True Sky

[GAVCA/Jambock__28]

Hi!

 

I do not know if anyone else made ​​this suggestion but you guys have seen this site?

 

http://www.simul.co.uk/truesky

 

 

It would be possible to merge it with the BoS engine?

 

It would be spectacular to fly in that sky!!!

[Picchio]

Have you seen the clouds in Rise of Flight?

[Jaws2002]

Have you seen the clouds in Rise of Flight?

 

 

The individual clouds are not that impressive, but this is a lot more than clouds. It's light, haze, fog, clouds and everything working together following a solid physics engine. Very different animal.

The ROF clouds are very nice, but there are not many types of clouds and the weather engine is pretty limited.

[IonicRipper]

Unfortunately weather always seems to be the weak link in flight sims.

 

DCS World (although is a great game) has such boring weather effects, it removes a lot of the immersion.

Edited October 15, 2013 by IonicRipper

[Jaws2002]

Unfortunately weather always seems to be the weak link in flight sims.

 

DCS World (although is a great game) has such boring weather effects, it removes a lot of the immersion.

Absolutely agree. It's one of the reasons I'm not too enthusiastic about DCS WW2 Europe. I joined kickstarter to help them out, but there are few really old areas of DCS that kill it for me.

 

 

Real environment extreme has some really advanced weather engine, too bad everything is made for MS flight sims. Their clouds are 2d but really look good.

[Picchio]

I agree. To me it is especially sky and object lighting and shading that make the greatest difference though... also, colour balance. Simply, one should not go without the other.

Although I love it as a simulation, I visually hate that feeling of bare flatness of ground shading in DCS (which is hopefully going to improve with EDGE, it's said that Terrain shadow projection is supported), for example, while I loved the sky shading in CloD but cried for some weather changes; but do you remember those dawns?

[SeaW0lf]

I consider ROF pretty good in this department. I would say at the cutting edge from what I have seen. The only suggestion that I would make is to add lightning to the rainy weather. I don't recall seeing it, but it would be perfect if it had any.

 

The other thing is about the "canopy sky". In ROF there is a fixed pattern of cirrostratus clouds above, a canopy background above the landscape and the real clouds, and it only changes the amount of stratus according to the season.  IMHO, this gives an arcadish atmosphere to the game, but after some time you just get used to it. But I remember that I didn't like it at all at first, back in 2010. But I bet that if they removed it from ROF you would find people complaining about it.

 

Instead, they could leave the canopy sky above clear of background pattern and give an option to place real stratus clouds. It would give more realism, because as it stands right now in ROF, you always have a background canopy of clouds above your head. But, from what I have seen so far in BoS, no "canopy background" above, just the real clouds, which is awesome.

[LukeFF]

The only suggestion that I would make is to add lightning to the rainy weather. I don't recall seeing it, but it would be perfect if it had any.

 

It's for good reason it's not simulated, as lightning grounded aircraft in both world wars. 

[SeaW0lf]

It's for good reason it's not simulated, as lightning grounded aircraft in both world wars. 

 

 

 

I understand, but at some point you would have clouds with lightning at the distance, even with partly sunny weather. Yeah, it would make it very hard to simulate, since you would have to have different types of weather in the same mission. But it would be cool. The other day I took off in a rainy day mission, with sound of rain drops an all, and I felt the absence of lightning or thunder.

 

Maybe in the future.

[FuriousMeow]

One of the biggest reasons that I don't see the devs utilizing that is that it has to be purchased/licensed to use, which cuts into their profits that go towards keeping them employed and consequently improving BoS in addition to creating sequels.

 

The other is compatibility, it's not just something that gets dropped in and works. There would be a lot of work to incorporate that system with the DN engine. The AI doesn't see through the clouds in the DN engine, so now they'd have to work on getting that working as well with this module.

 

Then there is also that what we see there may not be a real time render, so it could just be really slow but sped up to appear fast.

Edited October 16, 2013 by FuriousMeow

[Dakpilot]

It's for good reason it's not simulated, as lightning grounded aircraft in both world wars. 

 

Not so sure about that!

 

 Perhaps in WWI this is relevant due to lack of instruments for blind flying, and basic fragility of airframes pilot training etc.but in WWII with modern flight instruments a lot of aircraft were certified for IFR flight and lightning would be a common sight, however perhaps not so common in the region of BOS theater, however in Pacific, Med and to a lesser extent western Europe this could be a frequent sight.

 

Lightning was quite well simulated in original IL-2   but not to the level of actual lightning strikes  (more common in real situations than you'd think, but probably not needed in a flight sim)

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Quax]

It's for good reason it's not simulated, as lightning grounded aircraft in both world wars. 

 

 

Did you read Rudel´s biography, how he did spin minutes in a thunderstorm ?

[LukeFF]

Did you read Rudel´s biography, how he did spin minutes in a thunderstorm ?

 

How he did what? And besides that, flying in thunderstorms wasn't commonplace by any stretch of the imagination. The game shouldn't be modeling extreme outliers.

[A_S]

 

http://www.simul.co.uk/truesky

 

 

Very interesting, indeed !

[Stlkrash]

True sky would be great.

[elephant]

Impressive sky rendering! (True Sky).

[Foobar]

Hi!

 

I do not know if anyone else made ​​this suggestion but you guys have seen this site?

 

http://www.simul.co.uk/truesky

 

It would be possible to merge it with the BoS engine?

 

It would be spectacular to fly in that sky!!!

 

Wow! Very impressing! Didn't imagine weather like that would be possible in games.

[YoYo]

Have you seen the clouds in Rise of Flight?

 

In RoF You have some kind of very simply clouds and not many weather effect. In BoS I expect better weather effects, just till now not any screen of snowing, rain, snowstorm, fog ect. 

 

Very good clouds are in FSX (with for expample Active Sky):

 

 

 

Hope after when public beta will be open They will work on weather effect, better clouds too?

 

In War Thunder first kind of clouds was very simply too, now They take many improvements and it looks very, very well, not like before.

Edited October 22, 2013 by YoYo

[FuriousMeow]

Most weather kept squadrons grounded.

 

You want dynamic weather to fly through snowstorms, rain squals, etc - civilian flight sims.

 

Combat operations were regularly cancelled due to weather, has no place in an air combat sim unless you want to pull the rare flight in a thunderstorm (like Manfred Von Richtofen) but encounter no enemy because everyone else is grounded.

[YoYo]

We dont talk here about real procedures in 100%, for sure many fighters stayed on the ground (but not always - recon planes, transports or sturm bombers) but only about implementation of some kind of other kind weather.

In IL-2 CoD clouds and weather effect are better mutch than in RoF now.

[Grifter]

If I were betting I would say that after initial release it won't be too long before we are all surprised at improvements to the weather in IL2-BOS. With all the amazing stuff 777 has been doing in the last couple years I have high hopes for when they turn their attention to weather.

If anything would dampen (no pun intended  ) the results, it may end up being the impact on average frame-rate/performance of the servers. I feel like technology is finally overcoming a lot of these long-standing limitations to our Pilot dreams. If I compare it to an old favorite Chuck Yeager's Air Combat -c.1991, it reminds me of just how freaking far we have come.

[Uufflakke]

In IL-2 CoD clouds and weather effect are better mutch than in RoF now.

 

I don't know about RoF but keep in mind that BoS is only finished for about 30 - 35% at the moment.

So a lot needs to be done.

I hope the weather conditions get the attention they deserve.

 

That Truesky video looks highly interesting.

[YoYo]

Here examples from my RoF. Nice but looks like too more cotton (with Sweet FX for more sharp).

 

 

[Uufflakke]

Here examples from my RoF. Nice but looks like too more cotton (with Sweet FX for more sharp).

 

 

Distant clouds in RoF resembles the default IL2 cotton balls unfortunately.

From up close RoF clouds are much better.

 

But here is a tutorial in 3 parts 'How to make the clouds in the RoF'.

Maybe helpful to create some yourself.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UR5kqu8Qatc

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvGGNYrctS0

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHf7B9TeXbM

 

 

 

Got to say that modded IL2 do have some nice cloud mods too.

Here are two screenies of a high rez cloud mod I created a year ago or so.

 

 

 

[FuriousMeow]

In IL-2 CoD clouds and weather effect are better mutch than in RoF now.

 

Okay. I really don't believe you, because the last time I ran that title it was just close up clouds that looked exactly like the old Il-2 series. No distant clouds, just puffs in the sky. RoF's clouds, however, are huge and much larger than any cloud in CoD.

[Matt]

Weather is something that RoF is lacking quite a bit.

 

The cloud settings are just too generic. There is either one of the of the two puffy cloud-options or an overcast setting from which you can choose from (and the overcast doesn't look that great, atleast from above). And if you want to have precipitation, you need to use overcast.

 

So i hope for improvements in this area in the future. Just a bit more variance in the shape/type of clouds would already make a bit difference. Including some of the RoF clouds mods into BoS would help.

[Zak]

I don't know about RoF but keep in mind that BoS is only finished for about 30 - 35% at the moment.

So a lot needs to be done.

Yes, the sky is of course not final yet. As Loft once said there are at least two options that are considered now - some new sky that may drop overall performance significantly, or improved ROF sky that will surely keep the FPS high and steady.

[YoYo]

Okay. I really don't believe you, because the last time I ran that title it was just close up clouds that looked exactly like the old Il-2 series. No distant clouds, just puffs in the sky. RoF's clouds, however, are huge and much larger than any cloud in CoD.

 

... but You dont need belive me .

 

CoD:

 

 

 

IL-2:

 

 

Mutch better in IL-2 CoD for me, but its a different topic. Stay on course.

 

@Zak

 

Thx for reply, we wait and its only suggestions to do better sim for all :-)!

[HoH]

Yes, the sky is of course not final yet. As Loft once said there are at least two options that are considered now - some new sky that may drop overall performance significantly, or improved ROF sky that will surely keep the FPS high and steady.

 

Go for the first option :D or make it possible to shift from second to first lets say after a year when players PCs get more power.

[FuriousMeow]

These look way better than Il2 or CloD. It is on topic, we're discussing the sky that's in BoS. I'd rather have RoF's, or an improved version, than anything from the old Il-2 series.

Edited October 23, 2013 by FuriousMeow

[SeaW0lf]

These look way better than Il2 or CloD. It is on topic, we're discussing the sky that's in BoS. I'd rather have RoF's, or an improved version, than anything from the old Il-2 series.

 

Totally agree. ROFs clouds are a pleasure to the eyes and much better than the previous ones that I have seen. The only limitation could be rendering, but the atmosphere is great. If they improve in some aspects, like smooth rendering in some cases, it would be perfect.

[=IRFC=SmokinHole]

RoF clouds are good enough.  If performance is going to be sacrificed for eye candy, clouds or other atmospherics may not be the best place to turn.  The problem I have with RoF's clouds are a little hard to explain and during my time as a beta tester I could never get anyone to understand my point.  (a problem I often have which makes me unsuited to be a beta tester  )

 

The problem is this:  You are approaching just a whisp of RoF cloud.  Beyond that little whisp you can easily make out background features such as farmland, forests, whatever.  But when you enter that whisp your visibility decreases to zero until you fly through.  This does not happen in real life.  What you see is what you get.  Not a big deal unless you are chasing something.  But if you spend lots of time flying around and through real clouds, the RoF experience can be a bit jarring. 

[Jaws2002]

RoF clouds are good enough.  If performance is going to be sacrificed for eye candy, clouds or other atmospherics may not be the best place to turn.  The problem I have with RoF's clouds are a little hard to explain and during my time as a beta tester I could never get anyone to understand my point.  (a problem I often have which makes me unsuited to be a beta tester  )

 

The problem is this:  You are approaching just a whisp of RoF cloud.  Beyond that little whisp you can easily make out background features such as farmland, forests, whatever.  But when you enter that whisp your visibility decreases to zero until you fly through.  This does not happen in real life.  What you see is what you get.  Not a big deal unless you are chasing something.  But if you spend lots of time flying around and through real clouds, the RoF experience can be a bit jarring.

 

I know exactly what you mean. I noticed this with the new clod version. Most likely was there from the start, the difference is hosts didn't use the clouds much before, due to performance concerns. You can see a plane get into the cloud and follow him up to the point where you get into the cloud. Then, all of a sudden, you can't see nothing.

the clouds in clod weren't bad even before. It was just to much performance loss.

Offline, after I upgraded, I always added clouds to missions. It made a big difference.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Sim]

For the record: ARMA 3 is using TrueSky. At least for the clouds. There are some issues with their implementation - like the "warping" effect seen on the edge of the screen. Not sure if it's directly ARMA or TrueSky related.

[Jaws2002]

For the record: ARMA 3 is using TrueSky. At least for the clouds. There are some issues with their implementation - like the "warping" effect seen on the edge of the screen. Not sure if it's directly ARMA or TrueSky related.

 

I knew it looks familiar. I played quite a bit with that whether engine, inthe mission builder, during alpha and beta. It is impressive and does many things really well. Moving fronts, clouds formations and mist are really well done. I didn't like the clouds. Too low resolution. Look bad when you fly through them.

The lighting is pretty well done but the colors are off.

[JV44Rall]

How he did what? And besides that, flying in thunderstorms wasn't commonplace by any stretch of the imagination. The game shouldn't be modeling extreme outliers.

Yes, but flying though clouds in ROF and in CLOD seems to have little impact on flight. There's no "wwhooomfff" as when you fly into a cumulus cloud in a small aircraft in RL or turbulence that kicks you around like a can in a windstorm - which is what basically what you've become. I've been IMC in chop that rolls you 30 degrees before you can correct or pushes you down 100 feet in a couple seconds (my wife was not happy with me). I try to enter clouds at Va, and even then, I'm cautious.

 

Pretty clouds are nice to look at, but imho, there should be modelling for turbulence inside clouds. Diving into a cloud at high speed can very quickly snap off a wing in RL. In CLOD, there's no difference between the air inside and the air outside of clouds.

Edited November 15, 2013 by JV44Rall

[LuftManu]

Yes, the sky is of course not final yet. As Loft once said there are at least two options that are considered now - some new sky that may drop overall performance significantly, or improved ROF sky that will surely keep the FPS high and steady.

 

Zak, I find the best option to make a New Sky, better that using Rof one,its the best option for the "future" the hadware advances very fast, the new sky would be at the Standards of sims of 2014/2015 and in one year (as worst) we will not notice the Fps Drop.

 

EDIT: Going to create a poll in poll section, hope the Community can help you to decide devs! much more minds always help!

Edited November 16, 2013 by .-RDS-.Manu_vc

[VR-DriftaholiC]

I would love to see this realistic clouds networked. It's really the only form of cover in Arial combat and really would set this game apart. 

[4H_V-man]

Overall, I like the way clouds are done in RoF. What I find lacking is variety of weather. Sure, most of the time if it was stormy at an airfield then flight operationis were put on hold. BUT, it's not uncommon to take off with a reasonably clear sky and encounter weather during the trip. Also, I'd like to see TOWERING clouds. Not just clouds from three to ten thousand feet. I want to see thirty thousand foot thunderheads that I have to navigate around.

 

In Il-2 or RoF the weather is the same from one side of the map to the other. If a mission builder selects thrunderstorms, it's everywhere. Thunderstorms don't generally cover an entire 200 by 200 mile area. They're usually scattered around over a large area. Is this something that isn't possible due to programming issues, or is it simply something that would be a large performance hit for the normal desktop PC?

[Schmalzfaust]

I would love to see a new weather engine at all. As Manu_Vc mentioned we should look into the future with faster hardware. But beside eye-candy IMO it is more important to have some real feeling weather like thermals, hang wind and strong turbulence at cold/warm fronts or thunderstorms etc.