be happy sacrificing a little ground view distance in exchange for up-close pretties.
- Aza-Industries - 23.02.2010
Axial Wrote:Anybody with at least 4GB of RAM, a half-decent CPU, and an upper mid-tier GPU will be able to run it on very high settings. The crunch only starts coming into play when you want extreme view distances as well as uber detail on the cities. I'm sure most of us will be happy sacrificing a little ground view distance in exchange for up-close pretties.
Ditto and its not like its a game being made just for graphics (e.g. Cysis) not to mention the fact you spend most your time in the Air which has very little to render.
There is NO way they have made a more power hungry engine then Crytech's Cryengine 2 (which was made to push PC hardware to it's limits) which my PC handles with ease.
I easily estimate most games that haven't come out whether or not they would work on my system.
I've been gaming for many many years and Have researched nearly every aspect that goes into graphics rendering and how everything works. I've also been building and optimizing gaming rigs for different people for many years.
I have without a doubt I can run this on my PC at max settings and if you look at my first quote "What's great is I have no doubt I can run it at max settings" it clearly states what I know not that I want everyone to believe it. As long as I know it will work I'm a happy man.
I didn't mean to come across as offensive or patronizing in any of my posts and if I offended anyone I'm sorry. However I do enjoy a good-natured debate/discussion anyday as apposed to droll conversations so I had a good time talking to everyone in this thread so far.
Peace out!
- Guest - 23.02.2010
Wrong! Oleg said graphics are as important as historical detail. Are you sure you know what SoW is....if so, please learn your history before posting. Now I'm taking all your posts with a pinch of salt m8 (although I was before)
- Aza-Industries - 23.02.2010
philip.ed Wrote:Wrong! Oleg said graphics are as important as historical detail. Are you sure you know what SoW is....if so, please learn your history before posting. Now I'm taking all your posts with a pinch of salt m8 (although I was before)
I wasn't wrong.. I said the game isn't only about graphics.. did you read my whole post? Stop being a donkey on purpose.
I never once mentioned historical detail or how they would compare to the graphics.
Obviously you found nothing to fault in my post and started making up stuff so I'm wrong by your point of view.
If your going to keep arguing my knowledge of game mechanics and future technology projections maybe you should at least know what your talking about instead of just marking what I say as wrong just because you haven't studied this sort of thing like I have and assume no one knows more then you do.
here's an example if you still don't get it:
some guy of the street may be really good at art and can paint masterpieces where as I can't draw a straight line without a ruler, see how two people can have different skill sets?
- Guest - 24.02.2010
Aza-Industries Wrote:philip.ed Wrote:Wrong! Oleg said graphics are as important as historical detail. Are you sure you know what SoW is....if so, please learn your history before posting. Now I'm taking all your posts with a pinch of salt m8 (although I was before)
I wasn't wrong.. I said the game isn't only about graphics.. did you read my whole post? Stop being a donkey on purpose.
I never once mentioned historical detail or how they would compare to the graphics.
Obviously you found nothing to fault in my post and started making up stuff so I'm wrong by your point of view.
If your going to keep arguing my knowledge of game mechanics and future technology projections maybe you should at least know what your talking about instead of just marking what I say as wrong just because you haven't studied this sort of thing like I have and assume no one knows more then you do.
here's an example if you still don't get it:
some guy of the street may be really good at art and can paint masterpieces where as I can't draw a straight line without a ruler, see how two people can have different skill sets?
Sorry, I keep forgetting you can read Oleg's imagination :roll: My post initially was right and is justified. Graphics, as Oleg said, are important and make the game accessible to people who aren't sure about the genre. I'm not saying your PC will run SoW, but you can't be so arrogant as to assume you are always right. I already showed you where you were wrong, and that opinion makes your whole post different; if you've been assuming SoW won't be about the graphics you've making wrong assumptions. It is about the graphics, just as it is about the historical detail. I have no doubt the best PC's today should run SoW well, but I'm going to wait and see what happens before I make predictions that aren't justified. I haven't even seen SoW's physics engine, so for all we know it could much more realistic than crysis.
- Axial - 24.02.2010
I know I won't be able to run it on nice settings. I can barely run Wings of Prey on medium-high.
- Aza-Industries - 24.02.2010
philip.ed Wrote:Aza-Industries Wrote:philip.ed Wrote:Wrong! Oleg said graphics are as important as historical detail. Are you sure you know what SoW is....if so, please learn your history before posting. Now I'm taking all your posts with a pinch of salt m8 (although I was before)
I wasn't wrong.. I said the game isn't only about graphics.. did you read my whole post? Stop being a donkey on purpose.
I never once mentioned historical detail or how they would compare to the graphics.
Obviously you found nothing to fault in my post and started making up stuff so I'm wrong by your point of view.
If your going to keep arguing my knowledge of game mechanics and future technology projections maybe you should at least know what your talking about instead of just marking what I say as wrong just because you haven't studied this sort of thing like I have and assume no one knows more then you do.
here's an example if you still don't get it:
some guy of the street may be really good at art and can paint masterpieces where as I can't draw a straight line without a ruler, see how two people can have different skill sets?
Sorry, I keep forgetting you can read Oleg's imagination :roll: My post initially was right and is justified. Graphics, as Oleg said, are important and make the game accessible to people who aren't sure about the genre. I'm not saying your PC will run SoW, but you can't be so arrogant as to assume you are always right. I already showed you where you were wrong, and that opinion makes your whole post different; if you've been assuming SoW won't be about the graphics you've making wrong assumptions. It is about the graphics, just as it is about the historical detail. I have no doubt the best PC's today should run SoW well, but I'm going to wait and see what happens before I make predictions that aren't justified. I haven't even seen SoW's physics engine, so for all we know it could much more realistic than crysis.
I wasn't arrogant and I didn't assume anything. Do you actually read my posts? or are you just going to keep posting the same thing over and over again.
Also just because he said graphics are just important as historical detail that doesn't mean anything, how do you compare the two? at what ratio do you think perfect historical detail would equal a certain graphic quality? Good graphics are easier to produce these days and game engine are getting extremely efficient at utilizing hardware to its best capability.
To what are you referring when you said "I already showed where you were wrong" because that was never the case, I could just as easily say that I did the same to you instead of backing up my claims with knowledge like I have. Your still just saying the same thing and expressing no hint that you know much about the technologies behind graphics and computing instead your just saying I couldn't know what Oleg it thinking. You don't need to know what he is thinking to calculate the max performance criteria of software that is due to come out at a set rate withing a year or so.
Even if I had the best PC money can buy today that would be overkill as I have said in other threads its what you do with it that counts. People who go buy the best of the best often think they are "Pro" or something (in most cases they are not) where as I know enough to get high end but not ridiculous gear and make it run faster then most people can with there stupid super system. There a hundreds and hundreds of factors that effect performance and each one would give my PC a gain of a few percent more performance each time they are applied. I've done the exact same thing in the past to calculate how long my previous systems would be able to run everything perfectly all it takes is knowing where and what to study to figure this sort of stuff out.
If your going to reply again saying I am wrong I'm not going to waste anymore time trying to educate you because your clearly to narrow minded to understand that people are able to study or do research to gain a knowledge advantage over someone else in a particular topic.
RE: Aza, philip.ed, and Storm of War - Fireskull - 25.02.2010
Aza, brother, as I expressed earlier, I appreciate how you have made many useful posts at AAA. To your credit, the desire in you to make the most of your machine also shows admirable quality. There is more to you than these issues.
I am sad to see you cross the valley to lower yourself to such hostility. Debating something, even intensely, about something relevant to the topic is just fine. This of itself is edifiying. Your character assessment of someone whom you do not know is not. I can assure you that philip.ed is not " narrow minded ". I am concerned about your ability to avoid conflicts with AAA members. Please do better in the future. Philip.ed is not your enemy-he is trying to help you.
Aza, perhaps you have no idea the magnitude of the features which Oleg's company is promising in Storm of War. Maybe you can not see the many additional facets as indicated in the posts by Turul.
Added to this simulation will be mods of the approved type. The modding community has been calling for a gigantic simulation in Storm of War which surely must be much more demanding than anything you have seen to this date. A perfect example is the promise of changing weather conditions. Added to this is animations. This is on top of models with much more data processing requirement because of great increase in the number of details. Oleg is promising a few things which even the modding community has not even dreamed of creating.
Have you heard about the issues with the heavily modded Fw-190 D? In Storm of War, every areoplane will have this league of graphics, and probably more! Guys with poweful computer graphics are having a difficult time with this plane in graphics performance. In Storm of War, once all the planes, objects, weather, mods, and many other features are added, there likely will not be any chance of optimizing the simulation to the fullest quality and performance in your current computer.
Your knowledge of computers is limited to the present demands and it does not automatically transfer to the knowledge of the huge increase in graphics related details in Storm of War as promised by our friend Oleg Maddox.
I know some things about Storm of War that you and most AAA members do not know. Trust me. You are wrong to make unwise assumptions about the adequacy of your current computer to maximize Storm of War graphics. For your benefit, I will add that you need to remain reserved about making claims that almost everybody would consider to be unwise boasting.
Perhaps I shall receive you as my apprentice so you can learn the secrets of solid character, ambitious student that you are.
As for philip.ed: You can do better than this. Let's drop this debate and forward ho!
Aza and philip.ed, you must bury your irritation to reconcile with one another.
As for me, I am unsubscribing to this particular topic.
- Trooper117 - 25.02.2010
Quote:Perhaps I shall receive you as my apprentice so you can learn the secrets of solid character, ambitious student that you are.
Are you some sort of Jedi? :mrgreen:
- Aza-Industries - 25.02.2010
I did say I was sorry if I offended anyone or came across as offensive or patronizing and said that it was merely my opinion that my pc would run it.
Then phil.ed replied saying I was wrong about something I didn't even mention :???:
and on went the grrrrrr
also I'm trying some new meds and my mood has been a bit sporadic, I hope I didn't lower anyone's opinion of me to much by the way I've been posting.
- Guest - 25.02.2010
I said you were wrong when you said:
Quote:its not like its a game being made just for graphics (e.g. Cysis)Look into that how you will, but Oleg said that graphics in SoW are that important. Obviously there is a historical elemnt that is important, but if he was not bothered about the graphics then he'd realise we could just play BoB2-WoV. He has to future-proof his work, and beautiful graphics with an amazing physics engine offers the scope that he is after.
This is debateable, but there is no need to get aggressive here.
- Aza-Industries - 25.02.2010
philip.ed Wrote:I said you were wrong when you said:Quote:its not like its a game being made just for graphics (e.g. Cysis)Look into that how you will, but Oleg said that graphics in SoW are that important. Obviously there is a historical elemnt that is important, but if he was not bothered about the graphics then he'd realise we could just play BoB2-WoV. He has to future-proof his work, and beautiful graphics with an amazing physics engine offers the scope that he is after.
This is debateable, but there is no need to get aggressive here.
It isn't being made just for graphics... what crysis did was try push your computer to the limits with extreme graphics and post processing with no concern for efficiency. Sow will not be made this way and will have more consideration for a wider range of gear and efficiency throughout. To get as good or better graphics then crysis wouldn't even need the same amount of PC power because details will be focused on planes, post processing, clouds, physics and not thousands of swaying trees each casting perfect shadows with AA, bloom and DoF on them. I'm not saying its not a lot to process but it's considerably easier to get it looking good without using so much resources, this is of course purely graphics not physics or weather effect. What I'm trying to say is an Air Sim that runs on the same engine as an fps would run considerably faster then the fps even though it's the same engine.
Even after I have practically said sorry to everyone you continue to propel this discussion and you even added a smiley to make your comments look like they are in good jest instead of just trying to get the last say in and a response out of me.
Here's mine: :roll:
- Guest - 26.02.2010
Touch
- Aza-Industries - 26.02.2010
mkay.
- Axial - 27.02.2010
I'm not in this debate, but I'd like to point out something about foliage in games.
Generally, foliage (grass, leaves, etc.) are simply 2D sprites or bitmaps projected in such a way that they simulate a three-dimensional effect. If you stand on one of these clumps of "grass" it will, in most games, look flat to the point of disappearing. I haven't played RoF, but I suspect that the foliage in that game is much the same because it doesn't have to worry about you getting so close so as to be able to pick that render power saving feature out.
Crysis is different because it actually uses 3D models for its foliage, which is partially why it's so demanding on hardware. It also uses self-shadowing and shaders on the foliage, both of which are something that I've only ever seen replicated once in another game, and that was Halo 3 and only in a limited fashion. Note how both of them are shooters. Storm of War will most likely use the 2D sprites and that's fine because we'll be flying high above it anyways. Even on the ground in the cockpit we'd be too high up to see it.