Graphics seriously disappointing

[Finkeren]

People are obviously not content and we can see that if affects people on both sides of the processing power spectrum. 

 

Flight simmers are obviously never content. Ever.

[II./JG77_Manu*]

I think graphics are just right, how it is. Best flight simulator graphics by a mile. This is the only Sim where i can tell from 7,8 Km out which plane i see (when i see it from an 90° angle). In every other flight sim you see just a dot. No more words needed

[Finkeren]

I think graphics are just right, how it is. Best flight simulator graphics by a mile. This is the only Sim where i can tell from 7,8 Km out which plane i see (when i see it from an 90° angle). In every other flight sim you see just a dot. No more words needed

 

Hear hear. This is the single most important aspect of graphical representation in a flight sim, and BoS nails it.

[steppenwolf]

I think BoS looks just fine. I especially like the way the Devs have avoided 'texture quilting' with the landscape, like in RoF. Effects, DM, ambiance, and POV are the only things I'd like to see readdressed. GTA V has horrible quilting, pop ups, and low rex textures; but that doesn't stop it from being one of the best games made up to this day. Graphics aren't everything IMO.

[AceRevo]

As a long time player of WW2 air combat sims (dating back to Jane's WW2 Fighters), I am really disappointed with the landscape, cockpit and tracer graphics.

I know it's in BETA stage but so are other games such as War Thunder. Devs please prioritize improving the graphical appeal of this game.

 

Please, get in your WT 109 F-4 and take another look.

 

And are you sure you got a copy of BoS and not CloD or maybe IL-2 1946?? 

 

Im a long time WT player myself, just to be fair.. WT is all about Quantity, while BoS is all about quality. Theres a reason why theres only one theather and 10 planes in BoS. And be aware, if they succeed with their release, new theathers will come..

 

Not only does BoS look better, it also FEELS better!

 

Get on someones 6 and watch him dissapear in the sun.. Do the same thing in WT you'll know whos the winner here.. 

 

And for your information, the team behind BoS is a whole new team and are not the same guys behind the earlier games in the series.. (please correct me if needed or add whatever)

 

And if you REALLY need to compare, fly a snow covered map in WT first..

 

 

Edit: I dont take credits for this video, I just wanted to share a good video from multiplayer. WT cant be compared! BoS wins, hands down.. 

Edited September 5, 2014 by AceRevo

[=LD=Penshoon]

Hear hear. This is the single most important aspect of graphical representation in a flight sim, and BoS nails it.

Sure but render distance of the landscape is also important in a no labels and no navigational assist game mode. Maybe I just suck but I get disoriented easily since landmarks aren't rendered unless they are very close or at low altitude. 

 

I'm sure I can adjust but would rather see some improvements. 

 

And comparing BOS to WT is a joke. 

 

Now for what I like best is the cockpit animations, just moving the pedals and or throttle in the F-4 is eye candy seeing how they animated the cables and stuff. looks amazing on high fps. Very natural.

Edited September 5, 2014 by =LD=Penshoon

[kendo]

So much of this is subjective and everyone will have their own opinion. Some of mine - first I'm stunned that some people think ROF looks better. I like and play ROF, but I find sometimes there can be a slightly 'cartoony' feel to clouds, sky. I thought BOS was a big step up.

 

A lot of the complaints about the snowy landscape just seem to have missed the point of time and place. (reminds me of the Basil Fawlty quote: "What did you expect to see from a Torquay hotel bedroom window? The hanging gardens of Babylon? Wildebeest sweeping majestically across the plains..."  Non-UK folks - Google it ). I think they have done a superb job with the landscape - and there are variations in the snow - especially in Stalingrad itself, but also around the airfields with tracks, pathways, etc.

 

And I think the person who said original il-2 effects were better has probably been playing with modded il-2 too much and can't remember what it was originally like. But I well remember those twirling 2-D smoke trails from damaged planes.

 

For me some of the cockpits have been disappointing - primarily the 109. Expected better. But the Lagg and Heinkel are excellent.

 

Overall I'm surprised and pleased with what they have achieved graphically - and the clouds and overcast effects are still the best i've ever seen in a flightsim. Also the pilots!

 

Regarding COD - there are elements there that are not great imo - the pilots all look out of scale and I'm still not a fan of the landscape despite Team Fusion's tweaks. To me looks like it is being viewed through polaroid sunglasses - landscape colours are still out. And there is still a weird glazing effect on the planes. Overall I much prefer BOS. Elements are better integrated to produce a believeable landscape. Cockpits are superb and better in COD though.

Edited September 5, 2014 by kendo

[Fliegel]

OP: I just came from War Thumder and personally I think that BoS graphic is way better.

WT is oversaturated and has too high contrast (yes I tryied to tweak it, even in post FX) make sky white and ground black when looking at horizont, and so in my eyes BoS looks much more realistic.

Edited September 5, 2014 by Wenceslas

[sallee]

Could a mod merge this thread with this one http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/9546-devs-current-graphical-quality-way-higher-we-need/ ?

 

Thanks!

[BigPickle]

It looks great  actually . Could seriously use a summer map though .

 THIS!

[oneeyeddog]

Could a mod merge this thread with this one http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/9546-devs-current-graphical-quality-way-higher-we-need/ ?

 

Thanks!

Sallee if this were merged with the 'Current graphical Quality is Higher then We Need 'Thread, would they cancel each other out and both disappear?.

Edited September 5, 2014 by oneeyeddog

[sallee]

Sallee if this were merged with the 'Current graphical Quality is Higher then We Need 'Thread, would they cancel each other out and both disappear?.

It's a theory I've been working on for some years now....it's either that or the universe would end...shall we find out?

[Matt]

Better try that with your dogs first.

[oneeyeddog]

Better try that with your dogs first.

Nice.

[Vaxxtx]

Ill throw my 2 cents in.

 

BoS

 

Land is good. Snow....you cant really mess that up. More details on building would be good. Cockpit glass is awesome. Cockpits themselves leave much to be desired. They are not bad, but far from "wow". I cant see the "grit", and metal does not look metal. They look very generated and not realistic. From what I have seen on the exteiror of the models, they look very good if not just a tad saturated.

 

CLoD

 

The channel water is awesome, as is the varitey in land items. You can navigate using terrain rather easy. Turning up the settings and it looks above good but not great. Cockpits, are one of the best in a WWII sim. The metal looks metal, the lighting is perfect, there is "grit" to them. The exterior plane models look good, but again can look saturated sometimes like BoS.

 

RoF

 

Clouds look great, land look ok. Only ok because there is nothing there. Seeing a large scorched earth with trenches totally viod of infantry kills it. The cockpits look great. Everything has its right texture and color. Exterior palne model is great, but sometimes cartoony.

 

DCS

 

Land from high above or far away is great. Flying at night and coming to a town with lights on looks like a picture, again great. Daytime when you get closer its a mix of great terrain to horrible flat pixels. A jumble of variety of objects on top of a horrible rendered earth. It has some of the best cockpits and external models, specially when using HD cockpit mods from users, that I have ever seen. The buttons, the metal, the grit, all top notch.

 

 

The good thing is BoS is not done yet, so maybe that is coming? Since the other sims I mentioned are years old, I was hoping for the latest in the looks department. Is it final?

[LukeFF]

 

 

The tracers still look like lasers.

 

Ever see tracers in the real world? 

[Finkeren]

 

The tracers still look like lasers.

Ever see tracers in the real world? 

Ever see lasers in the real world?

[FuriousMeow]

Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder.

[Chuck_Owl]

I wouldn't say BoS is the next benchmark in terms of HD graphics, but it does the job fairly well for what it's trying to do. The color palette for the winter map is realistic and I think the game is overall kinda pretty. 

 

I'm a big fan of HD cockpits. BoS' are fine. I've seen better though, but I wouldn't say it's anything close to "disappointing" by any stretch of the imagination.

Edited September 5, 2014 by 71st_AH_Chuck

[Finkeren]

I think that's the key to what makes BoS great: Very little is actually terrible. That goes for the graphics as well. Even the parts that are just ok, do their job and don't stand out as being "bad". I can't say that about any other sim.

[9./JG27golani79]

I think the overall look is pretty nice - shaders though could possibly take a bit of tweaking - especially those used in the cockpits.

[Brano]

Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder.

 

LaGG3 cockpit is pure beauty.......and nothing else matters

 

Edited September 5, 2014 by Brano

[6high]

 

LaGG3 cockpit is pure beauty.......and nothing else matters

Metallica thought so aswell

[Chuck_Owl]

Darn it, you guys made me look for those Metallica CDs again 

[1./KG4_Blackwolf]

I think the graphics are just fine, flight FX makes it even better. They may not be the best I've seen but you do not need a super computer to run it either.....and nothing else matters. 

Darn it, you guys made me look for those Metallica CDs again 

Ahh just download it chuck, Lars wont mind!

[Finkeren]

Could we at least listen to some proper Metallica, and not that mediocre pop-fest that is The Black Album?

[Anw.StG2_Tyke]

I think the textures are pretty low-res. The technical aspect of graphics are pretty good in BoS. But I don't like the appearance. Everything looks grayed out and more like plastic instead of steel.

[Chuck_Owl]

 

Could we at least listen to some proper Metallica, and not that mediocre pop-fest that is The Black Album?

 

 

Now THAT is offensive 

Edited September 5, 2014 by 71st_AH_Chuck

[Nage]

This is what I have in the game (with latest update, GTX670 and nvidia 340.52 drivers). No matter which video preset is set.

Original resolution is 1920x1200 and the images are just cropped to focus on the ugly blur effect. Cinematic effect is off.

 

Edited September 5, 2014 by tikvic

[Capt_Hook]

Ill throw my 2 cents in.

 

BoS

 

Land is good. Snow....you cant really mess that up. More details on building would be good. Cockpit glass is awesome. Cockpits themselves leave much to be desired. They are not bad, but far from "wow". I cant see the "grit", and metal does not look metal. They look very generated and not realistic. From what I have seen on the exteiror of the models, they look very good if not just a tad saturated.

 

CLoD

 

The channel water is awesome, as is the varitey in land items. You can navigate using terrain rather easy. Turning up the settings and it looks above good but not great. Cockpits, are one of the best in a WWII sim. The metal looks metal, the lighting is perfect, there is "grit" to them. The exterior plane models look good, but again can look saturated sometimes like BoS.

 

RoF

 

Clouds look great, land look ok. Only ok because there is nothing there. Seeing a large scorched earth with trenches totally viod of infantry kills it. The cockpits look great. Everything has its right texture and color. Exterior palne model is great, but sometimes cartoony.

 

DCS

 

Land from high above or far away is great. Flying at night and coming to a town with lights on looks like a picture, again great. Daytime when you get closer its a mix of great terrain to horrible flat pixels. A jumble of variety of objects on top of a horrible rendered earth. It has some of the best cockpits and external models, specially when using HD cockpit mods from users, that I have ever seen. The buttons, the metal, the grit, all top notch.

 

 

The good thing is BoS is not done yet, so maybe that is coming? Since the other sims I mentioned are years old, I was hoping for the latest in the looks department. Is it final?

I agree with every word of this, as far as the graphics go.  DCS has the best cockpits and flight model (for the PFM planes), bar none.  Unfortunately, right now, that's all it's got.  Multiplayer performance is inconsistent at best, even with monster rigs.  Damage models are laughable.  And, of course, no real campaigns or online wars yet.  In a year it may be the *ultimate* flight sim, but not right now.  BoS is worlds ahead in smooth, consistent online play, even with 40+ people swirling around you.

 

I'd pay for add-on pits in BoS.  If it's technically possible and some modelers on the dev team wanted to make some extra dough, I'd buy plug-in HD pits in a heartbeat.  It wouldn't have any gameplay effect at all, just eye candy. 

[VBF-12_Stick-95]

This is what I have in the game (with latest update, GTX670 and nvidia 340.52 drivers). No matter which video preset is set.

Original resolution is 1920x1200 and the images are just cropped to focus on the ugly blur effect. Cinematic effect is off.

 

 

 

I agree, that does not look good.  I however have 1920 X 1200, use a GTX 680 with same driver and mine looks great, nothing like that.  I posted my settings for in-game and nVidia in the link below and some screen shots if you want to check them out.

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/10301-8x-anti-aliasing-how/?p=158844

[FuriousMeow]

That only happens in front of clouds, and the severity of it depends on your resolution. Lower resolutions, it is more present. Hopefully it will be fixed, but that is only present when viewing aircraft that have clouds/smoke behind them.

Edited September 5, 2014 by FuriousMeow

[Trident_109]

Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder.

Did you change your avatar specifically for this post? That damn cat-bat is just freaky looking.

 

 

Regarding BoS graphics? I think they are pretty darn good. At the very least they are beyond functional. Other games have better graphics but lack depth in other more important areas. Being familiar with RoF, I've certainly never been disappointed in BoS's graphics as I pretty much knew what to expect.

 

I wouldn't throw BoS outta of my bed for eating cookies.

[Gambit21]

Could we at least listen to some proper Metallica, and not that mediocre pop-fest that is The Black Album?

You mean when they learned what drums are for, and started playing tunes and stopped with the "speed for speed's sake" thing?

 

I'm guessing anything after Bon Scott isn't real AC/DC, and anything after Roger Water's isn't really Pink Floyd and post Peter Gabriel Genesis isn't really Genesis...

I got your number Fink!! 

[Gambit21]

 

 

 

 

Now THAT is offensive 

 

high five...

[Chuck_Owl]

*slap*

[Livai]

So we have one thread saying that the Dex's have spent too much time and resources on graphics and they are "to high" in quality and now this one saying the graphics are lower quality than expected in 2014.  I pronounce this BoS' Goldilocks moment;  "Just right".

 

RoF Game Engine was fine. Just needed to raise the Polygone Count and to improve that what is really needed like FM, DM, Plane Physics, HDR, Bloom,.............but not a Overhaul that remove what was good

[Rjel]

Anyone who is basing their opinion on BoS from mediocre screen shots like those a little further up or heresay from this or any other forum, is only kidding themselves. If people want to ride the fence and not buy until the game is released as a finished product, no problem. But what value is an opinion based on others experience?

[FuriousMeow]

Did you change your avatar specifically for this post? That damn cat-bat is just freaky looking.

 

 

I took one of my cats to the groomer, is it that bad? I was told it was the best in the area and that when done with her she'd look more appealing than expertly aged jerky. Now that I think about it, she has been quite rigid with her movements since she was brought back home...

Edited September 5, 2014 by FuriousMeow

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

I took one of my cats to the groomer, is it that bad? I was told it was the best in the area and that when done with her she'd look more appealing than expertly aged jerky. Now that I think about it, she has been quite rigid with her movements since she was brought back home...

Furious, groomers address is 1923 Main Street. Taxidermist address is 1932 Main Street. You might wanna check your receipt.