Jump to content
Han

Developer Diary, Part 127 - Discussion

Recommended Posts

Promising News, Moskau panorama could distract the first time. I am curious how great the 64bit impact is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'as the years roll by and new flightsims appear they all seem to be stuck with the same limitations.. limited numbers of aircraft in the air at any time and limited ground detail/city detail...'  - stiboo

 

1.) Moore's law is hardly a law nor is it scientific in sense of a natural science.

 

2.) More computing power does not translate into more customers, developers and money that would be needed to create a 'bigger better flightsim' and those (customers, developers and money) things are the limiting factors in conjunction with computing power.

 

No offence, but your negativity towards this project because of this decision seems a bit exaggerated.

 

Jordan :salute:

 

I actually think the Moscow compromise is fine and, of course, it looks great. But c'mon, stiboo's point on limitation is valid and hardly exaggerated. Instead of a horrible drop in FPS, which we're all familiar with, the compromise is to basically make flying over the city impossible. You have to admit - not a big step forward. And add to that his points on AC and ground unit numbers, all true. Hopefully the 64-bit change will remedy some of this though.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moore's law: everyone upgrades their PC every year, therefore all the players double their computer's power constantly.

Moore's Law doesn't seem to apply to CPUs. Year to year they don't gain that much. GPUs might see 30-40%. But CPUs are lucky to see 5-10%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moore's Law is every two years anyway, and Intel has announced they're slowing down. Also, it's not actually a fact-based 'law' but a guideline chip creators went off of to stay innovative but not bubble-bursting innovative.

Edited by [MYK]Mikeypro83

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great work.

 

Nice historical irony that all these decades after the Wehrmacht was stopped at the gates of Moscow, so we simmers of today are stopped as well :-)

 

Will there also be a winter version of the map?

 

Given the limitations of present-day gaming PC's it makes eminent sense not to model the city except from afar. This is a combat flight sim, anyway, not Flight Simulator XVI.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moore's Law is every two years anyway, and Intel has announced they're slowing down. Also, it's not actually a fact-based 'law' but a guideline chip creators went off of to stay innovative but not bubble-bursting innovative.

And that's a "good" thing. Look at it in reverse. Can you imagine how consumers would feel if their computers power was cut in half every two years? Nobody would buy a computer. Ok, they'd lease them ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Will there also be a winter version of the map?

 

Autumn and winter maps IIRC.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moore's Law doesn't seem to apply to CPUs. Year to year they don't gain that much. GPUs might see 30-40%. But CPUs are lucky to see 5-10%

 

Sorry I was being sarcastic. 

 

My point is that there are way too many factors that need to be considered, making Moore's law relatively irrelevant in this discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a 'higher authority' has forbidden the team from including all of Moscow.... I mean, it doesn't do for the Kremlin to be seen to be getting plastered by bombs on a nightly basis by over enthusiastic gamer's, lol!

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moore's Law is every two years anyway, and Intel has announced they're slowing down. Also, it's not actually a fact-based 'law' but a guideline chip creators went off of to stay innovative but not bubble-bursting innovative.

Actually its not even a guideline but a mere observation that Moore published in 1965...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually its not even a guideline but a mere observation that Moore published in 1965...

 

Hehe. Remember cameras like the Minolta SRT-102? They had a 2 cell CdS light-metering system, and it was eventually simplified to a single, smaller cell in order to save on costs! Now you can buy over 20 of those same cells for a $1 on Ebay!  :lol:

Edited by Lippisch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually its not even a guideline but a mere observation that Moore published in 1965...

It's a typically over optimistic view of technology progress from the 60s. We were supposed to have space liners for travel to hotels on the moon by this time too

Look at 2001: Space Oddesey. That's what they figured space travel would be like 15 years ago. Ha! :-D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Look at 2001: Space Oddesey. That's what they figured space travel would be like 15 years ago. Ha!

I don't want to derail this thread too much or sound like a 2001 apologist (maybe i am) but a lot of the technology shown may seem optimistic but the things you see in the movie are generally accepted as accurate for depicting what they are doing. Shuttle for LEO, orbital station with artificial gravity for long visits, a lunar transfer ship. One thing that doesn't seem to get brought up that much is how much the trip costed the U.S Government to send Heywood Floyd, i can't remember the exact figure. There's a reason why for the majority of the trip he is a lone traveler in a rocket.  It's a true sci-fi flick that everyone who hasn't watched, should. I'm still waiting for a movie to surpass it.

 

btw, enjoyed the DD!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I actually think the Moscow compromise is fine and, of course, it looks great. But c'mon, stiboo's point on limitation is valid and hardly exaggerated. Instead of a horrible drop in FPS, which we're all familiar with, the compromise is to basically make flying over the city impossible. 

 

From reading the dev diary and having seen the original livestream where they did fly low around the city I think they've gone this route not because of performance issues but more to do with quality.  Moscow is a huge capital city.  They don't have the time or resources to recreate the city to what the devs consider an acceptable level of quality to fly over.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to derail this thread too much or sound like a 2001 apologist (maybe i am) but a lot of the technology shown may seem optimistic but the things you see in the movie are generally accepted as accurate for depicting what they are doing. Shuttle for LEO, orbital station with artificial gravity for long visits, a lunar transfer ship. One thing that doesn't seem to get brought up that much is how much the trip costed the U.S Government to send Heywood Floyd, i can't remember the exact figure. There's a reason why for the majority of the trip he is a lone traveler in a rocket.  It's a true sci-fi flick that everyone who hasn't watched, should. I'm still waiting for a movie to surpass it.

 

btw, enjoyed the DD!

Oh it's a fantastic film. The creators wanted to portray space travel as accurately (for the time) as possible. They show weightless and silence. It's magnificently done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Look at 2001: Space Oddesey. That's what they figured space travel would be like 15 years ago. Ha!

 

2001: a space odyssey --- out 1968 => 48 yeas ago ( ;) )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HAL: That's a very nice rendering, Dave. I think you've improved a great deal. Can you hold it a bit closer? 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes all valid points I know.... it's just annoying that the game is called IL2 Battle Of Moscow  (But by the way you can't actually fly over Moscow)

 

as the years roll by and new flightsims appear they all seem to be stuck with the same limitations.. limited numbers of aircraft in the air at any time and limited ground detail/city detail.. all because our PCs can't cope. 

 

Moore's law that the power of the average computer processor will double every year seems to never ever translate into bigger better flightsims...

 

I have the original IL2 (3 versions of it)  CLoD and IL2 BoS  on my PC - which do I fly the most..  yes the original IL2 because apart from the external aircraft detail I just find it more enjoyable and 'fun'.

 

 

(1) IF Moscow was over-run by Stukas and 109's, Well we could this sim BAF "Battle after Stalingrad" When the Germans "Broke through" and headed on to Moscow. Then we could call it BAF. Battle After Moscow !... And we could all Fly over Moscow (and make the Devs put work into Buildings ,textures etc that we want Like a Hole in the head.

I am Happy to to see BOM Moscow from a Distance.

(2) What has Moores Law got to do with the price of Turnips ?... Moores law at the moment (for INTEL) is Tick Tock Tock ,Not Tick Tock like Moores law suggests....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since  2010 each new generation of Intel processor has improved by about 13% max... Moore's law? i'll buy that for a dollar!!  :biggrin:

 

HAL: Just what do you think you're doing, Dave? 

 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Edited by Dakpilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since  2010 each new generation of Intel processor has improved by about 13% max... Moore's law? i'll buy that for a dollar!!  :biggrin:

 

HAL: Just what do you think you're doing, Dave? [/size]

 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

I don't think you know what Moore's law is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think you know what Moore's law is.

 

Dont worry I fully understand the original 60's moore's law, just in more popular form people relate it to performance rather than transistor density, but regardless my post was just a joke using 2001/2010 space odyssey quote...

 

However Moore's law has seen a reduction to a bit above  half what was predicted

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From reading the dev diary and having seen the original livestream where they did fly low around the city I think they've gone this route not because of performance issues but more to do with quality.  Moscow is a huge capital city.  They don't have the time or resources to recreate the city to what the devs consider an acceptable level of quality to fly over.

 

Yes I think the Dev's were always planning to have Moscow fully incorporated into the map.. but the old flightsim engine just can't cope. 

 

My point about Moore's law is that the original IL2 came out in 2001? and our PCs are far more powerful since then, so why are we stuck with the same old limitations of a handful of aircraft in the air and a handful of vehicles on the ground...progress?   I was expecting more from the 21st Century after 25 years of playing flightsims on Spectrum, C64, Atari ST, Amiga, PCs...

 

But I do understand the Devs are trying their hardest and things take time...  

 

I believe that the 3D Virtual headsets will be the making of flightsims and if I were in charge I would be putting all resources into getting IL2 fully working with all headsets, it's a huge missed opportunity that IL2 isn't one of the 20 launch games with Oculus Rift.. they are made for each other.  (not that I can afford the Rift just yet!!  but I WILL have one ...)

 

yes 2001 and Back to the future movies.. feeling old!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Computers have become more powerful, but also FM/environment/physics and graphics have also increased in complexity and also increased in cost of development..in other more AAA genres the pace has been a bit quicker

 

I am sure 1C/777 would have wanted BoS to be a launch title on all the VR platforms, but where does the money come from in this niche market to produce the DX12 etc. new engine that is really necessary? missed opportunities or not there is a fiscal reality (especially in CFS genre) which we sometimes forget

 

Cheers Dakpilot

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From reading the dev diary and having seen the original livestream where they did fly low around the city I think they've gone this route not because of performance issues but more to do with quality.  Moscow is a huge capital city.  They don't have the time or resources to recreate the city to what the devs consider an acceptable level of quality to fly over.

The debate is impossible to test without the fully recreated city. I'd be surprised if the current engine could handle it though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The debate is impossible to test without the fully recreated city. I'd be surprised if the current engine could handle it though. 

 

Yes, you're right - we cannot know without the city to fly over.  However, I think this is a decision based more on cost/time rather than engine limitations.  I don't think the DN engine has too much trouble rendering highly detailed buildings if RoF or Stalingrad is anything to go by.

 

Moving objects?  Now that's another story.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The debate is impossible to test without the fully recreated city. I'd be surprised if the current engine could handle it though. 

 

Flying over Moscow city has been done already by the Dev team. During their last weeks live stream. At low altitude (tree top level) flying from the outskirts of Moscow to the Red Square for instance.

I was suprised to see that and from what I've seen it all went smooth. Not turning into a slide show or anything. And by the way, the flight over Moscow during the  live stream was not done on a super high end system according their comments.

But perhaps performance will be different during dogfights, explosions, air raids, ground activity etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2001: a space odyssey --- out 1968 => 48 yeas ago ( ;) )

I'm saying that the space travel they depict in the movie would have happened 15 years ago compared with today

2001 vs 2016.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, you're right - we cannot know without the city to fly over.  However, I think this is a decision based more on cost/time rather than engine limitations.  I don't think the DN engine has too much trouble rendering highly detailed buildings if RoF or Stalingrad is anything to go by.

 

Moving objects?  Now that's another story.  

 

 

Flying over Moscow city has been done already by the Dev team. During their last weeks live stream. At low altitude (tree top level) flying from the outskirts of Moscow to the Red Square for instance.

I was suprised to see that and from what I've seen it all went smooth. Not turning into a slide show or anything. And by the way, the flight over Moscow during the  live stream was not done on a super high end system according their comments.

But perhaps performance will be different during dogfights, explosions, air raids, ground activity etc.

I just assumed we were talking about rendering the city with the intent to engage in air combat over it. If there were a mission with multiple AC dueling over a fully completed Moscow city, I'd be surprised if performance could not be shown to increase noticeably if the all buildings were removed for comparison. I would say engine limitation or performance would be more accurately judged by the total of all the game facets rendering simultaneously. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point about Moore's law is that the original IL2 came out in 2001? and our PCs are far more powerful since then, so why are we stuck with the same old limitations of a handful of aircraft in the air and a handful of vehicles on the ground...progress? I was expecting more from the 21st Century after 25 years of playing flightsims on Spectrum, C64, Atari ST, Amiga, PCs.

The fact that you dont understand that the visual detail of the planes and the physics calculations are much more elaborate than the original IL2 is a little puzzling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that you dont understand that the visual detail of the planes and the physics calculations are much more elaborate than the original IL2 is a little puzzling.

Exponentially!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that you dont understand that the visual detail of the planes and the physics calculations are much more elaborate than the original IL2 is a little puzzling.

 

Yeah but you may transfer his question to "Why games preferred visual details to numbers of actors and visibility"? Which is also clear but a bit more interesting to think about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that you dont understand that the visual detail of the planes and the physics calculations are much more elaborate than the original IL2 is a little puzzling.

 

Yes I understand...

 

 the new IL2 is far more complex and makes the old IL2 feel like an arcade game...So in another 10 years the next gen flightsim will make this new IL2 feel like an arcade game?...  the future flightsim will be stuck with the same limitations of a few aircraft in the air and a few ground vehicles because any increase in PC power in the next 10 years will be negated by the complexity of the next sim....and on and on and on the cycle goes...

 

that's my point  - how can we get out of this cycle of the last 15 years where we cannot recreate big historical air battles because of the limits of the sim engine and/or PC power... is there an answer?

 

As things stand this IL2 will not give us a Battle Of Britain theatre add-on as it can't handle large numbers of aircraft and you cant fly over London as it would hit FPS, it can't give as a defence of the Reich theatre add-on again for the same reasons...  So I guess it will be the Mediterranean for the next add-on.. lots of sand and sea and smaller numbers of aircraft and we already have many of the planes used. That will take us to 2018 and then maybe a new engine after that?

 

I mostly play single player and like big immersive campaigns.

 

I will continue to support all the flightsims ....but we can still dream can't we?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The models are probably complex enough for most at this point and DX 12 shows promise of opening up the scenery/environment. The only thing missing at the moment to completely fool a casual onlooker is a bit more reflections. Some of the stills are really quite remarkable.

 

Good SP campaigns depend on good triggers and AI. You don't need every object to be active 100 percent of the time on a map. So that is down to the mission makers more than any particular technical bottlenecks.

 

Both SP and MP need to be able to handle more AI decisions. I'm not sure what opening up the number of AI decisions are based on. That is the key to more complex multiengined bombers and larger numbers of ground vehicles. I'm sure someone here can enlighten us on that detail. That will probably have to be solved quickly if we are headed to Kursk or any of the heavilly mechanized scenarios.

 

With 64 bit and DX 12 this sim may be the one to give us both eyecandy and good numbers in another couple of years. A new engine may not be necessary for quite a while if the computing bottlenecks are solved. We seem to be on a good path for this overall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Investigation on transfer to x64 is going good. x64 version is allready in beta-testing.

Due to its many dependencies this is the best news I've heard so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a 'higher authority' has forbidden the team from including all of Moscow.... I mean, it doesn't do for the Kremlin to be seen to be getting plastered by bombs on a nightly basis by over enthusiastic gamer's, lol!

 

Obvious limitations aside: as per the developer diary. I was actually wondering this exact same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a 'higher authority' has forbidden the team from including all of Moscow.... I mean, it doesn't do for the Kremlin to be seen to be getting plastered by bombs on a nightly basis by over enthusiastic gamer's, lol!

 

 

Obvious limitations aside: as per the developer diary. I was actually wondering this exact same thing.

 

In the old IL2, default version,  it is still not possible to damage the Berlin Reichstag building. Despite all the official patches and updates over the years.

Can't image that German authorities still have any influence on it. Can you imagine , Mutti Merkel in contact with Team Daidalos.  :biggrin:

 

I don't think higher authorities are involved in it. No conspiracy theories.

It is more prosaic, it is a matter of time and resources which makes flying over Moscow city center not possible (yet).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...