August 25th... New Black Shark Screenshots

[Ukr_Alex]

Well, they look that good on my X800XT if that helps :)

 

 

Are you implying that its playable on a x800xt/850?

 

If you say it looks that good on an x800 then ED must have done so good work with making the engine run smoother, optimizing and all thath :)

[dodger42]

Whilst I agree that the BTR looks great, it almost looks too good for the rest of the world. Check image 3. In comparison the tower behind looks like something from the commodor 64. One step at a time obviously, but all these things will be much more visible in a low and slow flying chopper than in the fixed wings. Fingers crossed they all get done.

[Guest IguanaKing]

They better not have removed the bullet ricochet, as the autocannon, yes, I stress, it's not a machine gun+ like on the mig/su/F-15, it's a cannon

 

Actually, the MiG/Su/F-15/A-10 all carry a cannon. Anything which fires explosive projectiles is classified as a cannon. ;) I'll bet the 57mm cannon on some of the older MiGs could make swiss cheese of the bathtubs in both the Hog and Frog. :pilotfly:

[D-Scythe]

HOLYCRAP! Now that's definitely new and immersive, ED really is great!

 

Immersive? It's great detail for sure (and kudos to ED for that), but to say that it's new and makes LOMAC more immersive is stretching it.

 

Non-graphical things like frequent radio chatter and better flight/wingman AI would make LOMAC more immersive. Just so you know.

[Shotsx74]

Immersive? It's great detail for sure (and kudos to ED for that), but to say that it's new and makes LOMAC more immersive is stretching it.

 

Non-graphical things like frequent radio chatter and better flight/wingman AI would make LOMAC more immersive. Just so you know.

 

Agreed, but it does look damn good though =)

[Disso]

Immersive? It's great detail for sure (and kudos to ED for that), but to say that it's new and makes LOMAC more immersive is stretching it.

 

Non-graphical things like frequent radio chatter and better flight/wingman AI would make LOMAC more immersive. Just so you know.

 

I see your point, but do you see mine? I said it made it even more immersive; now that immersion, may it be nothing more than a tad', it helps doesn't it? Flying in snow, looking down, and seeing an APC blanketed with snow, that would give me a wow factor for half-a-second, and actually make me think of the work put into it, even if not much.

 

Of course radio chatter, better wingmen, AI, dyanmics, ect ect is first priority in my books, because that my friend, is a whole nother' page, which doesn't just add another dimension to the game, but redefines it.

 

I pointed it out the way I did on this occasion because that's what the screenies showcased, and I like to point out small things and give praise where needed.

 

Have we actually seen news regarding radio chatter, dynamics, and the such? I'll do the same, and to a larger extent, when it comes.

[Alfa]

Immersive? It's great detail for sure (and kudos to ED for that), but to say that it's new and makes LOMAC more immersive is stretching it.

 

Non-graphical things like frequent radio chatter and better flight/wingman AI would make LOMAC more immersive. Just so you know.

 

I disagree D-Scythe.

 

The whole "exercise" when building a sim world is to create the illusion of reality and in this connection the graphical aspect is as much a contributor to "immersion" as anything else.

 

To obtain the proper sense of realism coherent appearance of objects versus surrounding environment is more important than 3D micro-details - you can get away with crude graphics as long as they have a uniform nature, because you mind will automatically adjust to whatever level of fidelity it is presented with. But if you add an object that clashes with the surrounding world in style/appearance, the illusion is broken.

 

The automatic switch between winter and summer texturing makes vehicles blend in better with the environment and look more natural in adverse conditions - this is particularly the case with the BTR-80 model, which apart from high 3D detail level, just looks right in the Lock-on world :) .

 

Of course there are all sorts of other aspects that contribute to the total simming experience and the appearance of a single vehicle may be considered a detail.......but then the entirety is made up of details :)

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

[Pilotasso]

I say I must agree with Dr Scythe here.

If you gotta shiny new tanks on the terrain wich you wont even see clearly from behind a HUD, without other improvements all those screenshots will not mean much, except good merketing on the ED's part.

 

Without runnin liliputians like Kenan said, and tank tactics this means little for those who will fly the Ka-50 solo, and virtualy nothing for all the other people, considering that without a multirole aircraft who buys blask shark will be doing it for the AIM-120C and for online compatibility only.

 

Im not saying ED is not doing this because, simply there is no information on that front, all that I concern is that "theres is no time for this or that aspect" when that "aspect" would be easely more important for imersion than the whole time spent on new models and their LOD1 detail.

[tflash]

D-scythe, Pilotasso, there are loads of Lockon players, like me, who most often fly single player with *external views on*. Sometimes I do not even pilot a plane and just spectate.

 

Black Shark is not BS to these customers but really a major advance.

 

My hobby is not so much air-to-air dogfighting but virtual air-to-air photography. Others are Movie makers.

 

All *these* people might find BS very, very immersive. And yes, I find this BTR-80 very nice.

 

What we cannot learn from these pics however is how it will go for the sounds. Helo's and detailed armour need appropriate 3D-sounds to be immersive. Technically, this presupposes the same as increased radio-chatter: a much better sound engine. With the current engine, any good sound addition would dramatically impact performance.

[zaelu]

I Agree with tflash

 

I fly with my budies with externals on and coops. I look at externals models in the mission all the time and I like them to be high detail (if posible). Also we make debriefiengs for our missions on our forum and put a lot of pictures there. For those pictures high detail models are recomended.

 

Shure a sim is not only graphics but without it it will be just a static hangar sim... like those where real pilots are training just to learn where the buttons are and what are the correct sequences of pressing them.

 

Also Alfa is right about "coherent appearance". A good argument is "IL-2" world, which is more cartoonish than Lock On's but is coherent in itself and "the magic" looks real.

[D-Scythe]

The whole "exercise" when building a sim world is to create the illusion of reality and in this connection the graphical aspect is as much a contributor to "immersion" as anything else.

 

On this point I have to disagree. I understand what you're trying to say, and yes, graphics are to an extent important to immersion. But I fail to see how the automatic changing of camoflage to suit the season "immerses" the player into the sim world.

 

Furthermore, graphics is simply (IMO) not as important as other aspects of jet combat in creating/maintaining the illusion of combat. As a flight sim graphics are important, but Lock On is a combat flight sim. Because of this, things like realistic, elements like more frequent radio chatter (i.e. Jane's F/A-18, F4:AF) and better AI would be much better in immersing the player into the illusion of teamwork/tactical maneuvering that's associated with a dynamic and high-threat combat environment.

 

So basically, BTRs that automatically change their skins to match the season is not going to make me feel a part of the LOMAC world.

 

The automatic switch between winter and summer texturing makes vehicles blend in better with the environment and look more natural in adverse conditions - this is particularly the case with the BTR-80 model, which apart from high 3D detail level, just looks right in the Lock-on world :) .

 

Again, as far as graphics go, I don't think it's anywhere close to being the most important factor in immersion (in a combat flight sim). For example, I doubt that this feature will stop the Falcon 4 fanboys from crying that LOBS still presents a sterile, *non-immersive* world to fly a Mach 2 jet in.

[Witchking]

I disagree D-Scythe.

 

The whole "exercise" when building a sim world is to create the illusion of reality and in this connection the graphical aspect is as much a contributor to "immersion" as anything else.

 

To obtain the proper sense of realism coherent appearance of objects versus surrounding environment is more important than 3D micro-details - you can get away with crude graphics as long as they have a uniform nature, because you mind will automatically adjust to whatever level of fidelity it is presented with. But if you add an object that clashes with the surrounding world in style/appearance, the illusion is broken.

 

The automatic switch between winter and summer texturing makes vehicles blend in better with the environment and look more natural in adverse conditions - this is particularly the case with the BTR-80 model, which apart from high 3D detail level, just looks right in the Lock-on world :) .

 

Of course there are all sorts of other aspects that contribute to the total simming experience and the appearance of a single vehicle may be considered a detail.......but then the entirety is made up of details :)

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

 

JJ, there you go...u said it yourself. We NOW see the difference between a reputed sim like IL2 + PF and a sim like lomac. even from the early days lomac has remained UNBALANCED. some planes the highest detail, some look like old 1998 models. I hope ED understands that I am not firing at them, but just trying to make them understand this same arguement of even fidelity. Look at IL2, planes are blocky, cockpits are blocky, however, there is tons in that game for immersion. There are foot soldiers, there are tons of units, the graphics DO not cause a performance issue. I love lomac a lot, I mean I have been with ED from the days of flanker 2. I am not a diehard fanboy but just their customer who likes their product and keeps coming back. However, having played games like IL2 pacific fighters, I like them sooo much that to be honest, "I went to my local futureshop to BUY the game in respect for Oleg maddox, if u know what I mean :thumbup:" . It is an amazing sim in my books". Lockon sure has the makings of an amazing sim, but, some decisions were made in it, which keep us waiting for LO 2 (PLEASE REWRITE IT WITH A NEW ENGINE ED...). HECK, the only other games which I "bought" even after I "had" them were LOCK ON when it came out priced at 54$ canadian and legacy of kain : defiance.

[S77th-GOYA]

There seem to be two ideas of what immersion really consists of. The one that I agree with is D-Scythe's. Immersion in this context helps the "suspension of disbelief" that one is just sitting in front of a screen. The other, if I understand what people are saying, is more like going to a movie. The special effects and "movie magic" help to take you to another world or another time. You might say one is active immersion and the other is passive immersion. IMO, active immersion is what helps make a game become a sim.

 

The biggest point for me is that even flying a mudmover, I'll never come close enough to any of the models/textures to see them in any detail anyway. I would MUCH prefer that the efforts going into this be put into other things that LOMAC lacks in its present state.

[zaelu]

I think it has been discused over and over this "high poly nice textured models" problem and ED has stated numerous times that the high poly models are not necesarely build by them. So the work is not concentrated on building those nice models.

 

But as in Oleg sim(s) the work sometimes is not that apealing to the public so the most catching for public attention remains some nice photos or movies...

 

So here we have our "not that true" problem... ED is accepting models build by third parties and they are presenting them as things to keep interest of the public until the work is done. Shure is not a bad thing but, would you like to know what boring troubles they might have had while programing the ABRIS instead? Or maybe some anoing insipid problem when they made the weapon advanced flight model etc etc?

 

 

Also we can not complain that we recieved only screens or movies.. Many ED members had posted here some details about the new Addon.

 

Sorry if I sound like "a fanboy" but, sometimes I have the impression that people don't realise completely that building a sim is a little more complicated that talking about it. Put on top of that that sometimes you have competition or other projects (like TBS) and the developer is not native at, atleast, speaking your language or even meeting your exact needs of information (which is common for humans :) ) and you may recalculate your position. Not that you where too pushing guys :) but...

 

In short... I like the high detailed graphics and I cant help my self :).. Hey ED some nice shader for the metal surfaces would be nice also... some wet metal... snow on the parked planes and cars... :D

 

Ok ok... I go now :P

[Highwayman-Ed]

There are some great points throughout this thread, and I think that some people are mistakenly thinking is that ED are putting their own efforts into making these models, which seems not to be the case.

 

I think what a lot of people are meaning with their comments that don't support the high def models, is that not all of these models are free (...?) and could that money be spent better elsewhere... :smilewink:

 

I love the models, but I can honestly say that as a ground pounder, the immersion comes 99% from the scenery around me than the units that I'm lining up on with my Avenger, or how good my wingmans flaps are modelled.

 

That's why things like TekaTeka's Trees and the new textures being worked on by Rocky and Grandsurf are much more important to me than anything else right now, but other people's prioritys are different, and I respect that.

[Blacknemisis]

I would like to see real looking mountains and when over cast and you are above the clouds way better looking clouds than those. And also better weather effects like when it rains you can see rain drops rolling down your cockpit window and moving clouds when it is over cast.

[A10FAN]

Ohhh god. If only the hind was flyable.:cry:

 

And the Apache :music_whistling:

[A10FAN]

I would like to see real looking mountains and when over cast and you are above the clouds way better looking clouds than those. And also better weather effects like when it rains you can see rain drops rolling down your cockpit window and moving clouds when it is over cast.

 

A weather program like active sky for fs9

[Kaptein_Damli]

I would really like ED to make the feel of speed more realistic in further games. I know Lock On FC is closest to speed than other sims, but I feel I miss some speed when I fly around the mountains and flying low. I sometimes look at my speedindicator and see I fly in 800 knots, flying low, and thinks: It MUST feel fast if I had been flying at this speed for real! Turning up the acceleration speed is not an option ether, so I hope ED will look at this. Don´t know if the rest of you agree with me, but hey, it just my opinion! :)

[Slaunyeh]

About the texture it has been said they are 3rd party.

Unfortunatly things like, changing skin when season changes, is a bit optimistic. Like 1/3 of the american troops went to Iraq with green camo...

So autoswitch, doesn´t happen in reality. It is true to some extent but not all. And since we doesn´t have a Dyn campaign but a sequence of canned... I don´t imagine anyone doing a sequence of canned mission simming a war that last more than a season...That would be....herculean work.

 

As for screenshot being good marketing. As a FCSimer, i would be a thousand times more enthusiastic if we had some movie with sounds, so we could hearing some chats, cause actually there´s none...

Heck a MP3 only would do it...Anything from this cold, imersion shattering, silence LOCK mac is.:( No need to go fance, just a landing with warchat on background and more ATC instructions. That is immersion.

I would be more happy to see damage modeling screenshots... Its nice to see all those beautifull shiny things, but they aren´t intended to remain in that state.:D

90% of the time i will only approach the wreckage so they´re more important to me than the brand new.;) Smoke, blowing up animation and wreckage. By the way, i´ve seem many tanks busting on you tube, military.com etc movies and i rarely see something ablaze after the BOOM. So no need to have such billowing flames, infantry mechs are made of steel not wood planks.

As 9/11 showed to the world, combustible don´t stay ablaze much in explosive condition, it will go boom spread and game over. No need to waste time on billowing flames that would exist and eat processing, keep this processing for the smoke if that be.

 

So some fancy cammo don´t turm me on, cause for much part we´ll won´t see it but in the library. Isuppose this is reserved for the LOMAC BAttle Sim Project.

 

All we got are news from the outside world of BS, not from the core, but the ED team of course, but very few to see or hear but for GA movies.

 

Even then the work seem great.

[Highwayman-Ed]

I agree Slaunyeh...

 

ED, any chance of allowing the Beta testers to release an avi of a simple mission, much like the ABRIS demo video, but with a couple of simmers actually flying a simple attack run instead of a monologue about the ABRIS modes and capabilities (not that I didn't find that usefull!).

 

It doesnt have to be long, it doesnt need to show anything special, just a short 10 minute demo flight...

[Bucic]

Finaly a voice of rationality, Highwayman-Ed! :thumbup:

0.7s scenes are not very informative. With all due respect, GA;)