Getting bored with it.

[element1108]

Perhaps a CE3 game like battlefield 2 or an arma 2 equivalent, you'll never see a flight simulator the level of complexity such as Falcon or DCS in that. It's primarily a FPS engine, draw distances still aren't large enough.

 

And by bland world, do you mean graphically? CE3 hasn't offered any solutions to dynamic campaigns, ai or anything like that, so it must be graphics correct?

 

Here are some numbers regarding how far the human eye can see at various altitudes ...

 

At sea level the curvature of the earth limits the range of vision to 2.9 miles. The formula for determining how many miles an individual can see at higher levels is the square root of his altitude times 1.225. Thus on a clear day at 1,000 feet a person with normal vision can see 39 miles; at 10,000 feet, 123 miles; at 25,000 feet, 194 miles. With good visibility a pilot at 25,000 feet can see Germany from the English Channel; at the same altitude over Tunisia he can see the middle of Sicily.

 

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,766761,00.html#ixzz1BKaqiS00

[GGTharos]

Just a comment on one of your earlier comments :)

 

Try picking up a heli and flying it around the map in ARMA2 after you extend visibility to at least 10km (I hope your PC can handle it! Turn down details if necessary). It is VERY important that you get this MINIMUM view distance. Then fly around the map and bit and see if it's big enough ...

 

An interesting thought, and probably somewhat doable, but it still leaves the pilot with a somewhat bland world. My bets still on putting a sim in CE3.

[Henchman14]

I'm not a huge fan of the Arma 2 engine. I like some things they've done with it, and its a living world, but my real love is the CE2 engine. Arma 2 engine really takes a lot of power to not do that much. Even in CWright's 100 km 2 ( I think thats what it was ) map at 60000 feet, I had no problems viewing the whole of the map. It says 60000 on my diagnostics readout, so I'm assuming its feet. All I know is, you could see a lot further than I've ever seen in an FPS game. There were only a few objects on it, and it was just mostly raw terrain like in BS, but still, pretty amazing for my low end machine. CE2 is kind of strange. Map size does not seem to affect FPS that badly. Supposedly, CE3 is going to be a whole lot more FPS friendly. Crysis 2 is supposed to come out in March and it looks like nothing but an XBox game, but what most PC players are waiting to get their hands on is the CE3 and Sandbox 3. Its been strange over the last 2 years of waiting, because Crytek has been very mum on even the computer stats that we'll need to run Crysis 2, and they've shown no screens or videos of PC play. So, hopefully, in around 2 months, we'll all get to see just what the Engine can really do at great heights.

 

All in all though, I like a good knife fight with covering terrain, pop up attacks, and rockets / cannon / gun sight. A copter like the BS would be devastating in Crysis. The real threat would be sneaky infantry patrols with RPGs coming out of the jungle. Down and dirty.

Edited January 17, 2011 by Henchman14

[GGTharos]

Viewing isn't my point. The viewdistance is important only so that you have some form of visual distance equivalentish to the Ka-50's. I'll say again, take a heli in ARMA2, run around in it like that, imagine you have 8km range weapons, and tell me if it's enough map for attack heli ops. That, perhaps, after you inform yourself a bit about attack heli ops first ... knife fights? Heh.

[Raven434th]

well ,in that case(If I think what it is yer tryin to say),...then you simply make a bigger 3d world for arma.Like they did for opflash years ago.50k x50k I think it was?I recall having to fly for almost 15 to 20 mins to get to the other side on that puppy.

[GGTharos]

Oh, good luck with that and your viewdistance. ;)

 

And either way, the problem remains ... you are still at a fraction of the map space that DCS uses. You cannot fly a realistic 200km long-ranged mission. And you can pretty much forget about air to air combat with modern jet fighters too ... 50km is when you start shooting :)

Edited January 18, 2011 by GGTharos

[Conure]

Oh, good luck with that and your viewdistance. ;)

 

And either way, the problem remains ... you are still at a fraction of the map space that DCS uses. You cannot fly a realistic 200km long-ranged mission. And you can pretty much forget about air to air combat with modern jet fighters too ... 50km is when you start shooting :)

 

Modern jets engage each other from 50KM??? Wow..Do they literally just lock onto something the radar picks up?

[Henchman14]

Well, I think the AMRAAM has a 20km? attack range? Something like that. Medium range missile. Some of our older missiles had greater ranges, but I think they were all SARH, while the AMRAAM is ARH. As for 200km long missions, I'm not that much into it. Mostly, in the missions I make, I like to a few klicks away from the action. Just enough time to setup my weapons and the shkval and start looking for targets and cover as I'm going in.

[power5]

Aim54 Phoenix was much longer range than 50km. Though I think it was a paper missile and never really used.

Edited January 18, 2011 by power5

[GGTharos]

They engage farther than that. Under the right circumstances, the shooting may start at 50km. Radar detection jet v jet for a smaller aircraft might be 60-70km, for the big interceptors like F-15, Su-27, it is over 100km.

 

Modern jets engage each other from 50KM??? Wow..Do they literally just lock onto something the radar picks up?

[GGTharos]

It's great that you think that, but aircraft literature indicates a 'useful range of about 30nm' which is 50km or so. Depending on the delivery method and AMRAAM version, you can make that range longer.

 

Well, I think the AMRAAM has a 20km? attack range? Something like that. Medium range missile. Some of our older missiles had greater ranges, but I think they were all SARH, while the AMRAAM is ARH.

 

 

Right, and pardon the abruptness but I don't really care that you aren't into 200km missions. I am, and so are a good chunk of people who fly a sim for the simming experience. Want shorter missions? You've for your FPS' for that, and it isn't like you have need for the detail of DCS' simulation to get your enjoyment out of things.

 

I'll say this once more to make it very clear: DCS is NOT and will NOT be an FPS, and it has never aspired to do so and will not aspire to do so for a good chunk of time to come. It is a simulator meant to simulate those 200km missions you aren't all that into. That is what it is geared towards, pretty much end of story and period. You can pine and wish and post all about how you want it to be something else but guess what ... it isn't, and it will not be.

 

As for 200km long missions, I'm not that much into it. Mostly, in the missions I make, I like to a few klicks away from the action. Just enough time to setup my weapons and the shkval and start looking for targets and cover as I'm going in.

[Renato71]

Jeez, what was the topic again?

[GGTharos]

Are you bored with it Renato?

[Henchman14]

 

I'll say this once more to make it very clear: DCS is NOT and will NOT be an FPS, and it has never aspired to do so and will not aspire to do so for a good chunk of time to come.

 

Thats fine. The people like me will be waiting for what were in those CE3 videos. Thats what we want. An FPS with realistic flight simulation. 100 km ranges are enough for me, and I'm sure CE3 is going to be able to handle it.

[Cali]

Wow. I can't believe what some of you guys are saying, it as to be a joke. 50km missile range, AMRAAM 20km range, that's 12 miles!

 

Henchman14 sounds like you are into air/ground quake then if you like being a few clicks away.

[GGTharos]

Does not exist.

Will not exist any time soon. Certainly not CE3 ;)

 

An FPS with realistic flight simulation.

[Henchman14]

Lol, just keep thinking that.

[Conure]

Lol, just keep thinking that.

 

Henchman if you're sitting in an office working 21 hours a day building the perfect ground/air simulator, you release it, and it works...I'll buy you a beer. Wherever you live in the world. I'll pay for you to drink all night!

[Henchman14]

Lol, well I probably won't be building it, but I'm sure with the new CE3, someone will. Those videos prove its being worked on. I was just playing around with the old CE2 looking down from 3 km at an Island, and still getting 35 fps on my old laptop. Thats what I like about CryEngine. Its very tweakable and adjustable. So you can push the limits with it. I saw in one of the new CE3 pics, there was a predator WAY UP, and there was no limited vis. Not that anybody could ever stick that many objects in a map. Would be crazy. Looked really nice. Good things to come.

 

Here it is, the pic of the Predator drone.

 

http://www.rt-immersive.com/?id=8

 

I have nothing against the world of DCS, its just that it looks like old Falcon IV tech ( 20 years old? ). Plus, I'd really like some human ground troops to fight against in places. Time for new tech.

Edited January 18, 2011 by Henchman14

[GGTharos]

You have something against reality though.

 

Not only is the DCS terrain head and shoulders above the falcon stuff, but you haven't presented any compelling evidence that anyone is even remotely interested in realistic flight simulation using CE. Perhaps you don't realize it ... but there's actually plenty of flight simulation talent going around ... and none of them are looking at CE.

[Conure]

You have something against reality though.

 

Not only is the DCS terrain head and shoulders above the falcon stuff, but you haven't presented any compelling evidence that anyone is even remotely interested in realistic flight simulation using CE. Perhaps you don't realize it ... but there's actually plenty of flight simulation talent going around ... and none of them are looking at CE.

 

 

Not CE, but I'm actually considering creating my own A-10 simulation based on the Call of Duty: Black Ops engine. You can do some serious damage to those guys on the ground as long as you're happy to pull really tight turning circles ALL the time.

 

(can anyone get the saitek website to work? my x52 messed up and decided to permanently zoom out, so I wanted to reinstall...Drivers section is down for me though, thanks Saitek....)

[Henchman14]

You should talk to a guy on CryMod named CWright. He's been working on getting planes into Crysis now for two years. He's pretty good. No where near DCS of course, but good simple flight. He might be able to help you with some code. I hope Crytek takes note of what he's doing. And I know the flight sim types say that FPS people will hate being killed by bombs, etc. Actually, we have mini-nukes in Crysis that kill far more players at once, and were used to it.

[Conure]

Wow. I can't believe what some of you guys are saying, it as to be a joke. 50km missile range, AMRAAM 20km range, that's 12 miles!

 

Henchman14 sounds like you are into air/ground quake then if you like being a few clicks away.

 

Hi Cali, what is the actual range of most fighter aircraft??

[GGTharos]

Range for what? Ferry range can reach 3000nm for certain fighters. Combat radius tends to be between 300 and 500nm.

[Conure]

Range for what? Ferry range can reach 3000nm for certain fighters. Combat radius tends to be between 300 and 500nm.

 

Ferry? I mean range for (roughly speaking) 2 modern, equal air to air combat planes built for the primary purpose of shooting other planes down!