LIONPRIDE Posted April 7, 2010 Posted April 7, 2010 . Hey folks - Love, Love, Love Blackshark .... I DL the DEMO for Wings of Prey and it is gorgeous ! Simply stunning and runs fantastic on my rig-yet black shark chugs along at 30-40 FPS. What's the deal? Is it the calculations of all the systems that make BS slow down and the lack of system info in WoP that makes in run so smooth? If they could take the scenery from WoP and get BS to run on it - WOW ! This is not an opportunistic TROLL thread - just trying to get some discussion going and some like minded thinking going. could BS use a new Graphics engine or, for lack of a better way to put it, am I that naive? Thank You . - - - - - - - - TO FLY IS HEAVEN. TO HOVER IS DIVINE - - - - - - [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
h00t74 Posted April 7, 2010 Posted April 7, 2010 There is more things going on in the background of BS and I think BOP is more of an Arcade style by what I hear. Most of the time w/ games have HIGH graphics, it does not have scripting like BS and other things going on simutanously on the map. Games like BOP usually have triggers to start stuff when you reach an area as well. Where as BS has stuff happening everywhere all the time.
GGTharos Posted April 7, 2010 Posted April 7, 2010 BS/FC2 both require very long viewdistances, the likes of which the comparatively tiny BOP maps cannot replicate. It is a trade-off - and that is simply one of the reasons for things being as they are currently. Further, as discussed previously on this forum, while the GFX engine is up for enhancement, this is a gradual/incremental project so far, not a wholesale replacement. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
EtherealN Posted April 7, 2010 Posted April 7, 2010 Yeah, BoP has a good couple advantages: 1) Nothing much to "simulate" 2) Extremely simplistic aircraft (even in "simulator" mode that thing is pretty much just arcade) 3) Extremely small world. Those maps are absolutely tiny. Graphics is a small thing here. BoP has very little for the CPU to do and crams in lots for the GPU instead. DCS is the other way around - it has a huge amount of stuff that needs to be done with the CPU, and therefore other things are kept relatively light. And as for the graphics in the terrain and such - DCS has a vastly larger world to load and render than BoP, which takes the resources that BoP uses to put more detail in a really small world. [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
M31 Posted April 7, 2010 Posted April 7, 2010 . Hey folks - Love, Love, Love Blackshark .... black shark chugs along at 30-40 FPS. What's the deal? Nothing wrong with 30-40 FPS, that should be perfectly smooth, turn off your frame rate counter and enjoy :thumbup: :joystick::pilotfly: 1
Scudslaker Posted April 7, 2010 Posted April 7, 2010 M31 is right.. no need of discussion!) TM HOTAS WH :joystick:, Saitek Pro Pedals, Track IR 4, 2xJoyWarrier, 1x KeyWarrior, i52500k @4600MHz, ASUS P8Z68-V Pro, NV 670GT, SSD+ WD BC+ WD Raptor, 32HD:pilotfly:[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
manne Posted April 7, 2010 Posted April 7, 2010 Nothing wrong with 30-40 FPS, that should be perfectly smooth, turn off your frame rate counter and enjoy :thumbup: :joystick::pilotfly: x2 Your eyes won't see the difference.
Recommended Posts