EtherealN Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Oh yeah, that would be awesome. :D [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Daniel "EtherealN" Agorander | Даниэль "эфирныйн" Агорандер Intel i7 2600K @ 4.4GHz, ASUS Sabertooth P67, 8GB Corsair Vengeance @ 1600MHz, ASUS GTX 560Ti DirectCU II 1GB, Samsung 830series 512GB SSD, Corsair AX850w, two BENQ screens and TM HOTAS Warthog DCS: A-10C Warthog FAQ | DCS: P-51D FAQ | Remember to read the Forum Rules | | | Life of a Game Tester Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joey45 Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Decent with those graphics would be AWESOME! How much is it for a licanse? The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. "Me, the 13th Duke of Wybourne, here on the ED forums at 3 'o' clock in the morning, with my reputation. Are they mad.." https://ko-fi.com/joey45 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyby Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 still, it's nice to dream I don't know crap from crapola about which 3D engine is best suited for a low-alt sim world, but it's an easy dream to see a virtual world that looks as good as what's outside my window. IMO the whole sim world wants that. I'm not talking CPU/GPU power, or engine cost or any other kill-joy reason why it can't happen. It's what people will flock to when it finally can happen. Of course a sim-er wants all the physics modeling that makes a (combat) flight sim seem worth it's salt too.;) Be optimistic!!:D Flyby out The U.S. Congress is the best governing body that BIG money can buy. :cry: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logan9773 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Well said. Crytek's CryEngine can do just about anything. You can have MASSIVE maps and all the view distance you want. The only thing stopping that right now is an annoying bug in the program that will be fixed with the release of CE3. That's why you haven't seen absolutely huge maps yet. People tried to design them, which should be possible, but ran into the bug at about 64km square. I know some college professor is actually trying to map the whole city of London in CE2. Of course, the thing that is really stopping huge maps, view distances, and physics is cpu/gpu power. CE2 brings high end computers to there knees. And from what I have seen of the C++ code, it is kind of hard looking. I would think you would need to use C++ to highly modify what passes for flight sim right now. Interestingly though, the guy working on it at present (CWright) appears to be using LUA and Flowgraphs only, and getting some really good results. Some people may not like it, but for the majority of people ( me included ), this melding of FPS and realistic flight sim is what we want to see, and will flock too. Will be nice to dive on a realistic Shilka, backed by Human Intelligence. :thumbup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinelnic Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Uhm... if you're diving into a Shilka, you shouldn't take much pride on Human Intelligence methinks... Westinghouse W-600 refrigerator - Corona six-pack - Marlboro reds - Patience by Girlfriend "Engineering is the art of modelling materials we do not wholly understand, into shapes we cannot precisely analyse so as to withstand forces we cannot properly assess, in such a way that the public has no reason to suspect the extent of our ignorance." (Dr. A. R. Dykes - British Institution of Structural Engineers, 1976) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinelnic Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Ok, just to demistify, here's what Cryengine 2 can do for a flight sim. Beware! this can be shocking! http://www.crymod.com/uploads/mediapool/20090901FA/3.jpg As I said above, the nice detail that CryEngine can produce goes to the absolute toilet as soon as you leave the ground. Creating a beautifully looking engine for flight simulation is done using completely different techniques. Westinghouse W-600 refrigerator - Corona six-pack - Marlboro reds - Patience by Girlfriend "Engineering is the art of modelling materials we do not wholly understand, into shapes we cannot precisely analyse so as to withstand forces we cannot properly assess, in such a way that the public has no reason to suspect the extent of our ignorance." (Dr. A. R. Dykes - British Institution of Structural Engineers, 1976) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zimster Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Cry Engine 3 is designed specifically with next gen consoles in mind (PS3,and 360s) and is actually a dumbed down version of the Cry Engine 2. So no it would not make sense to use the CE3. The engine does cater more so towards first or third person shooters detail. However it does have some amazing tool sets that are very artist friendly and that I'm sure the artist of DCS would love to have. DCS is a very specific type of game and does have unique challenges that very few games are faced with, and I would say that the DCS team is staying on top of and incorporating all the new technologies that make video games/sims up to date! After all I would say that DCS sim is the Crysis of the flight sim community. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmo81 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 (edited) I still think the Arma 2 engine would be better, take a look at these screenshots I took. This game has more depth than any game ive seen out there. (engine wise of course). I can set off a 7.5 KT Nuke at the other end of the map and will be able to see it from this distance. Ok, just to demistify, here's what Cryengine 2 can do for a flight sim. Beware! this can be shocking! http://www.crymod.com/uploads/mediapool/20090901FA/3.jpg As I said above, the nice detail that CryEngine can produce goes to the absolute toilet as soon as you leave the ground. Creating a beautifully looking engine for flight simulation is done using completely different techniques. I agree that CE2 would not be great for a combat flight sim, but thats not a fair screenshot to compare it to lol Edited October 21, 2009 by Cosmo81 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUBS17 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Sometimes we really do not look out of the window. It is called "release rush" ;) But seriously, my view on the situation with CryEngine in DCS: 1) from informed sources, crysis source code is a horrible mess (like almost any complex, break-through game). 2) there're no shipped titles, based on cryengine 3 3) we are definitely capable of releasing new products on our own technology. So, there's no guarantee that it is possible to create a DCS-level simulator on a CryEngine3. What if we start to create next DCS sim on a CE3, and get stuck into some engine deficiency in the middle of the process? And note, this is a huge, complex engine written by people who did only FPS all their life. It can easily get to the point that this engine need a complete rewrite. As a result you will never ever get any DCS: xxx at all. So, we will just humbly, painfully continue to develop our own, may be not spectacular, but definitely good working technology. And you really don't have an option to have CE3 in DCS ;) Heres a question is it possible for an FPS and DCS to share MP code for example if a developer for an FPS like Bohemia Interactive with their Arma 2 and DCS were to have a common MP code and common terrain etc? I think it would be very cool if that were to happen even if FPS mods were created for DCS.:thumbup: [sIGPIC] [/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ARM505 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Like it or not, and view it purely from a 'current technology' point of view, but IMHO ARMA II is the closest to the 'combined' genre we have at the moment - if you want to see what is currently technically possible when blending FPS and Flight sim (well, 'flight' at least :) ) then take a look there. Bring your supercomputer with you, but it's well worth it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sobek Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 I still think the Arma 2 engine would be better, take a look at these screenshots I took. This game has more depth than any game ive seen out there. (engine wise of course). I can set off a 7.5 KT Nuke at the other end of the map and will be able to see it from this distance. Can you play with these settings or only take screenshots? :) Good, fast, cheap. Choose any two. Come let's eat grandpa! Use punctuation, save lives! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EtherealN Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Heres a question is it possible for an FPS and DCS to share MP code for example if a developer for an FPS like Bohemia Interactive with their Arma 2 and DCS were to have a common MP code and common terrain etc? I think it would be very cool if that were to happen even if FPS mods were created for DCS.:thumbup: Yes, it is "possible". However, it is not practical - FPSes and simulators have different requirements and there would end up being compromises made in either direction. There will however not be any possibility to "mod" either of the two mentioned games to become multiplayer compatible. You might as well just write a new game from scratch at that point, would probably be less work. ;) I'd say it's probablymore likely to mod ArmaII to give it a better simulation engine, though it still won't have the detail, draw distance or size of map as DCS. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Daniel "EtherealN" Agorander | Даниэль "эфирныйн" Агорандер Intel i7 2600K @ 4.4GHz, ASUS Sabertooth P67, 8GB Corsair Vengeance @ 1600MHz, ASUS GTX 560Ti DirectCU II 1GB, Samsung 830series 512GB SSD, Corsair AX850w, two BENQ screens and TM HOTAS Warthog DCS: A-10C Warthog FAQ | DCS: P-51D FAQ | Remember to read the Forum Rules | | | Life of a Game Tester Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
104th_Crunch Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 (edited) ArmaII, eh? If you think you need a super computer to run ArmAII as it is now, imagine if you were to add the things that ArmA is missing compared to an actual flight sim, such as advanced flight modelling/physics, advanced avionics, AI capable of BVR, advanced missile modelling, etc. etc. the newest PCs would come to a crawl. I hate flying in ArmA compared to Lock On, or any other real flight sim. Maybe someday we'll have the best of both worlds, but not today. Those screenshots of aircraft in ArmaII look very pretty, but you may as well be playing H.A.W.X. in terms of simulated flight. Edited October 21, 2009 by Crunch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joey45 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 (edited) .....I hate flying in ArmA compared to Lock On, or any other real flight sim.since when did ArmA2 become a flight sim. It's a ground combat sim with flyable flying machines. Without them ArmA2 whould be like any other FPS. The FM in ArmA is designed [at first] to be flowen by Keyboard and mouse. Maybe someday we'll have the best of both worlds, but not today.indeed one day it will happen but the code will have to be written from scratch with that in mind. Edited October 21, 2009 by joey45 The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. "Me, the 13th Duke of Wybourne, here on the ED forums at 3 'o' clock in the morning, with my reputation. Are they mad.." https://ko-fi.com/joey45 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmo81 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Can you play with these settings or only take screenshots? :) at that resolution easily playable with max settings max view dist, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUBS17 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 since when did ArmA2 become a flight sim. It's a ground combat sim with flyable flying machines. Without them ArmA2 whould be like any other FPS. The FM in ArmA is designed [at first] to be flowen by Keyboard and mouse. indeed one day it will happen but the code will have to be written from scratch with that in mind. Actually Arma2 has multicontroller support so it is designed to work closer to a sim than Arma was. [sIGPIC] [/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warbird_242 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Those screenies look awesome - just imagining two apaches thundering down that river :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joey45 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Actually Arma2 has multicontroller support so it is designed to work closer to a sim than Arma was. Not that people with multicontrollers had problems getting their setup to work proply. The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. "Me, the 13th Duke of Wybourne, here on the ED forums at 3 'o' clock in the morning, with my reputation. Are they mad.." https://ko-fi.com/joey45 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logan9773 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 (edited) Cry Engine 3 is designed specifically with next gen consoles in mind (PS3,and 360s) and is actually a dumbed down version of the Cry Engine 2. Oh, yeah, it's so dumbed down.:music_whistling: Lol. And those are just the console shots. The PC version will have a lot more detail to be sure. Edited October 21, 2009 by Logan9773 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EtherealN Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 While I am also unsure of what to make of the "dumbing down" comment, it should be noted that that already linked video doesn't contradict it. In this case it might, for example, have diminished it's physics capabilities in order to instead focus resources on draw distance and visual effects. If that is the case, it would indeed be "dumbed down" as far as the purpose of games like DCS is concerned. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Daniel "EtherealN" Agorander | Даниэль "эфирныйн" Агорандер Intel i7 2600K @ 4.4GHz, ASUS Sabertooth P67, 8GB Corsair Vengeance @ 1600MHz, ASUS GTX 560Ti DirectCU II 1GB, Samsung 830series 512GB SSD, Corsair AX850w, two BENQ screens and TM HOTAS Warthog DCS: A-10C Warthog FAQ | DCS: P-51D FAQ | Remember to read the Forum Rules | | | Life of a Game Tester Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logan9773 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Well, I'm sure there will be things pulled out of the Xbox and Playstation versions. Otherwise, I might as well buy a $300 Xbox instead of a $3000 computer :smilewink:. Parts in that video did look very xboxish, like the waterfall for example. Personally, I think its better in CryEngine 2. Im sure the PC graphics, textures, and detail will be much more in the PC version of Crysis 2. Otherwise, they can give up on me and many other PC gamers from buying their game. My big gripe about Black Shark is that the terrain is so primitive. I want to see some meaningful terrain, like in Crysis. Canyons, rivers, trees, forests, large cities with tall buildings. Not just painted flat terrain with boxes for buildings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EtherealN Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 I'd love those things too, but unfortunately my 4GHz processor is already quite busy coping with the workload of performing a detailed simulation of the Ka-50. :P [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Daniel "EtherealN" Agorander | Даниэль "эфирныйн" Агорандер Intel i7 2600K @ 4.4GHz, ASUS Sabertooth P67, 8GB Corsair Vengeance @ 1600MHz, ASUS GTX 560Ti DirectCU II 1GB, Samsung 830series 512GB SSD, Corsair AX850w, two BENQ screens and TM HOTAS Warthog DCS: A-10C Warthog FAQ | DCS: P-51D FAQ | Remember to read the Forum Rules | | | Life of a Game Tester Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logan9773 Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Yeah, I think that's the big barrier right now. Its not the coding, or the engine, its how much power its going to take. Hopefully, Nvidia will come out with a monster DX11 card next year, that will take us to the next level. Of course, I don't think I'm going to pay their initial $1200 price tag, so I'll probably wait a year. :music_whistling: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
159th_Falcon Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 I dont whant to spoil your fun logan but in regards to DCS:BS the graphics card is in most cases no issue. Its the computational power of your CPU that is limiting your frame rate cause it cant keap up whit the calculations for the KA-50's flight model. So im afraid that not even 4 of the worlds fastest GF cars in CF/SLI would do any good to the performance. Faster CPU's and or and multithreaded version of DCS:BS would likely improve fps [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] The keeper of all mathematical knowledge and the oracle of flight modeling.:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logan9773 Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 (edited) Not necessarily. With DX11 we get OpenCL, Microsoft's DirectCompute, and the Compute Shader. This allows massively parallel operations to be performed on the GPU which has hundreds of cores. So at least some operations can be tossed to the GPU to perform for much faster number crunching. Programmers will just have to decide what threads can be given to the GPU to crunch and what threads must remain on the CPU. This is going to be a boost for gaming programmers. If graphics aren't taking up to much of the GPU, you push off some number crunching from the CPU on to the GPU for much faster results. I can remember seeing the differences between DX11 and the old DX9, DX10. DX11 is much more than just another step, its a real revolution. Here's one article on Wikipedia which decribes it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirectCompute Edited October 22, 2009 by Logan9773 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts