True Sky

[SeaW0lf]

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!

 

 

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.

 

 

I would love to see other improvements, but the game engine uses two cores, so, no matter how the hardware improves, you don't get much leeway to play around, especially because Intel is not improving in single threaded performance. They more or less try to achieve a similar performance spending less energy at each generation, focusing on the notebook / tablet market. We only get around single digits of IPC improvement. And they are not that wrong, because an i7-4770K is a powerhouse with its 8 threads. So, no matter what may come for Broadwell, for example, in my view the limitation is in the two cores that the game engine uses. 

 

They should start using other cores for different tasks, and then the margin for improvement is almost limitless. But right now I don't expect much more than we see at ROF, which already is a challenge for the mission editors, since the graphics and details are very rich.

 

But this is just what I think. I might be wrong.

[FuriousMeow]

8 threads don't mean anything for games. Physical cores matter for games, virtual cores don't help. I have an i7, but disabled HT to get higher overclock with less heat.

 

But the whole thing that only two cores are used is bogus. At one point you said RoF was only single threaded, and yet it can't be if it utilizes two cores.

 

I've provided screenshots of all cores being utilized, but I'm guessing you just want to dismiss that because you read somewhere something that was stuff.

[SeaW0lf]

At one point you said RoF was only single threaded.

 

 

I never said that, don't misquote me. I said that a member of Nvidia forum did a test with an i7 and a Titan and that the penalty from two to one core was of only 10% in ROF.

 

If you are not sure of what you are saying, just say in general and defend your point of view, but don't be personal, because you sound like a troll to me and this is not just now.

 

And the moderation officially said that the game engine uses 2 cores, so I will say that it uses two unless they say it uses more, regardless of what shows in your task manager. And this is a limitation in my opinion, with or without semantics.

[LukeFF]

And the moderation officially said that the game engine uses 2 cores, so I will say that it uses two unless they say it uses more, regardless of what shows in your task manager. And this is a limitation in my opinion, with or without semantics.

 

Nope, you're wrong. ROF and BOS both use more than 2 cores. That was explained ages ago. 

[SeaW0lf]

Nope, you're wrong. ROF and BOS both use more than 2 cores. That was explained ages ago. 

 

 

I am not sure why they moderation would inform us wrong. Jay Dolan tested it years back and said that it uses three cores, the same thing that the moderator said (that the game engine uses two and the OS uses one, so they recommend a quad core). I don't see anyone at ROF questioning it either. 

 

Could you explain why do you say it uses more?

Edited December 20, 2013 by Seawolf

[LukeFF]

 

I am not sure why they moderation would inform us wrong. Jay Dolan tested it years back and said that it uses three cores, the same thing that the moderator said (that the game engine uses two and the OS uses one, so they recommend a quad core). I don't see anyone at ROF questioning it either. 

 

Could you explain why do you say it uses more?

 

 

Because if the game only used two cores, there would be no urgent reason for people to upgrade to a quad core, and 777 wouldn't have gone through the effort to make the game run better on quad-core systems. It's an old and dead issue.

 

Also, please post the link(s) where these sorts of things you claim were said. 

[HippyDruid]

One of the first things that struck me when I first got RoF, was how nice the clouds and skies look.

I still find myself flying up, around and through them just for a bit of fun.

 

I can't say the same about Clod or DCS. They both reminded me of pretty poor particle FX from early CGI movies.

However, they do serve their purpose in game, and don't look totally crap. But in my opinion, RoF looks so much nicer!

 

True Sky is awesome, but would it work well with everything else the lads have planned for the game?

Edited December 20, 2013 by HippyDruid

[Matt]

Because if the game only used two cores, there would be no urgent reason for people to upgrade to a quad core, and 777 wouldn't have gone through the effort to make the game run better on quad-core systems. It's an old and dead issue.

 

Also, please post the link(s) where these sorts of things you claim were said. 

 

The game requires two cores, the operating system requires a single core, so we recommend 4-core cpu.

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/7-questions-developers/page-12?do=findComment&comment=45701

 

That of course doesn't need to mean, that it can only make use of two cores.

Edited December 20, 2013 by Matt

[FuriousMeow]

And it doesn't. It will use two cores at minimum, but will make use of more than 2 cores. I have posted the results of my quad core being utilized, and even in response to Seawolf's opinion which he really needs to cease with spreading, but my testing methods weren't good enough because I used Windows task manager - which I responded with CoreTemp showing core utilization of the same amount.

 

No cores sat at 0%, which was claimed from one of his sources to show that RoF will only use two cores.

 

RoF uses all four cores, as does BoS.

[ShamrockOneFive]

Weather is pretty important to a flight sim and many are right in saying that's not always done very well. IL-2 was pretty pathetic early on... haze plus a couple more cotton balls does not a weather system make.

 

Even if we're avoiding outliers like heavy thunderstorms it'd still be nice to have part of the map clouded over in partial or full overcast and part of the map less cloudy for example. Also things like snow fluries. I live in Canada... we have plenty of wintery weather and its quite possible to have a blue sky day with some heavy clouds on the horizon and some snow fluries blowing in without it being a major storm system. Just light snow, partial overcast, some blue sky here and there... that sort of moderate types of weather would be nice.

[JG26Hans_J_Marseille]

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.

 

When you are speaking about 2 options being currently considered @Zak, is the one mentionend by the OP, one of those ???

 

Are the devs even aware that such an amazing weather simulating program is on the market ??? Cuz i never heard up to now about those TRUE SKY and maybe i am not the only one...

 

 

I think this is an absolutely mindblowing work and IF the Devs dont know about this program yet, maybe you can show them the video ???

 

The offscreen voice even speak about performance and she promise the engine would need very low resources for whatever reasons !!! Maybe its worth a closer look...

 

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!!!

[FuriousMeow]

Just because it exists doesn't mean it's easy to use, or even compatible with just any game engine. Things like this typically need to be thought of and incorporated during the initial builds of an engine, not slapped on later. I can think of other game engines that did of lot of bandaiding and slapping things in, and they turned out to be a debacle.

Edited January 15, 2014 by FuriousMeow

[GAVCA/Jambock__28]

There are a good evaluation in modsim.org:

 

http://www.modsim.org/Articles/Simul/index.htm

 

Seems to be PC friendly:

 

CPU usage for cloud and sky calculation is low - for simulations running at real time this is less than 0.1% of frame-time. The rendering process takes a fraction of a millisecond for a full-screen image on a standard desktop graphics card (16.7 milliseconds are required for a 60Hz frame).

 

 

 

Who know the game "ArcaniA - a gothic tale" (from a indie developer) can try to test:

 

http://www.superdownloads.com.br/imagens/screenshots/1/3/131044,O.jpg

 

 

Also is possible a free evaluation for 30 days...

 

Whether or not possible to embed the software in BoS is interesting anyway