Developer Diary #332 Discussion

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

So in the future there will be next GB DLC , collector planes and maybe more DLC in GB series to finance the next project while the development could take years to finish. The next project would be new line of base code, so it would not share content from GB series just brand name. In the end we will have two separate games old  IL 2GB and the new one. This is good plan in action. Only that approach could overcome limitations of current technology.

[Picchio]

I understood that Normandy would be the last DLC (as a complete theater of operations using the current technologies)?

Edited November 10, 2022 by Picchio

[DBS]

14 hours ago, CUJO_1970 said:

In addition, we plan to create several more Collector Planes, which will be the modifications of the various aircraft that exist in the sim.

 

I found this part to be quite interesting, many possibilities for all sides here.

 

Sounds awful, with that logic you'd be paying for another hurricane to get the 40mm vickers instead of getting them as an option.

[Lusekofte]

5 hours ago, drewm3i-VR said:

You are grossly in the minority on that one. Nearly EVERYONE else on here is dying for the pacific.

I am not dying for it, and it is all dependant on  other things. I always wanted early PTO first. 
but if they skip that  I personally would not buy it automatically. 
Too me it is essential they expand it and not just go for one battle. 

28 minutes ago, DBS said:

 

Sounds awful, with that logic you'd be paying for another hurricane to get the 40mm vickers instead of getting them as an option.

Sound like Luthier all over again

[SquashmanMikeEH]

2 hours ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

 

 

If there's some capable 3d modelers and texturers out there, I'm willing to give a Malta map a try (its small size keeps things manageable; it's only a portion of the Lapino map). When fiddling around with the game tools, this is how far I got:

 

Is there any guidance anywhere for map making in Great Battles?

I've made quite a few big maps for IL2 46. Is map making in GB a similar process? 

Edited November 10, 2022 by SquashmanMikeEH

[sevenless]

1 hour ago, Picchio said:

I understood that Normandy would be the last DLC (as a complete theater of operations using the current technologies)?

 

There certainly are some hints to that. We might see clearer once that "next project" will be revealed and if they will still retrofit new tech into the already released BoX modules.

[kendo]

1 hour ago, DBS said:

 

Sounds awful, with that logic you'd be paying for another hurricane to get the 40mm vickers instead of getting them as an option.

 

Pretty certain that is a misreading of what they mean - it's more like the addition of the Spit 14 bubbletop. So a new earlier Stuka variant would be high on that list I would think.

 

A bomber variant of the Mosquito would be good too

[Missionbug]

It is always good to hava a Q&A, meet the team and have their thoughts on a few things but to me it was a little vague, enjoyed the hour though so thank you very much guys really appreciated.

 

There was a lot of mention of the community making maps so will there finally be a SDK released for this series to allow those who have the tools and ability to actually provide content?

 

There were objects made for maps in ROF that seemed to be similar in their make up to what we have here yet Vander mentioned there was no way for him to convert them for FC, what a pity that such stuff has not been included by the team and yet here they are asking for help and collaboration!

 

So then how will it/does it work for anyone with the tools, ability and desire?  Do they submit an idea and if the team likes it they get access or will there be tools made available to everyone? Besides that, if you build a map say does it automatically get added?

 

There was a lot of talk without much clear detail I feel.

 

Anyway, going forward I still hope for something on the Finnish front, that is a long border and could potentially go from Murmansk down to the Gulf without much in the way of cities, much of it was only covered before in the old game by modding so plenty of area there that could be considered as new certainly outside of those countries in the region and all kinds of interesting aircraft that could be used on other existing maps.

 

For those longing for the Pacific, I think that will appear in the new/updated sim they mention going forward, maybe the next DLC stops here in the current series and then a new sim is released.

 

As is always the case these Q&A sessions leave much to ponder so we just keep speculating until the next blue moon or those cows finally come home.

 

 

Take care and be safe.

 

Wishing you all the very best, Pete.

[Luftschiff]

5 hours ago, JG27_Steini said:

Very disappointed that there is never be a update for the radio / message system. It was outdate the day it was released. I dont understand why it was never been touched. I keep getting messages from 10km away and always repeating. The command system barely work and is subject for 1 decade now. They just dont care.

 

What are you talking about? They explicitly and clearly addressed this and said they have to, and will, rewrite the entire AI engine which will allow them in time to make better radio messaging, something that is currently impossible. It is being worked on for the next project. Find the timestamp here https://youtu.be/IDUwADOgLVk?t=3368

 

 

• There is not a brand new or third party engine, it's the same GAME ENGINE but they are rewriting/overhauling several modules, such as the graphics engine part of it. As someone working in the games industry the underlying technology for how to render graphics has changed quite drastically since 2013 and it's almost unavoidable at this point.
• Yes that work could benefit everything, not necessarily automatically across the board (e.g updating to a PBR rendering method would require manual updates of earlier planes). If they decide to move to a brand new project they will likely leave IL2GB as is for stability and resource reasons.
• It's unclear what next project will be, because they explicitly say they will keep doing DLC as usual, but some other statements are oddly vague. Could be language issues. Regardless, the engine is effectively the same.

 

Edited November 10, 2022 by Luftschiff

[sevenless]

6 minutes ago, Missionbug said:

There was a lot of mention of the community making maps so will there finally be a SDK released for this series to allow those who have the tools and ability to actually provide content?

 

An SDK would be great. IMHO the release of Prokhorovka (Tank Crew) without using that map for a single player flight career was a missed opportunity to at least partly model the air battles around the Kursk salient.

[CanadaOne]

2 hours ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

I would say that the concept of one single app for everything is dated. Microsoft tried it with Win8 that could be deployed to everything including tablets and phones; see how that went. If you have two separate goals (i.e. playing and creating missions) that may be related but have a completely different workflow and requirements, it's usually better to keep the apps separate.

 

 

In this case I see integration as being the best option. Mission creation and flying the mission are not so much separate goals as they are symbiotic. Perhaps not everyone who flies will create a mission, but it's 100% that everyone who creates a mission will fly. And the requirement that the sim be shut down and restarted and shut down and restarted and... and... and... for each change to the mission, well, it's no fun at all. It's hugely inefficient and does nothing to incite the average player to get into mission creation.  Not to mention the ME itself, while capable, is overly and unnecessarily complex. 

 

While the sim progresses and looks better and better with each update, the mechanism to make your own flight via the "mission editor" remains stuck. I hope when they update the engine they also make an actual in-game mission editor that is user friendly friendly as well.

[Chief_Mouser]

3 minutes ago, Luftschiff said:

 

What are you talking about? They explicitly and clearly addressed this and said they have to, and will, rewrite the entire AI engine which will allow them in time to make better radio messaging, something that is currently impossible. It is being worked on for the next project. Find the timestamp here https://youtu.be/IDUwADOgLVk?t=3368

 

In general I'm surprised how wildly people misinterpret statements in the video.

• There is not a brand new or third party engine, it's the same GAME ENGINE but they are rewriting/overhauling the graphics engine part of it. As someone working in the games industry the underlying technology for how to render graphics has changed quite drastically since 2013 and it's almost unavoidable at this point.
• Yes that work will benefit everything, not necessarily automatically across the board (e.g updating to a PBR rendering method would require manual updates of earlier planes)
• Nothing said suggests the next installment would not be part of IL2 GB.

 

 

You might have misinterpreted some of it as well. They said plainly that they could not add almost everything that was asked for in the Q&A, then clearly stated that these things will be included in the next DLC. So how is that possible? They are improving, but not replacing, the game engine so that the next iteration will be able to handle these things; nowhere did they say that it would be backwards compatible. If it was they wouldn't have said they couldn't do it to the questions that were asked. I am quite sure that all they've said in the past couple of weeks means that the next iteration of GB will be the something completely different from what we have; in effect a new sim, in a new theatre of operations, with no current aircraft that can be used in it. 

 

Mind you, the Q&A did nothing to dispel the vagueness about what's going on; more wishful thinking than actuality and of course more fuel for the speculation on here.

Cheers.

 

 

[Wardog5711]

Thanks to everyone that took the time to show up. That was a first attempt at something like that for the current IL-2 team and there were some issues right up until we went active. Coordinating across 9 time zones, and two different companies all needing to chat with each other in real time in the background was 'interesting'. And we learned some things that will get improved on the next video chats.

That was also a first for me on many fronts. I have spent my entire work career as a guy in the equipment room or behind the scenes that only talked to my own kind. Other engineers and techs. Being live on camera was not my natural state of being!! But my son has been working in the gaming industry for 10+ years and has been doing streams for a while. He will be giving me some professional pointers on how to engage the live audience and better multi-task the various comm channels.  And I got this text from him after we dropped off : "Boomer figures out the internet!" with lots of smile emoji's.  Hopefully, an old dog can learn new tricks. 

 

 

 

[sevenless]

2 minutes ago, Wardog5711 said:

"Boomer figures out the internet!" with lots of smile emoji's.  Hopefully, an old dog can learn new tricks. 

 

Given the fact that a lot of us guys are in their 50s and even up to their late 60s you did a pretty good job with this new wizard technology stuff ?

[Luftschiff]

1 minute ago, Chief_Mouser said:

 

You might have misinterpreted some of it as well. They said plainly that they could not add almost everything that was asked for in the Q&A, then clearly stated that these things will be included in the next DLC. So how is that possible? They are improving, but not replacing, the game engine so that the next iteration will be able to handle these things; nowhere did they say that it would be backwards compatible. If it was they wouldn't have said they couldn't do it to the questions that were asked. I am quite sure that all they've said in the past couple of weeks means that the next iteration of GB will be the something completely different from what we have; in effect a new sim, in a new theatre of operations, with no current aircraft that can be used in it. 

 

Mind you, the Q&A did nothing to dispel the vagueness about what's going on; more wishful thinking than actuality and of course more fuel for the speculation on here.

Cheers.

 

 

 

 

Well, they said it could not be done now, and that they are rewriting some core systems which would make it possible. Assuming this work is done on the same branch it would indeed be backwards compatible. Rewriting the render tech would require manual updates as I said, but wouldn't in any way necessitate throwing the old models and FMs aside. However, as you say it is indeed possible and occasionally hinted that it might be a completely fresh branch, new SKU, new game effectively. It's not impossible that the rewrites are so extensive it is easier for them to leave IL2GB on support as is, and start anew. On that point they're still pretty contradictory and vague but having relistened to the stream 4 times now, I'm starting to think you're right. 

[Sneaksie]

3 hours ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

If there's some capable 3d modelers and texturers out there, I'm willing to give a Malta map a try (its small size keeps things manageable; it's only a portion of the Lapino map). When fiddling around with the game tools, this is how far I got:

 

 

That's nice and the fact you did it by trial and error is impressive! By the way, at the moment we're working on the map making workflow documentation.

[Yankee_One]

I wanted to thank you Albert and Daniel for being so open and telling us what happend now, whats going on for the future. 

 

Sure it would  be cool to have drop tanks, but on the other hand i must say, what great work you all have done. Look the varaiety of planes.

Fantastic job. I love this sim and i enjoy it every time.

 

This streaming was absolutely great and informing.

 

Thanks!

 

 

Edited November 10, 2022 by Yankee_One

[Ribbon]

36 minutes ago, Wardog5711 said:

Thanks to everyone that took the time to show up. That was a first attempt at something like that for the current IL-2 team and there were some issues right up until we went active. Coordinating across 9 time zones, and two different companies all needing to chat with each other in real time in the background was 'interesting'. And we learned some things that will get improved on the next video chats.

That was also a first for me on many fronts. I have spent my entire work career as a guy in the equipment room or behind the scenes that only talked to my own kind. Other engineers and techs. Being live on camera was not my natural state of being!! But my son has been working in the gaming industry for 10+ years and has been doing streams for a while. He will be giving me some professional pointers on how to engage the live audience and better multi-task the various comm channels.  And I got this text from him after we dropped off : "Boomer figures out the internet!" with lots of smile emoji's.  Hopefully, an old dog can learn new tricks. 

 

 

 

You did great and do great job here, best out of CM i've yet seen, like working for us community not the devs....keep up the good work!

 

Now regarding DD and stream;

1.Loft's enthusiasm is encouraging

2.Looking forward to new engine overhaul

3.Very disappointed B25/B26 are basically of the chart

4.PTO being off charts too as next project also is disappointing but i hope it will be annpunced in a few yeara top.

5.Pilot-water surface intercourse fix in new version is welcome and somewhat gives hint next project will contain sea mass.

5.Please rethink about B25/26 and give them to us as collectors.

[T24_Martin]

@Wardog5711 and team, 

 

I really enjoyed the stream it was fun, interesting and exiting to hear about the challenges and greater plan. Especially the excitement of the team was fantastic!

 

In my opinion it would be good, if you or the team could clarify some points, that lead to discussions here. Especially what a new engine means for the current BOX titles, as well as the announced collector planes. Nothing in detail, just a general direction...

 

Will they be updated and included?

All in one game wit a modern set and an old in parallel?

Or will it end in having to different games?

 

Thanks for your support!

 

[AEthelraedUnraed]

2 hours ago, SquashmanMikeEH said:

Is there any guidance anywhere for map making in Great Battles?

I've made quite a few big maps for IL2 46. Is map making in GB a similar process? 

I don't know how map making in 1946 worked, but for GB a map basically consists of the following:

- a greyscale heightmap (black: lowest point, white: highest point).

- a black/white water map (black: no water, white: water).

- a black/white forest map (black: no forest, white: forest).

- a black/white "forest exclusion" map, to e.g. remove trees lining the roads (black: trees are not removed, white: trees are removed).

- an RGB texturemap (sets the base texture for each 800x800m tile).

- woods.wds, which defines the markup of the randomly generated trees inside woods (i.e. which tree models, how many trees, etc).

- a .tini file that link the texturemap colours to textures, defines the used terrain shader andsets some other textures.

- a .hini file that defines most of the things regarding the actual makeup of the terrain (links to the .wtr files, has a multiplier for the heightmap, defines the actual coordinates of the map, etc.).

- .ini files for the roads, which are basically just the coordinates of the road "waypoints".

- surface.dat files that define texture overlays for airfields, villages, additional roads, etc.

- .mesh files, that seem to do the same thing as surface.dat but use a different format that I haven't been able to read yet.

 

The various maps can be converted by a couple of tools to the .wtr files the game needs. I cannot remember where I found them; I think on the Russian forum after some creative Googling. Everything can be edited with the available tools and loaded in the editor, but you cannot play edited heightmaps in-game (the second image above, in-game, uses the default Lapino heightmap but because of my high altitude you don't really notice ).

 

But I'm sure that the map making docs Sneaksie mentions are much better than I'd be able to provide

 

1 hour ago, Sneaksie said:

That's nice and the fact you did it by trial and error is impressive! By the way, at the moment we're working on the map making workflow documentation.

Thanks! Although I'm sure you'll agree that making the terrain itself is the easiest part. For a map such as Malta, you'd need additional buildings as the western Europe ones don't quite fit. Same thing for some landmarks such as the various forts. If anyone would be willing to make those, I'm sure the rest could be sorted out

Edited November 10, 2022 by AEthelraedUnraed

[RNAS10_Mitchell]

2 hours ago, DBS said:

 

Sounds awful, with that logic you'd be paying for another hurricane to get the 40mm vickers instead of getting them as an option.

I don't know.  They obviously need to be able to generate some revenue while they are busy working on the next big thing.  "Big thing" development life cycle is many months (1-3 years).  That being the case, I'm ok with it.  Certainly want them to be able to stay financially viable.  This seems to me like a good way to generate some revenue.  On the plus side, it would mean they would be revisiting older planes on a semi regular basis, which would also provide them with an opportunity to train new people on stuff, and possibly discover/fix any exciting issues they might discover during the whole process.  

[DN308]

31 minutes ago, =VARP=Ribbon said:

 

3.Very disappointed B25/B26 are basically of the chart

 

5.Please rethink about B25/26 and give them to us as collectors.

Very disappointed is not a strong enough word to express what I feel.

It seems to me that the expectations of a good part of the players have not been heard.

 

And I strongly support the point 5 above.

Having at least one of these two beasts is what I expect the most

[Hypertexthero]

Good stream with good vibes!

My wild guess for the next theater in the series: Greece!

[Trooper117]

 

[JG4_Moltke1871]

Interesting to see that a new Game at all with new engine is possible. But for me it opens more questions than answers. Most important about that: If really a new engine starts, how is the impact for Flying Circus? The announced three parts are not finished…. Will a FC 3 still developed with old engine? Or will be there a compatibility? They talked about the fuel system and announced it for the new module. So they decided to cancel it for the old modules? That would be a great disappointment… The stream at all is a good idea but in this case it's more confusing than enlightening.

[Gunbus]

I am going Korean war  because thay are staying with piston Engines and jets ilke the ME-262 AR-243  also thay was talking about fuel system and Drop tanks  so Aircraft wise F7F Tigercat Hawker sea fury FB.11 Skyraider F-86 Sabre  fairey firefly A-26B-51 Invader F-51D Mustang 

Edited November 10, 2022 by Gunbus

[creamersdream]

How come there is no mention of drop tanks anymore? 

[jojy47jojyrocks]

14 minutes ago, creamersdream said:

How come there is no mention of drop tanks anymore? 

 

It is very briefly mentioned in the video. A bit vague mention, though...

 

Edited November 10, 2022 by jojy47jojyrocks

[Avimimus]

8 minutes ago, jojy47jojyrocks said:

It is very briefly mentioned in the video. I believe it is still in progress and on overhaul among other things that are also on overhaul.

 

Yes. It was mentioned when they were discussing how a surprising amount of R&D is required (as they simulate things for which there aren't standard solutions in the industry), so sometimes the first implementation of a system fails and they have to go back to the drawing board. They also said that solutions were learned and we'd eventually get drop tanks.

 

They also mentioned that we'd be able to survive bailing out over water or ditching, but that they weren't sure about how survivors would be rendered as the water implementation they are using is optimised for rendering at long distances and wouldn't be ideal for a swimming person.

[Wardog5711]

Hmmm.... I'd like to be rendered in a similar fashion if I am forced to ditch:

 

 

[Robli]

4 hours ago, 216th_Lusekofte said:

Sound like Luthier all over again

 

How does that sound like Luthier? I don't remember him doing a project, where modifications of existing planes would be sold separately or have I missed something?

[Koziolek]

2 minutes ago, Wardog5711 said:

Hmmm.... I'd like to be rendered in a similar fashion if I am forced to ditch:

 

 

only if you fly  a two seater ?

what about us poor fighter blokes

[Robli]

3 minutes ago, Koziolek said:

what about us poor fighter blokes

 

Now that Luthier was mentioned, the man was visionary and had a solution for that, too. Screenshot from CloD:

[dburne]

7 hours ago, JG27_Steini said:

Very disappointed that there is never be a update for the radio / message system. It was outdate the day it was released. I dont understand why it was never been touched. I keep getting messages from 10km away and always repeating. The command system barely work and is subject for 1 decade now. They just dont care.

 

Good point.

[DougW]

I am not knowledgeable regarding how computers utilize system resources but is it feasible to design the new gaming system to adjust to a individual's PC? PC RAM and GPU RAM are getting fasting and increasing in size and/or you have the ability to decide the the amount of RAM you want.  Example: GPUs tend to come with 12gbs of GPU RAM and larger and PC RAM can be 32gbs to 128gbs or more.  When I'm flying IL-2, my system uses maybe 10% of RAM and my GPU uses about 3gbs of GPU RAM.  My system has much more than that and due to my limited knowledge regarding efficiency of using my PC RAM and GPU RAM, I'm thinking I would like to dictate to the game to use more of my RAM/GPU RAM in order to have a smoother flying experience or as mentioned earlier, not have issues when the game has a large number of aircraft flying around. So having a settings option where we can direct the game to use so much PC RAM and so much GPU RAM.  Does this even make sense?

 

from a ignorant pilot.

[CosmiC10R]

i ended up waking up at 2am and it came up in my youtube feed so i watched it.

 

It was quite enjoyable to watch so thanks all for the effort and I'm excited for what comes.

I wondered about the AI too because it seems like it should be possible but I have done some modding in other games and run into some of the same hurdles where it seems easy on paper but becomes almost impossible to do in game for various reasons.

 

In Assetto Corsa I converted the Vancouver track and the engine won't allow the AI tracks that the AI follow to be too close for whatever reason so anytime you entered the pits (because it was so close to where the cars went the other direction up the back straight), literally seperated by a concrete barrier) it would say wrong direction because of the engine issue so I ended up having to give up on complete accuracy to make it playable.

 

The explanation given helped me understand a bit why it isnt a couple lines of code.

 

I excited for the future too and am really looking forward to the c47.

Edited November 10, 2022 by CosmiC10R

[creamersdream]

Hopefully the new project stays in the WW2 time frame. I'm not a huge fan of the jet era its to modern for me. Nothing interesting about flying jets. 

[RNAS10_Mitchell]

Sounds like a lot of forward thinking, planning, and action going on there Han. A+ and glad to hear all that.  Gotta stay ahead of the curve and sure sounds like you guys are on that big time.

 

FC updates and releases sound very exciting and promising.  

 

IMO, very positive DD.  Thanks for the info, and I'm looking forward to great things from the IL2 team.

12 minutes ago, creamersdream said:

Hopefully the new project stays in the WW2 time frame. I'm not a huge fan of the jet era its to modern for me. Nothing interesting about flying jets. 

Agreed.  

[Denum]

I loved the stream!

 

Please continue with these! 

 

You guys had me laughing quite a bit with your joking around and having fun. Lots of great information also. 

 

 

[Wardog5711]

Thanks.

It is a work in progress.  There were so many subjects/questions collected just on this forum and Discord that it would have taken hours to address them all.

And the areas of interest covered by this series is so vast that doing so in the level of detail expected by a lot of folks would not be possible in the time allotted for these things. 

I know everyone wants to know what the next DLC will be. Me too. But obviously that is not at a point that can/will be discussed publicly. 

If I had any authorized, actionable intel, I would happily share it. But no matter what it eventually turns out to be, somebody will be happy and others will be unhappy.

As my son constantly reminds me, 'Welcome to Gamer world'.  ?