nscode Posted June 7, 2006 Posted June 7, 2006 Everyone complains about frame rates being slow in other fields of the game, but it seems that the hud is actually uber-instant-responsive, while all RL videos show HUDs being slightly slugish and skippie. Also, one thing i noticed in that BS video: if you look at the hud's artificial horizon line, that is now western-style, the 0* horizon line doesn't appear stuck to the horizon, but to be not scaled properly, like in some bad MSFS addons. Is this becouse of the filming angle or stuff, or is it like that on sharky and how will we have it in the game? Never forget that World War III was not Cold for most of us.
VMFA117_Poko Posted June 7, 2006 Posted June 7, 2006 Also, one thing i noticed in that BS video: if you look at the hud's artificial horizon line, that is now western-style, the 0* horizon line doesn't appear stuck to the horizon, but to be not scaled properly, like in some bad MSFS addons. Is this becouse of the filming angle or stuff, or is it like that on sharky and how will we have it in the game? Good point!
Pilotasso Posted June 7, 2006 Posted June 7, 2006 I'd rather keep the smooth HUD because otherwise after exposed to the game for several hours it will give ya a head ache. .
Force_Feedback Posted June 7, 2006 Posted June 7, 2006 I've read an article in Russian how the devs that did the software for the ka-50 faced a problem, the CPUs for the HUD interface were shared with the weapon control system, the fps of the HUD dropped to 12 fps (seen in the 3-split screen video at patrick's that I uploaded). The military didn't accept such a low framerate, and installing new processors was too much of a hassle. The software developers started optimizing the code, and raised the fps to 24 in two weeks, and two weeks later they reached 30 fps. On the same hardware they almost doubled the fps, now, ED could learn from those dudes. So, the fps was low, but is "high" now, of course, the fps of the HUD is probably linked to the fps on the main screen in lockon. Creedence Clearwater Revival:worthy:
nscode Posted June 7, 2006 Author Posted June 7, 2006 Cool. Now Harrier developers could do the same :) Never forget that World War III was not Cold for most of us.
Force_Feedback Posted June 7, 2006 Posted June 7, 2006 Cool. Now Harrier developers could do the same :) Or the developers that plan to develop the Harrier in a certain combat flight sumulation ;) Creedence Clearwater Revival:worthy:
Shaman Posted June 7, 2006 Posted June 7, 2006 (...)On the same hardware they almost doubled the fps, now, ED could learn from those dudes. So, the fps was low, but is "high" now, of course, the fps of the HUD is probably linked to the fps on the main screen in lockon. If ED could only drop those broken pixel shaded special effects that screw up performance totally. But nooo. They'll add even more of 'em. Plus 3D rendered trees that bend with wind etc.. omg.. We still barely run LockOn nowadays when there's real stuff going on. I have little hopes that next project will be optimized and we can do much more within this sim then just play simple missions where there's just little destruction involved. 51PVO Founding member (DEC2007-) 100KIAP Founding member (DEC2018-) :: Shaman aka [100☭] Shamansky tail# 44 or 444 [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] 100KIAP Regiment Early Warning & Control officer
Pilotasso Posted June 7, 2006 Posted June 7, 2006 ED said they are working on several fronts with experimetal sruff such as Multi CPU suport shader 3.0 but wich wont yet happen in 1.2 BS. .
Xealot Posted June 7, 2006 Posted June 7, 2006 Everyone complains about frame rates being slow in other fields of the game, but it seems that the hud is actually uber-instant-responsive, while all RL videos show HUDs being slightly slugish and skippie. This is something that i've been thinking about aswell, I dont claim to know anything about aircrafts but judging from pictures i've seen of HUD shots clearly shows that the hud presented in lock-on is too clear.. another thing that did come to my mind aswell, I've seen some HUD shots of the mig-29 (i think)/F-15 but its very different from the one we are seeing in lock-on, the huds on those pics i have seen tends to be very much more simplified.. is it true that the HUDs we are seeing are different and more detailled than those a you would see on the real deal? or maybe they are modelled very realisticly and im just talking shit atm :music_whistling: The community newbie http://winsbydefault.com/pics/dctf1ibxh7.gif Replace this image! It's too big! © Administration (max size: 150pix height, 50kb)
Sleek Posted June 7, 2006 Posted June 7, 2006 I'd rather keep the smooth HUD because otherwise after exposed to the game for several hours it will give ya a head ache. take a break Pilotasso..not good to sit in front of ya monitor for several hour's :cry: (as if u need to be told that lol ) :thumbup: Be Good..Be Strong..:drink: ;)
Pilotasso Posted June 7, 2006 Posted June 7, 2006 well, its still not as good as having a smooth HUD no matter how long or how short the exposure is. And I have a 19" LCD display. Not that I have playing more than 2 hours a day anyway. :) .
ALDEGA Posted June 7, 2006 Posted June 7, 2006 I've read an article in Russian how the devs that did the software for the ka-50 faced a problem, the CPUs for the HUD interface were shared with the weapon control system, the fps of the HUD dropped to 12 fps (seen in the 3-split screen video at patrick's that I uploaded). That was indeed a terrible framerate on the HUD. Almost wondered if ED would put that in LOBS *lol* Btw, why would it have been such a problem to add a CPU? Are they so special/expensive? (taking into account the price of the entire Ka-50)
Force_Feedback Posted June 7, 2006 Posted June 7, 2006 That was indeed a terrible framerate on the HUD. Almost wondered if ED would put that in LOBS *lol* Btw, why would it have been such a problem to add a CPU? Are they so special/expensive? (taking into account the price of the entire Ka-50) They didn't have the time to upgrade the system before some deadline set by the military boys, and they were the ones wanting 25 fps+ in the first place. I know the ka-50 has a modular design, also electronics wise, but I guess cost played a role as well, as developing new cpus would need some time and $$$. So, the ka-50 now has a statisfactory hud frame rate, without new hardware. The HUD in-game looks pretty much spot on, compared to the real thing, symbology wise (whose rectangular surfces, gun targeting). Creedence Clearwater Revival:worthy:
Witchking Posted June 7, 2006 Posted June 7, 2006 If ED could only drop those broken pixel shaded special effects that screw up performance totally. But nooo. They'll add even more of 'em. Plus 3D rendered trees that bend with wind etc.. omg.. We still barely run LockOn nowadays when there's real stuff going on. I have little hopes that next project will be optimized and we can do much more within this sim then just play simple missions where there's just little destruction involved. loL! I agree buddy. Personally I would love ED entirely drop the 'heavy' engine and take up using the pacific fighters engine. I love the gfx in that sim...meh...here let me post a shot of it. :D WHISPR | Intel I7 5930K | Nvidia GTX980 4GB GDDR5 | 16GB DDR4 | Intel 730 series 512GB SSD | Thrustmaster WARTHOG | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR4 pro | |A-10C|BS2 |CA|P-51 MUSTANG|UH-1H HUEY|MI-8 MTV2 |FC3|F5E|M2000C|AJS-37|FW190|BF 109K|Mig21|A-10:SSC,EWC|L-39|NEVADA|
Ardillita Posted June 7, 2006 Posted June 7, 2006 ED said they are working on several fronts with experimetal sruff such as Multi CPU suport shader 3.0 but wich wont yet happen in 1.2 BS. wow wow wow... so... to play future version we will need multi CPU computers? nice news... I don´t understand why not optimize te code and make a good programing instead of just adding work and more work to a CPU...
Weta43 Posted June 8, 2006 Posted June 8, 2006 Quote: "Personally I would love ED entirely drop the 'heavy' engine and take up using the pacific fighters engine" I like the planes, explosions & water with the IL2/PF engine - & the FPS - but up close the ground looks cartoonish. As far as immersion goes & suspension of disbelief - LO's engine does it much better (till it does a little 'stall' for a second or two.) I don't think flying a chopper at 50km/h & 10m alt in PF would be convincing at all. Cheers.
Pilotasso Posted June 9, 2006 Posted June 9, 2006 Chopiness, but due to different reasons. You can get a shaky HUD as a result of low quality of video such as these, but also because of weather conditions and even the calibration and sensitivity of the air sensing PITOT tubes. THe pitch ladder and direction vector shake because it apears to be windy or somethings up with the onboard measurement kit. Heres a worse example, where the Pitot tube right in front of the HUD shakes violenlty and the HUD does the same to match: http://www.patricksaviation.com/aviation_videos/468/MiG-21_LanceR_Demo_-_ROIAS_2001?go=download .
Recommended Posts