Would you pay for new, better optimized game engine

[LukeFF]

7 hours ago, Feathered_IV said:

In SP, two squadrons of twelve aircraft meeting in combat is enough to be a bit iffy with the current game engine.  

 

Not hardly. If you're seeing problems with that number of planes, then it's probably a problem with old hardware.

[TWC_Ace]

51 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

Not hardly. If you're seeing problems with that number of planes, then it's probably a problem with old hardware.

Ribbon from our squadron has a super powerfull rig so he can elaborate more on how it really matters. Everybody experience problems with performance here and there but I agree that some standards must be met but it also depends if one is using VR or not, is he playing at 1080p or more.

Edited December 21, 2020 by =VARP=Tvrdi

[Feathered_IV]

3 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

Not hardly. If you're seeing problems with that number of planes, then it's probably a problem with old hardware.

What about a relatively small bombing raid by WW2 standards.  Say, thirty bombers protected by an equal number of fighters with perhaps twelve to sixteen aircraft intercepting.  Maybe twenty flak guns.   How would that go?

[cardboard_killer]

40 minutes ago, Feathered_IV said:

How would that go?

It . . . . . . .  . . .. would ...............................go .     . . ............ .... like

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

......th........isssssssssss.

[LukeFF]

2 hours ago, Feathered_IV said:

What about a relatively small bombing raid by WW2 standards.  Say, thirty bombers protected by an equal number of fighters with perhaps twelve to sixteen aircraft intercepting.  Maybe twenty flak guns.   How would that go?

 

Been there, done that, got the t-shirt - Jaegermeister's P-38 campaign is very heavy on the air and ground objects, and it handles things quite well. 

[CanadaOne]

7 hours ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

The Felix stove was a big boost for that game

 

 

I don't know what that is.

 

The game had style though, nice variety of planes. Kinda neat that you could buy a nice plane for $2 on sale. Or a scarf for $1. 

[DD_Arthur]

29 minutes ago, CanadaOne said:

I don't know what that is.

 

The Felix stove?  A great plane.  You could bomb the sh#t outta people and then offer 'em blankets and directions to the Falkland Islands while they took to the boats.

 

 

It gives you a warm...er, wet feeling

[CanadaOne]

24 minutes ago, DD_Arthur said:

 

The Felix stove?  A great plane.  You could bomb the sh#t outta people and then offer 'em blankets and directions to the Falkland Islands while they took to the boats.

 

 

It gives you a warm...er, wet feeling

 

Oh yeah, I had that plane. I pretty much had them all I think.

 

Warm and wet... oh my! 

[AndyJWest]

Now that's an aeroplane for the authentic VR-induced-nausea experience. 

 

Seriously though, the RoF Felixstowe is a masterpiece. 

[Lusekofte]

8 hours ago, CanadaOne said:

don't know what that is.

 

It is a Felixstowe gone through my new Motorola spelling control. It came along with channel map. You could even arm it with a cannon. I never looked back after that  I flew it all the time. 

Now, I have not the faintest idea why we ain't seeing a floatplane in GB, when so many was in ROF. It might got something to do with ROF economy , with planes being source of income and not packs with maps

[Trooper117]

It won't turn up unless they do an FC with the channel map in it... at present rate of progress, that could be in about 4 years time!

[Dutch2]

A new game engine for an specific use like MP, does also mean a new game engine overall, so it will be an new series of IL-2 games like we have now RoF vs FC, a kind of IL-3. That decision would eventually lead BoX to the corner were now RoF is, in an abandoned state. If I do take a look at al the collectors of badges here, I think it will be an horrifying story for those who spent that huge amount of money on all the IL2 pre-orders. That repeating of leaving a game series, like in RoF, is absolutely not good for the image of 1C. 

But eventually they have to go for something of a new game engine, as it do shows its age and not wanting to end like Wings: over Flandres fields or Wings: over the Reich.  

 

note to TS: why not use WT and WoWpl as it seems they do have an specific game engine for online combat. Never did play these games but could be a solution to your request. 

Edited December 23, 2020 by Dutch2

[TWC_Ace]

12 hours ago, Dutch2 said:

A new game engine for an specific use like MP, does also mean a new game engine overall, so it will be an new series of IL-2 games like we have now RoF vs FC, a kind of IL-3. That decision would eventually lead BoX to the corner were now RoF is, in an abandoned state. If I do take a look at al the collectors of badges here, I think it will be an horrifying story for those who spent that huge amount of money on all the IL2 pre-orders. That repeating of leaving a game series, like in RoF, is absolutely not good for the image of 1C. 

But eventually they have to go for something of a new game engine, as it do shows its age and not wanting to end like Wings: over Flandres fields or Wings: over the Reich.  

 

note to TS: why not use WT and WoWpl as it seems they do have an specific game engine for online combat. Never did play these games but could be a solution to your request. 

But tell me one thing....one day it will be Pacific theatre (after all the "safe options" are spent). And what then? How do you thing this engine will handle carriers, so many planes around landing etc? This sim with its current engine cannot expand alot without issues....This can be an end...

My guess is that this is exactly what will happen. They will make/use new engine, we will have completely new game in, lets say, PTO and other new theatres.

Edited December 23, 2020 by =VARP=Tvrdi

[Pikestance]

This is a poorly thought out pipe dream. The current development will take at least three years to developed (FC2 and BON). Moreover, I am guessing Tank Crew will get another addition as well. Jason only mentioned  a "New" engine if they developed PTO. I would imagine they would continue to developed both sets of games in that case. Lastly, given some of the recent updates, it doesn't appear they are nearly done with this engine. 

 

Final note; this game as always focused on the microcosm of combat, not a close proximate to the real thing. Th developer's tendency is to increase the level of detail per plane. In other words, if new engine, then expect greater realism and detail per plane, and not necessarily more planes on missions. This a small development team with limited resources. If you want something else, then you need to go somewhere else to get it. They have their niche. They are not going to abandon it to compete with a pre-established group. 

[Dutch2]

10 hours ago, =VARP=Tvrdi said:

But tell me one thing....one day it will be Pacific theatre (after all the "safe options" are spent). And what then? How do you thing this engine will handle carriers, so many planes around landing etc? This sim with its current engine cannot expand alot without issues....This can be an end...

My guess is that this is exactly what will happen. They will make/use new engine, we will have completely new game in, lets say, PTO and other new theatres.

 

I do not know if the PTO needs another game engine, if staying at the actual level, think its more 1C needs better software engineers for doing the game optimization.   Only if wanting to go further and do take the much needed level up road (FS2020 realism level) they needed one. But if they going to introduce a new game engine, BoX will be abandoned, like Rof. Guess thats also the dilemma phase 1C is now going to deal with. So be aware like you have every badge from the BoX series, I did warned you. ?

[simfan2015]

From all I have read the problem in case of il-2 GB is not so much its game engine but people buying underpowered pc configs and expecting miracles. Of course if a 'game engine' was not designed for a certain implementation (like +100 bombers? ) then that is a problem if e. g. BoN was set out to have this... but it probably won't be featured. Problems may arise 2 or more years from now when Jason would decide on PTO, BoB...? , but by then we will still be able to fully enjoy GB just as much as people are still enjoying 1946 as wel as RoF up to this day. GB will still be unique at what it offers.... the first and second war in the European and the Eastern theaters. That is, to me and IMHO , far more important than any game engine... the game content ! 

 

. 

[Ribbon]

I7 10700k 5.0ghz, evga 3080 ftw3 ultra, rift S.

Taking of from crowded airfield fps dips down from 80 to 35fps at moments.

This game engine is only for small sterile dogfight engagements.

It's a shame game isn't evolving in gameplay aspect making it boring and repetitive in both SP and MP.

It's called il2 Great Battles yet it can't sustain 20planes and 20 units at one place without becoming unplayable.

How will D day look like, few planes and few ships?

I'd rather resources and manpower being focused on bringing fully fleshed product (medium bombers, engine that can sustain grater battles, torpedos...etc) instead of trucks and two other titles that have same problems.

This is the reason i stoped buying all available content and giving full support!

 

 

[simfan2015]

@VARP Ribbon. You are wright that il-2 bogs down when a lot is going on in a mission... The same goes for a. o. DCS. This can be due to api, lack multi core support etc, but also depends on what is modeled. I can imagine that war thunder has less problem than dcs because of complexity of systems, graphics etc. BTW those 35 fps is great if there really is a lot going on... You have a great setup. 2 years from now when we have yet another generation of cpu and GPU this may all get 'solved'.... without a game engine update. BTW rewriting the engine as it is referred to won't be easy... The DCS is supposedly being rewritten... but after a number of years still nothing to show AFAIK. The main thing I wanted to say is... all this won't be easy.... Imho good or bad engineers and or intentions has very little to do with it. 

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

On 12/20/2020 at 10:59 AM, =VARP=NeedForWD40 said:

I would love to play singleplayer but it goes in slo-mo during game, both in scripted missions  and dynamic campaign modes, while fps is perfect, real world clock is out of sync with the one in the game, like the bullet time is on. Multiplayer works perfect in most cases except when there is server issues, and in QM there is 8 planes max on the opposite side and it works well, at least to me, but it is only 8 planes. And that leaves us that we as a group have to pull straws wich one will play because there is no room for full squadron on most servers.

P.S.

I think that this game has the best flight model, damage model, immersion with its blackouts and readouts which i really like, and it looks great.

 

This is a bug called time warping. It is a type of stuttering. Turn off vsync and it goes away. I had it too and enabling 4k textures, setting the target framerate and turning vsync off fixed it.

On 12/23/2020 at 9:48 PM, [=PzG=]-FlyinPinkPanther said:

This is a poorly thought out pipe dream. The current development will take at least three years to developed (FC2 and BON). Moreover, I am guessing Tank Crew will get another addition as well. Jason only mentioned  a "New" engine if they developed PTO. I would imagine they would continue to developed both sets of games in that case. Lastly, given some of the recent updates, it doesn't appear they are nearly done with this engine. 

 

Final note; this game as always focused on the microcosm of combat, not a close proximate to the real thing. Th developer's tendency is to increase the level of detail per plane. In other words, if new engine, then expect greater realism and detail per plane, and not necessarily more planes on missions. This a small development team with limited resources. If you want something else, then you need to go somewhere else to get it. They have their niche. They are not going to abandon it to compete with a pre-established group. 

They honestly should've just kept the CLOD engine and fixed it. CLoD runs 100 planes in huge battles at over 100 fps on ultra on my i7-9750h, 16 gb, rtx 2070 max q laptop in 1080p. While the AI doesn't use the same flight model, it is more competent, but CLoD doesn't have VR so I'm out for now.

[Cynic_Al]

That is a fundamental requirement for any multiplayer game, and any that doesn't meet it should be working towards it as a priority.  Nobody should be asked to pay extra for a standard feature, nor would they be.

 

Don't ask a question the developers wouldn't ask for themselves.

 

If you can find them, listen to the Q&A sessions Jason has hosted.  On more than one occasion he was taken to task on the netcode issue.

[Cynic_Al]

On 12/22/2020 at 3:38 AM, AndyJWest said:

Seriously though, the RoF Felixstowe is a masterpiece. 

 

Since you mention it, that's true provided one overlooks the embarrassing mistake they made with the positioning of the rudder bars, which would be impossible to operate.   

[Ribbon]

On 26. 12. 2020. at 11:24 PM, simfan2015 said:

@VARP Ribbon. You are wright that il-2 bogs down when a lot is going on in a mission... The same goes for a. o. DCS. This can be due to api, lack multi core support etc, but also depends on what is modeled. I can imagine that war thunder has less problem than dcs because of complexity of systems, graphics etc. BTW those 35 fps is great if there really is a lot going on... You have a great setup. 2 years from now when we have yet another generation of cpu and GPU this may all get 'solved'.... without a game engine update. BTW rewriting the engine as it is referred to won't be easy... The DCS is supposedly being rewritten... but after a number of years still nothing to show AFAIK. The main thing I wanted to say is... all this won't be easy.... Imho good or bad engineers and or intentions has very little to do with it. 

Not saying il2 devs are bad or not capable, in fact this is one of the best dev studios when it comes to communication with community and fixing things.

Not that i know anything about game development but from customer perspective engine is quite limited in MP as well in SP even with high end hw.

Performance problems in MP are daily thing, for server and clients. 

I just think little is missing for il2GB to be top notch flight sim both for MP and SP taking in mind reasonable expetations.....engine optimization, AI optimization and some medium bombers providing variety of gameplay.

 

My 2¢!

 

 

[II./JG77_Manu*]

I would definitely pay for it.

It is a shame, that it seems that it's mostly "Sims" (not exclusively flight sims) that have the worst engines, mostly relying on CPU single core performance, which really shouldn't be the case in 2021. 

Even with a quite decent rig I can't manage a constant 90 fps in IL2 (same goes for DCS) in VR. While in racing sims it doesn't bother me at all to use reprojection, I just can't stand it in flight combat sims. 

Right now I am "bound" to War Thunder, Elite and Star Wars Squadrons when wanting to fly in VR. I would definitely pay for an optimized engine that doesn't have problems running at 90 fps with a bit of stuff going on. 

On 12/26/2020 at 11:24 PM, simfan2015 said:

@VARP Ribbon. You are wright that il-2 bogs down when a lot is going on in a mission... The same goes for a. o. DCS. This can be due to api, lack multi core support etc, but also depends on what is modeled. I can imagine that war thunder has less problem than dcs because of complexity of systems, graphics etc. BTW those 35 fps is great if there really is a lot going on... You have a great setup. 2 years from now when we have yet another generation of cpu and GPU this may all get 'solved'.... without a game engine update. BTW rewriting the engine as it is referred to won't be easy... The DCS is supposedly being rewritten... but after a number of years still nothing to show AFAIK. The main thing I wanted to say is... all this won't be easy.... Imho good or bad engineers and or intentions has very little to do with it. 

Yeah, War Thunder runs smooth as perfect on my Reverb G2 with 100% at 90fps, even when I can see 30 aircraft in close proximity. That's what I expect from a flight sim in 2021.

I couldn't care less about the complexity of AI models if an engine can't even manage to show more then a handful at the same time without bogging down. It should be a war sim and not a museum after all. If I want to see perfect 1:1 modelling and systems, I go into the museum.

35 fps is unfortunately absolutely unacceptable when flying in VR, for me even 60 fps is unacceptable. And a new generation of CPU won't change too much in that regard, because the single core performance is only rising about 20-30% per generation, and that isn't nearly enough to change much. It is really only a new engine, using all cores properly, that could solve this.

 

Edited January 26, 2021 by II./JG77_Manu*

[Avimimus]

On 12/20/2020 at 10:11 AM, 1PL-Husar-1Esk said:

Pay who ?

 

I should think the big question is 'pay how'?

 

By repurchasing all modules? By having some features of the executable be 'locked' or limited unless one pays to unlock them (e.g. having the plane count limited unless one purchases a 'platinum' edition of some sort)? By crowd funding a million dollars?

 

On 12/21/2020 at 9:43 AM, CanadaOne said:

I have to say, I really enjoyed the Channel map in RoF. That was a big boost to the game.

 

Yeah - it was brilliant - here is hoping for an FCIV!

 

On 12/20/2020 at 10:15 AM, 40plus said:

pointless thread is pointless

 

Yeah... but if people on this forum stopped doing and saying things that were pointless... this place would be a lot more of a ghost town...

 

On 12/21/2020 at 12:56 PM, LukeFF said:

Not hardly. If you're seeing problems with that number of planes, then it's probably a problem with old hardware.

 

I could see that... but it is also true that there are significant limits on any hardware - and there are also probably some very clever (and expensive) optimisations that could be done... if the developers could spend a fortune on a single feature.

Edited January 27, 2021 by Avimimus

[Ghost666]

2 hours ago, Avimimus said:

 

Yeah... but if people on this forum stopped doing and saying things that were pointless... this place would be a lot more of a ghost town...

Ok, what's wrong with a town full of ghosts. Just maybe some of us like towns with spirits. ?

[II./JG77_Manu*]

13 hours ago, Avimimus said:

 

Yeah... but if people on this forum stopped doing and saying things that were pointless... this place would be a lot more of a ghost town...

While the poll itself really is pointless - I also have no idea how you would wanna pay for a new engine per se, I rather see it as: buy all the modules, when the game get's a new engine - , it definitely raises the right questions: that a new engine really is needed to get a sim that's up to the 20's, especially for VR

[Avimimus]

As much as I may be tempted to agree with you... the fact that you react to the poll with a 'no' explaining your vote against it suggests it is meaningful (at least from the perspective of the poll, if not that of the devs). I find that conclusion hard to avoid.

[I.JG3_CDRSEABEE]

With these new "chiplets" maybe the CPU/GPU game will change. Sounds like they can make much larger processing units with the "chiplets" Then we can just continue on....

[Missionbug]

Polls will always be useful I think to gather ideas and flesh out arguments for and against, they also give us things to discuss even if some cross the same

ground many times.

 

Development teams will to a large extent have a clear idea how they want to proceed, however, having polls will give them alternatives to think about and possibly implement if they are not overtly technical or costly.

 

Most I think will except a higher cost to bring improvements, to me this series is ridiculously under priced for the amount of content and updates that have come our way over the years but it is the model the team prefer that unfortunately means some long standing issues are without a fix, the question really is do they continuously try to update or move to a brand new engine and content, there are some who will think upgrades should come anyway and these should not entail further cost, difficult to know what way to go as asking the community to pay again for content they already have ( i.e., R.O.F.) could reduce the amount of finance available if folks opt out.

 

Take care and be safe.

 

Wishing you all the very best, Pete.

Edited January 28, 2021 by Missionbug