Jump to content

ED, take notes, please...


leafer

Recommended Posts

Guest EVIL-SCOTSMAN

i seen those and another set of screenies about 1 week ago, and holy shiat, them be the way to go.

 

to much power would be needed to get it like that.

 

in one of the screenshots, it said the specs needed to run it like that were.

 

47249248272483242 gigs of ram, sli nvidia 9800ultras 1gig mem and 2 fx67 cpus. :) jokingly that is.

 

that was on the site with all the shit hot looking screenies.

 

so we aint gonna see it anytime soon :( :(

 

EDIT:

this is the site i was at

 

http://www.global-scenery.org/ = magic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest EVIL-SCOTSMAN

still dont like the bitmaps for buildings and suchlike, the actual 3d buildings are cool, but when other stuff thats meant to be 3d suddenly become a single layer on the actual ground, it kinda spoils it for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This kind of photorealistic scenery is nice from high altitudes but when you get closer, it becomes really annoying. I dont think that this kind of scenery is suitable for Lockon, especially for BlackShark or FC in which we have low level, mud-moving type of flying...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm I was never the biggest fan of using photorealistic textures, mainly because the resolution was horrible when flying low. This really seems to be changing now though. Many screens still lack resolution there, but not as much as with previous X-Plane terrains. And it should still be possible to use multi-texturing like Lock On does, to get additional detail down low. Now add some real 3D objects and you get some damn nice scenery... ;)

 

Really great stuff; I have a feeling the RAM requirements for such a huge, high-resolution, non-repeating texture is incredibly high, but then again Lock On isn't easy in that regard either.

Caretaker

 

ED Beta Test Team

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing immediatly strikes me when seeing this :

Lack of trees!

That's when you see these screens that you realise how low flying in LO is nice :) (or in IL2/FB/PF in that matter, even if I prefer LO forests), and it better be, knowing that BlackSharks is coming :)

 

That said, the sceneries are indeed jaw dropping!

Whisper of old OFP & C6 forums, now Kalbuth.

Specs : i7 6700K / MSI 1070 / 32G RAM / SSD / Rift S / Virpil MongooseT50 / Virpil T50 CM2 Throttle / MFG Crosswind.

All but Viggen, Yak52 & F16

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All LOMAC needs to beat those graphics is a higher resolution terrain mesh. Textures, objects etc. are already superiour.

 

We need that kind of clouds also...

 

and i dont have seen clifs like that in Lock On ..but i really dont know if the real MAP of the region have it

 

But one thing get my eyes on

Now here is where it gets REALLY good: If you have TWO processors, or a DUAL core, then the SECOND CPU will load textures

while the FIRST CPU runs the simulator! Therefore, you can load scenery and fly at the SAME TIME, really lowering scenery-load pause times.

 

Maybe some day in the next project

Rodrigo Monteiro

LOCKON 1.12

AMD 3.8 X2 64 2G DDR ATI X1800XT 512

SAITEK X-36

AND VERY SOON TRACKIR-4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 609_SHTOPOR

As far as I know Fighter Ops is the next Falcon5 and its based on that X-engine

and as per developers it will see the light in 4Q 2006. It will have dynamic campaign in the future, and more AC will be added as time passes. Developers even said that cockpits will look even better then Black Shark 6DOF (it was on forum). So lets hope it will be a Lokcon killer.

Todays representation of radar in Lockon is unmatched, but I bet those developers have their copies of this game and learn their lessons. ED is falling behind with this silly Black Shark addon which most likely will not cut it.

Time will show.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"So lets hope it will be a Lokcon killer"

Let's hope not. Competition is good. Killing a competitor is not. Seeing the state of the sim market, you better have multiple interested devs, whatever your opinion on their work

Whisper of old OFP & C6 forums, now Kalbuth.

Specs : i7 6700K / MSI 1070 / 32G RAM / SSD / Rift S / Virpil MongooseT50 / Virpil T50 CM2 Throttle / MFG Crosswind.

All but Viggen, Yak52 & F16

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
"So lets hope it will be a Lokcon killer"

Let's hope not. Competition is good. Killing a competitor is not. Seeing the state of the sim market, you better have multiple interested devs, whatever your opinion on their work

 

The words of wisdom.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

К чему стадам дары свободы?

Их должно резать или стричь.

Наследство их из рода в роды

Ярмо с гремушками да бич.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 609_SHTOPOR

If u look at ED site u will definitely note that their Lockon is just one of products that developers make. I have a feeling that this project in ED is not a primary one. Just look how long it takes to fish out bugs in it. Either there is not enough funds allocated to this project or not enough dedication from the

top managers or both. This sim feels raw, its world feels empty. They coded

Lockon the way that it can't be expanded which is THEIR problem and only can be solved by making new product. ED just made it wrong from a very beginning. In programming there is term as usability and expandability if I remember correct. Hopefully they can implement chunks of their code into a new project. Look at IL2 FB, Oleg Maddox and his dedication that is what needed for ED and that is absent. Dynamic compain was implemented in Falcon 4 in 1998, did ED make any notes on that? No, they just proceded with Lockon which is basically upgraded Flanker, Flanker2, 2.5. Didn't developers feel that Flankers world was empty? U bet, and still they went that way. Sometimes i have a feeling that noone in ED is playing in Lockon anymore. Its just unbelivable as how they made it state of the art in some areas and lost it completely in the others. I love Lockon and hate it at the same time.

And yes I have a no problem if Fighter Ops will eat them alive, ED should relize this is a bussiness and if they are slow then someone will take their place so they can make accounting products instead. At least it will make them move a bit faster. Competition is good.

Btw if Fighter Ops turns up to be a killer, don't tell me that u would still stay with Lockon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The terrain mesh isn't really superior either I think:

 

http://www.global-scenery.org/new_zealand/pictures/newzealand_30.html

 

Well, the mesh has obviously not been carefully hand-edited to smooth out such spikes like ED's, it seems they are using raw satellite data. For a terrain that spans practically the entire world it is of exceptional quality though and like M$FS it also shows that textures can be 'tiled' without looking tiled (the fact that they are blurry up close is a function of their resolution, nothing prevents the use of better material).

 

However it is clear that the achilles heel of LOMAC's terrain graphics is the the elevation model, people are going to start comparing it to M$FS add-ons like this one (yes, the textures are not up to ED's standard when viewed from low altitude, but I'm talking only about the mesh here):

 

http://www.georender.org/AKFiles/ACV1_Screens/Ak20.jpg

 

http://www.georender.org/AKFiles/ACV1_Screens/Ak17.jpg

 

http://www.georender.org/S10Screens/ch3452.jpg

 

Better terrain geometry (possibly with 3D trees), preferrably a new theatre altogether, is clearly needed for the project after Black Shark. Dual core support is a given IMHO, all games will need to make that move sooner or later as it is the way forward in the CPU industry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If u look at ED site u will definitely note that their Lockon is just one of products that developers make. I have a feeling that this project in ED is not a primary one. Just look how long it takes to fish out bugs in it. Either there is not enough funds allocated to this project or not enough dedication from the

top managers or both. This sim feels raw, its world feels empty. They coded

Lockon the way that it can't be expanded which is THEIR problem and only can be solved by making new product. ED just made it wrong from a very beginning. In programming there is term as usability and expandability if I remember correct. Hopefully they can implement chunks of their code into a new project. Look at IL2 FB, Oleg Maddox and his dedication that is what needed for ED and that is absent. Dynamic compain was implemented in Falcon 4 in 1998, did ED make any notes on that? No, they just proceded with Lockon which is basically upgraded Flanker, Flanker2, 2.5. Didn't developers feel that Flankers world was empty? U bet, and still they went that way. Sometimes i have a feeling that noone in ED is playing in Lockon anymore. Its just unbelivable as how they made it state of the art in some areas and lost it completely in the others. I love Lockon and hate it at the same time.

And yes I have a no problem if Fighter Ops will eat them alive, ED should relize this is a bussiness and if they are slow then someone will take their place so they can make accounting products instead. At least it will make them move a bit faster. Competition is good.

Btw if Fighter Ops turns up to be a killer, don't tell me that u would still stay with Lockon.

 

Good points about the dynamic campaign engine, although that is a bit OT in this thread ;) I sincerely hope FO will be a success, but it will need more than a dynamic campaign to drag me away from LOMAC (or a future ED sim that might be available then). Also, I can't help the feeling that FO might be a tad over-ambitious, their feature descriptions seem to be based on the principle of categorically one-upping any and every other sim more than anything else (such as a modest but coherent design). Sure, they have qualified these sweeping claims by stating that these features represent the ultimate goal that will be achieved step by step in incremental updates, but OTOH this fact makes them no different to any other sim-developer, including ED, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 609_SHTOPOR

If ED had left the space for Dynamic campaign and multyprocessor support,

then they wouldn't have to redevelop as graphics in Lockon are fine. Open architecture where u can add new AC(like MSFS does) is just great. If u want to fly harrier? fine pay and fly in dynamic campaign, if u don't want fine too, fly whatever you have. This approach is apparently taken by Fighter Ops and

I believe its a winning formula. Also they don't implement Dynamic campaign from the start, probably they will do it when 4,8,18 processor desktop arrives

which I view as a wise desicison.

I asked them on the forum what they think about ED radar and missile behaviour as I believe its a strongest point of LoCkon, here is the link on

the answer that their developers made:

http://www.fighterops.com/forum/showthread.php?p=37673#post37673

To me these guys are on the right path. Hopefully we will have something till

ED comes up with their new product. At least ED may finally take notes what and how other houses develop their products, which is helpfull for us

buyers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If ED had left the space for Dynamic campaign and multyprocessor support,

then they wouldn't have to redevelop as graphics in Lockon are fine. Open architecture where u can add new AC(like MSFS does) is just great.

 

Open architecture doesn't come for free however. Setting up a generic interface powerful enough to allow adding new planes complete with new avionics is a very hard task that so far has never been done in the world of combat flight simulations, for a reason ;)

 

If u want to fly harrier? fine pay and fly in dynamic campaign, if u don't want fine too, fly whatever you have. This approach is apparently taken by Fighter Ops and

I believe its a winning formula. Also they don't implement Dynamic campaign from the start, probably they will do it when 4,8,18 processor desktop arrives

which I view as a wise desicison.

 

And wouldn't your former argument that Falcon4 had a dynamic campaign already in 1998 apply to Fighter Ops as well then...? ;)

 

At least ED may finally take notes what and how other houses develop their products, which is helpfull for us

buyers.

 

You seem to think ED doesn't really care about the sims they produce. Now I don't like each and every design decision in Lock On either, but I tend to think that producing flight sims isn't exactly the most profitable way to spend your programming skills on these days, so rest assured that the people who still do it have a certain passion about it - that apparently includes the Fighter Ops people as well. It's just that you won't see the multi-million dollar budgets from the past that went into sims like Falcon4 anymore, and that certainly does have its implications on the resources that can be spent on further development.

 

I'm looking forward to what Fighter Ops and also Jet Thunder (another "independent" project that looks very nice so far) will turn out to be; however I don't expect them to be the perfect sims that leave nothing to be desired either.

Caretaker

 

ED Beta Test Team

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
If u look at ED site u will definitely note that their Lockon is just one of products that developers make. I have a feeling that this project in ED is not a primary one. Just look how long it takes to fish out bugs in it. Either there is not enough funds allocated to this project or not enough dedication from the

top managers or both. This sim feels raw, its world feels empty. They coded

Lockon the way that it can't be expanded which is THEIR problem and only can be solved by making new product. ED just made it wrong from a very beginning. In programming there is term as usability and expandability if I remember correct. Hopefully they can implement chunks of their code into a new project. Look at IL2 FB, Oleg Maddox and his dedication that is what needed for ED and that is absent. Dynamic compain was implemented in Falcon 4 in 1998, did ED make any notes on that? No, they just proceded with Lockon which is basically upgraded Flanker, Flanker2, 2.5. Didn't developers feel that Flankers world was empty? U bet, and still they went that way. Sometimes i have a feeling that noone in ED is playing in Lockon anymore. Its just unbelivable as how they made it state of the art in some areas and lost it completely in the others. I love Lockon and hate it at the same time.

And yes I have a no problem if Fighter Ops will eat them alive, ED should relize this is a bussiness and if they are slow then someone will take their place so they can make accounting products instead. At least it will make them move a bit faster. Competition is good.

Btw if Fighter Ops turns up to be a killer, don't tell me that u would still stay with Lockon.

Time will show. ;)

Единственный урок, который можно извлечь из истории, состоит в том, что люди не извлекают из истории никаких уроков. (С) Джордж Бернард Шоу

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...