IL2 Graphics

[IV./JG51F_Muller]

Frosbite engine anyone? 

 

[LukeFF]

No

[Feathered_IV]

Worst gameplay I've ever seen.

[ZachariasX]

Definitely not.

[69th_chuter]

I believe his reference is to Frostbite 3 game engine not Battlefield 1 game. 

 

 

Looks nice.  I'm not sure how well it would translate over to a vastly more complex physics model type game, but I'm no programmer - lol.

[=EXPEND=Capt_Yorkshire]

looks like a game for kids and simple people.

[Picchio]

CryENGINE, please.

[ZachariasX]

These game engines are utterly useless for a sim. If they make something new, it should be an engine that tolerates a world based on a world geodetoc system like WGS 84. Anything else is just more eyecandy while delivering zero new aspects to gameplay. It's just not worth it drawing everything new for a new engine that is made to look to make the world look good as far as you can spit.

 

If you can map your "gamelevels" on a world, whole new possibilities for gameplay (mission making!) emerge. If you make rivets reflecting more beautifully, you win nothing for gameplay.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Honestly I would hate for graphics to turn out that way. One of the things I genuinely love about this Il-2 is how they managed to make the world look real, and good, without resorting to overly glossy colours and all that jazz. If a golden wheat field is moderately dull and burnt out, that's how it looks in game. If something is beautiful in real life - like Moscow, for example - it will look beautiful in game too.

[coconut]

These smoke plumes... Is there a volcano erupting in the background?

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Ah yes, the legendary Battle of Eyjafjallajökull.

[Picchio]

Honestly I would hate for graphics to turn out that way. One of the things I genuinely love about this Il-2 is how they managed to make the world look real, and good, without resorting to overly glossy colours and all that jazz. If a golden wheat field is moderately dull and burnt out, that's how it looks in game. If something is beautiful in real life - like Moscow, for example - it will look beautiful in game too.

 

Yes, in theory. I think the way DN renders terrain (especially ground "noise", and the way it receives and reflects light) in BoS/BoM is still looking quite synthetic, so to speak...

 

And speaking of glossy, we still have these screen-space reflections making airframes look so silly... I can understand artistic licenses, but eh...

Edited June 19, 2016 by Picchio

[coconut]

One thing to keep in mind is that IL-2 supports weather and any time of day, all without manual intervention. Matches can in theory span over the whole course of a day. FPS game engines, on the other hand, typically do not need to support that. It's quite likely that map designers set a number of lighting parameters manually once they've set the mission start time.

[Trooper117]

Just... awful!

[wtornado]

I would buy Verdun off STEAM at 50% off have been looking at it for a while.

 

Trench warfare at its worst.

 

Not as arcady as BF 1 not even close.

 

http://www.verdungame.com

[AndyJWest]

I wouldn't play that if they paid me...

[Boomerang]

Simulators are the best, forget the rest!

S!

[Picchio]

I understood the thread to be a discussion about graphics, not gameplay. I think that video isn't the best solution to do that, though. Also, the fact that there's a... uhm, plane in it doesn't really mean anything. I like what it can do, but I don't think Frostbite would apply well to a flight simulation. We need an engine much better tailored around the nature of the game/sim. And yes, I do think that right now it isn't... DN needs to be upgraded, but this stuff isn't a solution.

[Original_Uwe]

We already have such an engine in edge

[ZachariasX]

Condensation trails on the wings of a biplane... That [Edited] is just killing me...

[AndyJWest]

Condensation trails on the wings of a biplane... That shit is just killing me...

 

It can happen if the humidity is high enough - I've seen it in a video of Pitts pulling high-G manoeuvres.  Definitely overdone in the PO's video though.

 

Edit: There you go - Smokin_Hole from the SIMHQ forum showing how a Pitts should be flown.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKmEgtObwOw

Edited June 21, 2016 by AndyJWest

[ZachariasX]

I know it can happen, but not by the maneuvers this biplane is doing in the game. BTW, if you fly a Halberstadt like a Pitts, your wings come off at once.

[-NW-ChiefRedCloud]

A Halberstadt CL.II with British marking? Is this taunted as a captured plane or has EA just thrown out the history books on this one ? So you can jump out of the seat and fix the plane. Hum .... really? Wonder why I never read of this in the history books. Look, if you want the game, Battlefield 1, then get the thing. If you like it, then good. But it is a GAME and in no way reflects attempts at Flight simulation. Hell, in my opinion, even War Thunder comes out better than this. But as with certain parts of the body, WE all have opinions.

 

Chief

[ZachariasX]

So you can jump out of the seat and fix the plane

 

Of course you can. Or would you honestly board a Halberstadt CL.II with Britsh markings without a can of super glue to be able to fix potential eventualities? With ACME Super Glue, you're safe:

 

But like this, it works better:

 

 

I kinda like the gfx of that one. Nice FM as well.

 

Z

 

[coyote-edit]

Edited June 21, 2016 by ZachariasX

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

A Halberstadt CL.II with British marking? Is this taunted as a captured plane or has EA just thrown out the history books on this one ?

While I'm not entirely sure after having seen the gameplay yet I think this might have less to do with their decision to throw historical accurancy out the window but they served as substitudes for the yet unfinished british planes (EA has shown screenshots of the Bristol FB 2 and Sopwith Triplane already).

 

Sure the air part is gamey to the point it barely allows for any tactical air combat and the physics are probably out of question too, but at least the aircrafts look very nice and detailed.

 

Don't know why they screwed over with their flight mechanics, found it to be totally fine in BF1942.

[Guest deleted@30725]

Because Bf1942 was more sim than this. These games are just hold and spray bullets, hope for the best. To me all these games look the same. Bf3, 4, hardline, and bf '1'. They all use a similar engine and play almost exactly a like. Look like mods of one game.

 

The cars in 1942 were terrible, and tanks would bounce like cotton wool, but the gun play was slower like ww2 and at the time getting into different stuff was awesome. Ships even.

 

Bf2 Forgotten Hope 2 mod (for bf2) at the time was the best world war experience I ever had in a Battlefield multi re-spawn style of game. Huge, vast maps, long distance skill kills with your k98... ...is that a player, a bush or a texture pixel. One shot deaths made your player valuable. An arcade version of Arma. Shoot, miss, he shoots, misses, christ!, he get out knife and charges, back away, shoot, bloody hell!, shoot. Dead. Phew! Creep through buildings with your enfield with one shot to play with before a re-load hope he's not got a machine gun and knowing that if he has you've got the accuracy.

 

I wouldn't play this modern junk. It's just arcade nonsense for a brain dead saturday night. Skill cap is zero. They had the formula for Bf2. A decent game with mod support and loads of decent mods spawned from it which made people buy the game so they could play the mods and now they close mod support. Make it cash shop in game. I expect with mod support the community could have done better. I'm not missing anything I've not seen a thousand times before and since I played Bf4 and got Bf3 for free when they had an offer I know that those two games are practically clones of each other. Bf4 was pretty good to be fair in that the graphics were impressive. Those buildings falling down and streets blowing up was neat for a while. Hardcore mode was whether the game was fairly fun yet it was still spray and pray a lot of the time and only got it because friends had it, but hardline was trash and battlefront was pretty much trashed with bf 1 looking like a ww1 mod for bf4. So what's the point?

 

I'm gonna play it when someone gives me 1 billion dollars. Ha, ha, haaa, haaa. hi, hi, hi, hi. What? Sorry. Right, inflation - 2 billion dollars! ha, ha, haaa, haaa, haaa.

 

Bf1 - because it's the start of their new lineup of even dumber versions of the game to appeal to even more idiots and make themselves even more money, money, glorious money! 

Edited June 22, 2016 by deleted@30725